Battlefield 4 "Fishing in Baku" 17 minute gameplay video reveal

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's all very technically impressive and pretty, but it just looks like more of the same from Battlefield 3. The guns still look...I dunno, stiff.

Call me when they make Bad Company this beautiful.
 
J1SSL3R said:
I've been wanting to have a fully-interactive environment for years, but there has to be a reason we haven't seen it yet.
Click to expand...

That crane example I gave... HalfLife freakin' 2 did it. I'd like to think the lack of gameplay variety isn't due to developer incompetence... but if there's any factor at play here, it's most likely the fact that they're catering to the lowest common denominator (current-gen console owners)
 
Mister Negative said:
It's all very technically impressive and pretty, but it just looks like more of the same from Battlefield 3. The guns still look...I dunno, stiff.

Call me when they make Bad Company this beautiful.
Click to expand...

I agree, BF3 just came out a year and a half ago and it still looks amazing today:

battlefield3faultlineet7gh.gif

44a5a373.gif

5c3a3cf9.gif


I definitely think that Battlefield 4 looks better than 3, but it seems that we were already getting a taste of "Next Gen" on high end PC's a few years ago....it will be nice to see how much further they can push all these effects in the coming years.
 
-SD- said:
So, it really has finally come to this: people don't even want better game design anymore.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm asking. What would you do to improve the design? I see so many people saying "oh same ol' thing" without giving any insight as to what they would do differently.
 
played B3 maxed out on pc. and the difference between that and the b4-trailer is a generations leap.

we have gotten to a level of per pixel detail where you can't just compare gifs anymore.
 
Piggus said:
That's why I'm asking. What would you do to improve the design? I see so many people saying "oh same ol' thing" without giving any insight as to what they would do differently.
Click to expand...

Reposting this because people are obviously having a hard time coming up with interesting mechanics when they've existed in other shooters before:

Don't need to wrack your brain to come up with interesting gameplay scenarios other than just forcing a player through killrooms/pockets of enemies/setpieces (cross-posting from the other thread): Trailer left me feeling pretty much the same as I did towards the new Killzone: visuals are fuckin' impressive but gameplay hasn't evolve AT ALL. Show me smart enemy AI, working together in teams to eliminate you (for eg. one providing suppressive fire and another navigating through buildings and obstacles, flanking to get to you and your teammates). Show me the ability to defeat them using physics (fuckin hell it's a construction site, howabout letting me shoot down a pile hanging off a crane so that it drops on unsuspecting enemies. Or let a stack of cement pipes loose and roll into them)
 
Yeah the visuals are amazing and I think I heard from the guys at crytek say that know one will out do crysis 3 in graphics for like 3 years well it took less than a year
 
drexplora said:
The single player portion sells the dream!

DICE previews single player so much cause its what sells the BF dream!!
Along with a list of bullet points, ur all set.
-BF4 on Frostbite 3.0 ALL NEW!!
-Enhanced Destruction 4.0!!
-Bigger maps than ever before!!
-More real/emo campaign this time that plays like MP, sorta..
-64 players on consoles this time around??!
-BETA Details coming shortly, stick around!!

All together it paints a pretty picture that might not be the same using MP footage.
So it takes a while to get MP footage :(
Click to expand...

"It's part of the plan. We haven't planned it that thoroughly from that perspective. It's more like, what do we want to show first? Let's show something that explains the whole game as much as possible. Playing multiplayer in front of people doesn't give the audience the full picture. It's more about ticking off: what is new with the engine? What is new with the feature set? What is new with how we handle weapons? What is new with vehicles? We tried to integrate everything into one demo. It turned out to be the opening of the single-player campaign."
-bf producer
 
adelante said:
Reposting this because people are obviously having a hard time coming up with interesting mechanics when they've existed in other shooters before:

Don't need to wrack your brain to come up with interesting gameplay scenarios other than just forcing a player through killrooms/pockets of enemies/setpieces (cross-posting from the other thread): Trailer left me feeling pretty much the same as I did towards the new Killzone: visuals are fuckin' impressive but gameplay hasn't evolve AT ALL. Show me smart enemy AI, working together in teams to eliminate you (for eg. one providing suppressive fire and another navigating through buildings and obstacles, flanking to get to you and your teammates). Show me the ability to defeat them using physics (fuckin hell it's a construction site, howabout letting me shoot down a pile hanging off a crane so that it drops on unsuspecting enemies. Or let a stack of cement pipes loose and roll into them)

Seriously people, it's
Click to expand...

It's Battlefield, not Myst. You use military tactics to defeat your opponents. The type of shit you're talking about is something cheesy you'd see in The Transporter. You kill your enemies with bullets and grenades, not by setting off chain reactions that might appear in the next Final Destination movie.
 
OUT FOX EM said:
It's Battlefield, not Myst. You use military tactics to defeat your opponents. The type of shit you're talking about is something cheesy you'd see in The Transporter. You kill your enemies with bullets and grenades, not by setting off chain reactions that might appear in the next Final Destination movie.
Click to expand...

it's a game, not a military exercise.
 
OUT FOX EM said:
It's Battlefield, not Myst. You use military tactics to defeat your opponents. The type of shit you're talking about is something cheesy you'd see in The Transporter. You kill your enemies with bullets and grenades, not by setting off chain reactions that might appear in the next Final Destination movie.
Click to expand...

If you think what he described is too smart/complex for shooters then you're really what's wrong with the industry when it comes to shooters. He asked for smarter AI and the ability to use physics, how is that akin to asking for something Myst-esque? That makes no sense at all.
 
Serious question, I wonder what type of cuts we can expect for the PS4/Durango versus this video... If I had to guess, this is probably running on a GTX 680.

DICE are you using up dat 8 GB RAM on both platforms?
 
thuway said:
Serious question, I wonder what type of cuts we can expect for the PS4/Durango versus this video... If I had to guess, this is probably running on a GTX 680.

DICE are you using up dat 8 GB RAM on both platforms?
Click to expand...

Has there been a confirmation on what Video Card this demo was running on?
 
El_Chino said:
Has there been a confirmation on what Video Card this demo was running on?
Click to expand...

No but it only makes sense to use it as reference. PS4 and Durango could achieve approximate image quality if coded to metal. I'm trying to figure out the cuts. I am sure certain DX11 features, particle effects, and AA needs to be tweaked down. Still, I would love for DICE to offer a 720p 60 HZ version and a 1080p (cinematic) version option. I am double minded on which platform to buy it on.

I purchased BF3 on my PS3 and on my PC, but I find myself on the PS3 more often because my PC friends list is dwarfed in comparison.
 
RoKKeR said:
From a Battlelog poll. I wonder why DICE has seen some negative reaction.
Not really all that negative, but it's singleplayer.
Click to expand...

BF3's single player was a tacked on, derivative, and hopeless cluster fuck. It did very little to push the genre forward. The MP was where the greatness was at. They have a long way to go before they touch COD SP greatness (and trust me, it hurts saying that).
 
thuway said:
No but it only makes sense to use it as reference. PS4 and Durango could achieve approximate image quality if coded to metal. I'm trying to figure out the cuts. I am sure certain DX11 features, particle effects, and AA needs to be tweaked down. Still, I would love for DICE to offer a 720p 60 HZ version and a 1080p (cinematic) version option. I am double minded on which platform to buy it on.

I purchased BF3 on my PS3 and on my PC, but I find myself on the PS3 more often because my PC friends list is dwarfed in comparison.
Click to expand...

The demonstration of Battlefield 4, that Electronic Arts unveiled at GDC, was actually running on an AMD Radeon HD 7990 Malta graphics card.
 
so just because BF3 sp was bad this MUST be bad? The reasoning around here is astonishing. It is like people have already have set in stone that the BF4 SP is bad even without playing it. it is unfair to DICE. I am sure they want a fair chance to improve the BF3 campaign.
 
TalesOfWin said:
so just because BF3 sp was bad this MUST be bad? The reasoning around here is astonishing. It is like people have already have set in stone that the BF4 SP is bad even without playing it. it is unfair to DICE. I am sure they want a fair chance to improve the BF3 campaign.
Click to expand...

I sure hope the SP campaign is at least of COD standard, and contrary to most, I enjoy playing the campaigns (but have clocked 280hr in BF3 multiplayer as well). There is a history of bad campaigns though, and BF3s was fairly mediocre.
 
TalesOfWin said:
so just because BF3 sp was bad this MUST be bad? The reasoning around here is astonishing. It is like people have already have set in stone that the BF4 SP is bad even without playing it. it is unfair to DICE. I am sure they want a fair chance to improve the BF3 campaign.
Click to expand...
Then maybe they should emphasize those improvements instead of showing the same tired old militaristic shit, with poorly written characters, a lot of scripted set pieces and piss poor QTEs.

When someone tells you that tech enabled them to tell better stories, you know that their standards are aiming to outdo Garfield more than anything else.
 
Apostate said:
I sure hope the SP campaign is at least of COD standard, and contrary to most, I enjoy playing the campaigns (but have clocked 280hr in BF3 multiplayer as well). There is a history of bad campaigns though, and BF3s was fairly mediocre.
Click to expand...

and what is so better about COD SP? It has scripted action and michael bay setpieces as well.
 
TalesOfWin said:
and what is so better about COD SP? It has scripted action and michael bay setpieces as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it does. It's also more diverse in terms of locales, has much more interesting characters, and it's very cinematic as well. I like COD SP campaigns, they don't reinvent the wheel but it's actually fun to go back and play them every once in a while, just like watching a movie you like every once in a while.
 
Apostate said:
Yeah, it does. It's also more diverse in terms of locales, has much more interesting characters, and it's very cinematic as well. I like COD SP campaigns, they don't reinvent the wheel but it's actually fun to go back and play them every once in a while, just like watching a movie you like every once in a while.
Click to expand...

BF4 has a new set of characters. Not a single thing you listed give CoD SP an advantage. Its graphics are worse too.
 
The lighting is freaking ridiculous... I can't wait to be playing games like this on the PS4 / XboxNext.

I don't know much about Graphics cards these days, where does the PS4 GPU compare to the Nvidia Malta card this demo was running on?
 
TalesOfWin said:
BF4 has a new set of characters. Not a single thing you listed give CoD SP an advantage. Its graphics are worse too.
Click to expand...

You can't really list a bunch of features that make COD SP better, but rather it's the way the campaign feels and flows. You're never doing the same thing for too long, you're always getting put into some new situation that you have to fight your way out of, and the characters are generally likable. The campaigns never set the world on fire, but they're really fun to replay.
 
dankir said:
The lighting is freaking ridiculous... I can't wait to be playing games like this on the PS4 / XboxNext.

I don't know much about Graphics cards these days, where does the PS4 GPU compare to the Nvidia Malta card this demo was running on?
Click to expand...

Not good. The PC has 8.6 TF and the console only has 1.8 TF. However, if we discount architectural efficiency of consoles, you are still looking at over a 100% advantage in rendering. Cuts will have to be made.

I have a nagging suspicion it was only demoed on the 7990 for marketing. The game itself, is most likely developed on a single 7970, or a GTX 680, which would put it in PS4 / Durango territory.
 
Yeah, we don't even know what fps they were getting out of the demo. It was probably running at 100 fps on the 7990. That should be able to tank something with the visuals shown in this. People still have to remember that there are current gen versions of this coming out.

This seems to be a constant theme though. I remember when the Witcher 2 hit and people on here were very adimant that next gen systems would struggle to deliver visuals like that on ultra settings. It will be the same here...I honestly doubt the console versions will differ much or at all. Other games already shown look as good or better to me anyway. Dice just had a bit of head start by producing BF3. This just pushes that engine a little bit further, regardless of them renaming it Frost Engine 3....
 
ilnadmy said:
You can't really list a bunch of features that make COD SP better, but rather it's the way the campaign feels and flows. You're never doing the same thing for too long, you're always getting put into some new situation that you have to fight your way out of, and the characters are generally likable. The campaigns never set the world on fire, but they're really fun to replay.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I got a "solid CoD campaign" vibe from the BF4 trailer, despite some of its SMH moments.

izt_is said:
My thoughts exactly Anton! I was afraid to mention it for fear of being told by the GAF community to GTFO and go play ARMA 3.

But you're right BF is too fast-paced for something like that. Just at least give us lean PLEASE.
Click to expand...

Trust me, I could go into a lot of things that I think BF3 should take/borrow from Arma 3 :D
 
Anton Sugar said:
FWIW, I got a "solid CoD campaign" vibe from the BF4 trailer, despite some of its SMH moments.
Click to expand...
I did as well, honestly. The fact that they are sticking with one character, and one main squad could go a long way in helping the story feel more engaging. And despite the, like you said, SMH moments, there were a few sections that led me to believe the campaign could work out. That combat area was fairly open and you could approach it many different ways. That section alone was promising.
 
thuway said:
Serious question, I wonder what type of cuts we can expect for the PS4/Durango versus this video... If I had to guess, this is probably running on a GTX 680.

DICE are you using up dat 8 GB RAM on both platforms?
Click to expand...

I honestly expect the PS4 version to look like the demo, not sure about the new Xbox.
 
nelsonroyale said:
Yeah, we don't even know what fps they were getting out of the demo. It was probably running at 100 fps on the 7990. That should be able to tank something with the visuals shown in this. People still have to remember that there are current gen versions of this coming out.

This seems to be a constant theme though. I remember when the Witcher 2 hit and people on here were very adimant that next gen systems would struggle to deliver visuals like that on ultra settings. It will be the same here...I honestly doubt the console versions will differ much or at all. Other games already shown look as good or better to me anyway. Dice just had a bit of head start by producing BF3. This just pushes that engine a little bit further, regardless of them renaming it Frost Engine 3....
Click to expand...

Agreed. Even if the PC version runs at 60 hz and the console at 30 hz, we can still approximate a 1080p image between the two. I have a feeling the single player campaign will retain all bells and whistles with a lower frame rate, and multiplayer is where cuts will truly rear their heads, but in a competitive environment, the last thing any one cares about is visual fidelity.
 
Enemy helo shreds the building and fires high-caliber rounds inches from their bodies, and a broken leg is the worst they get? Wow. Dumb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Metroid Prime 4, 17 minutes gameplay 4K60
2 3 4 5 6
281
14K
efyu_lemonardo replied
Screamer - Gameplay Reveal
Trailer 
6
40
RAIDEN1 replied
Code Violet Extended Gameplay Reveal
38
514
Gripsx replied
Mukti - Gameplay Reveal Trailer | PS5 & Steam
5
192
semiconscious replied
Hunger - Official Gameplay Reveal Trailer
Trailer  2
87
1K
Hideous Snake replied
Top Bottom