The team behind XCOM takes on Marvel and delivers a tactical turn-based RPG with deep and rewarding combat.
Marvel's Midnight Suns Review
From the return of Dead Space style horror to the creators of XCOM creating a full-blown Marvel superhero RPG. Let’s take a look at the big releases across each platform…
Games of December 2022
Incredible 4K performance, the new GeForce RTX 4080 is here.
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition Review
With its triple-slot design, the MSI GeForce RTX 4080 Gaming X Trio is huge. But so is its performance.
MSI GeForce RTX 4080 Gaming X Trio Review
Post by Dan @ 09:42am 14/08/12 | 13 Comments
During a presentation at the annual GDC Europe developer's conference in Cologne, Joystiq reports that DICE GM Karl Magnus Troedsson indicated the company wasn't ready to start talking too much about the recently revealed Battlefield 4, but did offer a minor confirmation on the game's setting and the reasoning behind passing over a new Bad Company instalment for Battlefield proper.
with a lag time of six years between Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 3, why did the studio go with Battlefield 4 so quickly instead of heading back to Bad Company?

"There's a lot of things inspiring us as to how the franchise will move on. Everything from fans' feedback, to market research and, of course, what we want to build ourselves. It's not just one single thing," said Troedsson, continuing with a hint of sarcasm. "And, yes, I know Battlefield 4 is probably the most creative name we ever could come up with. I can't comment any more on that game because it's all secret."

However, he did go on to say, "We still want to stay in this genre, the modern day as it is. We feel this is a place we can be and continue with the series. Battlefield 4 can live in this space and be very successful."
Not ruling out a return to the more light-hearted Battlefield series, Troedsson hinted "That doesn't mean there might not be a Bad Company game again in the future".

battlefield 4diceeaelectronic arts

Latest Comments
Posted 01:16pm 14/8/12
I suspect the rush to develop Batlefield 4 has to do with the large number of dedicated Battlefield fans that DIDN'T buy Battlefield 3 due to the weak solo campaign and complete lack of mod support. I'm still happily playing Battlefield 2, and won't be buying another Battlefield until mod support is returned. That may of course mean never.
Posted 01:23pm 14/8/12
I don't think that number is as large as you seem to think it is
Posted 01:34pm 14/8/12
What Khel said.

I'm a lot disappoint at the moment with my mates who all rushed out and bought into BF3 Premium... it sold 1.5M copies in the first week alone (and at $50 a pop it was $12 more than I paid for my 'limited edition' version at launch).

Given EA's s***e track record for support, I won't be so quick to rush into BF4. The game as it stands has some horrible flaws, and flaws that need to be addressed.
Posted 01:36pm 14/8/12
I suspect the rush to develop Battlefield 4 is due to The Old Republic tanking and going free to play. Rumours abound of Riccitiello's imminent demise.
Posted 02:23pm 14/8/12
Was hoping for 2143 or something, I want my titans and mechs back.
Posted 02:43pm 14/8/12
I think they are just going the Call of Duty route and releasing 1 a year.
Posted 03:17pm 14/8/12
I think they are just going the Call of Duty route and releasing 1 a year.

by the time BF4 will be out, it would have been at least (or close to) 2 years which will be a bigger gap than BC2 -> BF3 and BF2 -> BF2142.

I think they're releasing at a steady pace *shrug*

Was hoping for 2143 or something, I want my titans and mechs back.

same. bit of a shame :\
Posted 06:47pm 14/8/12
Didn't I read on here that MOH and BF will go back-2-back each year.

BF3 got it out of my system, wont buy bf4 unless bored
Posted 07:51pm 14/8/12
I can't help but feel they are jumping the gun a bit, Also why the current modern setting? We already have BFBC2 and BF3 with modern settings. The only other thing I can think of is putting in drones and other newer tech to control like BLOPS 2.
Posted 08:56pm 14/8/12
I just wish they got rid of that coloured filter stuff for Bf3, makes it almost unplayable for me
Posted 02:53am 15/8/12
This only makes sense if BF4 is for next gen consoles. Where they do what people really wanted from BF3. Also using the main brand, launch of a new console makes sense.

BF3 showed they may have a fancy new engine, but they couldn't deliver a proper modern BF2 sequel on consoles. PC players then suffered as a result.

Where as BC was based on what consoles could do and they'd be able to do an amazing BC3. They'd be way better off doing an amped up FB2 version of BC2 if they were staying with current console hardware.

If next gen won't be out for this, then they better have made some big improvements to how FB2 works on consoles. The game is good, but so inconsistent in levels, destruction and so forth. It's also still buggy as hell.
Posted 11:17am 15/8/12
Is it it kind of obvious they are following the MW - Black Ops - MW - Black Ops route


If Activision can do it, why can't EA?

Bf3 is a f*****g good game. besides the bugs. well ahead of what cod does
Posted 01:38pm 15/8/12
BF3 is a solid game, can't complain too much about it. It is disappointing that there is no BF2142 sequel, that would have been awesome on Frostbite 2.0. I just don't understand what else there is to do in a modern BF game except for adding drones and stuff like BLOPS2. Sure it would be nice to see China as a faction to play but thats about it. They can just release more DLC instead of making a whole new battlefield if it is going to be pretty much the same as BF3.
Commenting has been locked for this item.