The public beta for Battlefield Hardline will go live in roughly 24 hours, but the developers are yet to confirm whether the latest iteration in the Battlefield franchise will run at 1080p and 60 FPS on Xbox One and PS4.
Just give me a smooth 60 frame-rate because if it is horrible like the last beta of this game then I'm not buying it even when it goes to the dollar bin.
I'm not too bothered if a game isn't 1080p this gen since the PS4 & XBO do a pretty good job of upscaling from lower resolutions. I'd be happy if all games ran at 720p with a stable 60fps this gen.
Personally I find that unacceptable for this gen. I dont need every game 1080p/60fps, but I expected more from this gen to be honest. There is still time to unlock each consoles potential, but to lay back and say 720p is good enough is something Im not willing to do.
I don't mind 720p games at all if they look good and the devs use tricks to eliminate some of the problems with the "lowered" resolution. I have the Xbox One Battlefield 4 and the jaggies can be terrifying in some places. Honestly, the Hardline beta looks about the same as BF4, which isn't great.
Until you realize even the PS2 could output [email protected]
Listen it's not going to run at 1080p @ 60 fps.. it's not going to happen. (it's using the same BF4 engine) -Also I find it funny when gamers ask for this, because those same people couldn't tell if BF4 ran at 1080p/60 without looking it up on the internet... LoL (which just means you should just be worried about if it plays good) Visceral needs to fix the shooting mechanics, get it working like Bad Company 2, because at the end of the day if they can't fix that, no one is buying the game anyway... So it won't matter if it's running at 720, 900p or 4k.. .____........___... .____||......||.......|___|| ||.........___||............ ||
it will be very interesting to see if Viceral lied to the world that BF hardline will be 60 fps and 1080p and they said that at last year for Sony's press conference.
Beta ran smooth last night on XB1 and looked slightly better in terms of graphics than BF4. Nothing drastic though, just slight upgrade.
The game graphically looks worse than BF4 so you'd think it'd be wasy to hit 1080p :/
"looked slightly better in terms of graphics than BF4." vs "The game graphically looks worse than BF4" Fight! I downloaded the beta but once you start it has to download more. The Planetside 2 beta servers are about to go live for the evening and I'm hooked on that so BF:H will have to wait. Maybe I'll check it out tomorrow.
even this game looking worse what battlefield 4 and can't reatch 1080p in consoles.
You've seen the final version of Hardline side-by-side with BF4? Cool can i borrow your time machine?
Back off, I had dibs.
Calm down dudebro, it's a time machine. Conventional laws of queuing do not apply. But just in case it has several seats... Shotgun!
Was the coment necessary ^^? You know damn well these consoles aren't powerful enough.
Still wish Visceral didn't get stuck making BF games. I wanted their Jack the Ripper title.
Well just take advantage of each systems hardware. That is all.
Gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you aren't referring to Kinect head tracking, or the controller light bar flashing red when you have low health?
Of course not, it's just easier to say take advantage of each platforms hardware and not take into account, time, money management, the fact that each platform has yet to do a game like this in 1080p AND 60fps and all other factors that play into a game of this scope. But I am glad that more people are starting to realize this, because in the beginning all you read from people was "parity, parity, parity!!". People have to realize that third party companies just can't do all the things they want their game to do on these new consoles at 1080p AND 60fps. Not yet at least.
PS4 camera has head tracking also, so that doesn't really apply to what he said.
That would be fine as well but I was actually referring to the hardware of the actual console if you know what I mean. Basically the ram, CPU and GPU for the most part. @red_gansta They should spend the most time on the version that will sell the most and the least amount of time on the version that will sell the least. That's a good way to plan a budget.
IMO if a consoles video chip is capable of 1080p output and a game doesn't run 1080p/60 then the developers are doing things wrong. Resolution and frame rate should always be prioritized over graphical detail. If the game isn't able to run 1080p/60 then the devs are putting in more graphical detail than the system is practically capable of.
I'd rather have a more vibrant lively world filled with foliage and things to do instead of 1080p/60fps. More stuff going on in the world means less Ps. Typically they can still nail 60fps but even if it's locked at 30 I'm ok with that. I knew the graphical jump from 360/ps3 to new consoles wasn't going to be as crazy as the ps2 to ps3 Era.
More graphical fidelity is a lot easier to see than a resolution or frame rate. I want the most realistic looking games possible. You can play a game at 4K and still have crappy graphics.
Graphics are irrelivant, gameplay is what matters. I would rather have the visual clarity of 1080p and the performance of 60fps over pointless graphical detail. @Vallencer: Graphical detail isn't needed for a game to be vibrant, that is all about artistic style. Just make the game cell shaded and use lots of bright over saturated colors.
I think people were expecting far too much from there £350 console, it isn't a super computer you get what you pay for.
Lol, some of these people seem to think when they pay 300~400 for a console they will get a 1080p 60fps locked experience, this generation has bred a bunch of drama queens and gamers in denial, my opinion would be totally different if i paid 700 or 800 quid for my X1 or PS4, but i didn't from the start i knew i was buying limited hardware, i sense a lot more salt incoming from the rez tribe.
MGS Ground Zeroes is 1080p/60fps as well as open world on the PS4 and runs without a single frame rate drop and looks better then this.. So much for not getting a 1080p/60fps experience on a $400 console. At least know what you're talking about when you open your mouth, now be quiet while us grown folks talk.
All real gamers ask for is a stable experience, you will do what's right visceral, if people keep demanding 1080p all while potentially breaking our gaming experiences i say jog on, go buy a PC if resolution is all you care about. capiche?! 60fps 720p will do visceral!, cheers! **** the resolution fanatics.
Since when did people begin to think that the display resolution is the only thing that takes up system resources, hmm? Simply lowering the resolution won't magically make your game run at 60fps all of a sudden... Smh. It depends on what the game itself is doing at any given time, and what the developers are trying to achieve in said game.
As a console gamer AND a PC gamer, this is flat out untrue. As a gamer I care about FPS, resolution, AND graphical fidelity. But not just that, also control options. With PC you get to make a choice based on how much you are willing to spend. I can play 1080p/120 on Battlefield 4, or I can go for 1440p/80, or 1800/52...all on a $329 videocard. Or I can play on PS4, use my controller, and play 900/35-60. It looks like CRAP compared to higher settings, resolution, and framerate, but I enjoy it more since I can wax people using a controller on PS4, whereas it's hard to get to 1.0 K/D ratio using a gung-ho rush style with a controller against KB+mouse on PC. So FPS, I tend to go with console, but going from 120 or even 136 FPS down to 35-60 is a BIG difference. But for many other genres I'll go with PC, if possible, because it'll give me those options, and generally can be had for cheaper. A $600 PS3 would literally cost $1000 today when you take REAL inflation into account (not the goal-seeked fakery that says it's only 2 percent). If that's the case the $1.29-2.99 steak from 10-15 years ago would be 20-30 percent more expensive, not the 300-400 percent like it is. So given that, we're basically paying 1/2 or LESS then we did in 2005-2006, even if nominally the price is less of a discount then that. People shouldn't expect top end performance with such a cheap system, of course cheap is relative and hard to find in a depression, so you have that to factor in. Plus you have the fact that developers like to lie to themselves. 60 FPS is better then 30. 120 FPS is better then 60. 4k is better then 1080p. Just like 900p is better then 720p. Higher graphical settings is better then lower. The key point is, many developers don't know WHAT MIX to use for their game. Some also waste resources on games. You see, not all fidelity is equal. There are some options that will cut 10-15 frames per second but don't add that much fidelity. So many of these 30 FPS games, could be 60FPS with almost no cutbacks to fidelity, except 1-2-3 settings being turned off, that these idiots want on, even though it adds little and costs alot. So people are really complaining to how inefficient the DEVELOPERS are, and in turn the developers again, choose to baffle the public with BS about 30 being CINEMATIC and crap like that. They could tell us the truth, they could make better decisions, they can actually try to fix games and optimize them BEFORE releasing, but they make excuses. It can also be other factors, like say the engine you use. As each engine has pros and cons. Perhaps they should of used another one, because it would have fulfilled their vision better, but they went with the cheaper one, or the one that suits the talents of their personnel but they failed to account for that versus their lofty goals. It's complicated, but your comment just simply glosses over all of that, and is therefore incorrect. Good luck though.
Let's all just have crappy, poorly detailed games as long as they're 1080p60fps because that's more important, isn't it? Right?... Guys?... Oh wait it isn't so stfu. Here's an idea, enjoy the games that hard working developers create for us to enjoy. No issues with a locked 30fps game EVER btw. Also, 99% of PS4 games run in native 1080p resolution, just saying. Along with having slightly better graphical fidelity and frame rates on multi-platform games than it's console competition.
I played this morning on the x1 and the game looks great. I don't mind if they Keep it at whatever resolution on it is now because it runs great!
just to throw this in..... I plugged and old Bravia 32" lcd into pc to see how battlefield 4 looked....with the increased screen size 32" v 22" and running all setting on ultra with the lcd native 720p it looked miles better tbh I normally run on 1080p with low/mid settings it's pretty interesting to see what they will do, as it's mainly multiplayer I would actually want 900p tbh due to being smootherbonline
Pretty hard to believe Visceral hasn't made any headway on either of these systems to improve the final engine product.
after bf4 i think i will just wait for the five that maybe debut on next year or so the last piece of premium dlc was a joke, poor graphics with awful jaggies booring maps and really uninspired, also they re introduced that late the crashes from launch (at least one crash per play) bf this time is a huge let down so i pass this
the xbox one line there saids it all. :/
Really don't care if it were 720, 792 ,900 or 1080, just give me a game that is fun , has great replay value. Do that am set day one.
I`m more concerned with the cartoony look and feel to the beta . Maybe on release there is a HD graphic boost on PS4 . Hope so .
I want everybody to try to figure out what resolution the BF Hardline beta is playing at. Without having to look it up.
It's gotta be 1080p on PS4 and look like thr pc version on ultra because we all know how powerful PS4 is. Edit: Uh oh, it isn't? But i was told...
You'll get disagrees for saying that. Because most people can't tell. I have no clue actually, but Heist game mode is a lot of fun
I know the disagrees will pile. But yea the Heist game mode is a lot of fun.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.