Battlefield 4 - Thread

Agreed, personally myself i think that dice's hands are tied by the bigwigs at ea, forced into simplifying things to get a product out to as wide a market as possible. Pc gamers in their eyes are a small niche market.

PC sales are comparable to consoles for BF3, not so niche market.
 
No, you just don't like any maps that have flags close together, something that plenty of other battlefield games have had. Even BF2 had maps like mashtuur city that were all clustered together

Difference is that BF2 wasn't all clustered maps, where BF3 is. It would have been so easy to design huge maps for 64 players where everything is spaced out, then only give the consolers a portion of that map. They just took a design decision you didn't like ( to make all the maps clustered)

It's pretty simple, the only maps anyone played in 2142 and to a lesser extent BF2 were ones where the flags were at least reasonably spread out, I don't think I ever played on Sidi Power plant...

You could avoid the **** maps (and my word Dice have made a few of them down the years) by playing the others, IN BF3 they are ALL clustered, can't escape them.
 
Wasnt aware that sales are similair. But i still think that theyve been told to leave out certain features that were standard in the past on pc. In order to get the product out as quick as possible. Look at the upcoming armored kill, a c130 on rails, surely it wouldnt take long to code it in as a player controlled element.
 
There are just a few maps on bf3 that can support 64 players, op firestorm, kharg island, caspian border and canals. Even then though, the flags are very close. The rest of them are to tightly spaced with ludicrous choke points, take metro. On 64 player conquest, it always turns into an explosive mess at ticket hall, grand bazaar, the alleyway, damavand peak, the tunnels.

I do like a bit of metro grenade madness sometimes though. :D

Got a excellent k/d radio once 49 kills 2 deaths with grenades. lol
 
I can enjoy metro with smaller player numbers, 30 or so. But tbh, it's just a point farming map with 64.
 
Wasnt aware that sales are similair. But i still think that theyve been told to leave out certain features that were standard in the past on pc. In order to get the product out as quick as possible. Look at the upcoming armored kill, a c130 on rails, surely it wouldnt take long to code it in as a player controlled element.

That's down to them dumbing down the game. See my post with tweets from the devs earlier about them saying we don't use the transport chopper properly so there's no point.

Yes there are tons of noobs out there who will just kill you trying to fly badly. It's a running BF joke about people not being able to fly.

But why not let those that can do it ? Some of us an fly stuff...
 
There are just a few maps on bf3 that can support 64 players, op firestorm, kharg island, caspian border and canals. Even then though, the flags are very close. The rest of them are to tightly spaced with ludicrous choke points, take metro. On 64 player conquest, it always turns into an explosive mess at ticket hall, grand bazaar, the alleyway, damavand peak, the tunnels.

When a map doesn't have enough vehicles or inconsiderate **** drive off alone in a LAV then having the maps 500+ yards apart becomes nothing but a slog and a bore. While I agree that maps such as metro aren't ideal they do provide for closely fought action compared to the normal maps. Damavand peak isn't so bad if you keep away from the tunnels, either by flying over or pushing through. On Grand Bazaar i've made a concious decision to keep away from flag B and the alleyway and I usually enjoy the map because of this. Every map will have a choke point on concentration of flags for infantry. A good balance between infantry and vehicles means that any map will have some points close together and others spread out a little more.
 
Agreed, im not the best pilot by any means. But when i do fly transport, i use it as its meant to be used. All to often you see one guy taking of in it by himself instead of waiting to fill it up and take people to an objective. It can be very frustrating.
 
There are just a few maps on bf3 that can support 64 players, op firestorm, kharg island, caspian border and canals. Even then though, the flags are very close. The rest of them are to tightly spaced with ludicrous choke points, take metro. On 64 player conquest, it always turns into an explosive mess at ticket hall, grand bazaar, the alleyway, damavand peak, the tunnels.

Sometimes I've stood and watched players it becomes that funny when it's a gridlock. It's like watching Predator or some film. Endless firing and grenade launching for 5 minutes. I have no idea why it becomes hilarious. But my god the lighting when it becomes a spamfest. Including the noise.

I'd miss it if they removed destruction entirely

As would I. I love the destruction and buildings falling down on people. I love all the debris blowing up on your screen as you luckily run through it all.
 
Battlefield 4?

I thought that battlefield bad company 3 was going to come out before battlefield 3.. anyone know if they are still bringing out bad company 3?
 
It's EA dude, of course there will be a Bad Company 3. If there is money to be made, EA will release it. I can imagine BF4 coming out in 2013 November time, with Bad Company 3 in 2014 with exclusive Battlefield 5 access, just a guess though.
 
Ive already been spammed by them to convince me to buy MoH Warfighter which gives me beta access to BF4 :/

Crazy neverending cycle of games!
 
Back
Top Bottom