Just gonna reiterate my hatred for the off-set BUIS, they should be mounted on or part of the scope. Off-set ones like that would obscure vision on the ejection port. Liking the firing sounds though.
[editline]27th March 2013[/editline]
The campaign doesn't look any more interesting than BF3's, gameplay wise. I hope the M32 isn't in MP.
Graphics wise the game seems to look better than BF3 but other than that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
Graphically that looks insanely good and the animations are incredible. Other than that, I dunno, I can't see the story being anything revolutionary, but that's alright to me if the multiplayer side is decent. Hopefully with BF3 under the belt experience-wise and this looking sort of similar we might see more attention being put into the gameplay in multiplayer this time around, sort of like how GTA V is looking to be GTA IV with a bunch more features.
[QUOTE=PieClock;40054974]Graphically that looks insanely good and the animations are incredible. Other than that, I dunno, I can't see the story being anything revolutionary, but that's alright to me if the multiplayer side is decent. Hopefully with BF3 under the belt experience-wise and this looking sort of similar we might see more attention being put into the gameplay in multiplayer this time around, [B]sort of like how GTA V is looking to be GTA IV with a bunch more features.[/B][/QUOTE]lol no what?
[QUOTE=Killer900;40055054]lol no what?[/QUOTE]
Eh, hard to explain what I'm thinking.
What I mean is there's no significant jump in the graphical department from GTAIV to GTAV, similar to GTA Vice city to GTA san andreas, however it looks like they've played a lot more with what you can do in the world, just like what San Andreas did.
I'm hoping this might prove similar in Battlefield, with the technology and framework being there from BF3, giving them more time to work on things like gameplay more than building a much more advanced engine (Doesn't look like much has changed with the engine to be honest).
It definitely [I]looks[/I] good. They really nailed the cinematic look this time around and personally I think it looks great. The gameplay just looks like more of the same though.
[QUOTE=Killer900;40055054]lol no what?[/QUOTE]
He means graphics aren't really a major selling point like they used to. Our graphics expectations have sort of plateaued, so now game devs are making bigger strides with more technical things, like physics and how the world around you behaves.
My wishlist for this one:
-Larger maps
-Planes fly faster than 60mph.
-An ocean map with two carriers and other naval vehicles.
-Destructible environments more along the lines of Bad Company 2.
-Get rid of the stupid vehicle perk system that basically lock out newer or slower players from ever leveling up.
-Make guns lateral moves instead of upgrades (they did an alright job with this in BF3 I guess).
-Allow larger squads.
-More vehicles. (Mobile artillery, Larger planes like the C130, etc)
GTAV looks heaps better than GTAIV.
[QUOTE=Hullu V3;40055156]GTAV looks heaps better than GTAIV.[/QUOTE]
Not really the point so don't start down that line. It was the closest thing I could think of in the amount of time I wanted to spend writing the post.
Basically the foundation from the previous game and engine is there for the next game, meaning less work needs to be done, meaning work can be put into different things such as gameplay features.
It probably wasn't the best example but that's all I meant, don't make a big deal out of it.
Oh yeah:
-And kill the idiot who suggested BF3 Premium.
Don't forget squad VOIP. I really have no fucking clue why they binned that in favour of the bullshit battlelog voice system because it requires you to be friends with the people you wanna communicate with. Squad VOIP is literally join and you can speak with all six guys. They should seriously take a look back at BF2 and 2142 before releasing this
same vehicles as in battlefield 3 same gun with the addon of duel sights and one new weapon and by the looks of it very liner gameplay. going to have to do more then that to impress me battlefield 4. or you may want to name it battlefield 3.2 and call it a addon..
I have this weird feeling that BF4 is going to be a start to some bi annual franchise to compete with the annual Call of Duty games. BF4 is probably going to reuse a lot of assets to the point where it's going to cause a big uproar in the community.
DICE why do you do this man. You don't have to compete with the Call of Duty games. You're better than them, you always have been. We will always love you. You don't need a singleplayer just because COD had one. You don't need perks. Please don't betray us like Infinity Ward :(
[QUOTE=PieClock;40055096]Eh, hard to explain what I'm thinking.
What I mean is there's no significant jump in the graphical department from GTAIV to GTAV, similar to GTA Vice city to GTA san andreas, however it looks like they've played a lot more with what you can do in the world, just like what San Andreas did.
I'm hoping this might prove similar in Battlefield, with the technology and framework being there from BF3, giving them more time to work on things like gameplay more than building a much more advanced engine (Doesn't look like much has changed with the engine to be honest).[/QUOTE]Ah okay.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;40055204]Oh yeah:
-And kill the idiot who suggested BF3 Premium.[/QUOTE]
Kill the guy who came up with the idea for a discount on a pack of all DLC plus extras? Seems a bit harsh for a guy who's been saving a lot of people a lot of money.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;40056953]you're not saving, you're spending more than you would have otherwise[/QUOTE]
each DLC costs $15 separately, adding up to $75 ($60 if you have Limited Edition, getting B2K for free). Premium is $50
BF3.1 is looking pretty good
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
