bf4 Gaming 'Battlefield 4' beta outed on EA Origin Store

[spaceelf]

I highly doubt there's going to be a Frostbite 3 anytime soon. Considering Win8 adds DX11.1 and thats what will most likely be available in 2014 as well, the current engine should suffice for a long time.

Frostbite 2 is far beyond current gen consoles, so I don't see what the point would be.

[Emn1ty]

BF3 disappointing? Are you being serious right now?

I'm kind of having the same opinion. The game was magnificent, don't get me wrong, but the problem with the game is its modern setting. Way too many shooters are based in modern times and honestly the battlefield seems much less dynamic. I've been itching for a good WW2 shooter and honestly am missing BF1942 greatly because of it. At least that had a great context to it and the maps were fantastic. BF3 has fewer, less interesting maps (at least that seems to be the case) and less diverse vehicles/weaponry.

1942 had vehicles from Britain, America, Germany, Russia and Japan with fronts everywhere in between. Flying heavy bombers over El Ala-mien or shooting rocket trucks on Kursk were all great and unique experiences. BF3 just doesn't give me that feel, I guess. In fact, I still regard BF2 as far better than any of the Bad Companies and BF3.

Maybe I'll like BF3 if they introduce of the 1942 maps into the game. So far I was just never really sucked into the game like I was with BF2 and 1942. I think I even have more game time in 1943.

In regards to the topic, though, it is inevitable for them to make another Battlefield at this point. The series is far too successful.

[dead.cell]

I'm kind of having the same opinion. The game was magnificent, don't get me wrong, but the problem with the game is its modern setting. Way too many shooters are based in modern times and honestly the battlefield seems much less dynamic. I've been itching for a good WW2 shooter and honestly am missing BF1942 greatly because of it. At least that had a great context to it and the maps were fantastic. BF3 has fewer, less interesting maps (at least that seems to be the case) and less diverse vehicles/weaponry.

1942 had vehicles from Britain, America, Germany, Russia and Japan with fronts everywhere in between. Flying heavy bombers over El Ala-mien or shooting rocket trucks on Kursk were all great and unique experiences. BF3 just doesn't give me that feel, I guess. In fact, I still regard BF2 as far better than any of the Bad Companies and BF3.

Maybe I'll like BF3 if they introduce of the 1942 maps into the game. So far I was just never really sucked into the game like I was with BF2 and 1942. I think I even have more game time in 1943.

In regards to the topic, though, it is inevitable for them to make another Battlefield at this point. The series is far too successful.

BF3 having a modern setting isn't the problem with the game at all. That's like saying you bought chocolate ice cream when you wanted vanilla. Just doesn't make sense...

Also, while there's no shortage of modern settings, there is also no shortage of WWII shooters. Hell, we still have more coming too if I'm not mistaken. Personally, I'm rather burnt out on WWII to be honest with you. The only thing that excites me any is how it would look in Frostbite 2.0+.

[Emn1ty]

BF3 having a modern setting isn't the problem with the game at all. That's like saying you bought chocolate ice cream when you wanted vanilla. Just doesn't make sense...

Also, while there's no shortage of modern settings, there is also no shortage of WWII shooters. Hell, we still have more coming too if I'm not mistaken. Personally, I'm rather burnt out on WWII to be honest with you. The only thing that excites me any is how it would look in Frostbite 2.0+.

Name the last WWII shooter that was released. Cause there are only two that I can think of and they aren't recent (Red Orchestra and World at War). And no it isn't like ordering chocolate when you want vanilla, but ordering something that looks and smells tasty but when you put it in your mouth it's bland (like the fajita I had last night). Perhaps I just need to wait for better maps. There are only two or three good maps in the game, most of the others are just chaos or everyone sits in the same spot and it becomes a giant choke point. Conquest doesn't operate the same way in BF3 as it did in 1942, too easy to camp spawns in BF3 and not enough distant capture points to pull out of it. There's a lot of little things I feel have made the game more annoying to play.

I also really miss the ability to take down enemy aircraft carriers as well as the ability to use destroyers.

[dead.cell]

I'm not criticizing you for having issues with Battlefield 3, but rather how you opened that statement.

"...the problem with the game is its modern setting..."

Just seemed like a silly thing to say, as one does not buy a game expecting it to be something else, ya know? Hence my reference to the chocolate/vanilla thing. Battlefield 3 is Battlefield 3, there isn't much reason why it needs to change to something vastly different.

Honestly, if they wanted to do a WWII shooter again (which they likely will seeing as they started with 1942), they'd be better off making it its own game and taking the proper amount of time, resources, and putting in the energy to make it great. At least, that's how I feel about it.

The community though as of late seems like they want something vastly different than they've seen in shooters lately, wanting developers to get crazy/creative. Whether that's a good thing though is something I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

[Noir Angel]

/facepalm

What? I don't play shooters in multiplayer mode, don't enjoy it.

[Emn1ty]

I'm not criticizing you for having issues with Battlefield 3, but rather how you opened that statement.

"...the problem with the game is its modern setting..."

Just seemed like a silly thing to say, as one does not buy a game expecting it to be something else, ya know? Hence my reference to the chocolate/vanilla thing. Battlefield 3 is Battlefield 3, there isn't much reason why it needs to change to something vastly different.

Honestly, if they wanted to do a WWII shooter again (which they likely will seeing as they started with 1942), they'd be better off making it its own game and taking the proper amount of time, resources, and putting in the energy to make it great. At least, that's how I feel about it.

The community though as of late seems like they want something vastly different than they've seen in shooters lately, wanting developers to get crazy/creative. Whether that's a good thing though is something I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

There is a large response to this as to why I feel BF3 doesn't really measure up to old battlefields. But its a tangent.

What? I don't play shooters in multiplayer mode, don't enjoy it.

Battlefield was originally nothing but multiplayer. It was either online vs other players or a campaign which was the multiplayer maps with bots. So I think you just bought the wrong game, heh.

[Noir Angel]

I didn't buy it, I got it free I did point that out. Not that it changes my opinion, I find Mass Effect 3 and Left 4 Dead 2 much more fun to play online than CoD and BF.

[Slammers]

What? I don't play shooters in multiplayer mode, don't enjoy it.

I see, that explains why you make the effort to come in here and post and even post replys in a thread that is clearly about a beta that will be multiplayer only then? Well done!

It'd be great if DICE left single player out of BF4 completely and focused completely on multiplayer but that will never happen.

[trag3dy]

While I couldn't care less if BF4 includes a single player campaign I doubt it will happen. They are going to continue trying to draw in as many people from CoD as they can and single player and/or co op helps with that. I do feel that BF3 could have been a much bigger game (more maps, bigger maps) if DICE had not dedicated resources to a single player campaign.

I definitely felt the single player in BF3 was more tedious than anything else to get through though, especially on the hardest difficulty. Just not fun at all.

[Crisp]

3 types of people who brought BF3.

1) Battlefield veterans who were sold into buying it based on DICE saying the game was going to be based around BF2, with all the hype videos, which turned out to be a lie.

2) CoD players who love it because they've jumped on the band wagon and praise the game as it has better graphics and game play, who have also turned it into a CoD vs BF war and have to keep comparing the two games when they're not even alike, oh wait they are now because of BF's direction in chasing to get more CoD players over. (new target audience)

3) Sheepeople who just buy anything because the reviews say it's good or because their friends play it and they have no opinion of their own.

Being in the category of a dissapointed BF vet, the only thing I can compare BF3 to is a polished turd.

Anyone who buys into this hole "buy MoH get early access to BF4 beta" is an idiot, if your intention is to only get it for the beta... remember what happened last time with the early BF3 beta?

[trag3dy]

I do agree that pre ordering MoH just to get beta access to BF4 is stupid if only because DICE hasn't even confirmed they are working on it yet. As for the rest, I don't fit into any of those 3 categories you listed and I'm not sure what your point with that list is. Though, I would be listed under #4, which you didn't list - I bought it because I liked it.

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

I did like Battlefield 3 but news of the "Premium Edition" or whatever the heck it's called turned me off.. as I just feel like we're now being milked for cash. News that BF4 is potentially only a year away only reinforces that feeling for me :(

[+SOOPRcow MVC]

I did like Battlefield 3 but news of the "Premium Edition" or whatever the heck it's called turned me off.. as I just feel like we're now being milked for cash. News that BF4 is potentially only a year away only reinforces that feeling for me :(

The premium edition, in my eyes, is no different then ordering any of the old "expansion packs" but getting even more for your money. Also, It's not like its a Call of Duty map pack where all you get is literally new maps.

[S00N3R FR3AK]

I do agree that pre ordering MoH just to get beta access to BF4 is stupid if only because DICE hasn't even confirmed they are working on it yet. As for the rest, I don't fit into any of those 3 categories you listed and I'm not sure what your point with that list is. Though, I would be listed under #4, which you didn't list - I bought it because I liked it.

It is official now, I would also be #4

I don't get people that have to generalize like that.

[Dotdot]

Tbh from the videos of MOH, Im not that overly impressed. Still think BF3 stands alone as the finest online modern combat game out there at the moment, so BF4 interests me deeply. However Im much more a fan of modern military fps/sims and once Arma 3 is out I,ll probs head in that direction.

Little worried at how early BF4 is coming out, so im guessing it wont be modern military in theme.

[what]

BF3 was very good but the whole premium thing and the "unlock for cash" was just a spit in the face to all the players who worked so hard to unlock all their gear for EA to turn round and just let bratty kids get their mom and dad to splash out cash to unlock the same content.

Maybe some people prefer to have access to all content without grinding for hundreds of hours. Some people don't have the time to dedicate and want to play casually with everything available in the game.