Recommended Posts

Well in general principle the whole BF system while pretending to be regular soldiers is pretty much spec ops based. 

 

My main point is though that a real world soldier have so much more awareness that doesn't exist in a virtual game world. heck just simple things like chopper to the west. well in HC mode you have no clue where west is. all the HUD options merely replaces soldier awareness.

 

take flight sims for example. back when developers actually bothered making costly combat flight sims for a limited niche market that allowed them to make money, but not much(actually it's more a publisher fault that developer fault that they died because they couldn't make back 10x), military pilots would actually say that, the most "realistic" sims where actually a lot harder to fly than a real jet, simple because well everything was correct, with the right hardware you had the rights stick and everything. BUT you weren't actually in the jet, you didn't feel the jet, you didn't feel and instinctively know your body and jets orientation. you couldn't just simple glance and look in other directions than you where flying, with with lock on view that makes you vision follow a target, unlike in a real jet it's hard to know what way the jet is actually pointed when you're looking at a target like that(granted VR helmets sort of fix that issue partly anyway). 

 

Sometimes, for realisms sake, you need to add helpers that real soldier don't have, because on the computer, you don't have what real solders have. 

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/warthog/ These are very advanced.

My current frustration now is bullet penetration, My sniper should be able to penetrate walls closeup or edges of walls. This crops up when people are lying behind a small wall and im above, the bullets seem to be temperamental about passing by the edge and hitting the person behind often giving my position away, its a clipping issue but really a high powered sniper should pass through.

 

The SRR-61 is lethal and worth playing through the others rifles for, range and velocity are great, as i play hardcore 90% of shots are kills.

 

Which assault rifle are people using, Ive stuck with the SAR-21 for the time although Ive unlocked the rest.

I had trouble with this too it's not automatic it is a set control. cropcircles was on the right track and it's not glitchy. First you target them while holding down Q on PC, R1 on PS4, and RB on Xbox One. Then you need to aim down your sights with your gun and get as many targets in it as possible and while aiming down sights you press Q, R1, or RB (depending on your console) to have your AI teammates including the chopper to attack those targets. Btw, sorry for this late post about it, but I just wanted to answer this question with a fully good answer so people could not be so confused.

I've unlocked all weapons and gadgets with the exception of the two new drone gadgets. I'll try to unlock them when I come home but I haven't been able to kill anyone as a jet pilot. The airspace is too small for me to handle and still be able to shoot down anything.

Random crashes and silent quitting of the game is really annoying.

I'm pretty disappointed with the china rising maps... Silk Road in particular is just awful, one of the worst battlefield maps I've ever played, very poorly balanced. Its completely wide open, with absolutely no cover almost no buildings and filled with vehicles. Its impossible to stay alive for more than 2 seconds outside a vehicle without being sniped across the map by recon or tanks.

 

Dragons Pass and Altai Range are alright, but kind of meh (and Altai Range is ridiculously bland graphically, it looks like it was whipped together super quickly with some stock assets :/).

EG gave China Rising 6/10 today, saying it "lacks 'levolution' or a consistent theme, and feels like filler"

 

Think it's time to hang up the dogtags on BF :/ I haven't played it since release weekend and have little interest in returning at this stage.

Yeah, filler is definitely the word I'd use to describe these maps.

 

BF3's premium had some excellent maps, I loved aftermath, back to karkand, end game, and armored kill was decent (sadly there no longer seems to be any servers with armored kill or end game in BF3 :( ). So when BF4 came out I went right ahead and got premium right away, but if the rest of the map packs are anything like this one I'll be regretting that (and not to mention the buggy state of the game)... Hopefully the rest will be better.

The new maps aren't pulling me in to the China Rising expansion pack, There more vehicle based and although on larger maps, Ive found on hardcore at least that they REALLY aren't suited to playing as infantry, its almost painful the amount Ive died and my kd and skill level has suffered unless I'm in a vehicle such as a tank or LAV. Also i don't think as Ive not seen any, the maps don't have any Features such as towers collapsing, Storms etc which at least was interesting in the standard Bf4 maps, On the desert map a sand storm would be really cool, reducing viewing distance.  For my style, they don't appeal.

 

Still not played Peaks so exclude that from my view, Ive only played maps on Conquest on Hardcore.

Forget the expansion stuff, how is the PC update working for folks? I played a bit this evening and did not have the audio drops like before. As to the "one hit kill" bug, I can't comment as I can never tell those kinds of things. I'm a casual BF player and I think my approach to the game helps me enjoy it more than what I'm seeing from others. 

 

I did play Altai Range earlier and as a pure Assault/Medic player I had a tough time, obviously. But it gives me reason to try out more vehicles and improve a bit. 

EA announces it's halted development of new content for Battlefield 4 until the game is fixed:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5175588/ea-halts-battlefield-4-expansions

 

Polygon updated its review score to 4 out of 10 because of the problems:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/29/5040656/battlefield-4-review

EA announces it's halted development of new content for Battlefield 4 until the game is fixed:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5175588/ea-halts-battlefield-4-expansions

 

Polygon updated its review score to 4 out of 10 because of the problems:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/29/5040656/battlefield-4-review

Wow. I haven't read about a game as buggy as Battlefield 4 in years. :|

Good, I'm glad to see a developer stepping up and taking action instead of just saying there's another department that handles the expansions like Maxis did with Sim City.

 

EA announces it's halted development of new content for Battlefield 4 until the game is fixed:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5175588/ea-halts-battlefield-4-expansions

 

Polygon updated its review score to 4 out of 10 because of the problems:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/29/5040656/battlefield-4-review

  • Like 1

Good, I'm glad to see a developer stepping up and taking action instead of just saying there's another department that handles the expansions like Maxis did with Sim City.

Just a slight correction, EA is the publisher. DICE is the developer. EA is the sole reason for all the mess and so it should be on them to stop pushing DICE so hard for release dates. Besides, the whole purpose was to beat Ghosts to launch and since that's out of the way, now they can focus on what is their second priority: a functioning game.

I do not dispute such a statement because that's what I was pointing out - that DICE is fixing it instead of working on expansion packs/more content like Maxis did while telling everyone "Don't worry, we'll eventually fix it, but here buy this $30 expansion pack that fixes vanilla game breaking bugs maybenot" and then when people complained they tried to pawn it off on another crew working only on extra content.

 

EA Games can go to hell, they have the worst reputation and if it weren't for them pushing bugged games out of the door to please shareholders we wouldn't get junk released anymore. 

 

EDIT: I see what you're pointing out, EA Games is "allowing" DICE to fix it in my opinion because DICE probably got extremely upset and pushed back finally with support from an outside source - always back room meetings/politics in a corporation that big. EA Games would have pushed for more expansions period, they should not be thanked for this decision in any way.

 

Just a slight correction, EA is the publisher. DICE is the developer. EA is the sole reason for all the mess and so it should be on them to stop pushing DICE so hard for release dates. Besides, the whole purpose was to beat Ghosts to launch and since that's out of the way, now they can focus on what is their second priority: a functioning game.

EA announces it's halted development of new content for Battlefield 4 until the game is fixed:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5175588/ea-halts-battlefield-4-expansions

 

Polygon updated its review score to 4 out of 10 because of the problems:

http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/29/5040656/battlefield-4-review

As one that doesn't have any issues with the game on PC, I hope that doesn't mean Mantle support is going to be delayed. I really want to test it out.

I haven't had too many problems with BF4 (the game itself, Battlelog is another story), but still more than BF3. For me it crashes while loading every third map (play two, loads the third and crashes) and randomly while playing the Shanghai map. I'm glad they are fixing the problems though, as some people are having it a lot worse. Clearly been rushed to release.

When it is working I'm enjoying BF4 far more than BF3. I can't put my finger on why, but it reminds me of BF2 a lot more than BF3 did. Teamwork feels a bit more important and rewarding again too.

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.