• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

Radec
Member
(01-30-2013, 06:55 AM)
Radec's Avatar

Originally Posted by NMFried

But why aren't we getting Bad Company 3 or Mirror's Edge 2 first?

I thought Bad Company 2 was vastly superior to Battlefield 3, though I'm probably in the minority here.

You're most likely in the minority since BF3 sold more than BC2 and Mirrors Edge combined.

And is a better game too imo.
Kibbles
Member
(01-30-2013, 06:57 AM)
Kibbles's Avatar
60fps on next gen consoles? Wow, CoD crowd will take notice.
demolitio
Member
(01-30-2013, 06:59 AM)
demolitio's Avatar
I really hope the China part is true since I called that back as soon as Chinese gear started showing up in the BF3 code that weren't in the game like their chopper. They also already had a lot of Chinese weaponry in the game and added more via DLC so it became more obvious, especially if they want to show people BF4 is a true sequel which wouldn't translate as well having to show the Russians and Americans at it again with all the same vehicles. Obviously the Russians should be in as well, but they would need things to differentiate it from BF3 that is easily recognizable.

My friend used to think I was crazy saying that once the BF4 beta info came out. :P

Honestly, I just hope they expand it from 90% of the shit being Marine gear too. You miss out on a lot of cool stuff by doing that and the BF3 DLC expanded on that luckily. I rather have newer toys from the other branches this time.

They would automatically win everyone over if they brought naval warfare back but I'll never expect that in modern games, especially given the latest trends worldwide involving navies.

Honestly, I hope BF5 goes back to WWII since a new generation with great destruction would change the setting quite a bit while also allowing for a shitload of variety in the game and in DLC. Imagine a bombing run in a town or even destroying all the foliage in a Pacific map. That would be a site to see and BF 1943 was only a sliver of what could be done in that setting. BF5 in WWII with navies again = more hype than BF4 for me.
Anton Sugar
Member
(01-30-2013, 02:59 PM)
Anton Sugar's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kibbles

60fps on next gen consoles? Wow, CoD crowd will take notice.

Given the rate they update their engine, CoD will be running at 120fps next gen.
Hindle
Banned
(01-30-2013, 03:13 PM)
I've never managed to play BF, the 360 version looked terrible when compared to the PC and that put me off. I'll be there day one if the next gen version is exactly the same as the PC.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
(01-30-2013, 03:18 PM)
LiquidMetal14's Avatar
This is what I expected from a next gen BF console title. On PC, it's all expected but on console, the 64p, higher res, 60fps experience is a must. I have full confidence in this happening based on the spec sheets of the newer consoles.
RoKKeR
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:22 PM)
RoKKeR's Avatar

Originally Posted by Anton Sugar

Given the rate they update their engine, CoD will be running at 120fps next gen.

No they wont. What would be the point?
Reiko
Banned
(01-30-2013, 03:24 PM)

Originally Posted by RoKKeR

No they wont. What would be the point?

120fps 3D
Reckless Onion
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:28 PM)
Reckless Onion's Avatar

Originally Posted by LiquidMetal14

This is what I expected from a next gen BF console title. On PC, it's all expected but on console, the 64p, higher res, 60fps experience is a must. I have full confidence in this happening based on the spec sheets of the newer consoles.

i seriously hope so, and i hope more shooters will go with 60fps.

The only reason i stopped playing bf3 (and any other shooter for that mater) on console is because of the input lag 30fps gives you..
Also Cod basically destroyed all other fps's on console for me because it has 60 fps and super fluid controls and cant stand anything less. And i know i'm not the only one and i still believe it's a huge part of the success of cod.
Anton Sugar
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:30 PM)
Anton Sugar's Avatar

Originally Posted by RoKKeR

No they wont. What would be the point?

It was a joke, bro.
whyman
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:32 PM)
No mod tools or support = Fail
Reiko
Banned
(01-30-2013, 03:35 PM)

Originally Posted by whyman

No mod tools or support = Fail

Consoles need to be protected. Or they will be hacked easily.
EVIL
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:41 PM)
EVIL's Avatar
Man, BF really doesn't need to taper itself to the COD players

I think BF3 is already as good as it gets in the way of catering to both sides, no need to further dumb it down.

I also question the commander role. While I agree it was a cool experiment in BF2, it didn't add much.

What I would like to see instead is more power to the squad leaders!

At the moment in BF3, being a squad leader gives you a minimal advantage, as in being able to mark objectives and receive a minimal xp bonus.

So how I envision squad leaders is, that a person who becomes a squad leader, gets a more tactical look of the battlefield. He/she can mark objectives (ranging from capture objectives to more unique themed objectives (destroy a certain vehicle, or stop a wave of tanks, etc.)
He also gets to see the objective markers from other squad leaders, so he gets to see where the major battles take place and adjust his/her tactics accordingly.

Squad leaders get the abillity to call in an airstrike, or radio for tank support. So for example you as a squad are in a tight situation, you want to capture a point but there are 3 tanks in the area. When you call in for air support a message with a map marker or 3d map marker gets sent to each pilot (heli/jet) with a request to take down the marker.

If they complete the objective the squad leader and pilot both get a 500 XP reward, and the pilot and squad leader get the full points of the kill, while the rest of a squad gets a small percentage of that.

What this does is make air support a valuable asset in taking down the enemy.

Because what I currently see in BF3 (this may differ from server to server) is that you have random battles on the ground, random battles in the air, and winning a round has more to do with dumb luck or superior fighters then tactics and team play.
Az
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:42 PM)
Az's Avatar

Originally Posted by Radec

You're most likely in the minority since BF3 sold more than BC2 and Mirrors Edge combined.

And is a better game too imo.

I actually agree with him, personally. I had a blast with BC2.
shagg_187
lapdance transform pants
(01-30-2013, 03:43 PM)
shagg_187's Avatar

Originally Posted by Anton Sugar

Given the rate they update their engine, CoD will be running at 120fps next gen.

Let's hope they jump to a different engine now. COD engine is getting very old with the ugly UE2.5 look.
sponk
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:43 PM)
sponk's Avatar
if >24 players on ps4, then this is my reason to buy a ps4.
Dark_AnNiaLatOr
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:45 PM)
Dark_AnNiaLatOr's Avatar

Originally Posted by Reiko

120fps 3D

sub-HD
Binabik15
Member
(01-30-2013, 03:56 PM)
Binabik15's Avatar

Originally Posted by Radec

You're most likely in the minority since BF3 sold more than BC2 and Mirrors Edge combined.

And is a better game too imo.

But assault Recon with G3, motion mines, C4 and Rush = I AM GOD. Seriously, I once I tried the G3 with Recon I became untouchable for that round. 3-1 K/D, which I never had even remotly close as engi.

In BF3 people won't even wait for you to repair or you'll simply blown up before you can do it. Suuucks.

And Rush mode in BC>Conquest in BF>>>Rush in BF, which sucks, since laying down my life to get that M-Com down was what I was best at.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
(01-30-2013, 04:01 PM)

Originally Posted by EVIL

Man, BF really doesn't need to taper itself to the COD players

I think BF3 is already as good as it gets in the way of catering to both sides, no need to further dumb it down.

I also question the commander role. While I agree it was a cool experiment in BF2, it didn't add much.

What I would like to see instead is more power to the squad leaders!

At the moment in BF3, being a squad leader gives you a minimal advantage, as in being able to mark objectives and receive a minimal xp bonus.

So how I envision squad leaders is, that a person who becomes a squad leader, gets a more tactical look of the battlefield. He/she can mark objectives (ranging from capture objectives to more unique themed objectives (destroy a certain vehicle, or stop a wave of tanks, etc.)
He also gets to see the objective markers from other squad leaders, so he gets to see where the major battles take place and adjust his/her tactics accordingly.

Squad leaders get the abillity to call in an airstrike, or radio for tank support. So for example you as a squad are in a tight situation, you want to capture a point but there are 3 tanks in the area. When you call in for air support a message with a map marker or 3d map marker gets sent to each pilot (heli/jet) with a request to take down the marker.

If they complete the objective the squad leader and pilot both get a 500 XP reward, and the pilot and squad leader get the full points of the kill, while the rest of a squad gets a small percentage of that.

What this does is make air support a valuable asset in taking down the enemy.

Because what I currently see in BF3 (this may differ from server to server) is that you have random battles on the ground, random battles in the air, and winning a round has more to do with dumb luck or superior fighters then tactics and team play.

you want MAG, its command system was ahead of its time, everything was ahead of its time
Violater
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:26 PM)
Violater's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kibbles

60fps on next gen consoles? Wow, CoD crowd will take notice.

No killstreaks, you have to fly the chopper yourself?
Yea I doubt 60fps is the last bastion for COD enthusiasts.

Originally Posted by Evolution_1ne

you want MAG, its command system was ahead of its time, everything was ahead of its time

Don't do this to me man, my emotions can't handle it, best FPS of this gen, marred by this Gen's tech limitations and some poor decisions on Zippers part.
This is the game that should have been Sony's flagship shooter.
Last edited by Violater; 01-30-2013 at 04:29 PM.
Reiko
Banned
(01-30-2013, 04:29 PM)

Originally Posted by Violater

No killstreaks, you have to fly the chopper yourself?
Yea I doubt 60fps is the last bastion for COD enthusiasts.

I remember a non tech gamer told me he didn't like BF3 on consoles because it was "choppy". If it wasn't smooth like COD, he won't be playing it.
Anton Sugar
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:29 PM)
Anton Sugar's Avatar

Originally Posted by shagg_187

Let's hope they jump to a different engine now. COD engine is getting very old with the ugly UE2.5 look.

God knows they're sitting on loads of cash, so I'm sure it will be great.
Ninja Moomin
Banned
(01-30-2013, 04:31 PM)

Originally Posted by Anton Sugar

Given the rate they update their engine, CoD will be running at 120fps next gen.

What rate - the engine has hardly changed this gen?
Reiko
Banned
(01-30-2013, 04:31 PM)

Originally Posted by Anton Sugar

God knows they're sitting on loads of cash, so I'm sure it will be great.

Knowing Activision they can ride on COD with PC spec engines for 2 more years:P
velociraptor
Junior Member
(01-30-2013, 04:32 PM)
velociraptor's Avatar
If they use the same engine next-generation, then I hope Call of Duty is a complete financial disaster.
Reiko
Banned
(01-30-2013, 04:33 PM)

Originally Posted by velociraptor

If they use the same engine next-generation, then I hope Call of Duty is a complete financial disaster.

Bethseda got away with it this gen.
Violater
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:34 PM)
Violater's Avatar

Originally Posted by Reiko

I remember a non tech gamer told me he didn't like BF3 on consoles because it was "choppy". If it wasn't smooth like COD, he won't be playing it.

To each their own, though in my opinion there is much more of a game there beyond the framerate.
zomaha
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:35 PM)
zomaha's Avatar
60fps and 64-player on next-gen consoles? i'm there.
Rush2thestart
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:37 PM)
Rush2thestart's Avatar
No BF4 on Wii U while on PS360 is hilarious. EA is not even trying to hide their contempt for Nintendo platforms anymore.
SapientWolf
Member
(01-30-2013, 04:49 PM)
SapientWolf's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rush2thestart

No BF4 on Wii U while on PS360 is hilarious. EA is not even trying to hide their contempt for Nintendo platforms anymore.

There are no FB2 games on the Wii U, and it's not like EA has been shy about porting to the console. There could be a technical reason for it.
TalesOfWin
Banned
(01-30-2013, 07:11 PM)

Originally Posted by sp3000

BF wasn't trying to be a COD copycat at that point.

Battlefield came out before the first CoD game.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
(01-30-2013, 07:14 PM)
Stallion Free's Avatar

Originally Posted by TalesOfWin

Battlefield came out before the first CoD game.

It also came out prior to EA firmly lodging it's fist in Dice's ass.
rakkadakka
Member
(01-30-2013, 07:19 PM)
rakkadakka's Avatar
The most popular map in BF3 was Metro. The love of infantry only maps is not restricted to COD players.

If they can manage to make the game run as smooth as COD it might go a long way to closing the gap. Especially with custom servers on consoles that allow people to run infantry only maps.
otapnam
Member
(01-30-2013, 07:26 PM)
otapnam's Avatar

Originally Posted by EVIL

Man, BF really doesn't need to taper itself to the COD players

I think BF3 is already as good as it gets in the way of catering to both sides, no need to further dumb it down.

I also question the commander role. While I agree it was a cool experiment in BF2, it didn't add much.

What I would like to see instead is more power to the squad leaders!

At the moment in BF3, being a squad leader gives you a minimal advantage, as in being able to mark objectives and receive a minimal xp bonus.

So how I envision squad leaders is, that a person who becomes a squad leader, gets a more tactical look of the battlefield. He/she can mark objectives (ranging from capture objectives to more unique themed objectives (destroy a certain vehicle, or stop a wave of tanks, etc.)
He also gets to see the objective markers from other squad leaders, so he gets to see where the major battles take place and adjust his/her tactics accordingly.

Squad leaders get the abillity to call in an airstrike, or radio for tank support. So for example you as a squad are in a tight situation, you want to capture a point but there are 3 tanks in the area. When you call in for air support a message with a map marker or 3d map marker gets sent to each pilot (heli/jet) with a request to take down the marker.

If they complete the objective the squad leader and pilot both get a 500 XP reward, and the pilot and squad leader get the full points of the kill, while the rest of a squad gets a small percentage of that.

What this does is make air support a valuable asset in taking down the enemy.

Because what I currently see in BF3 (this may differ from server to server) is that you have random battles on the ground, random battles in the air, and winning a round has more to do with dumb luck or superior fighters then tactics and team play.


I was talking to a buddy, I'd love it for squad leaders of squads that are actively completing objectives or attempting to complete objectives to receive the UAV calls or artillery strikes ala BF2. Or maybe even a cool down timer on these assists for it for each squad.
Vandiger
Member
(01-30-2013, 07:29 PM)
If BF4 on a PS4 looks comparable to PC than sold. Day one man.
Rygar 8 Bit
Jaguar 64-bit
(01-30-2013, 07:31 PM)
Rygar 8 Bit's Avatar
from those leaked specs it should be just as good as the pc version 4gb ram is a little concerning but it should be pretty close
JohnMcClane
Banned
(01-31-2013, 04:09 AM)
JohnMcClane's Avatar
IGN is reporting Frank Gibeau of EA stated today "will be launching a Battlefield game next year."

Confirms not 2013, but it doesn't confirm BF4. Could be any battlefield franchise.
Reiko
Banned
(01-31-2013, 04:10 AM)

Originally Posted by JohnMcClane

IGN is reporting Frank Gibeau of EA stated today "will be launching a Battlefield game next year."

Confirms not 2013, but it doesn't confirm BF4. Could be any battlefield franchise.


Next fiscal year is this year.
JohnMcClane
Banned
(01-31-2013, 04:11 AM)
JohnMcClane's Avatar

Originally Posted by Reiko

Next fiscal year is this year.

Gotcha. I myself wouldn't mind a next BC game.
Broadbandito
Member
(01-31-2013, 04:17 AM)
Broadbandito's Avatar

Originally Posted by JohnMcClane

Gotcha. I myself wouldn't mind a next BC game.

While a new BC game would be fun. It's gotta be BF4. EA would kill it by launching with the new xbox/ps
Xyber
Member
(01-31-2013, 04:20 AM)

Originally Posted by Radec

You're most likely in the minority since BF3 sold more than BC2 and Mirrors Edge combined.

And is a better game too imo.

BC2 was just more fun than BF3, even though BF3 had some better features. But both games are pretty awesome. I have 295 hours of BF3 on PC, 375 hours of BC2 on 360 and another 20 hours of BC2 on PC.

I prefer the look of BC2 because I really don't like all the filters in BF3. A sun that burn your eyes when you look at it, lens flares and shit that are just in the way. I just want a clean image that doesn't handicap anyone in certain situations.
Can Crusher
Member
(01-31-2013, 04:22 AM)
Can Crusher's Avatar
Frostbite 2 was made with next generation in mind so I'm expecting great things.
J-Rzez
Member
(01-31-2013, 04:37 AM)
J-Rzez's Avatar

Originally Posted by Violater

Don't do this to me man, my emotions can't handle it, best FPS of this gen, marred by this Gen's tech limitations and some poor decisions on Zippers part.
This is the game that should have been Sony's flagship shooter.

Mag was a great game, I played and pushed it heavily. Sony already has their large scale shooter flagship game ready for ps4, and that's planetside 2. Which iron ironically feels like mags gameplay. By time the ps4 launches PS2 will be out of beta that its still in now, and will be incredible, just so they make sure that console players can play with PC if they choose so.

Will be interesting for this gens launch though will bf4 and PS2 (most likely). Good selection of shooters for everyone, and AAA at that most likely.
RiverBed
Member
(01-31-2013, 04:52 AM)
RiverBed's Avatar
I feel I am in denial of next-gen till I see the first pic of BF4. Then, all bets are off.
Reiko
Banned
(02-26-2013, 10:09 PM)
Wow. That damn leak was spot on.

1080p 60fps confirmed.
Izick
(02-26-2013, 10:11 PM)
Izick's Avatar
This is huge. I honestly think one of the few reasons people still prefer CoD over games like BF3 is because of the FPS. This is going to be awesome!
RoboPlato
I'd be in the dick
(02-26-2013, 10:13 PM)
RoboPlato's Avatar

Originally Posted by Reiko

Wow. That damn leak was spot on.

1080p 60fps confirmed.

BF4 will be a seriously killer launch title if that happens. Combine that with enhanced destruction and more players and it'll be stunning.
Miles Quaritch
lemme stick dat Red Ring
(02-26-2013, 10:13 PM)
Miles Quaritch's Avatar
Any mention of always online, which I believe was rumoured at one point.
shagg_187
lapdance transform pants
(02-26-2013, 10:16 PM)
shagg_187's Avatar
The leak didn't mention anything about WiiU, correct?
Reiko
Banned
(02-26-2013, 10:17 PM)

Originally Posted by shagg_187

The leak didn't mention anything about WiiU, correct?

Yeah. No Wii U.

Thread Tools