You guys saw this review? Seems like AMD cards performs better in DX12 this time : https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/70...testresultaten-full-hd-1920x1080-+-frametimes
So, to any that have had a chance to play it... have DICE finally improved their abilities at a campaign? The time period setting instantly caught my attention. But, DICE are about as competent at creating a solid and gripping campaign as I am at even making a video game. I get everyone gets these "FOR THE MP!" but there are those that would love a great campaign in this time period.
It has pretty good atmosphere at least although the first level or "war story" as it's now six separate ones is a fairly linear tutorial while explaining some of the elements of the game and also the war itself. British campaign which is the second war story (And last available one in the trial mode.) has five additional levels mainly focusing on tank warfare with the first almost simulating a multiplayer game with capturing and holding zones while slowly advancing. Key moments are told via cutscenes (pre-rendered and a bit above what the in-game visuals are capable of delivering.) and the developers try to keep it a bit varied between the different levels or even in the same level with various diversions such as doing emergency repairs or being forced to scout ahead due to weather conditions, in this case thick fog. There's been trailers of I think almost if not all the six or so total war stories showing parts of what they will be about that might give some better insight than what's available from the trial version of the game but it can also contain spoilers. EDIT: Found them. https://www.battlefield.com/games/battlefield-1/singleplayer
I think this game has very high chances to have a great SP campaign. They certainly put a lot more effort in it than I would have expected them to.
Today I have decided to take a look at memory usage during multiplayer. Played 64 player conquest on all 4 maps that are available in trial and on each map RAM usage was always between 4 and 4,5 GB. That is for the game I mean. With system RAM usage and all my background stuff combined it stayed around 7,5 - 8 GB in total.
OMG my time ran out , roll on Friday Just so you know you get a five minute warning then thats it. It doesnt matter halfway through map or not your just booted back to desktop
Please. I hope you are joking right. On a lighter note, not sure if you guys have seen this Kalibri gun. https://youtu.be/xqVwgGdwwLs
No use in running this game in dx12 unless you desperately need those extra few fps in performance. dx11 is still the way to go with Nvidia hardware and/or multi gpu rigs.
Good question, the only dev even bothering about making multi GPU work under dx12 was Stardock, and AotS arguably wasn't really made for the game but only talked about as a technical stunt. There it worked, but other than that I have yet to see a working implementation of either CFX or SLI. And that's exactly what they created, putting multi adapter stuff on the dev's side and not dx's, it's practically dead because none of them actually bothers with GPU sales, rather having another thing they'd need to spend time / money on to do. And with the optimisations we do (NOT) see for PC gaming it leaves me quite pesimistic about multi GPU systems running well in dx12 anytime soon.
From my undestanding consoles use 1 GPU architecture. Both Vulkan & DX12, from my understanding move the multi GPU support from card vendor to game developer. Some development technologies, such as temporal antialiasing rely on previous frame info to continue, which wont happen in SLI, as they render one after another. Same goes for half screen rendering, so it wont probably work, seams? So all these together make me VERY pessimistic for multi GPU future. It's just a shame as there is no way we will get a single card that will push 4k+ resolutions to 100+ frame range with all bells and whistles, any time soon
