• NuclearTango - July 17, 2012 7:32 a.m.

    Everything Ea touches turns to crap. Dead Space, Mass Effect and now Battlefield.
  • fourteenaha - July 17, 2012 8:54 a.m.

    Don't forget the Timesplitters franchise. Though I think C&C Red Alert series got better after meddling. EA isn't all bad.
  • talleyXIV - July 17, 2012 7:29 a.m.

    Damn, they must have immediately went back to work after releasing Battlefield 3. Are they trying to match Call of Duty in releases?
  • tehtimeisnow - July 16, 2012 10:22 p.m.

    battelfeld sucks its its so boreing and the online sucks and the grafics sucks and the dlc sucks seruiosely thrust me on this on call duty is way more superier in every way
  • zombi3grim - July 16, 2012 9:48 p.m.

    People bitch when it takes too long for a release (half life 3) and people bitch when they release it too soon. People just bitch to bitch. So dont be a little bitch by bitching. Bitch the bitch out for bitching.
  • Turtman - July 16, 2012 7:40 p.m.

    Bad Co 3 Bad Co 3 Bad Co 3 Bad Co 3 Bad Co 3
  • boondocks50 - July 17, 2012 7:07 a.m.

  • OohWiiUILookJustLikeBuddyHolly - July 16, 2012 4:52 p.m.

    So Battlefield has overpriced DLC, A premium service and is pretty much annualized (MOH being the B-team). So pretty much every objective reason why Battlefield is 'better' than CoD is out the window. Good job EA.
  • Divine Paladin - July 17, 2012 12:21 a.m.

    Well, the DLC is pretty fairly priced (same amount of maps but you get more 10 guns per DLC than CoD). And BF isn't really annualized, since quite literally nobody buys MoH in comparison. However, I agree completely that the entire BF vs. CoD argument has been trashed. I don't agree at all with EA's decision and am not even going to consider BF4 unless it turns out to be one of the greatest games (not FPSes, GAMES) of all time. Or if console version is equal in terms of quality. Even then it's very unlikely I'll buy it. EA lost at least one customer with this decision. Making console-aimed spin-offs like BC1 and 2 is one thing, but selling out the main franchise is just too far for me.
  • ThatGamerDude - July 16, 2012 4:17 p.m.

    Well, this can't be good. I remember DICE being certain that Battlefield 4 was going to happen but I didn't expect it this early. There's also no hope that this listing could be fake so let's just hope for the best.
  • D0CCON - July 16, 2012 4:10 p.m.

    This is too soon. If they had to make a new BF, I would have preferred a Bad Company 3 in order to space out the "real" main entries (it did end on a dumb cliffhanger, btw).
  • Turtman - July 16, 2012 7:39 p.m.

  • ObliqueZombie - July 16, 2012 3:51 p.m.

    Wow. Already? The ten year gap between 2 and 3 was awesome, giving players a helluva good time thinking "Wow, we're finally playing Battlefield 3." Hell, I'm STILL enjoying it. But now? I fear for DICE, but if they continue to go down this road, either willingly or by the yanking of EA's hand, I hope they crash and burn. At this rate, get the hell out of EA. I don't exactly despise them, but I have a feeling EA is behind the scenes, screaming for another Battlefield to combat yet another Call of Duty.
  • aberkromby - July 16, 2012 2:46 p.m.

    DICE is the new Infinity Ward, and Danger Close is the new Treyarch. The Battlefield/Medal of Honor cycle has become the new Modern Warfare/Black Ops cycle. The Battlefield series, and DICE's creative freedom, was screwed from the start of Battlefield 3's development. It's all downhill from here, just like it was with Modern Warfare 2. Fuck you, EA.
  • Viron - July 16, 2012 1:55 p.m.

    Just let DICE work on something else for god's sake.
  • Andrew Groen - July 16, 2012 2:56 p.m.

    Haha I love this image. DICE is chained to the radiator with Mirror's Edge JUST out of reach.
  • chrisda - July 16, 2012 1:34 p.m.

    For a small while, EA was the lesser of the two evils, now they're back to being equal.
  • scaler2000 - July 16, 2012 12:09 p.m.

    "The vanilla $59.99" i remember when games used to be 35$ a pop :/
  • KnowYourPokemon - July 16, 2012 12:38 p.m.

    Really? Is that what your rose tinted glasses are teling you? I for one remember when games cost $80 or more. If anything games are a lot cheaper these days, especially when you take inflation into account.
  • FOZ - July 16, 2012 1:39 p.m.

    $50 last gen. I doubt games will get that low again.

Showing 1-20 of 25 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.