Support NeoGAF

[Ryoku]

...which stills looks terrible. I know it has some nice physic effects, but I don't think it looks good, needs more diversity, it looks all the same.

Eh, I'm not going to comment about what I personally think of the grass in Crysis 3, but using actual geometry would definitely look much, much nicer than using shitty transparencies repeatedly. Actual geometry allows for a more varied use, which increases diversity. It'd also perform worse

That said, Battlefield isn't really a grass-heavy game. You'll see ugly patches of 2D grass here and there, and that's about it.

 

[Raven77]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

 

[MiniBossBattle]

You don't tend to notice grass when you are rocket strafing tanks 150 feet off the air.
Just show the helicopter screenshots already.

 

[Nirolak]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

You might have some luck with Battlefield 5.

 

[Ryoku]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

I don't get how anyone would prefer anything short of 45-60 FPS in a multiplayer first-person-shooter.

 

[Reiko]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

I care about controller responsiveness.

 

[SniperHunter]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

Pretty sure this will be 30 FPS on next gen consoles. 60 FPS in BF3 is hard to maintain on ultra or even with a mix of ultra and high settings. Dice probably won't go for an unlocked frame rate and just lock it at 30 FPS with triple buffering

 

[A.R.K]

So those who have beefed up PCs and have played BF3 on high (or ultra) settings, do these look any better? From what I can see there is nothing "new" or "special" about these screens in terms of tech that hasn't been on PC. Yeah having this on PS4/nextbox would be a big jump. Obviously if these really are legit pics for comparison.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Lots of tears are being shed in the new Battlefield.

 

[Arnie]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

Hell no.

 

[TerryWogan]

Urgh. They're wasting time on a singleplayer campaign again, aren't they?

Just give us a hefty multiplayer with plenty of maps instead of nickel and diming us with map packs over the course of 18 months.

 

[Raven77]

I don't get how anyone would prefer anything short of 45-60 FPS in a multiplayer first-person-shooter.

To me the difference is not enough to warrant a downgrade in visuals.

 

[Arnie]

To me the difference is not enough to warrant a downgrade in visuals.

To me the difference is huge.

If COD was 30fps it wouldn't have ever been as popular as it was.

 

[StevieP]

So those who have beefed up PCs and have played BF3 on high (or ultra) settings, do these look any better? From what I can see there is nothing "new" or "special" about these screens in terms of tech that hasn't been on PC. Yeah having this on PS4/nextbox would be a big jump. Obviously if these really are legit pics for comparison.

They look about the same. Maybe a touch smoother. I play at 1080p on ultra with everything maxed, and that 3rd screen was instantly recognizable as what I've seen already (or similar) on my rig.

 

[Ryoku]

So those who have beefed up PCs and have played BF3 on high (or ultra) settings, do these look any better? From what I can see there is nothing "new" or "special" about these screens in terms of tech that hasn't been on PC. Yeah having this on PS4/nextbox would be a big jump. Obviously if these really are legit pics for comparison.

First and second shots look better than BF3 (just due to the faces). Third shot looks like BF3.

 

[Lakitu]

That 3rd screenshot in terms of scale looks amazing. But still, I wish that was a map because I don't really care about single-player.

 

[Nirolak]

That 3rd screenshot in terms of scale looks amazing. But still, I wish that was a map because I don't really care about single-player.

Given that the title is "Construction 1P" and the rest lack the "1P", I'm assuming there's a "Construction MP".

 

[majik13]

Check those jaggy shadows off to the right man! REAL LIFE AIN'T GOT NO JAGGY SHADOWS.

learn to read yo! "at first glance" of course it is not real once you take in the smaller details soon after. The first big offender being low res shadow maps, lack of ambient occlusion, hard edges, HUD, etc.

But looking at the big picture looks much more real life than the bf4 first person screen.

 

[SapientWolf]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

Unfortunately not.

I wish devs would let people choose, because the 60fps people would clean up online. There's a massive increase in input latency at 30fps.

 

[shinobi602]

This is going to look so pathetic on 360/PS3 lol.

 

[The Faceless Master]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???

AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

i would argue that 60fps = superior 'visuals'

 

[Tomat]

learn to read yo! "at first glance" of course it is not real once you take in the smaller details soon after. The first big offender being low res shadow maps, lack of ambient occlusion, hard edges etc.

But looking at the big picture looks much more real life than the bf4 first person screen.

I noticed that stuff at first glance because I'm an expert.

 

[zainetor]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

you also get input lag in the package dude.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???


AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

Well if you could care less then a lot of people agree. If you couldn't care less then you're alone.

 

[SniperHunter]

So those who have beefed up PCs and have played BF3 on high (or ultra) settings, do these look any better? From what I can see there is nothing "new" or "special" about these screens in terms of tech that hasn't been on PC. Yeah having this on PS4/nextbox would be a big jump. Obviously if these really are legit pics for comparison.

Looks about the same with minor improvements...the explosion effect in the first pic is better than anything in BF3 and they seemed to have added bokeh depth of field, remember dof was not present in BF3 at all. Looks like they have improved the skin shaders a little and added more objects in the world (birds flying away).

 

[Zero148]

This is going to look so pathetic on 360/PS3 lol.

and will propably make EA the most money on these platforms

 

[RoboPlato]

Man, if this is representative of what the console versions look like (outside of IQ) and it actually runs at 60fps as rumored next gen is going to be wonderful. Looking closely at them there's a ton of little details that have been added on top of the BF3 core.

 

[Nibel]

Crysis 3 on consoles VS Battlefield 4 on consoles

Might the prettiest win

 

[dragonelite]

I care about controller responsiveness.

Me too but other 8 years of 720p no thanks.
Then i rather have 1080p@30fps sharp IQ then blurred up 720p@60fps enlarged.
They should apply NFS:something(or some other title) that had a response time of 87ms.

Best would of course be 1080p@60fps. I still have a gaming rig that needs some new parts so i will wait for haswell and new gen gpu and decide then when bf4 requirements are out.

 

[HoodWinked]

visuals look remarkably the same as BF3

 

[olimpia84]

REVIVE +100
BIRD KILLED +10
BIRD KILL ASSIST +5

 

[shinobi602]

and will propably make EA the most money on these platforms

Simply by sheer numbers by default.

The real experience will be on next gen consoles and PC

 

[Silly.Mikey]

So those who have beefed up PCs and have played BF3 on high (or ultra) settings, do these look any better? From what I can see there is nothing "new" or "special" about these screens in terms of tech that hasn't been on PC. Yeah having this on PS4/nextbox would be a big jump. Obviously if these really are legit pics for comparison.

Not really. I dont see much of a diff at all. Theres a lot of birds tho. That will be fun when your in a jet.

 

[nickp]

Huh, that's weird. Wordpress usually automatically creates .htaccess files to stop people from browsing wp-content directories.

Must be something wrong with their installation.

I was going to say the same thing. At the very least there should be a blank index.html file in the directory to avoid this kind of easy access. Terrible security.

 

[Raven77]

Let me throw this nugget into the equation. DICE says:

"You can have greatly enhanced destruction and more detailed maps at 30 FPS or you can have reduced destruction and less detailed maps at 60 FPS"

Which do you chose?

 

[drexplora]

not as impressed as i was when i saw Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 3 for the first time..

 

[Silly.Mikey]

Let me throw this nugget into the equation. DICE says:

"You can have greatly enhanced destruction and more detailed maps at 30 FPS or you can have reduced destruction and less detailed maps at 60 FPS"

Which do you chose?

either way, itll need about 7 patches before it plays right. gimmie 60.

 

[A.R.K]

Looks about the same with minor improvements...the explosion effect in the first pic is better than anything in BF3 and they seemed to have added bokeh depth of field, remember dof was not present in BF3 at all. Looks like they have improved the skin shaders a little and added more objects in the world (birds flying away).

Thanks for the answers guys...Yes I agree, that fire explosion does look a lot better, kind of reminds me of KZ4 explosion effect.

I think it probably looks much better in motion. Less than 6 hours to go . I hope it looks this good on PS4

 

[Facism]

REVIVE +100
BIRD KILLED +10
BIRD KILL ASSIST +5

FLOCK WIPE +20

 

[Reiko]

Let me throw this nugget into the equation. DICE says:

"You can have greatly enhanced destruction and more detailed maps at 30 FPS or you can have reduced destruction and less detailed maps at 60 FPS"

Which do you chose?

"I'll take better playability in a FPS and impressive graphics as shown in these screens for 100 Alex."

 

[Chamber]

Not sure why anyone expected more than a beefed up BF3. Wait until PS3 and 360 stop holding back multiplatform development.

 

[Kyoufu]

Let me throw this nugget into the equation. DICE says:

"You can have greatly enhanced destruction and more detailed maps at 30 FPS or you can have reduced destruction and less detailed maps at 60 FPS"

Which do you chose?

60fps.

 

[BattleMonkey]

Yea not really amazed with these since it doesn't seem to be much of a leap compared to what we already have in BF3 on PC

 

[majik13]

I noticed that stuff at first glance because I'm an expert.

ok mr expert. it is just an expression. But still doesnt change my point. That the "big picture" looks more realistic is all.

Though I suppose they aren't going for that, and they want that wow factor.

 

[Lakitu]

Given that the title is "Construction 1P" and the rest lack the "1P", I'm assuming there's a "Construction MP".

Oh, thanks for the info, that would be fantastic. I'm salivating at all the sniping opportunities.

 

[Alcoholikaust]

looks way too good to be true..

very nice, cannot wait to see in motion

 

[kittens]

Am I the only one who could care less if its 60 FPS???

AM I?

Give me 30 FPS and superior visuals...

Nah, I'm definitely the opposite. 60 FPS takes priority.

 

[TheMan]

personally, i don't need BF to have jaw-dropping IQ. what I want, first and foremost, is huge battles. on consoles, i would like the max player count to be doubled at minimum, especially if they want to keep making maps like the ones included in armored kill. also, i want more vehicles that require teamwork to use successfully.

 

[shinobi602]

Crysis 3 on consoles VS Battlefield 4 on consoles

Might the prettiest win

New Killzone already wins from where I'm standing

 

[Ryoku]

Let me throw this nugget into the equation. DICE says:

"You can have greatly enhanced destruction and more detailed maps at 30 FPS or you can have reduced destruction and less detailed maps at 60 FPS"

Which do you chose?

On a serious note, 60FPS. The advantages to response time and gameplay are just too great.