Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Versus Indie - Battlefield 4 vs Insurgency
In this totally subjective and wholly arbitrary series I'll be comparing two similar games,
one a AAA release from a major publisher and the other from an independent developer. Is
the AAA title always preferable to the indie release, with a greater budget and usually
with more polished graphics and user interface? Or do indie games have the edge on their larger
cousins, with streamlined gameplay and often more responsive developers?
I should note that the once-black and white definition of AAA and indie game has changed
in recent years and there's now a greater spectrum between the two release models. However,
for the purposes of this series I'll be using the traditional definitions of AAA and indie.
The first two games I'll be looking at, Battlefield 4 and Insurgency, are superficially similar:
both are tactical squad-based first person shooters set in a contemporary world with
realistic weapons and gameplay. However, Battlefield 4 is a AAA title from Swedish developer DICE,
published by EA and with a long franchise history while Insurgency is a recent release
from independent developer New World Interactive and began life as a source mod for Half-Life
2. The scope and gameplay of the two games are very different and this difference is
at the centre of what makes the comparison so interesting.
Battlefield 4
Traditionally, Battlefield games were defined by their sweeping scope, including not only
tactical infantry combat but also ground and air vehicle warfare across huge maps and varied
terrain. Battlefield 4 continues that tradition and offers a variety of gameplay modes and
experiences. There's something for all FPS fans in BF4, whether you prefer close quarters
infantry combat or fighting for air superiority in an attack helicopter. Across the four different
and unique classes, all with their own tactics and abilities, there are dozens of available
weapons and hundreds of attachments to unlock.
The range of gameplay modes and loadout options points at the scale of BF4 and this is both
a strength and a weakness. While there is potentially something for everyone in Battlefield
4, the game itself is massive, growing larger and more complex with each expansion and threatening
to succumb to bloating and feature creep. Basic gameplay issues like hit detection and
client/server net code are neglected, with developers seeming to focus on implementing
new maps and game modes rather than fixing potentially game-breaking bugs. Granted, the
new features have been welcomed by the majority of players but the core game is at risk of
suffering from neglect.
I've played a lot of Battlefield 4 since it was first released but I haven't been playing
much recently. For the most part I've moved onto new games but the main thing that keeps
me from coming back to BF4 is the gameplay. I prefer playing on infantry-heavy maps like
Operation Locker but these maps are rendered nigh-unplayable by the amount of grenade and
explosive spam. You can find servers that ban explosives but even these devolve into
chaos, with choke-points becoming meat grinders. There's nothing particularly fun or tactical
about constantly running into certain death when two teams are fighting over one corridor.
These situations are caused by a confluence of weapon balance, map design, and player
mentality. Unfortunately, as there are many moving parts there's no easy solution.
Insurgency
Insurgency started off as mod for the popular and flexible Source engine, responsible for
classic first person shooters Half-Life 2 and Counter-Strike Source. Developer New World
Interactive recently released a standalone version of Insurgency, offering squad-based
military combat with an emphasis on realism and tactics. Much like Counter-Strike, the
opposing forces in Insurgency are split into two groups, here security and insurgents.
Players choose a class and loadout at the beginning of the round but unlike Battlefield
there are no unlocks or character progression.
Insurgency can't compete with the scale of Battlefield 4 (there are no vehicles, for
instance) but makes up for it with a tighter focus on infantry combat and strategy. The
Source engine is renowned for having excellent net code and firefights feel snappy and reactive.
Teamwork is essential as there are limited HUD elements and no mini map for spotting
enemies. One key controversial gameplay element is the lack of a kill feed; you won't know
if you've killed your target without seeing him die. Therefore good communication is key
if you want your side to be successful. Unfortunately, the Insurgency player base is still small
and finding populated servers can be difficult at times.
New World Interactive initially released Insurgency as an early access alpha and they were very
responsive to player feedback, incorporating a number of suggestions and fixes into the
core game. They've also released an SDK for custom maps and modding, an area in which
Battlefield 4 is lacking.
At the moment I'm enjoying Insurgency more than Battlefield, even though I tend to die
a lot. The gameplay doesn't feel as random as in BF4, even when I get suddenly killed
with no explanation. I especially enjoy being able to lean, something sorely lacking in
Battlefield. It's a shame there aren't more players as Insurgency fits nicely halfway
between stripped-down Counter-Strike and feature-heavy Battlefield.
Conclusion
So, should you play Battlefield 4 or Insurgency? Well, like I said in the intro, this is an
arbitrary comparison from my own personal experience. At the moment I'd say Insurgency
but I did have a lot of fun with Battlefield 4 in the beginning.
If you like a variety of gameplay modes, vehicles, and loads of different unlocks (and are willing
to put up with some frustrating deaths), try Battlefield 4. The game is still one of the
best-looking PC games around, with a high level of polish and attention to detail. This
polish doesn't come cheap, however, and Battlefield 4 has a AAA price, even before considering
additional DLC or Premium.
However, if you're looking for something a bit smaller, more tactical, and with surprisingly
deep combat gameplay, check out the indie alternative. At a third of the price of Battlefield
(even before the inevitable Steam sales), Insurgency is a lot of fun at a good price.