• Frostbite 3's 'seamless reality' highlighted in new video
    56 replies, posted
Levolution as a concept is cool, but I don't believe for a second it'll be good. So you can topple a building in that one map. That's cool, but some dumb ass in a tank is going to blow it up every single round because they can. If people can do something, one person will do it. [QUOTE=RichyZ;41170246]can we stop jocking on sweetfx's cock its seriously nothing really good looking [/QUOTE] On some games, Syndicate for example, sweet greatly helps the game since it can balance out the bloom. I agree with you about it in BF3 though, it just looks slightly more colorful. [QUOTE=DOG-GY;41170126]that's just bad design. i remember reading that now and i still do not understand why anyone would make an engine that requires that much work to make a single map. if they invested the time into making a nice engine that doesn't require a fuckload of programs then their development time would certainly be much better spent.[/QUOTE] Yeah, because a studio with some of the best engine techs in the industry is going to give themselves more work to do when their whole goal is a quick pipeline. Those programs are there for a reason. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=qwerty000;41170240] Edit: at least have the balls to reply[/QUOTE] I did rate you dumb on accident, but since you had to go and say something stupid like this i'll keep that dumb where it is.
I like to appreciate the environment and the physics, but really, how do you do that in a BF/COD game? Everything is so blurried and shaky and color filtered(which i think is a massive dumb downgrade).
[QUOTE=Delta616;41170365]I did rate you dumb on accident, but since you had to go and say something stupid like this i'll keep that dumb where it is.[/QUOTE] get a load of this guy
[QUOTE=qwerty000;41170240]After watching this video I can't stop thinking of three things 1. all of that crap (MP features-wise) could be added in updates for bf3, hell, community has been constantly asking for them, but lolno, even fixing the TV missile randomly fucking your helo up took them a year and ~3 patches 2. this is going to lag SO MUCH on my gtx fucking 580, and no it's not an old card, mimimimi, it's just who needs optimization in 2013, let's cramp features into our engine for marketing purposes (with setting on low for consoles), what, "It's ~next gen~ ofcourse it's going to lag on your non-GTX Titan GPU! Silly you!" 3. [sp]press X to cut leg[/sp][/QUOTE] 1. No, that can't all be added to BF3, the Frostbite 2 engine isn't very stable. Many of those features existed in builds of BF3 during it's alpha stages and we're cut because they caused too many problems. 2. That's not necessarily true, the great thing about Frostbite 3 is it's much more stable than Frostbite 2, but the recommended/max requirements for the engine aren't much more than FB2, at least according the recommend requirements of the consumer alpha and other QA sessions i've attended for BF4 so far. [editline]24th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=qwerty000;41170395]get a load of this guy[/QUOTE] Yeah, look at me not getting angry over a rating system.
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;41170351]Yeah, because a studio with some of the best engine techs in the industry is going to give themselves more work to do when their whole goal is a quick pipeline. Those programs are there for a reason. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] just because theyre a big studio with a big engine doesn't mean that they're infallible or made good choices.
It's a shame my PC can [I]barely[/I] even run BF3, I'm actually quite impressed by this game. I don't like fast sequel releases, but this game looks good and I really like the engine.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;41170981]just because theyre a big studio with a big engine doesn't mean that they're infallible or made good choices.[/QUOTE] You don't even know what choices they've made, just that they've said it's too complex and not possible for them to release modding tools.
[QUOTE=DaMastez;41168505]BF3 was a good game (MP wise); it didn't feel like a true BF game, but it was still a good game.[/QUOTE] Felt more like a Battlefield game than either Bad Company.
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;41170351]Levolution as a concept is cool, but I don't believe for a second it'll be good. So you can topple a building in that one map. That's cool, but some dumb ass in a tank is going to blow it up every single round because they can. If people can do something, one person will do it.[/QUOTE] I doubt the major levo features will be simple "shoot five times with a tank and it's done" features, they could be tough objectives or require a number of criteria to break. I mean, the building required its own mission to plant a bomb at the top, that isn't exactly "some asshat with a tank" material. I wonder though, what that would change exactly since it just falls into the bay
They showed in an actual gameplay video with players, once the building was destroyed the capture point was amidst the rubble, and the entire city was covered in ash and dust and it significantly decreased visibility. If they have a decent amount of player initiated stuff like that in every MP level, with the general changes to the game I think it might be worth a purchase. Still, I'm in the beta so that should help me decide.
[QUOTE=daijitsu;41171443]I doubt the major levo features will be simple "shoot five times with a tank and it's done" features, they could be tough objectives or require a number of criteria to break. I mean, the building required its own mission to plant a bomb at the top, that isn't exactly "some asshat with a tank" material. I wonder though, what that would change exactly since it just falls into the bay[/QUOTE] I hope its more dynamic than just "you can topple just THIS building, and if you shoot on the exactly RIGHT pillar you will cave in the ground above it". I mean in the video we saw that the pillars covered a bit of ground at least and I'd rather have it turned off if I cant break every single one.
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;41171731]I hope its more dynamic than just "you can topple just THIS building, and if you shoot on the exactly RIGHT pillar you will cave in the ground above it". I mean in the video we saw that the pillars covered a bit of ground at least and I'd rather have it turned off if I cant break every single one.[/QUOTE] I think the one example they have shown off so far is pretty impressive. I was watching E3 with someone who despises shooters and he thought it looked great.
That networked water simulation is pretty fuckin sweet.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;41169129]i dont remember it being about third party software, just that they had a lot of programs that they used. if that is what theyre doing then that's got to be a really asinine pipeline. the less programs you have to purchase and use on a daily basis the better.[/QUOTE] When they specified all of it, they were very vague (probably because they knew they were just copping out) on what programs they used to make a map: and I can only think of a few programs (third party) that would actually be required to make a map. Most of which are STANDARD pipeline programs (3DSMAX, Maya, Photoshop, Miles tools), so I don't think it's a good excuse to say "Oh, well, too many programs for you to handle".
Actually looks really neat.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;41170126]that's just bad design. i remember reading that now and i still do not understand why anyone would make an engine that requires that much work to make a single map. if they invested the time into making a nice engine that doesn't require a fuckload of programs then their development time would certainly be much better spent.[/QUOTE] Because reinventing what other companies did is silly if they can just license it for their own development. As much as I want mods, people demanding that DICE just remake the tools so they can release them is childish I think.
I wonder if they figured out how to make bullets consistently damage people yet.
[QUOTE=Rellow;41173258]I wonder if they figured out how to make bullets consistently damage people yet.[/QUOTE] yeah, networked water is good and all but if the game follows battlefield tradition and has no fucking netcode in addition to it feeling like absolute arse to shoot people like every battlefield game ever I do not give a shit about this game
BF3 greatly improved the infantry hit detection. Dunno how this is funny. Go play Bad Company 2 or Battlefield 2 if you want a classic. The hit detection in either game was unbearable at times.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;41171438]Felt more like a Battlefield game than either Bad Company.[/QUOTE] But still not a Battlefield game like 2.
they finally sold me.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;41170126]that's just bad design. i remember reading that now and i still do not understand why anyone would make an engine that requires that much work to make a single map. if they invested the time into making a nice engine that doesn't require a fuckload of programs then their development time would certainly be much better spent.[/QUOTE] it's probably super slick for developers who have hundreds of computers connected in a server with a dedicated maintance team but a nightmare for a team of modders with home PCs connected over the internet kind of like id tech 5! (did you know that RAGE's modding tools were released? everyone kind of forgot though cause no-one used it)
FINALLY! Realistic waves! No known video game has ever simulated a perfect realistic ocean waves and water. Plus the building collapses more realistically now. Meanwhile at Activision Infinity Ward , their newest feature in their call of Duty game is a playable dog. Plus time to upgrade your computer graphic card again
[QUOTE=Raidyr;41175747]BF3 greatly improved the infantry hit detection. Dunno how this is funny. Go play Bad Company 2 or Battlefield 2 if you want a classic. The hit detection in either game was unbearable at times.[/QUOTE] bf3 improved it yes but shooting people still feels fucking awful [editline]25th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=BCell;41179479]FINALLY! Realistic waves! No known video game has ever simulated a perfect realistic ocean waves and water. Plus the building collapses more realistically now. Meanwhile at Activision Infinity Ward , their newest feature in their call of Duty game is a playable dog. Plus time to upgrade your computer graphic card again[/QUOTE] if you have to upgrade your graphics card they're doing something majorly wrong since it looks the exact same as bf3
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41179603]bf3 improved it yes but shooting people still feels fucking awful [editline]25th June 2013[/editline] if you have to upgrade your graphics card they're doing something majorly wrong since it looks the exact same as bf3[/QUOTE] It doesn't for me.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.