Rumor – Are Squads Coming Back to Battlefield 4?

Squads may be returning to Battlefield 4, according to recent reports.

The feature that was originally present in 2011’s Battlefield 3 allowed players to squad up with teammates prior to a match, making it easier to enter a game on the same team and in the same squad. It has since been heavily requested after its removal in Battlefield 4.

Last year, developer DICE made it clear that the studio had no intent to reintroduce Squads, saying that the team is “not offering the old squad join feature because [they] didn’t feel that the feature in Battlefield 3 was on par with the quality that [they] wanted to offer our players”.

However, according to a discovery by Reddit user, xSty86, it may be returning after all. He recently took these screen caps from his PlayStation 3 console showing a Squads (Beta) in the main multiplayer menu.



Here’s his translation:

“First picture:

    • Quick Match
    • Squad Access
    • Server-Browser (obviously)
    • Test Range

Second picture:

Squad Access Lobby

Active squads by friends – – – Player

    • New Squad
    • No squads with friends available

Create a squad so your friends can join you to play together.

Back – Select – Refresh

Seen on PS3, obviously.”

We’ll keep you updated on any official announcements on the return of Squads to Battlefield 4.


    BF does nothing for me anymore. It’s sad really.

    • Katana67

      I’m still holding out.

      • VEX_VEHIX

        I tried, but they [EA/DICE] just keep pissing me off with each new update. There are TOO many hot games out now to be fucking up. They are arrogant beyond their years.

        *Flings BF4 disc at wall, grins*

        • Katana67

          Fun story.

          My buddy stationed overseas actually did this with his BF3 disk.

          • Scottie Richardson

            Yeah, I bet he did.

    • marpla78

      im there with you VEX….not the same feeling for BF after this one

      • VEX_VEHIX

        Exactly. Just feels like they have moved on already.

        They could learn a thing or two from the good people over at Respawn. Especially when it comes to mutual respect with it’s consumers.

        • dpg70

          That’s exactly what it feels like with BF4. DICE has moved on. Shoveled remaining DLC to another studio and moving on to their next debacle.
          I won’t go so far as to say they’ve killed the franchise, but if they took 2 steps forward in growing it with BF3, they’ve taken 3 steps back with BF4.

          • VEX_VEHIX

            Yup. That’s because as far as DICE is concerned, BF4 is great, its us consumers who bitch and moan for no reason.

            So fucking done with their shit.

    • Gannon

      Honestly, the game has its issues, but I’d be willing to look past them. My biggest issue is honestly the dumb maps and the non-griddy, unrealistic feel of the game. BF3 had far superior maps in my opinion, although the rest of the game was much sloppier.

      • VEX_VEHIX

        They even ruined the “re-imagined” Assault map pack.

        • Gannon

          I somewhat agree.
          Metro is better. Oman could be good if the damn storm didn’t last so long. Caspian is meh. And firestorm kinda sucks.

          • Katana67

            Why does Firestorm suck? I haven’t actually played it enough on SA to get a good sense of it, I’ve been on Oman mostly.

            I’m getting used to the storm on Oman, but yeah, it does last too long and takes too long to transition to clear again. I’m still really pissed about how shitty the bipod deployment is on Oman (and most maps) as well as the super cumbersome movement through buildings on Oman.

            • Gannon

              It just feels like an entirely different map really. The original looked realistic. This one looks over the top with the fire everywhere and the dark skies and whatnot. Also it just feels smaller to me. Idk if that is the case, but it sure feels that way.

            • Katana67

              I think it feels bigger! I was really worried about it feeling smaller, and was surprised to have it be bigger. The aircraft boundaries are still excellent as well.

              But, for me, some of the maps feel smaller for a variety of reasons. This is kind of true on Firestorm now that I think about it, but because it’s 64p on consoles… there are more flags in areas which were previously just un-used white space.

              I used that white space in BF3. I used it a lot, to my advantage.

              This is especially the case on Oman with the D flag. I used to snipe from that position. Now it’s a flag. And a suicidal one at that.

              I get what you’re saying about the aesthetic, having EVERYTHING on fire is sort of silly on Firestorm.

            • Gannon

              The player count could be it actually. Seems like the bases were farther away back then too, which felt cool–riding into the battle in a chopper from a afar. But it could just be my imagination/not paying attention.

            • VEX_VEHIX

              It’s too much. Just too much clutter.

      • Katana67

        Wow, I actually disagree with you this time around.

        I think the maps are as good, if not slightly better than the ones in BF3. Especially the DLC maps we’ve seen so far. The vanilla ones are a bit more ambiguous. The only maps I ever really enjoyed on BF3 were the B2K maps, the AK maps, Firestorm, and Kharg. That’s really about it.

        But, I think BF4 feels far more gritty/realistic than BF3 did. By a lot. BF3 always felt blue-tinged and mushy to me, in all regards.

        Both have pretty hardcore flaws for sure. And BF4’s been a disaster in terms of getting it up to snuff. But I think BF4 is better than BF3 in a number of key areas which make it better overall.

        It’s hard to compare two very flawed approaches to BF though.

        • Gannon

          I guess what I was trying to relate is more of the setting than anything. Yeah, a lot of the maps in BF3 had that horrible blue tinge, but at least the setting was at least somewhat plausable. With BF4 it seems like they’re going so over the top with map settings that it just feels stupid. To me it seems kinda like Cod 4 compared to MW2.
          Two other things that are killing the vibe for me are the unrealisticly bright, contrasty, almost BO1-esque colors, and the gimmicks. I dont want to be able to shoot old cannons at people.

          Aside from these three things, and ignoring the severe issues they’ve had in launching the game, the game it self I think is much much better than BF3. If, when you say “mushy” you are referring to the player control in the game, then I could not agree more with you. That was my number 1 issue with BF3.

          • Katana67

            Yeah, I suppose you’re right.

            BF3 just had shitty maps. BF4 has shitty themeparks. All in my opinion of course.

            Although I think CoD4 had wholly great maps and MW2 had some good ones mixed in with some random ones. But I get what you’re saying about the aesthetic.

            When I say mushy, I’m referring to the responsiveness, yeah, and mostly the shooting mechanic (which is still nowhere near what it should be, but at least the arbitrary cones being spit from the muzzle of my weapon are a little narrower in BF4).

            • Gannon

              That’s pretty much how I feel about it. Its “themeparky”. It just kinda kills it for me. It doesn’t feel badass anymore. It feels like an arcade.
              Agreed. Right when I felt BF4 controls compared to BF3 I was pumped. So much better.

            • Katana67

              More towns and strategic objectives (a la every BF game before BF3).

              Fewer space telescopes, oil refineries, and financial districts!

            • Gannon


        • Oblivion_Lost667

          I would say this depends on your game mode of choice. There are really no good vanilla rush maps, maybe Paracel Storm, but that’s pretty much it. If I recall, you’re exclusively a conquest player, so this can explain the opinion difference, on the maps at least.

  • Randy

    Why they removed this feature to begin with is beyond compression. This is the most heavily team based fps on the market and yet the only one without the ability to join matches with friends/classmate. Dice logic.

    • Patrick Matthew Barahona

      Sure it is supposed to be a high team based game, but how much people do you see that actually give you health packs and ammo packs when you aren’t playing with a party? In BF3, a lot of people just used it for themselves. There was also those medics that removed their defibs for tubes or the M26. And when people did actually help, like reviving you, 90% of the time was always at the wrong time.


      Because they needed the space for moar auto-lock weapons. Lol

    • Oblivion_Lost667

      The most heavily team based FPS on the market? All of a sudden CS takes less team coordination than BF? I mean hell, even America’s Army: Proving Grounds feels like teams work together more than in BF, and it’s free.

  • Cameron Purdie

    “It wasn’t good enough in the last game so instead of improving it we’re just removing it.”

    Wow, what a bunch of clowns.

    • Brandon Griffin

      Yeah basically this. Worst reasoning I’ve ever heard

    • Katana67

      I mean, to be fair, the squad system from BF3 was utterly horrible. And DICE has never been very good at UI. That’s no excuse though, you’re right.

      I’m surprised it took until BF4 for people to realize how messed up some of DICE’s ideas are.

      • ant1248

        Dice didn’t make the bf3 UI this other company did. The company had a video on YouTube touting their accomplishments but when they realized people hated them they took it down.

      • roland0811

        Like a “point-and-click” bird’s eye view mechanic for the mortar?…..A bird’s eye view for a high angle fire weapon? I still can’t believe that made it over from BF3 to BF4. Fucking hated it.

        And instead of fixing the broken gameplay mechanic they nerfed the hell out of it and made it to where you couldn’t use it in your spawn. It only had a 300m range anyway! I was killing guys trying to mortar me with my PDW! That’s just messed up to me.

        • Katana67

          Like having the reticle disappear on Hardcore for the mortar. Or for having their CAS jets be wholly ineffective at CAS. Or for thinking “random spread” is a good idea.

          I’m getting to the point where I’ve made so many critiques of DICE/BF4 than I can’t store all of them in my brain… and I’m beginning to forget them.

          • roland0811

            Yeah, now that I think about the gaffs in BF3 it’s a long, long list. And it’s as if they’re blissfully ignorant of it all. I asked Gustav Halling on twitter about the rocket artillery for BF3 and told him a point-and-click system would be a bad idea for something like that. He replied,”Well, what are your ideas?….After all you ARE the expert!”
            I thought that was funny because in reality I was arty in the service and proposed a simple but team effective way of doing that AND fixing the mortar…..Instead he went with the grenade launcher reticle and called it a day. So much lazy game design.

  • MegaMan3k

    Let’s phrase it another way
    “Would DICE do something that the users want?”
    (magic 8-ball says “all signs point to ‘no’ “)



  • BrodyLovesYou

    It;s pretty simple guys. Dice (with EA’s hand up their ass): Well, why use a squad when you can buy a server? Only $50!

  • Guest

    Basically what their reason for no squads is, is “this feature that the community liked wasn’t up to our standards, so we’re going to entirely remove it, instead of keeping it there and fixing it up.”

  • Collision

    It’s the squad join before a match feature not squad feature …

  • Doug

    Who cares, game is a disaster.

  • theplantain

    it’s about time i move on to another franchise…




      • Patrick Matthew Barahona

        Titanfall is boring.

        • VEX_VEHIX

          Fun for me.

  • MeisseN

    Wow. Battlefield 3/4 needs so much more teamwork than most other FPS titles and yet when I join my buddy we are placed in different teams, let alone being in the same squad. They are not only removing the team-up feature, but also making it a total freaking mess. Good job DICE, one more down.

  • MrChipdiggity

    please dont add one thing to break four more…please I dont think I can take much more I love my bf but it has taken alot out of me. when I first got it on xbone about 2 months after release it played flawless and now after all the patches and/or “fixes” it getting alot worse cant even play naval strike cause there is so much banding/stutter.

  • Guest

    Thank god this feature is making a return!Really hard to play with friends with this…

  • EcHo84

    Too little too late, and like the previous user mentioned. Removing an option is always better than having an option, in Dice’s eyes. Full blown retards!

  • One thing cod has is easy UI and great party system what they don’t have is a good game excluding some older ones!

  • Clayton Brevilieri

    After all this time, with all the bugs there are still, I can’t get excited by this. 🙁

  • Pingback: Battlefiled 4 : 分隊でのゲームジョインが復活か? – ゲームニュース – ゲームオンライン()

  • Angelreborn96

    Whoever talks trash about battlefield and their micro DLC, it’s only because they know cod players buy the game late and buy it and want the guns in a hurry like ghosts. Ghosts let’s you get any gun, any level with squad points. In this game you actually earn them harder. But anyways, cod kids wanna buy the DLC To actually get right in the game with good guns. So many kids from ghosts are on battlefield now playing domination, and they’re all low levels, and are already camping around.. It’s obvious. Typical. Bringing ur crappy way to play on battlefield

  • Marcin Kubica

    “…the quality that [they] wanted to offer our players” is now you play with your mates in a squad, then some of your other friends choses to play and join your session and suddenly you are being kicked out from the squad you were in and finding yourself in a new squad on the other “side” alone with the newly joined mate. Jollygood 🙂