Submitted by DPAD Dave 734d ago | news

Battlefield 4 on PS4 & Xbox One – 'We need to compromise in some places,' says DICE

The PC version of Battlefield 4 will look better than the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One versions, executive producer Patrick Bach has suggested, telling VideoGamer.com that it is "doing as much as [it] can" with the next-gen versions, "but we need to compromise in some places". (Battlefield 4, PC, PS4, Xbox One)

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 3 »
Septic  +   734d ago | Well said
Compared to PC, that is to be expected.

But still, 60FPS and 64 players on consoles will be brilliant.
Christopher  +   734d ago
If it's 60fps and 64 players on console, it won't be anywhere near 1080p. Maybe 720p. Maybe.

Even with the closed-system design, there's not enough there on either system to push it to 1080p.
#1.1 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(46) | Disagree(96) | Report | Reply
Lukas_Japonicus  +   734d ago
It will be 720p. There is no maybe there.
MasterCornholio  +   734d ago
They did confirm with the PS4 version that it would be in between 720P and 1080P and they would just upscale it to 1080P. Im pretty sure that it will be a lot better than the sub HD versions of previous consoles.
ooquis  +   734d ago
So since when you working at DICE that you know this?? you ever thought maybe,just maybe the ps4 version is made to be on par with the xboxone??for all you know the ps4 can do 1080p with no effort.
#1.1.3 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(62) | Report
Kleptic  +   734d ago
^yeah the IGN preview dude stated it was not 720p, but wasn't 1080p either...but noticeably down on settings, still...

not worried about it...for Bf3, the game looked like hot trash on both consoles until the day it released...even the beta was pretty awful looking...and the final product was perfectly acceptable...

I'm going with the PC version this time around...but mostly because all my bf3 friends/clan mates are doing the same...I think both consoles will get a great version of it though, with much less compromise than with BF3 (between consoles/PC i mean)...
Christopher  +   734d ago
To further explain my thoughts:

I think the single player and "certain" multiplayer modes may be 720p. I think any multiplayer mode involving 32+ people, though, may not even be full 720p.
Christopher  +   734d ago
@Maninja: Eh, I'm not sure they're going to get that in both single player and multiplayer. I'm happy to be wrong.

And, don't people come and say "Well, you're wrong". None of us know for certain. But, 60fps with 720p and 32 players at once? That's pushing the heck out of the PS4 hardware, let alone Xbox One.
user7402931  +   734d ago
look at kzsf, deep down ect, it could easily do 1080p.
Christopher  +   734d ago
***look at kzsf, deep down ect, it could easily do 1080p.***

1. Deep Down is complete demo mode with no concept of gameplay.

2. KZSF is 30fps limited and estimated at 1080p. But, also an exclusive title, not a multiplatform one.

3. None of those are "easy" considering that BF4 is multiplatform, 60fps aiming, will have more players on the screen at once, more forms of movement/vehicles, and will have destructible environments.
n4rc  +   734d ago
All this frame rate and res talk is amusing...

I remember running counterstrike at 60fps at like 1600x1200 more then 10 years ago... Ans that was with a geforce2 and like a gig of ram..

But back on topic... Look what they acomplished with this gen.. Hardware is peanuts to what we get next gen... Its not out of the question what they are claiming imo
Bobby Kotex  +   733d ago
No one is denying that Captain Obvious.
-Alpha  +   733d ago
Killzone Shadow Fall is 1080p and 60 FPS (for multiplayer).
scissor_runner  +   733d ago
The smoke and mirrors are starting early this gen. If 8 cores and 8 gigs of ram can get it done what is the fing point!
KiLLeRCLaM  +   733d ago
BATTLEFIELD 4 WILL BE 720P on consoles..It's been confirmed already!
Deadpoolio  +   733d ago
Oh Jesus there is more than enough "there" as a few morons keep saying for the PS4 and One80 to do 1080p...Until they stop developing for PS3/360 games wont be 1080p.....

BTW the PS3 CAN NATIVELY do 1080p NOW...WITH GAMES....The 360 can't do anything about 720p without upscaling
Blachek  +   733d ago
I wonder if an HD Install like was required on 360 would be a viable option to improve the presentation of the game
awi5951  +   733d ago

No battlefield 3 multiplayer hurts your cpu all the Particles and physics that goes on in multiplayer is crazy. I have a x6 core cpu and i have to overclock it to 3.7gigs in multiplayer to make my game play smooth at 1080P at 80+fps. So these consoles with weak CPU's thats whats holding the game back.
UltimateMaster  +   733d ago
There we go again, another debate over 720 or 1080... bla blah.
is it even really relevant to even argue on a game that isn't even released yet?
Christopher  +   733d ago
***Killzone Shadow Fall is 1080p and 60 FPS (for multiplayer).***

Can you provide a link that says, explicitly, that it is natively 1080p w/60fps? All I've found are "analysis" posts not official ones.

Edit: Nevermind, found it in a video just released today.
#1.1.19 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(19) | Report
thehitman  +   733d ago
A lot of people wont be able to 1080p @ 60fps on PC either... not on max settings.
GDDR6_2014  +   733d ago
I wonder what PC specs you will need to run it better than ps4. I would think my 3 Tflops 7950 is more than enough, that costs just $250 today, you can certainly build a pc with that for $700-800.
RyuCloudStrife  +   733d ago

You are just wrong! The dev ALREADY said it'll be above 720p!
Christopher  +   733d ago
@RyuCloudStrife: And I always, 100% trust what a dev says when people who played it said it didn't look 720p!!!!
starchild  +   733d ago
People saying "oh these consoles have plenty enough power to do 1080p/60fps" don't really seem to understand how things work.

Sure, the PS4 and XB1 would have the power to run current gen games at 1080p/60fps guaranteed, but if you are talking about games that are pushing graphics in other areas then it isn't guaranteed or necessarily even possible at all.

Even past generation consoles could have all ran all games at 1080p/60fps, but the games we enjoyed those generations would have been stripped down and wouldn't have been nearly as great in other areas. With fixed hardware something always has to give--there has to be compromises somewhere.

So is that what some of you want? The potential of all our games to be held back (in terms of AI, physics, graphical detail and realism) all so that games can conform to some standard that you think is important?

If you guys really want a guaranteed 1080p/60fps you should be gaming on PC. Consoles really aren't the place to enforce such a standard.

Going from 720p to 1080p uses around 40% more of a GPU's performance, while going from 30fps to 60fps uses 100% more of a GPU.

I don't want games to have to run on a 140% weaker GPU essentially. All that performance can be better put to use creating richer worlds, with more physics based elements, and more complex AI.

If people were smart, they wouldn't be asking developers to shoot for a standard that will be difficult to achieve and will result in games with juddery framerates (as they struggle to keep above 60fps), instead they should be asking developers to shoot for a rock solid 30fps that doesn't suffer from stuttering and screen tear.

A stable frame rate is much more important than a higher average framerate.

In order to achieve a stable 30fps it actually means that 30fps will be the MINIMUM frame rate and the actual frame rate will be going between like 30 to 50fps. Likewise, in order to achieve a solid 60fps, the hardware actually has to be rendering something like 60 to 80fps. That's a tall order.
mewhy32  +   733d ago
Well if they program for the lowest common denominator bone then we in for a very disappointing BF4. If they develop the PS4 version separately and don't get held back by the inferior bone tech then we could be in for something special on the PS4.
turgore  +   733d ago
It runs above 720p...still not native 1080p tho.
Shaaunyb  +   733d ago

No battlefield 3 multiplayer hurts your cpu all the Particles and physics that goes on in multiplayer is crazy. I have a x6 core cpu and i have to overclock it to 3.7gigs in multiplayer to make my game play smooth at 1080P at 80+fps. So these consoles with weak CPU's thats whats holding the game back.
_____________________________ ___________________

Seriously doubt that, considering i'm running an i3 at 3.4GHz and it runs smoothly.
Godz Kastro  +   733d ago

Dude, you really think the ps4 is more than what it is. You will have a slice of humble pie if you don't come back down to earth.
csreynolds  +   733d ago
"Maybe 720p"

People who've played the PS4 build at Gamescom have claimed it currently runs somewhere between 720. Moreover, neither Sony nor Microsoft are going to make a next-gen console that underperforms visually when compared to current gen.
bigtakilla  +   733d ago
Honestly it's a multiplat, so the sad truth is whichever system winds up being the weaker one, it's more than likely going to be optimized for that system and ported over to the other.
tehnoob3  +   733d ago
Yes, it is confirmed to be 720P, but I do not think that this is representative of the consoles' potential. If you recall to the start of this generation, the pinnacle of console graphics was Resistance.
awi5951  +   733d ago

Are you running on ultra with full AA ?????????? I AM.

My Cpu is actually a bottleneck untill i overclock but i dont need to upgrade right now im waiting for the next gen of CPU's to come out.
awi5951  +   733d ago
When they announced these slow CPU speeds i knew this would happen. AMD loves to make lots of cores on cpus but they are weak cores and they are slow. So when your cpu is getting beat by a dual core and you have 8 cores something is wrong.
4Sh0w  +   733d ago
I get it, we want amazing games but sometimes I think we play specs more than games.
Gamer1982  +   733d ago
They said all next gen will be 1080p however they will reduce FPS to 30 in most to get this. So I would expect 30FPS long before 720p.. I think the next wave of consoles means goodbye to 720p. Dunno why people think we will be getting 720p. It may hit 60fps in places unless its locked to 30fps this game or they may do the same tricks as last gen and cover up holes with AA etc..
Bolts   734d ago | Bad language | show | Replies(5)
saber00005  +   734d ago
Indeed Septic. In order to play that game with full maxed settings, you would need a high powered gaming machine. Which would cost about $1,500 to $3,000
vulcanproject  +   733d ago


Why not have a quick glance at an $800 dollar PC which is also now 6 months old (same stuff is cheaper now you can get a 7870 for less than $190 when they paid $240) managing Battlefield 3 on ultra @ 1080p with an average well over 60FPS at stock and over 70FPS OCed....

Even if you spend another $150 on a new OS and bits and pieces what you gonna do with the $1500-$3000 dollars you claimed you would need to do that? Buy two of them?
#1.3.1 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(2) | Report
Jazz4108  +   733d ago
Didnt i hear some fans on here say the ps4 and xboxone would do 4k gaming. Lol
saber00005  +   733d ago
@vulcanproject, First off... Those are just charts. Prove to me with a FULL BUILD on HOW much the PC is going to cost? Not to mention, this is BF4, not 3, and not 2. Running full graphic always on 60fps is NOT going to happen. You would be stupid to think so.

I would know this being an IT guy and being that I'm a PC gamer. You can't get
vulcanproject  +   733d ago
The 'charts' speak for themselves. The cost breakdown is at the start of the article, down to every dollar for the hardware, except you could build that machine easily today for LESS than when the article was written in February.


$240 for the card? Well heres an even faster one today for $190 shipped: http://www.newegg.com/Produ...

Overclocked that machine will average well in excess of 70FPS on Battlefeld 3 ultra. If you think Battlefield 4 will be so hugely more demanding it couldn't do 50-60FPS I suspect you will get a nasty surprise, at best it'll be an incremental improvement over the Battlefield 3 engine added to the fact its being built for 60FPS on console.

But if you insist, you could even buy a faster GPU for the $240 in the original build. Say....a 7950 boost or GTX670 if you look in the right place.

Or even worse case, turn down the settings a tiny bit. Do YOU think that the console versions will be as good as max settings of PC? I have my doubts they will be even at 720p.

You obviously aren't much of an I.T guy if you think you will need a $1500 PC to run Battlefield 4 lots better than the new consoles. I mean you seen what a sub $800 PC can do if you spent $1500 you would get a monster that could do 60FPS @ 2560 x 1600 LOL!

7970ghz crossfire perhaps? Frankly by the time the game is actually out in a couple months prices of better hardware will only be cheaper......

http://www.techspot.com/rev... heres a taster of 7970ghz crossfire which you could build for $1500 no problems. 93.6 FPS @ 2560 x 1600!!!! Fast enough for ya?
#1.3.4 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report
Ju  +   733d ago
We'll see about that. Because I believe this game will have some specs requirements to run 1080@60fps on a PC as well. A $800 PC won't cut it - else the PS4 could keep up.

I think this project is too ambitious. We'll find out when it'll release. Ambitious in the sense it totally ignores boundaries. Who ever designed this game totally ignored the specs we have today. And it will sure show. Designers these days are a bit off from reality it seems. To keep up with the scope and framerate Dice has to tone down the game so much that it looks worse than last years PS3 version. This can't be the right direction to go.
awi5951  +   733d ago
NO i doubt it. I bet my pc now will play it on high at 60 fps because i crossfire. Dual 7950's at 200 dollars each will run it fine on ultra I bet after the drivers are fixed.
Gamer1982  +   733d ago
Erm over 10 years an xbox one/PS4 would cost you over $1200. Console $399 plus 1 replacement over 10 years (everybody gets one I had 2 this generation alone!) = $349. So far thats $749. Add on 10 years of PS plus at $500 thats $1250. Thats for PS4 Xbox One is more expensive.

I have a pre-order for watch dogs in UK for my PC for £23.99 the cheapest PS4 pre-order is £49.99. A Differnce for £26. 10 games at that differnce (1 game a year!) is £260 which is another $402 (at current exchange rates).

So whoever says PC is more expensive obviously doesn't know what they are talking about. They just see the initial outlay. Oh and if a piece of PC hardware breaks you just replace that (and it drops in price FAST) so cheap as hell to fix! Not to mention a PC can do a lot more than a console and games are gonna look a LOT better on a $1200 PC compared to Xbox one and PS4 this entire generation.
#1.3.7 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Consoldtobots  +   733d ago
i dunnoo but this frostbite engine sounds terribly inefficient
saber00005  +   733d ago

First off, a majority of items inside the PC, are CRAP. For 1, your power supply is going to overheat b/c it's running at 100%. Really? A 550 watt to power both your graphic and your processor? It's like a car engine. What do you think happens when you rev up your engine till it's at the red line for a long period of time? It overheats and dies. And you want to over-clock it?

Second of all, the case is NOT designed to get rid of that heat it produces, ESPECIALLY when overclocking.

Third, your missing the operating system. Seems like your going over budget don't you think?

Forth, PC won't average 60fps on full in multiplayer. Note, in your article test results they were playing JUST campaign. There's a HUGE performance difference in offline mode, and online. Don't believe me? Try single player, than multiplayer. More things to render, more players, more explosions, more visual, etc. I'm sure 90% of gamers buy Battlefield games to play the multiplayer. Being that's what Battlefield franchise is known for.

Dislike all you want, but if you honestly think you can maintain over 60FPS, all the time, on Ultra, 1080p, then you know nothing. The charts listed aren't detailed and looks to ONLY show the HIGHEST FPS, and not the lowest.

Oh by the way, you also forgot tax, shipping, AND an operating system. Crunch the numbers, it's well over $800 kid.
#1.3.9 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
awi5951  +   732d ago

You must be a console fan any PC game can run at 60 fps at 1080P. BF4 when the drivers are mature will run on anything from a 7850 and up fine on high and it will look better than the console version.

Because PC guys will just turn off the AA which BF3 never had a problem with jaggies, or turn down the shadows to medium which i dont care about in multiplayer, Leave the textures and draw distance at max, You may turn down the ground clutter who cares about paper and grass moving around. And when it cones to particles, smoke effects, texture quality leave them at high or ultra and it will look far better than consoles and it would be at 60 fps.
vulcanproject  +   729d ago
Sorry saber, but I laughed all the way through your rubbish post talking about PC, when at this point in the discussion its pretty clear you know nothing about it as a gaming system.

Why would a 550 watt PSU be maxed out on a single GPU and intel setup? That whole system at max load will NEVER pull down more than 450 watts even overclocked. http://www.legitreviews.com... 289 watts at burn in (253 gaming) so you would have to nearly DOUBLE that to make the system unstable.... So please, actually try and not talk crap here. Even a 7970 pulls down less than 400w in that system.

Heat is simply not a problem. You're talking rubbish. That build is specced with a third party CPU cooler (not crappy stock) and the card I pointed out had a quality non reference cooler. Are you just a bit....thick?

Third- I pointed out the card was cheaper and I mentioned $150 for an OS. You can actually get one for $99. Shame you can't read and missed that bit in my post hey?

Fourth (not forth) it WILL average 60FPS in multiplayer. It'll average more. The multiplayer of most games accounts for a variance in performance and typically tones down assets slightly. Battlefield is no different. The best bit is you can lower settings only slightly to achieve more performance if you desire.

The big deal here is we now know PS4 can only do medium settings! I'll bet that this PC could do better than medium AND 1080p AND 60FPS.

If you can't accept that machine averaged over 70FPS and has a very good minimum then thats just your problem.

I think you'll find that so called existing 60FPS shooters on console such as COD actually don't run 60FPS a bunch of the time, despite aiming for it. Pretty much any COD game you care to pick whether it be PS3 or 360 will run somewhere between 50 and 60 FPS, certainly not locked out to 60FPS as a 'minimum.' Minimum framerates on COD for the consoles is typically 40FPS. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... 360 has the best performance but even it can't help dropping off from 60FPS quite a bit. Any other console you play it on and it crashes even lower...

You could really do with learning a little before you enter this discussion, clueless!
#1.3.11 (Edited 729d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
jjb1981  +   734d ago
I couldn't have said that better. Bubble+
ATi_Elite   734d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(9)
3-4-5  +   733d ago
Yea for BF3, coming from COD, having 24 player battles was awesome, but I know see how most of the maps were designed for 64 players, some are too big for 24 players.

Can't wait for this game.
Funantic1  +   733d ago
I told a PC gamer at my job about the PS4 and X1. I told him about the specs on both and he busted out laughing. He said they were both weak. He was dying laughing in tears and his face was so red. I was embarrassed. :-(
#1.7 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
TKCMuzzer  +   733d ago
The fact that he laughed about it so much says more about his lack of life fulfilment than any thing else.
man console that much behind??

Gddr6 coming next year on pc lol.

Should get worse.
#1.8 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Sarick  +   733d ago
That and RRAM aka ReRAM should be in the market by 2015. This might not make games look better but it'll help with storage and instant on. Even speeding up the system by having a solid state type cache for large games.

Faster loading etc.

The thing people forget is gaming consoles are designed in such a way that developer will use there potential until the product is discontinued.

Another thing I've notice is people talking res and FPS. I any developer could create a flat one tone image at 1080p 60FPS. It's the environment, textures, animation, game play, and physics that make a game good. There are more factors then just refresh rate and how many pixels are on the screen.

A lot of things could happen in a few years that make PC evolve more. Most of us know the console we buy will get its fair share of the market interest from the developers even if it's not the latest tech.
#1.8.1 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report
DeadlyFire  +   733d ago
I think its more to do with them not getting enough time with the hardware. They have a launch window they need to make. In the next couple of years as they adjust to the hardware expect the next Battlefield on consoles to look alot better than this one. It shouldn't disappoint by any means though unless your a PC diehard. Then just buy the PC version.
SatanSki  +   733d ago
Its expected but as well trully sad. New consoles arent even out, yet they cant handle current pc graphics. Wasnt that bad last gen.
Cernunnos  +   733d ago
It was just the same, but the media did not have the same focus on specs, and the consoles back then didn't have hardware that was easy to compare to PC's, due to the different arcitechtures.
SatanSki  +   733d ago
I am not concerned with the specs, im concerned they cant handle new BF on highest pc details
PeaceKeeper   733d ago | Spam
thezeldadoth  +   733d ago
its not 64 players on the console version
PFFT  +   733d ago
Last i heard it was.
CrimsonSquall  +   733d ago
Next Gen ala PS4/XB1 yes for 64. Current ala PS3/360 no.
trancefreak  +   733d ago
So what happens in 3-4 years when the consoles plateau? Do we settle for less detailed environments in the sake of 1080p? Or 720P upscaled going to be the norm. I much rahter prefer less effects for a crisper rez of 1080p TBH.

I guess time will tell, and we all know both consoles being in a closed environment will do a lot more when coding is refined, and optimal multi tasked code threading software techniques being applied.

What I really want to know since every time we see these graphical masterpieces being displayed; they are on the latest high end systems in sli. I want to know how well a GTX 680 will run this game. It is possible that Frostbite will be better optimized in the future for consoles(Meaning BF4 1080p would be achievable on these consoles today) just the lack of time and launch window prohibits this capability IMO.

It also is a fact that these PC first games are always showcasing the latest PC GPU in SLI UberWare to get people to purchase the latest GPU cards. From my experience of PC gaming there are always so many games having issues in SLI that sometimes its better to have a more powerful GPU solution. Not always but sometimes.

In closing, I believe these consoles will see incredible graphical leaps in time. Just at this point with such a close launch window games need to get pushed out on time. The Next Gen consoles are fresh technology for developers to grasp and harness all of their capabilities and potential. It will come just like every other console generation we see the the boundless leeps until the console are pegged out which would start another Gen.
#1.13 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
fullmetal297  +   733d ago
The Tweet you posted isn't from a Battlefield developer and in fact is just a regular person who makes youtube videos, so it's not creditable in any way.
Syntax-Error  +   733d ago
if I dont see any graphical difference between 360 and X1...IT'S GHOSTS FOR ME. Screw that shit. No one is going to sell me a port and call it NEXT GEN
gamernova  +   733d ago
Wait one gosh darn minute!!! So now Ps4 isn't as powerful as a pc? I am in shock! Or is the new excuse that the console is new and still needs to be learned? Lol Or is the excuse that it is not worth paying thousands for the extra bit of resolution? (total lie, btw) :P
joab777  +   733d ago
I don't care honestly...but its bullshit. I guarantee u that with the same tech in2-3 yrs...games will look much better. Anyway..did anyone ask console gamers how important 64 player maps are?
otherZinc  +   733d ago

Since you think the PS4 can easily do 1080p 60fps native, why is Killzone, Knack, and Drive Club not in 1080p native running at 60fps?

Meanwhile, Forza 5 IS 1080p native at 60fps. Answer me that?
#1.18 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Lukas_Japonicus  +   734d ago
Whatever platform you buy the game on, you are still going to have fun with your friends on it.

If anyone expected the console and PC versions to look identical needs to get their heads out of the clouds.
Majin-vegeta  +   733d ago
I agree and i think this fits nicely along with your comment.

JunioRS101  +   734d ago
People need to relax. At the very least, it will look better than previous consoles, have twice the frame rate, more than twice the maximum active players, has more guns/customization... I think we'll be fine.
ZodTheRipper  +   734d ago
More paid DLC, more microtransactions, more private servers ...
falviousuk  +   734d ago
dont buy it then
Soldierone  +   733d ago
I hope they make "quick match" DICE only servers. If private servers are as annoying as BF3 then I don't care how the game plays, that totally ruins it.
Activemessiah  +   734d ago
60fps or GTFO.
BillytheBarbarian  +   733d ago
Yeah! Anything less is pointless
Sony360  +   733d ago
Guess you don't like films then.
MasterCornholio  +   734d ago
As long as the gameplay is solid and the framerate is good not to mention its at least 720P im fine with it.

The cheapest next gen console is 400€ so you cant expect it to outperform a 2000€ gaming PC.
Lukas_Japonicus  +   734d ago
Sense. This post has it.
CoLD FiRE  +   734d ago
But one would expect it to be on par with a 4 year old PC at least!
BISHOP-BRASIL  +   734d ago
So call us when you have pics of BF4 running on 4 years old PC, because as of now all they showed was the game running on top gaming PC rig and PS4, not old PCs.
CoLD FiRE  +   734d ago
I will show you how it runs on a 5850 once the game is released.
tordavis  +   734d ago
My PC is 5 years old and BF3 destroys the console versions and so will BF4.
MidnytRain  +   733d ago

You people need to stop posting this. The rig tha had for the shows were clearly overkill.
neoandrew  +   734d ago
The place where i live, you can buy a pc that outperform next gen console for max 700€.
fullmetal297  +   733d ago
Any PC with a mid range video card like the 660ti can render BF3 at 60 frames and 720p minimum and they cost $200 average. A rig built around a mid-range video card can be built for 500 dollars. To top it off, you have free online so it won't cost you yearly.
gamernova  +   733d ago
It can't outperform a 1000$ one either. or even a 800$ one. But...on a pc you can play all your old and new games. So yeah, check mate :P
tee_bag242  +   733d ago
You're right. I'm a bit disappointed but I'd much prefer 60fps @ 720p than 30fps 1080p. At least Dice are doing that right.
gaelic_laoch  +   734d ago
I want to know was there any compromises made for the Xbone version against the PS4?
darx  +   734d ago
Whats it matter both are the inferior version.
aLucidMind  +   734d ago
It matters to those that dont want a PC and prefer consoles. Just because you prefer pc doesnt mean console vrrsions dont or shouldnt matter.
Master-H  +   733d ago
It matters because dude might be buying both the bone and the fore and wants to buy the better version of BF4 maybe ?
Also he might be interested in bragging rights so he can go to the fanboyz-war with em lol
#6.1.2 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report
tee_bag242  +   733d ago
@ Master-H

Well if buying the better version matters so much he'll do himself a favor and get it on PC and work out how to use console pad and connect a HDMI into a TV.

I know. Its very hard isnt it?
#6.1.3 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
KazHiraiFTW  +   734d ago
lol does it really matter? If you actually care about the differences between consoles, just buy a PC. You will be way happier.
AIndoria  +   734d ago
Yes it matters. There are people who'd rather play it on their couch instead of hurting their backs on a chair-desk.

Source: PC gamer. Don't be an elitist a-hole, you give us a bad name.
KazHiraiFTW  +   733d ago
lol you know how easy it is to play your PC on tv?

Step 1: Take an hdmi cable then insert into back of video card.

Step 2: Take other end of hdmi cable and insert into back of television.

Step 3: Enjoy any game you want in TRUE 1080p resolution and way better graphics and 60 fps while sitting your fat ass on a couch.
tee_bag242  +   733d ago
@ Alndoria

Stop with the excuses! If you don't know how to plug a HDMI cord from your PC into your TV, or a 360 pad to your PC... just say so.

Don't be a fool-elitist. You give us fools a bad name.
SonyPS4  +   734d ago
I am getting this on PC either way. Not going to settle for less than the true BF experience.
#6.3 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
The_HarryEtTubMan  +   733d ago
True. Playing BF3 for the first time on high-end PC for about 2 weeks, and it has a very big community and is like playing a different game than when playing it on consoles.
TheGreatGamer  +   734d ago
There won't be many compromises but the ps4 version is sure to have better graphics and won't drop frame rate as much as xbone
tordavis  +   734d ago
^ Armchair developer in the house!
andibandit  +   733d ago

but the pc version will just be soo much better than the ps4 version.

ahh youre right, bashing the competition feels good.
TheGreatGamer  +   733d ago
PC will obviously blow them both away only wished i had enough money to build a good one
Sony360  +   733d ago
The lesser of 2 inferior versions, and even that is speculation.

So far the only thing we know for sure is that the PC version is insanely superior.
#6.4.4 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
demonddel   734d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(1)
clmstr  +   734d ago
Well, this was to be expected.
ape007  +   734d ago
im no PC gamer, i havn't played on any pc more than 2 hourse except half life 2 and Doom 3 in 2004 (good ol days)

but PC will always edge out consoles
#9 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Eonjay  +   734d ago
PC version was running on dual 7990 GPU setups. The estimated price of the PC rig they used was $3000. So, it better look better on a super highend PC if you are going to spend that kind of money. If consoles were that expensive, the console gaming community would be much smaller.
CoLD FiRE  +   734d ago
But it would still run at 1080p 60fps on an old ass 5850. :\
Studio-YaMi  +   734d ago
No it won't,unless you lower the visuals or lower the res,stop spreading false info.
starchild  +   734d ago
Trust me, once it is optimized the system requirements won't be dramatically different than they were for Battlefield 3. I get a solid 60fps in Battlefield 3 on my overclocked HD 7950.
#10.2 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Kleptic  +   734d ago
yeah, i've read rumors that those crossfire'd rigs used for E3 and Gamescom were natively running the game maxed at something above 2k...at least for the networked press matches (not sure about the videos released to the press)...

So the test PC's used for that are not really anything to go on...a huge amount of that expense was simply in cooling as well, as conferences are notorious for temp control problems...

I'm waiting to see what happens with AMD's deal with EA...a number of radeon gpu's will ship with a full copy of BF4...along with a price cut/sale to a lot of them...Here's to hoping i can finally pick up a 7970 3gb ddr5 for under $300...i've been waiting since June, almost grabbed one for $304 on amazon, but then read about this bf4 deal coming...
theEx1Le  +   734d ago
@kleptic, getting my 7970 later this week for £180 :D. I'm sure it'll have no problem keeping up with BF4.
cyguration  +   733d ago

It was 4K and they were using "The Malta", that $1k dual-GPU that destroyed the Titan in the benchmarks.

But yeah, I agree, those conference setups are nothing to go by since you could get good results on a decent 7xxx brand from AMD.
tee_bag242  +   733d ago
Yes and they were playing it a 4k resolution and probably 120 fps. Did you forget that part ?
Niv  +   734d ago
Would u pay for more graphics? Start whining at an $600 ps4 with gtx780 on board.
Let this cycle run 5 years , the next gen wil arrive sooner than you think, especially ifxb1 sales are 40mill to ps4s 80mill.
Microsoft should pull the trigger first.
SonyPS4  +   734d ago
Oh the guy with a crystal ball...
#11.1 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
KwietStorm  +   734d ago
monkeyfox  +   734d ago
Yeah im sure it will look better... on a top of the range PC..

Alot of people running this game on their PCs however will not be able to match the quality of the new consoles im afraid..

Same old bullshit argument.. YES of course a £1000+ PC will look better than a £300 console... DUH...
tubers  +   733d ago
"Alot of people running this game on their PCs however will not be able to match the AFFORDABILITY and SIMPLICITY of the new consoles im afraid.."

That's really mostly it.

Experience/quality is more subjective.
pabadamus1  +   734d ago
Uh duh. Of course the PC version on ultra settings will be better than anything consoles can do. Before everyone starts burning Dice in effigy we should realize that we will get 60 F/S and 64 player matches...a first in console history for the franchise. The thing is I played BF3 on consoles and I was thoroughly entertained and impressed by the presentation. If BF4 is better than that and runs at a smoother, faster frame rate then bring it on.
barbarajtussey   734d ago | Spam
amnalehu  +   734d ago
In a year we will find out that it has nothing to do with console capability. I remember when the first Madden came out on PS3 and how they said that they were constrained by the systems "limitations" and you look at the current version and they are 10 times better. Seems like they are rushing this game.
TacticAce  +   734d ago
I think that DICE is purposely not doing the best they can from a graphical standpoint and feature standpoint because they want to add to the longevity of the franchise as much as they can without reaching a saturation point like COD. I believe that they actually have the capability to really have a feature rich and very good looking graphical game but since its the beginning of the console cycle they didnt give us everything yet. You guys need to wait a couple of years when these next gen games break off from current gen and are designed from the ground up for next gen hardware.
#16 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
theEx1Le  +   734d ago
Well if thats the case then it kinda sucks for PC guys. They will be maxing out essentially the same game as it released if they way you see it is true. For the record i also believe this is the case. They cant give you the best up front, because why would you buy the next one.
Khajiit86  +   734d ago
It will look better on pc... I will have more fun with it on PS4 because I will get to play with my friends unlike the pc where only 2 people I know could run the game at minima settings.
Albie360  +   734d ago
Get richer friends.
Khajiit86  +   734d ago
How old r u?
Majin-vegeta  +   733d ago
Some of us have bills and sh*t to pay and we don't ask for an allowance.
Pandamobile  +   733d ago
Lol, I think that's the opposite of what he means. Most of my friends didn't start PC gaming until they had jobs.

Gaming platforms are like cars. I'll probably offend some people with this analogy, but it's a lot more accurate than you'd think. What it boils down to is that consoles are your mid-class cars. The PS4 and Xbox One are like a 2013 Ford Focus. They get the job done, they have some cool features and they're pretty cheap for what you get.

PC's on the other hand range from your barely-functioning beaters to F1 race cars. You can get something similar to the Ford Focus and expect a similar level of performance out of it - or you can get a high performance luxury car with tons of extra features a lot of people wouldn't even miss.

Some people are willing to dish out some extra dough for a better experience.
#17.1.3 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report
Sony360  +   733d ago
So why does BF3, which is still pretty much the best looking game you can buy today, have the biggest community on the PC then?
Khajiit86  +   733d ago
So I should play where more people play and not where more people I know play?
stuff  +   734d ago
As usual I wonder how many here actually read the article:

"I try to remember what it looked like back then," Bach adds. "To me it's back then! It has come a long way. This is why I'm not completely sure on how to answer the question, because some people might not see the difference. When they look at it, [they'll say,] 'Yes, it looks exactly the same.' To me, I will see the difference because there are so many levels of fidelity that is for some people hard to spot. The experience will be very, very similar, but then what it is might not be the same."

He also talks about how he feels that PCs aren't even powerful enough to satisfy him. Some people are just hard to please.
Npugz7  +   734d ago
Either these next gen systems are weaker than expected if they are already maxing them out or Dice doesn't do a good job of ports!
tuglu_pati  +   734d ago
you know this is a launch tittle right?
illtownNJONE  +   734d ago
its a lauch title give 1 to 2 yrs consoles should be good by then
Ve_Chuy  +   734d ago
BEHOLD Pc the king of gaming world
AIndoria  +   734d ago
Behold another elitist idiot here to give us a bad name. Pipe down bro, pipe down. Let console gamers enjoy their game, just as we'd enjoy our own.
Underworld  +   734d ago
And I couldn't care less! How will I ever survive. The difference will be minuscule. And no, it won't look better on all pcs. I hate when people say "It looks better on pc" like everyone has the same top pc. There will be many people playing it on pcs that won't look as good as the console versions. All depends on what you have. Don't give this crap that it'll look 10x better on pc or will "destroy" the console version. All will look great! PC gamers have to be the most annoying fanboys. I and millions of others prefer consoles. We don't want to game on pcs! Get over yourselves.
Ve_Chuy  +   734d ago
No matter what console gamers says pc is the king of gaming and everybody knows that. Best graphics, best games, best exclusives, Best tournaments, Mods, Cheaper, Awesome Free to play games: Dota 2, Hon, LoL, Hawken, Mechwarrior, Warframe, Warface, Runescape,
Star Wars The Old Republic, Tf2, Path of Exile, Tribes Ascend, Smite and many many more !!FREEEE!!, i prefer spend 5000$ on a PC and enjoy all his advantages as gaming platform, and guess what is Cheaper play on pc look this insane deal 10 AAA games for 5$ https://www.humblebundle.co... you cant find something like this on consoles, and remember is a PC that does so much more things than play games, so tell me a reason to play on consoles if you can play of pc? the truth hurts common let the disagrees roll
#22.1 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
Underworld  +   733d ago
Oh God. Yes, we all know the best pcs have better graphics and are more powerful. PC gamers don't need to act like pricks though. I spend a lot of time on pc browsing the net and doing work, I don't want to game on it too. I like my consoles. Cheaper and far easier to use. Best games? Lol. PC has hardly any games I want to play, and I prefer the console exclusives. And I don't like mouse & keyboard. You want to spend $5000 on a pc. Good for you, bud. I don't!

I swear pc gamers just can't stand people not liking pc too.
#22.1.1 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(7) | Report
Sony360  +   733d ago

A lot of console fanboys are just as prickish and snobby.

Ps3 fantards were the worst this generation.
DaGR8JIBRALTAR  +   733d ago
wish hawken was f2p on the ps4. hell, i'd even pay to play it!
jlo  +   734d ago
BF3 was a very well optimised game. You don't need a beastly rig to run it at 1080p 60fs, probably the same for BF4

They've shown them on two 7970s, because they were early builds and also running at resolutions beyond 1080p
KontryBoy706  +   734d ago
Now people want to say, "well duh of course it would look better on PC". A few weeks ago I read several people saying "oh these consoles are going to be just as good as PCs... take that PC master race". "Oh, the PS4 is very powerful... powerful enough to run games in 1080p 60fps and look like a maxed out PC". People really need to pipe down and expect more of these "cuts and compromises" in the coming years. Don't expect a $400/$500 console to be a gaming PC. It's just not going to happen. The media is the blame for hyping everyone up for no reason, now people expect these consoles to be just as good as a gaming rig. Not so. Don't you guys know a PC GPU is half the size of the PS4/XB1? I believe we will see more info in the coming months/years of games with more "cuts and compromises".
#24 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
voodoogts  +   734d ago
30fps and 720p is not nexgen. That's ps3 and 360. These nexgen console better be 1080p 60fps
Pandamobile  +   733d ago
Your expectations of "next-gen" might be a little unrealistic there, friend.
PeaceKeeper   733d ago | Spam
KontryBoy706  +   733d ago
Well PeaceKeeper... this current gen had PLEANTY of games that weren't actually 720p... they were sub 720p. AKA weak ass consoles.
Sony360  +   733d ago
FPS and resolution isn't what makes a game next gen.

We had 60 fps games on the dreamcast, but look at them today.
#25.3 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
hollabox  +   734d ago
Getting BF4 on the PC as usual, I just hope AMD next GPU is out by then. My Nvidia GTX 670 is starting to struggle in games with full effects and AA.
#26 (Edited 734d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Locknuts  +   734d ago
I think 60fps is the most important thing. Definitely more important than resolution and even more important than 64 players.
Asuka  +   733d ago
honestly once the game is fully optimized you should be able to run this game on high settings @1080p >60fps on a $600 pc no problem. 1440p and beyond is a different story. People like to bring up those demo kits using 7990s and say that you would have to spend ~$3000 just so you can play the game. but thats only if you play on gaming with multiple monitors and/or >1440p. Most people are probably not going to play @1440p or beyond, so 1080p@60fps for about ~$600 is reasonable. its still more expensive than a console, but you get a pc out of it.

the consoles are nice however. The graphical settings shouldnt be too much different, probably medium~high settings when compared to pc with slightly lower textures, but you wont notice the difference anyway @1080p. not enough pixels being rendered to care.
esemce  +   733d ago
The game will be 720p@60fps maybe 1360x786 and up scaled to 1080p but it will not be native 1080p@60fps.
kingPoS  +   733d ago
How in the world did gt5 ever mange 1280 x 1080 @ 60fps. Come to think of it.. that was years ago. Lets talk about the engineered consoles of the next generation and what they can do.

I usually reserve judgment for the final product... do you?
#29.1 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
lunatic0001  +   733d ago
dont care if it looks like shit compared to pc...just give me 64 player matches and a smooth 60fps and im good :) only problem i have is for what next gen console i should get this for????
Majin-vegeta  +   733d ago
The one all your friends are gonna be on.For me it's PS4.
lunatic0001  +   733d ago
thats the problem it used to be that everyone would be on xbox but it seem everyone is split between next gen consoles
Albie360  +   733d ago
I so not understand your problem? Ps4 all the way.
DaGR8JIBRALTAR  +   733d ago
just get both...problem solved.
PFFT  +   733d ago
I think this is a very bad place for you to be asking which system will be right for you. You should do a bit more research on each respected system. Price point (IF price point isnt a issue then we can scratch that one off), games so on and so forth. I for one will be buying the Xbox One come launch day BUT i do plan on getting a PS4 at a later date since like you i will have friends on both sides. And well KZ and Second Son look to freaking bad ass to let them pass.
#30.3 (Edited 733d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
lunatic0001  +   732d ago
i never asked which system should i get...if everything goes well ill be having them both by the end of this year im still debating what system should i get bf4 for....its a hard decision this time because i always got the 360 versions last gen because of my friends but this next gen is gonna be tough since some are getting ps4 and some xb1.... stupid friends of mine
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Here’s Some More Rainbow Six Siege Multiplayer Action

13m ago - SegmentNext - We have some more Rainbow Six Siege multiplayer gameplay for you all. It’s around 1... | PC

Splatoon Update 2.1.0 To Launch This Week, Tweaks and Fixes Included

29m ago - GS:" Splatoon, the third person shooter developed by Nintendo now available in all regions exclus... | Wii U

The Wii U Games You Need to Play in August

Now - Let's take a look at what Nintendo will be offering throughout the month. | Promoted post

Masquerada: A Story-Based Tactical RPG in Dragon Age's Off-Season | USGamer

31m ago - USGamer: The problem with conventions is there's a lot of games to play and your time is rather... | PC

Check In, Knock Out: How Convention Hotel Space Should Be Handled | USGamer

31m ago - USG: My trip to PAX Prime 2015 was a last minute affair. I booked my hotel and travel around two... | PC

Timespinner: I Can't Hate On Another Indie Metroidvania | USGamer

31m ago - USGamer: With the proliferation of indie development, I feel like I've seen an increase in one g... | PC