Battlefield 4 official discussion/thread. [PS4,XO,PS3,X360]

[Rurouni]

I don't think the lower resolution on X1 matters on competitiveness because it's a closed environment. If they allowed cross game play then it would matter. Having said that, I'm not a fan of sharpening aliased video. It just accentuate the aliasing. On still image it's more bearable.

 

[Delta9]

Questionable GIFs don't really help your cause...

It's only questionable to you because you believe there is a slight difference.

 

[RudeCurve]

I don't think the lower resolution on X1 matters on competitiveness because it's a closed environment. If they allowed cross game play then it would matter. Having said that, I'm not a fan of sharpening aliased video. It just accentuate the aliasing. On still image it's more bearable.

It would be cool if the day 1 patch allows turning on/off the sharpening by the user or even the level of sharpening.:smile:

It's only questionable to you because you believe there is a slight difference.

Dude I've seen the HQ videos and the aliasing difference in motion to me is slight...you don't have to like it but you really should move on because you're beating a dead horse...

 

[BRiT]

*AHEM* I suggest both of you, Delta9 and RudeCurve, agree to disagree and move on. For everyone's sake, please learn how to be tolerable.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's only questionable to you because you believe there is a slight difference.

Diablo 3 looks terrible in static scenes on my TV, but surprisingly smooth in motion as it's 60 fps, combined with a little LCD smear on my TV ... it's daft to evaluate game from static images. I don't know why this has to be repeated over and over. We no longer live in a world where game information has to come from static printed photos or low res gifs over a dial-up connection. Everyone has access to videos now. They are the only sensible way to evaluate the appearance of games, that or the game itself. And if someone says, "it doesn't look bad to me," that's subjective and a stupid point to argue against. So why do people argue time and again?

 

[Delta9]

Diablo 3 looks terrible in static scenes on my TV, but surprisingly smooth in motion as it's 60 fps, combined with a little LCD smear on my TV ... it's daft to evaluate game from static images. I don't know why this has to be repeated over and over. We no longer live in a world where game information has to come from static printed photos or low res gifs over a dial-up connection. Everyone has access to videos now. They are the only sensible way to evaluate the appearance of games, that or the game itself. And if someone says, "it doesn't look bad to me," that's subjective and a stupid point to argue against. So why do people argue time and again?

Maybe because it shows the true graphics much better.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Maybe because it shows the true graphics much better.

The world isn't made of static images. It's in motion. The experience of games is intended to be in motion. If D3 was a text adventure with static art, you'd have a point, but it's not. Nor is BF4. These games are intended to be played in motion. And if you're not happy with that, then on a technical level, if a game implements something like temporal AA, the static shots won't represent what the user experiences. Likewise, post AA can look great on a static image but ghastly in motion due to pixel crawl - the static image isn't anything like the 'true graphics' in that case.

Games are all about tricks and cheats to make them look good. Tricks and cheats reliant on the game moving are every bit as legitimate as tricks on static images. People should stop wasting their time and everyone else using static images to evaluate a game's appearance to the end user.
They're great to evaluate the engine and techniques, but the user experience is derived from the game in motion and that's the only sensible reference point.

 

[Aenima]

DF's videos are 60fps and high quality...I trust my own eyes....

DF posted HQ 60fps footage.

The 'HDMI full-range bug' still seems to be in place on these videos, which does the Xbox One no favors in terms of aliasing and shimmering. But even despite this, differences aren't massive, but does makes the Xbox One version seems less refined IMO (hard to tell what it would look like with similar color output). 60 fps was a priority, and I think that is what is going to have the largest impact on the gameplay. However word will spread that PS4 will have the superior version, so that will have an impact on sales / PR, even if people will have a hard time picking out these differences in motion.

 

[Nesh]

Yeah the black crush is a problem with DF's capture not with the game or console itself. The capture equipment that EA handed out doesn't have that issue. I think that argument is done and buried so no point in repeating it ad nauseum. As for the color saturation not saying it's better or worse it's just an observation. X1 version has much more saturated blues you could see it in the sky when the camera pans up to the heli. It's also evident in the rain level. Could be due to contrast doesn't really matter. In the DF thread people were saying the X1's colors are closer to the PC version...*shrug*

http://imageshack.us/a/img30/3198/g73u.png
http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/10-29-2013/Cga4zT.gif
http://imageshack.us/a/img62/5310/8n11.png

Looking at those images it gives the impression that the PS4 version is rendered at lower resolution. Some of the details are lost on the PS4 images as if QAA was applied

 

[novcze]

The 'HDMI full-range bug' still seems to be in place on these videos,

Of course black crush is still there, they didn't have another recording session to record another videos.
And PS4 videos are presented in Limited RGB range instead of Full RGB range, so until DF gets new videos I wouldn't consider their footage as relevant in any comparison.

 

[Billy Idol]

I can't get the sniper to work...I really don't know what is going on, but I can't hit one. Although the smoke trail points directly to the target and looks imo fine: no hit. Don't know what to do ?!?

 

[Billy Idol]

Had to replay the last mission to unlock the P90...oh boy: while the SP is ok-ish in general...the last mission is such a pain to play...

 

[Davros]

15 mins of bf4 4K footage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRT6j_SDZR4

 

[RudeCurve]

Despite the super high resolution I still see some aliasing which basically confirms what we all already know....resolution is not the answer for better looking games....it's the assets. I think PC games will always suffer this "bottleneck"...and why AAA console exclusives at much lower resolution still look better than the "best" PC games.

 

[steveOrino]

resolution is not the answer for better looking games....it's the assets. I think PC games will always suffer this "bottleneck"...and why AAA console exclusives at much lower resolution still look better than the "best" PC games.

Not sure if you are trolling or this delusional.

 

[djskribbles]

Resolution isn't single handedly the answer, but it obviously helps quite a bit.

 

[Davros]

Despite the super high resolution I still see some aliasing

What res did you watch it at ?

 

[RudeCurve]

Resolution isn't single handedly the answer, but it obviously helps quite a bit.

True but at a certain point it helps a lot less. This is clearly evident in that 4K PC footage where the assets are exactly the same and even though the resolution is a huge jump the aliasing is still there. Now imagine the assets being much higher quality as seen in the CG cutscenes from games like AC and Halo 4 but at 2K resolution with more robust AA methods.

What res did you watch it at ?

The original

 

[pjbliverpool]

Despite the super high resolution I still see some aliasing which basically confirms what we all already know....resolution is not the answer for better looking games....it's the assets. I think PC games will always suffer this "bottleneck"...and why AAA console exclusives at much lower resolution still look better than the "best" PC games.

Stop trolling. It's 4K, you can't see any aliasing unless it's a result of poor Youtube encoding viewed at none native resolution.

And there is no console exclusive that you can objectively say looks better than BF4. I realize you would like this to be true but repeating it ad nauseam will not make it so.

 

[Davros]

Have to admit I didnt notice any aliasing at 3840x2160
ps: pj never said the assets had changed