This has been found on origin.com
![]()
I wonder how far away that is. I really hope it doesn't turn into a yearly update.
Surely they can't rollout the next game before they have finished doling out the DLC for BF3? It's not sustainable. BF4 needs to WOW and that will happen on the next gen. Releasing it this gen will be financial suicide.
Probably be every other year, with Medal of Honor in between them. Don't like this development, but seems unavoidable if EA want to keep up with CoD.
Lots of people buy COD for the single player, whereas most people buy battlefield for the MP. The SP of battlefield will have to be more engaging if they want people to buy it for that on a more regular basis.
BF3 has a decent campaign mode. I enjoyed it.
Two years worth of online play is worth it for me, considering I play most games for an average of a ten days before shelving them. Yearly updates would suck though.
I didn't think BF3's campaign was good, then again MW3 was probably the weakest SP in that series too but generally I enjoy the COD campaigns...
I thought BF3's hard campaign was better than any CoD so far. I tend to do CoD in one five-hour sitting every Christmas Day for my son. BF3 took me around ten hours to finish.
Last edited by J0e Musashi; 14-07-2012 at 05:20 PM.
BF3 SP was fun on hard mode, but sailing through on the normal mode was dull. The story had too many characters to drag you in properly, so you never felt any sense of urgency. Too disjointed. Depends if you buy FPS for the story or not.....
Bring back the Bad Company that's what I say.
Both games had good single player, good main character and most of all I will say it now BC2 is still the FAR better multiplayer.
Bookmarks