1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Battlefield 4 showcased in 17-minute gameplay trailer

By Shawn Knight ยท 50 replies
Mar 27, 2013
Post New Reply

    NTAPRO TS Evangelist Posts: 809   +102

    Oh no, but I thought EA made crappy games? Lol
    I think the iron sight next to a scope was done in either MW3 or BF3. Don't remember what gun but I'm sure I saw it
  2. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    The hybrid sight isnt a new thing. I think it made its debut in COD MW3. The only other time I saw it was in MOH:W. I think Arma may have had it also

    IAMTHESTIG TS Evangelist Posts: 1,155   +395

    40mm grenades aren't that big. I think the animation is the soldier loading two at once. That's a big rotation of the cylinder after loading (two) rounds.
  4. Skidmarksdeluxe

    Skidmarksdeluxe TS Evangelist Posts: 8,001   +2,885

    "EA" & "games/gaming/gamer" don't belong in the same sentence.
  5. bielius

    bielius TS Addict Posts: 213   +17

    Iron sights next to a scope is in Arma 2, been there the whole time.
  6. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 1,916   +595

    Touche. But definitely not BF3.

    Maybe I should of said I've never seen it done in a game I've wanted to play before.
  7. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 1,916   +595

    ^Read above.
  8. TS-56336

    TS-56336 TS Addict Posts: 609   +109

    I was mighty impressed by the trailer, BUT I am not sure whether to call it BF4. It looked like a heavily modified BF3 with a lot more polish and post-processing FX, I loved the attention to details (splashes of water under feet, bullet sparks and explosions), however I am pretty sure all of this will greatly affect performance (64 man carnage).

    Its up to DICE to get BF4 heavily optimized for PC and make sure it still is THE platform of choice.
  9. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 1,916   +595

    There is no problem with 64 players with BF3, so why would a game you don't think is worthy of the BF4 name, be any more demanding than that, and cause DICE trouble optimizing it? It seemed to run pretty frickin smooth in the demo.

    They demo'd the game with an AMD 7990 (rumour?), so PC is still the focus. And if you look at the pre-order page at the bottom, the PC copy is in front of the Xbox version which is in front of the PS3 version.
  10. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,044   +793

    I think he means that the graphics will affect performance, to be fair, I'm currently using an Nvidia GTX 285 and 64 player maps (with 64 players playing) so lower the framerate considerably in medium to high settings (DX10 obviously).

    Just because the pre-orders are in that order doesn't mean they are exactly done by importance / sale numbers, I thought the PS3 version sold more than the Xbox version anyway :/ could be wrong though. Although I really do hope the concentrate on the PC version this time round, when BF3 came out the PC version had way to many bugs to the point I wasn't able to play it for longer than 30 minutes for the first 2 months, some bug which caused the whole screen to go black and never recover right in the middle of a game.

    Anyway, the demo is going to be smooth, have you checked your framerates in the BF3 campaign? silky smooth as well even on relatively low end cards (650ti as an example) but the multiplayer does get hit hard performance wise on the same card.

    IAMTHESTIG TS Evangelist Posts: 1,155   +395

    I dont see why you guys want new sound and animations so bad? I understand new vehicles and weapons though. the animation and sounds are excellent in BF3. this is the first BF where all the reloading animations are accurate I think, or at least very close. The running and vaulting animations look pretty good as well. I dont see a need for new ones. And why new sounds? More sounds... sure, but no need to change existing ones for weapons. But new weapons and anything new should have new sounds and animations.
  12. Sorry friend but that was in medal of honor warfighter
  13. Waros

    Waros TS Rookie Posts: 18

    Character modelling looks far better than bf3...bf3 characters and faces looks like 2d garbage[​IMG]
  14. All I want is BF1942 in these graphics! Make it happen EA and I will gladly buy the "Gold Megga Gamer Edition" or whatever the hell you decide to call it.
  15. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 1,916   +595

    I know what he meant, and that ancient GTX 285 of yours needs to be put down!

    Considering the demo was done on a PC surely shows where DICE focus is still at. Sales do not concern me. DICE is simply catering to their longtime fans and show them that they still have the passion to make the game DICE wants to make, and not one that is just good enough for everyone. BFBC2 and BF3 surely showed that. I was lucky I guess and had no launch day gamebreaking bugs. Only the glitches annoyed me. ie: M26 Dart and the M16A3 dominance.

    The demo they showed was smooth. I could find no fault with the framerate or textures.

    I haven't directly compared BF3 SP and MP performance, but I do know my 7870 GHz Ed @ 1100/1300 can easily do Ultra with no AA @ 1080p in the MP portion of the game, though I did drop it down to Medium w/2xAA to help with input lag.

    See you on the Battlefield!
  16. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    I will wait till the Alpha/Beta to see if I will preorder. I don't get what the Premium junk includes. I really wish they made BF4 a bit more different then BF3. Maybe like 80 players? I just hope they bring back maps with better graphics (already amazing).
  17. Bannhammer

    Bannhammer TS Rookie Posts: 21

    Anyone remember how ea said they didnt want dice to become a 'battlefield factory' lol, $60 dlc, another ea clone game.
  18. NTAPRO

    NTAPRO TS Evangelist Posts: 809   +102

    I remember how battle field 3 sold millions of copies. At least it's obvious work is being put into the game with the 3 years it's been in development. I used to think people actually had a point when they said CoD games was released every year, but I've noticed that in the Black Ops and modern watfare separate sub series, the games were actually produced every 2 years from each other. I've never really understood how there can't be obvious similarities to previous games when using the same base engines. If it's a huge success, odds are there's going to be a next one. Regardless of clones or not, it's obvious more people enjoy the game than those that don't.
  19. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    People thought BF3 would be Bad Company 3.
  20. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,044   +793

    I would normally agree but you'd be surprised just how many games it still can run at full with absolutely no problem, I'm currently going through the Mass Effect Series with no Problem, Borderlands series, Runs absolutely fine at full, Bioshock series again seem to run absolutely fine even with the graphics cranked right up.

    But of course things like Battlefield (or pretty much any game using DX11) cannot be cranked up and usually are a little too much to be run at full, but hell on a graphics card that old I'm still severely impressed with how well its aged.
  21. avoidz

    avoidz TS Guru Posts: 460   +55

    The graphics look very nice. But is this just another corridor shooter?
  22. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Basically lol.

    Burty, what frames are you getting? Also arent those all DX9 titles for the most part? Mass Effect 3 may be DX11. But that all aside, the GTX 285 only does DX 10 at most if I am not mistaken, so that basically allows for you to run at max settings.
  23. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,044   +793

    Exactly! Now in Battlefield 3 I can actually see the difference between using DX10 and DX11 modes, but pretty much all half decent games in the last 10 years have been DX9 or DX10, only very few games seem to actually use DX11 and all of those games have a DX10 mode which runs rather well on the GTX 285. I also really struggle to tell any difference.

    In BF3 I have the settings on Auto which seems to set Texture Quality to High and everything else to medium, Anti-aliasing deferred to off, motion blur off and Ambient occlusion to SSAO, oh and Anisotropic filter to 4x
    I also have v-sync on.

    currently running on a Q6600 overclocked to 3.2Ghz, 6GB DDR2 Ram and a Western Digital Black 640GB drive.

    I don't seem to drop below 28fps, and it only gets that low when on a big 64 player map and things have just turned hectic and buildings are falling down all over the place etc...

    Pretty crap compared to what I did have, but I'm still mightily impressed with how well it copes with the latest and greatest :)
  24. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    DX 10 was a failure, barely any games adopted it.
  25. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,044   +793

    That's the same with DX11, its not really anyone's fault other than Console development and publishers/developers not willing to take the time/resources to add so much extra graphical muscle to the PC version of their games.

    I was actually surprised to see the list of DX10 games released was just as large as DX11 titles:

    DX10 also had some great titles, Original Crysis (which personally felt like the only decent game so far in the series) Company of Heroes was a massive hit, original Assassins Creed as well as Bioshock 1 and 2 also had DX10 support.

    I wouldn't necessarily say DX10 was a "failure" more short lived :)

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...