Has DICE “Got The Balls” To Move Battlefield Away From the Modern Setting? Ex-DICE Producer Asks

With talk of new game engines like Frostbite 3, everyone wants to know what game developers like DICE could accomplish with a popular FPS like Battlefield or where they could take the genre in terms of setting.

Between Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1-3, Battlefield 2-3, Battlefield: Bad Company 1-2, Medal of Honor 2010 – Warfighter, FPS fans are probably starting to find the modern war setting a tad stale, a setting that was once again confirmed for the upcoming Battlefield 4.

It works, and it’s a setting that most of us can relate to since we live in it, but that doesn’t mean it stays interesting forever. More recently, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 took a slight risk by entering the near future setting the year 2025, but it certainly wasn’t anything drastic. It still featured more-or-less modern weaponry that we’ve seen before in some shape or form.

Surveying comments back when DICE first announced Battlefield 4, it’s not too far off to say that some were disappointed they were’t going to be seeing a successor to a game like Battlefield 2142, a title that featured high-tech weaponry and vehicles like mech robots in a future far off from today. To many, 2142 stays in their hearts and minds as one of the more memorable Battlefield titles.

Even ex-DICE producer Gordon Van Dyke, who worked on 2142, is asking if DICE has “got the balls to leave the safe haven of a modern war setting.”

Screen Shot 2013-04-17 at 3.06.18 PM

He recalls working on the developments of 2142, saying that with the type of technology DICE possesses today, a game like Battlefield 2143 could hit its full potential.

Screen Shot 2013-04-17 at 4.02.48 PM

More than anything, Gordon’s tweets bring up a solid discussion point: Do shooters today rely too heavily on the modern setting? Do you think Battlefield or Call of Duty could see their next big breakthrough by either returning to the past or exploring the far future? While a setting like World War II has been done and done again, chances are that next-gen game engines could provide a more interesting and revitalized take on the familiar setting.

Perhaps exploring alternate realties all together, much like Bioshock: Infinite did, might prove beneficial for game devs like DICE.

What do you guys think? Also, how “far future” is too far? Would you ever purchase a Battlefield or Call of Duty game that featured laser guns and aliens or took place in space? Let’s hear it in the comments below!

Thanks, Pixel Enemy.

  • PewPewTank

    I’m sure DICE has the balls, but I don’t think EA does

    • http://mp1st.com/ David Veselka

      That’s actually an interesting way to put it. To this day, my theory is that DICE didn’t even want to make Battlefield 4, but rather Bad Company 3 or 2143. But since Battlefield 4 would probably sell better and be more recognizable overall, that’s the direction they went.

      I could be wrong, of course. DICE does seem pretty passionate about BF4. I’ve seen it first hand as well.

      • Casavult

        Maybe if Battlefield 3.5, I mean 4, sells even better than Battlefield 3, just maybe EA will give DICE the Go! signal to make Bad Company 3.

        I have a sneaky hunch though that Bad Company 3 will be DICE’s next project after Battlefield 3.5, I mean 4, is over and done with.

        • TommyV2

          3.5? Most stupid fuckin’ thing i’ve ever heard. Have you seen the gameplay at all?

          • http://www.facebook.com/timothy.medric Timothy David Medric

            Don’t go there, they’ll never understand.

            • http://www.facebook.com/TheNeoReaper Chad Eugene Rash

              Understand what? Rinse & repeat.

            • ckpinkham

              At least it’s more of an improvement than every COD since 4. Dice is doing a whole new engine, with improved graphics (obviously), improved gameplay, and they claim because they aren’t doing co-op, they’ll have better story too. And since it’s arguably the best multiplayer of any shooter, that will stay the same or maybe be slightly improved.

            • http://www.facebook.com/J0KE7R Oprea Ciprian

              Is not a new engine,it is just FrostBite 2 updated..thats all.Don`t be a fool and believe their marketing.

            • Jason

              Frostbite 2 was also a rebuild “Updated” of Frostbite 1.5, oh wait every iteration on an sequel engine is that way you idiot…

            • http://www.facebook.com/J0KE7R Oprea Ciprian

              Have u seen the 17 min trailer?Is that a new engine that u seen there?
              If u seen FB 3 as a “new” engine u must be really idiot.Between BFBC 2 “engine” and BF 3 “engine ” is a BIG difference;not like between BF3 and BF4.

            • Storm_Worm5364

              The difference in BF3 to BF4 is like BC to BC2. Almost the same thing. I can say that Frostbite 3 changed way more than the Frostbite 1.5

            • http://twitter.com/paulinacio91 Paul George Inacio J

              people are very stubborn and just don’t see the improvement from frosbite 2 to 3!! There paying too much attention to details like character and gun animations that quite possibly will be changed in the final version of BF4

            • Storm_Worm5364

              Yes, but Frostbite 2 had been to be “dismounted” for them to work on everything they did back then. And they changed everything. The only thing that I’ve noticed it, is the voices and the sounds that the guys does when they die and everything like that. They made a whole new animation system and weapon handling system.

            • Casavult

              It’s the same Frostbite engine but just updated… It’s not a whole “new” engine really.

            • Jason

              If it shares any % of the same code it is not a “New Engine” which are most of the “New” engines out there like, Dunia Engine (the engine that runs Far Cry 3) shared 33% code from Cryengine 2 during Far Cry 2 but was made by Ubisoft while Cryengine 2 was made by Crytek.

            • Jason

              I think you meant COD?! YEAH I SAID IT BITCH! ;)

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

            um yeah probably everyone who uses this site has….not much improvement mate not much at all.

          • Casavult

            Now that is one of the most stupidest comments I’ve ever read. Obviously I’ve seen Battlefield 4 gameplay otherwise I wouldn’t of called it Battlefield 3.5 .

            Yeah, it looks almost EXACTLY like Battlefield 3… It’ll most probably be shipped with the bugs that ain’t fixed in Battlefield 3 + more LOL.

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004730201116 Morgan Freeman

              Battlefield 4 does look better than its predecessor, because there’s no annoying ass blue tint to everything.

            • TommyV2

              You sound like a teen, talking in circles about shit you can’t comprehend.
              Bugs are a part of almost any game’s release and doesn’t always get fixed, but Dice usually manage to fix it. Talk about having a negative perspective. What the hell did you expect? Like it’s a bad thing that it looks like BF3, which it “exactly” does not. It has the same feel, like it should have, but please, enlighten me of a better war-based FPS that’s better, because I can’t think of any. I can see that you’re a person not worth arguing with, as you’ve already made up your mind about the matter.
              And i will probably get my shit shoved on this site for saying this, but Jeez!

        • Clayton Johnson

          Nope, Mirror’s Edge 2 is already confirmed to be their next title

        • Jordan Matt

          Yup, I guess frostbite 3 and destruction 4.0 don’t make a difference right? Wrong, it’s not Battlefield 3.5, it’s BF4. I think you’re confused with modern warfare 2.5

      • Oblivion_Lost667

        Actually, you make a good point. It’s essentially probably likely that they would’ve prefered to make BC3/2143, but are passionate enough about Battlefield to love to make another one regardless of it being a spinoff or not. Either way, they’re likely to continue BC and make a 2143, so regardless of the order released, as long as they make good games, I don’t particularly care what’s released. Hopefully BF4 improves a lot on BF3.

      • http://twitter.com/TI_21 TI_21

        I’m pretty sure they want to do BF4 instead of a spin-off. DICE doesn’t even seem to be chained by EA in the first place. http://bit.ly/15iqIrU

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

      sequels sell. new IP… *cough mirrors edge *cough* do not (usually) no matter how good they may be.

      • Clayton Johnson

        That doesn’t matter to the people that bought Mirror’s Edge. There’s already a sequel in the works so I’m happy.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

          really then why isn’t it coming out this year? oh wait its also a sequel aswell now. not saying its a bad game great game but bad sales still hope ME2 sells well i like faith :P

    • Nick Loner

      Took the words right out of my mouth.
      They have the skill and the technology to make a great sequel to 2142, but modern setting hasn’t been milked enough just yet and EA knows it.

    • http://twitter.com/swipe_06 swipe_06

      I think the reason for BF4 being the next one in line has to do with the upcoming next gen consoles. You dont want to sit around years without having your top notch FPS on those machines.

    • http://www.facebook.com/awkenney Aaron Kenney

      I’m sure the setting doesn’t matter even 1% as much as gameplay, feel and mechanics.

  • Daniel Matros

    BF2143 DLC expansion, coming to BF4. make it happen, DICE

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

      hrmm too much work they gotta do new models,sounds, textures for weapons,vehicles, gadgets etc. not saying they can’t do it but would probably cost alot a downloadable version for $20 would work for them though.

      • MegaMan3k

        New models, sounds, textures, weapons, and gadgets didn’t even fit the pipeline for BF4, I don’t think we have any hope for them in a DLC.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

          lol

          • Clayton Johnson

            Am I the only hone hoping for a more expansive character customization class? apart from BDU?

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

              yup :P not really looking forward to that

            • Clayton Johnson

              I am defeat

    • http://www.facebook.com/gordon.knowlton Gordon Knowlton

      NO!! I WANT 2143 AS A STAND ALONE!!! IT DESERVES MORE THAN 4 MAPS!!

      • allcapsmakesyoucool

        CAPS LOCK!

      • Casavult

        AND NO MORE ORIGIN!!!

        I had to add to it. It felt fitting with what I was going to say.

  • bengalsfan9595

    I would buy bf in the future but Activision would make treyarch or infinity ward do something stupid just like always

  • James K

    I’m sure they will leave the modern style to show a different content in the next BF game.

  • Katana67

    2142 was great and all, but I’d much rather have a quality modern shooter. Perhaps they should let someone else take over of 2142 and/or Bad Company, or make a whole new studio for said purpose.

    • sheldon

      i’d rather bad company die peacefully than be done by anyone other than DICE

    • http://www.facebook.com/gordon.knowlton Gordon Knowlton

      thats retarded….

      • Katana67

        Thanks for that insightful comment. Appreciate it.

    • Niosus

      Nah, they should switch it up everyone once in a while. Otherwise BF will become the next CoD: constantly iterating on the same.

      Throw a Bad Company or even 2142 in there… It keeps the team engaged because it’s something different + it will make the next BF feel less dull because it is NOT exactly like the last one.

      • Katana67

        Or they could just be in touch with their main franchise and make better BF games in succession. My point was that if I had to choose… I’d pick Battlefield (Modern) every day of the week. That doesn’t mean I don’t want them to innovate in that context.

      • Clayton Johnson

        Then they would be JUST LIKE COD! Apart from Destruction, how Is Bad Company any different from Battlefield? How about DICE foucus on a pre existing IP like Mirror’s Edge or even create a new one?

        • Niosus

          Bad Company 2′s singleplayer was actually good. Not amazing, but worth playing through. Why? Because of the humor and little puns that loosened it up.

          On the MP side the “default” experience was indeed not that different, but have you played the Vietnam DLC? The soundtrack, settings, weapons etc… just amazing.

          They can keep BF as their premium super serious shooter and BC to explore a bit. Try out new gameplay elements and settings, a bit faster paced and a good dose of humor. I’m looking to have fun… Something that BF3 failed to deliver for me while BC2 actually did, but that’s just me.

          Oh and they should do Mirror’s Edge 2 as well. With the money they made from BF3 + the DLCs they should be able to hire a couple more guys and multitask a bit ;)

          • Clayton Johnson

            Bad Company 2′s campaign was pretty good IMO as well but I never buy Battlefield for it as Battlefield used to only have an offline multiplayer experience rather than story driven. A Yes I’ve played the Vietnam DLC. While it wasn’t anything like Battlefield: Vietnam it was good for what it had. Though the biggest issues were chokepoints and the fact that fewer and fewer people played the DLC BC2 was still fun and I have plenty fun with BF3.

            Also they are already developing Mirror’s Edge 2 as I have sourced multiple links confirming it in another comment above. I’m far more excited for that than I am for BF4. Not saying I won’t like it but Battlefield needs a deserved rest.

            • Niosus

              totally agree on the ME2 part.

              All I’m saying is Bad Company can have a place, but only if they decide not to kill it but instead try to figure out how to make it work.

  • runey5

    yes, i would play a game that has laser guns, but the space and aliens things is old, its been done (halo)

    • Clayton Johnson

      Battlefield 2142 did not have lasers, or space or aliens. Battles were on earth using projectile ballistics just like today, just with what could be called advanced gear.

  • born2expire

    WW2 on FB3 would be awesome. Future, no thanks, too cheesy.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

      well BO2 did it. 2143 was good. crysis did it .(not well though impo) none of em felt ‘cheesy’ to me i would like a alternate history *nazis in present time or US lost the vietnam war* or post apocalyptic battlefield would be cool

      • Stir Kullberg

        Whoa? Alternate? US DID lost the Vietnam War!!! lol

        • James K

          He’s from a different realm where Jimmy Carter became the mastermind of the Watergate scandal, U.S. is still in Great Britain’s control (or the Great British Empire), North Korea became the most popular country and David Veselka is running for reelection to become president in India.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

            damnit ive been found out also we have a deathstar

        • dpg70

          Technically it was never a war, so…

        • MrNintendoCoke

          *South Vietnam lost the Vietnam War.

      • Oblivion_Lost667

        Crysis feels more alternate present day than future personally. I would love for them to bring out a Frostbite 2142, or even a post apocalyptic one. (They in a way even tested this with Endgame, and it was pretty damn well recieved.)

      • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

        An alternate reality is about the only thing these studios could do spice things up and make this modern setting less monotonous. Homefront had the right idea, but poor execution. Also, you could have totally played off your Vietnam War comment by saying you meant Korean War.

        • http://www.facebook.com/TheNeoReaper Chad Eugene Rash

          We won that aswell.

          • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

            There’s no “as well” lol. I full-fledged withdrawal of troops and diplomats is not a win, which is what happened in Vietnam.

            • RNPGhost

              … or is it…

            • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

              Lol the U.S. was just using reverse psychology on them.

        • Clayton Johnson

          As long as alternate history games don’t end up like that disaster of a game Turning Point: Fall of Liberty, I say go for it. Homefront was well done IMO.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

          ah homefront….so much potential….such a waste ;/

          • Clayton Johnson

            I deleted my comment looking edit button which was RIGHT THERE! lol
            Well we could see what HomeFront 2 brings. I actually liked the campaign in the first game. We’ll have to see what Crytek does with it on Cry Engine and next gen.. Hopefully it can improve visuals while keeping that awesome and chaotic 32 player multiplayer

            • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

              It’ll be interesting to see how they are going to continue the storyline.

            • Andrew Smith

              Your right we will have to see what crytek will do with homefront. I think they will improve it a lot. They might even have a new engine beyond cryengine 3 since homefront is predicted to come out 2015. And with the next gen counsels we might see 64 player multiplayer, but who knows. We will just have to wait and see. I personally can hardly wait to see some gameplay. E3 this year?

  • MeatPopsicle

    They (either EA or DICE) probably didn’t want to pursue a future setting because B-Ops 2 was just released (though of course a followup to 2142 would be 1,000 times better than B-Ops 2). 2142 was my first exposure to BF, and I can’t wait for DICE to deliver a followup.

    • MegaMan3k

      1) I want BF2142 on Steam, not that it’ll ever happen

      2) I want a BF2143 microgame ala BF1943

      3) Black Ops 2 is barely futuristic compared to 2142, not to mention they’re a century apart. (In perspective, time wise, that’s greater than the difference between the Civil War and World War 2,)

      • http://www.facebook.com/gordon.knowlton Gordon Knowlton

        no 2142 on ORIGIN with full friend support and the ability to join friends

  • http://twitter.com/ZonedApparel Zoned Apparel

    I know Im probably in the minority but I would love to see someone revisit WW2 with a quality shooter running on a modern engine with modern controls. Tons of players in a massive town with the amount of destruction the engines are capable of producing now would be epic. Too bad people got burnt out on WW2 shooters last gen..

    • born2expire

      People are stupid, to the younger generation WW2 is not relavant and ddin’t know any vets. Both of my grandfathers are WW2 vets, and my Great Grandfathers WW1 vets, I grew up on their stories of the war.

      WW2 has great balance and clearly an evil force to defeat. It would be great to see other nations in the game again like DICE did in 1942, instead of just US vs Germany. I would love to see British, Aussie, Finnish/Scandinavian, Canadian forces in the BF series again. Or if we are forced to have another modern conflict game lets see if from a Isreali point of view as they have a very modern military, just tired of seeing Americans as the heroes over and over again.

  • JK Monroe

    Oh please don’t go back to the past. It’s been way overdone with the WWI & WWII camps. Either stay in the present(with more emphasis against Muslim terrorism and regimes) or go into the future.

    • steveholt

      that’s… kinda racist

      • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

        “Muslim” is not a race, it is a religion. I believe the word you are looking for is bigoted. Though there is terrorism from groups other than Muslims, they just happen to be the most prominent group in recent history. Plus, I don’t think national armies are fighting against anti-abortion groups or small factions of Neo-Nazis.

        • Clayton Johnson

          Actually Muslim is not a religion, but rather one who follows the beliefs of the religion Islam. I agree with you and your post though. His comment was rather bigoted.

          • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

            Semantics lol.. You knew what I meant. I don’t think the person was being intentionally bigoted, he was just naming a very obvious supposed enemy for a FPS that’s based off of characters from the United States.

        • Katana67

          That doesn’t mean that non-Muslim terrorists/terrorist groups are not a big deal or that they pose less of a threat. It also doesn’t mean that a terrorist group and that group being Muslim, have anything to do with one another.

          Furthermore, there is a vast difference within “Islamic terrorism”. Sunni and Shia terrorist groups conduct themselves differently from one another. Likewise, there is a vast difference between international Islamic terrorism and area-specific Islamic terrorism.

          IRA/PIRA is in pretty recent memory for Northern Ireland.

          Baader Meinhof is still in pretty recent memory for Germany.

          LTTE (pioneers and most rampant supporters of suicide bombing) terrorism is still a latent threat in Sri Lanka.

          Lone wolf terrorism and right-wing terrorism remains an undiscussed problem in the United States, as well as transient narco-terrorism.

          • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

            TL;DR… I doubt the U.S. military has much interest in Sri Lankan terrorists and I don’t see much of an end game for a video game about fighting homegrown terrorists in the U.S. since none of the groups are very large. I’m sure the threat is real for them to strike at any time, but just wouldn’t make for much of a video game, which was the subject of this discussion.

            • Katana67

              If that’s TL;DR, I weep for you.

              And the subject you brought up, mind you, was the significance of non-Islamic terrorists. One could easily fight against such a group in a video game, because *gasp* it’s fiction. You, however, were using real-world parameters and then retroactively dictating video game principles based upon your own misguided and uninformed notions of the terrorist landscape.

              Sorry??

            • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

              Lighten up a little, sir. It’s called a joke. No need for the condescending tone, as well. If you think I’m wrong, tell me I’m wrong. I’ve been wrong before and I have no doubt that I will be again, but there was no need to an ass about it.

            • koloco9

              “I don’t see much of an end game for a video game about fighting homegrown terrorists in the U.S.” Isn’t that what Watchdogs is about?

            • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.huggins.7 Thomas Huggins

              I have no idea. I’m referring to real life terrorist groups in the U.S. which are all tiny and would be crushed in a week or so. Of course, in a game, they can make some fictional group that is numerous and powerful.

      • Look it up

        Islam has been waging war for thousands of years. That’s a historical fact, and has nothing to do with bigotry or racism. Go google it. Look at all these ignorant people who think Islamic violence is new. Do yourselves a favor, and spend an hour researching the history of Islamic Conquest, beginning with Muhammed, including Europe, Africa, and Asia.

  • http://twitter.com/darkthunder84 Michael Anderson

    What made BF1942 and BF2142 great games, I think was mostly due to the fact that most games weren’t alive when 1942 was set (and ofcourse, said gamers won’t be alive in 2142). 2142 was pretty intelligent in designing a potential future setting which utilized futuristic, but not necessarily sci-fi weapons and technology. Most weapons in 2142 still utilized projectiles (rather than lasers), and you still had projectile based tanks (albeit, using hover technology for movement).

    Turn on a television set, flip on the news channel, you see all the Modern Warfare and Battlefield combat you want in the current-day conflicts that are ongoing. Don’t get me wrong, Battlefield 4 looks amazing. But it’s not that far different from what we already have in Battlefield 3. At this point, I think both DICE and Infinity Ward are on the verge of running the well dry, by making too many FPS games in the same setting.

    A new Battlefield 1942, based on Frostbite 3 technology would be a wonderful thing to see. Imagine the fun with using the technology for destructible environments for such things as artillery strikes, carpet bombings, blowing up key facilities such as bridges.

  • 2mandude

    You know how they can move away from the modern setting? By adding in some frickin’ dinos! That would prehistorically awesome. And the dino easter eggs may all be foreshadowing it!!!

  • crisp

    As much as I was sick of WW2 shooters at one poiint, I miss it now. The setting could be really nice with the dazzle of the new engines.

    • http://www.facebook.com/gordon.knowlton Gordon Knowlton

      well said

    • http://twitter.com/LazerSharkBlog Lazer Shark

      As much as I like the knife kills, remember melee attacks with your heavy riffle? They were equally as satisfying.

    • Casavult

      Agreed. I’m sick of Modern Day shooters…

  • OhTHATguy

    BF3 is my favorite game of all time, and I started gaming on the origial NES. BF4 will soon replace it but I have absolutey zero interest in a futuristic BF game.

    • http://www.facebook.com/tyler.dominick Tyler Dominick

      I agree man.. its really high up on the list. There are so many haters and jaded people in the community its sad. BF3 is one of the most under dogs in the FPS realm. Its big, but small, there is nothing to date like it… and bf4, well, bf4 from what i have seen ( yes more then trailer ) is going to make all eyes bleed with site.

      • 123456789!!!

        BFC2 is really close so saying theres nothing like bf3 is false.

  • JustinD

    The future warfare I have seen is the gayest shit ever. Modern setting with REAL weapons is where it’s at. I wouldn’t mind a WWII game since I’m a huge fan of military/war stuff but future shit is just shit

  • Brian Anthony

    EA hired respawn for future and past spin-offs….like the future MOH that I’m sure respawn will get a crack at!

  • hwz

    I want DINOSAURS

    dice disappointed us in bf3 and I won’t be fooled again

    • BROLY

      NO, ok listen NEVER will you see Dinosaurs ft. as a DLC in a Battlefield series, according to DICE, battlefield was meant for realism and if DICE actually were to do this, it probably be a stand alone.

  • http://scene-gamers.de/ Sascha Siska

    Its not the question there have the balls. The question is, how many fans would like this. Personally i wouldn’t this setting in a Battlefield titel and i think, the most of the fans wouldn’t that too. Sorry for my english im a old german guy :D

  • http://www.facebook.com/tyler.dominick Tyler Dominick

    Still… more server space for me… bf4 will be truly shown at E3 when we see the MP, till then i will watch the bf4 trailer more , more , more, more more…

  • http://www.facebook.com/babis.katramadas Babis Katramadas

    i would like to see a WW2 game by dice with frostbite 3 but is this possible?

  • http://www.facebook.com/brandon.stern.37 Brandon Stern

    I personally want the Battlefield IP to stay in the modern setting for the time being, I know many others would like this aswell. I’m not at all interested in a “2142″ redux, I have Halo on consoles for the futuristic warfare. I wouldent mind a WWII, Vietnam, or Korean War expansion for BF4 though. Maybe cost 30$ but have eight maps and generally two times more content than a 15$ expansion would.

  • pot51e

    WTF is he talking about? Sounds a tad bitter. DICE deliver a product into EA’s portfolio; its EA that calls the tune. Now they have Respawn working on a new IP (codenamed Titan) and West always wanted a new IP in the future when at activision, there is a fair chance that theirs will be EA’s future combat. As for WW2; I think alot of the market will be turned off by it – age of player, relevance, etc. My belief is that modern, “present future” settings are just fine – if only we’d move away from US vs “n”. One of the exciting prospects for MOH was the ability to play as alternate factions.Of course the delivered game sucked and it quite rightly now fill the shelves of pre-owned games (alongside Aliens and Rage) for about 50p.

  • http://twitter.com/kafailiu Kafai Liu

    DICE should buy the rights for Lucasarts and use the new engine to finish 1313, first assualt and obviously Battlefront 3

  • nelson

    no, dice ruined bf2 sequel with bf3, bf3 was a huge disappointment. i am still waiting for dice to make bf4 a proper bf2 sequel that bf3 should have been, but probably isn´t happening. dice forgot what battlefield is, just like many new players don´t know what battlefield is. i don´t want to se another sequel of one best battlefield games ruined because dice wants to make battlefield like cod.

  • Zwabber046

    I’d rather go a little back in time and maybe get some cool old weapons in it again. Modern is a little over-used now and i guess WW2 also was over-used but I kinda missed that period with me being 16 and game more regularly since I was 13. The only game I can remember I played was Medal of Honor: Frontline with my brother and I just loved the game. I would really like to see some interesting DLCs besides the normal DLCs. So beside the normal 5 or so, maybe some cool ones that go medieval style or American Revolution….. I do hope Bad Company 3 will still be coming, maybe with the same timeline as BC2

  • prostynick

    I’d love to round around with M1 Garand and iron sights. I’d take Thompson too, but it should have a huge recoil.

  • http://www.facebook.com/johnprestonevans John Evans

    It’s not a lack of “balls” that keeps us in the modern era, its simply a smart decision to give the masses what they want. This article is the equivalent of calling someone “chicken”. Stay the course DICE! Do NOT change the setting of Battlefield.

  • Magilla187

    im pretty sure BF2143 would do wonders on the FB3 engine and i hope that would likely be another title they work on next after BF4

  • JustinD

    If BF4 has random bullet spread and damage based on class and not caliber it will be held back and shit.

  • Hol_Up

    I have respect for Gordon Van Dyke, and he is bringing up a good point. Just when will we see a 2142 remake?

    But more i mportantly, when will Mirror’s Edge 2 be announced?

  • dpg70

    Doesn’t matter if DICE has the balls. EA doesn’t and that’s what matters. Respawn is handling their sci-fi shooter.

    • http://rmdclan.com CmdrVOODOO

      I keep forgetting about Respawn. That’s going to be an interesting shooter.

  • Pingback: Former Battlefield producer would like to see DICE return to future setting | Video Games News Worm()

  • Pingback: Former Battlefield producer would choose to see DICE return to future setting()

  • Pingback: Could DICE Return Battlefield to the Future? | Elite Gaming News()

  • http://www.facebook.com/awkenney Aaron Kenney

    The immersive factors of an FPS game don’t really matter to me as much as the mechanics and feel of the game. Single player campaigns also haven’t appealed to me since MW2 threw a knife in the eye of Call of Duty after pulling it out of its own torso.

    In multiplayer, I really could care less what the setting of the game is so long as the immersive factors do not hinder solid skill-based mechanics. In Battlefield 3 I felt like the feel of the game was more for the crowd who enjoys immersion rather than good, sporting multiplayer. In my opinion Bad Company 2 got it right. Unfortunately Call of Duty effs up sportsmanship by moving more and more away from skill-based mechanics, instead basing many mechanics on chance and metagame aspects such as custom class decisions and killstreaks.

    • http://www.facebook.com/awkenney Aaron Kenney

      The players are the issue. Not whether the setting is “stale” or not.
      People have short attention spans and are always more concerned with how
      something looks or how a narrative plays out than how the game actually
      plays. It goes hand-in-hand with this trend that, for some reason,
      developers believe that games should follow the trail blazed by movies
      and literature. I believe games should create their own standards and not be restricted to the domains movies and literature have set.

      • chad

        oh my god, no one cares. get off your fucking soap box.

  • Pingback: We, The Otaku! » Blog Archive » Former Battlefield producer would like to see DICE return to future setting()

  • http://www.facebook.com/aaron.m.demelo Aaron Mclean Demelo

    i have said this a million times before and ill say it again someone needs to do a WW1 FPS it would be amazing and is totally doable. Considering all the drastic advances in graphics and game engines in the last decade among all fps’s not just Battlefield. Imagine a whistle going off and the next thing you know you are charging an enemy trench, or the brutal task of being part of stormtrooper night raid clearing enemy trenchs and fortifications, or being high over the battlefield in a bomber demolishing enemy positions from the heavens. things like these examples are what make a game so good and make people want to come back and play them again and again. So please if any good game devolopers are out there PLEASE MAKE THIS GAME come out of the modern warfare bubble. the whole gaming community worldwide has had their fill of modern shooters its time for a change.

  • Andrew Smith

    Everyone is talking badly about bf4, but i think it will take more then a 17 min sp gameplay trailer to give us all of its potential. I will wait for them to reveal more of the game over the coming months.

  • Maleficpood

    They need to make add more water wars in BF4. Like Destroyers and aircraft carriers.

  • kyuubi_clone

    the problem with futuristic shooters is that people will always compare them to modern shooters – a benchmark that they KNOW! and this in itself creates tonnes of issues for the devs to cope with. yes, a sequel (to 2142) would be great and awesome, but with the way the market and economy is today, i really do not see DICE taking such a huge risk. and if they do, there are millions of fans that would still want a modern-day BF4. it’s like damned if you do and damned if you don’t. between the devil and the deep blue see lol

  • Pingback: Live Cyber World » Blog Archive » Former Battlefield producer would like to see DICE return to future setting()

  • Just Play The Damn Game

    I’d like to see a Post-Apocalyptic/Anarchist type of Battlefield but not the normal crap post-apocalyptic games have like those sniper rifles with a soup can and glass for a scope and people running around in motocross armor but factions independent of government and weapons that are different from the norm and futuristic-ish/plausible. Most of all a Campaign that doesn’t try to be all brothers in arms “i got your back bro” and “don’t you die on me stuff” just live and die by the gun for a cause. [just my opinion]

  • Jake

    it seems like Dice is motivated and excited to pick up the project, but they are either to busy with their other titles, or being held back by EA. Back in 2011 a tag found in the Back to Karkand expansion for Battlefield 3 hinted to the upcoming title Battlefield: 2143. The ironic part is that this was immediately declined by Electronic Arts.
    Senior DICE developer Lars Gustavsson has said that he’d “love to make” a sequel to Battlefield 2142, SADLY the studio has no plans to go in that direction as they’re knee-deep into Battlefield 4.

    I’m glad to be elated to see someone such as Gustavsson is still intrested and willing to go towards that direction, my hopes for 2143 goes towards him.

    • Clayton Johnson

      Look at that Beautiful shot! This game would be the best thing since Planetside 2! In its own way of course

  • KidsTHeseDays

    Hey kids, stfu about the “NEW ENGINE OR NOT” cause you guys are gamers right? Than stfu, play the game, enjoy it and shut the FUCK up (A)

    You ARE welcome.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000473322091 Jeroen Jacobs

    New Battlefield WWII game!

  • leeroy_newman

    DICE got no balls, only money.

  • Navy

    I want WW2 or Vietnam. I want it to be past, not future or present.

  • http://rmdclan.com CmdrVOODOO

    I’d rather see games in the next century rather than the last. We still need another 10 years of yearly releases in the modern setting to catch up with the number of WWII shooters we’ve had.

    A 2143 would please me more than a bad company or another WWII or Vietnam era game.

  • anonymous

    cod sucks! i want dice to make a new “old gme” with the frostbite 3!

  • charles gunter

    I say take today’s equipment and make a full game version of battlefield 1942 … Could you imagine how epic the battles would be … Everything is so much more balanced that way . I’m so tired of the modern setting …. It don’t make the best games .

settings

close