Battlefield 4 coming Fall 2013, powered by Frostbite 3
Electronic Arts has officially "revealed" Battlefield 4, a more "human, dramatic, and believable" action game powered by the new Frostbite 3 engine. The upcoming shooter will be released this fall, according to EA.
Electronic Arts has officially "revealed" Battlefield 4, a more "human, dramatic, and believable" action game powered by the new Frostbite 3 engine. The upcoming shooter will be released this fall, according to EA.
According to the press release, "multiplayer game design elements are incorporated into the single-player campaign." That means you'll be able to direct squad mates, play through "huge environments," and ride vehicles all in the campaign. The single-player mode will also track player progress, much like in MP.
Press were shown a 17-minute gameplay demo. However, here's EA's official description:
The demo begins as the player--Recker--opens his eyes to discover that he is trapped in a rapidly sinking car with three of his squad mates. Shooting the window is the only way out. Panic and fear are pushed aside as Recker makes a difficult decision--take the shot and recover the intel but risk that not everyone will survive. The emotional demo features a cast of characters unrivaled in interactive entertainment.
Unfortunately, multiplayer has not been detailed.
"We are so humbled and proud to debut Battlefield 4 on a global stage with simultaneous events in San Francisco and Stockholm. To be this early in development, and to already be so polished is a huge achievement for the DICE team and reflection of their passion and commitment to driving the franchise forward. Today's demo was just the beginning -- we have so much more in store," EA Games VP Patrick Soderlund said in the press release. "It is thrilling to witness peoples' reaction when seeing the game for the first time. It really makes you realize that we are at the beginning of a whole new era for gaming. As artists and craftspeople, we are focused on creating a dynamic, open design that brings people together with amazing, surprising unscripted moments that they'll talk about for days. That's the beauty of Battlefield."
-
Shacknews
replyAndrew Yoon posted a new article, Battlefield 4 coming Fall 2013, powered by Frostbite 3.
Electronic Arts has officially "revealed" Battlefield 4, a more "human, dramatic, and believable" action game powered by the new Frostbite 3 engine. The upcoming shooter will be released this fall, according to EA.-
And we've updated this post with the 17-minute gameplay demo.
-
-
Pretty good contrast to the quote from EA guy in the same story:
"It is thrilling to witness peoples' reaction when seeing the game for the first time. It really makes you realize that we are at the beginning of a whole new era for gaming. As artists and craftspeople, we are focused on creating a dynamic, open design that brings people together with amazing, surprising unscripted moments that they'll talk about for days. That's the beauty of Battlefield."
More like that's the beauty of Battlefield's multiplayer, what does that have to do with this garbage?
-
A game only a stockholder could love.
-
That's what EA needs right now, considering that they're about to go through a reorg, and are commencing an executive search committee for a new CEO (i.e.: not simply promoting Peter Moore or Frank Gibeau).
Battlefield 4 probably started development right after Battlefield 3 shipped, and it was probably the most sound of the "+1 to game number" sequel ideas outside of EA Sports. Look at Army of Two 3; look at Dead Space 3; look at Dragon Age 3; yuck.
-
-
How's that working out for them?
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
I would like to see some mutliplayer gameplay footage that show off the map design. I could care less about a disposable singleplayer. I mostly want to know how the maps are set up and what is the lead platform. I would like to see maps designed with 32+ people in mind again as the ones in BF3 definately weren't.
-
it's "I couldn't care less" for christ sake!
-
-
-
-
-
-
This was my thought. I kept thinking HOLY CRAP that looks amazing, but it doesn't look that fun to really play. Just run forward and the world explodes at your feet through scripted events.
Meh. Too bad, I wish they took all that obvious graphic talent and made a game that was actually fun to play rather than one where you needed some advil and a barf bag after you finished playing.
-
-
not spoilt, but demand better, it looks absolutely great (for the most part, barring some weird shininess and overuse of HDR and screen smear) but the thing is its *way* to busy and scripted, go to that cover and *pop* the enemies appear, go through that door and *pop* enemies appear, go up that stair and *pop* an helicopter appear. I loved how BC1 handled it I've said it before and will continue to say it until the end of time. For me I would prefer that once you enter an area *all* enemies are populated and start doing what they are supposed, guard, walk, wank whatever, then you approach in whatever way suits you play style, for me slow, deliberate I pick them off one by one, for other they might go in guns blazing.
-
looks like a fun SP campaign but we need more MP details, i hoped they'd at least show a minute of that
-
SP footage always looks far more dramatic when it comes to 1st trailers though, this is how it's always been done. We'll get MP trailers in due course but they always show the scripted scenes to show off the engine and gameplay first.
-
-
Russians forever the bad guys.
-
[deleted]
-
-
I hate the "X hours earlier..." story construction so much.
-
Yes pretty cliche by now and feels like they are overreaching for a "movie" feel.
-
[deleted]
-
No, I'd rather they put together a linear story and not depend on a tired narrative conceit to generate interest and tension.
-
[deleted]
-
More to the point, I wish they'd redirect some of the money that's going into the tech and assets and hire a better writer. Or just hire one. A smart and well written story with interesting characters would go so much farther than a new coat of paint on the same war game we've been playing for almost ten years.
-
[deleted]
-
I'll bet the game will have it. BF3 did the very same thing, beginning at the end.
-
It makes a lot of sense to use that device for a game. During the development a lot of stuff gets cut out, so you never know which locations actually end up in your game before it's all done. So making the story a bit non-linear loosens up the need to tie everything together perfectly. For the actual story it's garbage though.
-
-
BF3 sure did
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
nope. not necessary. the BF franchise has always been about MP capabilities. they shoehorn in some SP "writing and characters" in BF3 just to take a bite out of CoD, which has always been mostly about the dramatic SP or coop campaign... and CoD has the disposable MP part.
if you want to get writing assignments, send them to CoD. That's where I want my linear stories well written and characters to remember. Everyone knows Captain Price. Battlefield? Uhhhhhh nope. That's not their focus.-
I know it isn't their focus, but if they're going to market the game by directing my attention to the singleplayer campaign then the story telling needs to improve if they want to keep it. I don't expect you all to agree or for them to change their production: I'm just expressing my disappointment.
-
That's fine. One major issue is that It's also potentially dreadful scope creep to the series. Battlefield never really had a story. Just missions. CoD has a story and characters and arcs and betrayal and that stuff. Same with BLOPS 1 and 2.
The SP addon to BF3 was just the training/tutorial to me. Tweak your config, get shit all squared away in SP, unlock a few things. Then you hit MP, where the game excels and is the focal point. The marketing for single player is more of "yep we have it too, check it out" but I don't think they are trying to direct your attention to it.-
And that's fair. But then the BF3 single player campaign is a shitty tutorial because it is so tightly scripted. By way of comparison, I really enjoyed the BC2 campaign because the maps were much more open, in part because the destruction was much more pervasive and effective, and the player's freedom to choose any combination of weapons meant the player was free to choose his strategy, too. Of course the story was silly, but the squad mates were fun personalities, and it served its purpose, as an entertaining tutorial, much better than the too serious and too narrow BF3 campaign.
-
BC2's SP was pretty much a sandbox except for the few on-rails/scenario based things. You even usually got given weapon choices and multiple paths (or could create your own with explosives).
And it managed to be 100x more entertaining than the BF3 SP, which was such a hollow COD clone. Only the tank bit was good, the jet bit was nice to look at but gameplay wise it was entirely meh.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
I think it looks fantastic. But then I also totally enjoyed BF3 SP so ...
Just finished CoD: MW 2 last night and this BF4's scripted moments crap all over CoD's scripted moments. And once again, Dice knocks it out of the park with the sound fidelity.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
Godammit I've been playing BF3 wrong for months. When reloading I try to duck behind cover. Seems I should be standing in the motherfucking open and reloading at will based on this video!
-
wowowowowowowowowowowowow
-
If EA/DICE are going to attempt to use graphics as the pathway to the gamer's heart (which is a flawed idea, more focus should be put on characters and narrative) then the visuals will have to look a whole lot better than this.
This looks perfectly fine, but they seem to be aiming for some sort of deeper thing and they are nowhere close to accomplishing that. Someone give those folks at EA a few copies of Bioshock Infinite.-
From an art/design standpoint, Bioshock Infinite is better than BF3. From an engine/technical standpoint, BF3 is still the best looking game on the market, by a long shot. Well.... maaaaaybe tied with Crysis 3.
-
-
Subjective.
-
-
-
-
You've just fatally misunderstood the entirety of my post.
I haven't asked them to do jack shit. If you read the quotes from the event THEY'RE the ones pushing emotion in games and talking about how Frostbite 3 allows them to do such wildly different things to deepen the gaming experience. They've put this on themselves.
The notion that graphics and combat can make players connect deeper to the material is flawed. I've never been emotionally connected to anything in a game with a bunch of shallow characters and faceless middle eastern enemies.
-
-
It's flawed because it's NEVER WORKED EVER. Examine games that generate deep emotional moments with players, it's things like Walking Dead. A glorified point and click adventure. Things like Journey and all this other types of gaming experiences. You don't hear about people getting connected to Battlefield, Halo, Gears of War, Killzone, COD... shooters. Beautiful shooters with great audio/visual presentation.
Graphics and combat don't bring you emotional involvement.
EA has claimed that's what they're after with Battlefield 4, so far they've shown they don't have a goddamn clue how to achieve it.
If you think otherwise that's fine, but you have nothing to back up such opinion.
Love your "try again" bit at the end, cute. Unwarranted and horribly misguided, but cute.-
because, perhaps, they aren't designed to. it's not trying to "WORK". you are asserting "more focus should be put on characters and narrative" when it isn't even remotely supposed to be there.
are you going to try and shoehorn that in for GTA5? SR4?
you made a list that does back up what I'm saying, you are trying to shoehorn something onto that list of games that DELIBERATELY ISN'T THERE. "more focus should be put on characters and narrative"
stop it. misguided? look in the mirror.-
You are terribly misinformed about everything. I've already stated I do not require anything to be added to Battlefield, this is merely what EA/Dice mentioned wanting to achieve in Battlefield 4.
THESE ARE THEIR GOALS.
I don't know how many times I can write that. You seem to want to push your own agenda about "PEOPLE TRYING TO RUIN YOUR BATTLEFIELD WITH FEELS" but I never asked for that.
Go do your research, here I'll even help you.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/27/editorial-how-the-concessions-stand-in-battlefield-4/
Then re-read my comments and maybe we can have an educated conversation.
If you would like to continue being ignorant of the facts, you can do so, but I will not be responding to you.
-
-
Multiplayer generates its own emotional investment. It's a different feeling than you can ever get with bots and a scripted story.
-
Totally different thing and I'm not sure that's what EA/Dice were talking about in their closing statements at last nights presentation. They're talking about making the game more human and creating a deeper interactive experience. I guess you can say they're talking about multiplayer, but they said that after showing an extensive single player demo that did none of those things. That is what has people up in arms.
It's not only joystiq either, it's on Polygon, Garnett hinted towards his disappointment on Twitter.
Multiplayer generates a very competitive feeling for me, but I'm not emotionally moved in any substantial way. It's like winning a game of one on one at the park or something. Yeah it's cool, but you forget about it quickly.-
That's you. I'm saying I'm the opposite. Single player games have to be extremely good to generate an emotional reaction in me. Multiplayer games hit me harder every time. It's not the competition (that's there too), it's that the outcome is actually in question and that real players are more interesting and unpredictable than bots can ever be.
-
You feel that in a multiplayer shooter? You're emotionally attached to a bunch of faceless avatars, usually obnoxious (in the case of XBL, can't really comment on PSOnline) members of today's youth?
I can understand you saying that in other games (MMOs) even co-op adventure games, but being an avid multiplayer shooter fan, I cannot even fathom getting so attached playing Battlefield or Halo. Different strokes I suppose.
Elizabeth in Bioshock Infinite is more than just a bot, so are many characters in games that I've mentioned. They take on bigger meaning due to great characterizations and narratives.
Maybe EA will reveal more towards what they spoke about at this conference later. I do feel it's a bit unfair to judge so harshly so quickly, but what they spoke about was just so out of sync with what they showed.-
There isn't one right way to create an emotional connection in the player. Just saying 'more character, more story' isn't going to cut it, particularly for a game like this. Bioshock can work its strengths and weaknesses, and so can Battlefield.
-
You're very strong in your belief here, but I don't really get why you're comparing Bioshock with Battlefield. They offer completely different emotional experiences and convey this in completely different ways. I think EA are well within their remit to make their claims based on what they're attempting to market, and I would expect DICE to use the tools at their disposal to achieve their target. You don't have to hate on it just because it doesn't resonate with you, and you are crazy if you think they're going to learn lessons from Bioshock because Battlefield is an entirely different game.
-
"As we all know, the best games out there are not really about polygons, or shaders; it's the emotional connection that we make with players. The DICE studio has evolved into world-class entertainers and storytellers. We are strongly driven by the desire to craft new worlds, new gameplay experiences, and fill them with gripping stories, unique characters and spectacular moments." ....
"are creating experiences that touch us emotionally – experiences that are human, dramatic and believable." - Patrick Söderlund
Again... their words not mine. They are attempting to build deeper connections with player through their narrative, which FPS shooters do that the best? Half Life and Bioshock, the latter does it better than most games in general.
You guys keep talking about this "other" way to convey emotion or to connect with the player through narrative... like what? How do you do it in a game structured like Battlefield? You do it with gripping narrative, great characters, and voice work. You do it the Bioshock way.
Visuals and set pieces don't equal emotional investment, never have, never will. Battlefield 4 must do more to accomplish THEIR GOALS.
If they would have never made the statements they made, no one would be making the argument I'm making.-
You're stuck in some weird thought rut, visual style and immersive effects count too, and they differ between games but can still achieve the desired impact for their genre, audience, and intent, if done right. You're also assuming they're not at all going to try to build something in the way of what you call narrative, because you want to hold up games that you know and trust, like HL and Bioshock. I'm not really standing up for BF, but I don't think your viewpoint has any merit.
-
I'm not in any thought rut at all, no one has said style and immersive effects don't count, what I believe I've been painfully clear in saying is that they aren't enough. My argument is simply that if EA/DICE wants Battlefield 4 to succeed on some deeper emotional level as they have openly claimed they do, then they have to do more than what they did in BF3 and what they've showed they're doing in Battlefield 4.
Some people feel they can do that by just doing what they're doing now or upping the graphics a bit and to that I have responded "show me where that's worked before". People keep responding with these baseless hypotheticals. I've openly said I didn't want to trash these guys so much because they've only showed 17 minutes, but it's clear that what they showed was supposed to be an example of a deeper emotional decision (cutting the leg off, sacrificing the leader by shooting the glass).
Figuring out how to generate emotional investment in a narrative isn't hard to figure out, it's just super hard to execute. I'm challenging Battlefield 4's tactics for doing so.
-
-
-
-
Bioshock 1, for me and seemingly many others of the gaming community, generated more emotional investment than most shooters. It made me ponder themes and ideas much deeper than gaming. The twist made me feel much more integral to the narrative (even if it was superficial feeling of integration) and Infinite (from the few hours I've played thus far) is the Bioshock 1 experience on steroids.
Elizabeth is a really great piece of technology that I think is a big step forward for character creation in games.
I also feel like I've stupidly narrowed this down to FPS, but I feel like games like Uncharted, Papa y Yo (to a much larger extent than the former) have a place in this discussion.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ah dice should have taken my advice on this one. I emailed them that they need to move away from the military combat to a more domestic police vs bank robbers type of game. Basically GTA with a decent FPS engine. Coulda done a 24 cops vs 8 over powered bank robbers or something. I dunno take a risk. think outside of the box. This demo just look too safe. no one is gonne bite.
If anyone at dice wants to hire me for game design I'm available.-
i actually know someone there, hang on, let me IM him your comment
-
[deleted]
-
-
So yeah i don't see anything new in this trailer. I was hoping for reboot of 2142 in to 2142, but that is not it. All i see is Battlefield III additional solo campaign. If You want me to pay money for this in the same amount as for Battlefield III you have to be kidding me.
-
-
I'm pretty sure you can use a controller with a computer these days.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
Like Crysis this is now a series for new gamers and system builders to splooge over the graphics and movie level sound effects. So to those people, have fun with it.
-
Just finished watching the vid again in full rez(in work only saw a few mins) at home not distracted and watched the whole thing while eating a cookie for desert.
Holy Shit! That was the most amazing thing I have seen in gaming yet, the graphics and detail are insane \m/ it makes Crysis 3 look like ass(which is something). This is a 100% better than BF3, those that say it is the same need freaking glasses or are freaking crazy. My dual Titans are READY.
Frostbite 3 > Frostbite 2 100% watch it again and go play BF3.
The amount of particles, shaders on all surfaces, tessellation, normal maps, small detail a shit tone of more detailed polys in all sceens, high rez textures and massive detailed areas, better lighting, better color palette, better post processing, totally way strong use of DX11 effects need to re watch and re examine the vid.
Back to BioShock.
BF4 is freaking MASSIVE it has crushed anything I have seen to date.-
you're full of poo, sir
-
Makes me sick to think people actually want this trash.
-
-
-
