Betafield: BF4 Open Beta In October

J.J. Abrams called. He wants his lens flare back.
I’m more of a far-off admirer of Battlefield than someone with an active interest in it. I have my binoculars trained on it and I can tell it’s beautiful, it’s big, and it looks like a lot of fun. But I have Arma 3 and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (I’ve been casually playing CS:GO with some friends for the past few evenings), and there’s no more room for another shooter where I have to know things about the guns. For those of you who really want to play it, you’ll be able to on October the 1st for free: that’s when the open beta will allow everyone to hop on Conquest mode on the Siege of Shanghai map.

Which looks like this.

But this being Battlefield and EA, they have another beta as well. A pre-emptive splitting of the community? They’re getting their work done early, I see. The “Exclusive Battlefield 4 Beta” is for Battlefield 4 Digital Deluxe pre-orderers, Battlefield 3 Premium members, and the people who bought Medal Of Honour: Warfighter (remember that?). It also starts “early October 2013” according to the FAQ, but there are no other details. It might be a different map, or it might be super-early access to the open beta, but I can’t imagine it’s the second as both betas seem to be starting at the same time.

It’ll be out on Oct 29t in the US, and 1st November in the UK. Because of reasons.


  1. BobbyDylan says:

    “exclusive” 24 hour early access. you heard it here (and 2 years ago) first

    • Craig Pearson says:

      That can’t be all it is, surely?

      • BobbyDylan says:

        It was for BF3.

        • alfred says:

          my roomate’s mother makes $74/hour on the computer. She has been out of a job for 9 months but last month her check was $14943 just working on the computer for a few hours. Go Here
          ………………. link to

      • SlimPickins says:

        I believe the ‘exclusive’ beta for BF3 got us 48 hours…and dont call me Shirley.

    • PoulWrist says:

      From what I’ve heard it’s 72 hours early access :p and I have all the things that could give me beta… although the MOH was not voluntairy.

  2. Cytrom says:

    If it wasn’t a total DLC bait, I didn’t knew EA’s history with this.. and every franchise they own, and it wasn’t an origin exclusive, and if it had a proper in game server browser instead of that garbage battlelog, THEN I’d totally buy this.
    But there’s just way too much bullshit attached to it.

    If I’ll ever feel a despeate need to play something battlefield-ish again, I’ll just reinstall Bad Company 2. At least rush mode was fun in that, and you can jump into a game without starting 3 other apps and buying 10 dlc packs.

    • Moraven says:

      At first it rubs you the wrong way, but it actually works out pretty nice.

      Better experience than I have had with RO2 and NS2 in game server browsers.

      • Cytrom says:

        No it doesn’t. I played more than 200 hours of BF3 and i fucking hated battlelog all the way, and had issues with it 80% of the time. Slow, unreliable, unstable, inconvenient crap.

      • Synesthesia says:

        Nope. I have to close my chrome browser, because i have around 40 tabs on, sapping very much needed ram, and open that piece of shit browser in firefox, everytime i had to play it. Eventually i gave up on it. And i loved the 50 euro dlc that divided the community in 6. Classy.

      • Koozer says:

        I spent roughly a week getting Battlelog to actually launch games. It will also for some mysterious reason only let me or my brother play our own individual versions of the game in MP, never at the same time.

    • SirKicksalot says:

      How is BF Premium anything but great DLC?
      How is it worse than Special Forces and the booster packs?

      • Cytrom says:

        Premium maps might have been great.. but they needed to make something great because at least 2/3 rd of the vanilla bf3 maps were total garbage designed by monkeys. And I’m not paying another game’s worth of money to get what i should have gotten in the first place in the base game.

        • nearly says:

          So basically the game is dumb, everything about it is dumb, there’s nothing redeemable about it because it’s dumb, and if anyone doesn’t mind or likes something about it, it doesn’t matter because it’s dumb. I see your point.

          • Synesthesia says:

            To be fair, the vainilla maps design is quite abysmal. Most of them have points where you just dominate the other team right to their spawnpoint. The back to karkand dlc showed those flaws quite clearly. Maps about a decade old were infinitely better than the ones that came bundled with the game.

          • Cytrom says:

            I didn’t say that. I said i played more than 200 hours of it. Obviously it had redeeming qualities, there was like 3 or 4 vanilla maps that were ok and back to karkand maps were decent, had lots of fun moments.. its just that during all those fun moments, there was always multiple annoying stuff lingering in the background causing about as much frustration and annoyance. The source of most of those were either enduring technical issues, poor design choices, or EA’s greed. I don’t think either of those will be resolved in BF4, and I’m not willing to participate in another experience like that, and i dicourage others from doing so too… who knows it might make EA change its ways one day.

      • wengart says:

        It heavily splits the community to the point that buying Premium becomes sort of a waste.

    • SlimPickins says:

      please do, we are all sick of hearing 2 year old complaints

  3. Hwacha says:

    Tempting, but I’ve been neglecting Planetside 2 for far too long.

  4. Moraven says:

    I wish you could just upgrade your copy of BF3 for $40. Just like you do for WoW Expansions.

    It looks the same game with an improved engine and bigger destruction.

    $40 for current BF3 owners.

    $60 for new players.

    Alas this would really only work for PC copies and doubt they would do it.

    I await the Premium all inclusive GOTY version before I jump in.

    • nearly says:

      I haven’t been following this too closely, but it does seem to be a fair bit different. Very similar of course, but I feel like the Premium service is more the upgrade you’re imagining. MMOs have a slightly different expectation attached because they need to keep the treadmill going in a way that people don’t really demand of other games. There’s such a dearth of content that they need to dangle big changes to get people to cash in.

      Maybe there’s not as big a change here as BC2 to BF3, but it seems somewhere between and probably a marked improvement over the latter (hopefully). I get the impression they’ve been working on this since they released BF3.

    • DanMan says:

      I’ll probably be doing the exact same thing. With BF3 premium I’m in no hurry to spend 60 bucks on BF3.6. It’s them who call it a “franchise”, so don’t blame me for thinking like that.

      Btw. where does it say October 1st? All i see is “beginning of”, which doesn’t need to be the 1st.

  5. Mudlab says:

    Who’s “JJ Abrahams?”

  6. SkittleDiddler says:

    Battlefield: the only IP with betas that actually run better than the full releases.

    • darkChozo says:

      Eh, the BF3 beta definitely had some advantages over the full game, but it was also a fairly buggy mess. How I miss you, Long Necked Soldierman and Picture Of Concrete Strip In The Sky Blue Void.

    • BobbyDylan says:

      I think you might be thinking of the BF3 alpha. Which was far superior to the BF3 RC. It had ground deformation that didn’t make 1/2 the team glitch under it, no blue tine everwhere, and the Sun didn’t cause eye cancer.

      • Cytrom says:

        Good times.

      • Smashington says:

        BF3 is meant to be a fully immersive nerd soldier simulator. They plucked an unsuspecting nerd from his blacked out computer dungeon and threw him outside. His eyes never fully adjust to the real world.

        • BobbyDylan says:

          Last time I checked, the Sun doesn’t take up 40% of the Sky.

          • Apocalypse says:

            But when have you checked the last time? Things change sometimes within a few years.

  7. BossSleepy says:

    Huh. Was anybody else a bit startled by the falling office towers? Seems like just the other year that sort of thing was serious national-trauma, lets-restructure-fundamental-tenants-of-society sort of thing. Now it’s video game spectaculo-fuel.

    I mean, it’s possible that there’s never been a catastrophe better suited for being co-opted into WarGameFace-ability, but, still. I was a bit “uhh..”

    • darkChozo says:

      Assuming you’re not just trolling, skyscraper collapse != 9/11 reference. If there’s an airplane crash or twin towers involved, sure, then it’s probably a tad tasteless and/or oblivious. But censoring buildings collapsing because of 9/11 is like censoring all explosions because of a bombing.

      Not to mention that skyscrapers/buildings collapsing (preferably on top of you so you can have one of those black-out-but-survive-and-get-pulled-out-by-your-squad moments) is practically an action shooter cliche at this point.

      • BossSleepy says:

        Not trolling — honestly kicking the question around.

        There’s definitely something about the way the trailer tries to be a cross between being hyper-realistic and arcade-y that makes the that falling building seem more evocative. I’ve played a bit of Crysis2 and it never semed like it was trying to be “not a videogame” in the way it presented the world and your experience of it. The superpowers removed that.

        The BF trailer seems much more about capturing something that could be happening in the world right now: blood on the “camera’s” lens as you black out and die. The way the ground shakes and your “hearing” blows out when there’s a nearby explosion. That it’s China and Shanghai, not some pastiche city that alludes to a major Chinese city, the way the GTA games allude to cities.

        • Smashington says:

          Fuck now I know this guy exists.

          You seriously need a hobby other than reading far too much into Battlefield 4’s story like it is something new. China was one of the major 3 factions in BF2. They are back by popular demand. Not some subliminal media programming to get us ready for a war with China.

          And the building thing… Jesus. I mean we can at least give them kudos because they made a skyscraper fall over the way it should if a chunk of it gets blown out instead of imploding on itself straight down and not damaging anything around it. AMIRITE OR AMIRITE? Tee hee!

          Blood around the camera lense when you get shot? Hasn’t COD been doing this since the WW2 days? Why is this an issue? Why am I even entertaining your questions! FACK! I’ve fallen into the trap!

          • BossSleepy says:


            If taking a few minutes to post a couple of pinheaded thoughts about the BF trailer means I need a hobby, what does that imply about you? Not only did you take a few minutes to post, you seem to have gotten pretty worked up about the whole thing.

          • Premium User Badge

            Phasma Felis says:

            Crikey, man, settle down. Have a cuppa. It’ll be all right.

        • nearly says:

          I seem to remember people making the comparison quite readily in CoD 4 when generic Middle East buildings were leveled and your NPC companions maybe cheered or something.

          I assume the event is just too far from the consciousness (maybe considering other tragedies and acts of terrorism since) to really pull at anyone’s sensibilities. Also, maybe their target audience (or the people that are watching these trailers) are overwhelmingly too young? Depending on what sites/communities you visited on the anniversary, you might have seen a good number of posts from people saying they were only two or three years old when the towers fell.

    • Cytrom says:

      Don’t worry, no good Americans were hurt during the fall of that building, only ‘bad guys’, like chineese, russians, muslims or whatever… mostly chineese. So its OK!

      ‘Murricah, Fuck Yeah!

    • PoulWrist says:

      Did you watch any movies in the last year, or so? The ratio of skyscrapers destroyed to people killed on screen is like, 10:1. A.e. Man of Steel, Pacific Rim, Star Trek 2, those other movies that I forgot, but which were spectacles of effects with tons of buildings falling over all the time. Also, I recall that last Transformers movie as being largely about buildings falling down.

      • BossSleepy says:

        “Did you watch any movies in the last year, or so?”

        Not too many, actually (hoping to get to Pac Rim this week.) I guess it still just raises the question, in general, though — when did this go from being something that’s such a deep trauma point to being something that’s great for spectacle? I’m just curious.

        I also don’t think you can make a generic “skyscraper collapse != 9/11 reference” statement. I’m not saying *every* sky scraper collapse is a 9/11 reference, I’m just pointing out that the way it was presented to that particular trailer certainly seemed suggestive of it: dense city core + shaky cam + glass clad tall office tower. I don’t think it’s a stretch to call that an allusion.

        • shagohad says:

          Well its interesting that the first thing you would think of is 9/11 considering that the US military has been waging urban warfare at great cost to civilian life and causing the destruction of urban environments since long before 9/11, a practice which they are likely to escalate. I guarantee you that the destruction in Manhattan is nothing compared to the utter desolation of places like Fallujha, Kabul, ect. Maybe this is a bit radical but perhaps before wondering whether we should be offended by 9/11 like civilian destruction we should ask if a large portion of the world is offended by us simulating their vilification and destruction in virtual entertainment.

          Or you could simply enjoy the playground that is one of the largest cities in the world and would most likely be a site of contention should the 2 superpowers at play here fight it out (assuming they used conventional weapons that seems unlikely) and ignore the whole civilian aspect, which battlefield has always done, all maps have been conveniently evacuated for you’re destructive pleasure.

          • Subject 706 says:

            Well, in all fairness the afghans themselves had done a pretty good job of leveling many parts of Kabul long before the americans arrived…

  8. RPSRSVP says:

    So $60 for at least a year’s worth of online play. I can live with that, even if the cost doubles with BF4 Premium.

    • Synesthesia says:

      Really? 120 dollars for one game seems a bit steep to me.

      • RPSRSVP says:

        A year’s worth of subscription based MMO’s is still more expensive and it’s a bargain compared to what one has to pay to be competitive in most F2P’s. AAA title with arguably the top 5 graphics engine and enough server population to keep it going. And no burden of persistent worlds.

        And it’s not like the Premium is absolutely necessary

      • SlimPickins says:

        not if you play it for 400+ hours during the course of 2 years…

        • Apocalypse says:

          The number of humble bundles that I can buy without feeling cheap still gives me more hours of entertainment … actually if I think about it, I have already 200 hours with NS2 alone ;-)

  9. Turkey says:

    No more elevator muzak gags in 2014.

  10. stoner says:

    Will it have BF2 style single player? If not, then not interested. BF3 was a major disappointment concerning SP. PoS, actually.

    • PoulWrist says:

      Did BF2, the worst game of the BF series, perhaps bar Vietnam, have SP? Wow… so it was like 1942, where you could put 63 bots on the map and look at what stupid things they would get up to?

    • SlimPickins says:

      they announced there would be a practice mode, possibly with simple bots. and seriously, take off your rose tinted glasses, bots sucked big time…being why it was quite rare any major mod would bother to support them.

  11. bit.bat says:

    They sure are proud of their stabbing animations. I find them unnecessarily gratuitous.

  12. MrSean490 says:

    After seeing what they did with BF3, I’ll be giving this a miss. Planetside 2 has definitely filled my Battlefield void though.,

  13. goettel says:

    Love BF3, can’t wait for 4.

    Uncool, but true.

  14. bretlee996 says:

    I am surprised that any one able to make $5942 in 1 month on the computer. you can check here webpage ——–>

  15. GameDreamer says:

    Battlefield 4 looks like BF3. I will buy it, that’s for sure. I am so excited when they made an announcement.

    Buy Battlefield 4