Battlefiled 4 anti-fud thread. PlayStation 4, Xbox One, PC.

Status
Not open for further replies.
@ flynn
There is a difference in price and the way people look at each company. I dunno about other people but it angers me that Microsoft put out weaker specs and charges 100$ more while making a nice profit on each unit sold while sony puts out better specs and loses money on each unit sold. It just makes it seem like sony cares more about the gamer. You can argue that's not true all you want, but that's definitely the way it appears.

The only real + for Microsoft is dedicated servers. That is nice lol.


Gawd when did I become so pro sony wtf happen to me.
 
I just want to know if the voice commands work.

If on xbox one I can say "Ammo" and somebody gives me ammo appossed to

"motherfuqer...your carring a machine gun.....give me some fukin ammo....people are so f-n stupid in this game"

than it's a win for xbox.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Two Pennys Worth
blue said:
I'm not sure how a multiplat game running at a lower resolution with a lower framerate is a "clear win" for Microsoft. Frankly, I think it is pretty embarrassing. They had the 360 out a year before PS3; if someone were to tell me the system having the worse performing multiplats at launch would be Microsoft, I wouldn't have believed them.

I'm sure things will even out, just like they did for PS3/360, but having an inferior product than your competitor, while charging 100 dollars more, isn't a "clear win."
Click to expand...
I know one win for MS.....they are running at 720p and PS4 at 1080p and some people actually think the xbox one version looks better.

200.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Two Pennys Worth and Flynn
Cody32599 said:
I know one win for MS.....they are running at 720p and PS4 at 1080p and some people actually think the xbox one version looks better.
Click to expand...

Same s*** happened with PS3/360 games. It is what it is.
 
eVo7 said:
Qbert has already proven his aged rig can run the game better than next gen consoles.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute. I though Qbert said he couldn't run the game on his GTX 660? He said that his CPU was a bottleneck.

penguinpig said:
are you blind, that might be the reason.
Click to expand...

Two low res screenshots. It just doesn't seem to be proof of anything really.

Flynn said:
1. I'm not convinced that the sharper look of the X1 version is solely due to capture hardware configurations. I'll have to see the two for myself to verify.

2. Even with an unfinished review copy of the game, the X1 version looks virtually identical to the PS4 version. There's more aliasing, but it's a case of 'bad' and 'worse', not 'great' and 'bad'.

3. While the differences seem to align well with the raw specs delta, it also implies that (likely) the X1 platform is simply too 'hot-off-the-press' for developers to properly take advantage of the custom hardware, etc, because when the custom hardware is properly used, I'd expect a smaller delta... reminds me of the PS3/X360 launch when the PS3 had to run Madden at half the frame rate of the 360 version, and still dropped more frames (implying the 360 was more than twice as powerful, which is obviously not true).

Bottom line, though, even if the delta didn't shrink (which it likely will), this isn't a delta the layman will notice or care about... so it's actually a clear win for Microsoft either way. Either the delta will get smaller and even the highly critical will have a hard time determining a clear winner (like with last gen), or the delta won't shrink but it won't matter because only 1 out of every 50 gamers or so will be able to notice or care.

So really, no elephant in the room, no 'big issues' for Microsoft, no big difference, no big deal.

Where the differences will be obvious and noticeable will be in the way the OS's behave, in the interaction models, and in the services. I think MS will have a clear victory across all of those, and look forward to the reactions from the world.
Click to expand...

Definitely not a clear win for Microsoft. XB1 has a hardware upscaler and Sony has a software upscaler. The XB1 has more detail, but also a lot more aliasing upscaling from a much lower res.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, how many Battlefield threads are we going to have?!?! I don't know where to post :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hazard71
blue said:
I'm not sure how a multiplat game running at a lower resolution with a lower framerate is a "clear win" for Microsoft. Frankly, I think it is pretty embarrassing. They had the 360 out a year before PS3; if someone were to tell me the system having the worse performing multiplats at launch would be Microsoft, I wouldn't have believed them.

I'm sure things will even out, just like they did for PS3/360, but having an inferior product than your competitor, while charging 100 dollars more, isn't a "clear win."
Click to expand...

Perfectly said. Couldn't agree more. How is one of the most popular BF players in the community saying that the PS4 MP looks better than the Xbox One SP a win for Microsoft? I think both games look great and end the end, none of this will be remembered once we get our hands on the damn games :grin:
 
Last edited:
penguinpig said:

look at the rocks in the back at 37s. and look at the building in the back on the left at 2:52

then look at the 45 s into ign's video notice how the blacks aren't crushed and u can see the detail in the rocks. http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/10/28/battlefield-4-xbox-oneps4-graphics-comparison
Click to expand...


Even in DFs QA they showed there was no real way for them to improve the visual quality just by changing a few settings. It's pretty silly. Microsoft has a built-in hardware upscaler and Sony doesn't. It's really that simple.

Hissatsu said:
@ flynn
There is a difference in price and the way people look at each company. I dunno about other people but it angers me that Microsoft put out weaker specs and charges 100$ more while making a nice profit on each unit sold while sony puts out better specs and loses money on each unit sold. It just makes it seem like sony cares more about the gamer. You can argue that's not true all you want, but that's definitely the way it appears.

The only real + for Microsoft is dedicated servers. That is nice lol.


Gawd when did I become so pro sony wtf happen to me.
Click to expand...

You know you are going to get trolled for this, right? You were the first one flaming people for saying anything bad about the XB1 just a month ago. Now you've done a complete Xbox One Eighty.
 
Hissatsu said:
@ flynn
There is a difference in price and the way people look at each company. I dunno about other people but it angers me that Microsoft put out weaker specs and charges 100$ more while making a nice profit on each unit sold while sony puts out better specs and loses money on each unit sold. It just makes it seem like sony cares more about the gamer. You can argue that's not true all you want, but that's definitely the way it appears.

The only real + for Microsoft is dedicated servers. That is nice lol.


Gawd when did I become so pro sony wtf happen to me.
Click to expand...

This. How anyone can say this is a win for MS is beyond me as you are paying an extra $100 to get lower resolution and more jaggies.

For reference, Xbox One:

ibcyLL9DEObrRq.gif


PS4:

iQXnww9oCgl6.gif
 
DriedMangoes said:
This. How anyone can say this is a win for MS is beyond me as you are paying an extra $100 to get lower resolution and more jaggies.

For reference, Xbox One:

ibcyLL9DEObrRq.gif


PS4:

iQXnww9oCgl6.gif
Click to expand...
They both have the EXACT same IQ problems... Based on BOTH gifs suffering I don't think you can call the very slight increase in resolution a 'win'.
 
eVo7 said:
Qbert has already proven his aged rig can run the game better than next gen consoles.
Click to expand...

Battlefield 4 running on Qbert PC (40fps):

iAZvHwLJfWUja.bmp


ibqiiXHIbRhyyn.bmp


Qbert said:
Pretty good. Sometimes it'll drop to mid 40s/low 40's, but that's during the really chaotic moments. For the most part, I'm getting between 45 and 55 fps. Not bad for my hardware, considering I'm at 1080p with high/ultra settings.


I can't complain, some people swore up and down that my hardware wouldn't run it that well.
Click to expand...

Qbert's PC
1080p
high/ultra settings
45-55fps

PS4
900p
high settings
60fps

Damn! Qbert wins.
 
GeorgeSoros said:
Even in DFs QA they showed there was no real way for them to improve the visual quality just by changing a few settings. It's pretty silly. Microsoft has a built-in hardware upscaler and Sony doesn't. It's really that simple.



You know you are going to get trolled for this, right? You were the first one flaming people for saying anything bad about the XB1 just a month ago. Now you've done a complete Xbox One Eighty.
Click to expand...


LOL to be fair though I still think xb1 is nice, and I will be picking up my day one edition at best buy on launch. It's just obvious which system has the better hardware at this point and I want the best graphics I can get on a console. People are forgetting that BF4 is just a port at the end of the day. I expect sony games to look even better with all that extra horse power. Killzone already looks way better than bf4 to me for example.
 
PC > PS4 > X1 > Current gen looks to be the nature of this title.

AO being added still to X1, so it'll look better than it currently does which is an added bonus. Could actually assist claims that ESRAM/harder to dev for on X1 claims have some weight, perhaps not, time will tell.

Overall plays pretty much the same but neither console is hitting 60fps with slight dips eh?
 
GeorgeSoros said:
Wait a minute. I though Qbert said he couldn't run the game on his GTX 660? He said that his CPU was a bottleneck.
Click to expand...


That's what I thought during the beta. But the beta was very poorly optimized.
This morning, I was seeing on average 45-55 fps, however, I followed some tips like running dxsetup from the dx folder in the game's installation directory and updated my .net framework and the games runs butter smooth now.
 
For an anti-fud thread, we sure have a lot of fud in here. We need an Elmer Fudd emoticon btw :)
 
Not sure where someone got their info from regarding the pc version being washed out......I see nothing washed out.
 
DriedMangoes said:
One looks like it has 2-4x AA while one looks like it has 0xAA. I mean, you can clearly look at both and see there is a difference.
Click to expand...

Yeah... No... What I see is a poorly conceived scene for this rendering technique. It looks bad no matter what resolution you run it at, no matter what post processing effects you apply to it.

Instead Dice should endeavor to put less poorly conceived scenes in their game...
 
Qbert said:
That's what I thought during the beta. But the beta was very poorly optimized.
This morning, I was seeing on average 45-55 fps, however, I followed some tips like running dxsetup from the dx folder in the game's installation directory and updated my .net framework and the games runs butter smooth now.
Click to expand...

Damn if you are getting those fps I wonder if I'd be at 55+ with my setup. I have a i5 2500k @ 4.6 ghz and a 760 gtx @ 1280 core clock. I'm really tempted to get this game on my pc but I've never really been a fan of these type of games. I only played bf3 for campaign mode. >.>
 
DriedMangoes said:
True. But one is clearly better than the other.
Click to expand...

Not only that the X1 version is zoomed in even more. Showing the distant objects that are clearly more jagged in both. X1 ver still looks worse, but damn that ps4 gif doesn't look good by any means.
I just kinda torn now, I can't get the ps4 version until spring, but that's the one I wanted, now I'm thinking of getting the x1 version because I like the clean look it has even though other aspects are inferior. I may end up with both.
 
XBoxNeo said:
Yeah... No... What I see is a poorly conceived scene for this rendering technique. It looks bad no matter what resolution you run it at, no matter what post processing effects you apply to it.

Instead Dice should endeavor to put less poorly conceived scenes in their game...
Click to expand...

Man you are truly hilarious
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeSoros
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back