Battlefield 4 Review

Battlefield 4 arrives with an excellent multiplayer component that is overshadowed by innumerable technical problems. This sequel was destined to be a refinement of Battlefield 3, one of the best shooters from 2011, with DICE making many small improvements to the successful recipe. Unfortunately, it is the most technically flawed Battlefield game in at least 10 years. While primarily a multiplayer experience, it retains a shallow single player campaign that has not learned much from its predecessors. The multiplayer is packed with many features, including the return of an unconvincing Commander and imposing Levolution moments. There is more emphasis on vehicular combat and naval vessels play a crucial role on some maps. Single player is essentially a preamble for the online component, and the only way to unlock some multiplayer weapons.

Single player has you assuming the role of Sergeant Recker, placed in charge of a small squad codenamed Tombstone. Their orders are to evacuate VIPs from Shanghai but the waters are muddied when the story lacks clarity and goes off on unnecessary tangents. As Recker, players do not have precise control over the squad they are commanding. You can only order squad members to suppress enemies. The silent protagonist aspect of Recker is handled poorly within the context of the story. Often you’ll be following the very soldiers that you should be ordering around. So you feel like the ‘special’ squad leader that is made to think is in charge when you are effectively a dog on a rigid leash. A modicum of choice, or a better handling of conversations, would have repaired this unnecessary rift.

Single player moves from one engagement to the next with a familiar pace if you have played the Battlefield 3 campaign. Enemy AI is capable, when it does not glitch out, and your friendly companions will assume serviceable cover positions. The campaign is linear, but there are side areas to explore with hidden weapons that are unlocked for later use at weapon crates. These crates, placed in sensible positions within combat zones, allow you to alter your weapons on a case-by-case basis. If you are being attacked from a distance, changing to a sniper rifle provides immediate rewards. All weapons have excellent handling, just like its predecessor, so every combat sequence is satisfying. Unfortunately, the campaign weapon selection is limited to predefined attachments and this is no more obvious when the knife is your primary stealth option.

There are times when the campaign attempts to emulate a multiplayer-like experience. In one section you can take a tank through a park area while AI tanks lob shells over rolling crests. Alternatively, you could abandon the tank and experiment with explosive gadgets behind crumbling structures. One later area, set in a flooded cluster of houses, is probably the best part of the campaign. In this scenario, multi-tiered structures are occupied by snipers and anti-tank soldiers fire tow missiles. You can take the mobile-AA and decimate the area, or equip sub-machine guns and clear each building rapid-fire style. These choices are refreshing but short-lived. It was a smart idea to use the same buildings in single player that you will find in the multiplayer maps though. This way the campaign trains players to use gadgets and familiarizes them with the basic map structures.

The campaign showcases numerous visual strengths within Frostbite 3, but they are offset by some weaknesses. Visual highlights include a gun fight at the top of a skyscraper or trailing a tank on foot between abandoned cars in Singapore. Weather effects are excellent, especially when the wind sways trees naturally. Tombstone character models are highly detailed and look spectacular under certain lighting conditions. However, the solo campaign features excessive, and inaccurate, reflective surfaces. The worst example is a water feature at the base of a skyscraper where the reflections are at odds with the world. These are not subtle reflections and you cannot avoid seeing them. Battlefield 4 tries to be flashy and ends up looking cheaper than it should.

Technical glitches are ever-present in Frostbite 3 during the single player. When fighting soldiers near a shoreline, a dead body will float 20 feet above the water. In another chapter, after finding a hatch within a naval vessel, your squad will run backwards until they are teleported into a cut scene. After destroying an incoming chopper, a single Chinese soldier will begin running on the sky before vanishing. Friendly and enemy soldiers will walk through solid objects like they don’t exist. Many of these problems have been in the Frostbite engine for years and their continuing presence should be worrying for Electronic Arts. If EA plan to use the engine for many future games, how can they create a polished experience when the creators of the engine struggle? Despite numerous issues, the single player can be endured for the multiplayer unlocks.

Multiplayer will always be the mainstay of the franchise, regardless of what extra features have been added offline. Is Battlefield 4 multiplayer a revolution for the series or an evolution? Like every previous game in the series, it is an evolution of concepts. This time players are treated with a comprehensive class system with more gadgets and customisation options. Levolution is a new feature that causes large changes to maps based on player-triggered events. Naval units play a bigger role, but are only present on half of the 10 launch maps.

DICE have made many small changes to multiplayer based on feedback from the previous games. Small examples include: five-man squads, C4 returning to Recons, different grenade types and a much better user interface for spawning and weapon loadouts. There is a testing map that allows players to pilot vehicles without needing to join an empty server. Maps feature more buildings with BC2-style destruction to create a happy medium between structure and demolition. VOIP returns for PC players, so you can now chat with random squad mates. The four player classes – Assault, Recon, Support and Engineer – have not changed significantly but can be tailored to individual needs. Each class can be more proficient killers because they have access to the deadly Carbines. There are many other sensible changes that make it feel like a more complete version of BF3.

Not every change in Battlefield 4 is an improvement however, as there are questionable alterations. The disable mechanic is no longer a reliable component of vehicle combat like it was in BF3. This means that the chaotic moments around burning tanks have disappeared. Ground vehicle movement and collisions are worse than ever, with the Russian armoured truck struggling to accelerate up a 5 degree incline. The kill feed is delayed which can make the action less fluent initially. Throwing the new ammo and medic packs is inconsistent at the best of times. Even the dog tag system is a step backwards for the franchise with no record of who you stabbed.

Online presentation is superb with both obvious and subtle differences to its predecessor. The audio engine produces even better sounds in different environments. Some of these, like rain falling on your uniform, are best heard when there is a lull in the action. Water is now fully dynamic, translating across the network, although this is only prominent on one map. Player animations are further improved, excluding when friendlies twist their neck demonically as you come up behind them. Color grading has practically vanished, but there is less consistency. The Rogue Transmission map, set around a large radio satellite, feels artificially colored with some weaker ground textures and mediocre foliage. Zavod 311, a map featuring an abandoned Tank factory, makes target acquisition difficult because of low-contrast lighting. Target acquisition is generally more difficult than in BF3, although that may be due to the different player models. While it occasionally looks better than any game on the market, only a few maps provide consistent excellence.

Map structure is very friendly to vehicles and most function well with 64 players in Conquest mode. Operation Locker is the only infantry focused map and it panders to those who enjoyed Operation Metro from BF3. It provides several chokepoints that you will either come to hate or love. Most maps feature busy infantry areas, but there are fewer zones where vehicles fear to tread in 64 player scenarios. One of the most detailed maps is Flood Zone, with plenty of flimsy cover on rooftops and vehicles fighting in the streets. Paracel Storm showcases the water tech better than any other and it is also the only map to demonstrate the wonderful dynamic weather. As the storm intensifies, waves produce troughs that conceal your approach and create new Battlefield moments. Water combat is possible in half of the ten maps and patrol boats act as floating tanks. Maps are solid, although few seem to be memorable additions to the series.

The Rush game mode returns, although it still has the same problems that were present in Battlefield 3. On Hainan Resort, attackers begin from a naval vessel and attempt to breach the shore with choppers and flimsy boats. Attackers are usually dead in the water before they can even destroy the first set of MCOM stations. It is like Kharg Island Rush from BF3 only with a larger distance to shore and no mobile spawn point. Other maps completely reverse the status quo, like when the attackers on Golmud Railway have multiple tanks in the first stage. Most maps seem to be designed for Conquest first and then tweaked to work in Rush mode. Rush is inconsistent, again, and some stages are frustrating.

Obliteration is one of the best new game modes that DICE have introduced to the series. This mode spawns a single bomb that teams fight over and attempt to plant at three enemy bomb sites. The action is always intense around the bomb and trying to get past defenders is a tricky proposition. You can slowly move it forward with infantry support or take a helicopter and fly over defenders to plant the bomb with little resistance. To ensure you are never far away from the action, a paradrop spawn point system improves the flow exponentially. The only negative of the mode is that it can feel like an endless tug-of-war and your teammates might not understand the usefulness of vehicles. It still represents a worthwhile, and highly replayable, addition to the franchise.

Players more interested in infantry battles will need to turn to the Domination and Team Deathmatch modes. These modes are confined to small sections of maps and have no vehicles. Domination is a faster form of conquest and it usually creates circular action with several defensible areas. Team Deathmatch tends to have teams spawning at opposite ends of the map. Both modes showcase excellent weapon handling and have some intricate level layouts. You’ll get joy from the shotguns, sniper rifles and the personal defence weapons. These modes compress the action and provide a refreshing change from the larger conquest matches. With more weapons, attachments and gadgets than before, there is lots of value for infantry-only gameplay.

Commander mode returns, although the implementation is different to BF2 or BF2142. The basic commands are here: UAV scan, supply drops and issuing squad orders. Additional abilities let you set high-value targets or promote squads. The big change is that Commanders do not exist on the battlefield. You cannot hunt a commander and destroy his assets because assets are linked to flags and the Commander merely views the game from above. The game does not change appreciably when a Commander is doing his thing in large matches. There were many situations where the losing team was the only side with a Commander. Occasionally your friendly commander will drop a vehicle for you, or reveal waves of orange triangles on your map, but the impact is minor. As a squad leader, you might get orders to capture the same flag you are already attacking. For most players this is rarely transparent and it doesn’t bring team cohesion. DICE have created a Commander that has little impact on the end result, and often relies on luck to succeed.

Playing as commander is simplistic and you stay busy clicking. UAV scans are frequently placed over areas because they only last a few seconds. You can attempt to give squads orders, although few will actually follow them. So you watch the battle from above, look at the tiny picture-in-picture view of your squad leader trying to follow orders while his squad-mates camp on the hill, and wonder if this is it? The incentive to play as commander is practically non-existent because you feel powerless. At least with previous games, there was action on foot and influential assets that made the Commander crucial. In Battlefield 4, you are merely hoping that everything falls your way. There are some who will appreciate this role returning, but it lacks justification for its hollow execution.

Levolution is not just a gimmick, although its implementation ranges from impressive to brutally underwhelming. Skyscrapers collapse, roads flood and a destroyer crashes into shore. Shanghai is perhaps the most impressive, with a building collapsing to form a newly structured flag. Do you defend the support columns or destroy them? Flood Zone has a levee that releases water into the streets as players scramble on ledges to avoid the boats weaving between facades. These big events could happen within the first few minutes of a game or not happen at all. They improve map replay value and ensure you are thinking on your feet as the world changes before you.

Other Levolution ideas are far less impressive. Golmud Railway sounds enticing from a Levolution aspect – surely gamers expected that a large freight train that would derail and cause massive damage to a nearby flag? Instead, IEDs are lazily placed across the map and can explode at the flick of a switch leaving shallow craters. Another weak Levolution event, seen in the map Dawnbreaker, occurs when two switches trigger a gas pipeline that collapses the road. More water Levolution ideas and weather effects would be welcomed because the tech there is already quite impressive.

Battlefield 4 suffers from countless issues within the multiplayer realm. Servers frequently crash and cause all players to lose progress. The Obliteration bomb will often disappear and the round might forget to end. You might be promoted half a dozen times when you hit a new level and get sent back to the previous level in the next match. Rubber-banding also returns, bringing back nightmares from Tehran Highway in BF3. Occasional network quirks mean you can die before your killer begins firing. Invisible walls prevent bullets from hitting their target. Sound mutes itself at whim and might even reverse direction just to increase the challenge. Conquest flags might appear contested when nobody is around. Even grenade icons persist after explosions. DICE’s games have always been buggy at launch, but never to this extent. Major issues should be fixed, but they will always be playing catch-up. Instead of balancing post-release, DICE are fixing game-breaking problems. BF4 is weeks behind its ambitions and may never fully recover.

Battlefield 4 is like a building demolition with a short length of detonator fuse. It’s loud, precise and achieves its goals. But with a short fuse, in this case the countless technical problems, it becomes impossible to experience without suffering injury or death. In a few weeks from now, when DICE have sorted out the major issues, players can enjoy the destruction without losing progress or crashing. There are a lot of good features within Battlefield 4, although not every change is a huge success. It is disappointing to see a game release in such a poor technical state when the underlying components are impressive. There is nothing quite like a multiplayer gunfight on the deck of an aircraft carrier while choppers fly overhead and the weather escalates, before the server crashes. Battlefield 4 takes the franchise to new heights but, just like the skyscraper in Shanghai, it occasionally comes crashing to the ground.