Battlefield 4 - Review 8.0 - KEEP IT HERE

As a graphics whore myself this thread is absolutely disgusting.

*hits back button in disgust*

this times a million.

Because they're cross generational games and shouldn't be used to represent "true next gen experiences"

Leave that up to something like Killzone which is solely on one piece of next gen hardware to see what it's capable of right now. Plus it will get better in time

@princeofshapeir: I played a bit on ultra and there is definitely an increase in quality, especially with the textures. However it's far too taxing on my machine to make it worthwhile. I need a new GPU. My 2x 570s can't do it anymore :(.

@Jebus213: Where have I said any of that here? When discussing Battlefield 3 many people, including yourself, continued to bash the game on the basis it's not BF2 reskinned. Especially since BF2 is incredibly overrated due to nostalgia glasses. That got annoying after 2 years.

The game really does cross the uncanny valley at times. The lighting is superb

@seanmcloughlin: When I finally get a new GPU I hope to run the game on ultra settings at 200% supersampleing. A lot of the graphical issues I see are just due to aliasing and stuff that would be completely ironed out with a higher resolution downsampled.

Console gaming - The battle for second best rages on.

The picture with the birds in the scrap yard, look in the upper left corner lol. Why do it looks so ugly. Looks like ps2 era textures for the Xbone. Is it supposed to look like that?

You have a 670 GTX, right?

How's the performance on ultra?

Just had my first game on Lancang Dam, this game is ridiculous looking, even more so when you factor in it being a 64 player map.

Loving the Test Range aswell, really nice addition.

@Wasdie: I actually prefer multisampling AA + morphological AA over supersampling. Not only do edges look much smoother, but the combo runs better than SSAA, too...

In other words: meh.

Based only on single player, framerate hovers around 45-60 FPS for me, probably 50-55 average. The lowest I've seen it go is 32. Ultra settings include 4x MSAA so I imagine that eats some frames.

On the whole I think it's optimized well considering the visual quality. As a point of reference, for me, BF3 on Ultra ran at 60+ FPS constantly.

The guy who posted that gif on GAF has two Titans and is playing at something like a 5000xsomething resolution and downsampling it. It's crazy, he's only getting like 15-35 fps lol

I really want to get the new AMD cards cos they're stronger and cheaper than a Titan but they run like 90C which is hot as HELL! I wanna see what Mantle offers though. You're a tech software guy, do you think Mantle will be worth it/make a difference? I've always been team green but am considering crossing over for next gen.

An 8.0 is far from "meh"

I hate how system wars reacts to scores these days. Anything below a 9.0 seems to just be considered as bad

I'll probably pick this up on PC.

also...THE KING IS BACK.

the king?

@lostrib:

Lol this Is I think the 4th time I've seen a cow try to claim ownage with comparison shots and they look better on the One.

Still waiting to find one comparison shot that looks better than the XOne.

@greensand24: but they don't lol. Ps4 version do look better.

If you're referring to yourself then I have some bad news cos I don't know who you are lol

He could be referring to the ps4's superior performance.

Who knows?

I think AMD is gonna be in a sweet position this next gen. With mantle and the next systems being fully AMD as well. And for BF4, it's an AMD sponsored game/engine. My 7970 is tearing it up like it's nothing

Hopefully by the time I need/want a new GPU, mantle will be fully implemented and be able to say for sure if AMD has an advantage in games

That 290x looks really tempting, especially since I have a fairly nice nvidia card already that I could devote to physx.

I think I'm waiting for a better cooler placed on it by a 3rd party and maybe a little bit more of a price drop.

lol 9s. Anything that doesn't win GOTY is simply not worth playing.

I only play one game per year BTW.

unless you find hacked drivers, you can not use an NVIDIA card for physx alongside a AMD GPU

I thought for sure you could, that's a pretty big bummer then.

That's what I'm thinking. AMD seems to be where it's at right now price:performance wise

hacked drivers being the key words there, but it does work. And physx is usually really dumb anyways.....Borderlands 2 is the only one that does it good enough to be worth it, and it runs great without nvidia anyways

I just hope it's less pronounced this gen or AMD has a counter for it.

I just hate missing out on that kind of stuff.

Xbox One version looks better than the PS4 version in those comparisons.

I'll be picking it up, like how they added the sandbox island for MP just to dick around. I'm not holding my breath for the SP though. BF3 had an awful campaign which almost makes me want to tell them to forget it all together or actually put forth a decent effort.

My guess with these screenshots is that the PS4 is using a much more aggressive form of post-process AA, and therefore the textures get blurrier.

Same happens with the PC version, if you use Post AA it completely blurs the nice textures and makes it look like shit.

This can be alleviated by upping the sharpness on your TV, and similar filters.

The XO has horrible aliasing, probably because the AA method (if used at all) is not as strong as on the PS4, which in turns benefits textures, but does a shitty job on jaggies. Aliasing is something a TV won't fix, you'll actually need to disable some filters (edge sharpening) to make it look not as crappy.

It seems to have a higher contrast crushing the blacks but also making certain elemts POP a bit more giving the illusion of looking better.

Like so many mods for PC games just up the contrast to stupid levels and people say it looks better

@TheTruthIsREAL:

@greensand24: "but they don't lol. Ps4 version do look better."

Then show me one. I've even gone to sites other than DF and AT WORST for the XOne both versions look the same.

In other words I've either seen shots that look better on the XOne or they look the same.

And I'm not the only one. Oh and lol at fanboys trying to explain it away and spin with terms such as artificial sharpening....WTF?

@seanmcloughlin:

The illusion of looking better? What the hell does that even mean lol? It either looks good or it doesn't. Why are you over complicating things?

I was gonna give a proper reply to this but searching through your previous posts it would seem you have a strong bias towards the Xbox so I'm not even gonna bother now because you would come up with some reason why I'm wrong

Oh and I finally finished downloading the game and played the first two SP missions.... holy god it's the best looking game I've ever seen. And that's saying a lot cos Metro LL and Crysis 3 look amazing

Jesus, how slow is your internet? didn't you start it like yesterday?

VERY damn slow, started on monday and was getting 150KB/s almost constant. Sometimes it went to 400

Only played a wee bit, but SP already seems like a significant improvement over BF3. Intro is alright storytelling, ok use of licensed song, you can sort of spot people and sort of have your squad help, gather weapons like in BC and at least that one section was more freeform, like BC. Hope the whole rest of the game is like that, but I hear it isn't. Has a scoring system, which I guess is a good thing. Although with a gameism like that it seems they'll trip themselves and fall on the cake they wanna eat with the emotional bondage. Getting control taken away is so damned trite. For as little as I've played, it feels like I've only actually played like half of it.

MP is very more of the same so far. There are improvements, tweaks, intricacies and big things like Commander, but the overall feel of most everything is super familiar if you've played BF3 for some amount of recent time. Don't know how long I'll stick by this one honestly. Hopefully other maps are more alluring than Shanghai, which is the only one I've played so far. Or maybe I'll get into Obliteration. Or the aforementioned Commander position. Not throwing the towel in this early.

The first map I joined was actually Operation Locker. After seeing the spawn screen and then spawning and playing for 30 seconds I'll say **** you people who kept playing Metro. Look what you did, you utter turds. So I quit that one.

Locker is a better map than Metro

Well obviously. How could anything possibly match or exceed its putrid awfulness?

Benchmarks out

well they are remaking it for DLC...

40 FPS at ultra 1600p.

Consoles can suck it.

Really tempted to upgrade my GPU for the MP. Single Player runs maxed out at 60 almost constant so far but the MP is gonna be another story completely and because the game looks so good I wanna be playing on higher settings. Normally I play on all low in MP just to get near 144 fps for my monitor