GameStop 'wowed' by Battlefield 4

Battlefield 4 has been shown off to at least one retailer, as confirmed by EA's own Origin.

80

Our knowledge of Battlefield 4 is pretty limited, but at least a few parties are now privy to more information on the upcoming game. At least one retailer has reported that Electronic Arts has shown the title privately, fueling speculation of an impending reveal.

GameStop (via NeoGAF) tweeted that EA had shown the game, and EA's own Origin subsequently confirmed the account with a retweet. "Got to see Battlefield 4 today and all I can say is WOW!" the tweet read. "Thanks @EA for the sneak peek. Can't wait for you all to see it." We know that the game is at least getting a beta in the fall.

It could be mere coincidence, but the timing seems suspiciously close to Sony's event tonight, where it is expected to debut its next console hardware. Sony already enjoyed a relationship with the series, gaining timed exclusive access to Battlefield 3 expansions as an answer to Microsoft's similar deal with Call of Duty.

Editor-In-Chief
From The Chatty
  • reply
    February 20, 2013 8:15 AM

    Steve Watts posted a new article, GameStop 'wowed' by Battlefield 4.

    Battlefield 4 has been shown off to at least one retailer, as confirmed by EA's own Origin.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:23 AM

      I never finished the single player in BF3. Got bored.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:28 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:28 AM

        I enjoyed it, great graphics showcase.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:30 AM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 8:32 AM

          God the graphics of that F18 scene, so amazing.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 8:39 AM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:11 AM

          yep that was awesome, plus dat music!

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:19 AM

          Oh man, I played that in 3D. FUCKING. AMAZING. The cockpit dome glass was crazy looking.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:22 AM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 10:26 AM

          I seem to be the opposite. I enjoyed the SP but was underwhelmed by the fighter/cockpit part. I'm not sure what's supposed to be so awesome about that part. The graphics? Because it was no better or worse than the graphics in the rest of the game, which were great. The gameplay? I recall it being somewhat on rails and you didn't have full control--more of a shooting gallery, IIRC. So I guess I missed whatever the hype was about.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 4:10 PM

          Lol, i never got that far, i was so put off by how boring the first level was, immediately hopped on coop and then mp

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 5:43 PM

          i didnt play much SP. is there a way to just start at that level?

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:31 AM

        Same, although I put in a solid 250hrs into the MP.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:42 AM

        I never play any of the BF single player stuff

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 8:45 AM

          BC was pretty good, especially BC1

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:12 AM

          I really enjoyed Bad Company 2. It was open just enough to be interesting. BF3's campaign was terrible.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:46 AM

        i've bought the game twice and never started it. no fucks given.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:12 AM

        Who the hell plays BF games for SP? Unfortunately that revelation alone discredits your opinion.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:12 AM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:23 AM

          [deleted]

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 9:30 AM

            [deleted]

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 9:37 AM

              [deleted]

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 9:39 AM

                [deleted]

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 9:55 AM

                  [deleted]

                  • reply
                    February 20, 2013 12:26 PM

                    Quit reaching for the bottom to be right. Yes semantically you are right. But you look ridiculous resorting to that when you damn well know what everyone means.

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 10:01 AM

                  It's singleplayer, it's a singleplayer mode. These are things you said the games never had and you were wrong, sir.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 9:58 AM

              Bad Company 1 and 2 both had a campaign. And while not EXACTLY the same as their main series counterparts, they are still very much BF games.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 10:01 AM

                I actually enjoyed the hell out of Bad Company 1 SP.

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 10:02 AM

                  So good.

                  • reply
                    February 20, 2013 10:28 AM

                    Funny and fun as hell.

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 10:28 AM

                  Me too. I don't get the hate. The dialogue and acting was top notch and genuinely funny, too.

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 11:13 AM

                  I'm pretty sure I didn't take the intended escape path from that monastery, but I still had one hell of a fun time doing it.

                  • reply
                    February 21, 2013 1:30 AM

                    I don't think we had an intended path for that section lol. I scripted it that part and it was pretty difficult just making sure you actually could go pretty much anywhere upon leaving the monestary.

                • reply
                  February 21, 2013 1:22 AM

                  Hell YEAH ! such a gem.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:35 AM

        Never even started it past the opening which I used to setup some of my controls.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:55 AM

        I finished it (it's short and easy) but I could have done without it just as well. The co-op missions were kinda cool.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 10:28 AM

        Battlefield was never a single player game... who gives a shit?

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 10:32 AM

        They need to make the entire campaign coop in my opinion. My dream would be to have something as open as BC1 single player played with 4-8 of my friends. Just give me open ended missions that we can tackle how we want.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 11:20 AM

        I bought it to test out my new Graphics Card, but never finished either, it still installed thought so if I ever get bored. I don't care about multiplayer.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 11:21 AM

        I couldn't even start it -- it kept CTD'ing on me. I played 45mins of it, then went straight to MP and never looked back.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:25 AM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:27 AM

      But were they blown away?

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:31 AM

        It seems like they were prepared.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:37 AM

        Lets not get out of hand, they're not IGN

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:29 AM

      Imagine that, a company that makes money on selling games was wowed by a game

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:40 AM

      wowed, just wowed.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:40 AM

      Well that's enough for me. I'm going to pre-order 7 copies!

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:45 AM

      They can't wait to sell used copies of this shit. cha ching!

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:45 AM

      Might get piled for saying this, but frankly I just really don't like the BF games. I have a hard time seeing people, and half the time I have no clue what's going on. It's pretty, I'll definitely say that. One of the best looking games of the current console gen. Just not really my cup of tea, I guess.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:12 AM

        thanks for sharing

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:21 AM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:42 AM

          Can't dislike a game if the graphix r good.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 10:06 AM

          Oh, no doubt of it. Generally shooters are more fun on PC. But, I like playing with friends, and exactly zero of my buddies play on PC, so it'd be a waste of money.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 11:28 AM

            and exactly zero of my buddies play on PC wow. :(

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 11:32 AM

              It's more common than you think. I had one buddy who played some PC games only because I gave him my old PC when I upgraded. The rest are on consoles. It's not easy telling people to drop a lot of money on something that will depreciate so fast. I don't blame them though. Just watching Giant Bomb's Crysis 3 quicklook where they spent a while trying to get the framerate right was exactly what I don't miss.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 11:40 AM

                Well then again, we have people stretching their old dual cores on windows XP 32bit for a lonnnggggggg time.

                http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

                I'm really glad the consoles are getting upgraded though. having all development be stuck in DX9 and low def and such is aggravating. it will be a great time for all gamers this year!!!! :) PC and consolers will be singing kum ba ya for sure, right ?!?!!?

                • reply
                  February 20, 2013 11:52 AM

                  I'm interested in seeing if gamers migrate away from PC. Whether PC gaming is getting stronger naturally, or mainly because it's a long drawn out console cycle.

                  • reply
                    February 21, 2013 2:42 PM

                    I don't have any friends who play consoles anymore. Most have sold theirs and bought gaming PC's now, and my PS3 and 360 have friends lists that are never active. Forever alone I guess...but I think it's a trend. The ones who dont play anymore just stopped gaming altogether...and the rest are on PC now. Even my kids' friends keep pestering them to switch to PC too.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:24 AM

        I can completely see your point.

        Starting with BF1942 was probably the best way for anyone to get into it. All the chaotic, open-map mayhem at LAN's (standing on planes taking off, laying mines on opponent runways, C4 on moving jeeps, etc.) left a lasting impression on me.

        While I can say that you're missing out, the mayhem I talk about doesn't happen in pub games, but the adrenaline rush I get when capturing a point while playing cat-and-mouse with two dudes in an Apache...it's still pretty awesome.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:29 AM

          Yea I miss the zany over the top fun from 1942, BF3 just doesn't have that :(

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 10:04 AM

          Yeah. I dunno, it's like I said, I honestly just have a hard time seeing people until I'm already dead. They're not in a copter or anything, just running around. I do at least decently well in other shooters, but I just do miserably in BF games.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 11:34 AM

            that's long range and large scale shooters for you. since you likely don't play planetside 2 either, that would be equally bad. you have to really think about your surroundings and where you want to go.

            personally I prefer BF3 and PS2 to CoD/BLOPS maps, where you spawn a grenade throw away from the enemies. but they sure are easy to see.

          • reply
            February 21, 2013 1:33 AM

            [deleted]

          • reply
            February 21, 2013 5:34 PM

            That is because Battlefield 3 is terrible in the AA department. You can't see anything at a reasonable distance because either everything is so fucking jaged because you've turned off the terrible blur AA, or because you have it enabled and you can't see shit that way either. It's one of the main reason I stopped playing BF3 a month after launch. Why would I want to play a game that I'm always getting killed by people I will never, EVER, have a chance in hell of seeing for no other reason than because the games AA solution sucks ass.

            Bad Company 2 I enjoyed very much though and logged an incredible amount of time in, and guess what, it had proper AA. Fuck Deferred rendering bullshit. Don't build your game around it if developers are going to go backwards in AA solutions, just dumb, especially in large world, fast past FPS's.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:53 AM

        I got tired of it too fast, but then I got tired of Planetside real fast too, getting to the point where video games are just getting boring

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 10:07 AM

        I have played more Battlefield (mostly 2, 2142, Bad Company 2, and 3) than the majority of people here, and I kinda see what you mean. If you aren't fairly intimately familiar with a Battlefield game, it is real easy to get overwhelmed. There are a lot of different mechanics at work at every level. Just figuring out which weapons work for you with which attachments, what I would consider getting a handle on the infantry combat, takes quite a lot of experimentation. Throw in all the different vehicles, figuring out infantry vs. vehicle and vehicle vs. vehicle combat, there is a lot to learn to really be good (I only consider myself a decent to good level player in BF3, because I did stop playing for months before picking it back up again).

        On the other hand, if you can get a handle on the basics you will find yourself learning how to better acquit yourself in combat. Stuff like map familiarity (easily one of the most important aspects of being great at Battlefield) and understanding the UI fully (i.e.: realizing that when a CP marker starts to phase in and out that an enemy is capturing it, which the vast majority of people who play don't seem to have figured out at all) are not super difficult but improve your performance dramatically.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 11:22 AM

        BF1942: Amazing.
        Modern Combat: Amazing.
        BF3: Amazing, but I got bored of it after a few months.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 11:29 AM

        I didn't like any of the BF games =/

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 11:31 AM

        I also had a hard time seeing people in BF3, but found it was something that improves the more you play the game. I think your brain learns to differentiate between the different pixels after hours of playtime, it also helps when you start to understand the map in general - where the choke points are, where enemies are likely to be flanking from, etc.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:54 PM

        I tend to agree with alot of these "REALISTIC" army type games. Not to mention that trying to play casually is just about impossible unless you want to consistently add to everyone else's scores.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 9:23 AM

      Too busy playing Arma 2 and with Arma 3 around the corner.. who cares? DICE ruined the Battlefield franchise.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 9:27 AM

      Why is this news?

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 9:39 AM

      Shacknews, everyone.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 6:16 PM

        Dude this is big news. A major publisher is making a sequel to a blockbuster franchise and a person has seen it. We can't see it. But someone has.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 9:42 AM

      WOWy{!}y

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:42 AM

        I'm so wowed that I even screwed up the tags.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 10:13 AM

      Needs more Bad Company 3 first ;( Destruction 2.0 FTW!

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 10:16 AM

      They weren't MIND BLOWN ??

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 11:22 AM

      Wowed by how many sales they won't get because of digital distribution?

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 11:45 AM

      I just want to play the beta for BF4 noww, lets see what upcoming E3 footage is shown.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 12:00 PM

      I have to say that BF4 has to seriously impress after getting burned about the hype from BF3. For me it is going to be hard to go back from huge platoons and massive battles of Planetside 2 to 16-64 player battles. They have to do more than glitz up the graphics they have to improve the gameplay again.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:04 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:09 PM

          muhfuckin' +INF right here.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:20 PM

          [deleted]

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:25 PM

            [deleted]

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:27 PM

              I think he means it killed the shack community's interest in regards to shackbattles and stuff.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 2:30 PM

                If you only play games that the shack plays in an organized manner, you're not gonna' play a lot of shit for very long.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 3:36 PM

            The DLC is great. While the fact that it is DLC and not free for everyone kinda sucks, the actual quality of the content is really fucking great.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 4:07 PM

              I HATE Close Quarters. Probably because I hate CoD MW. The vehicle expansion was OK, but after I played it a while I realized I really didn't like the maps.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 4:25 PM

                Aftermath is pretty fun, I don't think anyone touches CQ anymore, its just Vanilla, AK, and AM usually.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 9:12 PM

                CQ was my favorite set from the DLC. Awesome maps with lots of interesting routes to take, cool weapons, lots of gunfights and no fucking vehicles. just pure awesome!!

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:21 PM

        Battlefield 3 had the best infantry mechanics of all the games...

        Wheni play planetside2 i ask myself "why the fuck did i want to go back to tribes with battlefield1942 floaty ass netcode" it drives me insane how floaty that shit is.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:24 PM

        BF3 is fucking awesome (on pc). It surpassed the hype for me.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 12:30 PM

          BF3 was no where even close to BF1942 and BF2 in terms of map variety and scope of the maps. BF3 don't get me wrong is a gorgeous game but its really lacking in lot of areas. Its not hard to see since Bad company the game has been getting or feeling smaller than it should be and tactical play has been wrong out the window for instant spawn action. BF3 to me feels like a series of missed opportunities.

          I think its good that games are challenging BF in combined arms sandbox warfare. It might mean they will have to also step up and improve the gameplay. For now I will enjoy doing large scale Ops in Ps2.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:17 PM

            that's... weird. I think BF3 has more variety. It has some super huge maps, and some small maps. Most of the other Battlefield maps you are walking your ass off no matter what. I think BF3 has fucking AMAZING map design, and combat is easy to come by if you want it, and easy to avoid it if you want to snipe it up from super long range. Well, other than on Metro. :D :D :D

            I disagreed about missed opportunities, I think it ushered in entire new ones - with one exception - THE LACK OF COMMANDER. That's a huge miss :D

            Do you have premium? A lot of the new maps are really fucking awesome.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:29 PM

              For the record I own all the battlefield games. The game has gone from being a team shooter to a lone wolf game. The maps in BF3 funnel you too much in to certain areas. The maps were huge in BF1942/2/2142 to give room to use the vehicles properly and flank and so on. They weren't meant to walked on foot and you had to actually use things like jeeps and buggies to get around with other people.

              Battlefield never used to be about instant action or being able to find some to kill every 2 seconds.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 4:36 PM

                Gameplay has evolved over time to fit the current attention span of players. Look, even in Planetside 2 which you seem to prefer (I'm BR47) has issues with people trying to find the battles, SOE is revamping it day to day but those large open expanses between non front line areas is boring and most of the fun comes from zerg vs zerg & a few squads or platoons splitting off.

                BF3 is a great focused shooter with vehicular combat and through the DLC they've offered, you can get whatever type of maps to suit your fancy. The shooting mechanics feel snappy compared to PS2 and the gameplay mechanics make for quicker action compared to the PS2 metagame which involves camping the spawn room or grinding out defense certs at a Biolab or ghost camping an entire continent (IE: Amerish & Esamir). Unless that's your preferred thing to do with time, sit on flags/cap points waiting for crappy cert gain when you can be shooting dudes in the face for +100xp.

                You're never gonna get your old school run a thousand miles of boring terrain on foot, or waiting around for a vehicle to respawn in future shooters, it just doesn't make a fun game.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:30 PM

              There's a lot of variety now that there are nearly twice as many maps from DLC than what originally shipped with the game. Took more than a year to get to this point though.

              25 maps currently, the game came with 9, and there are another 4 coming next month.

              I wouldn't say the map design is amazing, especially in some of vanilla maps, but Aftermath has been really good and if he wants large scale vehicle maps then he should try Armored Kill.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:24 PM

            load up 1942 and check out some of the maps. i did recently...they are massive, and empty, and lifeless. there is tons of stuff going on in an average midrange BF3 map. 1942? hills and low view distance and barely any architecture, and of course no destructable buildings or objects.

            you can get excellent, slow-paced, tactical, team-oriented experiences in BF3. it just requires the right server, map, and players. it's not like 1942 was always epic. people would run around gunning in a disorganized fashion; it's just that the infantry combat is now good, so there's more incentive to ground-pound and play DM style on some maps.

          • reply
            February 21, 2013 1:37 AM

            [deleted]

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:28 PM

        I've played more BF3 than any game in recent memory. The only thing I would change is to tone down air vehciles, or simply add gun emplacements.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:30 PM

        I thought BF3 was fantastic. It took the great infantry combat from BC2 and added in the scale of BF2.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:13 PM

          Yeah as a veteran ground-pounder of all BF games, improving the infantry game definitely helped. I think the basic AT launchers could stand to be a bit more effective (i.e.: the RPG and SMAW are fairly useless unless you're getting direct rear shots on tanks), and air power can still be very overpowering at times, though it's not as bad as the jet rape in BF2. Getting rid of the bombs on the jets really helps balance all that stuff.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 1:17 PM

        Map quality is the biggest issue. Same with getting rid of the doritos, unlimited sprint, no in game voice com, and bringing back commander.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:13 PM

          Voice com is sorely missed; and commanders were great when you had one who knew what they were doing.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:16 PM

            The problem I always had was that while I enjoyed playing the commander, I was often far, far more useful actually participating in combat. Sitting around waiting for the UAVs and artillery to recharge was always super annoying and made me lose patience.

            The vehicle drop would be handy in BF3 though. Sometimes you're stuck on foot, and it sucks.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:18 PM

              I know you drool at the recollection of dropping a fix-it crate on a friendly mech. just admit it. :D

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:27 PM

              I can't remember: Did the command get removed from the battlefield?
              A better implementation would be to keep the commander on the battlefield, and just make the command duty a secondary thing (kind of like how squad leaders work)

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 4:29 PM

                Nope, you're still on the field, but you cannot directly score any points. So while you could run around and kill people all day long, it wouldn't get you any score.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:19 PM

            What about squad leaders that actually mean something. In the older games owning the flags and squad leaders were extremely important. In the post-BC BF games you can spawn on any one and ignore all the flags or objectives. That isn't how BF is supposed to be played as its about tactics and the team win. Instant spawning on any one in your squad kind of ruins the game in a lot of ways as it deemphasizes the importance of controlling the map.

            Vanilla BF3 had maybe 2 or 3 good conquest maps and the rest were small linear maps that were less than half the size of a good BF2 map. It might work on the low player cap found on the consoles but 32+ no so much.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:26 PM

              well in BF2142 the squad leader beacons were crucial, like how planetside 2 can have the spawn beacon now as well. BF3 squadding and management and tactics were a little lackluster, I agree there. But.... I also think they acknowledge that people are really stupid and can barely use those functions. Complete shitheels in the commander seat in BF2 were a major pain in the ass... but... I really like the commander function.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:29 PM

              [deleted]

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:29 PM

              yeah BF3 is definitely more action based. They want players to get back in the fight as soon as possible. I think it leads to a more spammy chaotic game though.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 2:31 PM

              Play on Hardcore servers.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 9:15 PM

              I do miss the days of squad leader only spawns.

        • reply
          February 21, 2013 1:41 AM

          [deleted]

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 12:30 PM

      You know what would be awesome?? Is if Battlefield 4 was set in WW2.

      Frostbite 2.0, destroying villages, craters in the countryside from 88's...

      *sadpanda*

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 12:32 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:33 PM

          I know it's been retread like a hundred times. However, a european backdrop is much better than some middle east sandstormed village.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 2:44 PM

            I'm kind of burnt out on the modern military gear and weaponry in games, same as I was with World War 2 years ago.

            At this point I'd be fine with another WW2 Battlefield as 1943 never made it to PC, and that was just a few Pacific Theater maps anyway. Dogfighting and bombing support is a lot more fun in those prop planes vs jets. Tanks that can dominate infantry, I'd love to see naval battles and artillery return too.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 2:45 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 3:14 PM

          Modern warfare bullshit has been fucking played out. Time to bring it back home. Bring back the WW2.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 9:40 PM

            As much as I'm not the biggest fan of WW2 FPS games (there's a lot less weapon variety and people tend to get more sperg-lordy over the necessary taking liberties with things for gameplay in WW2 games for some reason), I would really like to see a new BF WW2 game...take all the stuff that they've advanced with the recent BF games (like having a shit load of weapons to pick from (as opposed to being stuff with the standard whatever class weapon for whatever side you're stuck on which is realistic, but fuck realism), and tons of destructable shit). Hell, a new WW2 BF with the better less geriatric infantry combat they've pulled off in their last several games along with lots of destructable shit actually gets me excited.

            • reply
              February 21, 2013 2:51 PM

              I personally feel that making a BF game set in WW2 but using REAL locations, with destructible terrain and buildings would be awesome. Omaha Beach, Carentan, The Bulge/Ardennes, Monte Casino, Barbarossa, etc. Wow what chaos that would be. Id love it.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 6:22 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 6:43 PM

          They should make it Vietnam. That's when weaponry really got interesting. And they tried 1.5 times to do it already.

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 9:41 PM

            80's Cold War. Plum and wood AK74s and awesome vz.82s for everyone!

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 9:44 PM

              Oh and some AKMS's and obviously some old school triangle handguard M16s and old school Car15s/M4s along with a shit load of cool western 70's and 80's rifles (Sig 550 series stuff, crazy HK stuff, crazy stuff you saw lots of in 80's action flicks, etc). On second thought...just make it a cheesy 80's Cold-War era action film game...like Commando meets Red Dawn the game. Hell they could even tie it in with the Bad Company stuff.

              • reply
                February 20, 2013 10:40 PM

                Yes, yes, YES... I'm hearing you. I'm seeing the worldguns.ru page being used extensively... I sense....a cocaine kingpin.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 9:23 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 21, 2013 1:44 AM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          February 21, 2013 2:48 PM

          I hope modern war games go away fast. Every gun feels the same for each type. Early MoH and BF1942 were awesome and each gun really felt different.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 12:51 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 2:08 PM

      It seems soon for a new battlefield game. What is this one adding?

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 3:19 PM

      If they keep the focus on the PC version and work to make that the primary focus, it should be awesome. The moment they start shoe-horning in stuff to meet the needs of console gaming, quality will (possibly) drop, imho. :(

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 3:49 PM

        Yes, back to WWII - lets do this!

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 3:51 PM

          How about WW1?

          • reply
            February 20, 2013 4:14 PM

            Trench warfare would make for shitty gameplay.

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 6:22 PM

              What if they were chest high?

            • reply
              February 20, 2013 9:46 PM

              To be honest, most WW2 and Modern FPS games have very little to do with how WW2 or Modern wars are fought.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:03 PM

        They already switched mid-development to console oriented features... So its no different

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 9:39 PM

        yep, it basically means we will get a bunch of half assed maps designed for consoles. It wasnt really until karkand that we got any good bf3 maps and even then they were smaller than the originals.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 4:08 PM

      BF3 poorly supported, developers interacting with reddit instead of their own forums - nope, I'm out. Probably my last multiplayer shooter.

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 5:55 PM

        Have you seen the official forums? Total shitfest.

        • reply
          February 20, 2013 8:22 PM

          Just like Bf3 then. DICE are sellouts.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 5:03 PM

      I'd really like to see a sequel to 2142 rather than BF4

      • reply
        February 20, 2013 8:23 PM

        I'm still hoping for a sequel to Bf2 at some point.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 5:40 PM

      BF3 still wows me so it's not hard to believe.

    • reply
      February 20, 2013 8:22 PM

      Is Bf4 going to be the authentic CoD experience that DICE wanted to create with Bf3?

      • reply
        February 21, 2013 12:51 AM

        I love that EA has failed with three consecutive games to recreate the CoD single player experience. Probably one of the easiest formulas to emulate and they can't do it even when they throw unlimited money at it.

        Medal of Honor, Battlefield 3, Medal of Honor: Warfighter. All terrible single player experiences.

        • reply
          February 21, 2013 3:48 PM

          "Bf4 will be the authentic CoD experience I've always wanted to make (for money)" - Patrick Bach

          Patrick is feeling really confident this time! Lol.

        • reply
          February 26, 2013 12:52 AM

          Well in all fairness the "COD experience" isn't so great these days, either, and hasn't been for quite some time.

          • reply
            February 26, 2013 10:41 AM

            Treyarch and Infinity Ward still do COD better than Danger Close or DICE, even though they are using dated technology. If the whole goal of COD is a rail shooter with a spectacle of destruction, then you'd think the latest and greatest in graphics would give you the edge.

    • reply
      February 25, 2013 10:46 AM

      I was a bit surprised BF4 didn't make an appearance at the PS4 press conf like this story theorized. Bigger surprise was a no-show by EA completely.

Hello, Meet Lola