Battlefield 4: Official Single Player Story Trailer

LOL. I thought is was hilarious. I guess having more invested in COD, and wasting my money on the last 3 hoping it would be good has that affect on me. Especially since Infinity Ward 2.0 said they built the engine from the ground up for Ghosts, and then walked it back and said they really just tweaked the current engine and added to it... but hey! Here's this dog you can use! I remember how much they hyped up Ghost the character in MW2 because he had that skull mask.. turned out he didn't contribute much to the campaign. IW tends to overhype stuff way more than Treyarch.

Then again it could be reading too much into it. Dog attacks have been common in COD where you have to shoot them or press a button to break their neck when they jump on you... I dunno if that ever happened in BF3's campaign and I can't recall it happening in BFBC2. But who knows... it probably was a jab at COD.

I'm sure it was a jab at CoD. But honestly, Battlefield is such an advanced game, they don't even need to reference CoD at this point as competition as far as I'm concerned. I think I wanted more out of the trailer than just action. It'd be good to know more of what the actual plot of the game is. CoD can't compete with BF, their real competition now will be Titanfall. I just hope all the hardcore CoD players stick with CoD and don't screw over BF with their endless TDM game play style.

I dont see Titanfall being a threat because they are exclusive/timed exclusive. Gameplay wise its going to flow like COD:MW2 Which is a faster pace than any other COD game that has been made, and way faster than BF. Titanfall 2 might be something to worry about if this game turns out.

Also, interestingly enough, perhaps Titanfall can run better on PS4? It seems COD might and Activision is grabbing MS by the balls because COD is Xbox's lifeblood 

http://kotaku.com/theres-a-rumour-that-the-next-call-of-duty-runs-at-1080-1451075059

CoD is definitely the fastest paced multiplayer I've ever played. It can be good for playing quick matches if you only have a handful of minutes to play a game. But if my free time is that short, I'll usually just look at twitter instead.

That would be bad for MS if the rumor is true, but there are so many people on the "hate Xbone bandwagon" that it wouldn't surprise me if it is just a rumor.

Did you see the new rumor that the Xbox One will need a blood sample from each player to fully calibrate the new Kinect? It uses the same blood sample reader as those diabetes test strips and it slips right into the controller.

, They really deserve it. I applaud Activision if they are using their mega leverage to break the condition that games have to look as good or come out first on Xbox or they wont carry the game at all... There is no way Xbox will not have COD on launch. Activision knows that it would be a huge disadvantage in who gets a jump start this new generation. More devs under Activision and then EA may follow suit. These types of rules aren't good for competition, whats the point in striving to make the best hardware when you can just bully publishers into watering it down for everyone just to suit whatever crap you put out.

I'm thinking activision needs to get a couple titanfall employees to show them how to properly use those new MS servers so they can optimize their game.

The more I think about it, Activision probably needs to completely re-optimize the game for the Xbox One because of all the last minute changes MS made to the system right before mass production. They probably had Ghosts all set for 1080p and after those changes, they probably came across some discrepancies that would result in them dropping it to 720p only. Thats just a guess, but its the only thing I could think as to why their flagship game wouldn't be running at full quality at launch.

I dont think removing DRM and overclocking the processor would affect the games resolution. I think its that 30% more power all the dev's have been claiming PS4 has. MS can deny it all they want, but when they tried to calculate what PS4 would have and guessed way off, it hurt them. Instead of trying to build a powerful platform, it sounds like they just were trying to be slightly better spec wise  while saving the most money.... They didn't even stabilize the drive to stand vertically. I get that its not a good business model to take mega losses on units sold, but I think MS might have dropped the ball, and they are in so deep right now with PR problems its going to be an uphill battle to make things right and optimize these games to look close to what the competition can produce. Both consoles are going to have to compete with Steam Machines as well. Nintendo isn't a threat. Steam is... throwing a 3rd competitor into this mix will only make things even better in the long run.

I agree that I think they were off on what Sony's specs would be, but regardless of that 1080p is a standard for PC games for years. i would think MS would have the Xbox One set to handle all games at 1080p. BF4 isn't even running 1080p on PS4, but Call of Duty Ghosts will be.. it doesn't make sense to me why both of these next gen systems can't get 1080p correct. I'm thinking all the launch games are being rushed or delayed at this point just because of this.

Steam Machines are going to be very promising. But the main problem steam will have is EA. With the majority of steam machines running linux, the only way to play the newest EA titles on one would be to install a dual boot system to get windows and origin running.

Although the dog punch was a jab at COD, it wasn't originally made to be.

Skip to 4:20 to see the exact scene from a distance. This gameplay reveal hit youtube before anything about COD was shown at E3. Pretty interesting how they moved the camera in for a closer shot on their newest trailer.

http://kotaku.com/battlefield-4-the-kotaku-review-1453710321

Looks like solo campaign is crap again. lol The only reason they put it on there is because reviewers will bitch about paying $60 for a multilayer only game. Titanfall is already getting that flak. As I am not an achievement/trophy hoarder, I generally never play campaign more than once on these games. Its a lose-lose for DICE, they never were a single player studio to begin with. 

The campaign sounds like it'll be no better than the BF3 campaign in terms of plot. At least it'll look good and have a few moments, but it won't be an amazing experience. That kind of sucks. But with the amount of hours I put into the multiplayer of BF3, I used the campaign as a training mode to get the hang of the game controls and physics. At least it had a purpose in that sense.

That video looks good, but it seems a bit off to me. Watching it in a spectator mode like that with none of the HUD elements makes it look like the game is just a bunch of people running around aimlessly with large bullets flying through the air. lol.

I didn't really believe this guy had a system for ultra setting until half way into the video... the game shines when there are environmental elements and lighting in it, otherwise it looks no better than BF3. lol That doesnt matter tho. the map layouts themselves look great, and 64 player battles are so much better...

I'm looking forward to finally playing 64 player battles on console. Other than that it really doesn't look any better than BF3 at all to me. The new maps look good, I'm just hoping theres plenty of vehicle upgrades and new vehicle types to satisfy my vehicle addiction.

Oh yeah. 64 player battles make all the difference. especially for vehicle warfare. I read a few more reviews on IGN and Joystiq and they all seem to love the levolution as well. PS3 and 360 map boundaries were so much more confined. I think you'll enjoy conquest more with 2 more flags than you are use too.

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/10/30/battlefield-4-how-xbox-one-and-ps4-stack-up-against-pc/

Good news on the graphical comparison vs. PC.

I hated pop in effects on BF3 for PS3. It would happen on Wake Island conquest more than any other map. The main reason for it, as far as I can tell, is because of the large amount of vehicles on conquest mode. If every vehicle available on that map was in use, you could tell it was straining the match because of how the details of the grass, buildings and ledges would literally be constructed in your field of vision as you were running forward. It can be annoying, but it didn't affect gameplay. But being next gen consoles I would think issues like that would have been resolved. As for the Xbox version, jagged edges.. that sucks.