BATTLEFIELD 4!

[Hayzoos]

HOLY FUCK



Watch this shit in 1080p full screen and prepare to have your fucking mind blown. This game is going to be fucking insane.

[Moolah]

Wow. As much as I don't really give a shit about this genre, this looks great.

[Truth.]

will be coppin on new systems

[Dragondude R]

hell yeah

[Combo7]

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/27/edito ... lefield-4/

Editorial: How the Concessions Stand in Battlefield 4

EA seized an entire movie theater in San Francisco in the midst of GDC 2013 to demonstrate nearly 20 minutes of Battlefield 4, which is also a video game. The venue was large and loud enough to encapsulate the shooter's cinematic aspirations, and flaunt every extravagant detail manifested in the weapons, soldiers, lighting and urban environments – right down to the cracking, withered paint on a door. Battlefield 4 belonged on every inch of that big screen.

And that's fine. I enjoy shooters, I adore movies, and I think there's a valid convergence to be found between the two. It's rarely a shortcut for superior storytelling, but the medium is malleable and fit for many authors. Some strive for realism, others seek expression in the abstract, and some guys prefer to make a crazy game about shipping soup to other planets.

None of those, however, have claimed responsibility for a "new era of interactive entertainment." That would be Battlefield 4, according to EA Games Vice President Patrick Söderlund. "Revealing the game to you all today is a big deal for us," he said in epilogue to the game's exquisitely rendered destruction. "It signals a new era of Battlefield and, frankly, a new era of interactive entertainment."

His frank statement, made within earshot of this week's Game Developers Conference, seemed to oscillate between deleterious and delirious. The content of the presentation – the objective of which is to showcase the game's technology and intent – seemed incongruous with Söderlund's mantra of "redefining what gaming can be," and later became harmful to it.

Here's some of what I saw: a slow, linear walk through a dilapidated school, followed by a cutscene and a shootout; a crashing helicopter; an escape from a building as it crumbled right on cue; the protagonist, Recker, helped up by a fellow soldier after briefly losing consciousness. Is Battlefield 4 "redefining" gaming or looking it up in the thesaurus?

Though Battlefield 4 is obviously the product of many talented programmers, artists and sound designers, the rich imagery couldn't obscure the rails. Battlefield 3's single-player campaign was lambasted for its intrusive scripting, so to see it again and so prevalent is disappointing. The feeling is exacerbated when you consider Battlefield's multiplayer origins, and the personalized stories that emerged from the car chases and plane crashes instigated by players themselves.

As the speech went on, the subject became more and more hollow. It was the melon ball scoop of speeches.

"We have built the Frostbite 3 game engine to be state of the art," Söderlund said. "It is a world-class engine that is more powerful than anything we have ever built. It is a piece of technology that really challenges us to come up with new ideas, new innovations, new ways to entertain people. The power of Frostbite leaves us with no excuses. There's nothing really holding us back anymore."

If Frostbite eradicated excuses and restraints, and the results aren't obviously distinguishable from older games, then ... what was holding Battlefield back? The demonstration suggested EA and DICE are chasing after fidelity (again: fine!), but Söderlund said they're chasing storytelling. Even if you adopt a reductionist approach and simply consider Battlefield 4 a movie of sorts – and this presentation its trailer – it's fair to say that it looks like a lousy movie. I'm not saying the game won't be fun to play regardless; I'd just love it if a kitsch neck-stab at cinema was on the low end of aspirations in our Battlefield-induced new era of interactive entertainment.

After trumpeting the power of Frostbite, Söderlund scooped this one out: "As we all know, the best games out there are not really about polygons, or shaders; it's the emotional connection that we make with players. The DICE studio has evolved into world-class entertainers and storytellers. We are strongly driven by the desire to craft new worlds, new gameplay experiences, and fill them with gripping stories, unique characters and spectacular moments." Nobody in the audience disagreed with this, which was nice, but all of the Battlefield 4 footage just did. In the broad range of emotions that might be explored in a shooter – tension, fear, panic, excitement – where does yet another exploding helicopter fall?

Finally, Söderlund suggested that DICE and EA "are creating experiences that touch us emotionally – experiences that are human, dramatic and believable."

The Example of DICE's attempts at inciting emotion, and not simply recreating it in the faces of their virtual actors, came later in the show. After tumbling through several floors of a collapsing building, the player found a fellow soldier injured and pinned beneath heavy debris. The only way to extract him in time was to cut off his leg.

The frantic argument and distress was not poorly acted, but the scenario felt generic and insincerely contrived; its execution shallow and tactless. Press F to Cut Leg, and the scene continues. Frostbite 3 made the wound seem realistic, and painted a tortured expression on the leg's squirming owner, but it couldn't impart the severity or trauma of the act. This is not a problem solved by better technology, though Söderlund's presentation was hinged on the idea that it was.

The last time I spent a good deal of time cutting off a limb (in a game) was in Telltale's The Walking Dead. It was harrowing, justified, and memorable. Though Telltale's engine is undoubtedly lacking the technological finesse of Frostbite 3, it is far better at acknowledging the player's participation in a dramatic scene, and relied on good writing just as much as its character models and animation.

It's too early and unfair to discuss dilution of agency in Battlefield 4, so I'm expressly focusing on the quality and conviction of the presentation I saw in a movie theater. For better or worse, the venue was appropriate - big, brash and capable of blasting out what little remains of the classic Battlefield theme. It used to be so energetic and melodic, and now it sounds like a dubstep song played through a Geiger counter.

[naturalborn103]

People bitch over anything, huh^? Video games aren't supposed to win Nobel prizes, they are supposed to be entertaining. This looks extremely entertaining.

[Combo7]

Unsurprisingly, you missed the whole point of the editorial.

[Random Sample]

Looks pretty awesome. I haven't played a shooter in the past few years, but I think I am going to get this one.

[chump change]

I agree with the editorial... the cut scenes/scripting are getting way more play nowdays than they should.. got all these new engines and platforms but all the focus goes towards making the game look like a movie.. not towards innovative game play.. i don't have examples because I'm relying on smarter people to come up with the shit
.. not press x fast to amputate leg

[Combo7]

Have you tried Far Cry 3? True open-ended sandbox gameplay as well as good characters, story, and acting.

[wheels]

I agree with the editorial... the cut scenes/scripting are getting way more play nowdays than they should.. got all these new engines and platforms but all the focus goes towards making the game look like a movie.. not towards innovative game play.. i don't have examples because I'm relying on smarter people to come up with the shit
.. not press x fast to amputate leg

I feel like this game will really shine when people start in on the multiplayer. There's only so much you can do with a single player campaign, a lot of it has to be on rails.

But with all the technology in BF4 I bet you'll see some crazy stuff come out of multi. Especially if it's 32v32 or better

[360]

Chump, your statement is an opinion that should be a fact and I completely agree with you.

Wheels statement is a fact. The multiplayer is where BF shines. Honestly, no one even cares about the single player campaign.
I'm just going to make an educated guess based off of my experience and throw some pseudo-data out there but I am willing to bet that, at least, 50% of the players who get this game won't even touch or think about the single player campaign.
That's the way it is with all FPS's that are known for multiplayer these days.

[rayza]

will be coppin on new systems

[Dragondude R]

Chump, your statement is an opinion that should be a fact and I completely agree with you.

Wheels statement is a fact. The multiplayer is where BF shines. Honestly, no one even cares about the single player campaign.
I'm just going to make an educated guess based off of my experience and throw some pseudo-data out there but I am willing to bet that, at least, 50% of the players who get this game won't even touch or think about the single player campaign.
That's the way it is with all FPS's that are known for multiplayer these days.

I hate that this is true. Me and my bro used to love single player in games like Halo living in the boonies with no internet. Nowadays, all single player campaigns are wack because they're just tutorials to the multiplayer, basically