I'd like to see a return to the Bad Company series at some point. More like BC1 hopefully, because it had a fun quirky campaign that I enjoyed as much as the multiplayer (BC2's campaign just felt weaker somehow). I know Battlefield purists will hate me for saying that but I don't care, I'm hardcore like that.

 

Battlefield 4 is nice. But what about the game us BF fans really want? Where's Battlefield 2143? I'm ready to **** **** up in some Titan Mode. Battlefield Vietnam 2? I'm damn tired of the modern war setting already.

 

Basically the quotes in the article translate to : "Yes. Indeed, we do want your money"

 

And I'll be more than happy to give it to them.

 

...that's what she said.

 

Personally I would like to see a sequel to the original Battlefield 1942. Very fond memories of the 3 phases of war(land, air, sea) all coming together on some maps. I still cherish the out of the box style that game was for its time. Allowing us to control aircraft carriers, submarines, and destroyers, along with torpedo bomber planes to counter them. The fixed artillery positions were key focal points for pilots to destroy, otherwise they could wreak havoc on your ships/ground forces.

They said when moving onto the sequels that their reasoning for getting rid of those features were due to "limited players" getting to enjoy those key elements out of the overall player base....But then they go and add something like the Commander feature in BF2..Anyways, a true sequel to BF1942 with updated tech would be astounding. For as long as we had to go with WWII over-saturation, I think we are overdue for something as grand and epic as that sequel could potentially be.

 

If you want it done right play ArmA 2 and the hundreds of terrific user made missions and campaigns, especially in co-op. And ArmA 3 will be here soon enough. IW and DICE are never going to do it right because they won't move away from Hollywood war. They should get rid of single player altogether and focus on innovating multiplayer and co-op. Well, DICE is going to innovate regardless, but IW... Get your **** together.

 

Agreed. Battlefield 1943 was hardly a sequel. For me though, a 2142 and Vietnam sequel need to come first imo. Battlefield 2142 was just extremely fun to play, and aside from Crysis (only for single player), I hate sci fi games. I don't play Halo, don't play Gears. And while Vietnam was good, and the BF:BC2 Vietnam expansion was nice, I feel there's so much more they can do with this setting.

 

I, for one, believe, that, except for, bad company, and maybe 2142, most other battlefield games, shouldnt play with campaigns. From what I heard, BF3 turnd out to be EA's COD MW. I would love to see the return of conquest/assault, as THE central gameplay, maybe a little more concentratd for SP and LAN.

 

Agreed about ArmA. There are crazy communities out there that actually require training sessions, etc. Really, some of those guys need a life.

Secondly, if I was the CEO of IW and anyone working on COD, I would tell them "more of the same" until is stops selling like hot cakes. It is still immensely profitable, so it is what it is.

 

As a tribute to the shooter games that paved the way...


They're making BF4 an 8-bit side-scroller....

 

they'll never beat CONTRA!

 

I agree. Get rid of campaigns altogether an replace it with more co-op, and more focus on multiplayer.

 

People are going to buy regardless. More of the same and they'll eventually just fade away. Innovate and they'll remain at the top.

 

Highly doubt that. Battlefield has never had single player before this. No BF player cares about it. And as long as the multiplayer is terrific, nobody will have a problem paying full price.

 

quite true. Except for bc series, i am sure no one will miss the single player. Though i would like them to include LAN with bots. Honestly... I WANT A CAMPAIGN FOR 2142. Why? Bcoz, its that one sci fi game after a long time in which humans arent fighting mutants or aliens or so forth. An interesting premise, in which i dont think anyone will mind campaign action, provided its well made, of course

 

I agree with R&R and 366 about Battlefield...outside of the BC series (actually not even BC2) I would pay full price for MP alone. However, with what is expected from current FPS games I don't think it's feasible to drop SP just because gamers love to complain and when you are competing with COD you can't afford to be a leg down.

 

ah, yes. That game. But seriously, on my part I am expecting Hollywood action like COD. Being a soldier meself, i knw firsthand COD isnt realistc, but its a good boredom buster. Ghost recon is nt. BTW, hw do you guys feel abt 'commander mode' in BF?

 

I just got 3 and there's already 4.