Battlefield 4

 PC
User Score
6.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 4118 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,054 out of 4118
  2. Mixed: 847 out of 4118
  3. Negative: 1,217 out of 4118
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. tact
    Oct 31, 2013
    6
    Sad day. The series is becoming more and more *cheap*, very much about explosions and looking like a crappy Transformers movie than actual good gun game/shooting mechanics. I still hang my hat that BF2 and BF42 have done the best job in the series in putting together fun maps, even gameplay, and awesome shooting mechanics that are downright fun across all vehicles. BF4 feels cheap, crappy,Sad day. The series is becoming more and more *cheap*, very much about explosions and looking like a crappy Transformers movie than actual good gun game/shooting mechanics. I still hang my hat that BF2 and BF42 have done the best job in the series in putting together fun maps, even gameplay, and awesome shooting mechanics that are downright fun across all vehicles. BF4 feels cheap, crappy, and sterilized. I am disappoint. The more I play these *huge blockbuster game releases*, the more I find myself being satisfied disproportionately by Steam games that I had never heard of.

    The time for sheeple consumerism at teh checkout line for major game releases is finally being gifted with the dawn of a new era, the Steam era of india gaming connections. We have CHOICES! Jut because they lambasted the BF4 marketing campaign on us does NOT mean this game is better than an average score of 6.5!    … Expand
  2. Starkiller94
    Oct 30, 2013
    5
    This was a pretty big disappointment for me... To the people saying that this could've easily been DLC for Battlefield 3, you are pretty much right. I thought they were going to make groundbreaking upgrades to the series, but it's nothing different from Battlefield 3. There's still ridiculous bugs and glitches, the weapon and vehicle balancing is out of control, and the players on theThis was a pretty big disappointment for me... To the people saying that this could've easily been DLC for Battlefield 3, you are pretty much right. I thought they were going to make groundbreaking upgrades to the series, but it's nothing different from Battlefield 3. There's still ridiculous bugs and glitches, the weapon and vehicle balancing is out of control, and the players on the servers are awful. It's already been plagued with people jet ramming and stuff... The graphics look horribly outdated on the Xbox 360, looking worse than Battlefield 3 (I don't know how that's possible, but it's true...) If they patch the game and fix the balancing, my score would be around 7 or 8. For now, it's going to remain in the middle category.… Expand
  3. oliver1h
    Oct 30, 2013
    5
    I know little kids will downvote me but anyways...The game is the equivalent of the Hollywood popcorn movies. The story is totally unrealistic. The writers clearly have no how military, weapons, or just simply physics work in real life. A.I. is dumb (very dumb), graphics are nice, sound effect are mediocre at best. Weapon handling is the same for every weapon and you need to shoot everyI know little kids will downvote me but anyways...The game is the equivalent of the Hollywood popcorn movies. The story is totally unrealistic. The writers clearly have no how military, weapons, or just simply physics work in real life. A.I. is dumb (very dumb), graphics are nice, sound effect are mediocre at best. Weapon handling is the same for every weapon and you need to shoot every enemy 2-3-5 times before they would die (even with a high calibre sniper rifle).
    If you want a meaningful game look elsewhere. If you want explosions, collapsing building in every 4 seconds go for this game.    … Expand
  4. N7Maintank
    Oct 30, 2013
    6
    Battlefield 4 multiplayer is amazing as usual, however its singleplayer's storyline is very weak; one of the worst I've seen. However I do appreciate DICE's effort in hiring native Mandarin speakers for the Chinese characters.
  5. TixyLix
    Oct 29, 2013
    6
    I just don't get the hype, playing it I still find the maps to be rather lacklustre compared to previous maps in the series (not including BF3) and it just feels and looks exactly like BF3...

    Maybe I'm just bored of Battlefield, but I don't see that as my problem, they should have done something new with the series.
  6. polonium
    Oct 29, 2013
    6
    BF3 inherently had many technical problem including shoddy netcoding, hardware compatibility issues, and general problems that just never got fixed. For PC players hoping BF4 is finally fixed, you're going to be in for a bad time. Yes it is the first day of release, but for a game that took over two years to develop, is that really a viable excuse? So many other games come out nowadaysBF3 inherently had many technical problem including shoddy netcoding, hardware compatibility issues, and general problems that just never got fixed. For PC players hoping BF4 is finally fixed, you're going to be in for a bad time. Yes it is the first day of release, but for a game that took over two years to develop, is that really a viable excuse? So many other games come out nowadays that run perfectly fine from the get go. BF4 honestly runs better than its predecessor but fixable issues still exist. The most obvious is the sound on some maps. It will just cut out and not work at all. It's not an isolated problem, it's a game related problem.

    BF4 single player in a nutshell: worthless. The pathetically short campaign will assault your intelligence throughout. It doesn't look like they put a lot of effort into the story but visually it's pretty nice. Little things irked me. For example moving across a bridge in a storm. Soldiers don't get blown off the bridge, but 2 ton vehicles do. And not just slide off, I'm talking about levitating and flying off at violent speed. Yet a 120lb female doesn't get pushed around. OK. Successful games these days are successful because of the little details. You won't find that in the single player.

    MP maps are pretty damn good though which make up for the lack of single player but I was having random crashes after about 20 minutes in most cases. Brand new computer that is more than capable mind you. The Battlefield franchise is really starting to push me away from PC gaming. It's the first game I've played that consistently makes you troubleshoot every piece of hardware you have in order to get the game to run.

    My specs:
    i5-4670k
    AMD R9 280x
    8GB 1866mhz RAM
    128GB SSD    … Expand
  7. fluxmulder
    Dec 24, 2015
    6
    Campaign is a joke. But we don't play BF for the campaign so I'll skip to the multiplayer. This is an inherently good squad FPS game, probably the best of it's kind. Solid shooting mechanics and a very robust leveling system. It is let down by bad map design, too few infantry-based maps, and a terrible web browser based matchmaking system. 6/10.
  8. Expospeed
    Dec 7, 2014
    5
    BF4 is basically a patch for the previous game - nothing innovative here. My breakdown is as follows:

    1. Graphics: 8/10 - excellent as before, even on low-end rigs
    2. Gameplay: 7/10 - great controls and satisfying experience with good sound effects
    3. Story: 2/10 - not interesting or engaging at all
    4. Multiplayer: 2/10 - stuttering, lag, and crashes

    Overall, average game.
  9. DemonicSoul
    May 24, 2015
    6
    Story: You play as Sgt. Daniel "Reck" Recker--leader of the US Marine squad, Tombstone. With US and Russian conflicts at an all-time high due to the events of BF3--and with China on the verge on siding with the Russians due to the assassination of their leader being blamed on the US--it's up to you and your squad mates to help prevent war from breaking out. As a story, it's not that bad.Story: You play as Sgt. Daniel "Reck" Recker--leader of the US Marine squad, Tombstone. With US and Russian conflicts at an all-time high due to the events of BF3--and with China on the verge on siding with the Russians due to the assassination of their leader being blamed on the US--it's up to you and your squad mates to help prevent war from breaking out. As a story, it's not that bad. The voice acting is once again great; the characters are slightly better and more memorable this time around compared to BF3; and the settings are still nice and varied. Unfortunately, you're still a boring silent protagonist with no personality. Overall, the campaign is better than BF3, but it could still be improved upon. 6/10

    Gameplay: The shooting remains largely the same as in BF3 (although with no stupid panic-knifing enemies), but with the added addition of squad gameplay. Since you lead Tombstone squad, you can spot enemies for them to shoot, and have them enter vehicles and fight with you. You can also change what weapons and gadgets you use in the campaign to suit your play-style. All of the improvements are nice, but the gameplay is still largely the same as before. 6/10

    Graphics: In short, the graphics are everything that made BF3 gorgeous, but made even better and without the annoying blue tint. Although, the vehicle collision and character models can still be better. 9/10

    Sound: DICE is excellent at creating realistic sound designs in their BF games. The sound here is everything from BF3, but once again, made even better. Simple as that. 10/10

    Multiplayer: Unfortunately, the MP here is disappointing when compared to BF3, and it's not because of its launch issues. For starters, the 4 infantry classes from BF3 return with some tweaks made to their arsenal. One big new feature is "Levolution"--a mostly gimmicky feature where each map has a scripted large-scale destruction sequence (like a building collapsing) caused by player action, and it only affects one part of the map. There are also an abundant amount of vehicles--land, air, and sea--to use from with improved unlock orders; Commander mode--a mode where 1 person steps away from the battlefield and gives orders to all squads on a team in hopes of leading them to victory--returns from BF2 with a few new features that might be considered balance issues like highlighting areas with radar; Assignments--challenges from BF3 that rewarded you with guns and customization items--are also available to add more replay value to the game; the suppression was balanced; and there are still a plethora of gadgets to use. There's a lot to like about BF4, but there are also some MAJOR flaws in its system. The game does have 10 maps, but these maps aren't as fun as 3 and often feature plenty of camping spots like the rooftops of buildings where the only way you can get up there is usually with a helicopter; but even then, you'll probably have to deal with a few squads of campers which might lead to a death. Outside of conquest, these maps mostly SUCK for other modes like Deathmatches or Rush. And speaking of modes, there is a lack of new game modes here. Besides Conquest, Rush, Deathmatches, and Domination (rip-off of CoD's domination mode), there are only 2 new ones, and both flopped. There's Defuse--BF4's attempted response to CoD's Search and Destroy mode that failed--and Obliteration--a "CoD Sabatage-style" mode with 3 bombs on both sides that flops because of the large map size, and the limitation of only 1 bomb carrier; so if you spawn far away from him, the mode becomes a running simulator since you'll have to get up to where the action's happening. The counter-knife system--where if you knife a guy in the front, a QTE pops up--sucks, but 4's BIGGEST sin is it's progression system. For starters, there are an excessive amount of guns to choose from, and while it's good for allowing more customization for the player, there's so many guns that they all start to feel the same. Why would I need 9 different sniper rifles if they all perform the same? It's like DICE copied and pasted several gun stats and merely changed the looks. And unlike BF3, you DON'T unlock guns by progressing your class as the 2 are separate. This means you HAVE to get kills with that gun class in order to unlock more guns. With all classes that have the last gun at somewhere in-between 48K-83K, you would need HUNDREDS of gun kills and assists in order to progress. This is all on top of that same stupid attachment progression system from 3. There are also Battlepacks--packs of random loot from attachments to XP boosts--that are very much unnecessary and almost pay-to-win due to the awful progression system. This game, essentially, is a major GRIND-FEST that only gets fun once you have everything you wanted unlocked, and good luck with that. 6/10

    Verdict: The game had promise, but with a grind-y progression system, and maps that only work for Conquest, Conquestfield 4 disappoints.

    Rating: 6/10    … Expand
  10. morfil
    Apr 29, 2014
    6
    It's been 2 months now and things just keep getting worse with each update. Don't believe me? Go check the Battlefield/Battlelog forums yourself. Hundreds, if not thousands of posts with problems and people wanting their money back.
  11. Sharky0922
    Sep 27, 2014
    7
    Best FPS ever atm.

    Have many issues but there is no better one to counter it.

    My main problem with this game that their development is going towards COD.
    ANd thats not good sign.
    They try to take COD market while ignoring their fanbase.
  12. Hun7ing
    Mar 2, 2014
    6
    At its core battlefield is all about epic battles on a big scale with cool toys and gadgets to somewhat simulate real warfare. This game does that but it has terrible net code and some weird game mechanic choices. I am a fan of Battlefield but after six months this game still has lots of issues and I would only recommend it at a discounted price.
  13. CharcoalBurst
    May 11, 2014
    5
    I gave it 5/10 because of the graphics. That's it. Lots of crashes, boring maps. Mantle doesn't work the way it was advertized. Servers are full of exploiters/cheaters EA won't do anything against. It's hard to enjoy this game without playing it in hardcore mode because of that. The netcode is not on par with a game that is supposed to be at the top of PC gaming. Bought the premium editionI gave it 5/10 because of the graphics. That's it. Lots of crashes, boring maps. Mantle doesn't work the way it was advertized. Servers are full of exploiters/cheaters EA won't do anything against. It's hard to enjoy this game without playing it in hardcore mode because of that. The netcode is not on par with a game that is supposed to be at the top of PC gaming. Bought the premium edition and haven't even found the courage to try the last DLC which is told to blow like the two others that came before.… Expand
  14. rscl
    Aug 16, 2014
    5
    This game delivered the average single player experience I would have expected from a multiplayer-focused game. Although the game included cutscenes and cheesy dialogue, it was interesting enough to keep playing.
    Beside the game having great looks, this time around you were able to complete the missions without being controlled towards a certain outcome. It felt more like the usual fps    This game delivered the average single player experience I would have expected from a multiplayer-focused game. Although the game included cutscenes and cheesy dialogue, it was interesting enough to keep playing.
    Beside the game having great looks, this time around you were able to complete the missions without being controlled towards a certain outcome. It felt more like the usual fps shooter - in a good way.
    Still too linear though, and pointless.    … Expand
  15. LeGod
    Feb 15, 2015
    6
    None of the top critic reviewers really had to balls to mark this game down to something which is a bit more reflective of the state of the game. yes when it works it is good, but you can't keep awarding high scores to games which are just plain broken. it really does seem like the creators of this game are taking the piss charging this sort of price and then having the cheek to get theirNone of the top critic reviewers really had to balls to mark this game down to something which is a bit more reflective of the state of the game. yes when it works it is good, but you can't keep awarding high scores to games which are just plain broken. it really does seem like the creators of this game are taking the piss charging this sort of price and then having the cheek to get their players to buy dlc when the game isn't even fixed. its a sad reflection of where we are right now with videogames, someone has to make a point and take a stand because with the way things are going right now if you keep rewarding games with high marks that aren't in a state to even be released then the industry will never get better! i'm looking at you ign, gamespot and destructoid! stop giving these broken games so much credit! because if you do then what happens, people buy it regardless of the faults it has and it encourages similar behaviour within the industry, suddenly everyone thinks "hey its ok to release a game that really isn't finished properly because that triple A game did and it still got high marks". and what happens with games with high marks? they sell well and nothing changes.
    I know this game is all about multi player but someone should really address just how bad the campaign was, it was a woefully bad experience! it was like watching one of the worst movies you've ever seen.
    the single player campaign could have done with much more work. and again, this is something that most reviewers just don't care to mark down, like this part of the game never exists. its still a component of the game, even if most people buy it for the multiplayer the solo side should still have a large amount of consideration. when you add these two bad gameplay experiences together it should impact the overall score significantly enough to drop it down from good to average.
    i'm not going to give this something ridiculous like 0 because it has merits and there are a lot of good things that reviewers did pick up on and that I agree with but I am giving this a lower score than what the average critics gave it as I think thats correct and fair in light of its flaws.
    I seriously hope they fired the people responsible for dragging this game down and employ some people who can do the job properly to work on hardline. if hardline is anything like this then make a point of NOT buying it. they've got to win people back by showing they are capable of providing a gaming experience that is worth your money.    … Expand
  16. Manamaster
    Jun 7, 2016
    5
    There is something missing from the experience, I couldn't enjoy this game as much as I enjoyed BF3 on PS3.
    After buying the Digital Deluxe Edition and having downloaded the extra content that On The House gave away a few weeks ago, I still feel that the game is not as rewarding as previous iterations were.
  17. eva3si0n
    Jul 2, 2017
    5
    Game came out in so crude state that the first half of year it was global beta dough rather. In a game no, there is nothing new, it is just slightly improved BF3, under improved I mean only graphics, a sound and Levolution. For the rest only regress. The equipment is simplified to simplicity. Cards on start in general were awful. The ballistics became worse, closer to COD. Singleplayer inGame came out in so crude state that the first half of year it was global beta dough rather. In a game no, there is nothing new, it is just slightly improved BF3, under improved I mean only graphics, a sound and Levolution. For the rest only regress. The equipment is simplified to simplicity. Cards on start in general were awful. The ballistics became worse, closer to COD. Singleplayer in general a failure, so boring and uninteresting Singleplayer wasn't in a series. And yes the most important probema is an optimization, she still wishes to be the best, Netcode still didn't repair. A game was saved by children from DICE LA who somehow repaired this braking piece of **** from EA.… Expand
  18. Tabbris
    Dec 16, 2019
    6
    Well this is like bf3 but shorter. Story is liniear and nice, sountrack is good
  19. Khazar2
    Apr 15, 2020
    7
    TL;DR: Objectively not a top 5 Battlefield game, but still very good considering it's a copy of the best Battlefield.

    I was very conflicted on whether to give the game a 5 or a 7 due my bias in favor of the game. Yes it's a carbon copy of BF3, yes it added more issues than solved them. and yes it was a disappointment until DICE LA saved it. But at the end of the day, it's the closest    TL;DR: Objectively not a top 5 Battlefield game, but still very good considering it's a copy of the best Battlefield.

    I was very conflicted on whether to give the game a 5 or a 7 due my bias in favor of the game. Yes it's a carbon copy of BF3, yes it added more issues than solved them. and yes it was a disappointment until DICE LA saved it. But at the end of the day, it's the closest current gen game to Battlefield 3 and introduced 64 player matches to consoles. That alone should give it 7/10. You can make a good argument for giving it a 5/10 (but not lower than that) when considering that this game can be summarized as an inferior version of BF3, but this argument becomes less and less relevant as the online BF3 servers become more and more sporadic. The dedicated fanbase to BF4 even two games later is a testament to its greatness.    … Expand
  20. Kythas
    Nov 9, 2013
    6
    This game is great...when it doesn't crash.

    The gameplay is great. I actually do love it. But there's nothing more frustrating than playing an entire round, having a great round, and then getting disconnected from the server and losing all the XP you would have had. It's happened to me more times than I want to admit. I've probably only received credit for around 60% of the matches    This game is great...when it doesn't crash.

    The gameplay is great. I actually do love it. But there's nothing more frustrating than playing an entire round, having a great round, and then getting disconnected from the server and losing all the XP you would have had.

    It's happened to me more times than I want to admit. I've probably only received credit for around 60% of the matches I've played in. Yes, I've been disconnected around 40% of my matches and received no xp or other credit for those.

    That was after three days after launch of being unable to log in. There was no help on the forums, either. I eventually had to figure out on my own what the problem was as to why the Battlelog site wouldn't start the game.

    This will be a fun game when they get the disconnection problems fixed. Until then I'll play CoD and get griefed by all the hackers. At least it doesn't disconnect me.    … Expand
  21. Sensless
    May 1, 2014
    5
    The new water system, dynamic maps, commander mode, and the improved effects are nice in Battlefield 4, but EA needs to slow down with the DLC. a high-end title should get no more than 3 DLC's, and DLC should be for an efficient price, and have actual content to offer. There are still many bugs in the game, even after the beta.
  22. lol4n00b
    Nov 4, 2013
    6
    This games launch is a damn big dissapointment compared to battlefield 3, netcode is 3 times worse and full of bugs and crashes. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME NOW, its broken.
  23. Genespark
    Nov 17, 2013
    7
    Battlefield on release appeared to be very promising, but EA and Dice have done it again! A game full of gamebreaking issues, glitches, sound issues, crashes, bugs, everything you can imagine. There is nothing more frustrating than being into the game and the game crashes. Gameplay-wise, I think that vehicles are in ridiculous abundance. Planes and Helicopter flare times are ridiculousBattlefield on release appeared to be very promising, but EA and Dice have done it again! A game full of gamebreaking issues, glitches, sound issues, crashes, bugs, everything you can imagine. There is nothing more frustrating than being into the game and the game crashes. Gameplay-wise, I think that vehicles are in ridiculous abundance. Planes and Helicopter flare times are ridiculous making them incredibly difficult to play. However, the map design is both effective and beautiful with plenty of flanking routes contrary to BF3. Rush players will be dissapointed, for attackers rarely win, but domination and obliteration gamemodes are fun and importatntly add to the feel of bf4. The Battlelog interface looks prettier, but is incredibly buggy. The singleplayer campaign was beautiful. Graphics were fantastic. Story was nothing new, but definitely better than BF3. I would recommend waiting a month or two after all the patches are rolled out before you buy this one.… Expand
  24. Enpatsu
    Nov 3, 2013
    6
    look good, fun, deserve a 7/10, but crash, lag audio problem and all the other bug ruin the game.
    instead of sell a game not finish for money, think about the community you are loosing Dice...
  25. Goldfish
    Nov 2, 2013
    5
    This is actually a good game, but what a bug-filled crash-fest on PC. Campaign is unplayable to due to the game crashing every few minutes. I couldn't even get to a checkpoint before my game would crash at least five times. The multiplayer was plagued with horrible lag the first few days, so you couldn't play any aspect of the game on release.

    The multiplayer is better now, and the maps    This is actually a good game, but what a bug-filled crash-fest on PC. Campaign is unplayable to due to the game crashing every few minutes. I couldn't even get to a checkpoint before my game would crash at least five times. The multiplayer was plagued with horrible lag the first few days, so you couldn't play any aspect of the game on release.

    The multiplayer is better now, and the maps are alright. Operation Locker is like a worse version of Metro, set in some sort of gulag. Horrible map, even more grenade and rocket spam than on Metro.

    The game is really beautiful though. Other than Operation Locker, all the multiplayer maps were great. The campaign is also very enjoyable as long as you treat it as a Shoot-em-Up movie. Don't expect an intriguing plot and deep underlying themes, you wouldn't expect that of your typical adrenaline filled action movie. Of course, I've only been able to play the first three and a half levels due to the game being broken, but those levels were enjoyable.

    What really pisses me off, which seems to have been repeated, is that the Defib is not unlocked right away. You need to play 2-3 games to actually unlock it. I don't play Assault so that I have a grenade launcher, I do it so I can heal and revive people.

    Pros:
    -Mostly really good multiplayer maps
    -Beautiful graphics

    Cons:
    -Horrible crashes, unplayable campaign
    -Lag online
    -Operation Locker
    -Unlocks are too grindy, some are simply not needed    … Expand
  26. Sweetew
    Nov 15, 2013
    5
    Do NOT buy into the hype of this game. 2 weeks after release and the game still has HUGE issues.
    Bugs, glitches, crashes. This will the last time I ever preorder another dice game again.
  27. Bassefrom
    Nov 4, 2013
    5
    The game as it is now is decent. It shows a lot of potential, but it's quite poorly executed. You realize that EA wants to make as much money as possible and promotes premium features and battlepacks making the players almost having to buy more content to thoroughly enjoy the game.

    The graphics are great! I love them! A huge improvement over the last Battlefield title and it was better    The game as it is now is decent. It shows a lot of potential, but it's quite poorly executed. You realize that EA wants to make as much money as possible and promotes premium features and battlepacks making the players almost having to buy more content to thoroughly enjoy the game.

    The graphics are great! I love them! A huge improvement over the last Battlefield title and it was better than I had expected, even if I can not run the game on higher settings than medium. However, sometimes the graphics flickers a lot and it becomes difficult to see enemies further away from you, and flickering objects easily draws your attention away from the enemies.

    There have been some improvements to the game over Battlefield 3 that I really like. For example being able to select where to spawn by clicking on the map. Also weapon customization has been improved, but I really miss the ability to quickly change weapon with only a few clicks. Now I have to go in and change the weapon in the customization menu instead of doing it at the deploy menu.

    Some of the maps are great, while others are just ok, and a few are not worth playing at all I feel. Some of them feel rushed and unfinished, not suited for this kind of game at all. Others are great, and offer huge playability with all the gamemodes available.

    Battlelog has disappointed me a little. The server browser is far inferior to the one available for Battlefield 3 and I would really want to see more options when searching to servers. It also doesn't seem to show all servers available and seems kind of random at times.

    The unlock system is very similar to the one in Battlefield 3, but I feel with the introduction of battlepacks, it has become slightly worse. Also with the huge amount of unlocks available for every gun, it feels like it takes ages to unlock something you want.

    When the game works, it feels good and is quite enjoyable, but that is not often. Most of the times the game won't even launch, but instead battlelog gets stuck at the joining server message blinking and the game isn't even starting. The game also crashes and disconnects a lot. I feel this is unacceptable since we paid for a fully working game, yet it feels like a beta/alpha version with a lot of bugs and crashes that still needs to be resolved.

    The guns overall feels quite nice, but some weapons really behave weird and not at all like they did in the previous title. Overall the gameplay is quite different and you need to get used to the new guns and attachements before you can perform very well. Some guns are ridiculously underpowered and desperately needs some tweaking, but I haven't really found an overpowered weapon yet, which is nice.

    If the game did not have so many issues, I would have rated it higher. However, it shows a lot of potential and can be rated higher in the future if they fix these problems. Therefore I feel that a 5 is a fair rating for this game. My advice is to wait before buying this game, since it's near unplayable for a lot of people. In a few months the developers have hopefully fixed a lot of issues. Also, expect to be paying for more than the actual game if you want to be able to enjoy this game for several years to come, because EA and Dice will try to force people in to buying Premium and Battlepacks. Personally, I am really against this kind of thing with DLC and premium features, I mean I already paid a ridiculously high amount for the game itself, why pay just as much again just so I can get a few more maps and weapons? We'll wait and see how much content premium actually offers, but unless I can find it at a huge discount, I will not buy it.    … Expand
  28. madotha
    Dec 26, 2013
    7
    Now after being able to play I can tell: It is okay. It still feels good to play, but it's too much like the previous game. There are many improvements, but I really feel like I'm still playing BF3.
  29. FPSConan
    Nov 1, 2013
    6
    I rated this game as 6. I am a big BF series fan since BF2.

    Sadly the formula Dice used in BF4 sucks. The flying the jets require no skills, the soldiers can be easily killed. spawn areas are messed up......etc what shall i say. the maps are small and its like playing 64 players on 32 or 48 players map.... console feeling. the only good thing is the graphics.
  30. teap98
    Nov 2, 2013
    7
    Game would be good but is plagued with multiple crashes and stuttering.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

44
#44 Best PC Game of 2013
7
#7 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
27
#27 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 52 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 52
  2. Mixed: 10 out of 52
  3. Negative: 0 out of 52
  1. Pelit (Finland)
    Mar 11, 2014
    91
    Battlefield 4 could just as well be called Battlefield 3.5. The new Battlefield features are only marginal improvements over Battlefield 3, but even as such it leaves the competitors way behind. Hopefully the bugs will be squashed soon. [Nov 2013]
  2. GameCritics
    Jan 13, 2014
    60
    Even if multiplayer wasn't buggy, Battlefield 4 would still only be a barely passable installment in all respects besides the snazzy graphics. EA and DICE played it safe by providing the same thing they did the last time around, with another phoned-in campaign and only minor alterations to the online.
    Read full review
  3. Level7.nu
    Jan 3, 2014
    60
    Battlefield 4 keeps soldiering on in the same footsteps as previous games in the series. The lack of worthwhile news makes you wish for more. Dice stays in its comfort zone calls for explosions and not much more. The series needs to evolve or fade out.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »