Top
400°

Report: DICE Sweden Battlefield 2018 Title Will Be in WW2 Setting, DICE LA Working on Bad Company 3

A new report claims DICE Sweden is making Battlefield 2018 and it's in a WW2 setting, while DICE LA is working on Bad Company 3!

The story is too old to be commented.
3-4-570d ago

Awesome. BF1 was really good and I'm probably going back to it after finally playing codww2....it's the best cod game in years but I overall enjoyed BF1 more,and I'm really excited to see what they can do with even more gun option in WW2.

BadElf69d ago

I agree with everything said

Summons7570d ago

Both very awesome to hear. COD WW2 was terrible and seeing as Dice handled BF1 very well I'm sure a WW2 setting will be as well but good lord is Bad Company 3 long over due!

LP-Eleven70d ago

COD: WWII was not terrible at all. A very enjoyable experience, in fact!

OT: More Battlefield is great to hear!

showtimefolks70d ago

summons

no it wasn't it actually is a very good game

let's not act like dice are so perfect after they released BF4 unfinished

Summons7570d ago

The story was terrible and the only was typical broken COD. Yeah, it was pretty bad. Let's not act like COD is perfect seeing as WW2 came out in a terribly broken state and all COD and lack polish. Also I never once said every single BF game has been perfect.

Darkwatchman70d ago

BF4 as released in the state that it was entirely due to EA. Dice had no control over that and the amount of effort that dice poured into fixing the game post launch and making previously paid dlc content free all after the game was broken for several months...that shows they were dedicated to salvaging their work of art that was destroyed by EA’s insistinece on rushing the game out the door

showtimefolks70d ago

Summon

You can say a lot of things broken isn't one of the things. And that's coming from someone who doesn't like COD or BF

BF4 came out unfinished and it took it atleast one year before it became enjoyable

Every cod this gen has had 3 years of development time so extra time usually means better product

Instead of hating maybe dice should step their game up and not be outsold by cod every single time

_-EDMIX-_70d ago

@summon-so what were you expecting some sort of Epic Bioshock Citizen Kane type Story? The biggest problem I have is that Call of Duty single player story is not really as good as even Battlefield neither are really so great that you're going to remember them.

Sooooooo yea

I purchase both series and I could tell you both series actually have pretty meh single player stories but the segments regarding the single players are actually pretty good even if the story is not that great.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 70d ago
SolidGear370d ago

Disagree on WWII being terrible but fully agree on Bad Company 3 being way long overdue!

oof4670d ago

I miss attack choppers and little birds.

_-EDMIX-_70d ago

Different games

Call of Duty World War 2 was actually not bad at all it's actually a very good game.

Tazzy70d ago

Call of Duty WWII was a huge leap over Infinite Warfare Battlefield 1 and 4 were short to me Infinite Warfare seemed a lot longer.

FITgamer70d ago

COD WW2 has one of the best campaigns in franchise IMO.

DialgaMarine70d ago

You clearly are someone who will hate on CoD no matter what they do, so I don’t see why you’re trying to set standards for it. If you like BF, cool, but CoD WW2 is a great game. I haven’t really played CoD MP since MW2, but I’ve been playing WW2 a crap ton, and have probably spent more time on the multiplayer there than I have all previous CoD’s combined. It’s great, and BF doesn’t set any sort of standard that CoD is required to meet.

SierraGuy70d ago

Battlefield feels too heavy and clunky. COD is what every other shooter aspires to be. It's fast and frenetic fun. You have to be very good in multiplayer to have a chance. Battlefield is not the worst game out there but let's not get confused here.

Parasyte70d ago

That is because Battlefield is meant to be more realistic, while CoD is an arcade shooter.

Cuzzo6370d ago

CODww2 is far from terrible. Maybe you just suck at it. Bring on BC3

NarooN70d ago

I love all the people telling you the game WAS good as if it's an objective fact lol. The campaign was a total joke, somehow more linear than the last games wher if you try to go off the main path in any fashion you get punished for it. A lot of the set pieces were outlandishly stupid (like the derailed train) and the gameplay suffers from the endlessly respawning enemies until you reach some invisible trigger barrier like some of the earlier games as well. Plus the narrative was mediocre at best since it was super predictable and cliché.

Zombies still mostly the same so boring as usual, while the MP STILL has the same ol netcode and weapon balance issues which apparently is a staple of the series. Lots of bad maps too. Even the CODWW2 subreddit called the game's issues out, I guess only on N4G will fanboys shill for any game in existence, or maybe they just never played any actual good shooters so they have incredibly low standards lol.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 70d ago
Tru_Blu70d ago

wwII opens up a lot more then 1 had. Tanks and planes were much more lethal, guns were vastly improved but still before the laser guided lock on's. If they don't casualfield it again skill will be important in a wwII setting. Who am I kidding though, it will have heavy aim assist.

fathertime446470d ago

Korea or Vietnam would be a nice change. We've all played ww2 games, how about some other wars please

TheColbertinator70d ago

The Troubles in the British Isles

NarooN70d ago

Korea would only offer a change in terms of scenery and aesthetic, most of the weaponry and armaments were the same as WW2.

aaronaton69d ago

Vietnam won't balance right for axis and allies. Can't really remember how it was on PC all those years ago?

TKCMuzzer69d ago

Its about appeal. WWII still has a massive historical draw due to the events involved. It had one of the biggest impacts on present day living and involved pretty much all of the world meaning you can involve multiple nations, therefore adding more appeal.
At the end of the day its a business and they need the game to sell, personally, DICE doing WWII will be great, the atmosphere etc, COD WWII is ok but it doesn't capture the grandeur or size of the events involved, its just COD in a WWII skinned world. Tanks played a major part of WWII and COD just can't replicate this with its limited style.
Now, stick in tanks, Battlefields destruction elements, its more realistic gun elements and we may just get one of the best WWII implementations in a game.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 69d ago
SonyStyled70d ago

You shouldn’t really need laser guided lock ons to shoot something. More satisfaction w/o it imo

Earning70d ago

It was approved before this http://n4g.com/news/2130687...

Got hot, and then removed. Why? The two articles provide the same information. If that article is already hot on N4G and providing valuable information, why fail it and let this rise?

Themba7670d ago

kinda upset for real i wanted vietnam setting

D3TH_D33LR70d ago (Edited 70d ago )

Could always be like bad company 2 and end up an add on. The real stand alone battlefield Vietnam game is easily the worst and isn’t good at all, ok maybe modern combat was the worst lol. However, Bad company 2s Vietnam dlc, was amazing.

Themba7670d ago

that was my fav dlc of all time

Show all comments (60)
The story is too old to be commented.