EPTBattlefield 4 - Page 11
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:15 Torte de Lini wrote: Is BF4 graphically improved? I need a comparative graph to show the differences in the two since they look so damn similar ): Graphics are a bit better but BF4 difference is mainly going to be maps, better destruction and probably better maps now that consoles aren't holding it back. Commander mode, 5 man squads, voip, new weapons and some other stuff I can't think of at the moment. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 13 2013 15:06 Brett wrote: DLC was $49.95 for all of it. Less than the game costs here and US? You also don't have to buy it. BF3 was a complete game when released. Nobody forces you to buy any DLC and nothing was added or taken away in those DLC packs that ruined the game. Your hyperbole is just a poor way to express your personal distaste with DLC. You seem to believe that because you paid $50-60 originally, you deserve everything else that is developed and released subsequently for free (and I don't disagree that it would be great if that were still the case, as it often was in days gone by). But video games have become more about business than anything else, and with development costs being so high these days, it's no surprise that such practices have gone the way of the dodo. Hence his entitlement comment. Lament the change of business models all you want, but DLC as a concept hardly ruins a game itself. Development costs are so high because developers and publishers are stupid. DLC is not necessary. DRM is not necessary. Anyone who thinks that this is just the "natural evolution of the market" or "a necessary step" is just being an ignorant apologist. | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:33 blade55555 wrote: Graphics are a bit better but BF4 difference is mainly going to be maps, better destruction and probably better maps now that consoles aren't holding it back. Commander mode, 5 man squads, voip, new weapons and some other stuff I can't think of at the moment. Eh, I might just wait then. I couldn't keep up with BF3 and it had some annoyances. I'm definitely iffy about the commander mode; hopefully it's as good as it was before and just unsure about the game. | ||
|
Michaels
419 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:33 Stratos_speAr wrote: Development costs are so high because developers and publishers are stupid. DLC is not necessary. DRM is not necessary. Anyone who thinks that this is just the "natural evolution of the market" or "a necessary step" is just being an ignorant apologist. DLCs are great for reviving interest in a multiplayer game. I don't understand why people hate them. | ||
|
Westy
England808 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:38 Michaels wrote: DLCs are great for reviving interest in a multiplayer game. I don't understand why people hate them. Because the whole concept of DLC was based on community made maps, which were free. Developers just decided to take this concept, do it worse than the community and put a massive price tag on it. I hate the concept of DLC. It just shows how much gamers are getting milked right now. However I love the battlefield franchise and will be buying all DLC, so I can't really complain. | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:38 Michaels wrote: DLCs are great for reviving interest in a multiplayer game. I don't understand why people hate them. Because as games continue to come out they are shipped with less and less. Now instead of 15 maps you start with 10 and have to buy 5 more. Things like this. DLC's are being announced before the game is even release, DLC is announced the day the game came out. For some cases on console games some of the "DLC" is actually on the disk. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:38 Michaels wrote: DLCs are great for reviving interest in a multiplayer game. I don't understand why people hate them. Current DLC is, 90% of the time, just developers holding back content and work so they can milk the consumers unnecessarily. On disc/day one DLC is, in absolutely zero cases, justifiable. As a poster above me said, consumers just put less work into the initial product so they can charge extra for more things later. The only cases where DLC is justifiable is with games like Skyrim where the "DLC" is more like a small expansion pack and the original game comes with hundreds of hours of content. | ||
|
Brett
Australia3822 Posts
On June 14 2013 10:43 Stratos_speAr wrote: Current DLC is, 90% of the time, just developers holding back content and work so they can milk the consumers unnecessarily. On disc/day one DLC is, in absolutely zero cases, justifiable. As a poster above me said, consumers just put less work into the initial product so they can charge extra for more things later. The only cases where DLC is justifiable is with games like Skyrim where the "DLC" is more like a small expansion pack and the original game comes with hundreds of hours of content. That quite arguably applies to BF3 and its DLC... I do agree that day one and on disc DLC is stupid however (unless it's just something like a pre-order bonus). | ||
|
altered
Switzerland646 Posts
| ||
|
Michaels
419 Posts
| ||
|
NIIINO
Slovakia1320 Posts
On June 14 2013 22:11 altered wrote: A game like BF3 that has online multiplayer and can give you fun and entertainment for hunderts of hours (1500h+ in my case) is not a ripoff with dlc or not. 120$ gave you vanilla + premium with all dlcs. Thats going 5 times to the cinema or one night to a club. Even if you play the game for 50 hours and then stop its still relatively cheap entertainment. I would undersatnd concerns if you guys lived in countrys wih very low income but most of you complaining are first world citizens, so get a job and stop being cheapskates. But wouldnt you like Project Reality or more free maps for BF3 ? Its like buying 5 more maps for SC2 every 3 months. BF3 is fan, but it could be something magical. | ||
|
Rowrin
United States280 Posts
Looking back at bf2, it had some dlc late in its lifetime (armored fury), but it also had free map updates (wake island, jalalabad), as well as proper exansions that included not only new weapons and vehicles, but new features like the crossbow that allowed you to repel down terrain, as well as a complete map pool not just a single map. Battlefield 3 is what, 2.5 years old? Probably 3 years old once bf4 is out. Bf4 is looking like a glorified expansion IMO that costs more and will be outdated every few months without another $15. Granted I played bf3 without dlc just fine and would have gotten karkan if I didnt realise there would be like 5 more. I dont know about bf4. . . I have it preordered but may cancell to go the arma3 route. I really only want one since I dont have the time to onvest in both. All that said ive played battlefield 1942, the desert combat mod, 2, special forces exp, euro force exp, armored fury, 2142 and 3 . Just never fell in love with 3 like its predecessors. | ||
|
Demonhunter04
1530 Posts
On June 14 2013 05:33 blade55555 wrote: Graphics are a bit better but BF4 difference is mainly going to be maps, better destruction and probably better maps now that consoles aren't holding it back. Commander mode, 5 man squads, voip, new weapons and some other stuff I can't think of at the moment. The lighting and destruction are vastly improved. The HUD is also cleaner and the commander has more options now than before - UAV, counter-UAV, cruise missile strikes, supply drops, etc. I think squads are actually capped at 6 players - it showed the player's name above the 5 other squad members in this video: "Levolution" is this new gameplay mechanic that goes beyond what's shown, to things like cutting power to disable lights. | ||
|
Michaels
419 Posts
On June 15 2013 04:06 Demonhunter04 wrote: The lighting and destruction are vastly improved. The HUD is also cleaner and the commander has more options now than before - UAV, counter-UAV, cruise missile strikes, supply drops, etc. I think squads are actually capped at 6 players - it showed the player's name above the 5 other squad members in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nJY7n8KaOY&feature=player_embedded "Levolution" is this new gameplay mechanic that goes beyond what's shown, to things like cutting power to disable lights. The sixth player shown is commander. | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BMwCTRcCcAARc1S.jpg:large) shit just got real | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
| ||
|
Phelix
1931 Posts
Weapon balance will always be an issue...hope DICE can get this somewhat balanced this time around. | ||
|
Michaels
419 Posts
On June 15 2013 07:09 Torte de Lini wrote: What's Levolution exactly? Real-Time Dynamic Map Features, for instance when you destroy the skyscraper it will not only cover everything in dust, but also create a new landscape such a "Ground Zero" in the map they showed at E3. There were also rumors many months ago that there is gonna be a map with a dam you can destroy to flood some areas etc. | ||
|
Michaels
419 Posts
| ||
| ||
