Are DICE's new standards for visuals significant enough to offset lower resolutions?
Looks like the consoles hold up quite well
Because DICE took the BF4 engine, shrunk the maps and put less players on them for the sake of "balanced gameplay", which is a cover up for "the consoles cant handle big maps and battles." Because BF4 ran like crap on consoles, and PC suffered for it. The ONLY reason this game runs and looks well is because there are less players and vehicles, and the maps are small. It's not hard - if you have less horsepower, you render less objects to get better performance. Wake up.
So the devs are working within defined parameters to make sure everybody gets the same smooth experience............ something they could never do with a PC version due to the ridiculous amount of configurations to take into account. Sometimes less is more, I'm sure all devs would prefer it every PC gamer used the same GPU, graphics card, motherboard and memory setup.
No it doesn't. But every gen we need something to argue about and this gen it's 1080p vs 900p Maybe I am noob but even last gen when so many 3rd party games looked better on xbox360, I still had awesome experiences on ps3. When we are playing a game can we really tell the difference with naked eye between 1080p and 900p? And this is coming from a Ps4 fan I just don't get all the fuss or pixels. Anything over 720p imo now a days is good enough
Quote : When we are playing a game can we really tell the difference with naked eye between 1080p and 900p? And this is coming from a Ps4 fan ... I can see the difference on my TV. Battlefront has damn good IQ on PS4 even at 900p thanks to the great AA solution. But i noticed some blurriness. Well, not everybody can notice resolution difference.
Are you sure the blurriness is the resolution? Blur could be attributed to the heavy use of post processing AA, or texture filtering... I find my 4K TV handles 720p TV feeds reasonably well. No blurring or jagged lines, and the people can look quite lifelike :) I'm not saying resolution doesn't make a difference (I have 2 4k gaming PCs, my wife would rip my nuts off if I said those were a waste of money), but there are many other factors that go into image quality.
shit.. you guys are rich yo.
lol no, not rich. Just spend too much of the money I do have on this hobby.
For me, its simple. Console owners want the best performance from their hardware. Pc owners want the best performance from their hardware. Why should one set care but the other not. Some people dont get that some can tell the difference. To them it matters, to others it doesn't, each to their own but anyone who states they wouldn't want improvements as long as it wasn't to the detriment of performance is lying through their teeth Differences were highlighted last gen even though the resolution differences were smaller. If it mattered to you last gen, it should matter this gen. If it didn't matter to you last gen then fair enough...you can't be labelled a hypocrite. I don't understand those who now claim they can't see a difference yet were quite vocal last gen about multiplat superiority due to graphical disparities. Nobody's fooled. I guess some don't understand the idiom about reaping what they sowed.
So much emphasis is placed on resolution, just because it is easily defined and measurable. There are many other factors that go into image quality as well. That more nebulous term almost invariably favours the PS4 as well, and yes it makes sense for Digital Foundry and co to do their analysis. The lower resolution on consoles matters, and seems to be the main thing separating versions here. But Xbox fans in particular should be pleased this game doesn't look as sore on the eyes as Battlefield Hardline, despite running at the same resolution. Hardline is so ugly it seriously impacts enjoyment of the game imo. With Battlefront I think it really stands to highlight how important other factors like AA are, when compared to the console Battlefield games. That's just more interesting than another affirmation that 900p looks better than 720p. I'd still buy the PS4 version if I was planning to play this on a console.
yeah, definitely other factors, both visual and back end and its why I'm careful in saying as long as their isn't any detriment to performance...Ill add in relation to its competitors. I also dont like that spin some use to downplay the the fact that one console performs better than the other and that people, like last gen, wanted the best their machine could muster.... sounds like 'If you wanted a fast car you should of bought a porsche GT'.... Well I would love a porsche but I can't afford one plus I have 2 kids so its 2 seats aren't practical but my M5 isnt a slouch and I can fit my family in...... They know who they are;)
I'm just gonna click agree to that, and hope that your family do know who they are lol.
Some games it may matter. The fact that Battlefront is 720p on XBOX, I can genuinely see and tell the difference.
But you dont even have an xbox one so how can your words have any credit? Ive actually played the it on xb1 and it looks really good. High resolution textures exactly the same as ps4 the only difference is slightly lower resolution and due to all the effects in place its actually a really clear image even more so than black ops 3 which is running a higher res than battlefront. Resolution isnt everything and even then xb1 has an upscaler chip to enhance the final image up to 1080p so its really not a big deal.
looks great in 900p
They both look like my childhood video game dream come alive.
If your blind as a bat or play on a tiny TV sitting and squinting at what's going on. Then no.
I played the beta on a high end PC and a PS4, I think it looked great on both and my PS4 copy is on its way to me now.
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.