Felix Lighter
Member
Unlocking with a VPN, is there any potential risk of having your account banned or anything along those lines?
I'd take that with a grain salt. It's hard to determine how good a map is based on playing a couple of matches. It's good to hear that Operation Locker has more flanking options than Operation Metro though.Like hearing how everyone is raving about the quality of the map designs and there's not one which people will try to avoid playing on.
Unlocking with a VPN, is there any potential risk of having your account banned or anything along those lines?
16:00 CET with a Korean VPN - in roughly 15 and a half hours I believe.
"Again the game eats system memory like pan cakes, never mind that we lowered the resolution to 1920×1080, system memory usage is peaking somewhere above 9 GB. Welcome to the next gen game, ladies and gentlemen! 10Gb for Battlefield 4 at this point in time is a must have, and if you can afford it go for at least 16 GB just to be sure."
Whoever is playing it on PC, better have loads of RAM in case.
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-cpu-gpu-benchmarks/13/
"Again the game eats system memory like pan cakes, never mind that we lowered the resolution to 1920×1080, system memory usage is peaking somewhere above 9 GB. Welcome to the next gen game, ladies and gentlemen! 10Gb for Battlefield 4 at this point in time is a must have, and if you can afford it go for at least 16 GB just to be sure."
Whoever is playing it on PC, better have loads of RAM in case.
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-cpu-gpu-benchmarks/13/
"Again the game eats system memory like pan cakes, never mind that we lowered the resolution to 1920×1080, system memory usage is peaking somewhere above 9 GB. Welcome to the next gen game, ladies and gentlemen! 10Gb for Battlefield 4 at this point in time is a must have, and if you can afford it go for at least 16 GB just to be sure."
Gamespot's Flood Zone preview was pretty good, some cool moments in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isnjPw390CM
The engine very likely uses the ram that is available to it, similarly to the way it uses VRAM. There is no reason to release an asset from memory if it's available to use, especially now that it is a 64bit executable. I have 8 GB of ram during the beta and I didn't have insufficient memory errors running the game on Ultra. It uses what is there if it's available but doesn't require it.
Like Felix Lighter said, it probably scales very well. I know people with 4 GB of RAM were able to run the BF4 beta alright. But if you have plenty of RAM, it will utilize it.
Whoever is playing it on PC, better have loads of RAM in case.
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-cpu-gpu-benchmarks/13/
"Again the game eats system memory like pan cakes, never mind that we lowered the resolution to 1920×1080, system memory usage is peaking somewhere above 9 GB. Welcome to the next gen game, ladies and gentlemen! 10Gb for Battlefield 4 at this point in time is a must have, and if you can afford it go for at least 16 GB just to be sure."
The engine very likely uses the ram that is available to it, similarly to the way it uses VRAM. There is no reason to release an asset from memory if it's available to use, especially now that it is a 64bit executable. I have 8 GB of ram during the beta and I didn't have insufficient memory errors running the game on Ultra. It uses what is there if it's available but doesn't require it.
The engine very likely uses the ram that is available to it, similarly to the way it uses VRAM. There is no reason to release an asset from memory if it's available to use, especially now that it is a 64bit executable. I have 8 GB of ram during the beta and I didn't have insufficient memory errors running the game on Ultra. It uses what is there if it's available but doesn't require it.
Well the nice thing about RAM is that it is the absolute easiest upgrade available to you and relatively cheap, though unfortunately, right now the price is on the rise.
Gamespot's Flood Zone preview was pretty good, some cool moments in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isnjPw390CM
I'm wondering if the price rise is on purpose, at the same time as all these next gen games. Very good timing if you ask me.
I'm wondering if the price rise is on purpose, at the same time as all these next gen games. Very good timing if you ask me.
Finally.the move to DDR4.
Whoever is playing it on PC, better have loads of RAM in case.
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-cpu-gpu-benchmarks/13/
"Again the game eats system memory like pan cakes, never mind that we lowered the resolution to 1920×1080, system memory usage is peaking somewhere above 9 GB. Welcome to the next gen game, ladies and gentlemen! 10Gb for Battlefield 4 at this point in time is a must have, and if you can afford it go for at least 16 GB just to be sure."
But I only have 8GB.
Gamespot's Flood Zone preview was pretty good, some cool moments in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isnjPw390CM
Yo, what time is that embargo up? I'm fucking excited!
In 2011, BF3 got an 89 Metascore on PC, and Modern Warfare 3 got a 78. Interested to see how Ghosts and 4 compare in scores, this year.
I'm wondering if BF4 will be praised for being a fixed BF3, or hated for being a fixed BF3.
I'm fascinated with how COD ends up. I don't hate the series and I don't get into the whole BF vs COD rivalry but I'm actually very surprised at how underwhelming COD Ghost looks on a purely technical level especially considering its surprisingly high system requirements. It looks on the outside to be a standard iteration of the series but the bare minimum spec jump is huge.
They released the new CoD requirements like last week or something, they're back to pretty much like what Black Ops 2 reqs were, not that crazy "GTX 780 recommended" bullshit that we first saw.
I missed that. Are the most recent specs the ones published on Steam?
Yup, the minimum specs for Ghosts are Shitty CPU, Shitty GPU, and 6GB of RAM.
Even though COD was never a visual marvel, I'm surprised they didn't want to amp things up a bit on the graphics side heading into the new gen. Then again if that core multiplayer fun is there like it has been year after year, I'll most definitely be back. Just as I will with BF4.
Even though COD was never a visual marvel, I'm surprised they didn't want to amp things up a bit on the graphics side heading into the new gen.
The framework they are using dates back to Quake. They can splice in new stuff but it's a mess. I find the tracers that are the same as the first CoD game especially funny.
I'm expecting reviewers to slobber praise all over Battlefield this year, while CoD will get the typical "Call of Duty is always solid, but its another CoD" treatment that it always does. I think things like the Levelution and the return of Commander Mode will score points with reviewers.
The hype for Ghosts seems to be the lowest I've ever seen from the franchise since 4, but maybe I'm out of touch.
Gamespot's Flood Zone preview was pretty good, some cool moments in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isnjPw390CM