Battlefield 4 Prattle Feed For All The New News

Look, you can see the big dipper!

Tonight EA lured us in to a darkened cinema, on the promise of news about the only-just-announced-even-though-everyone-knew-about-it-for-ages Battlefield 4. But while we knew it existed, we didn’t know what it might contain. Um. Yeah, about that…

Once again, DICE revealed a Battlefield with its single player. It’s odd. It was odd when they did it with BF3 too. Battlefield is a multiplayer game. But that did not trouble the presenters of last night’s ludicrous misfire. Here’s how it happened:

DICE (whom we must remember are NOT a Battlefield factory) introduce things by explaining that there will be no introduction, and promise us no rendered footage. And then begins a video, “Fishing in Baku”, accompanied by, er, Bonnie Tyler’s Total Eclipse OF The Heart. There’s nervous laughter. “Oh, man, I don’t want to die to this song,” says a voice in a car sinking into the water. There’s relieved laughter. That peters out into the realisation that this is single-player, and our time is about to be wasted at length.

The first actual in-game playable moment we see is a dank, grey corridor. It’s like a statement, a declaration of intent. There surely cannot be the collectively lacked perspicacity to fail to understand what message presenting a dank, grey corridor offers us about the game. But I’ll tell you what – what a dank, grey corridor. Water effects on the ground like I’ve never seen before. Wow, look at those particle effects, the cloth physics on those billowing curtains, lighting of the like I didn’t think was possible. Frostbite 3 is delivering on its promises like a postman possessed. And what’s that? “Press E to open.” A game demo on PC.

Of course, it couldn’t be shown on PS4 or Xbox 3: The Xboxening at this point, not that it was announced for them nor anything else. But oddly, the soupy movements show it’s being played with a controller. Developers are weird.

But now, moving on from our dank, grey corridor, we’re looking out from the fixed point of a dank, grey window, shooting up the streets to protect an NPC. It’s achingly, all-permeatingly unoriginal, but utterly beautiful at it.

Suddenly we’re in the woods, and good grief, the light on those perfectly rendered individual leaves on the bushes. Every thin branch bobbing, no 2.5D tricks, just the best foliage gaming’s ever seen. This isn’t a step forward in graphics, but a groin-breaking stride. Splashes as NPCs run through puddles, proper splooshes of water, like puddles do. Puddles in a grey building site, while the men shoot the ones facing toward them, because they’re facing toward them, and press E on a car to drive it.

Details are rendered impossibly far into the distance. If it’s trickery, it’s the best trickery I’ve seen. A distant horizon meticulously detailed with grey, crumbling buildings of no interest, in dreary yet well rendered nothingplace. We see the men fire the chunky gun at the other cars for some presumably important reason.

There’s a chopper on your side. Targets are designated, it fires at them. They blow up. They blow up more beautifully, and more extraordinarily than I’ve ever seen the targeted areas blow up in all the FPS games that are otherwise exactly the same as it. Now they’re going up that FPS games’ lift, and shooting at the FPS games’ helicopter that you shoot at when going up that FPS games lift. It looks ridiculously amazing as it destroys the familiar FPS building you’re running through, before FPS games’ scripted sequence where the helicopter causes all your friends to fall down, and then a big brick tower falls through the roof next to you all.

You’re knocked out, and then you come around all fuzzy, and your friend is looking directly in your face. You know the scene I mean, from the FPS games. But one of the men is hurt in the cutscene, and you have to cut his leg off at the knee by pressing F, then drive him to somewhere, but that Bonnie Tyler song is back and we know what’s coming! The scripted sequence sees the helicopter that’s still pursuing us seem to get shot down, and then we crash into the water. And then we’re off to China. WUB WUB end.

“It’s a new era in entertainment.”

Says the DICE man on the stage, after the video of the same things happening that have happened in every FPS game ever. A sequence of events that could have come from any reveal of any war-based FPS single player campaign in the last two hundred years, not least the Battlefield 3 announcement footage.

“It’s not about the polygons, the shaders. It’s the emotional connection we make with players.”

If emotions include “BANG!” and “CRASH!” then they’ve nailed it.

“The technology has enabled us to become better storytellers.”

If you mean better at telling the same story that gaming has been telling for all of time, then yeah, possibly.

It’s impossible to think anything other than: it’s a multiplayer game! Why aren’t you showing us that? What is this for?

If it was intended to be a demonstration of Frostbite 3, then as you’ll see in the trailer below, I’ve never seen a game looking anywhere near this good. But beyond that, I have nothing useful to report about the game.

Right at the end Stage Man 2 said

“Social persistence to increase replay value… A single player game true to the Battlefield franchise.”

I don’t know what that means. He didn’t explain. Like he did not about the multiplayer that’s all anyone wanted to hear about. And indeed like the release date, or the platforms it’ll be on. (Edit: Since the event, and impressively 20 minutes after the 11pm PST embargo, EA sent a press release explaining that it’s out this Autumn.) Instead we were shown the same 18 minutes of FPS footage we’ve been dragged through in an inexorable loop for the last twenty years.

Tonight we were told that Battlefield 4 is the best looking game yet to have us dragged by our noses down dank, grey corridors. Information that precisely no one wanted to know.


  1. SuperNashwanPower says:

    All I want is a photo realistic interactive simulation of drinking tea with john walker and jim rossignol in monaco. All of us shall be wearing white three piece suits with a red tie. As long as you can adjust their mood in the options. No grumpy john simulation thank you very much

    • PopeRatzo says:

      It’s probably more like Far Cry 3 than you think.

      • SuperNashwanPower says:

        Jim crafting a new pair of brogues from the hide of the serving boy he just offed with an elephant gun will be the title’s BAFTA moment.

  2. DickSocrates says:

    IGN and the like have corporate interests in hyping up everything without giving any critique. Expecting them too is the problem. They are a pop site, they cover fun things and make everything seem nice a fluffy. If they attempt to bring down the gaming industry by telling the truth about how insnaely stale everything is, they’d only be damaging themselves.

    As for the game itself, I suppose those graphics look good, but I’ve gotten to the point now where the only leap in tech I’m interested in is photo realistic. Everything between what we can do now and that will be treading water. And when you start cranking detail up like they have, it makes things like the stupid particle spark effects and the up close detail textures which don’t look like any real surface I’ve ever seen stand out as being very fake.

  3. phelix says:

    Grenades have smoke trails behind them, just like in real life!

  4. Ernesto25 says:

    zzzzz I think i mussed have missed out of the BF party i grew up hearing how good bf2 was and the others but due to crappy internet i didn’t get them. BF3 lasted me all of 2 hours before i got bored. I was absorbing the BF dynamics via osmosis but i assumed BF was a multiplayer games and was surprised there was a single player in this at all. I try to ive people who buy these games the benefit of the doubt as when i was young i had a “buy anything that was a ww2 fps phase”.

    Basically i want mirrors edge 2

    • Ci2e says:

      Did you ever get a chance to play BF2, if not grab it on Origin, there are still servers up and running 7 years (after launch) later.

  5. yhancik says:

    Will it be as good as Battlefield of Honor?

  6. Player1 says:

    Another great franchise bites the dust. Sad really. Duke Nukem 3D is better than this gameplay wise…

    • Spakkenkhrist says:

      Played it then?

      • Ci2e says:

        No you can just simply tell it’s all about eye candy. Gone are the days of the truly entertaining games back in the day. When content and mechanics had precedence over flashy graphics. I bet all those console kiddies are drooling over this right about now.

  7. sabasNL says:

    So, DICE stopped being innovative after Battlefield 1943, and since then just reproduces previous games in a coating of superb graphics.
    Fun fact: Every DLC of Battlefield 3 (including weapons, gamemodes, maps) is a reproduction of a previous Battlefield. Only Close Quarters could be seen as original, but this is clearly a copy-cat of Call of Duty, and CQC isn’t even new to Battlefield (BF 2142 had great corridor / close-range combat, for example).

    Battlefield 4. Prepare 4 Nothing.

  8. Kadayi says:

    “If it was intended to be a demonstration of Frostbite 3, then as you’ll see in the trailer below, I’ve never seen a game looking anywhere near this good.”

    Must admit I’d of been ok with the action being less Hollywood actioner kinetic, but goddamn it if that tech isn’t ball kickingly impressive.

  9. Parge says:

    Looks amazing. Don’t care about the SP, but I’ve had 290 hours worth of excitement out of BF3 and 280 out of BC2 so they could charge me £100 for the game and it would still be a must buy..

    • Ci2e says:

      BF2 Total Time: 870:17:49 // BF3 Total Time: 91H 45M

      I’ve had plenty of time to determine which game I’d prefer and it’s still BF2…

  10. Kinth says:

    “A single player game true to the Battlefield franchise.”

    Hahahah that has to go up for the “Complete bullshit made to look nice behind industry jargon” awards

    How can you have single player true to the battlefield franchise when Battlefield was (and arguably still is since most played BF3 for MP) a multiplayer franchise.

    The demo is OK, doesn’t really tell us anything we want to know about it other than they’ve made it look a little bit prettier (A whole lot prettier to those who played on consoles) and the sound design isn’t as good as BF3’s (still in development so we can hope)

    All in all it’s like those pointless campaign demo’s they do for CoD at E3 each year, no one is interested in them and what we all want to know about is the MP. It’s a shame that they are deciding to follow the CoD path with all their marketing. They could have been different and immediately gained far more interest by showing us MP first.

  11. D3xter says:

    Looks more like Battlefield 3 Expansion: Battlefield 3.5.

    Also looks like they haven’t learned much from the criticisms to their last game (or their previous games featuring big campaigns with Bots in SinglePlayer) and have for the most part just made another scripted, corridor-based (if you look at the Minimap, most places it seems like you can only move a few feet to the left or right) SinglePlayer Shooter with QTEs and B-movie story instead of a “Battlefield Experience”.

    I’m hoping EA fails to capitalize on the franchise as another “Call of Duty” production mill and there’s only a fraction of the people buying it. Personally I’m pretty much done with the series for now after Battlefield 3 (and even more done with EA after everything they’ve done lately).

    In the past DICE at least managed to vary the series quite a lot in style, gameplay and setting by jumping epochs e.g. 1942, Vietnam, Battlefield 2 (a.k.a. “Modern Combat”), 2142 and then Bad Company 2. It seems they won’t even be doing that anymore and EA will just try to simulate Activisions model, just with presumably even more DLC and Microtransactions.

    • Ernesto25 says:

      Probably EA were annoyed another company was making more money than them in a chosen genre. “If they can make the same game and release it making huge amounts of money then so can we” looks like the motto for this one.

  12. McDan says:

    I liked it, sure multiplayer is probably the only thing most people want from the battlefield games, with my copy more than double paying for itself with how much fun I’ve had online with BF3. but then singleplayer isn’t something to totally look over and ignore, you are paying for it as well. Uh, the point I think I was going for is that hopefully it’ll be better than the BF3 singeplayer, though can’t really judge from one mission, or the video from it anwyay.

  13. Saarlaender39 says:

    So, according to the first pic, my old F*R*I*E*N*D, Matt LeBlanc, appears in BF4?
    Nice to see an old lad, widen his spectrum.

  14. xcession says:

    The black dude looks and sounds quite a lot like Michael K. Williams (aka Omar Little). He’d be a great character to cast, if the single player was the reason anyone bought these games.

  15. roryok says:

    2:45 – what kind of idiot looks down at his hand while pushing open the door to room that might have baddies in it? KEEP THE GUN UP MAN!

  16. RabidTurtl says:

    Rant incoming. You have been warned.

    I’ve been a long time fan of the battlefield series, playing since ’42 came out. This game, rock paper shotgun’s reporting on the presentation of it, and BF3 are shattering my confidence in DICE as a developer.

    This emphasis on single player is beyond ridiculous. The battlefield series does not need it. The amount of money they are pouring into the single player is most definitely not offset by the the few people who pick the title up because it has single player. And if it is anything like BF3’s single player, it is going to be mind-numbingly stupid. Did DICE pick up some idiocy by working with Danger Closer on MoH, like some terrible, developer-killing virus?

    I’m not sure DICE remembers what made Battlefield awesome. Years of forced competition with CoD (which they never had to compete with anyways) seems to make them come out and say stupid, nonsensical lines such as “The technology has enabled us to become better storytellers.” If you feel you need technology to be a better storyteller, you aren’t a good storyteller. Technology creates a new, rich medium for storytelling, not a better one.

    BF3’s record does not inspire confidence in BF4, especially since 4 appears to be 3 with slightly better graphics (which most people will turn off for an edge in multiplayer anyways) and minor tweaks (UI changes, shotgun has 3 rounds, the silly change your sights on the fly). Considering 3 didn’t exactly feel like a battlefield title, with the lack of command support and the constant action a la CoD (versus older titles in the series having highs and lows in the action), DICE is going to have to really sell this game to me, if at all. Sad that PS2 seems to understand what made Battlefield great while DICE just wants to be CoD-lite.

    At this point, this is probably going to be the second Battlefield title I skip, after Bad Company was console exclusive.

    • Ernesto25 says:

      I guess this confirms in my ignorance when i loaded BF3 for the 1st time. “huh there’s a single player all these years ive been hearing what a good multiplayer game the BF series is “. It felt like COD and i been deliberately avoiding anything cos since MW3. Guess EA really think the FIFA model will work with anything.

      Edit: I assume we’ll be hearing the usual ” We wanted to player to have the ability to do X” and “WE want to player to experience to richness of Y which will make them feel Z” from the devs. Oh and “We have worked really HARD on improving AI/design/textures”

      Glad im not too fussed about this one but feel sorry for the people who are.

  17. dmastri says:

    Yawn. Let’s innovate with….another contemporary military shooter. How I pine for the days for old, titans and mechs, drop ships and goliaths… snow crusted port bavaria….

    EA corp strikes again. Well DICE, we had a good run. Good luck with your inevitable grind into mediocrity and eventual dissolution.

  18. Moraven says:

    Sad to see trying to push SP so hard. I guess SP CoD gets the attention and people to play the 6 hours, but then 98% of their time is online.

    • Ernesto25 says:

      Strange though when COD was a while back mainly focused on its SP untill MW.

  19. xcession says:

    The more DICE’s games resemble everyone else’s, in terms of gameplay at least, the greater the need there is for proper modding support.

    The only thing that can keep this franchise from sinking completely into the abyss of gaming for hyperactive racial slurring teenagers, is if someone *else* injects a new feel using the frostbite engine. DICE apear to think they can counter the slide by just doing it the same as everyone else but better. That alters the trajectory, but it’s still going to shit.

  20. tungstenHead says:

    Hunh. Basic squad control. Whenever the player spots, not only does the heli go apeshit, but so does the rest of his squad. That’s new.

    Also, after the brief indoor bit at the beginning, the fighting takes place in wider spaces with a lot more options open to the player. Hopefully there’s a bit more of that throughout the game. Any linear space seems to be a story driven bit. And even then, the player opened all the doors himself.

    Very early yet, but y’know what? I’m gonna say it looks promising. I mean, there’s plenty of stupid on display here, and I’m not saying I’m hopeful for the game of the year or anything, but it looks like it might actually be able to clear the bar for merely alright and bring a couple of new things to modern military shooter singleplayer.

    Also, there’s a couple of things there that are very intriguing for a multiplayer person. The secondary sights, the spot animation (if that makes it to multiplayer, it’ll be huge), the grenade launcher, and — this is actually potentially massive — a female character.

    I’m gonna talk about that female character for a quick second, because it’s potentially more than just the potential to play as a female in multiplayer, which is awesome in itself, but not necessarily the whole story. Yes, considering how many times I’ve said potential, this is wild speculation territory.

    The most common reason given for the lack of female characters in games is because of the memory budget of the current consoles. EA hasn’t announced what platforms they’re releasing this on, and if they’re willing to ignore the outgoing generation of consoles this go around, then it means they’re only playing with the much improved new platforms and the ol’ steadfast PC. This means more memory and more processing so things like female characters, improved destructibility, larger maps and even more players are on the table now. (Obviously, more players and more destruction means even worse netcode, so maybe hopefully not?) I’d settle for female characters, but maybe we’ll see some other new features in multiplayer too.

    *fingers crossed*

    • Misnomer says:

      Well said. I wasn’t sure what was going on with that mass spotting bit. He did seem to be calling in support. I will need to watch again to see if there is any GUI suggesting options or whatnot. That would be cool though if there was that kind of “placing orders” training in SP to get more people to do it in MP.

    • Upper Class Twit says:

      Holy Carp! An optimist! I thought they were all extinct.

    • darkChozo says:

      As long as we’re being positive, I have to say that the sound design was pretty great. The opening really nailed the bad action movie cold open feel, better than any game I can think of. Dialogue was pretty good, felt reasonably natural and they weren’t super-efficient-military-men, though there were some odd pauses and it wasn’t exactly Shakespeare. Everything before twelve minutes or so was actually pretty open for a CoD-style manshooter (CoD’s actually not toooo bad about that, but others have been pretty terrible, BF3’s campaign included). Everything from the elevator on may as well be a cutscene, hopefully that’s not too prevalent throughout the rest of the game (on one hand, opening levels tend to be scripting-heavy. On the other hand, wishful thinking).

      Overall, looks like it could be a decent singleplayer campaign. Not a revolutionary one, it’s still a dumb manshooter, but if you like dumb manshooter campaigns, it already looks better than BF3’s.

  21. Skyhigh says:

    Looks great, as expected from the singleplayer mode, but show the multiplayer mode please EA/DICE!
    Plus, I am grateful that the Xbox360/PS3 era comes to an end, for the love of god!
    PS4 and next Xbox can hopefully only mean better games for PC.

  22. Don Reba says:

    Sounds like they made a good engine for Mirror’s Edge 2. Waiting for the announcement.

  23. poohbear says:

    John Walker you keep implying BF4 is just like any otherr generic FPS game out there with the SP, but i don’t see u offering any alternatives? U’re just complaining complaining complaining, yet u know in this industry THAT THIS IS WHAT SELLS! I can complain the Elder Scrolls is just another generic fantasy RPG, but that doesn’t detract from making it a great game! A lot of people out there LOVE the modern combat setting, i was sick of WW2 games and yes maybe in 2-3 times we’ll be sick of modern combat settings, but it sure beats WW2 settings.

  24. darkChozo says:

    I think I’d prefer this if it ended at 12 seconds.

  25. Enkinan says:


    Maybe I’m getting old but I just can’t get excited about the 342345th present day manshoot at this point. Also, BF isn’t supposed to have single player. Or DLC.

  26. Sniggyfigbat says:

    OK, ready to go. Just designate your targets.


    Whoever wrote that should be shot. By a helicopter. After someone had pointed them, pressed a button and highlighted everyone in their general vicinity.

    • Brun says:

      Close air support is usually coordinated pretty heavily with ground troops, often with an officer on the ground responsible for directing fire from aircraft. It’s called “close air support” for a reason – the purpose of the aircraft is to support the ground troops, so it needs to apply pressure exactly where the ground troops need it to go, and it needs to absolutely, positively avoid friendly fire (a serious risk when supporting an infantry engagement in heavy jungle or other difficult terrain where target identification is difficult).

      For helicopters the development and use of those tactics goes back to Vietnam, they’re hardly new or unusual. It’s not really unrealistic that the helicopter asks for some kind of designation, especially if it’s just arrived on the scene.

      • Bhazor says:

        When they’re literally twenty feet away from the pilot climbing out of military trucks?

        In real life “da choppa” would be half a mile away not hovering twenty foot above the ground directly over them.

        • Brun says:

          When they’re literally twenty feet away from the pilot climbing out of military trucks?

          Yes, even then. How can you be sure they are enemy trucks? Does the unit you’re supporting have vehicles with them? The pilots just flew in from detached loitering positions or forward bases, they have no clue what’s happening on the ground except what they’ve been told by the FAC when he requested CAS, nor do they know how the skirmish has evolved during the time it took them to get on station. Maybe the battle took a fortuitous turn and the friendly forces have since captured the trucks. Maybe the trucks weren’t even there when the call for CAS went out. At the very least the FAC would need to describe the positioning of his own unit so the helicopters knew where it was safe to shoot, and that’s exactly what I’m talking about when I say “coordination.”

  27. Smion says:

    Whenever there’s a multiplayer only thing, everybody on here is like “Looks great but I’ll pass because I don’t play multiplayer games.” And now everybody whines about singleplayer being available?
    Fucking nerds will whine about everything, no matter what you do.

    • Brun says:

      Perhaps each group is a different set of nerds that do not always post on the same threads as one another?

    • Bhazor says:

      No the usual complaint is “This series has a strong tradition of single player content, no one cares about the multiplayer component. Why are they wasting money on it?” here the complaint is “This series has a strong tradition of multiplayer content, no one cares about the single player component. Why are they wasting money on it?”

      In both cases its the same. A series breaking away from what it does best in order to tick the marketing box so they can list it on the back of the box.

  28. gulag says:

    Either it’s Amnesia Day on the internet, or I just outlived everything I knew and loved. Did the original Battlefield happen so long ago that people seem to think it started out as a single-player explosion-fest of QTE and ’emotional’ (read ‘lazy’) storytelling?

    History lesson time: Battlefield is a series that defined big map multi-player manshooting on land, sea and air. The fact that it’s now being sold/announced with 20-odd minutes of single player footage makes me wonder if the only original staff left at DICE are the tea lady and the guy who refills the photocopier. The maps have gotten smaller, the focus on single player has continued to grow, and the loss of player-run servers has shrunk the longevity and community of BF games. That’s not an encouraging trend.

    EA’s attempted reworking of Medal of Honour to be more Call of Duty than CoD killed that series stone dead. Battlefield 3 wasn’t much to write home about, but this complete reversal of what the series represents might just land it in the same shallow grave. EA seem to be elevating the art of running franchises into the ground to the point where I wonder if they would be better off selling ploughs.

    • Ci2e says:

      Yeah it’s quite sad honestly, everything is going south and there doesn’t seem to be much we can do besides prove it with our wallets. Still then you know this will be hitting consoles so will that make a big enough dent? I’m not sure if there is anything else that can be done besides emailing the staff which I’ve already done. Maybe we need to create a huge following of core BF gamers that want a real sequel to BF2, instead of something that’s made solely for consoles and then ported to the PC. Then again do any of the core BF gamers have any enthusiasm to try to turn things around? Everyone seems to be getting discouraged, something tells me to have hope, they might actually listen, who knows.

  29. Lev Astov says:

    Duuude! He had auxiliary sights on his scoped rifle! I have those! That’s awesome.

  30. KevinLew says:

    I don’t understand why anybody would find this video entertaining. It looks exactly like how movies were scripted in the 90’s: They didn’t have to make sense as long as there was stuff blowing up and the good guys shoot up bad guys.

    My point is, for a game that seems to focus so heavily on graphical realism to provide immersion, if the characters don’t act like normal people and do things that don’t make any sense, then that immersion is gone no matter how good your game looks.

  31. Greg Wild says:

    I quite enjoyed BF3 multiplayer, but the SP was utterly dire. Looks like 4 is following the trend. But, to be honest, in a world in which Planetside 2 exists, I just don’t care to pay another £40 for a slightly improved BF3.

  32. Kadayi says:

    “Tonight we were told that Battlefield 4 is the best looking game yet to have us dragged by our noses down dank, grey corridors. Information that precisely no one wanted to know.”

    Did you ever want to know John?

    link to

  33. Shooop says:

    Pre-order now for access to day-one exclusive DLC that allows you to use vehicles!

  34. impish says:

    I quit BF3’s campaign immediately after they put me in a fighter jet and didn’t let me fly it–in a game where flying a fighter jet is a thing you can do.

    “A single player game true to the Battlefield franchise” would, in my mind, entail combined arms battles in large, open levels where the player could further his objectives using his or her choice of weapons and vehicles available in the scenario. Like Dynasty Warriors, but with tanks and helicopters and fun.

    When the player dies, they would respawn as “reinforcements” and the battle would continue, rather than reloading from a checkpoint.

    If they must, the battles could even be strung together with short campaigny sections as transitions.

    And voila, you’ve got a single player version of the game that can introduce players to Battlefield, rather than a better looking CoD clone.

  35. smiddy says:

    What an incredible write up of the trailer! It perfect sums up what I was thinking the whole time, “We’ve seen this before” “This isn’t multiplayer” “Why aren’t you showing us multiplayer?” “Holy shit this looks incredible!”.

    Look, Dice, I know you’re not reading this, but still. No one’s saying you’re not allowed to make a single player campaign and maybe it’ll turn out to be something interesting, but let’s be honest here, it probably won’t. So stop wasting all our time and get to showing us one of those 128 player matches that I’m sure you’ve got running on some secret super computer somewhere.

    • Ci2e says:

      Yeah, okay but if the maps aren’t twice the size of the Battlefield 2 maps then all you got there is a crap load of players crammed into a space the size of a CoD map. I sure hope this isn’t coming out on the PS3/360 because I think that’s what is holding back the new vision DICE has for Battlefield. Instead of doing it properly they are literally shoving it in our faces with an engine so full of pointless eye candy. Now I miss the days of the Nintendo too D:

  36. Ham Solo says:

    It looks quite nice, but could use some more color, all this grey brown mess isn’t realistic. Arma 3 is much more vivid.

    • P.Funk says:

      Isn’t that the best though? I don’t know why Triple-A means utterly depressing. The highest production values of depressing I’ve ever seen. I don’t even remember a single movie that was this depressing looking.

      There is nothing like playing Arma on one of the persistent server modes like Insurgency or MSO and realizing that while it was 0300 not so long ago, that the sun is just coming up and the colours are changing and soon enough you can dump your NVGs and save another KG of weight from your ruck.

      I have never been less tempted by Triple-A production values in my life. Its as if they’re trying to piss off anybody that wants choice, value, and freedom in gaming.

  37. GalacticGamers says:

    Compare prices and find the cheapest source of Battlefield 4 at

  38. GameDreamer says:

    This is great! Awesome.

    Buy Battlefield 4