Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, May 28, 2018.
Thats what i want to know....
hopefully nvidia will slap dice around the chops for caching dx12 shaders during play instead of at game start and this will be the first Frostbite title to not have dx12 stuttering.
In Requirements section they forgot to mention:
-Lack of Historical Knowledge
I can't imagine that they'll go backwards on server tick rate, still gotta be 60Hz right, or do some games have even higher tick rate? I know some games have 30Hz tick rate, but can't see them taking a backwards step.
Today I read this: https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/dami...ds-the-inclusion-of-playable-female-soldiers/
Wondering why that "dad" couldn't be honest to his daughter: "You can't play a female character because there hardly were any back in that time." It's as easy as that, would work too. They can play their modern day agenda with a modern day game if they need to, but oh well, it is what it is. I only hope the gameplay advantages of female character models are not there, like obviously a reduced silhouette (more difficult to spot), or at the worst, smaller hitboxes. That would really break it for me tbh.
Well it depends on how much they want to spend on server infrastructure. They haven't yet reacted to the question (I have) about if you can manage your own servers again like with BF3/4, or if you have to get those fixed ones like with BF1 (no server scripts, no control over tick rate, etc). I could easily think they will start out with 30Hz with the beta to test and see if it works.
Let's nevermind that every detail revealed about the gameplay say that the game is going to play out very different. The recoil mechanics alone are enough to warrant a new title... then there's the whole new interactivity layer which might end up being bothersome, but it's also wildly different from previous games. Apart from that, then if "conquest gamemode with vehicles and infantry" is "very similar" to previous games, then why did we ever get another BF after 1942 if that was a problem.
Several games, including Battlefield itself, has higher tickrate than 60. CS:GO for instance runs at 64 or 128hz, BF4 and BF1 on small servers can run up to 144hz.
Oh they were running at such high tick rates? I wasn't aware of that. Certainly didn't feel like that all the time, but that's good, and necessary. Not sure 144Hz will be the general setting, but even getting to 60Hz is a bare minimum these days I'd say.
SJW ideological game. Not more not less.
Personally, History is History, and attempts to rewrite it are disgusting. They could have added Soviet's which actually had a significant amount of female soldiers on the frontlines and in the support instead of making things up because it may OFFEND someone. (for example, both of my grandmothers served as nurses).
They need to list the system requirements according to the resolution, FPS desired and maybe also number of players in a match. The last one maybe asking too much. Maybe they will do that in the future.
Agreed on all of that. I notice a bigger fps drop when playing 64 player BF1. Doesnt matter if I had my 8 thread 1500x or my 12 thread 1600.
That's cool, I play Battlefield 1, which servers have more than 60Hz tick rate? I play Deathmatch on official servers, they're 60Hz. Do you know which ones have more than 60Hz? I don't see many server issues with BF1, so I think 60Hz is adequate, but if they want to increase it to 144Hz, then that's cool too because that's more representative of the 144 fps that my PC is running the game at.
Yeah, that would be cool if they could list CPU requirements versus the desired fps required - e.g. 60fps, 120fps/144fps. I think there's a big difference between the requirements required (ha!), so would be good for them to put an official stamp on those.
im sure you do; the frostbite engine is heavily multithreaded out of necessity...each additional player = heavy cpu calculations
Battlefield games have always been like that, no matter the advancements in processor tech and don´t matter the stagnating netcode. I don´t see heavy cpu calculations, it isn´t AI, nor advanced bullet physics, nor players causing enviroment destruction red faction style. I used to play planetside 2 on 1500 player servers just fine most of the time on my old 3ghz quad core.
planetside2 @1k player count battle runs at literally three ticks per second (yes 3hz tickrate regardless of your client updaterate) & physically despawns characters outside of a draw distance-based radius so that your cpu doesnt even calculate their positions or any actions taken. thats not really relevant comparison from a technical perspective...
But it´s relevant from an execution perspective, 64 players have been around since forever and online gameplay doesn´t feel much better despite the massive increase in processor requirements.
Lucky to say my 3570k paired with a 1070 and 16gb ram plays BF1 no problem. Most probably because Im still playing at 1080p.