Welcome to the New Shacknews

You're currently viewing the beginning of a full site renovation for Shacknews.com. You might find something working oddly. If you do, let us know! More exciting new features to follow.

Battlefield gets a teaser video promoting tomorrow's announcement

It's eight seconds long ... only three of which show anything.

51

I've been on a rant lately about teasers to teasers. Battlefield actually started it with its tease to an upcoming announcement. Then Sega had a 30-second JPG to the eventual announcement of Dawn of War 3. Now Battlefield is again baiting us with a nine-second teaser to tomorrow's announcement, only three seconds of which really shows anything.

Let's just say the reaction of the soldier in the video mirrors mine - one of disbelief.

Something is rising in front of the soldier, as a shadow covers his face and his eyes rise to follow the ascent of ... well, your guess is as good as mine and we will need to wait until tomorrow to actually figure it out. 

World of Games had originally said the game would be set in World War I, but that has since been removed. However, it has been replaced with what could be the actual packshot for the game:

I guess we will know more tomorrow at 4 p.m. ET

Contributing Editor

From The Chatty

  • reply
    May 5, 2016 10:20 AM

    John Keefer posted a new article, Battlefield gets a teaser video promoting tomorrow's announcement

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 10:23 AM

      The photoshop work on that case is so awful, it can't be real.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 10:39 AM

        Plus it's basically aping bf4

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:44 PM

        I agree. My bosses who can't tell proper design for good marketing from plain text on paper could even tell that looks stupid.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:23 AM

      That looks amazing!, the hype is real for BF5 that is how Frostbite 4 looks like in DX12 Ultra mode, apparently we are all going to loose our shit tomorrow and think BF4 was just a bad dream.

      I want to believe... the force is strong with this one.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 11:26 AM

        and think BF4 was just a bad dream.

        Maybe if you can cool it on the hype you can enjoy actually good games. BF4 was very good if you stayed with it after the first couple months. Really we didn’t have it too badly on PC.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 11:31 AM

          I don't have a beef with BF4, its a good game.

          Try telling that to the others that seem to bitch about the net code all the time and the stability issues.

          Apparently BF5 has all new net code, hopefully it will own.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 11:33 AM

            I also heard that the next TES is an all new engine :D

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 11:38 AM

              Dude! I have felt it for a while now the next Elder Scrolls will be at E3 I can't freaking wait!

              Freaking awesome hey I heard this as well(I hope its true) its about time,s o cool, E3 is going to own.

              I thought Dishonored 2 might use it but its using their internal Void engine based on id tech 6, I am sure they want to launch the new TES with Elder Scrolls and ti totally makes sense they would do that.

              Can't wait!

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 11:55 AM

                No valcan, the next TES wont be at E3 this year and Inwas being sarcastic

                • reply
                  May 5, 2016 12:16 PM

                  I really think it will be there, if not they will 100% show the next Elder Scrolls at the least, there is no way they just going show Dishonored 2 which is out this year.

                  Next Elder Scrolls @ E3 2016 = 100% if you ask me.

                  • reply
                    May 5, 2016 1:04 PM

                    They'll show more than Dishonored 2, but it won't be TES6. Remember they didn't even announce that Fallout 4 existed until 6 months or so before it released.

                    Definitely:

                    Dishonored 2, Fallout DLC, DOOM post-release hype and DLC / ongoing support, TES Online hype and ongoing support, TES Hearthstone.

                    Maybe:

                    A little ongoing hype for Fallout Shelter, Has that awful looking Battlecry game been cancelled? Starfield (whatever that is, trademark filed 4/11/2016).

                    Possible, but likely just a screenshot or cinematic like Dishonored 2 got a year ago:

                    Maybe Machinegames or Tango have had enough time to show whatever they're working on.

                    Massive surprise:

                    Arkane is supposedly working on two games, Prey II? Terminator Future Shock II?

                    No way in 2016:

                    TES6, Fallout 5, Doom Two. I think it is more likely they will announce a sequel to a 1995 Terminator game, a franchise that I'm pretty sure they don't even have the license to create games for, than they are to announce TES6 this year.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 2:48 PM

              Well, too be fair, they said that about Skyrim as well.

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 2:49 PM

                they always say that and its still that old shitty engine with a few addons there and there. Just like COD.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 11:37 AM

            As much as you can do all new netcode, it is fairly obvious at this point that massively complex games like BF, Planetside, etc are pushing the bandwidth designs of our ISP models. Our internet simply wasn't designed for the best behavior for low latency gaming on this scale. As such, I am not hoping for much magic. If it is as good as BF4 currently is I won't have issues.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 11:44 AM

              This is such a massive point "pushing the bandwidth designs of our ISP models. Our internet simply wasn't designed for the best behavior for low latency gaming on this scale"

              Our internet info structure really is like 1990(well not quit :) but you know what I mean) and it blows we really need to upgrade that shit. The question is when the hell will that happen :( and will they charge the shit out of us if they do?

              I think more and more especially with the new consoles and the new PC games pushing graphics and content hardcore, how the hell is the MP games going to keep up? It really is going to be a major issue. Shit I know my Telus can not handle real 1080p TV streaming, I doubt its real 720p, so yeah not much else to say.

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pG0yq2ATWbc that has to work on game NET code these days that shit is not an easy job :( props to them for sure.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 12:12 PM

              If the server is on fiber, there is plenty of bandwidth to do all the physics and keep shit running smooth. Dice just sucks at programming netcodes and ea is going to farm as many consistant servers as it can onto 1 box.

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 12:15 PM

                There really is no excuse.

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 12:20 PM

                Yeah dice has always been fairly terrible at netcode. BF4 finally got way better. However, the number of times the exact same bugs showed up year after year in their games always makes me hold off for awhile.

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 12:33 PM

                Did you ever rent a server for a BF games? Server providers charge a lot more for them because of the bandwidth they require. And that is just one end, it takes two to tango. Put them on fiber all you want, but if your client end is sending low priority packets (which they most likely will be) and your ISP decides to bounce you a couple thousand miles just because before it hits your crappy router, the best server and connection in the world won’t fix it all.

                The BF4 fixes were essentially ways for the game to change what stuff it needed, predicted, and prioritized to get out in those likely to be delayed packets. Then handling the way the servers made their predictions based on that.

                You still have this infrastructure in the middle that was not designed around sending gaming information packets as quickly as possible between a gaming client and a server.

                • reply
                  May 5, 2016 12:36 PM

                  (and yes it is more involved than that and I am not a programmer who can explain it well, but "netcode" being good or bad is pretty laughable anyway. It is a barely comprehensible statement.)

                  • reply
                    May 5, 2016 12:39 PM

                    So now youre going to argue that netcode cant be programmed good or bad? Thats your new position? God youre the worst

                    • reply
                      May 5, 2016 12:52 PM

                      Good or bad is too simple. It doesn't take too much googling of "netcode" to show that even if you aren't an expert.

                      • reply
                        May 5, 2016 12:57 PM

                        good or bad are especially useful ways to summarize the top level qualities of a complex thing, especially when you can only understand the top level output (how does the game feel) and not the technical nuances of the thing you're attempting to talk about

                        • reply
                          May 5, 2016 1:00 PM

                          Within very limited contexts. But when people are saying "there is no excuse" and "fairly terrible at netcode" then nuances matter because they clearly don't get just how many things are involved.

                          Over simplification leads to unrealistic expectations and anger.

                          • reply
                            May 5, 2016 1:12 PM

                            when their games have the same issues version after version which other competitors do not have it's fair to say they are delivering low quality results and there is no excuse in the sense that what customers are asking for is entirely possible to have

                            • reply
                              May 5, 2016 1:21 PM

                              What competitors?

                              Seriously. What other games are putting 64 players out there with physics based projectiles on every weapon, vehicles, terrain deformation, destruction...

                              Name one that is doing that better.

                              Actually just reduce it to 64 players and vehicles and you end up with very few games and all of them I can think of have had severe complaints about "netcode". (RO2 and the ArmA series come to mind, searched on Planetside 2 and it seems a lot of people have been complaining about that for years).

                              Latency will always exist, what people call netcode is trying to compensate for that and its many varied ways of showing up due to our internet infrastructure. DICE could have done a better job of it in BF4 and eventually they did.

                              But no, there are no competitors doing it that much better than BF with the same type of game.

                              • reply
                                May 5, 2016 1:57 PM

                                Even if you truly believe they have no comparable competitors (lol) this

                                What other games are putting 64 players out there with physics based projectiles on every weapon, vehicles, terrain deformation, destruction...

                                is their choice. No one required them to choose this feature set. If they continually can't deliver it at the same quality levels of other popular shooters it's not consumers job to forgive them because it's hard. It's Dice's job to make a competitive shooter on feel, connectivity, etc.

                                • reply
                                  May 5, 2016 2:05 PM

                                  You said their competitors do it. Name a competitor that does it.

                                  Otherwise, it is a sacrifice some gamers make to play games that do those things. Obviously they made mistakes and had room to improve as they have made a lot of changes, but I don't think you can say they just suck at netcode when no one else is doing what they are doing.

                            • reply
                              May 5, 2016 1:25 PM

                              I'd stop feeding the troll if I were you.

                            • reply
                              May 5, 2016 1:29 PM

                              I mean, just have a look at the hand wringing over at the overwatch reddit about server tick.

                              https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/3u3zj8/20_tick_discussion/

                  • reply
                    May 5, 2016 12:39 PM

                    "I don't know what I'm talking about but let me tell you about it"

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 3:11 PM

              no...it has everything thing to do with "normalizing" the play experience for all people...including the lowest common denominator with a shitty ISP. because of this...EVERYONE suffers...quite literally. what needs to happen is they need to abandon this moronic concept of somehow bridging the divide between low and high latency players. it needs to be unplayable for anyone rockin' 100+ pings....plain and simple. has nothing to do with limitations of our current Internet or the ISP's at all. BF4 servers get all sorts of broken when 4+ players have 120+ pings and that's on a server with 64 total players(all of which are 50~ pings or less on avg.).

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 3:42 PM

                That means goodbye every playing with friends in Europe.

                Honestly I don’t mind be disadvantaged playing against people in Europe, that is sorta the way it should work at those pings. But, I would like it to be somewhat doable.

                • reply
                  May 5, 2016 4:02 PM

                  Oh no, the horrors! All my friends in europe... Wtf?

                  • reply
                    May 5, 2016 4:13 PM

                    I actually have a bunch I game with. Sorry I'm not you.

                • reply
                  May 5, 2016 4:07 PM

                  fine with me. i don't need to play games like battlefield with the entire globe. the game relies too heavily on a 1:1 relationship between players that are playing. you can get away with it in just about every single other style of a game except a shooter like battlefield.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:20 PM

          I do not think he is capable of being less than 1000% on the hype meter.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:27 AM

      Clothing doesn’t scream 'modern'. mmmmmmmmm

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:29 AM

      the shadow is an alien space ship

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:29 AM

      That is either Bad Company 3, or the dude is looking up at a huge mech or something, or both.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 11:31 AM

        Also get a mech/spaceship feeling.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:40 PM

        Doesn't look like any of the BC squad.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:30 AM

      I hate teasers ...

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 11:34 AM

        I agree man :( it has to stop, either show the damn game or don't I don't get it. Well at least BF5 showed something I have to give them credit for that most don't even do that at all.

        Do teasers really do any positive thing for the game and hype train?

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 11:38 AM

          We have two threads about BF5 today. We would probably have none without it.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 11:46 AM

            :) LOL, I guess it works then.

            Still I wish they showed more and not mess around, but like you pointed out it obviously works.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 11:51 AM

              Gamers love hype. They really do. If you track back on the recent Doom ever since they flashed the name it has been all hype. If they had never decided to beta test the MP Shack would still be frothing over the very idea.

              Expectations are easy. Delivering is hard.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 12:36 PM

            Yeah I don't really blame teasers when they're showing it tomorrow. If it wasn't until next week or something that would be annoying.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 12:46 PM

        Your name would be way cooler if it was Feekinator.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 3:54 PM

          The name is from my avatar on Twitter, which I have had for years. The image was designed by Aaron Williams of Dork Tower fame. He and I have been friends for awhile and he created a couple cool ones for me.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:42 AM

      well thank god it's not ww2. box art looks pretty modern.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 11:58 AM

      Fucking pumped. Love me some battlefield.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 12:42 PM

      Battlefield 5 to be called Battlefield 1 ? Looks like they are going for a franchise re boot huh.

      Source: https://battlefieldforum.net/index.php?threads/battlefield-5-to-be-called-battlefield-1.165/

      I am down for what ever they do personally, so then it could still be WWI...

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 1:00 PM

        Yeah the teaser really only say BATTLEFIELD, no numbers. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 1:24 PM

          BATTLEFIELD WORLD PREMIER

          I just take that to mean the next entry in the BF franchise, a reboot doesn't make a lot of sense to me considering the first game was called 1942. This is going to have some kind of subtitle or number, they're just saving it for the reveal.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 1:59 PM

        I honestly don't see the point in changing to restart the sequel order. None of the main line Battlefield games connect with any of the others at all. The only games that do are do are Bad Company 1 and 2. Its just a military sandbox game.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:00 PM

          I won't be surprised if like CoD, they just drop numbering altogether.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:08 PM

          Agree. I thought BF 2 was a dumb name for a game. Did that mean Vietnam wasn't a real BF game?

          I could almost buy that when BF3 came and BF2142 wasn't counted, but then you got BF4 next and nothing in between. BF:Hardline will be another orphan of the numbering if this is BF5.

          But, what made BF2, BF3, and BF4 deserve those numbers? BF2 and BF3 had completely new engines. BF4 wasn't nearly as different.

          I don’t get their naming scheme.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 2:10 PM

            bad company started out as a all new BF console only game, then BC2 came out and they ported it to PC as well. BF3 was a direct BF2 sequel.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 2:11 PM

              But not a 2142 sequel because BF2 and BF3 occur in the same era? So the BF numbers are only for modern military themed games?

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 2:12 PM

                so far looks like yes, either I dont care GIVE ME THAT NEW BF GAME RITE NOW

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:10 PM

          3 & 4 are related

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 2:12 PM

            Not in SP plot. Their MP is similar and the engine didn’t change much, but beyond that they are not tied together.

            • reply
              May 5, 2016 2:43 PM

              No there IS a connection between them. The Russian in the BF4 prison that escapes with them is the same one from BF3.

              • reply
                May 5, 2016 3:43 PM

                Ohhhhhhhhhhhh. Yeah I totally missed that. The world didn't seem that much worse for wear since the events of BF3, but honestly both had such dumb overarching Tom Clancy style plots that I don’t remember.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:22 PM

        EA has to compete with Activision on names.

        Battlefield 5 has to change to something like Battle of Field.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:25 PM

          Battlefield: Infinity + 1 Warfare

          Activision will respond with:

          Call of Duty: Nunh unh, infinity +1 is still infinity warfare

          prompting EA to respond with

          Battlefield: My dad can beat up your dad.

          • reply
            May 5, 2016 3:18 PM

            my dad can beat up your dad quitsies no anti-quitsies no startsies

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:50 PM

        personally hoping for a Battlefield/Battletoads crossover

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 1:00 PM

      I think hes looking up to a giant zeppelin, omg plzplzplz

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 2:05 PM

      Zombies? I think so.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:07 PM

        I don't even think I bought Battlefield 4, but that doesn’t sound right.

        • reply
          May 5, 2016 2:18 PM

          No I did, but it says I played only 3 hours.

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 2:12 PM

      What if it becomes sort of modular? Perhaps instead of different regions it's different time periods?

      It'd be hell to develop though, having to support and balance so many elements.

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 2:15 PM

        I loved this idea when people first started mentioning it, but then I imagined all the complaints about community fracturing and how some of the coolest eras might not get played much and I got less enthused.

        I would totally love an SP campaign like that though. There was a game that tried to do this and failed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darkest_of_Days

    • reply
      May 5, 2016 2:25 PM

      Damn, we get all kinds of news tomorrow. nVidia and Battfield!

      • reply
        May 5, 2016 3:48 PM

        a live gameplay session played on nvidia 1080 !

    • reply
      May 6, 2016 9:00 AM

      It's a WWI game... looks like the soldier is wearing a trench coat, (and not some futuristic exoskeleton, as every game today). I bet the shadow is a Mark I tank ...a wild guess, I know.