Even if the PC is not the lead platform, would it be reasonable to assume a PS4/Xbox One port to PC or to each other would also work as easily? How the console versions perform isn't really of any consequence to me, I'm just curious as to how necessary/beneficial platform-specific optimization even will be this console generation. It would also be nice to think technically-poor console to PC ports are a thing of the past. Development tools in general seem so much more matured and refined than they did at the beginning of the last console generation, for example, and there isn't anything exotic in either console this time around either, so is there really any reason to assume games for either console will become noticeably more technically impressive over time or that first-party studios even have much of an advantage, technically?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 4 PS4 runs at 720p native [DICE: Incorrect]
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
Even if the PC is not the lead platform, would it be reasonable to assume a PS4/Xbox One port to PC or to each other would also work as easily? How the console versions perform isn't really of any consequence to me, I'm just curious as to how necessary/beneficial platform-specific optimization even will be this console generation. It would also be nice to think technically-poor console to PC ports are a thing of the past. Development tools in general seem so much more matured and refined than they did at the beginning of the last console generation, for example, and there isn't anything exotic in either console this time around either, so is there really any reason to assume games for either console will become noticeably more technically impressive over time or that first-party studios even have much of an advantage, technically?
Roland1979
Junior Member
He was attacking me and telling me how i should feel with a misinterpretation of my first post. You are ironically misinterpreted my last post. 30 Fps doesn't cut it really for competitive gameplay, this is the opinion of nearly 99/100% of the competitive scene. But of course you are entitled to you opinion. He was attacking me on mine, are you saying you and him can have a opinion but i can't? I bet you only read my post, and not the one i was responding to.
I also didn't laugh about his nickname, i said it was fitting (as in ironic). Next time take the time to read the whole conversation before replying.
Hip Hop
Member
No, what we need is for developers to start pushing the envelope.
If they would have stuck with 30FPS on consoles, they will have most likely had the same visuals anyway.
FeiRR
Banned
So you're saying that the competitive scene on consoles doesn't exist (outside of COD)? Because almost all this-gen shooters are 30 FPS (or less) and still millions of people play them somehow. I see no problem with competition if everybody has the same tools of play (I'd even say it's more fair). But of course you can't brag about how much money you spent on a console.
Roland1979
Junior Member
That's because they have no choice, look at PC scene, the always go with frames over visuals. Doesn't mean they not rather have 30 frames more given the chance. There is a reason almost all fighting games and racing games are 60fps. I never said it was unplayable, i do say that 30 more frames can make a world of difference. Who's bragging about spending money? You digging that up is just as narrow minded as PC elitist or people who brag about spending on anything really. I game multi plat so i speak from a experience (both console and PC). And please don't make more assumptions over misinterpretations. Next time quote me on something or don't assume. Where did i wrote the competitive scene on consoles don't exist? And i wasn't trying to say that either.
Portugeezer
Member
Of course, but at 60fps not so much.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
As much as I am excited for next gen, can't avoid to feel the new consoles are woefully underpowered....
Look at KZ:SF, then some screens of Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo... then Uncharted 2, KZ2, The Last of Us, God of War 3, Halo 4...
Then look at KZ:SF another time.
Then go outside, take a smoke in the wind... go see the ocean.
Atraveller
Banned
Maybe not as much as people think, AMD wouldn't be bothered with hUMA if it doesn't work. hUMA will improve PS4's performance, but for how much? We'll have to wait and see.
Whitechocolatekrispies
Banned
Is resolution, texture size and IQ really ... that important?
Christ the game plays exactly the same at 720p as it does at 1080p ... stop being pathetic graphics whores. If you want 1080p @ 60fps spend $1000 on a PC. Because that's what it takes. Don't complain when a $399 device only runs the game at 80% while costing less than 40% the price of the hardware that runs it 100%.
WTF hUMA has to do with that?
hUMA is the new Cell? LOL. It's not something that has to be used... it's there and it make things easier to do, impacting from the get-go on the classic bottlenecks of pre-hUMA memory config. You don't have to squeeze performance out of it this much.
If BF4 isn't 1080p, it isn't because of hUMA or not hUMA, at all.
The Janitor
Member
I'm confused by the update, it's not gonna run 1080P but still higher than 720P?
.la1n
Member
Then you haven't been paying attention to any of the technical specifications released or numerous articles written on the subject.
Atraveller
Banned
Reread my post, I have not mentioned it will help achieve 1080p, I'm just telling that guy the console won't be as weak as some made it to be.
Bf3 for sure looks nextgen
I'm just tired to see hUMA everywhere, and make that a tick box for overpowered or underpowered console! As a whole, PS4 certainly isn't weak at all.
I remember when, in early 2012, some were talking about 2TFLOPS for nextgen and up to 8GB ram. They were looked as candid as ever by the same guys that downplay nextgen right now, being underpowered, etc... As a consequence of that FUD, everyone is doubtful and pessimistic as fuck.
For those guys, consoles will always be underpowered because of limited TDP and price, despite being, as closed boxes, the most powered things on the mass market, even providing a high jump forward in tech.
3rdamention
Member
Agreed, seriously.
i shouldn't call it popin..geurilla made some crazy nice improvements in their engine and it kind of pixelizes into view..but still, it will be visible once you get your hands on it
JonathanPower
Member
DICE is one of the best developers out there so it's normal that people expect big things from them.
Xbox1 (the first one) was also x86, a Pentium II and a PC GPU, a Geforce2.
Halo1 looks great at launch but games that came later pushed it more. So ofc optimization is needed.
JonathanPower
Member
They didn't say it's not gonna be 1080p, they said the final resolution will be decided once the game is optimized.
& here we go.... remember to me the last time where a launch game run better on console than to pc, 360 launch was full of this crap.
In defence of DICE, I give them a bunch of years to see what they can do on those platform; for now, they have simply ported the game on ps4, but surely haven't pushed the hardware to the maximun. Of course, I'm not expecting 60 fps in the future.
Well, I never thought BF3 was that great on PS3 and 360, matter of fact I thought it looked poor compared to other FPS on both consoles. So really nothing has changed here, EA puts out videos and pics of game running on a high priced PC then when the console versions come out they look like crap. I am more impressed what developers are able to do with PS3 and 360 then BF4 on a high powered PC.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
Calm down dude. We're just talking about games.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
Now COD will get on them about being sub-1080p.
Your memory seems to differ from mine. When the 360 launched it was a very potent machine and there wasn't much debate over that.
Latvian Hitman
Member
Considering how underwhelming Ghosts looks even in the PC footage we've seen thus far, I don't think they'll be able to get onto DICE about anything regarding visuals. Ghosts is definitively the least impressive next gen AAA title I've yet to lay eyes on.
Huh. Wasn't aware that console versions had come out. Thought that was still months away......checks calendar......hmmmm. Nope. Definitely not out.
If you want to spend ridiculous money, you can have hardware that is an "entire generation" (if we are to define them solely by power, which is stupid imo) ahead now.
Problem is, you get much better bang for your buck spending less than 3 or 4k on a computer.
I do agree however that this generation will probably be a more standard 5-ish year length because the hardware isn't up to scratch to go another 8 year length.
Roland1979
Junior Member
Practice what you preach son. And i'm calm, i actually think before i put something in writing. I was talking about games then you tried to jam your opinion down my throat.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At this point you can choose to let it rest.
EDIT:
Touché admins, touché...
Last I checked BF3 has been out for almost a year but I could be wrong.
rudieboy77
Member
I wonder if an HD7850 will play it at Med/High settings at 60 fps 1080p? I find it very interesting that having set specs to gear the game towards and they couldn't get 1080p to work. Is DICE going to say that the recommended gpu on PC to achieve 60fps and 1080p is 7970/680 or higher, I doubt it.
The double rendering of the sniper scopes in Ghosts is incredible. I imagine it's be even harder to do on BF because apartment you need to render each world twice.
With a 460 and a Amd quad core I was able to play BF3 on high/ultra at around 40-60fps. 64 player servers are when I would see drops. When I upgraded to a 4670k I got a huge boost in those situations. Multiplayer games with a lot of players are generally much more intensive on the CPU than the GPU.
DizzyCaffeine
Member
Stop making sense.
rudieboy77
Member
I was thinking the same, my question about 7970/680 was rhetorical. GPU's with lower specs will of course play this game at 1080p 60fps, so why cant the PS4? The HD9XXX is the only new cards coming out by the time BF4 comes out and I doubt the game would be optimized for those cards. TBH this just makes my decision to make a gaming PC easier. I was getting a next gen console to play BF4 with 64 players and at 1080p. So I'll have to get a set up that will do that.
kriskrosbbk
Member
Jackfrags shares his experience playing BF4 at GC.
Also few words about the PS4 ver. @10:15min ,if interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0gu5RzbPiw&hd=1
Also few words about the PS4 ver. @10:15min ,if interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0gu5RzbPiw&hd=1
Whoa was that a knife counter at 2:35?