According to developer DICE, the Battlefield 4 footage was from an "unoptimized, pre-alpha" version of the game.
If that's true, then that means... http://25.media.tumblr.com/...
Sorry, accidentally disagreed. And isn't that from the bf3 launch trailer?
It reminds me of: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Boom Boom Pow!
Thats all everybody does anymore, load dirtbikes up with C4 and ghost ride them into you, and BOOM!
That means there's still time to make it look more like freaking Call of Duty...
Yeah man, how dare a military shooter look like a military shooter.
Are you talking about the new killzone?
I know what you mean sort of, too many games have a dull grey drab look to them. Barely any colour. I mean look at the original Doom's compared to Doom 3, everything got painted down to dullness. Thankfully not all games are like that.
I know what u mean, over the top action does look like cod only with better graphics and sound
Amazing how the drones disagree with you when you speak the honest truth. Sometimes i think most of the accounts on N4G are PR shills. BF3 was a derivative mundane shooter that just happened to have vehicles. It was barely treading water from the last one, six years previous. It tried to be CoD, not itself, and failed.
you guys can't really blame developers for wanting that COD money, game development it's a business after all. Even Killzone abandoned its root to go the COD way....
No, sorry. It just mean that it won't take a $5k rig to run it. *see my post below FAT MAN GO BOOM*
Rig will run it just fine
@DeadSpaced If that's true, then that means..
yes and they can add blue tint later like in bf3 alpha no tint then in beta blue tint
They already have the high contrast lighting and supernova sun as well so it makes sense to me
I laughed way harder than I should have at this.
Man I had never even cared to look at BF3 before Beta so I didn't new about the blue tint thing... I just googled some immages about it and damn, I like BF3 (still playing it regularly), but it would of have been so better without that stupid blue tint (and apparently there's some blur too?). I can actually see everything (and maybe that's the problem, I can see even some small hiccups that are not so notable in the final version, not that it would be a deal breaker, in fact, I would happily take those minor flaws over the blue tint).
wow.... gold status must be friggin eye rapage.
You guys believe anything huh...
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh h 680 sli waiting for this game
And by the time it comes out you can rest in the reassurance that cards costing 1/3rd as much will play it just as well.
Off the mark by quite a lot there.. i got my 5870 for £300 in 2009 at launch and it's still worth around £100 on Ebay. That's over 3 years later. So while cards do drop in price, it's not nearly as much or as fast as you make out. Of course it depends on the card in question as well.
lol u know nothing about gpus do u just some console fanboy
LmAo @ foxy Wouldn't that be a Third of the price...100/300.....is 1/3... One third....... If ur 2009 card was 300 and can play BF3 then hd argument holds water
im with you on this I have 2 rigs one crossire 7950 and one sli 680 rig. I also have a PS3 and waiting on the PS4. I cant wait to run bf4 on either or
i don't belive this developers only wanna pump up hype. ''omg it's pre alpha,we have alpha,beta and imagine how game gonna look like when they release it :oo day 1'' -.-
It's true. If it didn't look how they wanted it to then they wouldn't have made it a marketing centerpiece. Sure, the game is in pre-alpha but that means nothing where this is concerned. It's not like the textures we saw will be twice as sharp or the explosions twice as explodey.
will look the same. i bet the SP is already done, just like kz:sf sp is aleady done . just bug fixes and tweaks
this it will look maybe 5% better,but i belive this is final product
Thanks to DICE effort to create best linear Michael Bay hold my hand single player experience multiplayer is gonna look like another "unoptimized, pre-alpha" 0_o
This isn't DICE's way of attempting to excuse anything brought up by critics, perhaps simply stating a fact. Besides, why would they have to justify anything...looks friggin awesome! Only goes up from here!
I hate to use memes as I feel they're the lowest common denominator of replies on the internet but: Haters gonna hate. It doesn't matter what they do, there are certain people out there who thrive to just bitch and moan about everything not being X, or nothing being like Y, or for some reason arguing that everything is the same as Z. INTERNET. (Also, I think for an alpha build it looks pretty rad. I have no reason not to trust what DICE has stated, they're a pretty transparent company.)
Thank you! that's what I pretty much said earlier "I don't understand the negativity from some press members and/or gamers. complaining about "same old same old". wake up!!! it's not gonna get any better than graphical improvements from now on, and maintaining a steady progress in visual quality. unless there's a giant leap in computational power and let me put the emphasis on GIANT. facts are: we need better AI, fresh and new gameplay ideas. but battlefield fans like myself, wanna stick to the good old battlefield formula plain and simple that's it. SP is a plus but it comes down to multiplayer experience one of the finest out there. I enjoyed 1942/1943 BF2 bad company/ bad company 2 and BF3 + DLCs, and you know what all I see is improvement throughout - they're pushing the boundaries, damn hard at DICE both technically and artistically FACT! if people are jealous of what they're looking at in those 17minutes - deal with it. Battlefield fans are happy and that's enough."
for some reason i read your comment in a hank hill voice.
@elhebbo16 They always do.
A little shine and polish here and there but that's about it when the game launches.. still hoping DICE is able to get the PS4 version at 1080p and close to 60fps
I hope they dont improve the graphics too much. I loved the way the trailer graphics looked. Now we need it to run smooth. MY bf3 runs very smooth, so if they can match that performance and not stress my comp more than that then Im good. SO DICE PLZ DONT PUSH THE GRAPHICS TOO FAR, IT ALREADY LOOKS AWESOME.
Alpha my ass more.... What a load of BS... sick of hear bs like this.... that demo was polished to the max on a computer nothing near what the ps4 and 720 will look like.... Don;t fall for the PR talk people...
Pre-Alpha...totally agree, very polished looking, but the code is **** right now. You should have seen what they were running it on. TWO Radeon HD 7990's(4.3-6.9 TFLOPS EACH depending on version and clocking, 12GB GDDR5 ~$900 EACH), at least 16GB DDR3 RAM, and I believe AMDs best 8 core CPU. Probably a $5k rig...*orgasm* *eyes bleed* *wallet commits suicide* Any decently coded final version of a game would run at hellish resolutions and FPS. BTW, PowerColor produces a 7990 called the Devil 13. But, it should look like that on the PS4 by the time they are done optimizing it. edit: The thing is people think it will look better by the time it gets to them, but generally it will look the same, it's just that they should actually be able to run it on their rigs... that don't cost $5k. Pre-alpha normally denotes placeholder textures and such, not code optimization.
Why two 7990's? they were probably running it on 3 monitors.. and even then it's not guaranteed to get 60fps. 1080P is best for a single high end card, higher will produce bad FPS. Plus going to multi card setups is a waste of money because of the micro stuttering introduced by doing so. Because no company has fixed the damn issue which has been around since dual card connectivity existed. So 1080P, a top end card & (hopefully) 60FPS or more if you have a 120hz monitor is best. 1080P will be best for performance and quality for a long time, you only need to look at certain poorly coded games like Crysis to see they won't run 60FPS on release on top cards.
I've heard it quoted as a "set of 7990s", but then again others are saying a single 7990. Could be some confusion about the 7990 being a dual GPU itself. But, that little tidbit kills the whole dual GPU being a problem in the first place. It was clearly 60FPS. I have no idea about the resolution, but was supposibly well over what was seen in the 1080p video. Nonetheless it's go big or go home for AMD, so they are not going to wimp out.
it was only ONE hd7990 which is two hd7970
Totally agree with Zoyos , after I made this post I found out what they were running on as well... and it is true what you are saying about it... But it is going to be a wait and see, for what it looks like in the end... I am sure they will land somewhere close to the mark... but it just sucks.. Ever since killzone you never really know what you are looking at anymore... Before was the same to a certain point, but know every game shown off for the first time is on PC, running high end cards or has been touched up in some way... Gamers just have to more careful of not fulling for PR and marketing traps... we need to be aware of it that is all... @1886afc the new piece that talked about the hardware specs said a pair of 7990s
Well there was a bf3 alpha (I was in it) and then a beta for all platforms a few months before the game's release so I wouldn't dismiss this right away.
PS4 Version Pre-Alpha
My comments are in pre-alpha mode.
O good, so theres hope that theyll get better lol
"For one, no developer and publisher would ever allow a world reveal of a game in unoptmized stage." Euhm yes they would. They do it all the time - the game only reaches beta close to release. What they show when they announce the game is generally alpha footage, and a game in alpha-stage is never optimised because it would get in the way of the development pipeline. (e.g. optimisation isn't pretty, and doing it early means finding bugs takes a painfully long time). I don't even understand why this is classed as a rumour. If DICE said it it's news, not a rumour.
Considering DICE starts with the graphics, then the gameplay then the story, i think it's fair to say this is as far as the game will go in graphics. Pre-Alpha just means they've covered the graphics and party the gameplay and story.
I shall rent this first. Wouldn't want to be duped again with the dreaded input lag now would I...
Man I waited MONTHS until they fixed it. It really pissed me off that they would treat it as if it wasn't a game-breaking priority that needed immediate fixing. The worse part was how it split the community on ps3's battlelog--half had input lag, the other half didnt, so whenever those who did have it would complain, the other half would call them cry baby's. But imagine if every move u made in the game, every shot, etc had a half-second delay? Unplayable. That's why I was so p!ssed too. By the time they finally fixed it, my KDR was crap. Now that it's fixed, I average about 2.50 to 3.00 PER match. But my KDR is officially only 1.80 because it was so poor before the patch, that I have to play for hours, getting 3.00 KDR's for hours, just to go up 1 measly tenth of a decimal in my KDR. Seriously man, DICE really showed me how little they give a damn about ironing the bugs out in their games. They still make THE BEST shooting game in history, but I will not buy it day one--just in case it's full of game breaking bugs. They really pulled a Bethesda there. Only those of us who had the severe input lag for 5 months would even understand.
Oh my Gerd not the kdr!
Yeah I had major imput lag issues at release also. And It didnt become playable until the patch came out that allowed you to disable Anti-Aliasing, Doing that fixed the imput lag but made the game look like ass. Nowadays you can play with AA enabled fine, only took them forever though. What I do not understand is how other people "claimed" to not have imput lag. I play on a 2ms Asus computer monitor. (Asus VW246H) There is zero lag on this monitor unless the game itself just lags. I recommend buying this monitor from Newegg to game on it with your PS3 or Xbox 360, your KDR will skyrocket because you have no idea what 2 ms response time feels like if you game on HDTVs. I always play like shit at my friends houses because im just not used to any slieght imput lagg at all from their LCDs.
I got so pissed off with it I stopped playing all together. A few months later upgraded my PC and waited for BF3 to be on sale so I could get it whiles't paying as little as possible. I didn't want to give DICE/EA more money than I had to considering the way PS3 owners have been treated in the past. I'm now happy enough playing on PC but I suck as it's hard for me to get back into PC gaming with being so used to a control pad for so long lol.
The real question is: does DICE ditch fire teams of 4 and bring back actual squads of 6 in MP?.
....and Commander Mode....and Battlerecorder....and mod tools....
I hope they will now make a proper BF4 instead of the BF3.5 I witnessed in that demo... Or better yet, make a freaking BF with a different setting, come on, you've done it before. Nobody asked for BF4, it's too soon for that...
Freaking lie again. Just like they did with bf3...
Just like KZ:Shadow Fall. Next gen is looking very promising indeed.
I wonder how shittier the next gen console graphic is since it was pc....I guess watch dogs/gta 5 and beyond two souls is the best new gen can offer
Completely burnt out of fps mp. My only interest lies in the new Rainbow. Black Arrow and Vegas were honest gunplay. Perks and massive load outs ruined the genre for me. What's that? I got knifed from fartheraway than Peyton manning can throw? Oh look, he's got double ninja pro++ with multi-barrel grenade launchers that not only have homing devices but cite bad poetry.
I'm definitely starting to feel the same way. For me the problem is just the lack of any real tactical FPS type games out there. It just seems like most devs don't wanna take a shot at them. Like there's not much authenticity or realism in the actual shooting mechanics. No such thing as gear load out and how it affects player mobility, the extent of body protection, amount of ammunition carried, etc. Tedious weapon and attachments unlocking. I don't know, I just wish some dev would take a shot at making a type of FPS that has that kind of authenticity, but also takes skill to play whatever role you want like a sniper, fighter pilot, tank crew, etc. I want them to make a game like that and release it on most main platforms (PC, PS3/4, 360/next gen Xbox) because that's how they can increase the fanbase and get more support for these types of games and bring something fresh in this already saturated FPS market.
Did you even play Battlefield ?
I have played Battlefield, but there are a lot of things that are... meh( not as in bad, but not satisfying when you pull something off), when it comes to things like ballistics in the game. Like only some guns have bullet drop when others don't. Like sniping could have taken much more skill and patience by actually making the scope's mil dots actually useful and having each mil dot go in conjunction with its proper distance. You can sprint for almost the entire time without any penalty. I always played hardcore and still, everyone can keep running around and take a good amount of bullets from certain guns before going down at times. But here's the thing though, I definitely would not want Dice to change the way their game plays just to satisfy the kind of game I want. I know Battlefield has a very large fanbase and this is what the gameplay has been like for most of the series. I simply wish there were more developers who would just take a shot at making a much more authentic, tactical FPS game.
Since most n4g comments are I i thought I would take a positive swing; I can't freaking wait for battlefield 4! :) lol
lies pre-alpha wouldnt be used for marketing its all to build hype, i want bf4 but come on if it was pre-alpha it wouldnt even be worth showing at least to the extent that they showed us