Support NeoGAF

[Theorry]

First and foremost, the E3 Walker Assault footage is a genuine, practical look at console gameplay in motion. The PS4 capture is largely unedited, providing long stretches of action around the icy Hoth map, and letting us in on frame-rate and resolution details ahead of launch. Right away, from an early pixel-count we see the game matches the basic framebuffer setup of Battlefield 4 and Hardline: the evidence suggesting this PS4 build runs at a native 1600x900 with a pass of post-process anti-aliasing.

Despite the upscaled resolution, the game still looks good on Sony's machine (though in light of these metrics, we wonder if we'll see any improvement over Xbox One's limited 720p Battlefield presentation). From mid-air dogfights between X-Wings and Tie Fighters to on-foot battles against oncoming AT-AT walkers, DICE's work nails the aesthetic of the original films. And despite a confirmed cap of 40 players (lower than Battlefield 4's maximum 64), the scale of terrain is still broad enough to impress. However, it's fair to say its network of trenches and mountains don't come close to matching the sheer density of detail of the Endor woodland map shown in April.

In other words, the early Endor teaser is more a demo for what Frostbite 3 is capable of, possibly given the right PC setup - an engine benchmark ahead of time. Though a direct comparison of this map on PS4 isn't possible yet, certain effects are evidently removed from the gameplay demo shown at E3. For starters the depth of field and a per-object motion blur are missing, while alpha transparencies lack the sharpness of this initial reveal. It's a setup that falls in line with Battlefield 4 on console, where motion blur is only engaged for campaign mode and cut from the multiplayer component. However, with no campaign mode due in Star Wars Battlefront, these effects show no signs right now of making a return. Even for crafted missions intended for split-screen play - such as this Horde mode fight on Tatooine - it appears there's no change from the PS4's multiplayer demo.

The E3 demo's presentation is far less cinematic as a result, but the sense of scale is still very much there. Though the Hoth map is nowhere near as densely packed as Endor's woodland, draw distances are vast with only minimal geometry pop-in when swooping down in an X-Wing. Up-close, character model detail is also close to the teaser's high standards. The only let-down is a sighting of a filtering cascade: when flying past other airborne vehicles, shadows far below appear blurred until it descends past a certain threshold. Otherwise, the game's approach to shadows quality and ambient occlusion is every bit as strong as the Battlefield series' appearances on console.

Even with the Hoth demo's mostly white colour palette, there are neat visual touches not seen in the original teaser. Parallax occlusion mapping features heavily on this icy map for example, with footprints and indents lining the base of the trenches to give each surface a three-dimensional look. Backed by a specular component, the texture mapping for snow is convincing, especially as it's pitted against the Frostbite 3 engine's lighting model.

A perfect 60fps on PS4 is seemingly not within reach right now. The E3 build is an explosive, open-ended 40-player match that rarely holds at this target number, besides the indoors segment right at the start. In this respect, performance is very similar to Battlefield 4 at its peak in multiplayer; a 40-50fps game for the general run of play that can dip into the 30s when pushed. In fact, speeding across the map in a TIE Fighter practically locks performance to 30fps for several seconds in our analysis, giving us the lowest figure across the demo.

Thankfully v-sync is engaged, but it's still clearly a long way from the silky smooth 60fps update we're looking for, even given the concessions in physics-based destruction and overall player count. Despite this, we're hopeful that the frame-rate reading will improve by release, and especially so far smaller-scale battles. After all, Battlefield Hardline did show extensive improvements between its beta debut at last year's E3 and its final release earlier this year.

No doubt the team's early experiences with PS4 and Xbox One are an advantage as it builds on the current codebase, and we hope that this - along with the current PC closed alpha - staves off a repeat of Battlefield 4's buggy launch. But so far so good: the most exciting part is that Star Wars Battlefront has a few months to go before its November release. Despite falling short of the April trailer's dazzling high pitch (perhaps inevitably), it already gives us plenty to get excited about. The performance level on PS4 isn't ideal - and clearly work is needed there - but as an early indicator, it's at least on par with the team's previous games on Sony's hardware - and crucially, there's time to improve come release.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLQ6iRl8QPA

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...ront-on-ps4-shows-huge-promise-but-needs-work

 

[SJRB]

Is it normal to write an article about a game's performance months before it is released and conclude with "it needs work"?

 

[Kenzodielocke]

Seems like it's gonna be like BF4 performance on PS4, 900p and most of the time not 60fps.

 

[the_batman]

Is it normal to write an article about a game's performance months before it is released and conclude with "it needs work"?

EA brought this upon themselves.

 

[mrklaw]

Who bases an article on what the final product might be while using footage from a behind the scenes video?

C'mon now.

This is just disgusting clickbait from DF.

Seriously though, interesting article. Lots of people were massively unconvinced when the early teaser was revealed. The loss of DoF and motion blur is unsurprising. Framerate is disappointing - if that doesn't improve (and past history suggests that EA are ok with a wobbly framerate) then it would be a shame.

I haven't played BF4 on PC - does that have motion blur? If so I think the PC version could live up to the reveal trailer fairly well.

 

[Codiox]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

 

[Daffy Duck]

Is it normal to write an article about a game's performance months before it is released and conclude with "it needs work"?

It is now, they did the same with Advanced Warfare.

 

[Durante]

Seriously though, interesting article. Lots of people were massively unconvinced when the early teaser was revealed.

Clearly for good reason. At least if they were claiming that was running on PS4 -- was that the case? I don't remember.

 

[Mike Works]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

THE GAME ISNT OUT YET

I can bold the caps next time if you're still struggling with the concept.

 

[SolarMystic]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

This is why DF should stop doing these pre release analysis. People read it and think the game will be shit, despite the fact the game is still months away from being finished.

 

[Valnen]

THE GAME ISNT OUT YET

I can bold the caps next time if you're still struggling with the concept.

Past history with the developer in question matters.

If this is 900p like BF4 I will be sorely disappointed.

 

[Guymelef]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

No, it doesn't.

 

[Shining Sunshine]

Hey DF, Shenmue 3 also needs work. 8)

 

[ShamePain]

I hope Mirror's Edge achieves 1080p at least.

 

[PSOreo]

Do the words 'Pre Alpha' not mean this is obviously still a work in progress? Bit silly of DF to be analysing at this stage.

 

[Guymelef]

I hope Mirror's Edge achieves 1080p at least.

It should, as Dragon Age.

 

[Skux]

If this is 900p like BF4 I will be sorely disappointed.

It already is.

 

[Ishan]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.
Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

Thank you for your shit post . May I introduce you to more entertaining variants once you're done with the normal
Ones ?

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Huh? If i remember correctly, there is Motion Blur in the Multiplayer part of Battlefield 4.

 

[Backfoggen]

900p is disappointing. XB1 will be 720p then again.

 

[Angel_DvA]

it runs so good on PC with low hardware... Dice/EA are really terrible at porting games on console.

 

[Madness]

First Halo 5, now Battlefront, both games that are still 4+ months away, and haven't even reached gold status. Guess they're dying for the clicks. They really should wait for something a bit more final before these types of articles. Don't really benefit anyone.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

First Halo 5, now Battlefront, both games that are still 4+ months away, and haven't even reached gold status. Guess they're dying for the clicks. They really should wait for something a bit more final before these types of articles. Don't really benefit anyone.

Uhm if the history of Frostbite games is anything to go by then there wont be any big changes. Especially not with the resolution. Performance yes. I remember Hardline really running bad in the first beta on PS4.

I hope they can reach such improvement for Battlefront too

 

[R3TRODYCE]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

Yep.

Sure it's not a final build but I doubt it'll get too much better given how the other BF frostbite games run on console.

 

[Nokterian]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

No surprise there really.

 

[ShamePain]

it runs so good on PC with low hardware... Dice/EA are really terrible at porting games on console.

Bad Company 2 was one of the best looking games on 360/ps3. After that their technical ability has dropped of a cliff.

 

[Seanspeed]

First Halo 5, now Battlefront, both games that are still 4+ months away, and haven't even reached gold status. Guess they're dying for the clicks. They really should wait for something a bit more final before these types of articles. Don't really benefit anyone.

I find it interesting, so it benefits me.

it runs so good on PC with low hardware... Dice/EA are really terrible at porting games on console.

Or these games simply run into bottlenecks much quicker on these consoles.

DICE are not incompetent, so this seems far more likely.

 

[MagicWithEarvin]

I just want a locked 60 fps on PS4 with stable servers on launch, but I'm keeping my expectations low because it's EA/DICE.

 

[Kysen]

Never mind the performance the gameplay sucks. Feels way too arcadey and lacks the immediacy of BF4.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Never mind the performance the gameplay sucks. Feels way too arcadey and lacks the immediacy of BF4.

Because its not Battlefield. Its Battlefront.

 

[Caayn]

First Halo 5, now Battlefront, both games that are still 4+ months away, and haven't even reached gold status. Guess they're dying for the clicks. They really should wait for something a bit more final before these types of articles. Don't really benefit anyone.

Then don't click on these threads if they don't interest you. And please don't speak for others by saying "don't really benefit anyone". They interest me, I find it interesting to see the path a game takes before it hits store shelves. What effects/features a dev prioritizes, new additions/changes during the dev cycle. To me that's a benefit of these articles I get more information on that.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

At least it seems to be better looking than BF4, thanks to improvements like PBR. But the low resolution is really disappointing. BF4 in 900p was one of the two big reasons why I made the switch from PS4 to PC as my main gaming platform. And I don't regret it, especially after reading this. Now I can play with 156% more pixels at 60+ fps (The other reason was The Order 1886. Beautiful looking game - but as soon as I started moving my character, all the details seemed to just vanish. Was so disappointed.).

I hope they can fix this until release, without further compromising the image and effect quality. I really wonder why they struggle so hard. I can't imagine that they are just bad at porting games, like some users here are implying. Seems much more plausible to me that stuff like this just shows the consoles' limitations.

 

[stryke]

If thing's don't improve much they should just lock to 30 when you're not on the ground. It fluctuates too much.

Certainly clears doubt that it's running on console though.

 

[Daffy Duck]

I just want a locked 60 fps on PS4 with stable servers on launch, but I'm keeping my expectations low because it's EA/DICE.

That's not going to happen.

At this stage I'm thinking of ditching consoles and moving to PC. It's obviously not the best place to play any more. And reading thedsips from the target 60 down to mid 40's etc etc are starting to wear a little thin if I'm honest.

All we hear these days is targeting 60 fps on consoles, when that drops you know it's not going to hit that and will be anywhere between 30-55 fps

 

[darkwing]

900p? what is this, 2014?

 

[Kysen]

Sony/MS really dropped the ball this gen going with AMD. Not even 2 years in and the hardware shortcomings are starting to cause problems. APUs are certainly not the future.

 

[Durante]

At this stage I'm thinking of ditching consoles and moving to PC. It's obviously not the best place to play any more.

By that argument, you should have always been on PC

 

[mrklaw]

This is why DF should stop doing these pre release analysis. People read it and think the game will be shit, despite the fact the game is still months away from being finished.

Or people adjust their expectations so they are prepared that the game might not quite look as good as early teasers, which seems like a good thing. I don't see an article where DF say the game is shit.

 

[cripterion]

900p? what is this, 2014?

No, this is for the players.

More seriously, they give the priority to the framerate.

 

[cyberheater]

That's not going to happen.

At this stage I'm thinking of ditching consoles and moving to PC. It's obviously not the best place to play any more. And reading the sips from the target 60 down to mid 40's etc etc are starting to wear a little thin if I'm honest.

I bought a GTX970 pretty much just for this game so I can play it at 1080p @ 60fps with max settings. It's going to be glorious.

The PS4 version still looks great though. Nov can't come soon enough.

 

[zychi]

This is why DF should stop doing these pre release analysis. People read it and think the game will be shit, despite the fact the game is still months away from being finished.

It's the opposite. It warns people not to preorder if the game is still running like shit.

 

[Daffy Duck]

By that argument, you should have always been on PC

Well years of living in houses with no room for a desk meant consoles were easy and convenient to store so that's what I used.

Plus I now need a PC for my work and it's making me consider it seriously now.

I bought a GTX970 pretty much just for this game so I can play it at 1080p @ 60fps with max settings. It's going to be glorious.

The PS4 version still looks great though. Nov can't come soon enough.

It does look nice but on the back playing BF4 yesterday and getting annoyed at frame dips on hainan resort affecting my sniping as for my jimmies rustled lol.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

If thing's don't improve much they should just lock to 30 when you're not on the ground. It fluctuates too much.

Certainly clears doubt that it's running on console though.

I think they have to lock it at 30 fps at some point, at least for games like Battlefront. How else are they going to include new graphic features in the future?

Sony/MS really dropped the ball this gen going with AMD. Not even 2 years in and the hardware shortcomings are starting to cause problems. APUs are certainly not the future.

Unfortunately they are. Sale numbers are high, and Microsoft/Sony don't loose money on their consoles. I don't think they see any reason to change this model.

 

[Omni]

First Halo 5, now Battlefront, both games that are still 4+ months away, and haven't even reached gold status. Guess they're dying for the clicks. They really should wait for something a bit more final before these types of articles. Don't really benefit anyone.

I know you're still on a "defend Halo 5" crusade, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with analysing things that have been publicly shown. Hell it even says that it's not final in the damn article.

Believe it or not, people like to know about these things. Would help if developers commented on what they're trying to achieve once in a while.

 

[Hayvic]

Do the words 'Pre Alpha' not mean this is obviously still a work in progress? Bit silly of DF to be analysing at this stage.

I don't understand this notion. I'd rather think the game will be shit and then be surprised come launch than to be convinced by the publisher that the game is awesome and it turns out like batman AK on pc. Time and time again it was shown we can't give publishers the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Pooya]

These early analysis are really good actually, you can know what to expect at bare minimum at least, I'm not sure what all the whining is for in every thread. How often things like resolution change 4 months before release? yeah yeah I know some xb1 games last year.

 

[Caayn]

Sony/MS really dropped the ball this gen going with AMD. Not even 2 years in and the hardware shortcomings are starting to cause problems. APUs are certainly not the future.

It's not AMDs fault that MS and Sony both had their budget set as they did. AMD has better hardware available.

 

[impact]

900p, 30-60fps is not a good look

Normally I'd think that the game is still months away from going gold so they've got time to fix it, but this developer/publisher combo leaves zero confidence. I might have to suck it up and go with an Origin game at $60 :|

 

[Daffy Duck]

Do the words 'Pre Alpha' not mean this is obviously still a work in progress? Bit silly of DF to be analysing at this stage.

Pre alpha is just some BS term from developers now. If it was a true alpha they wouldn't show it to anyone because it would look awful.

 

[Turin Turambar]

So it runs like shit. Like BF4.

Jesus these consoles are already struggling...

What do you expect, solid rock 60 fps?

This game graphics were one of the most praised of all E3, the fact is something above 30fps in consoles should be considered "good news".