• Battlefield 1 Details-Vol. 1
    21 replies, posted
[video=youtube;_lU_uSYtw-M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lU_uSYtw-M[/video]
You can tell DICE puts so much fucking love into their games. Incredible sound design, detailed minutia, pushing graphical limits with amazing optimization. Then EA swoops through and makes sure their games remain as hollow, shallow, and repetitive as possible. DICE and EA is probably one of the most paramount examples of an incredibly passionate dev team being fucking sunk into a marsh by their publisher. [editline]20th September 2017[/editline] Battlefield 1 frustrates me to no end because you can tell the potential is there, but because EA is more worried about a micro-transaction esport delivery that is locked into this tiny little framework that plays everything as safe as possible it never reaches that potential.
To be fair, A lot of the details probably came as a bonus to their systems. Like they probably made an entity that will push back physics stuff for the grenades. The tank probably spawns the same entity or whatever they did when shot as well. Also I'd imagine the bullets are on the same texture sheet as the gun as some games do, so when making skins for the gun they did the bullets as well. For the impacts they probably made a bunch of physics impact noises for various masses and materials, then when a physics interaction occurs, such as the shell hitting something, it plays the impact. I could be wrong though, but I believe that's how most of those effects happened.
[QUOTE=Wolverunder;52701289]You can tell DICE puts so much fucking love into their games. Incredible sound design, detailed minutia, pushing graphical limits with amazing optimization. Then EA swoops through and makes sure their games remain as hollow, shallow, and repetitive as possible. DICE and EA is probably one of the most paramount examples of an incredibly passionate dev team being fucking sunk into a marsh by their publisher. [editline]20th September 2017[/editline] Battlefield 1 frustrates me to no end because you can tell the potential is there, but because EA is more worried about a micro-transaction esport delivery that is locked into this tiny little framework that plays everything as safe as possible it never reaches that potential.[/QUOTE] There are barely any micro-transactions in Battlefield 1
[QUOTE=Xieneus;52702097]There are barely any micro-transactions in Battlefield 1[/QUOTE] Shortcut kits, Season pass/DLC, Premium, pretty much the only reliable way to get Battlepacks, etc. It's not as in your face as other games, but they're undeniably there.
[QUOTE=DeVotchKa;52702430]Shortcut kits, Season pass/DLC, Premium, pretty much the only reliable way to get Battlepacks, etc. It's not as in your face as other games, but they're undeniably there.[/QUOTE] I'd argue the grind in BF1 is just to encourage the shortcut kits. For example, in battlefield 4, you had to grind to unlock flares.
The war bonds system help you unlock the most integral stuff right away which is usually not behind a class rank requirement. Like ammo box and medic box.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52702781]I'd argue the grind in BF1 is just to encourage the shortcut kits. For example, in battlefield 4, you had to grind to unlock flares.[/QUOTE] That was BF3. In BF4 you at least had a default kit for all vehicles and classes.
I don't mind the battlepacks in BF1, they're unintrusive (imo) and only cosmetic in either case... apart from the melee weapons but honestly they may aswell be cosmetic too. What I don't like is premium and the lackluster DLC's they've released for BF1 so far. [editline]21st September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52702781]I'd argue the grind in BF1 is just to encourage the shortcut kits. For example, in battlefield 4, you had to grind to unlock flares.[/QUOTE] It wasn't really that much of a grind to unlock most if not all of the weapons and equipment, imo. Those fucking challenges to unlock the DLC weapons though, fuck those so hard, I don't even think you can unlock those with real money in any way?
I think the only game more impressive is GTA 5
I wish most MP games took the Titanfall 2 style of progression where just a decent amount of hours will let you unlock most of the things you need, and you earn in-game credits you can't buy with real money for specific things you want asap. And the only stuff you can buy with real money are cool looking cosmetics.
Tbh bullets and tincans having skins and basic sound design isnt that impressive.
[QUOTE=bob4life;52702930]Tbh bullets and tincans having skins and basic sound design isnt that impressive.[/QUOTE] They could have just as easily just recycled the tincan texture for all of the factions and nobody would have noticed, same with the different sounds for bullet casings. It really is the fact that they went the extra mile for something 99% of the players probably wouldn't notice.
Youre recreating the 10's here, you need to establish a believable environment. Prop physics and era-accurate signage is the bare minimum you need, most of the details included in the video were consequences of having to maintain that believable environment. Having a windmill turn a little faster in the rain doesnt make me get up and clap. And im pretty sure 99% of players would notice if their gun had mud on it or not.
[QUOTE=bob4life;52703017]Youre recreating the 10's here, you need to establish a believable environment. Prop physics and era-accurate signage is the bare minimum you need, most of the details included in the video were consequences of having to maintain that believable environment. Having a windmill turn a little faster in the rain doesnt make me get up and clap. And im pretty sure 99% of players would notice if their gun had mud on it or not.[/QUOTE] I didn't notice it until the video brought it up. And no, the windmill moving faster isn't gonna "make you clap". It's about adding little details that aren't required but make the environment you're playing in that much more interesting. They could have just as easily made the windmill move exactly the same in all weather, but they bothered to make it different like it would be in reality.
If you had a $100 million dollar budget, would your windmills move faster?
[QUOTE=bob4life;52703065]If you had a $100 million dollar budget, would your windmills move faster?[/QUOTE] Uh, what? :huh:
[QUOTE=FpShepard;52702972]They could have just as easily just recycled the tincan texture for all of the factions and nobody would have noticed, same with the different sounds for bullet casings. It really is the fact that they went the extra mile for something 99% of the players probably wouldn't notice.[/QUOTE] To be fair, the bullets changing is probably because they're part of the same UV/Material, so whatever they use to tint/change the base texture, effects it too.
[QUOTE=bob4life;52703017]Youre recreating the 10's here, you need to establish a believable environment. Prop physics and era-accurate signage is the bare minimum you need, most of the details included in the video were consequences of having to maintain that believable environment. Having a windmill turn a little faster in the rain doesnt make me get up and clap. And im pretty sure 99% of players would notice if their gun had mud on it or not.[/QUOTE] You say all of these details are the "bare minimum" yet I'd wager the vast majority of action games don't have this level of attention This is the DEFINITION of going above and beyond with detailing in a game.
[QUOTE=Leo Leonardo;52704384]This is the DEFINITION of going above and beyond with detailing in a game.[/QUOTE] Then this is the definition of exaggeration. And Id wager a majority of action games arent set in 1910. I dont know if the bar's been lowered for what impresses or not, but its literally the job of 3d modelers to do a case study on what they are implementing into a game, and making it accurate or not. I feel like the guy in the video was a little over enthusiastic about gun sloshing, cuz i sure wasnt. And again, with a 100 million dollar budget, you bet your ass there better be some effort put into maintaining a believable WW1 environment.
[QUOTE=bob4life;52705602]Then this is the definition of exaggeration. And Id wager a majority of action games arent set in 1910. I dont know if the bar's been lowered for what impresses or not, but its literally the job of 3d modelers to do a case study on what they are implementing into a game, and making it accurate or not. I feel like the guy in the video was a little over enthusiastic about gun sloshing, cuz i sure wasnt. And again, with a 100 million dollar budget, you bet your ass there better be some effort put into maintaining a believable WW1 environment.[/QUOTE] It's fine if you aren't impressed, but it doesn't mean everyone else has to feel the same. Sorry if I'm misreading but it feels like you're saying people shouldn't be impressed.
It also shows with the reload animations. It is really cool to see the detail in those, because in other games, they just throw the mag away or eject the rounds or whatever, but in this one, your guy catches the round that would be ejected with his fingers over the ejector, and reloads one by one (on the clip fed rifles), and some of the guns have really elaborate reloads. I find that really neat.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.