Well, I guess a two or three year release cycle is better than the yearly cycle COD uses? Hope they go back to Bad Company.
[QUOTE=MisterM;36809761]Well, I guess a two or three year release cycle is better than the yearly cycle COD uses? Hope they go back to Bad Company.[/QUOTE]
Don't go for compromises, this is milking the name just like COD.
EA saying it exists while DICE saying it doesn't.
Who to believe?
Welp, goodbye Battlefield.
It's too early to say if this will be good or bad in my opinion. I just hope it's not another bf3.
The Beta is in the fall 2013, so the game will probably be out in the winter of 2013 or early 2014.
Watch BF4 still kick COD's ass.
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;36809878]I just hope it's not another generic shooter with vehicles.[/QUOTE]
How was BF3 a Generic shooter with vehicles?
Still way too early.
Almost every Battlefield game has been 2 years apart.
What the hell would they add in a Battlefield 4 game? I simply can't imagine a good sequel to BF3 at this time..
I still play battlefield 2
Unless it's set in the future and includes Titan mode, then yeeees!
auto merge aah
Maybe it will be the 2142 sequel that people have been wanting.
Maybe Battlefield 4 is just a WIP name.
[QUOTE=Chernarus;36809898]Watch BF4 still kick COD's ass.[/QUOTE]
I don't want it to be better than cod
I want it to be a different game
[QUOTE=Tuskin;36809900]How was BF3 a Generic shooter with vehicles?[/QUOTE]
Not saying it was, my point is that I hope it won't be too similar to BF3.
[QUOTE=MisterM;36809761]Well, I guess a two or three year release cycle is better than the yearly cycle COD uses? Hope they go back to Bad Company.[/QUOTE]
All they're missing is a 2nd company to help them develop Battlefield
[editline]17th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Chernarus;36809898]Watch BF4 still kick COD's ass.[/QUOTE]
Watch that be a fucking subjective concept and not objective at all, in fact, COD kicks BF's ass by sales.
Sure, the existence of BF4 is out in the open now, but I wouldn't expect it until Q4 2013- Q2 2014. Assuming this wasn't a marketing error.
Additionally I think BF4 is more likely a sequel to 2142. (Obviously not called BF4 if that's the case.)
Way to shoehorn Shooter Sergeants Fighter People, EA
[QUOTE=Oblivion470;36809959]What the hell would they add in a Battlefield 4 game? I simply can't imagine a good sequel to BF3 at this time..[/QUOTE]
You make it sound like BF3 was a good sequel.
It took BF2 and mashed it with BC2, damaging all the good parts of BC2 in the process making it better than BF2 but inferior to BC2.
It just wasn't as fun to play.
BF3 was good. I still enjoyed and played BF2, 1942 and 2142 more but that by no means it was a bad game; the setting was generic but the mechanics were unique.
[QUOTE=Delta616;36810050]Implying that BF4 is coming out this year? Sure, the existence of BF4 is out in the open now, but I wouldn't expect it until Q4 2013- Q2 2014. Assuming this wasn't a marketing error.
Additionally I think BF4 is more likely a sequel to 2142. (Obviously not called BF4 if that's the case.)[/QUOTE]
Uh... It says in the article that the beta for Battlefield 4 will be in the fall of 2013...
[QUOTE=dgg;36810062]You make it sound like BF3 was a good sequel.
It took BF2 and mashed it with BC2, damaging all the good parts of BC2 in the process making it better than BF2 but inferior to BC2.
It just wasn't as fun to play.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, it was more fun than BC2
But you know, if you want to act like your opinion is fact that's like, ok
not really
[QUOTE=mac338;36810076]BF3 was good. I still enjoyed and played BF2, 1942 and 2142 more but that by no means it was a bad game; the setting was generic but the mechanics were unique.[/QUOTE]
The mechanics are from Bad Company that was polished in Bad Company 2 and then they muted them to almost not being used at all in Battlefield 3.
[editline]17th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Clementine;36810090]I disagree, it was more fun than BC2
But you know, if you want to act like your opinion is fact that's like, ok
not really[/QUOTE]
No, I act like my opinions are my opinions.
BC2 was fun because you could actually take out tactical points and re-shape the map, so to speak. In BF3 the destructions are limited and does not have a big effect on the strategic points of the map. It's like "you can destroy this, but it won't really change anything" "Oh but you can't destroy this, it should be there, because, you know... Uh...".
[QUOTE=dgg;36810097]The mechanics are from Bad Company that was polished in Bad Company 2 and then they muted them to almost not being used at all in Battlefield 3.
[editline]17th July 2012[/editline]
No, I act like my opinions are my opinions.[/QUOTE]
"You make it sound like BF3 was a good sequel."
If that isn't implying your opinion is correct I don't know what is
Wonder if this one will have modding capabilities. Doubt it though, knowing that EA is involved. [img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-saddowns.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=Clementine;36810105]"You make it sound like BF3 was a good sequel."
If that isn't implying your opinion is correct I don't know what is[/QUOTE]
It makes it sound like I didn't think BF3 was a good sequel.
Its just odd that they announce Battlefield 4 in a different game.. I mean they haven't released any details nor any screenshots from it and you can already get into the beta.
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;36810118]Wonder if this one will have modding capabilities. Doubt it though, knowing that EA is involved. [img]http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-saddowns.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
It's on the frostbite engine. So absolutely not.
It's not EA's fault either, it's Dice making their own engine modding-unfriendly.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.