The next hurdle for PS2 is named BF4

It's EA, they'll sell you part of the game, then sell the rest of it through DLC. I don't believe for a minute EA is creating this with Pc gamers in mind this time too. The online play I saw still felt very BF3ish. A single player story is not what the BF game were meant to be about. It's a bit OTT on destroying every object in the environment in its focus for game play. I don't buy EA games these days I got better things to spend money on.

linear maps, the worst hit detection in a modern FPS i could literally go around a corner or go prone all meanwhile my hitbox is still standing getting riddled with bullets, so damn annoying, only a few weapons competitive (m16/aek) for MONTHS, Ace players legitimately dominating Servers with Heli/Airplanes, friends only playing codmetro64, rpgs on infantry everywhere, premium was a scam if you expected new features to merge with the Core game rather than side games with and above all of that
Less Destructible buildings than bad company 2... SO SAD, this pretty much sums up my disappointment for BF3

BFBC2 was way more fun to play, and the Vietnam dlc was awesome

Nuh uh.
There was NOTHING to be surprised about.

Remember the E3 videos which "blew away" players ?



Scripted
Single
Player

Yet EVERYBODY hopped on the hype-train.
A massive ********** went on with the so infamous "R.I.P. CoD"

EA promised a Bad Company 3 with those video, they delivered one.

Nope, Bach already confirmed it'll be 32v32 on pc, ps4 and xbox 1

The only reason I'd play BF4 instead of PS2, is if I feel like flying. Flying a helicopter in Battlefield is by far the most enjoyable air-experience I've tried. Flying an ESF, on the other hand, is one of the most boring ones.

It wasnt the content display that deceived everyone. It was the promises and lies. I can still remember when the B-1 was confirmed to be in BF3. a freakin B-1!! turns out it was a cinematic in the corner of the screen during a single player video. I can remember promises about the biggest map in BF history, only to have a large playable area and small, tiny combat zones. I can remember hearing PC to console port, and then..................They even specifically promised that BF3 was a break away from bad company and a true successor to BF2. I, like many others, believed the words of the devs. That was the mistake and the lies Im talking about. The masses dont do that, and the masses LOVE BF3.

Trust me, If not for my brother, who found all of these promised by following the development, I was also convinced that this game was just going to be a bigger version of BFBC2, based on the actual content release. But after so many promises, and so many hopeful comments about a return to what made the BF franchise great, I to jumped aboard the bandwagon and even partook in BETA (which they promise was a severely reduced version of the real game HA!)

That MP "reveal" was scripted as ****, there is absolutely no way that that level of co-ordination and teamwork is going to exist in the real thing.

Its funny, BF3 worked better on consoles than on PC. I go to look at Aussie PC BF3 servers and its a ******* ghost town, whilst PS3 Aussie servers are fuller than a....well, <insert pun here>

BFBC2 on PC is a better BF game than BF3 could ever hope to be.

Well, it's mostly because it had nothing to do with BF2. What made BF2 its charm was the slight realism of war and teamplay combined with an incredibly simple, arcade-ish genre, no useless or ultra-unnecessary realism tweaks. 1942 was even better than that.

yup everything now is moving to call of duty. However there were a few changes that are good.

However all my complaints are not the ones this guy complains about.

Here it comes... "Oh that game is going to destroy this game!"... That game is released "That is ******* bull! I'm going back to this game".

Oh and don't worry about the next CoD, Activision spent so much money on the graphics that there's nothing for the gameplay, hell, they don't even have enough to pay the main game critics for another 18/20.

"Battlefield 4 features 64-player multiplayer on Xbox One and PS4"

Google gave me over 184,000 results for 'ps4 bf4 64 player' when I did a quick search, this was one of the fist that popped up.

Elsewhere, at BF4 Central:

"Now PlayStation 4 players can breathe a sigh of relief, knowing that they too will get to experience Battlefield 4 with 64 players, Commander, and all the new features. PC players will of course also see 64 player support. However, PS3 and Xbox 360 versions will be limited to 24 players in multiplayer."

Source: http://bf4central.com/2013/06/battlefield-4-supports-64-players-on-playstation-4/

It can happen but you're right, just like in PlanetSide 2, there's more of a mob mentality amongst a lot of solo players and strong teamwork tends to be ad hoc rather than by predetermined plan. The heavy stripting was due to the time restriction and their desire to show off as many new features as possible.

In Oz, you have a lot of eastern (i.e. Asian market) players and that's a big region for the PS3 while BF3 sales on PC have always been far behind, hence what you are seeing. This applies to all FPS (and for that matter, MMO) titles, not just BF3.

There are over 2,000 people playing BC2 mutiplayer on PC right now, no reason why you can't join them. And 60,000 on PC doing the BF3 thing. Lots of options and you get to choose whichever makes you happy.

At the office where I work (a MMO studio), we were discussing this very thing yesterday and basically came to the conclusion that while PS2 seems to have adapted a lot of the BF3 elements into its game, the DICE folks seem to have done the same with BF4. Hopefully this will continue as the two are quite synergistic with each other, especially given that we don't seem to have a Battlefield 2143 heading down the pipe any time soon ('Battlefront 3' and Mirrors Edge 2 being the next two titles).

To quote TB;
"Players complained BF3 was too easy so we've added 300% more blinding light sources."

One day I hope game devs realise that bloom/lens flare are incredibly annoying. Same with the "enchanted forest" look in new MMORPGs. Yeah, all those fancy filters and nonesense is only going to give everyone a headache.

Failing that, give us the option to use sunglasses....

You could tell fairly early, even before preorders ended, that BF3 fulfilled none of those promises.
There were plenty of previews out there.

It's basic customer awareness; not preordering before trying.

Do you want a cookie or something? lol

Yes I got caught up in it. Im a trusting individual. I never did the pre-launch scene, and was an avid BF fan, having played every BF title and most of the mods. I was as skeptical, and aware as you say we should have been but my brother insisted that it was simply content that had not been displayed yet, so i pre-ordered hopeing for the best, and expecting the worst (i got what I expected).

Im not sure where this conversation is going to be honest. IMO devs should be accountable for their promises. I dont know how to go about doing that, but if your displaying a final product, before its launch, your doing something wrong. If your displaying a product, and making promises that the display is only partial, then we should expect more out the the final product.

I played BF3 all the way up until I couldn't find any servers running anything other than metro. It had its problems, and def had its disappointments, but It was fun most of the time.

PS2 is awesome. What they have accomplished is beyond what I expected. Still, the fact of the matter is PS2 rewards people for communication and strategy, both of which feel too much like work- when you have to play telephone with bad squad/platoon leaders (most of the ones I have bumped into). PS2 will lose a lot of money to BF4 if it is an easier game to play. I play arma2, also. I understand the importance of communication in most situations. Like you guys have said, there will always be times when people want all of the pageantry, and hassle that it takes to organize outfits and platoons. Still, I personally will welcome having all the information about what is going on in the fight (without the hassle). This means less time playing PS2, and that equates to missed opportunities for SOE to make more money off of me (at least in that area of the game).

BF4 might not steal players from PS2, it will just change the direction that their money is flowing.

I'll never go back to an fps multiplayer with a smaller scale or number of players than this game.

BF4 in fact WILL pull players away from this. Different types, but the allure to BF4's visuals and immersion to war is second to none. The PS4 version of PS2 will be the only thing keeping PS2 on life support.

Things each need to do to ensure success:
DICE - Fix their netcode, which they overhauled completely as claimed.
SOE - Start listening to their fans, get people to optimize this game, balance out the pops, balance out the factions, put in meaningful "modes", and put in meaningful content. And not at a snail's pace. But SOE has exhibited none of this outside of maybe optimizing the client, maybe, as we all know how their "optimizations" worked in the past.

I have read the entire thread and this is what I found most entertaining. Agreed!

I have played the last four BF games released. I have BF4 pre-ordered (for XB1) but am not particularly excited by it and some of the changes, particularly Commander mode. I am excited enough about PS2 to pre-order a PS4 specifically to play PS2. Hopefully it will be a very fun game, but I suppose BF4 is there just in case its not.

It is nothing like BF2, which was an amazing game. Had air, land, ship battles. HUGE maps. Very competitive. And didn't come with day 1 expansions. I will not be getting BF4 and i regret getting BF3.

I wouldn't worry TBH. There might be a slight dip in population when the game is released but after a few weeks things will start to normalize.