Battlefield Hardline

[GunWrath]

Yeah, Matty, the Vice Detective.

 

 

But yeah, I was getting quite bored of military games myself. I don't think this quite fits the title "Battlefield" but it looks just as action-packed as any other BF game.. and it's a different pace. Has an R6 vibe as well.. which is always fun. I just hope there's a decent co-op this go around.. because I feel some Tango & Cash action coming soon.

Edited May 28, 2014 by GunWrath

[OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick]

I'm going to be pissed if this game is cross-gen. But, knowing EA is a money hungry corporation, I'm sure it will be...

[iNero]

It is. The Last Gen Logos with BFH Tag already have been found in battlelog already.

[FranklinDeRoosevelt]

Jesus. EA had to turn their backs once again and do something stupid like this. Dumb f*cks. At this rate, they aren't even going to make a next gen only game.

[OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick]

I hope the consumers will enjoy all the restrictions that will have to be put on this game then...

Ugh. So tired of studio's taking the easy route and releasing it on both generations of consoles. As you can tell from Watch Dogs, the graphics are going to take a huge hit. I wish more studio's had some balls and would release games only on current gen consoles. Sure, you'll get lower sales, but the game will be 100x better.

Edited May 29, 2014 by OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick

[iNero]

Watch_Dogs aleadry runs sub 1080p with the graphics it has. PC would profit but Next Gen wouldnt look better, most likely.

Edited May 29, 2014 by iNero

[Daz]

Just watched the footage.

 

Looks totally sh*t imo.

 

All the animations and weapons are basically ripped from Battlefield 3, they still have the weird as f*ck stances from bf3 and the dumb shaking effect when shooting. Nothing looked new, grappling hook and ziplines are awesome but they had those in Battlefield 2 in 2005 and have only just brought them back, they should have been in a game ages ago.

 

It in NO WAY can be tactical or slower paced, all it is going to be is battlefield 3/4 reskinned with the same guns, just new vehicles a few new gadgets and game modes. I am completely and horribly offended by the footage. Battlefield and it's engine and gameplay only works well in a large player count large map area, as we have seen the last two games' single player portion have sucked big wee wees and offer nothing unique, so I don't see how adding some lame as f*ck story is going to help that in any way. It is just another direction they haven't gone yet and I am not saying it is guaranteed to suck, I am just saying this is a f*cking pisspoor substitute for a new battlefield game. Something that could have been either Bad Company 3, Battlefield Vietnam 2, or Battlefield 2143.

 

Sorry if it seems like an overreaction but that video was f*cking upsetting being a hardcore battlefield fan that I am.

 

What a f*cking disgrace to the battlefield name.

[DisasterMaster13]

I personally like the look of Hardline from what we've seen. And I say this as someone who's never been interested in Battlefield before.

[tuareg]

Why do they want to emphasize on team work? How does that even spark inside their tiny brains? Do they not know what community their games are being played by? Team work in BF is rare and it wont change just because of heists. It's going to be a massive clusterfudge.

 

It really is just going to be an even more run and gun version of BF with everyone rushing in different directions and spraying. Basically Cod at this point.

 

I mean i'm okay with it if they manage to recreate the cod formula and actually make it work/make it fun, but i was expecting something else entirely. I'm aware that tactical/slow gameplay doesn't sell games anymore, but it would have been fatastic if it turned out that way.

 

I'm still going to wait until e3 for the final verdict, but at this point in time i'm not so much interested to be honest.

Edited May 29, 2014 by tuareg

[iNero]

Yea, I dont get why Devs try it and try it... People will never play such modes like the devs want it. But thats mainly the devs fault.

 

The only game I know where you really have to work together is Insurgency which is an amazing Indie FPS.

 

Similar to Red Orchestra.

 

You die in 1 Bullet without armor, 2-3 with light armor and a few more with heavy armor. But armor also makes you slower.

So you have to use cover and smokes and other stuff alot cause you die so quick. When people stick together they have the best chances to win the game. Team Member only respawn when the team destroys or takes an objective on the map.

 

This is one of the most realistic games Ive played including the sound. So intense.

 

But you will never see this type if gameplay in a AAA Shooter since people dont want hardcore tactical shooters. They rather want to run around like with no brain and shoot everything that moves.

One reason I moved to PC... Indies are better than AAA Titles most of the time.

Edited May 29, 2014 by iNero

[Daz]

Exactly, it seems like it is beyond anyone's brainpower that if you REALLY want to force teamwork and tactics, make the weapons create realistic damage. That way you will actually want to take cover, use tactics, aim the direction you move, always have your gun aiming instead of sprinting, gadgets and other devices will make things even more worthwhile and important to the game dynamic.

 

I am not asking for Goldeneye License to kill mode, or no respawns, I just think weapons should actually feel like they are dangerous, no matter what type of weapon it is. If I get the drop on 3 or more people I should be able to kill them all if I have flanked and nobody is aware, not restricted by my weapon's ability to dish out enough damage to one person at a time.

 

I don't know, it could still be ok, but was this really that in demand from battlefield fans or were they just trying to tap into the Payday 2 crowd? Because they sure as sh*t aint beating that game for fun gameplay and teamwork.

[Mr. Scratch]

Bitch bitch bitch bitch, that's all I f*cking see on this page. Doesn't anyone f*cking like it? It looks like Payday and GTAOnline in one.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Mr Scratch

[STRUCTURES]

Footage is 6 months old.

 

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2014/05/28/leaked-battlefield-hardline-video-six-months-old-internal-company-meeting-says-ea-exec-steve-papoutsis

[Th3MaN1]

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

[TheMcSame]

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

No sh*t... 6 years between the games, of course there's going to be new stuff. Do you really think they can add as much stuff in just a year?

 

Don't like the series?

Solution: Don't play it, don't buy it.

[Mr. Scratch]

Call of Duty made the same game with MW3, this is nothing like any other Battlefield. How the f*ck did you come up with that comparison?

[Th3MaN1]

 

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

No sh*t... 6 years between the games, of course there's going to be new stuff. Do you really think they can add as much stuff in just a year?

 

Don't like the series?

Solution: Don't play it, don't buy it.

 

Yes you can. My point with BF 2 and BF 3 were that these kind of games should not be released so soon. It's barely been a few months since the release of BF 4 and they already gave us info about the next Battlefield. Spin-off or not, take you f*cking time. If you like to play the same thing with a different skin, be my guest.

 

Call of Duty made the same game with MW3, this is nothing like any other Battlefield. How the f*ck did you come up with that comparison?

This is the same as BF 4, with a new setting. Damn, that's new.

[TheMcSame]

 

 

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

No sh*t... 6 years between the games, of course there's going to be new stuff. Do you really think they can add as much stuff in just a year?

 

Don't like the series?

Solution: Don't play it, don't buy it.

 

Yes you can. My point with BF 2 and BF 3 were that these kind of games should not be released so soon. It's barely been a few months since the release of BF 4 and they already gave us info about the next Battlefield. Spin-off or not, take you f*cking time. If you like to play the same thing with a different skin, be my guest.

 

Call of Duty made the same game with MW3, this is nothing like any other Battlefield. How the f*ck did you come up with that comparison?

This is the same as BF 4, with a new setting. Damn, that's new.

 

Can you?

Tell you what, go make a battlefield that has as much new things as BF3 did in just a year. A full single player and multiplayer. Have fun with that...

[Th3MaN1]

 

 

 

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

No sh*t... 6 years between the games, of course there's going to be new stuff. Do you really think they can add as much stuff in just a year?

 

Don't like the series?

Solution: Don't play it, don't buy it.

 

Yes you can. My point with BF 2 and BF 3 were that these kind of games should not be released so soon. It's barely been a few months since the release of BF 4 and they already gave us info about the next Battlefield. Spin-off or not, take you f*cking time. If you like to play the same thing with a different skin, be my guest.

 

Call of Duty made the same game with MW3, this is nothing like any other Battlefield. How the f*ck did you come up with that comparison?

This is the same as BF 4, with a new setting. Damn, that's new.

 

Can you?

Tell you what, go make a battlefield that has as much new things as BF3 did in just a year. A full single player and multiplayer. Have fun with that...

 

I see you are ignoring my response to your post. I'm not willing to have this discussion with you anymore.

[esmittystud101]

Even Battlefield can produce Online Heists, something Rock* can't.

Edited May 29, 2014 by esmittystud101

[DisasterMaster13]

Damn it!, was really hoping this game would be next-gen only. Now it's gonna be held back for last gen. How do they expect the levolution to improve if they keep doing this,

[esmittystud101]

Damn it!, was really hoping this game would be next-gen only. Now it's gonna be held back for last gen. How do they expect the levolution to improve if they keep doing this,

Yep, totally agree. Take all that curr. gen. time and put it in torward Next Gen. You will have a better product. Maybe it will entise someone to purchase a next gen. But unless they try, they will never find out.

[TheMcSame]

I'm not willing to have this discussion with you anymore.

 

 

[Daz]

Bitch bitch bitch bitch, that's all I f*cking see on this page. Doesn't anyone f*cking like it? It looks like Payday and GTAOnline in one.

So what? We bitch because we care about the series, and that it seems from what we have seen so far a wasted opportunity for a game that isn't already done to death. I never said it will suck balls, but it can't be anything far superior than what we had with BF3 based off the fact it is probably the same engine and using all the same assets. It is not like BF3 was one of the best battlefield games, it was far better than 4 but nothing compared to BC2 or BF2.

 

From what we have seen, it is just a reskin, that is all. I don't see any value in a battlefield game forced inside buildings. We had that in the BF3 Close Quarters DLC and it sucked arse. We don't need it turning into a run and gun shooter with authenticity going out the window for the sake of run and gun gameplay.

 

 

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

 

 

First of all the animations are f*cking horrible, look at them for f*ck sake. Have you even seen someone fire a gun before? That recoil is f*cking hilarious, it is like they have some form of extreme parkinsons while on steroids. f*cking terrible.

 

Not to mention the same overused stance, holding an M16 by the magazine-well and not the horizontal foregrip. You can't use the "that is what marines do" excuse anymore. It looks god damn ugly and you end up holding shotguns, sniper rifles and light machineguns as if they were made out of paper. It looks f*cking awful.

 

The M16, the UMP, the M40A3, the M9 and more which I have now forgotten, all ripped from BF3. They don't even seem to be the BF4 animations and skins.

 

 

The point is we have all played BF3, we don't need it again, if I wanted this I am sure there are mods out there for that sort of thing.

 

We didn't need battlefield to scale itself back, but I think they realized the limitations of the consoles and decided to do a Titanfall and will probably scale back the player count too.

 

It just is a wasted effort. DICE can barely get their own game sorted out right these days, I can't imagine what a mess this will be.

[Mr. Scratch]

You do remember that every single GTA until San Andreas used much of the same properties from previous games, don't you? I don't see you bitching about them.

[FranklinDeRoosevelt]

While I agree BF doesn't change much every time, this has the biggest change. How can you be blind to that? The Single Player is getting LOVE, meaning a good story is plausible at this point, which people who like stories can be a fan of this side of the game, and multiplayer has been overhauled with new game modes, along with different maps with different vehciles and such. It's still BATTLEFIELD as your engaing in warfare,but the game modes are more entertaining and have different objectives as opposed to the boring modes in the previous games.

 

For f*cks sake, are you saying online heists isn't fun? Cops n Robbers isn't fun? I mean if you think that, then that's your opinion but you haven't even played it yet.

Edited May 29, 2014 by FranklinDeRoosevelt

[Daz]

You do remember that every single GTA until San Andreas used much of the same properties from previous games, don't you? I don't see you bitching about them.

Because this is a topic about Battlefield not GTA, I have nothing to say on those games.

 

It is f*cking moronic to even compare the two games. You are grasping at straws.

 

Single Player is getting LOVE, meaning a good story is plausible at this point, which people who like stories can be a fan of this side of the game, and multiplayer has been overhauled with new game modes, along with different maps with different vehciles and such. It's still BATTLEFIELD as your engaing in warfare,but the game modes are more entertaining and have different objectives as opposed to the boring modes in the previous games.

 

For f*cks sake, are you saying online heists isn't fun? Cops n Robbers isn't fun? I mean if you think that, then that's your opinion but you haven't even played it yet.

 

You all are missing the point entirely.

 

If I enjoy a game, I want more of it right? New maps, new weapons, new outfits, etc. We love it for what it is, a large scale military battle with huge player counts. Completely changing the design of that dynamic is f*cking stupid. It is unnessasary, just like it was for Call of Duty to jump the shark and go into the modern era with made up ridiculous storylines let alone into the future with walking marmot tanks.

 

The point is it is a complete change in direction, but at the same time the exact same game we have already played. So we know how it will play, gameplay wise, and we know the theme of it now involves more indoor gameplay which I already know from both other games actually is pisspoor and broken. So what does this game offer? Just a new coat of paint and gimmicks in the form of a cop theme instead of military.

 

And please don't tell me that singleplayer is even going to be worth a god damn thing. It looked terrible, cliché as hell and is completely redundant. Battlefield has always and only ever been about the multiplayer and forcing a singleplayer in just like the last two attempts is just a waste of development time.

 

It is obvious they handed the game off to another studio to develop it to throw a battlefield game out there to fill the gap while DICE are working on Star Wars Battlefront, which I hope will be way more worth playing than the last two games they have released, including this new title.

 

 

Sure I haven't played it yet but neither have you. And considering it is just reskinned BF3 we have played it, that is why I know this setup is just another thing to make all the kids happy neglecting any hardcore fans.

 

But it is a different studio and hopefully just a one off side project as I mentioned above, so I can excuse it for that, but it doesn't mean my points aren't valid.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Daz

[Lil ski]

@Xerukal

AFAIK, Visceral is doing both. I don't think it will be much of a problem. Treyarch handled CoD just fine when IW passed the mantle on to them and this is the same thing.

Yeh I prefer Treyarch handling COD's singleplayer than IW. I liked the missions and stories from BO1 and WAW (don't know much about BO2, I didnt play the campaign that much through..)

 

OT:This game looks pretty cool. Its nice and refreshing to have a new focus in FPS rather than modern military and there hasnt been much police action games out there. (I have a feeling COD might go that route next just to compete in the future lol)

 

Will play/10

 

 

 

Edit: im also wondering from watching the preview, when they say that you will look for clues in all that does that mean that this gameh will be a (semi) open worlder or linear missions like the last games? That would be very cool and different from the battlefield series and make it worth playing. Like an open world fps like Far Cry 3.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Lil ski

[TheMcSame]

 

Bitch bitch bitch bitch, that's all I f*cking see on this page. Doesn't anyone f*cking like it? It looks like Payday and GTAOnline in one.

So what? We bitch because we care about the series, and that it seems from what we have seen so far a wasted opportunity for a game that isn't already done to death. I never said it will suck balls, but it can't be anything far superior than what we had with BF3 based off the fact it is probably the same engine and using all the same assets. It is not like BF3 was one of the best battlefield games, it was far better than 4 but nothing compared to BC2 or BF2.

 

From what we have seen, it is just a reskin, that is all. I don't see any value in a battlefield game forced inside buildings. We had that in the BF3 Close Quarters DLC and it sucked arse. We don't need it turning into a run and gun shooter with authenticity going out the window for the sake of run and gun gameplay.

 

 

Seems sh*t, to be honest. Everything is from BF 4, animations, guns, graphics. All that's new is the setting. Look at BF 2 and BF 3, both had the same setting, yet they bought new stuff into the whole franchise, and were awesome games overall. This? It's what MW3 was for CoD.

You can't really change much though...

 

Animations... there's northing wrong with them, they don't need changing.

 

Guns... A gun is a gun. You can't have a weapon that looks like a M9 and call it an AK 47. Not all of them are from BF4.

 

Graphics... high frame rate > graphics

 

And MY GOD... this is the stupidest thing I've seen all day

 

 

First of all the animations are f*cking horrible, look at them for f*ck sake. Have you even seen someone fire a gun before? That recoil is f*cking hilarious, it is like they have some form of extreme parkinsons while on steroids. f*cking terrible.

 

Not to mention the same overused stance, holding an M16 by the magazine-well and not the horizontal foregrip. You can't use the "that is what marines do" excuse anymore. It looks god damn ugly and you end up holding shotguns, sniper rifles and light machineguns as if they were made out of paper. It looks f*cking awful.

 

The M16, the UMP, the M40A3, the M9 and more which I have now forgotten, all ripped from BF3. They don't even seem to be the BF4 animations and skins.

 

 

The point is we have all played BF3, we don't need it again, if I wanted this I am sure there are mods out there for that sort of thing.

 

We didn't need battlefield to scale itself back, but I think they realized the limitations of the consoles and decided to do a Titanfall and will probably scale back the player count too.

 

It just is a wasted effort. DICE can barely get their own game sorted out right these days, I can't imagine what a mess this will be.

 

If you want more realistic animations then play something that is closer to a simulation rather than an arcade shooter... the animations are fine for an arcade shooter.

 

Again I've made this clear, a gun is a gun. They can't legally change it without giving it a fictional name. They can't take an AK 47 and turn it into an M9 but still call it an AK 47. Who cares that they've ripped it from BF3 anyway? R* have ripped hundreds of things from their past games but people don't b*tch about them.

And guess what! I've already made this clear as well. If you don't like it then don't buy it and don't play it.

B*tch about it all you want but if you're going to blame anyone for Battlefield's past failures blame EA seeing as they're the ones rushing DICE meaning DICE has to cut corners.

 

Let me just make one point extremely clear though.

 

Don't like it? Don't buy it!

[FranklinDeRoosevelt]

Daz, who the f*ck said that they are forcing single player on people?

 

Single Player is getting LOVE, meaning a good story is plausible at this point, which people who like stories can be a fan of this side of the game, and multiplayer has been overhauled with new game modes, along with different maps with different vehciles and such. It's still BATTLEFIELD as your engaing in warfare,but the game modes are more entertaining and have different objectives as opposed to the boring modes in the previous games.

 

For f*cks sake, are you saying online heists isn't fun? Cops n Robbers isn't fun? I mean if you think that, then that's your opinion but you haven't even played it yet.

 

Sure I haven't played it yet but neither have you. And considering it is just reskinned BF3 we have played it, that is why I know this setup is just another thing to make all the kids happy neglecting any hardcore fans.

 

But it is a different studio and hopefully just a one off side project as I mentioned above, so I can excuse it for that, but it doesn't mean my points aren't valid.

 

That's exactly what BF4 is, hypocritical much? BF4 is basically BF3 in every damn way possible, just with different maps and etc. So your point is?

Edited May 29, 2014 by FranklinDeRoosevelt