Anyone excited for Battlefield 4?

phoeneous

chrisone wrote: »

excited more for the ps4 than I am for BF4. However , yes i am excited too for BF4. I am not playing it or buying it until i get my PS4 though.

Consoles. meh. You can't play an fps on console, I don't care what anyone says.

SteveLord

BF4 looks exactly the same as 3. But gamers will throw money at it over and over, encouraging this. See Call of Duty.

chrisone

Not sure why some of you are downplaying the PS4 or XBOX. They are claiming 60fps, while your PC's would not get that good of performance unless you had a beast rig that you made for 1500-2000 grand. I have a macbook pro retina, beast of a machine, and i know by experience i cannot run BF3 at full blast settings at high resolution. No way in hell i run BF4 at 60 fps on decent settings. Stop before i hear about some insane BS of a rig you made for 400 bucks that runs BF3 , COD at 60FPS etc on high res.

Sorry id rather spend 400 on a console and run BF4 with no problems and the game looking amazing.

YEs i agree that FPS is best played with a mouse, but you can do that on a PS3 anyways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df_N8U0hDyE

SteveLord

These next-gen consoles are equal to a 2 year old PC at best. I would be shocked if they could run any game at 60fps at 1080p. Especially a game with as many players as BF4. Don't be fooled by tech demos.

Coupled with all the DRM and internet check-ins associated with the Xbox One at least....you can have it.

tpatt100

Steam releases PC hardware reports on a pretty regular basis. A 2 year old PC is nowhere near the norm out there for people playing games on the PC. There are a lot of people out there playing on pretty old hardware and upgrade only when their PC dies. When I played Wow it seemed people upgraded their machines every other expansion and still end up with graphics cards that are barely gaming ones.

If you browse the PC game forums there are regular posts asking if their PC will run it, which kind of was behind the "can you run it" site.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

Looking at the averages for Steam players the Xbox and PS4 is generally above the norm for PC gamers, most are still playing on old technology hardly anybody runs on anything really current because there hasn't been a need. Barely half have DX11 cards. 13 percent play with Intel integrated graphics lol.

Heck barely half even have quad core cpus, half are running dual cores.

Console releases this holiday season will cause a pretty significant jump up in hardware specs for gaming. The primary advantage consoles have now is a standardized hardware for developers to develop for that is closer to PC. So make it once and it works for them all, vs having to take into account PC hardware averages have been pretty lacking for a while now as gamers get older and have less money and or time to play games.

Mishra

I was always sad that they built a bunch of wonderful graphics then pushed you through campaigns for "action" but I never had the ability to stop and look at the details.

I'm never really excited for EA games. If you buy the game and all the DLC, it ends up costing 100-150 dollars vs waiting later. Then when I wait, everything is established and I get slaughtered since I haven't been playing 1000 hours like the rest of them.

I really don't like supporting EA either. I've been more excited about kickstarter games... 2014 should be a good gaming year for me. 2013 has actually been one of the worst.

cmorris14

chrisone wrote: »

Not sure why some of you are downplaying the PS4 or XBOX. They are claiming 60fps, while your PC's would not get that good of performance unless you had a beast rig that you made for 1500-2000 grand. I have a macbook pro retina, beast of a machine, and i know by experience i cannot run BF3 at full blast settings at high resolution. No way in hell i run BF4 at 60 fps on decent settings. Stop before i hear about some insane BS of a rig you made for 400 bucks that runs BF3 , COD at 60FPS etc on high res.

If they reach 60fps at 1080p on the PS4 the graphics still won't be much better than medium graphics on the PC. The Sony uses what is the equivalent of a 7870 GPU. I had a 7870 back in March that I played BF3 with custom graphics settings between medium and high at like 45fps. I don't think I can see them getting 60fps @ 1080p with high graphics. Alternatively, you could pick up a 7950 and put a decent OC on it and run it on high. A decent build with a 7950 could be done for $800. Definitely more then the PS4 and Xbox One984, but certainly not $1500-$2000. Also, a PC can be used for a lot more then just playing games, obviously. Additionally, PC games can often be had for ~$40 a month or two after release, that doesn't happen with current PS3 and 360 games and is not likely to happen with next-gen consoles.

phoeneous

Aside from the bugs and crashes, bf4 is amazing. They went above and beyond with levolution, especially since you can kill people with the environment. Currently running in on two 650 ti boosts in sli and getting an average of 90-120 fps most of the time on high settings. Ultra puts me at 40-70 fps with vsync, af, aa, and ambient occlusions off. If anyone wants to add me as a friend I play under the same name as in this forum, phoeneous.

Params7

Played over 100 hours of BF3, over 200 hours of Bad Company 2, and now I'm loving BF4. On ps4 it looks and plays amazing, besides a lot of server issues and disconnects of course.

Params7

cmorris14 wrote: »

If they reach 60fps at 1080p on the PS4 the graphics still won't be much better than medium graphics on the PC. The Sony uses what is the equivalent of a 7870 GPU. I had a 7870 back in March that I played BF3 with custom graphics settings between medium and high at like 45fps. I don't think I can see them getting 60fps @ 1080p with high graphics. Alternatively, you could pick up a 7950 and put a decent OC on it and run it on high. A decent build with a 7950 could be done for $800. Definitely more then the PS4 and Xbox One984, but certainly not $1500-$2000. Also, a PC can be used for a lot more then just playing games, obviously. Additionally, PC games can often be had for ~$40 a month or two after release, that doesn't happen with current PS3 and 360 games and is not likely to happen with next-gen consoles.

Console games are optimized for one kind of machine though, so developers are able to squeeze relatively more power out of the hardware than they can on PC's where they have to make it compatible with a general list of devices. In the end, PC will always beat consoles in visual department. But I like the analog controller options with vehicles and jets in Battlefield so which is why I get them on consoles. I fly jets and choppers a lot.

Alternatively, I'm actually really looking forward to the Steambox. They're apparently going to be PC-Console hybrids, and one of them will reportedly released with a Nvidia Titan built in. Valve claims the controller will bring mouse level accuracy, and I really hope that's true.

AwesomeGarrett

Params7 wrote: »

Played over 100 hours of BF3, over 200 hours of Bad Company 2, and now I'm loving BF4. On ps4 it looks and plays amazing, besides a lot of server issues and disconnects of course.

Amateurs!!! You need to step it up to the big boys!!!

I'm not very proud of the time wasted below:

Progression - AwesomeGarrett - Battlelog / Battlefield 3

Before you get on me about wasting time. I did put more hours than that into my CCNA and CCNP.

tpatt100

I held off on this game, might get it for PS4 when I get one. I am reading it has a ton of issues on the PC.

phoeneous

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST
Not a ton, most were fixed with latest update. After they fix the netcode, everything will be great.

pamccabe

I've started building my own computer recently. After digging around and seeing what BF4 has to offer, I'm curving my build to cater to this game. That and Planetside2. I don't have time for time sink MMOs anymore, so a good fast paced shooter is where I'll have to blow off some steam.

MrAgent

I bought an Xbox one and BF4 on Friday, and to me the game is awesome. It did have a few issues connecting to servers on the first day or two, but other than that... its been fun.

403Forbidden

My argument for the past 7 years has been for PC and against Consoles.

It really saddens me that developers are limited to what they can do with PC games thanks to Consoles. Developers have to make a game that will run well on a Console, after the first 6 months to a year after that console is released this is a huge bottleneck for developers.

"Hey! There is this really cool new technique that we should use!" -Developer
"Does the PS4 have the ability to use it? No. So No." -Engineer
"This game looks amazing!" -PC Gamer
"Ugh, this game takes forever to load and looks way better on the computer.." -Console Gamer

The above is what I hear constantly from friends and collegues.
The Developers want to make something cool, the Engineers are the bad guys saying no they can't, PC Gamers love the game anyways because it is so fast and looks amazing on their mid-highend systems and console gamers are complaining about load times, view distances, particle effects and blocky edges.

For the time being, at least until something like the Occulus Rift is available I will be using my PC and leaving consoles in the dust every step of the way.

tpatt100

Most PC "gamers" are playing on really bad hardware now a days. The market isn't there anymore for cutting edge or even remotely near cutting edge because there isn't enough people buying gaming capable computers. They are not limited by consoles they are limited by the fact that the console versions at a time were outselling the PC market by several times over so they go where the market is for profit.

The Xbox one and PS4 "now" is a significant upgrade hardware wise even when compared to the average PC gamer so it will allow developers to make the next jump in game play since PC hardware is slacking now a days due to low sales in general.

I put together a PC for Steam Big Picture and from my couch I cannot tell the difference between my AMD 7950 in my main PC to the AMD 7790 with half the CPU and RAM. Nobody is leaving anybody in the dust because on my 53 inch Plasma on my couch I can't tell the difference between mid, high and ultra settings, consoles and PCs are two totally different gaming environments.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

Looking at the latest Steam hardware surveys most people are playing casual games using dual core cpus, 8gb of RAM, DX 10 cards and the most popular is Intel integrated graphics followed several rows down by several year old Nvidia DX10 cards.

So the consoles are doing nothing but helping game developers by allowing them the freedom to develop for hardware that is considered higher end for the average now a days at a subsidized console price.

RomBUS

Nice to see some PS4 enthusiasts on here.

Send me your PSN handle once you receive it via PM. Will try to get a PS4 toward Xmas or the new year

SteveLord

tpatt100 wrote:

Most PC "gamers" ...snip...

The steam survey is by no means scientific. First of all, it is OPTIONAL. And the integrated graphics reports aren't reliable since many laptops have both intel and an ATI/Nvidia video card that may not be utilized until a game is actually ran. If you add them up, the discrete video cards have them beat. Finally, the fact that there is a broad range of hardware is a good thing. It proves you don't need the latest and greatest to enjoy a ton of PC games. Especially when you consider Steam's library of inexpensive/non demanding indie games.

Consoles are still far from being superior performers. Their specs are just meeting what PC gamers have had for years. And then they will get surpassed within the next year. Hell, they are still struggling to make games that can be played at 1080p and won't tank in frames regularly. And can have up to 64 players in them. PCs have been able to do that for years.

About7Narwhal

What does any of this PC vs Console crap have to do with BF4? If you like it on a PC, buy the PC version. Likewise for Xbox and PlayStation. I'm not quite sure why every game discussion has to have these stupid arguments.

phoeneous

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST

Because people like to justify what they've paid for. Chevy vs Ford, Apple vs Android, Blonde vs Brunette, you get the point.

wallpaper_01

I just bought the Xbox One and got BF4. It runs a lot better on my X1 than BF3 did on my PC with the GTX570. Its so smooth on consoles! But the graphics obviously are not as good. If I had to pick Id go for my X1 version. Mainly for ease of use/how smooth it is and more of my friends play console. I dont really care about ultra spec graphics too much.

SteveLord

phoeneous wrote: »

Because people like to justify what they've paid for. Chevy vs Ford, Apple vs Android, Blonde vs Brunette, you get the point.

Sometimes it is that. Sometimes it is pointing out wrong or misleading information.

SteveO86

I was a huge fan of BF2142, loved the squad based combat and the commander aspect of it.. made it seem like much more then a simple run a shoot game like Counter Strike is.

As much as I would love to grab BF4 to see how the series is doing I don't think I've got the time.

Besides the whole CoD and BF games seem to be the exact same game re-released every year with slightly better graphics every year.. then allow you to buy the previous maps as DLCs...

--chris--

SteveO86 wrote: »

I was a huge fan of BF2142, loved the squad based combat and the commander aspect of it.. made it seem like much more then a simple run a shoot game like Counter Strike is.

As much as I would love to grab BF4 to see how the series is doing I don't think I've got the time.

Besides the whole CoD and BF games seem to be the exact same game re-released every year with slightly better graphics every year.. then allow you to buy the previous maps as DLCs...

Im a annual COD fan, have played the last 5 with buddys online. I can say with a great level of certainty, the graphics don't even improve from release to release lol.

Call of Duty: Ghosts Copy & Paste Modern Warfare 2 Ending - YouTube

Its more about getting together with old friends online and catching up than it is about playing the game.

tpatt100

phoeneous wrote: »

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST

Because people like to justify what they've paid for. Chevy vs Ford, Apple vs Android, Blonde vs Brunette, you get the point.

You can always expect a "My PC is the bestest" comment when ever somebody mentions a console.

tpatt100

--chris-- wrote: »

Im a annual COD fan, have played the last 5 with buddys online. I can say with a great level of certainty, the graphics don't even improve from release to release lol.

Call of Duty: Ghosts Copy & Paste Modern Warfare 2 Ending - YouTube

Its more about getting together with old friends online and catching up than it is about playing the game.

I don't see how people can claim it's a copy and paste when one is the ending and the next is the beginning. I can see it is paying homage because the "Ghosts" are supposed to be a reference to "Ghost" Riley in Modern Warfare 2. Since the story line became a total mess I figured they just abandoned that story line.

Edificer

Cisco forums + Battlefield!!!?? I'm loving it.

VAHokie56

I never played any FPS games aside from counter strike when I was in college 10 years ago but I picked up BF4 when I bought my new gaming PC 3 weeks ago's and I have been addicted ever since. I love it

tpatt100

I have been playing Borderlands 2 a lot the past month. Picked it up when it was on sale on Steam and am now playing a few of the DLC