Deus Ex Alpha

Played the Beta, it's a map pack. Nothing special other than cooler-feeling maps. Well done EA. -4/10

How's the new Conquest mode?

clyzm wrote:How's the new Conquest mode?

Pretty much the same as BF3's man.

What I have gathered from BF4 Beta:

-Painfully long loading times
-Frequent crashing
-Worse and/or equivalent visuals compared to BF3
-Wait, this is Frostbite 3? Doesn't seem so...
-Punkbuster causing many additional game issues.
-I can see "Leveloution" becoming lame over a year's time.
-Battlelog is more clean now, but it's still fucking battlelog (it's such a gimmick)
-There is more dynamic exploration in maps now. By this I mean that there are more elevated spots one can travel to such as skywalks, etc. It doesn't feel like everyone is on ground level shooting eachother out.


In a nutshell, EA has successfully turned the Battlefield series into the next COD. I really REALLY hope the full game is nothing like the beta.

Aidan wrote:In a nutshell, EA has successfully turned the Battlefield series into the next COD. I really REALLY hope the full game is nothing like the beta.

Said as if you believe it hasn't been since Battlefield 2.

Magniir wrote:

Aidan wrote:In a nutshell, EA has successfully turned the Battlefield series into the next COD. I really REALLY hope the full game is nothing like the beta.

Said as if you believe it hasn't been since Battlefield 2.

I liked Bad Company 2, and Battlefield 3. There were noticeable improvements in both, and the destruction system is somewhat dynamic, and fun to play with.

However, I didn't like where they took BF3 at a certain point (e.g. DLC, Gold Membershit bullshit and other pay-to-win nonsense)

Why do you not like Bad Company 2, or BF3? What in your opinion sets BF2 apart (other than nostalgia).

Aidan wrote:Why do you not like Bad Company 2, or BF3? What in your opinion sets BF2 apart (other than nostalgia).

Actually, that's when I thought it started going downhill, not that BF2 was actually good.

Bad Company and BF3 weren't too bad and, ultimately, the series is still nowhere near as bad as Call of Duty (sequels every year? Yeah, no thanks), but it's not exactly some pinnacle of fps gaming, and I think that was always my biggest issue with Battlefield and Call of Duty.

They could be doing better to reinvigorate the genre but they're not, they're simply polishing the same wheel every generation. Other than a shiny coat of paint, some new maps and a few tweaks in mechanics, what's the real difference between the original Battlefield and Battlefield 3?

To be fair though, I don't see how you can make them more than what they are (competitive multiplayer shooters) without changing the concept entirely, I simply never saw a justification for a $60 pricetag when the primary change was maps and a few new matchmaking systems.

Magniir wrote:Actually, that's when I thought it started going downhill, not that BF2 was actually good.

Bad Company and BF3 weren't too bad and, ultimately, the series is still nowhere near as bad as Call of Duty (sequels every year? Yeah, no thanks), but it's not exactly some pinnacle of fps gaming, and I think that was always my biggest issue with Battlefield and Call of Duty.

The same bothers me. Battlefield is a fun game no doubt, but isn't as 'special' as most people seem to think.

Magniir wrote:They could be doing better to reinvigorate the genre but they're not, they're simply polishing the same wheel every generation. Other than a shiny coat of paint, some new maps and a few tweaks in mechanics, what's the real difference between the original Battlefield and Battlefield 3?

$$$$$$ > sequel > $$$$$$$$$$$$ > sequel > $$$$$$$$$ > sequel > $$$$ > sequel > $$ > NEW IP > $$$$$$$$ > sequel > etc.

Gamesaremorebuisinessthanever.jpg

Yeah, it's no surprise. It sucks, but if most people start smartening up, pubs will HAVE to let devs make decent games.

There are a few differences:

-Destruction system
-Larger array of customization and equipment ("few tweaks")
-Decent squad system ("few tweaks")
-More people playing the newer titles (a given, over time)
-Storyline (Lol BF, Lol Story)

I would call BF4... BF3.2. If there isn't a LARGE difference, the game should not be considered a sequel. BUT HEY, a few tweaks, good advertising, and enough hype and no one will know the difference until BF5 is released.

Magniir wrote:To be fair though, I don't see how you can make them more than what they are (competitive multiplayer shooters) without changing the concept entirely, I simply never saw a justification for a $60 pricetag when the primary change was maps and a few new matchmaking systems.

>Justification

They are now simply making money off of stupid people (which is generally how the world works to a degree). Unfortunately the games we play will never step up in quality, until gamers step up their intelligence.


So yeah, the reason why I play BF3 is because of the destruction system, and because EA takes all the online players out of the previous games (by either DLC persuasion or force).


MY FUTURE PREDICTION:

When BF is dying out, EA will magically become the publisher of another game company, or a new IP that "REDEFINES THE WAR GENRE," or whatever given trend is at the time.

To be fair, Battlefield and even Call of Duty are still fun games, but I get the exact same level of fun from previous titles in the franchise as I do from the most recent and therefore cannot justify the cost to play what I consider a polished turd.

Amusingly, I have no problem playing Pokemon, Zelda or virtually any other RPG title known to man, despite how ridiculously similar all of those are, too. But that is a topic on the effects of nostalgia and not one for a topic on Battlefield 4.

Man I be playin the beta

It's basically Battlefield 3.1

Holy shit they even recycled a shitload of textures and models

I hope it goes the way of Medal of Honor...

clyzm wrote:Man I be playin the beta

It's basically Battlefield 3.1

Holy shit they even recycled a shitload of textures and models

Yeah I raged hard dude. Beta is trash. Hopefully the Full game will be like... BF 3.3 or something but this shit is almost unplayable.


-and yeah Jake.. We can only hope.

I played it at Eurogamer, wasn't impressed tbh

More like Battlefield 3.1

Yeah, I played some more yesterday night. Again, it feels like BF3 should have been, and is definitely nothing to consider as a next installment.

I don't get on with FPS games anymore to be honest, getting a little sick of them

Also, lol @ everyone who has told me "Yeah it's only the beta."

My answer for that is, "NO SHIT, do you even know what a beta is." Beta is for altering small mechanics, and touching up on game bugs/fixes.

This is not going to fix that fact that there is almost no difference between BF3 and BF4's very simple mechanics, and Maps.

ynnaD wrote:I don't get on with FPS games anymore to be honest, getting a little sick of them

Yeah man, albeit I already ordered BF4 before hand (stupid move on my part), and it isn't bad (It's at the equivalent spot in time as MW2 in the COD timeline which is arguably the end, before the game turns into complete shit). I play BF for fps, but in general I too am sick of FPS games, and games in general. Indie games seem to be my source of fun these days (as do most).

FUCK THIJSASONSODGNOSINGF GAMMMEEEEEEE.

I'm officially DONE with BF4 now. After getting 33 kills and 1 death, then losing it all to yet ANOTHER crash.

Brokenfield 4 is uninstalled, and I'm never ever buying another EA branded product again. Back to music production.

[youtube]OZ7ZXe6nOsE[/youtube]

Ahaha! That is hilarious!

Don't worry, they're working hard to fix all of the bugs and other issues. They will release the patch in 2015 under the name, "Battlefield 5."

Mr357 wrote:They will release the patch in 2015 under the name, "Battlefield 5."

I know, right? Apparently bug fixes have turned into 'next installments.'

Levolution, aka leveling the game