BF4Central - All about Battlefield 4

Is Battlefield 4 too similar to BF3?

68
We take a close look at whether BF4 is too similar to the previous game in the series.

Battlefield 4 vs BF3
Over the past few weeks, DICE and EA have released a ton of Battlefield 4 footage on YouTube. We got to see long stretches of uninterrupted, unedited gameplay in HD for the first time. And something was clear from the beginning: Battlefield 4 resembles BF3 a lot.

Because of this, many gamers have referred to Battlefield 4 as “BF3.5″. We analyzed over an hour of footage and the latest in-game screenshots, looking closely at the game and found out that the “BF3.5″ namesake isn’t far too off — at this point in development, Battlefield 4 looks and plays like a large expansion pack to BF3.



Battlefield 4 vs BF3 interior

Judging by the hours of footage that has was released over the past weeks, it’s clear that Battlefield 4 includes plenty of assets from BF3. Here’s a list of the things we were able to spot which are identical in BF4 and BF3:

  • Most of the sound effects are the same (vehicles, explosions, guns, etc.)
  • Awards (ribbons etc.) are identical
  • Most of the vehicle models are the same (e.g. M1 Abrams tank, Huey and Viper helicopters, etc)
  • Voice over is the same
  • Some of the in-game assets on the map are the same (crates, trash cans, cars, boxes etc.)
  • Most of the player animations appear to be the same

Granted, what we saw was wasn’t the final game, however, DICE has openly stated (via Twitter) that they’ve finished adding features to Battlefield 4 back in July, and from now on, it’s all about polishing and tweaking. Visually, the games are identical, but DICE has always said that most of the changes to the Frostbite 3 game engine remain “under the hood”, which will improve overall gameplay experience (such as faster patching).

BF4 vs BF3

Apart from the gameplay, which appears to be nearly identical to BF3, Battlefield 4 does introduce a whole slew of features. Better squads, new unlocks, weapons and vehicles, new Commander mode, tons of new Battlelog features, and much more we don’t yet know about.

Is Battlefield 4 still worth $60? Most likely. Heck, Call of Duty has been pretty much the same game since Modern Warfare — there’s more variety in the BF3 and its DLC than in all of Call of Duty over the past 5 years.

68 COMMENTS & TRACKBACKS

  1. Shadow7Cyrus
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:19 am

    “The Best” is similar to “The Best”!

  2. Your Friendly Neighborhood Poster
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:37 am

    BF4 looks identical because its probably quite literally a modified Battlefield 3 running on a updated version of Frostbite.

    If they like the direction Battlefield 3 went and wanted to keep going in that direction, starting Battlefield 4 all from scratch would probably not leave them with enough time to complete the game with the time frame given to them by EA. Plus they would likely end up with a game very similar to Battlefield 3 in terms of core mechanics and looks if they made Battlefield 4 from scratch.

    I’m not sure but I’m assuming they probably did the same thing with Battlefield 2142 where it looks like they used Battlefield 2 as a ‘base’ and built 2142 off of that base. The end product is pretty much a futuristic Battlefield 2 with slightly better graphics. Even so it was one fun game, so Battlefield 4 may be a Battlefield 3.5 but I’m personally willing to fork over $60 given the changes and additions they’re making.

    • bad_conduct
      September 15th, 2013 at 2:36 pm

      wtf? 2142 came out after Battlefield 2. There’s no relationship to 1942. You are way off in that comparison.

      • andy
        October 30th, 2013 at 5:54 am

        He said BF2 was the base that they built 2142 from… Read.

    • Mike
      December 18th, 2013 at 2:32 am

      It can’t be a “modified version” of BF3 if it’s a new engine. I think what you mean is that the engines are similar because the core code of both engines is probably the same.

  3. IVanSpinal
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:49 am

    64 players for nextgen consoles ;)

  4. GamerzX
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:56 am

    OH REALLY geees you think?! Thats why I ant happy not a bit for BF4!

  5. Heplinger
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:57 am

    BF3 looked good, so visual similarities are fine by me. I think the greatest changes we will see are in gameplay, including far more opportunities for teamwork. I have enjoyed BF3 tremendously, but I have a feeling BF4 could will be more fun for those looking to PTFO together.

  6. mohammad
    August 14th, 2013 at 9:58 am

    “battlefield 3.5″ no wonder the game will get some negativity if you released the last one UNFINISHED EA .

  7. bored
    August 14th, 2013 at 11:20 am

    no it isn’t worth 60$ and it is BF 3.1 not even a 3.5

  8. Sparky
    August 14th, 2013 at 11:29 am

    I do believe the features mentioned above are very similar if not identical to bf3, but those things dont mean to much for me at least. What only matters to me is how the so called levolution with work out. If they nail that, what else really matters? Possibilities can be endless. Changing the way each game plays out because of levolution is what makes any game stand out from another. Destructible environments. Its the reason i stopped playing any call of duty after MW2. They never changed the map on how they can be manipulated.

    It should be no different with bf3 compare to bf4. Guns, vehicles, actions whatever can all be similar, but in the end if they claim this levolution with be worth it, then i think thats what will affect the whole game. If they fail, and say only very small percentages of building fall, then yes this game will fall the fate of the COD series. The mechanics and gameplay are great on both games, but you need that something to change or people will eventually sway the other way for a bit.

    Im hoping they didnt just toss this game out to get sales for both current gen and next gen, trying to copy what COD did, because even though COD sells tons, i think they lost some players that were there in the beginning. I would hope this is optimized for ps4 and xbone in great detail, not just amount of players but it has to look shiny as well as play great. Nothing worse then buying the next gen battlefield to look like bf 3.1 visually.

    • cicle
      August 14th, 2013 at 11:51 am

      I dont know how bad BF3 is with graphics on ps3/360, but i think on next gen you get the BF4 low/medium setings from the PC, I am sure that is a verry big improvement for you console guys, but when you realy want the good graphics you need to buy a gaming pc of 700/800 euro. (I play on PC)

      • Gizmoand
        October 5th, 2013 at 3:13 pm

        I already have that. And more to it.. and TBH. the beta is dissapointing, personnaley i think its time to change the time in which the game is played out..

  9. gaccio
    August 14th, 2013 at 12:08 pm

    if a game comes out, and it comes out with a DLC at launch, then it is an unfinished product, and since that is exactly what happened to BF3, i personnaly will no longer purshace any EA tittle again, tired of paying full price for an unfinished game.

    What they just showed us, is nothing but a god damn patch for BF3, it’s not a different engine, it’s not even upgraded, they say 2.5 but what they mean is, “were showing you the engines potential now”, which could be easily applied to BF3.

    Nah i am not impressed, yet another rushed project, and the people that say this is something new, well, thank you for contributing to the collapse of video gaming.

    • Symcore
      August 14th, 2013 at 1:13 pm

      I’m not sure what world you’ve been gaming in, or maybe you’re just too young to remember or realize..but almost every game released in the past 10 years that I’ve played has been unfinished on launch day. That’s the state of software and game developing now, and has been for years. Case in point…Windows 8. The release is simply nothing but an open beta.

      As far as the engine goes, why is it everyone says because it doesn’t “look” much different, then there must be no significant engine changes. Is an update in graphics really THE determining factor on what’s been improved in an engine. You and I have no freaking clue what, or how much may or may not have been changed in the engine itself.

      And, to all of you whiny bitches that say “I’m never buying an EA game again”….blah blah blah. You’ll buy it, maybe not on day 1 – maybe not week 1, but you’ll still buy it. Thinking you’re that important just makes you look silly…so please, get over yourselves.

      • xBlooWahFullx
        August 16th, 2013 at 10:19 am

        You, sir, are my hero.

      • D_Rock
        November 4th, 2013 at 11:55 am

        All i gotta say is look at ffxiv they overhauled the engine ang gfx in 1 year and rereleased the game as new but did not charge customers 60 bucks for the new version i guess that japan treats there fans better

    • Winrarisu
      August 14th, 2013 at 4:18 pm

      >but almost every game released in the past 10 years that I’ve played has been unfinished on launch day.
      Comedy Gold, many great games have been finished at launch, there has been no game as buggy as BF3 was in ’11. BF3 was rushed. Admit it.

  10. gaccio
    August 14th, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    Battlefield 3.5 | Official Trailer Parody
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3TYJTkg6PM

  11. Adam B.
    August 14th, 2013 at 12:38 pm

    Most of the sound effects are the same (vehicles, explosions, guns, etc.)

    ^ Not at all.

    Voice over is the same

    ^ Nope.

    Most of the vehicle models are the same (e.g. M1 Abrams tank, Huey and Viper helicopters, etc)

    ^ Because that’s how they look in real life……

    • TheEdgeOfUnknown
      November 28th, 2013 at 7:21 pm

      It just shows that whoever wrote this is a complete idiot… Lol I have battlefield 4 on my ps3 and I LOVE it

  12. cod sucks
    August 14th, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    The vehicles are the same because there are not that many different tanks or vipers. And BF is a real life shooter not like cod were they make there own weapons like peacekeeper..

    • Winrarisu
      August 14th, 2013 at 4:15 pm

      There are actually many different attack helicopters and MBT’s in use with the US military.
      I could choke with your comment, ‘BF is realistic not like cod.’
      So, what’s wrong with making fictional weapons?

      • Joltthecoat
        August 14th, 2013 at 5:48 pm

        Not by the U.S. Marines which have always been the focus of battlefield outside of Bad Company.

        The AH-1Z is the only true attack helicopter in use with the U.S. Marines.

        The M1A2 is the only Main Battle Tank in use with the U.S. Marines.

        You’re clearly not the sharpest knife in the cabinet, judging by your other comments. How about all the brand new Chinese vehicles that have never seen combat in the Battlefield series? I don’t see people talking about them.

        I must also mention, the alpha build and E3 build was Battlefield 4 as it stood at least five months ago, as they had to finish a build and compile it without being able to update it over time. That puts it far behind the finished version in all ways.

        How about the fact they added naval combat and intense water physics simulations? You can now sprint swim, dive, pull your gun in the water, and you will move as the waves move you. Boats realistically float, unlike any other game on the market. If a helicopter flies over your head, it will cause large disturbances in the water which will throw you up and down in the water. When the tower collapses, a giant tsunami occurs and can throw a boat a short distance in the air realistically. A player in a jetski can use this massive wave as a ramp, almost like motorcycles of the sea. Wake turbulence occurs, and roughs the water where a boat has just been.

        That could never have been a patch to Battlefield 3, as the water physics are a core engine upgrade alongside the air current simulations.

        By air current simulations, I’m referring to the fact that explosions and other movements(such as helicopter rotors) actively blow wind in the environment, dispersing smoke and moving trees away with the gusts of wind.

        The animations are not all the same. They have upgraded to a new animation engine for Frostbite 3 that can actively render procedural animations to allow the models to react actively to their environment.

        For example, when an RPG flies past a character, the character will actively stumble and move to dodge it, actually causing a slight change in the player’s momentum and a slight motion to move away from the RPG or gunfire. In third person the visuals of this is incredible, and very much immerse the player in the game.

        I would love to ask you how commander mode would be patched into Battlefield 3, being as it’s a complete overhaul to the serverside and client process to make it capable of working.

        How about field specializations, something last seen in Battlefield 2142? They are a vastly redone mechanism of perks that was very popular in 2142. That’s not a feature that would’ve been patched in the first place.

        The particle simulations have been completely redone as well, with an incredible change in the very subparticle rendering for lights and other objects.

        Frostbite three also includes close-quarters style microdestruction across the entire map, even in very massive maps. This means the terrain will be deformable at nearly a particle-based level depending on bullets and explosives, and is much more advanced than the destruction in Battlefield 3. That doesn’t even touch on levolution which is a brand new engine-based game mechanic which wouldn’t be possible if it wasn’t for Frostbite 3. Frostbite 3′s render streaming process makes it possible to cause massive serverside changes in the map without any lag on any part.

        They hired brand new voice actors, Chinese, Russian, and American. None of the old voice actors will be in the final game. The voice overs are completely different, and I have no idea what the post is talking about.

        Flight models have been redesigned, with helicopters being momentum based and have a lot more momentum behind them much like the real thing.

        Running has been redefined to cause you to do a tactical jog that turns into a sprint rather than going full-on sprint at first, this is a big change.

        There are now three factions in total– Russians, Americans, and the PLA. Servers can freely choose which faction is doing what, and each faction has faction specific weapons, camos, and vehicles.

        There is dynamic weather on many maps, including every naval-combat focused map. This means that battles can be led in man directions by the weather adjustments.

        You realize that almost no gadgets, vehicles, vehicle upgrades, maps, field specializations, commander abilities, weapons, and weapon attachments have been revealed. The source code of the alpha contained less than 20% of the final game’s content in those fields.

        There are so many new vehicle classes, gadgets, class changes, optimization changes in this game, that even if it was to be considered an expansion pack, it would be more than worth the 60 dollars. This would be a DLC bigger than the entire premium pack in its span– Battlefield 4 will ship with around 20+ maps, as has been said by DICE. And that’s not including all the new vehicles.

        I could care less if you think this is the same as Battlefield 3, all the shit I’ve just listed is less than 30% of the new features in the game.

        If you think this is a patch, you better show me a damn good reason how this could’ve been a single patch. That’s over 12 gigabytes of a patch in that case.

        Also, the day one patch is because the game must be finished and compiled over a long period of time, and the beta is only days before release. Any day retrieved by the beta is used to patch bugs and adjustments that have been required and judged as being needed by the beta. This is the NATURAL PROCESS of a game that has a beta that ends only days before the release.

        Speaking of which– do you think that a day 1 patch makes it incomplete? How does that work? The reason there is a day one patch is to finish up details. It’s not like they code it the day the game is released, the day one patch proces begins around the time of the beta and incorporates all features that have been required by the beta.

        If you think this is less of a new game than a new call of duty, you’re an idiot.

        • Christopher Mundahl
          August 14th, 2013 at 6:27 pm

          You made my day, thank you! :)

        • Skypalla
          August 14th, 2013 at 8:46 pm

          Amazingly we’ll spoken man, couldn’t have said it better myself! I had a huge grin on my face because you hit the nail on the head about this game. Thanks for making my day! :D

        • BlindSpider11
          August 14th, 2013 at 11:44 pm

          Well said! Battlefield 4 is a HUGE games. Can’t beleive people are calling it “Battlefield 3.5″ yet we have only seen parts of two campaign missions and one multiplayer map.

        • Tyler
          August 15th, 2013 at 12:06 am

          this man needs a beer!

        • JonasAxbox
          August 15th, 2013 at 4:52 am

          Nice, that is!

        • Winrarisu
          August 16th, 2013 at 9:46 pm

          Amazing egotistical idiots who’ve never played a true refractor bf game…

        • CHIZZY
          August 21st, 2013 at 3:53 am

          BOOOOO YAAAAAAA WELL SAID BROTHER!

        • Vipor_1988
          September 25th, 2013 at 12:22 am

          BEST COMMENT EVER!!!

        • KidAnime20
          October 2nd, 2013 at 5:19 am

          You cleared most of my doubts about this game now. And for those of you still claiming that BF4 is still Battlefield 3.5, you suck. You just don’t wanna admit that SOMEONE actually did some research (i did too to confirm that Joltthecoat is not a fibber) and found out how wrong you are. Do you wanna call Borderlands 2 “BL 1.5″, or have you already before? Maybe you heard of this saying: Don’t fix what is not broken. That principle applied to both games (BL2 and BF4), they kept what was good about the games, they added and fixed features to help balance out gameplay (making it more fair, less tedious, etc), and improved what mattered.

        • Mike
          December 18th, 2013 at 2:52 am

          The M1 isn’t just the only main battle tank in use by the Marines, it’s the only one in use by the entire U.S. military.

  13. N-Shifter
    August 14th, 2013 at 2:55 pm

    The stupidity of some people online is beyond belief, it really is.

    Any of you folks that think this is BF3.(whatever), that’s great! Don’t buy it!
    For the rest of us that know there are more to game engines than the visuals (which have been clearly improved), we’ll buy it and enjoy everything new that you lot were too blinkered to see.

    Have fun.

  14. ryleyma61
    August 14th, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    The difference for console players will be more dramatic than PC players – 64 players, better graphics etc will help justify ‘BF3.5′…

    That said, most of the trailers I’ve seen have different sounds (the weapons sound better – like BC2) and different voice overs.

    I just hope the damage model is better – I can only play BF3 on hardcore now because it just seems too unrealistic when a man can take a full mag of 5.56, let alone ten .308 rounds from an LMG….

    fingers crossed for 64 players BF4: Vietnam mod? :P

  15. Winrarisu
    August 14th, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    Not surprisingly, I mean, DICE has a reputation of re-using A LOT of stuff.
    Look at the games, BFV was essentially a re-skin of BF 1942, they even released a 1942 mods for ‘Nam.

    BF 2142 was also a reskin of BF2.

    While BC2 did feature many new things, a large majority of weapons and stuff was reused from BC1.

    BF4 also looks very similar to BF3, hopefully, they have fixed the game in general and balanced multiplayer, hopefully.

  16. Methodoc
    August 14th, 2013 at 4:47 pm

    Don’t let you’re eyes and ears fool you! Don’t base on video and stupid feedback.

    I’ve played all the BF games, mostly 1942/BF2/2142/BF3. I was in the Alpha for BF4, there are many things:

    1) The feel of the game is like a classic BF, very close to BF2 but faster, but not a clusterfuck like BF3.
    2) Less suppression and lens flare, you can actually enjoy the game now.
    3) Guns feel more balanced, recoil more realistic, no BS M16A3.
    4) Vehicles drive better, certain sections can be disabled so gameplay is changed completely for vehicles. Helis fly just like BF2′s, so now challenge is added for noobs.
    5) shoot while you swim and underwater to avoid getting shot.
    6) GUI is like the old games, click on the spawn point on the map
    7) The scale of the map is not just what you see, there is underground, and multiple levels to in a building which you can enter. There are elevators in almost every building, car and store alarms that give away your position.
    8) Gadgets that make sense. The recon can laser tag a vehicle, no need to place a soflam. Most were locked, but from what I hear the mortar from Bad Company is making a comeback, this is for support.
    9) Graphics. Even though there were no textures, it looked better than BF3, it was that good.
    10) Boats, I took out a tank and a chopper with one, nothing else to say.

    I can go on and on. I’m a BF veteran who was not happy with the outcome of BF3, but stuck with it. Take it from a fellow veteran BF4 is *NOT* BF3.5 when it comes to feel and gameplay. BF4 is what BF3 should’ve been!

    • SkyPalla
      August 14th, 2013 at 5:18 pm

      Very true man!

      So pumped for this game! :)

    • Orcs
      August 14th, 2013 at 11:43 pm

      But are the spawn points close together like BF3? Besides BF3 being an unfinished pc. of substance, the spawns were too close together.

      I would like to see the spawns spread apart, requiring a vehicle to travel to like 1942 and BF2.

  17. A Noni Mouse
    August 14th, 2013 at 5:57 pm

    I wouldn’t care if it were just an Expansion Pack for BF3 as long as they come up with a way to eliminate hackers.
    Even sr8 ones : )

    • Your Friendly Neighborhood Poster
      August 14th, 2013 at 7:05 pm

      Server side hit detection would be a nice start. Client-side hit detection is handing the hackers the hit detection system and saying “go nuts!”

      Now we have players being teleported across the map, bullets doing literally %700 of their normal damage and hackers pressing a single button which kills a entire map with a ammo box.

      I’m not necessarily complaining, but come on, if you’re gonna use crappy client side hit detection at least secure it better.

      • phobia
        August 15th, 2013 at 3:06 am

        While at it switch to an inhouse developed anti-cheat system, instead of using PunkBuster. There have been various problems when a patch came out before the corresponding PunkBuster update was available.

  18. The Iranian
    August 14th, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    How about, instead of expecting a huge Battlefield 2 (2005) > Battlefield 3 (2011) graphical/gameplay jump, view it as something that was already at its best, but… better!

    Besides, Frostbite 2.0 to Frostbite 3.0 difference is VERY MINIMAL and mostly on the back-end, but enough to warrant a new “version number”. It is NOT supposed to mean that the difference is as big as Frostbite 1.0/1.5 to Frostbite 2.0, rather, what I mentioned above.

    Reusing assets is common practice for ALL game developers. That’s not to say they do not go untouched.

    VOs are BRAND NEW. If you’ve played enough BF3, you’ll notice that the US voice is very different (it actually sounds like the actor’s voice who played Matkovic in the BF3 campaign). And of course, brand new Chinese VO and most-likely Russian VO. They’ll always use similar terms, it isn’t like they invent the battle chatter.

    Guns? Well, I’ve seen plenty of brand new guns and I am sure many are returning. What’s wrong with that?

    I am glad you guys at least acknowledged that BF4 has new features, that, by itself, define it as a different experience from BF3. If they feel similar, that’s fine, how much more can you refine the BF3 experience? Not a lot, I can tell you that.

  19. Jonathan
    August 14th, 2013 at 6:34 pm

    Ever hear the words “don’t judge a book by its cover”…
    I will just wait for the finished product and hopefully see you guys on the battlefield!

    • phobia
      August 15th, 2013 at 3:08 am

      Exactly, people please reserve your final judgement for launch ;)

  20. Graham
    August 15th, 2013 at 1:15 am

    Of course the games are going to be very similar when ppl on here and other places keep asking for things from past Battlefield generations. That’s why numerous times I have stated that new things should be brought to the game not just re-inventing the old otherwise it will be the same old same old, so don’t moan about it, its what most ppl have asked for.

  21. cattlefield
    August 15th, 2013 at 7:12 am

    I canceled my BF3.1 preorder and got PAYDAY2 instead, its amazing

  22. TheBlindLeadingTheBlind
    August 15th, 2013 at 9:49 am

    You guys don’t even know what to look for in difference between the two -.- There’s a world of difference. This is like a bunch of McDonald’s lovers acting like food critics.

    Do you have any clue whatsoever how much work goes into creating these games–ESPECIALLY–creating (even if it’s only improving) a AAA engine. FFS. Try to make a game. You will give up in 2 seconds and say omg how do they make it look so good?

    Go write some occlusion culling engines, deferred shaders, dynamic lighting, piece together the work of thousands of artists with only a handful of devs–all to make the game look a lot better and people saying meh, looks the same as the old one.

    So much frustration I have for whiney ass gamers

  23. kennz
    August 15th, 2013 at 12:37 pm

    FROSTBITE 3 LOL OVERHYPED GAME ENGINE. IT’S NOT EVEN IN TOP 5. DICE WHAT DID YOU GET RIGHT IN BF3??? WATCH HOW LOUSY IT LOOK ON NEXT GENERATION.

  24. Bogan Battler
    August 15th, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    The complainers here are like a bunch of old women. Hats off to the writer for a successful trolling of this here readers: very funny stuff.

    I can’t believe how much whining is going on. I watched hours of gameplay footage from E3 and saw a world of difference from BF3. It seemed more realistic, more chaotic, more beautiful, more team work, more excitement, more immersion. Bigger maps. Amazing destruction. Sick animation and lighting.

    Compare that to the pitiful COD reveal last night on Xbox Live. My god it was pathetic. That game honestly looks like an arcade game from the mid 1990s. The graphics are terrible, it’s all pixelated and 2D in scope. I am a film colorist for a living and spend most of my days grading HD footage for movies. I can tell you that, with my hyper sensitive eyes, BF4 is eons ahead of COD in terms of graphics and immersion and Colours and lighting. It almost looks like film.

    And how crap does CODs silly customization look? It’s all Colourful masks and made up “bad ass” punk weapons.

    Here’s the rump: COD players play paintball. BF4 players play airsoft.

  25. the guild reaper
    August 16th, 2013 at 10:29 am

    same electronic arts rip off as always…no thx battlefield 3.5

  26. Soldier4343
    August 18th, 2013 at 6:16 pm

    Spent $700 on a GTX 780 classified upgrade alone for BF4 that should say how much I’m excited for it.

    • Rawr
      October 28th, 2013 at 10:06 am

      Should have waited and gotten the r290x… Mantle api used by bf4 blows away any performance on an nvidia card… 7x as many function calls per second

  27. Potato wizard
    August 19th, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    Well battlefield is all based on realism. And as far as real goes, there’s only so much you can do really. After a while a game becomes near flawless. So unless they hike up realism a lot, (physics on building destruction etc) they will have a similar, yet still better game. I am considering buyin it twice, for current and next gen consoles.

    • Potato wizard
      August 19th, 2013 at 2:32 pm

      As far as graphics and development go, this does look beautiful I might add. We should remember, it looks better than bf3 and this is alpha stage.

    • Foorty
      October 24th, 2013 at 9:19 pm

      Are you fckin serious? REALISM? Where? Battlefield is MORE realistic than CoD (sligthly, bulletdrop is the reason), but that’s it. The game is arcade as hell, NOTHING is realistic in it…

      You must be a fanboy or just really stupid (these should be synonyms)

  28. Skeptical BF2 Player
    September 2nd, 2013 at 11:34 pm

    Cut the nonsense. I played the Alpha and this game is definitely better than BF3. Its just lazy writing that takes clearly better shaded alpha screenshots and suggests they are the same when the subtle details–you know the runs that reviews should notice are greatly improved.

    Secondly how DARE you use Campaign shots to make ANY argument about BF which has ALWAYS been a MP first experience. This pedestrian point of view is a horrible way to put yourself out there as relevant in the BF community.

    The jump between BF2 and BF3 was more than 5 years–you seriously think they could reproduce that jump in less than 2? DICE went above and beyond to create develop and modify the Frostbite engine while bringing back several of the most wanted features from BF2 not even counting Commander while updating and improving gameplay.

    The haters complaining about nothing are CoD fans just trolling–the honest fact is alot of things were wrong and or lacking with BF3 and they have been adjusted and corrected with BF4. Too expect a lightyear jump in graphics and to ignore is childish even after you look at the latest character models and dont see the improvements.

    Easy Fix, haters–just dont buy it, we dont need you typing your whiny BS when you should be playing.

  29. liam
    September 13th, 2013 at 6:20 pm

    “the guns sound the same” why make the guns sound different?

  30. adam
    September 16th, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    I hate people who always take a dig at call of duty, i mean if bf4 plays the same as bf3 people wont admit because that will give cod fans fuel against bf players. If cod ghosts changed every bit of the game eg: graphics, vehicles, destructible land etc people would accuse call of duty creators of copying the battlefield series, so as long as the 2 games are still being made there will always be a hatred between the players.

  31. John
    September 24th, 2013 at 4:30 pm

    I’ll stick with BF4 for my next gen FPS choice. COD: Ghosts looks to me like it’s going to be a worse campfest than the Black Ops games. BF at least rewards players for taking an active role in combat instead of rewarding players who hide and sneak around like rats.

  32. Vipor_1988
    September 25th, 2013 at 12:17 am

    OMG!!! I’ve really spent a lot of time the last weeks informing myself about the changes in BF4… and it’s definatly not BF3.5, it’s a whole new game, and we’re going to experiance a very different and more intense and exciting gameplay than in BF3…. and all you whiners: please go and play COD or something and let the real soldiers play a real wargame!!!

    • kraigdankk
      December 19th, 2013 at 9:11 pm

      A real war-game? Haha bf4 is no “real war-game”. Go play flashpoint.

  33. Flenser
    October 3rd, 2013 at 8:17 am

    It will be a big improvement for those moving to next gen consoles with increased player count, map size and graphics. If I were playing BF3 on PC instead of 360 I would be disappointed because it does seem the same. I played the beta on 360 and it seems like exactly the same game.

  34. Lugaa
    October 23rd, 2013 at 9:18 am

    Still going to be better than any CoD game.

  35. Dro-Willie
    November 29th, 2013 at 8:44 am

    All I want to know is battlefield 4 worth it on the xbox 360/ps3? I dont have the money to throw down on a 500 dollar new system even though 64 players in one game looks too dope. But is it just more fun to play in general then battlefield 3 on current gen consoles?

  36. Hooblah
    December 6th, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    It’s a good game. It’s water physics and weather change and somewhat changing enviornment like where u can lock gates or cause a dam to break are all awesome factors to have in a game. COD should be ashamed. In COD ghosts I got killed and my body did the same stupid death animation, fell into water, and my body sank without a splash. Lol. I’ve been a BF fan since bf1942 and I gotta say I found the last two BFs to be the best.
    Sorry guys wasn’t a big fan of the bad companies…don’t know why really. I think I was spoiled with BF2 on computer and BF3 was pretty much an updated faster pace bf2 which I liked.
    Gotta say tho, so far bf3 is my absolute favorite. Cant put my finger on it. I think I liked the maps alot more. The only thing that I found disappointing in bf4 was the 64 player thing. It can only be in conquest so now the maps feel too spread out and I can get killed from any direction. Bf2 with 64 players didn’t feel that way. It was packed with people but not too overwhelming. I think that is the difference in shooter today vs older ones. The maps try to accommodate everyone playing so it is nearly impossible to put anyone into an absolute killzone or feel safe on a map. So far playing, it just doesn’t feel like 64 people r playing. I was expecting rush to have 64 players. Imagine what a crap storm that would be. Utter chaos, but fun

  37. kraigdankk
    December 19th, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    How can you guys compare this game to call of duty ghost? Really. Cod ghost was great compared to the other last 3 games, graphics and movement. Bf4 is a damn fun game, and im a cod fan. Huge cod fan. But to compare these two, there not level games. Cod can only be compared to its self, but company backbones (treyarch, infinity ward) . “then who do we compare bf4 with?” its self. Bf3. And yes, I know ghost has some “battlefield style game play” (leaning, mantling over walls with you gun still drawn, change the map some what) but at the same time so does bf4. Dont go and think I hate or think bf4 sucks, just to compare thies two games is unreal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>