GameStop 'wowed' by Battlefield 4
Battlefield 4 has been shown off to at least one retailer, as confirmed by EA's own Origin.
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.
-
Shacknews
replySteve 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.-
I never finished the single player in BF3. Got bored.
-
[deleted]
-
I enjoyed it, great graphics showcase.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Oh man, I played that in 3D. FUCKING. AMAZING. The cockpit dome glass was crazy looking.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
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.
-
-
I really enjoyed Bad Company 2. It was open just enough to be interesting. BF3's campaign was terrible.
-
Who the hell plays BF games for SP? Unfortunately that revelation alone discredits your opinion.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
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.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
why is there a campaign mode in BF3 then? Thats singleplayer.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I actually enjoyed the hell out of Bad Company 1 SP.
-
-
Me too. I don't get the hate. The dialogue and acting was top notch and genuinely funny, too.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Never even started it past the opening which I used to setup some of my controls.
-
Battlefield was never a single player game... who gives a shit?
-
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.
-
-
[deleted]
-
But were they blown away?
-
Imagine that, a company that makes money on selling games was wowed by a game
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
I'm not quite sure why this warranted an article. Perhaps Steve Watts is in gamestop's pockets
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
wowed, just wowed.
-
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.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Can't dislike a game if the graphix r good.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
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.
-
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 ?!?!!?-
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.
-
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.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
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.-
-
-
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. -
[deleted]
-
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.
-
-
-
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
-
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. -
BF1942: Amazing.
Modern Combat: Amazing.
BF3: Amazing, but I got bored of it after a few months.-
[deleted]
-
-
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.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
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.
-
-
-
They weren't MIND BLOWN ??
-
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.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
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.
-
-
-
-
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.
-
-
-
-
oh god me too. I feel like Ive got KY on my boots.
-
-
BF3 is fucking awesome (on pc). It surpassed the hype for me.
-
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.-
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.-
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.-
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.
-
-
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.
-
-
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. -
[deleted]
-
-
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
-
Map quality is the biggest issue. Same with getting rid of the doritos, unlimited sprint, no in game voice com, and bringing back commander.
-
-
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.-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
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.-
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.
-
[deleted]
-
Play on Hardcore servers.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
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*-
[deleted]
-
-
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.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Modern warfare bullshit has been fucking played out. Time to bring it back home. Bring back the WW2.
-
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.
-
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.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
80's Cold War. Plum and wood AK74s and awesome vz.82s for everyone!
-
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.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Battlefield 1916 perhaps?
-
Though I'd be all over a Battlefield: Korea faster than you can say Nehi Grape!
http://i.imgur.com/0GCwR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mOaYW.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/higP0.jpg
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
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.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
It seems soon for a new battlefield game. What is this one adding?
-
A showcase for new-gen consoles.
-
A new island for the publisher.
-
-
-
-
-
Trench warfare would make for shitty gameplay.
-
To be honest, most WW2 and Modern FPS games have very little to do with how WW2 or Modern wars are fought.
-
-
-
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.
-
-
-
-
-
-
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.
-
-
