18 years after the conclusion of Shenmue II, Yu Suzuki returns with the long-awaited crowdfunded sequel - decades in the making.
Shenmue III Review - Party Like its 1999
We sit down with Hearthstone’s Lead Designer Dean Ayala and Producer Melissa Corning to discuss the new dragon-themed set, the new Auto Chess inspired Battlegrounds, and more.
Hearthstone: Descent of Dragons - Blizzard on the New Expansion
We sit down with Game Director Jeff Kaplan and Lead Designer Geoff Goodman to discuss story versus PvP, sound design, Push, and the game’s interesting launch plans.
Overwatch 2 – The Big Interview
We've run Red Dead Redemption 2 through its PC paces as the series finally lands on the Desktop platform!
Red Dead Redemption 2 is Finally on PC - How Does it Fare?
Post by Eorl @ 10:59am 09/03/13 | 17 Comments
EA may be revealing the next Battlefield title much sooner then thought if the invitation sent to IGN is anything to go by. Featuring the familiar colour palette of Battlefield 3, the invitation states that potential attendees should "save the date" and advertises the date of March 26th, the same day as this months Game Developer’s Conference.

Currently nothing has been officially confirmed however it could be possible that EA is revealing Battlefield 4, a title that is known to be in development thanks in part to beta positions being offered when pre-ordering the recent Medal of Honor: Warfighter title. It was also previously confirmed by GameStop's CEO, who posted on their Twitter page saying "Got to see Battlefield 4 today and all I can say is WOW! Thanks @EA for the sneak peek."

The Game Developer’s Conference will take place in San Francisco from March 25th through 29th. The event will begin immediately after this year’s PAX East, where Blizzard and Capcom have also teased new announcements so keep an eye on AusGamers for all the news.

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below on what you think EA might be revealing.




battlefield 4gdcea





Latest Comments
fryzeegunner
Posted 12:18pm 09/3/13
yeh bf4, but it will be rushed. It's turning into cod. Long live BF2 and BFBC2.
arkter
Posted 12:41pm 09/3/13
but it will be rushed. It's turning into cod.


+1

inb4 Call of Battlefield Duty 4
kirkoswald
Posted 02:59pm 09/3/13
As much as i love bf2. BF3 is still an epic game and if they can keep pumping out more then god speed i say
Some Fat Bastard
Posted 03:26pm 09/3/13
So sick of modern warfare FPS games.
FraktuRe
Posted 03:38pm 09/3/13
I really hope they walk out on the stage and just straight up say "We are not working on Battlefield 4..."

Then he turns to walk away, but stops and turns back. "We are working on Battlefield 2143."
tommoz
Posted 05:40pm 09/3/13
its not exactly a yearly release so i wouldnt say "its turning into cod". BF3 is such a good game, please dont say BFBC2 is better, nostalgia is such load of s*** lol. Cant wait for 4, its going to be insane
infi
Posted 09:39pm 09/3/13
bf3 is an awesome well polished product, so I don't see where the hate is coming from.
Rdizz
Posted 09:43pm 09/3/13
because bf3 is ripe with hacking now. I stopped playing and nearly everyone on euro servers knows about the catalyst hack so yeah its pointless.
fpot
Posted 11:39pm 09/3/13
So sick of modern warfare FPS games.
Get ARMA 3.

I bet to play this game multiplayer you will need to always be online.
Crakaveli
Posted 01:21pm 10/3/13
I bet to play this game multiplayer you will need to always be online.
link
Gibsmith
Posted 08:56pm 10/3/13
I didnt think Battlefield 3 was that good... Just saying... It had plenty of features and polish but I found the gameplay missing something... I did thoroughly enjoy BFBC2 though... Can't put my finger on what exactly it is that makes me dislike BF3 so much... Would like to see a current-gen rendition of 1942 or 2142 though, that would be a nice change.
BladeRunner
Posted 09:50pm 10/3/13
I demand Battlefield 2143. Why announce another BF when the current one is not even dusted and put on the shelf.
Raven
Posted 10:38am 11/3/13
So sick of modern warfare FPS games.

Yeah - even old or futuristic ones get old quick. Sure, the technology might change - oh yay, you have a laser rifle instead of a semi-auto, but it's still the same principle.

Unfortunately most FPS games that involve swords etc have sucked - and it's mostly due to the control mechanics. IMO Assassins Creed 2 is about the only game that's got it right - and only on PS3. Even the PC version was difficult at best to specify what you wanted your char to do. Skyrim was equally difficult.
infi
Posted 10:42am 11/3/13
So sick of modern warfare FPS games.


what we need to is go back to WW2
Tollaz0r!
Posted 10:46am 11/3/13
Unfortunately most FPS games that involve swords etc have sucked


Chivalry: Medieval Warefare has done an excellent job of FP melee based weapons. It works really well and I've played it a lot, heavily skill based so you don't get killed by people who are way below your skill level by random stuff (the odd bug might help them from time to time), and fighting people of your skill level is pretty intense.

It works so well that you can have epic scores like 40/5 whilst the rest of the server are 20/15 or something, simply because your footwork and weapon use are well practiced and awesome and stuff.
RUSTA
Posted 11:02am 11/3/13
Unfortunately most FPS games that involve swords etc have sucked


Rune was good. Really fun Multiplayer
badfunkstripe
Posted 03:30pm 11/3/13
I really hope they knock it out of the park with this.

I know it's wishful thinking, but I hope this is what we all wanted BF3 to be. I think they did have a bit of a rough start with BF3. Premium has given us a way better game, and I feel like they've been using that as part of their BF4 strategy.

As to BFBC2 That game was awesome. The key thing it had over BF3 is that the matches were a bit more dynamic. A lot of BF3, even outdoor maps play totally predictable and like a corridor map. In BC2 you did always feel a bit more on your feet. Also the damage models and kits were done better.

I felt BC2 actually felt like more of a battle. You could often get to cover when shot, return fire, which in BF3 in HC you just die.

You just got a better sense of accomplishment with BC2. It was how it played, the use of destruction as a feature of gameplay, not just eye candy. In a BF3 map when it's heavily destroyed, 95% at least is just superficial which doesn't really alter game play. At the end of a BC2 match, some were leveled and it really altered game play. That change in playing was such a great element for being on your toes. BF3 at this stage really plays the same constantly. There's less freedom I feel.


Anyway BF4, i just hope they give us more maps at launch than BF3. Better maps. Go back to some maps only for certain modes. Making a rush map and forcing conquest on it doesn't work. Same as forcing rush into a conquest map. BC2 showed the approach for rush/conquest maps perfectly. BF3 was a step back.

They also need VOIP, and some sort of commander. Better class set ups. Better netcode.

Worst case scenario is at launch it has something like
2 small conquest maps.
2 rush designed maps
2 giant maps
2 close quarters maps

With everyone mode on each even when it doesn't fit. Then we have to wait for months for DLC to explain out preferred type of play.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
17 Comments
Show