Despite offshoots oscillating between World War II, Vietnam, and the year 2142, the locus of the Battlefield franchise has been centered in the modern-military warfare setting since Battlefield 2 made its debut in 2005.
With Battlefield 3 flourishing as Electronic Arts’ and developer DICE’s most successful installment of the series to date, the hotly-selling Battlefield Premium service looking to propel its life cycle far into 2013, was there ever really any question, when Battlefield 4 was announced last month and appeared, as it still does, fast-tracking for an October 2013 release, that EA would tamper with the lucrative contemporary formula and head, say, back to the future or the 20th Century?
Maybe it’s our hindsight talking now, but we would have been a little surprised. In any case, DICE general manager Karl Magnus Troedsson confirmed at GDC Europe today what many had likely suspected: Battlefield 4 will be set in the modern era of warfare. According to Joystiq, Troedsson revealed the news when discussing the factors that guide the Battlefield franchise:
“There’s a lot of things inspiring us as to how the franchise will move on. Everything from fans’ feedback, to market research and, of course, what we want to build ourselves. It’s not just one single thing. And, yes, I know Battlefield 4 is probably the most creative name we ever could come up with. I can’t comment any more on that games because it’s all secret.
“We still want to stay in this genre, the modern day as it is. We feel this is a place we can be and continue with the series. Battlefield 4 can live in this space and be very successful.”
Troedsson’s talk was part of a session that explored the prodigious history of the Battlefield franchise, aiming to convey how successful gaming entities were built, maintained, and could gather a loyal fanbase along the way. GDC Europe was thought to be a possible fount of Battlefield 4 insight – right now, the only concrete information attached to the game is its Fall 2013 beta – and while the time period isn’t a whole lot to go on, Troedsson did drop a hopeful hint for Bad Company fans, as well.
We broke down last month why Battlefield 4 is releasing so soon – and in lieu of Bad Company 3. While it’s understandable that EA would feel the need to capitalize on Battlefield 3′s overwhelming success, perhaps seeing the usurping of Call of Duty as an attainable goal, many are now left wondering if Preston Marlowe and co. will ever resume their duties after the well-received Battlefield Bad Company 2.
Troedsson – he wouldn’t rule it out. The company is committed to Battlefield 4 (and still 3!) right now, but he says, “that doesn’t mean there might not be a Bad Company game again in the future.”
Ranters, are you glad to see Battlefield 4 sticking literally to its modern-day guns? Where else can the series go, considering the already-wide reach of its 10-year history?
-
Follow me on Twitter @Brian_Sipple.
Source: Joystiq
What You May Not Know About The ‘Xbox One’ [Updated] 
Xbox One: Watch The Next-Gen Xbox Presentation Here! 
Electronic Arts Engineer Blasts the Wii U 
Has Microsoft Abolished Used Games on the Xbox One? 
Loading ...
I fail to see how it particularly matters when it takes place, multiplayer will be fun regardless of setting, single player probably not so much, but that’s irrelevant. The game will probably be the same more or less. I am glad they didn’t set it in the future just to copy COD, that just smacks of desperation
Are you kidding? It could completely change how the game is played if dome correctly. If you paint it over with a futuristic style, then yeah its gonna suck (like Bops 2). But if done right, it gives you a chance to be a lot more creative.
I’m cool with it being a modern setting, although a WWII or future setting with Frostbite 2.0 would be awesome.
If they keep the same setting then they really need to build off of what they made with BF3 otherwise it’ll be a glorified expansion. They could add more exotic locations, weapons, vehicles, customization options, and (shooting for the stars here) more players!!
They could easily keep a modern setting, give or take a few years, and still keep it fresh. Like adding random earthquakes or random/changing weather effects. Again, shooting for the stars but they did mention the engine is capable of generating earthquakes so it isn’t out of the question. It’s also safe to assume it’ll be on next-gen consoles. Idk, just my two pennies/hopes.
There are too many games with modern setting and it is now getting really old. Slim chance but id like a ancient setting or like a unique futuristic setting.
I agree with you 100%.
I agree.
They have Bad Company 2 (and eventually, 3), MOH: Warfighter and BF3 (with its upcoming DLC) all based in the modern setting. BF4 would just be BF3 with the features we all wanted there in the first place unless they change its setting.
Modern war games are really starting to get old now like the WWII genre. But if this is what they want to do then they should go ahead and do it.
I would love to see a world war 2 game on the frostbite 2 engine. Destructible environments with old ww2 guns would be epic
I agree. Imagine a map with small streets and tight corners, in the rain. With indoor segments, sniper towers, and fully destructible bridges. It’d play out like a scene from Saving Private Ryan. And with slightly smaller maps and 32 vs 32, it’d be very hectic and fun. They could make it Battlefield 1944 and charge $15 or $20 like BF 1943. I want a Battlefield 2143 also lol but I’d prefer that be a full $60 game.
I think it’s time for devs to go back to WWII because even if they were a little old a few years ago, there are so many more possibilities for what they can do.
I fell in love with BF1942. Don’t get me wrong there isn’t one game of the franchise I haven’t thoroughly enjoyed, but I would love them to revisit where they started. Release a full WWII game that really taps in to the nitty gritty of it. Some may consider a WWII game too 1 dimensional in terms of the limited technology at the time. For example, guns wouldn’t have foregrips, grenade launchers, red dot scopes and so on. No reactive armor or guided shells for tanks and so on. I personally think that the rawness of the weaponry puts all players at an even playing ground and there for relying a little bit more on team play to get the job done. Imagine playing Stalingrad with the buildings disintegrating around you on the Frostbite 2 engine. Imagine the chaos of the Normandy landing. Or my personal favorite the openess of El Alamein. Dice started off with 3 WWII games in the series (1942, Road to Rome and Secret Weapons). I say revisit your roots.