Well, I will preorder the standard edition cuz I'm digging the changes this game made, I also hopping for a better SP, the 17 min trailer had more emotion and excitement then the entire BF3 campaign
Like i said on an earlier post, BF4 feels like a better base to expend on IMO, the addition of DMRs and carbines to the all class weapons gives a lot of potential to adapt to different play styles regardless of class, therefore ppl wont be repelled from using a class because of the weapon designed for that class.
This hopefully means more teamplay, cuz I'm no longer stuck w/ a clunky LMG if my squad needs a support, you know what I mean?
[QUOTE=Hellsing4682;42512957]Me and my friends have been playing the BF4 beta for a bit. It's not really that special, like the others have said before, it's way too similar to BF3.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't help that they left the biggest change from BF3 out of the beta, commanders. Obliteration is also an awesome gamemode, I prefer it over Conquest actually.
Holy shit the mobile AA needs to be nerfed. It's good at killing everything ever. It's way better than the normal IFVs.
Specifically the LAV-AD. Being on an LAV, it's extremely mobile which makes getting out of trouble very easy. On top of that the way the US side of the map is set up makes it much easier for the LAV to cover the bay and move through the US side as well. The Chinese side is too tightly packed and the Chinese AA is much slower.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/sUlvV0Y.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;42510866]I still don't get why BC2 gets a pass just because the first wasn't on PC.
Like, BC2 was literally BC1 rebalanaced with a couple new weapons, maps, modified modes and animated collapsing buildings.
I'm probably not gonna buy BF4 as soon as it comes out, but still I see nothing wrong with it.[/QUOTE]
Not that i really have an opinion on this either way, but bad company is a series with a competent and continued single player story that makes up a significant part of the product. I'm not saying that's what they focused on most but lets just say the SP and the MP were about equal in terms of the effort they put in.
heh, to think about it I never purchased any of the bad company games because the name sounded so stupid compared to just a game name and the number
but I was also only like 9 years old or something so that's a factor too
I remember BF2 vets hating on BFBC series and calming themselves down that it was just a spin off.
Now, BFBC series are more preferable to the actual sequels. Sad state of affairs.
[QUOTE=gudman;42513813]I remember BF2 vets hating on BFBC series and calming themselves down that it was just a spin off.
Now, BFBC series are more preferable to the actual sequels. Sad state of affairs.[/QUOTE]
I think BF3 was a step up from BC2 but that's mostly by way of the technical aspects. In terms of gameplay I think they are both good Battlefield games.
BF3 was surely an improvement over BC2 what the shit are you guys talking about.
BF4 is quality too, but it's an awkward half-leap from BF3 for the same price. That's the only conflict I see.
Can't wait to be a jet whore on bf4.
[QUOTE=Mbbird;42513896]BF3 was surely an improvement over BC2 what the shit are you guys talking about.
BF4 is quality too, but it's an awkward half-leap from BF3 for the same price. That's the only conflict I see.[/QUOTE]
You can't really compare the 2 series since they offer a different experience, to say it's an improvement is not really the case.
Bad company game play is more infantry orientated and I'd argue that (for the most part) it was better than the infantry fighting in BF3.
It's hard to explain it really but BC2 was fast without nessescarlly being chatoic, BF3 is fast and pretty much always chatoic.
I'm getting BF4 because it's similar to BF4. I usually hate this argument when it comes to games and too much of the same thing can really hurt and ultimately fuck over a franchise (see CoD), but I loved BF3 and I'm gladly paying for a more refined version of the same game.
my main gripe is that the ACRW or the ak5 have been on every single class and its dumb that the classes can be muddled down to universe weapons.
I also feel that BF4 is similar to BF3, but based on the beta it also offers enough variety to be a solid sequel. The biggest difference so far in my opinion is the height differences, it's not something that we have really seen before.
Having said that, they will need to sort out a ton of bugs and balances before this game becomes really great. I don't see a point in rushing to buy it right away, maybe a few months down the road during a sale, enough time for them to sort out all the major problems.
The biggest disappointment however is that there aren't as many destructible buildings as I had hoped, also it's far to easy to take down a the main building. Usually on conquest it goes down within the first few minutes.
Is it just me, or is battlelog down?
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;42516065]Is it just me, or is battlelog down?[/QUOTE]
Works fine here.
Yeah, was just probably a hiccup. It's back on now.
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;42516065]Is it just me, or is battlelog down?[/QUOTE]
I've been having trouble with it all day, keeps saying client connection shut down.
[img_thumb]http://horobox.reager.org/u/MegaChalupa_1381785537.png[/img_thumb]
But Shanghai really is a nice looking map before the tower falls, I'm definitely looking forward to how the other urban maps end up.
Apparently, these are the aliases I've used over the years with all the various EA games and products associated with my current e-mail:
[QUOTE] NoQuarterPolicy
FirstAidKitHere
McPolite
YouAreInMySight
YouAreInMyScope
I Like Orange
HealingInTheRain
AwesomeMayCry
Virtual Pew Pew
FIREWISE
SleekRacer
Spencer_Ruler
McGunningson
McDaggerson
Pure Pwnage
Xitanas[/QUOTE]
Actually, some of these I forgot but are better than I thought they would be. Maybe I'll use "NoQuarterPolicy" for my next soldier name.
[editline]13th October 2013[/editline]
Though I have to confess half of these names come from Battlefield Heroes and Battlefield F2P. :suicide:
Thankfully I stopped playing them right after I realized they were terrible, terrible games.
you know with the second assault dlc and the addition of levolution in BF4 i wonder what big events will be caused by players
i mean its obvious what the levolution feature of caspian border will be (the tower) but what about gulf of oman or operation metro?
[QUOTE=MacD11;42516343]you know with the second assault dlc and the addition of levolution in BF4 i wonder what big events will be caused by players
i mean its obvious what the levolution feature of caspian border will be (the tower) but what about gulf of oman or operation metro?[/QUOTE]I'm not sure, but I think I saw a collapsing roof in the metro.
[QUOTE=MacD11;42516343]you know with the second assault dlc and the addition of levolution in BF4 i wonder what big events will be caused by players
i mean its obvious what the levolution feature of caspian border will be (the tower) but what about gulf of oman or operation metro?[/QUOTE]
making trains come barreling down to hit people.
Instant vehicle respawn servers are the cancer of Battlefield, and anyone who hosts one deserves to be executed.
[editline]13th October 2013[/editline]
It's not a hyperbole, I really hate these servers with a burning passion. Why Dice even allows the respawn rate of vehicles to be changed is beyond me. It's unbalanced as fuck.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;42516363]making trains come barreling down to hit people.[/QUOTE]
I'm imagining that the central capture point is the operations center that controls every door, light and train on the map. Imagine capturing the train controls while the enemy is riding, and locking the doors. Maybe the enemy could be controlling the trains and the engineer welds the switchpoint so the enemy can't change it.
Of course this won't happen in a million years but I love the idea.
I'd imagine Oman would have something like one of the cranes being destructable, maybe they smash into one of those buildings that snipers camped on in BF3 and tear it apart?
Metro might be a cool map if you could derail a train and collapse the roof, making it so several control points are no longer accessable and forcing you to fight outside.
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;42516496]Instant vehicle respawn servers are the cancer of Battlefield, and anyone who hosts one deserves to be executed.
[editline]13th October 2013[/editline]
It's not a hyperbole, I really hate these servers with a burning passion. Why Dice even allows the respawn rate of vehicles to be changed is beyond me. It's unbalanced as fuck.[/QUOTE]
People hate waiting?
[QUOTE=sa2fan;42516820]People hate waiting?[/QUOTE]
Or perhaps having fun actually.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;42516002]my main gripe is that the ACRW or the ak5 have been on every single class and its dumb that the classes can be muddled down to universe weapons.[/QUOTE]
See to me that's a buying point for me, i like the idea of playing with toys but not being forced into a weapon that's a huge disadvantage for 70% of situations. (read: sniper rifles.)
You can wreck shit if you play conservatively with a tank or IFV: [url]http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/battlereport/show/1/389617378639106688/248495487/[/url]
Basically, I made sure I was mobile at all times and as soon as I felt I couldn't handle a situation, I retreated to repair and reassess. Works especially well with an IFV if you make you make sure you never 1vs1 against a tank.
You can 1v1 fine with APC vs tank if you angle it and make sure to fire all TOWs as fast as possible, as well as make sure they hit in a 90deg angle in side or rear. Or top, for that matter, seeing as vehicles have a top hitbox now as well.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
