<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Battlefield 4: Five Key Areas to Improve On	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on</link>
	<description>Get a Bolt of Gaming Now!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 18:08:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Indy		</title>
		<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on#comment-196552</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Indy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 18:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamingbolt.com/?p=155804#comment-196552</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[One of the worst written articles I have read in a long time, the writer seems to frame things in a positive or negative light only to flip the intended meaning in the next paragraph. Coupled with commenting on things that exist as being unrealistic such as extended magazines, weapon modifications and target finders (I&#039;m assuming you meant things like laser designators?) seems quite odd. I would suggest commenting on modern FPS focussing on a more action movie style approach instead of trying to focus on talking about how much unlike call of duty something is.


Battlefield seems to do well to find a balance between realistic elements commonly seen in military simulators such as ARMA and the action hero fun and gun of other modern FPS.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the worst written articles I have read in a long time, the writer seems to frame things in a positive or negative light only to flip the intended meaning in the next paragraph. Coupled with commenting on things that exist as being unrealistic such as extended magazines, weapon modifications and target finders (I&#8217;m assuming you meant things like laser designators?) seems quite odd. I would suggest commenting on modern FPS focussing on a more action movie style approach instead of trying to focus on talking about how much unlike call of duty something is.</p>
<p>Battlefield seems to do well to find a balance between realistic elements commonly seen in military simulators such as ARMA and the action hero fun and gun of other modern FPS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: lobname		</title>
		<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on#comment-196519</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[lobname]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 20:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamingbolt.com/?p=155804#comment-196519</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[you say the destructibility in battlefield 4 doesnt measure up to bfbc2? we havent even seen what we can do with destruction in battlefield 4. they havent showed much.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you say the destructibility in battlefield 4 doesnt measure up to bfbc2? we havent even seen what we can do with destruction in battlefield 4. they havent showed much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hol_Up		</title>
		<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on#comment-196508</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hol_Up]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 18:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamingbolt.com/?p=155804#comment-196508</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[People ask for more destructibility but the reason why it worked so well in BFBC2 is because they didn&#039;t have tons of air vehicles that could directly attack ground targets. For example in BF3 if the jets were able to level a building in Rush, how would it  be fair to the defenders if their only cover could be destroyed in an instant every round. Also it would be seriously frustrating in a 64 player conquest mode where nowhere is remotely safe because you have the threat of 6+ aircraft and 10+ tanks blowing shit up. Then it&#039;d be a case of the only way to be of any use is to be in a vehicle which would seriously undermine the infantry combat and class roles.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People ask for more destructibility but the reason why it worked so well in BFBC2 is because they didn&#8217;t have tons of air vehicles that could directly attack ground targets. For example in BF3 if the jets were able to level a building in Rush, how would it  be fair to the defenders if their only cover could be destroyed in an instant every round. Also it would be seriously frustrating in a 64 player conquest mode where nowhere is remotely safe because you have the threat of 6+ aircraft and 10+ tanks blowing shit up. Then it&#8217;d be a case of the only way to be of any use is to be in a vehicle which would seriously undermine the infantry combat and class roles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Anonymous		</title>
		<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on#comment-196507</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 18:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamingbolt.com/?p=155804#comment-196507</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is time for big scale maps on multiplayer, with 100 players vs 100 players. Come on DICE, do it!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is time for big scale maps on multiplayer, with 100 players vs 100 players. Come on DICE, do it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: ollienkd		</title>
		<link>https://gamingbolt.com/battlefield-4-five-key-areas-to-improve-on#comment-196489</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ollienkd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 14:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamingbolt.com/?p=155804#comment-196489</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Who cares about the campaign. I don&#039;t by FPS&#039;s for that. 
BF3 campaign - 15 min
BF3 MP - 720 hrs]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who cares about the campaign. I don&#8217;t by FPS&#8217;s for that.<br />
BF3 campaign &#8211; 15 min<br />
BF3 MP &#8211; 720 hrs</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
