Battlefield 4 (2013)

This title delivers a high-octane military shooter experience with large-scale battles, destructible environments, and intense multiplayer warfare, similar to the previous entry, improving in almost every aspect of it. The Frostbite 3 engine powers impressive visuals and dynamic elements like collapsing skyscrapers and flooding streets. Expanding upon the most praised mechanic of the same engine, with even more impressive elements that could be destroyed, such as entire buildings.

While the single-player campaign is forgettable and riddled with clichés, the real strength lies in its 64-player multiplayer, featuring diverse maps, vehicles, and tactical depth, this time, focusing more on infantry combat than vehicle warfare. Though since the servers were very flexible, you could always find games focused on one or the other, but the general common feeling is that the map design had infantry in mind, or even aerial and aquatic vehicle combat, compared to Battlefield 3 which focused more on ground warfare.

At launch, the game was plagued with bugs and stability issues, but post-release patches and community support significantly improved performance and gameplay over time. And unfortunately this title also uses a browser-based lobby, so no in-game way to search for matches, servers and etc, which is a big downside in my opinion since the website's UX/UI was terrible. This is great for fans of chaotic, team-based warfare. Still holds up for multiplayer fun, especially with friends.

The campaign is just alright. It's not nearly as good as Battlefield 3's campaign (graphics aside, and even that's debatable) and was very frustrating from a story & occasionally gameplay standpoint (WHY THE HELL IS THIS A CHARACTER-DRIVEN STORY WHERE THE PROTAGONIST (WHO'S ALSO THE COMMANDING OFFICER!) DOESN'T SPEAK?!). You can tell this wasn't patched much, if at all from that disastrous launch.

But the multiplayer is GOATED and one of the best MP experiences I've ever had. So that more than makes up for everything. Truly the peak of the Battlefield MP experience. It's still populated even today for a reason.

Overall Score: 8/10

Played this game on pc and played it over a month of on and off on the campaign mode. the story is typically nothing interesting or intriguing to hook us up for long.

the try has to be mentioned. the vehicles and weapons and bombs the choice is too much for campaign mode and the gun's accuracy sucks like I am an average player in this game but the sniper and lmg which is the combo I use or smg and ar the scope and recoil are way worse in the story mode.

may be because I got so used to Fortnite, apex Legends online game gun modes this feels too difficult to handle.

coming to the review.

1. the story and the conflict are not clear because the growth of the characters is not shown in depth with memorable action pieces or lines.
2. the Music is good, really good, one plus for this.

cons:

1. too many choices of weapons and options.
2. not great physics of jumping or crouching glitched sometimes and had to restart the game.
3. really simple military story where one team kills another without any actual storyline that the viewer a non military can sympathise with,
4. the previous game was not good, but have some good set pieces with different scenarios and sacrifices. this doesn't have that many except for the climax.

Feeling like the Battlefield series are not for me. only call of Duty is. Let's see if the other battlefield story modes change these opinions.

1 star only, since I am not playing this game again. and don't really care about the game either.

(As with my previous Battlefield posts, these are my thoughts on the singleplayer campaign only.)

Fresh off a great time with Battlefield 3, I was looking forward to the sequel. I hadn’t read that many things about B4’s campaign, but I had read left me with the impression that was in for, at least, a pretty decent time. That wasn’t true though. I'm actually astonished how much the single player Battlefield experience decreased in quality from the previous game to this one, leaving me with little more than a huge sense of unexpected disappointment.

I’ll start with the improvements, because there aren’t that many of them. The main one is clearly the return of the impactful, epic destructible environments. In B3 they felt pretty toned down when compared to previous titles, but here they are, quite literally, back with a bang. Another thing I enjoyed was the fact that DICE got rid of the QTEs that made their debut in B3. They weren't needed then, they weren’t needed now, and I'm glad they left them in the past. Something else I enjoyed was the addition of the leaning mechanic, which definitely makes engagements more enjoyable and add to your options, and which was missing from the series up until this point. The gadget stashes that you now get throughout missions, and which go hand-in-hand with your weapons cache, are also great. You can have two gadgets at any given time, but this usually comes with an annoying limitation I’ll touch on later. Finally, the game looks great, even a decade later. B3 had already been a leap in visual quality in all aspects except texture work, but B4 absolutely fixes this problem, resulting in a very pleasant visual experience throughout.

That’s it though. Every single other thing that is different from the previous game to this one was, to me, a clear downgrade. The main step down I noticed almost immediately was sadly one of the most important things you can have in any shooter: the shooting. More specifically, shooting, precision and aiming balance. It just feels off, wildly inconsistent, and oftentimes unfair - which is ironic because B4 is actually a considerably easier game than the ones that came before it. Sometimes you headshot enemies from really far, others you keep hitting them, and hitting them, and nothing. Then you change positions, including stepping further back, and voila, down they go. Invisible walls can easily be found throughout missions, which is also annoying, but sometimes you're just not hitting enemies, period. There's no rhyme or reason to this consistency problem, and at times it felt so mediocre compared to B3 that I wondered if the people who made this iteration were the same.

The shooting problems I described above, granted, don't happen all the time, so I think I could’ve easily looked past them if they were the only issues I found in combat. But they weren’t. For starters, the Dumb & Dumber rendition performed by your squadmates is back. I mean, they are unbelievably bad. Like, they do nothing. At points, they actually actively harm you by bumping into you and pushing you out of cover or shoving you off edges (yes, this happened to me). And the funny thing is that you now have an ‘engage’ option that makes them open fire on whoever you point it at. Which is the same thing as saying that the button does nothing, because a) they don't actually kill anyone, and b) enemies are constantly focused on you, so they’re barely even able to divert their attention. Speaking of enemies, they are now bullet spongier, much more inaccurate, and either absolute sniping legends or dumb as rocks (no in-between). So you get these two - squad and enemies - in the same room and it's a contest to see which one comes out looking the stupidest. On occasion I found myself staring at them on opposite sides of a small sandbag barrier taking turns at shooting at each other and always, absolutely always, missing. That’s how hilariously bad it gets.

Another thing worthy of the Hilariously Bad award is the story. I obviously wasn’t expecting Oscar material, and not even the level of quality I got in B3, though if I’m honest, I was at least expecting some effort. But I genuinely believe I didn’t see any: the ‘narrative’ is ludicrous, careless and often non-sensical; every single character is as charismatic as my left elbow; the missions are mostly boring slogfests; the more bombastic cinematic approach is a pointless addition; every single attempt at eliciting emotion fails miserably, from start to finish; there are long-drawn walking sim-type moments scattered throughout the game that have zero relevance or positive impact, in fact they keep interrupting the flow; there are even characters from the previous game who get introduced with no logic and for no discernible reason. All of this makes for a pretty gnarly narrative experience, even if you're not expecting much to begin with. To top it off, your own character gets put in a particularly laughable situation. This is the first time in these four games you never actually get to see or hear your character in cutscenes, which I'd be more than okay with. But the problem is the game made him the squad leader, so he’s constantly being bossed around by everyone else without as much as a reaction. Too funny.

Quickly going through the other things the game does, in my opinion, poorly: level design is back to being wider, but it’s a lot less clearer than every game so far; the radar is also back, but it’s inconsistent in its indicators and it clutters the UI; the level of polish is below what one would hope for a title of this size since you come across your fair share of bugs; even though you now have gadget stashes, there’s usually a gadget restriction for each mission, so you can only choose from a couple anyway, which makes zero sense and restricts both agency and strategic aspects; finally, until you eliminate all enemies in a specific location, the game doesn't progress, but because the radar is so inconsistent in pinpointing them, and the areas are wider, you sometimes need to spend a fair bit of time chasing down that sole rando before you can move on.

It is clear to see I didn’t love my time with Battlefield 4. I didn't hate it, but truth be told, I had to push myself to finish it because I got it in my head that I would play all remaining Battlefield campaigns. Suffice to say I think this was a significant step down in quality when compared to B3 in almost every aspect, and quite disappointing to say the least after the last game’s showing. 5/10

The gameplay for the single player campaign sucks. I threw that disk in the garbage lol. Sitting in a landfill awaiting to be unearthed by explorers going for the Anthropocene fossil records of 2013 AD.

Radio broadcasts. The sound of distant thunder. The silence in the elevator. Airdropping onto a sinking nuclear aircraft carrier. The echo of gunshots 500 meters way in a concrete tunnel network. Retreating to the hold the line at the fortified entryway to a bunker in Karelia, and an explosion caves in the ceiling, forcing the fight to the atrium as enemy operators drop in.

DICE brainstormed up the coolest possible environments on Earth to be designed into maps. For China alone: Guilin Peaks, Gobi Desert, a Shanghai skyscraper, a jail near the peak of a mountain, a radome overlooking a large valley, and two maps of multi-level urban slums. The diversity is just so awesome, with rich and immersive versions of the Karelian arctic and sunny tropical islands.

Boats and transport helicopters create a variation of mobility, and there is always a shifting strategy at play. It is such a special feeling to be a transport helicopter pilot with a load of legit players, swooping to a drop off point and then taking off again with just the side gunner on the minigun. Then maneuvering the helicopter at an angle to give the most optimal field of view for your gunner. If you are in a vehicle with a vocal and skilled player it gets so interesting as you work as a unit. There is often a feeling of selfless cohesion, for instance the player who is raining mortars into the objective cannot actually see the action, and is doing so because it feels good to effectively support their team. In this sense, it is impressive what DICE succeeded at; convincing players to become specialists which each offer their own contribution to the chaos of the battlefield.

I discovered a group of friends here and we played Conquest and Rush on Hardcore. I do not know why players would prefer Normal mode, giving vehicles regenerating health broke the gameplay in my opinion. Conquest is purely and obviously fun, but anyway, Rush was designed with unique strategies for every map, and worked dynamically with the complexity of each map. It was so cool to dive into the roleplay of Rush and assault or defend each base, with the environment changing as you advanced or were forced to retreat. One brilliant game of Rush we had started out raiding a beach from the ocean with speedy hovercrafts, and ended in raiding the castle which is a hike up from the beach.

The main issue with Battlefield 4 that the majority of players would agree on is there was no way for a server to actually ban handheld anti-aircraft weapons. It was just a house rule most of the servers followed. It was hard enough for fighter jets to be effective, and nothing beats impacting an enemy helicopter with a dumb-fired rocket or sabot round. This dynamic is exactly why regenerating vehicles broke the gameplay, it nullifies machine gun fire on attack helicopters and allows transport helicopters to recover from that tank round which just flew 1 kilometer to hit you.

I will never forget the first time I ran with the crowd in Operation Locker and reached the choke point at the opposite side of the panopticon. The audio in my headphones was unreal. The echoing of gunfire and explosions as the space only 4 meters in front of me was being absolutely fragmented by crossfire. Soldiers yelling out full phrases, missiles flying out of the smoke. Someone sets up a trophy system on a tripod. It becomes clear what I should do now; shoot into the smoke.

The soundtrack for Battlefield 4 is god tier, a fresh and innovative mix of traditional Japanese wood and string instruments and pulsing electronic. It perfectly compliments DICE's emulation of Sol that beams at the peak of every map. Fishing in Baku is a special song to me, I listened to it in the sun to celebrate getting a good apartment which was adjacent to a Bhuddist temple.

I picked up this game as part of the introductory EA Play deal. Hey, it was 80 cents for the first month. Why wouldn't I raid the EA library and play a ton of Battlefield games?! (still a thing until March 9, 2021).

This was my first dive into the Battlefield series. I firstly played Battlefield I (yes, a newer game, I know) and loved every aspect of it. I played Battlefield 3 right after (yes, I know, an older game) and enjoyed it so much. The story wasn't stellar but it kept me engaged and tense and is notably higher quality than many similar titles in the genre that have been churned out since. The gunplay was nice and tight, the movements smooth (you could actually hit the target without bringing up the scope or squeezing the entire clip out in one go). I devoured it whole in one sitting of 8 hours. Then I came to Battlefield 4...The horror...

I am not sure who fell asleep at the wheel when making the AI but my teammate and an enemy could be a foot away from each other, literally looking at each other, with no consequence. Heck, sometimes, the enemy AI wouldn't even see my teammates and just go for me. Running towards me and then suddenly away. Again and again. Sometimes, just for a laugh, one of the cronies would just suddenly stop moving somewhere. This would leave me having to scout the map to find the blundering idiot and finish the job. More often than not it would be the last person too.

The visuals are good, and they aged fairly well. The destructible environment was a great choice and added a ton to the experience. You just can't stick around the same place for too long or the enemies will make sure your head takes an early vacation. The abundance of enemies keeps you on your toes and they actually use cover! Yet, overall the AI leaves a lot to be desired and drags the whole game down with dumb decisions.

Initially, I barely managed to go past the sequence where you have to destroy a tank with anti-tank or SLAM mines (Mission 1?). It was already glaringly obvious this whole BF 4 endeavor will not end well. But there is more! What happened once I finished the said mission you ask? A glorious video sequence...at the end of which I fell through the floor of the boat I was traveling in! So chalk up bugs to the list of issues, of which there were plenty.

I kept playing...and playing...hoping it will redeem itself in the end...and finally, just like the numerous tanks and armored vehicles I have commandeered, I gave up. I bailed on the Singapore mission (mission 4 out of 7). As I progressed, on top of other issues, the now obviously dry and drab even by 'Murrica!' type narrative standards story plain knocked me out completely.

Very disappointing after coming from Battlefield 3. I hope this is a blip on the radar as a go through the rest of the series. Should you buy it? Unless you are a die-hard fan, no. If you are - only if you are afraid that you might start shaking and sweating uncontrollably if you don't own one of the games. Otherwise - not recommended, though it is your call, boss. I think better options exist both in thr BF and other game series.

Good luck! And if you did play it, did you have a different experience?

Theme song: (blowing raspberry noises)

The reason I picked up this game out of nowhere in 2019 was because I was looking up PC games I had missed out now that I have a PC that runs them, that and the fact that when I learned that this game was banned in China, I had to look it up because banned games do interest me to some extent. And well, the whole China thing about this game is pretty much lifted off of a neoliberal nightmare of World War 3 happening and China being the main perpetrator, it's politically vague to say the least, but the whole U.S.’s fear of China being the best is still relevant.

And this was during the Obama administration, so you could get away with making the U.S. seem like heroes and good guys still in video games, nowadays the Army doesn't have that much of a good image and most people who join the army are bad people, so the whole refugee thing in the plot is more unrealistic the more you learn of America's practices, it is more likely they would be part of the Axis nowadays in a World War 3. I guess it's ironic you go against Russian military in that case too seeing as stuff are like nowadays.

Well to get it over with and to put it in a simplified manner: Battle of Field 4 felt like a mediocre Call of Duty: Modern Warfare experience. Think Call of Duty, but somehow a little more linear in design and a lot busier at being cinematic or a commercial for the U.S. Army. There's a lot similar with this game to the Call Of Duty series, the whole World War 3 angle, the EMP blast, the prison escape segment (straight of a re-purposed Gulag? Which reminds me a little too much of Black Ops) except... Call of Duty is less boring and more fun, and has a lot better map design depending on which entry. Call of Duty feels arcadeier and Battlefield 4 campaign tries to be more cinematic.

The plot follows like what seems to be 3 demi-gods (that never die regardless of how silly the scenario is, really if anything Call of Duty feels somehow more realistic even if it is out there being a far-fetched action movie premise) starting mess in China. Spoilers for the opening sequence, your squad dies and you controlling someone called Recker is now the squad leader… How unformatted that the squad leader... Is a mute. All they really can do is point to enemies to make so that your NPC immortal friends attack enemies for you (or at best do a thumbs up sign), and I kinda basically forgot this mechanic throughout 70% of the campaign.

There's an interesting point system that allows you to unlock weapons but outside of that it isn't utilized to its fullest potential, there should be more of a compliment towards it, like you can spent it on something else. The destructible environments thing is cool and can come useful when you are trying to shoot off a wall to get an enemy in certain times, but it doesn’t feel to be fully used for its maximum potential in the campaign.

Apparently you can beat the entire campaign in 3 HOURS, but considering I played it on hard mode, I got stuck for like 2 hours dying over and over again due to how precise the tank segment is on the second mission. Seriously, I played through the whole thing on hard mode because medium and easy didn't feel that engaging, but TANKS are almost impossible on hard mode to go against, and the way that one segment works is that there's like 4 tanks, and you got only 1 tank to use, if it gets shot 2 times, you are done, and you have to keep exiting it so that it heals. Ugh, I just hated that segment so much and it felt I never got a checkpoint. I was surprised to discover that the campaign is AWFULLY SHORT, because I wasted so much time on that one tank segment. The ending choice is laughable, do 3 things and you get like 10 seconds of an ending. I was expecting more singleplayer stuff, perhaps like how Call of Duty had amazing mini-games or endless survival modes, but really it is hard to expect an FPS game to be better in action and how much it has to offer than Modern Warfare 2 will be. The tank segment really made me hope this ended sooner, but then it ended abruptly without that much of a variation.

Not sure what more to add, it isn’t the best of its kind, and as soon as I started I felt as if it could’ve been better. It didn’t really click with me, I get that it is trying to be Call of Duty and that was Dice’s step in trying to make Battlefield more similar, the graphics and attention to detail are very nice as well but in general it feels lackluster. It’s really messed up that FOV only works IN MULTIPLAYER ALSO.

I realized I played this game first before Battlefield 3, I should've played that one instead since it seems most people like it better.