What do you guys think about the gameplay trailer? What looks good, what doesn’t, and what kind of things do you want to see in the finished game?
seems more of a battlefield 3.5 to me. Same textures, animations and models used for some things, but improved water, smoke and explosion quality. The increased destruction was missing, seemed more like close quarters destruction than the bfbc2 destruction i was expecting. I would have loved for them to make it anew as much as possible, and don’t bitch and moan that it can’t be done either, bfbc2 vietnam had none of the vehicles, models or weapons of the base game (did use some of the textures though) and that was just a DLC. Still as much as im not really impressed, its still very early days and the have the ability to change a lot before it is released, so im not really holding my breath about it.
gameplay didnt impress me that much… Need to wait for the beta to see the more accurate depiction of the finished product.
Obviously the big draw for most people here will be MP, but for an SP mission it had all the tension, drama, story progression and action to make anyone want to play. Far more so than COD from what I can see - which is the primary objective for EA with this, really.
Honestly… the trailer looks just like BF3 to me. I was hoping to be blown away with something new and exciting but everything looks and sounds just like BF3. The only thing I was able to see that was neat was that insta-click spotting thing the guy uses where it spotted the enemies inside of the building. Otherwise, if no one told me this was BF4, I would have thought it was a BF3 expansion or something.
Just trying to facilitate discussion not prove you wrong; did you notice the effects on the building facade that the player made when blowing up the gas tank/canister/something during the firefight that occurs while covering the return of their 4th member from the 2nd story windows? Unless it’s just a preprogrammed effect, that definitely looked like enhanced destruction to me.
I can definitely agree on the recycled player models, animations and certain vehicle models (same model of attack helicopter used… but I guess you could argue that the Russians probably have a “standard” attack helo they use… this is about realism, isn’t it?)
yeah i agree that the destruction has been increased some what, but i was expecting more bfbc2 destruction where you could level buildings, it just seemed like such little improvement in this gameplay that it was just meh. like here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=U8HVQXkeU8U#t=490s
they shoot a grenade launcher at some cover and it does pretty much the same thing as in bf3. Yeah i guess the russians would have a standard attack helo, but with the advanced textures and frostbite engine, you think they could have at least added extra details to the model right?
Not impressed and don’t really give a shit about single player. Way too scripted.
I want to see 64 poeple multiplayer and changes to it from BF3.
Does anyone know if they have even confirmed it will be on the next gen consoles? I would like to see a source on that.
I must agree, it could have been a little better. I am still impressed though. It is practically living an action movie.
I think adding a female soldier(Who we can see) was a nice touch. I wonder if maybe they will use a female MP model for one of the classes.
People aren’t impressed… I don’t understand it. Honestly. The Textures got upgrades, the character models got upgrades, the destruction got upgrades. The amount of action in a certain scene has been increased. The story telling is amped, the new sight switching is nice(Thanks to Arma). I mean, some stuff got small changes, while there are some huge changes and even new additions as well. I’m not sure what else people are expecting, this is the top of the line I’ve seen any video game. Show me a game that has better graphics than this.
Ok can I just say one thing…how much change do you expect in a game based on modern combat? We dont have any flying boats or fully auto 50 cal snipers, i think they do a great job with keeping up with present day military weapons/vehicles ect. The game looks amazing you can see a lot more attention to detail this time around. Its not a huge jump from bf3 but its going to be amazing
i was impressed with some of the lighting and water improvements, but overall i generally play a game for immersion and watch action movies for explosions and what not, but to each there i own i guess 
The thing is that the only gameplay addition there was where dual sights and the spotting animation.
Other than that it was the exact same single player we had seen in BF3. Just different missions and different scripted events.
Here you go: http://n4g.com/news/1218823/battlefield-4-is-coming-to-next-gen-platforms-according-to-gamestop
The problem isn’t the graphics, it’s the gameplay. The same ol’ gameplay that’s been DONE TO DEATH for the last seven years in the FPS genre. It lacks any innovation beyond graphical, and completely belies the large-scale teamwork and tactical combat that Battlefield (was once) known for.
I’m not sure what else you’re expecting out of a war based shooter stemming from current technology. I play the SP for the stories, I play multiplayer for the new maps and vehicles. I dunno what else you can really do to improve this. Extra sights are cool, but if you had a bunch of single player missions that were just armies fighting, that would get boring quick and you can’t build a fast paced storyline with that. Scaling it to four dudes that are in it for the long haul is where it needs to be at. They took the BC/2 Games and transferred some of those ideas into Battlefield. Which I like. I’d rather have four guys against the world than an entire army of dudes crushing an opposing force. Myabe for like ONE map, but I want character development, and that’s best when there are a finite amount of people.
There are so many ways to improve this.
Rather than this generic action hero nonsense, they should have tried to incorporate the scale, teamwork and tactics of Battlefield’s multiplayer into a campaign. Picture this: a squad of up to 6 players – either AI or friends – where you each can choose a different class or role, similar to how it is in MP. You’re then dropped into a scenario where you have a variety of approaches to complete your mission, and it’s up to your squad leader (most likely you) to plan the assault, using a waypoint and attack/defend/form-up system and voice Comms. Think a modern day Brothers in Arms with a hint of Crysis 1’s approach to level design. If a squad member dies, a medic can either revive them, or they can drop in on a squad beacon (with limited respawns) that the squad leader can only place once or twice a level. If the SL dies, it’s game over.
This is just one of many ways they could have shaken up the generic Michael Bay movie-game that’s been done to death. FPS’s don’t have to be this way.
Well I guess this is really a difference of opinion here. I’m not really one for the “republic commando” gamestyle. Attack and Defend and squad calls are just so tedious it takes away from the immersion for me.