I don't think that 70 hours is really that much. I've got 36 on a very limited play schedule, so 70 is perfectly reasonable. There were guys who were hitting rank 110 etc within the first few weeks, that is less reasonable, in my opinion.
I think this game is leaps and bounds better than bf3, and the primary reason for that, imo, is the maps are so so much better than bf3 maps. They seem to have a better balance of vehicle combat and infantry combat. BF3 felt to heavy on one or the other, and if it was a heavy vehicle combat you were kind of SOL if you were on foot. It's been awhile since I played bf3 last so maybe I'm off base. I find it's easier to get away from the vehicles and get into infantry combat which keeps the game fresh. And on the flip side there is plenty of vehicle combat if that's your thing. You're not punished for preferring either. Does that make sense? I'm having trouble verbalising my thoughts on it.
Regardless, overall from maps, to deployment screens I'm preferring bf4. Although I do wish the deployment/kit screen still had drop down weapon/gadget picks.
|