EA shows 17 minutes of Battlefield 4 gameplay

The Radeon HD 7990 did more than appear on stage on stage at the Game Developers Conference. The card also powered a demo of Battlefield 4, which is being previewed at the show. It looks like the hype train is now in full swing for the upcoming title. EA has posted a handful of screenshots in addition to two videos.

Let’s start with the official announcement trailer:

Rihanna provides the soundtrack for a predictable series of quick cuts and over-the-top action sequences. Fans of the franchise will want to get comfortable for the second video, which shows off 17 minutes of actual gameplay from the Fishing in Baku mission.

How can you not love a gameplay video that starts with Total Eclipse of the Heart? And no, I’m not talking about a dubstep remix.

Admittedly, the gameplay trailer does feel like a bit of a Battlefield 3 remix. The single-player action looks similarly scripted, although there’s perhaps a little more drama this time around. Even the settings are familiar from the last game. However, this is just one mission, and the end of the video teases a visit to the east coast of China. That should be different.

As expected, the graphics are gorgeous—even better than in BF3, which is already a great-looking game. There seems to be more environmental destruction this time around, and the character detail seems to have been bumped up. The environments shown off in the footage are pretty varied, from open outdoor areas to cramped building corridors.

Battlefield 4 is due to be released in the fall, and I hope the single-player portion is less formulaic than in the last game. That’s probably asking too much, given the Call of Duty style that has afflicted all too many first-person shooters. For me, the Battlefield franchise has always been about the multiplayer, anyway. We don’t have a sense of what BF4 will offer that front, but I’m sure EA will trickle out snippets of multiplayer action in the coming months. You can check out the first batch of Battlefield 4 screenshots in the gallery below.

Comments closed
    • jonjonjon
    • 7 years ago

    love it. blame COD because BF3 campaign sucked. perfect logic. its not dice’s fault for making a terrible campaign its COD’s fault for being to popular and dice had to copy them. then you get this. “For me, the Battlefield franchise has always been about the multiplayer, anyway.” again the campaign sucked but that doesn’t matter because its all about mp. yea if you want to play a vehicle combat game. BF3 should be called a VCS vehicle combat shooter not a FPS. i don’t know why they even give you a gun. half your team is sitting there waiting for a helicopter or plane to spawn doing nothing. ill take fast paced gun fights of COD over the lame vehicle whoring in BF. again EA will be crying as BF gets smoked by COD. im all for anything that makes EA mad and hope BF flops.

    • DrD
    • 7 years ago

    BF3 is actually a pretty good game in my opinion. Origin is here to stay, like it or not. Why would EA pay a third party to distribute it for them. The real issues that need addressing in BF4 multiplayer are client or server side hit detection, latency compensation, cheat detection and management of caught cheaters and , if they have dedicated servers for rent , support for server admins.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    The facial rendering tech is way better than it used to be. Crysis 3 good???

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah, it looks pretty good.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    I see all the hate on here. Its clear that sp is not they main stay of the series nor is it where most of the resources are going but it sure does show well and help with promotion of the game.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 7 years ago

    The only reason EA continues to release SP movies is clear: on release day, few can play MP due to server and load issues.

    • tanker27
    • 7 years ago

    Nothing beats the last BF trailer with the M1 platoon. But everyone knows that the single player game generally sucks and that the multiplayer game is the best.

    I do think that Dice’s sounds are top notch.

    But I think I am gonna move on to Arma.

    • Welch
    • 7 years ago

    The underwater scene had me thinking I would actually purchase this game…… Then I watched the rest, which don’t get me wrong looks fun, but is so unrealistic and over the top that it would just feel cheesy. I want difficulty in my single player FPS games. This looks like you can get hit 100 times before finally falling to the ground. The AI looks as dumb as any other FPS since the original BF game, and there is just too damn much “OMGZ, everything is blowing up and somehow we survive.”

    That being said, cinematically speaking it looks pro, graphics look great, movement looks much more fluid and realistic than BF3 ever did. All around I am intrigued, but I still feel like they are banking on amazing graphics. I also have to say that the voice acting feels like its finally great, no more out of place sounding voices and lines. With the exception of the cheesy 1 liner comical reliefs…. Why do we need those still guys? Do they not care that they have almost just been killed 50 times before going up an elevator? Do they need to make a joking comment about the terrace view, who would really do that in a situation like that…. It just feels gimmicky and pulls you out of the current feeling of the moment.

    I guess after playing Arma II and Arma III (Alpha), its hard to imagine playing a game where I can get shot over and over, run my vehicle into a wall, use a grenade launcher 10-15 feet away and not take shrapnel or die. I’ve been done with unrealistic teenage shooters for a long time.

    Graphically, it shows promise. Now just make the game play and events realistic.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      About the ‘realism’ of the combat- I think the presenter did make a mistake here. The game was shown being played on a far to relaxed/easy setting, appearing to be even more relaxed than BF3 MP is on Normal mode (I play Hardcore primarily because I want people to die when I shoot them).

      I couldn’t help but thinking, like you, ‘this dude should be dead,’ over and over.

      And the other thing that stood out- the ‘Combat Lifesaver’ comment when they get to their leader’s leg, is just plain silly in light of modern military training. Even an Airman straight out of basic would know what had to be done, and further, that a tourniquet would be needed! That poor dude wouldn’t have survived with the amount of blood they depicted ‘painting’ the ground after they pulled him away.

      • forumics
      • 7 years ago

      well blame the kids nowadays and how they can’t stand pressure
      back in the days our games had a life counter, the minute it hits 0 you are dead, no auto increment unless you get health packs

      nowadays most games if not all have this you must get shot a million times before you are dead policy… sucks the realism out of games

    • Miltond
    • 7 years ago

    WoW,can’t waiting

    • Krogoth
    • 7 years ago

    Another EA franchise that is being burnt into the ground.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      You know, I usually agree with your opinions, but this one seems a little short-sighted- can you explain how it’s being burnt down?

        • Laykun
        • 7 years ago

        Use your brain and watch the video again. Start thinking.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          Replies like this are helpful to no one and show absolutely zero critical thinking or social skills.

            • Airmantharp
            • 7 years ago

            I wanted to respond to him, but I couldn’t be sure as to which of the multiple ways his statement could be interpreted was intended, or if he meant to communicate all of them.

            I’m not really offended; there’s a lot to like and a lot to dislike about the whole thing that is Battlefield/DICE/EA.

        • Krogoth
        • 7 years ago

        Battlefield franchise is becoming “COD:MW me-too!”. The process started back with the first Bad Company and it gradually grew worse with each new installation.

        That’s a reason why BF-fanatics prefer the dated BF2 over the new stuff.

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          Not that you could convince me to play (or pay for) a CoD game, but while they’re both contemporary military shooters, it seems that in practice they’re quite different. CoD comes across as the ‘infantry-only’ military shooter with smallish maps, while Battlefield has tons of vehicles and quite large maps in comparison. While I understand your disdain for the confluence of some aspects between these franchises, it’s hard to discount how Battlefield has provided quite a different experience than the CoD teams.

            • Krogoth
            • 7 years ago

            With BF2, you are 100% correct.

            With the more recent titles, BF has become COD with vehicles……..

            The SP campaigns are almost a blatant rip-off.

            • Airmantharp
            • 7 years ago

            The SP campaigns are definitely ripoffs- they’re just distractions and may be mildly entertaining. That BF4 MP is very likely to be BF3 but bigger, better and prettier makes sense; but a better single-player experience certainly can’t hurt, even if it’s only marginally better.

            As for BF being CoD with vehicles- well, maybe that’s what some of us want :). And BF4 might just bring back the ‘Commander’ option, especially if they up the player count; it’ll damn near need to be necessary if say you get 128 people into a server, which is entirely reasonable.

            • Krogoth
            • 7 years ago

            128 player servers aren’t possible outside of LANs unless the clients are geographically close to each other.

            • Airmantharp
            • 7 years ago

            If you’re right, I may be mistaken about how these games’ netcode works: I’m assuming that each client only has a connection to the server, and not the other clients.

            From that, it would seem that the only issue with scaling the number of players up would be the capability of the clients (BF3 is CPU limited today, more so than other shooters), the bandwidth of the clients to accommodate more data, and the capability of the server to do the same. Servers are typically provisioned to run multiple server processes so it’s not likely that there’d be a hardware or network limitation as much as an increase in the cost of each server process hosted, with fewer running on each server.

            But if there’s another limitation, then upping the scale quite rightly could be difficult!

    • Laykun
    • 7 years ago

    Dice Developer : People seem to like our games because we provide a different experience to what they’re used to
    EA Marketer : You’re right, Call of Duty is popular, lets do what they do.

    Quick time events, on the razors edge situations, lack of subtlety, shooting gallery gameplay, beautiful graphics and cinematic animation. seems like Lip Stick on a Pig to me.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    I was pretty excited to see what they were cooking up. The dramatic elements were solid and the production value very exceptional. I didn’t have a hope but I’m already intrigued. The over arching story need only improve dramatically and we will have a COD killer on our hands. I think MW4 will be hard pressed to surpase this at E3

    • jthh
    • 7 years ago

    I am still waiting for a sequel to BF2.

    • jessterman21
    • 7 years ago

    Very nice textures and lighting. Frostbite’s painted concrete has always impressed me. Made Mirror’s Edge look real, and really works in this game, too.

    Here’s hoping for SMAA support, too.

    • Forge
    • 7 years ago

    Good news everyone! After two years in beta, Battlefield 3 is not getting any further bug fixes! We here at EA cordially invite you to pay us again for more maps and yet another hackneyed and cliche single player “campaign”, and another year or more of obvious glitches, cheats, terrain bugs, clipping errors, and flat out WTFisms in multiplayer! After that, We’ll announce BF4 part 2, aka BF3 part 3, and totally end support and updates for vanilla BF4!

    $EE YOU ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! BRING YOUR WALLET!

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 7 years ago

    EA’s been on an 80’s kick with music on their trailers. They had Total Eclipse of the Heart here, they had Phil Collins on Dead Space 3, and they had Crysis 3’s launch trailer including Sharp Dressed Man.

    Can’t wait for the Dragon Age 3 trailer that has Don’t Worry Be Happy and the Mass Effect 4 trailer playing Love Shack in the background.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      The music was very well used here; I think it’s a good thing. Especially if it’s good non-current-pop music.

    • LastQuestion
    • 7 years ago

    I was really hoping that the upload would have better quality. Having a high quality upload isn’t that complex and it’s something I keep expecting ‘professionals’ to know how to accomplish. Not that they ‘suck’ at their job but if a mild interest in game capture and access to Google enables superior results then…well, maybe they suck at their job.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      You can change the video quality to 1080p. Maybe you suck at Youtube.

        • LastQuestion
        • 7 years ago

        Or maybe things are quite like what I proposed.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          You didn’t propose anything that isn’t already there. Maybe you should explain what you mean by ‘high quality’?

            • LastQuestion
            • 7 years ago

            I suppose it is a matter of standards by which ‘high quality’ is defined. By high quality I mean uploading a video which is almost lossless(not just visually lossless) by comparison to the source, at an ideal and reasonable bitrate(~30-40Mbps), thereby the only perceivable degradation in quality is that presented by the compression Youtube uses.

            For the amount of compression artifacts present in the BF4 video I have a hard believing that they fulfilled that general guideline. My knowledge is far from complete so its possible that the methods they use to capture gameplay are not as effective as mine. But that again begs the question of how good can they be at their job. Perhaps they operate under certain constraints. It could be many things.

            The one thing which is certain that the videos I’ve uploaded for BF3 do not have nearly as many compression artifacts as the BF4 video. Even in my early days of continual learning and adaptation I found quality like in that video surprising. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8_c6BJv4sA<]Here's an example[/url<] of what my limited knowledge could achieve earlier. I've since made further changes in how I capture which I suspect may even improve quality more. Whatever the case might be my passing interest shouldn't ever exceed those of a professional, let alone those working on something like BF4.

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    Definitely looks good… I think Dice successfully took over Tryarchs place as far as over the top cinematic shooter on rails cinematic campaigns go. CoDs were always pretty much like this, but Dice finally figured out their magic to making a good campaign (as far as linear gameplay goes). It’s really a shame it took them this long.

    It’s also a shame that the gameplay was codified, I miss BF3 style gameplay, everything still feels too cinematic when playing multiplayer…

    It’s good they’re finally putting all of this into high gear though. For the amount of money EA makes, they should’ve been craping out BF clones every couple years and constantly updating their games with new content, pay or free. It really doesn’t bug me as long as content is always is being released and the game is always in a constant state of development. Big companies have been neglecting their franchises for far too long and only Activision seemed to know what they’re doing as far as that goes.

    Don’t get me wrong, EA and Activision aren’t my first picks for companies, but for AAA games like this… no one has the same amount of capital to throw around and make things look good. They also set a baseline for decent gameplay (even if it’s not spectacular). It’s like McDonalds.

    All of this aside, I’m sure they didn’t do anything to improve cheat detection and this is a point that people definitely need to be more vocal about.

    • brute
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<] However, this is just one mission, and the end of the video teases a visit to the east coast of China. That should be different.[/quote<] china's west coast would have been cooler

    • tootercomputer
    • 7 years ago

    I generally do not like FPS games, and this is more combat I guess. But the graphics are simply amazing, and very exciting game, incredible flow.

    • maxxcool
    • 7 years ago

    Thank you for buying BF3, and the all of the many extras and packs.. now buy them again for this one.

    • Anvil
    • 7 years ago

    13:37 minutes earlier? Oh Dice.

    Also, thank you based Panetta for the final few seconds of that trailer.

    • GatoRat
    • 7 years ago

    Why do these game use camera artifacts like lens flare? Drives me crazy.

      • Aegaeon
      • 7 years ago

      Exactly. Simulating a camera lens in front of your eyes does not increase immersion, it breaks it!

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        Valve got this; they explained by interview that this is why they didn’t include lens flare in the original Half-Life, even though the hardware available had specific support for it.

        I don’t find it too distracting, but maybe developers could include it only when a ‘camera’ view is being simulated, and not human eyes?

    • Silus
    • 7 years ago

    Looks awesome and exciting! Once more the eye opener goes to the graphics, which will certainly keep pushing PC hardware. The graphics look a bit better than in BF3, but not that much. At this point I’m not sure BF4 will be able to take Crysis 3’s crown as the best looking game, but we’ll see when it’s out. The action seems top notch. Although I enjoyed the single player campaign of BF3, it didn’t have this type of exciting action in it. I hope that it isn’t restricted to just this level.

    I’m not expecting many changes in multiplayer. BF3, as is, is already the best online shooter there is, so I’m expecting the same, with more and newer levels, better graphics, more weapons and vehicles and that’s it. Keeping what works while improving it or adding to it, seems to make the most sense at this point.

      • squeeb
      • 7 years ago

      It looks good, but I’m still quite happy with BF3 and the xpacs. Been playing CQ, AM and EG since premium was on sale a few weeks ago.

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        I actually have yet to buy any expansion and I know I already missed out on some of the Origin sales, but oh well, can’t buy them all 🙂

        Still I’m also happy with BF3, but seeing it evolve is always a good thing too. PC Gaming needs more games like these that push its boundaries, since the majority will still be just console ports.

      • Darkmage
      • 7 years ago

      How about a single-player training mode so you can practice flying a helicopter before jumping into an online match?

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        And why not…I have nothing against that idea.

        • ChronoReverse
        • 7 years ago

        They just need to have Helicopter Superiority.

        I’m MUCH better at flying now that I’ve spent so much time furballing in Air Superiority.

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        There was a Coop mission that gave you the chance to shoot baddies without experienced players shooting back- but I gotta tell you, helicopters have very little defense against one AA opponent, and two are killer.

        • JohnC
        • 7 years ago

        That would be awesome. Create a special single-player map, with all of the vehicles near your spawn point, and an on-screen guidance telling you “press this key to roll left” or whatever.

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          You’ll have to look up the key mappings yourself (and if you’re using a controller to fly helicopters or a joystick for jets, you’ll probably want to remap them), but joining an empty server largely serves the same purpose.

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 7 years ago

    Female Soldier in the last few seconds of footage….can o’ worms officially opened.

      • Deadsalt
      • 7 years ago

      Not an American solider in all likelihood. Also, it’s a game, who cares?

        • lilbuddhaman
        • 7 years ago

        The feminists will care because of some disillusion that men want to kill women. (and I guarantee there will be squads/clans made with men-only or women-only setups)
        The “pros” will care because they’ll claim the hitboxes are different for the female players than the male players. (hopefully this won’t be true)
        The realism / purists will claim that women don’t have the presence IRL that the game will place on females on the battlefield.
        The cynical assholes (me!) will claim they wasted dev time on female models instead of actual gameplay content such as maps/vehicles/a working comma rose/commander mode/weapon balance.

          • Deadsalt
          • 7 years ago

          -Well the crazy feminists will care, but they are irrelevant.

          -I also doubt the hit-boxes would be all that different, and also hope this won’t be true.

          -The realism people can shut up until the actual game comes out. We don’t know the plot or the setup for the plot. As long as there is a reasonable explanation for her presence, IN GAME, they can’t complain. If they just drop her into the game to be pretty eye candy, the realism folks can/should tear her to shreds.

          -Also since we don’t know the all characters involved or their roles, I wouldn’t claim they wasted dev time until after the game is released.

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        The grunts in the video appear to be regulars, certainly not Recon, Rangers or SF; and there are plenty of female regulars in near-combat positions, with combat positions opening up. Since BF:BC and BF3 were both set in near future conflicts, it does make sense that they’d portray the expected near future states of current militaries.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      I want to add to the OP: this can of worms NEEDS to be opened!

      Women have become a huge presence all over the battlefield, and shouldn’t be ignored. They make very real contributions to the force and frankly make it better than it was before.

    • Arclight
    • 7 years ago

    Why must they give single player so much attention? Have they forgotten this was supposed to be a multiplayer only game? Trust EA to make a singleplayer game like SimCity need persistent connection while making an online shooter like BF have a single player campaign.

      • Silus
      • 7 years ago

      Just because you don’t like the single player portion, doesn’t mean everyone else doesn’t either. I’m glad Dice (not EA) keeps the single player campaign, especially when it looks as exciting as what’s shown in this 17 minutes of gameplay footage.

      Also, the game is slated for Fall of 2013, which means you’ll have plenty of time to watch gameplay footage from the multiplayer portion of the game.

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        I think you misunderstand. That 17 minutes *was* the single player campaign.

          • Silus
          • 7 years ago

          Uhh? How did I misunderstand, when I clearly mention that in my own post ???

            • willmore
            • 7 years ago

            Whoosh…

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            he was saying the single player is only 17 minutes long.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            Sarcasm is hard. Especially on the internet.

            • Silus
            • 7 years ago

            Ah I understand now. Not very funny, but fine.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        By 2013 who else still likes on rails single player campaigns where your only role is to press W and E for 5 minutes between cinematics. Seriously i’m tired of this sh*t.

          • sschaem
          • 7 years ago

          Movies are even worse.. you just sit there for 2 to 3 hours doing NOTHING. What a ripoff.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            And then they rip you off at the concession stand with overpriced DLC…I mean popcorn.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            That’s your fault. I bring a keyboard to movies and press W and E for 5 minutes between cinematics. SO MUCH FUN!

          • superjawes
          • 7 years ago

          And people wonder why we want Valve to release the game-which-shall-not-be-named. Say what you want about the reused puzzles At least you aren’t just running between cut scenes.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      Why? Because Battlefield is EA’s Call of Duty response. If they are going to beat Call of Duty, they must have all the ingredients to the special recipe. They must have:

      1) A short, Michael Bay-esque single player full of explosions, thin plot, and lots of vaguely known actors.
      2) Russian Ultranationalists doing crazy things that make sense only to them.
      3) An expansive multiplayer that is virtually ignored in nearly every trailer yet remains the most reason anyone buys the game and/or continues to play it for more than the 4 hours it takes to complete the single player campaign.
      4) QTE’s.
      5) Expansions that expand the barely mentioned, but game selling multiplayer with the forgotten single player… forgotten.

      That’s the recipe. Throw in a dash of modern times with a slight futuristic pinched in for good measure. BAM!

      You got yourself another Call of Duty just waitin’ to pop out of the oven and give you a few billion dollars. Right? RIGHT?

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        I’m guessing you never saw the promos for BF3 ? There’s a dozen trailers and demos for multiplayer alone, but of course they also had a couple for the single player.

        Let’s assume you are right. In case you missed it, Call of Duty sells millions and millions of copies in each iteration, so why wouldn’t others want to follow on its footsteps ? Clearly they’re doing something right for their business. I don’t like it and Call of Duty stopped being interesting ever since CoD 2, with 4 being a bit different due to being a different time period, but it was basically the still type of game, where you’re so limited and on rails that you can’t even open a door…

        But, you are wrong, because BF3 is nothing like Call of Duty (even in the single player, although it does have some similarities, but what game of the same genre doesn’t have similarities ?) and the multiplayer still IS the core of any Battlefield game, as BF3 proved and still proves with the best online shooter experience in the market with huge maps, lots of people per map, amazing graphics that increase the realism and immersion. complete freedom with vehicles and weapons. Call of Duty pales in comparison…

      • diable
      • 7 years ago

      They give it attention because some people actually play it, heaven forbid.. I know, those people don’t know how dumb they are. Also who doesn’t have a persistent internet connection in 2013? I don’t see whats the big deal. Climb down from your high horse before you get a nose bleed.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        Aaaaaand you’re wrong. [url=http://www.techspot.com/news/51505-ea-shelves-medal-of-honor-franchise-after-weak-sales-reviews.html<]This[/url<] is where i'm coming from, not from a high horse, sort of speak.

    • Forge
    • 7 years ago

    Like Kraft75, I bought BF3 because I had enjoyed BF1942 up through BF2. Bad Company 2 was so-so, and BF3 is a couple big steps in a wrong direction. I will pass on BF4.

    • Prestige Worldwide
    • 7 years ago

    This just in from EA: After 2 years of Beta, Battlefield 3 is finally ready! So ready, in fact, that we’re putting a 4 on the box!

    *stockholder applause*

      • Firestarter
      • 7 years ago

      Now all they have to do is make it a good game, and we’re set!

    • Kraft75
    • 7 years ago

    I was the biggest BF1942 fan, played the hell out of it, and all the mods, from Galactic Conquest(Star Wars) to Pirates, Desert Combat, etc… So many hours!

    I bought BF3, wanted to get into it, hoping to rekindle my love for BF but it didn’t jive at all. I didn’t like the match browser thingy, and I didn’t like origin… total meh for me. I might glance at this one when it comes out, but if it’s still attached to origin it’ll be a pass for me….

    Time to dust off those old BF1942 CDs again!!!

      • squeeb
      • 7 years ago

      Sadly, Origin is going nowhere.

        • Kraft75
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah, well I’m going to keep my money until they catch on…

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      I assume you did actually play the game, but your post makes it sound like you didn’t bother.

      Origin is annoying and it is DRM, but it’s also a download manager and automatic patcher, which is important when servers are kept patched as well. And Battlelog is a massive improvement over previous in game browers. Look up Better Battlelog, which makes it even better.

        • Kraft75
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah I played it, I think I might have spent 3-4 hours before giving it up. I think I would probably appreciate the game for real, if it wasn’t for the package it’s in. I just gave up because it was so clunky, with browser and Origin. My beef is more with EA and their online distribution solution Origin, as opposed to the developer and the game itself. I think they should rethink their business model to allow their games to be released by other competing distribution solution, like Steam. Steam I like, and it’s a manager/patcher as well, and it is DRM, but I don’t have an issue with authentication. They can keep running origin if they want, but release the games elsewhere as well. When they do that I’ll be happy to send them some of my money, and it would go far into rectifying my view of that company, which is very low at this point in time.

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          What’s clunky?

          Origin starts when Windows starts, I click on the BF3 icon on the taskbar and a browser window opens, and I join on a friend or join a server- it’s pretty quick, and not of any significant difference than what I’d do for Counter-strike on Steam.

            • JohnC
            • 7 years ago

            It’s not “clunky”, it just feels different, and that is why people dislike it.

            • Airmantharp
            • 7 years ago

            Most of us, myself included, didn’t like Steam either. We didn’t explicitly trust Valve any more than we trusted Microsoft or Sony, and we didn’t want extra crap installed and running just to play Counter-strike:Source, either.

            Unless it involves higher framerates or lower ping times, we don’t like change, I can agree on that. And I didn’t want to use Origin (or whatever it was called before), but that was the reality of playing EA’s games.

            In the end, though, Origin is largely unintrusive, and you really don’t have to use the thing except as a game manager (like Steam). You can just make shortcuts to the game executables. And man, if you’re criticizing Battlelog, did you really like the server browser in Bad Company 2?!?

    • Sargent Duck
    • 7 years ago

    No doubt EA will release this game where you need a constant Internet connection to their servers so they can offload some of the gameplay elements to their servers, since your computer can’t properly handle a FPS…

      • Firestarter
      • 7 years ago

      No need to, you already have to sign in with your browser to even get into the game, so when their servers are down you’re up the proverbial creek anyway, with your paddle held hostage.

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        Not for the single player campaign you don’t. If you’re offline, you can play the game without any connection.

          • Sargent Duck
          • 7 years ago

          Let me fire up Simcity…oh, wait a minute…

            • Silus
            • 7 years ago

            Who was talking about SimCity in this thread ? Oh right, no one…someone just made an analogy, but always concerning this game called BF4, which if it’s anything like BF3, won’t need any internet connection to play the single player portion.

            • Waco
            • 7 years ago

            And SimCity, if it was anything like SimCity 4…oh wait. Right. It’s not similar at all. Why would you expect this to be in regards to the DRM restrictions?

            • Silus
            • 7 years ago

            Because unlike the large majority around here, I don’t see “EA” and start crying because of whatever. Making analogies between entirely different types of games is ridiculous to say the least.

    • henfactor
    • 7 years ago

    No Firsts here.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This