Battlefield 1
- Thread starter Jupiter
- Start date
-
- Tags
- not uncharted 4
I'm leaning towards a 1080 but I'm still undecided depending on final performance. If the 1070 doesn't end up at least as fast as the TitanX then I'll probably go with the 1080. I'll also likely update my CPU but I've no idea what too at the moment. I hate the fact that the 'E' range is effectively 2 generations behind the standard desktop parts. (Kabylake will be released not long after Broadwell E).
You can probably overclock the 1070 to hell and back and surpass Tx performance. If Pascal is in any way similar to Maxwell in terms of overclocking it will be piss easy. I'm running my 970 at 1.5ghz core clock since day 1 without altering voltage whatsoever...
That has to be the most thorough remasters of this gen. Absolutely every asset has been reworked, with dynamic lighing, post-processing, pbr and all other cool stuff. Hope they allow you to jump back and forth from the original like in Halo Aniversary for comparisons.
RenegadeRocks
Legend
thread lock incoming ! 
cos Drake looks sexier than the zepellin gazing guy !
cos Drake looks sexier than the zepellin gazing guy !
Ummm, what?
Guns had iron sights long before WWI. Practically every gun did. The Winchester 30-30 from the 1800's even had an iron sight that the user could adjust for range. I know since I used my grandfather's old US Calvary issue Winchester 30-30 long rifle (relatively rare since most US Calvary issued 30-30s were carbines) as a hunting rifle when I was a teenager.
It is extremely rare to have any cartridge based firearm not have iron sights no matter when it was made.
Heck, most flintlock rifles dating back to the 1600-1700s had some form of iron sights, some of them even had range adjustable iron sights as well. They were quite rare on flintlock pistols, however.
Here's a Russian design from 1654 with iron sights. It's beautiful.
Regards,
SB
I don't have gun, I never know real gun in real life except from my dad's story about his dad at war...
Even than, that gun you showed. Wow it's beauty really reached me. Now I miss my last word in destiny.
Considering that you can optimize other passes to use less samples and can help to resolve image into higher res buffer, I would say that TAA has some very nice advantages for low resolutions.
Heh,
I remember slapping C4 on that RC helicopter drone, flying it into a room full of campers, and bringing the whole thing down on their asses. BFBC2 was friggin awesome.
deathindustrial
Regular
As far as destruction goes, I'll believe it when I see it.
I want this game to be good but DICE deserves zero trust after what they have done with the last two Battlefield iterations, especially with respects to the game working properly at all at release. BF4 was functionally a barely working early access game on consoles with it remaining in the that state for at least the first year and a half. Instead of focusing on fixing their broken game, they released DLC which compounds the scumminess of their behaviour. I am not really sure if they ever fixed the game fully or if it is just that the population went down enough to mask their poorly functioning software.
I want this game to be good but DICE deserves zero trust after what they have done with the last two Battlefield iterations, especially with respects to the game working properly at all at release. BF4 was functionally a barely working early access game on consoles with it remaining in the that state for at least the first year and a half. Instead of focusing on fixing their broken game, they released DLC which compounds the scumminess of their behaviour. I am not really sure if they ever fixed the game fully or if it is just that the population went down enough to mask their poorly functioning software.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
While I'd normally be the first to jump on the hate EA bandwagon and it would be good for consumer perception if all bugs were fixed before new content (DLC) was released, however, the reality isn't so easy to define.
First, the people doing the DLC aren't the people responsible for fixing the bugs. By and large they will be level designers and personnel related to asset creation. In other words, they can't help fix the bugs.
That means that unless you want to fire those people, they have to be doing something. And the only thing they can do is create additional content (DLC).
In the past (and even presently with games that don't do DLC), you hire content creators (level designers, asset creators, etc.) after prototyping and then fire them or lay them off near the end of the project. So your content creation team would basically be like seasonal employees. Only while they are laid off, they might find work at another studio and be unavailable for your next project. So content creation teams could vary greatly from project to project within a company.
Among other things DLC allows them to mitigate that somewhat by keeping them employed full time (assuming DLC does well enough to continue creating and releasing it until the next project needs content creators).
Perhaps they could have delayed the DLC until the bugs were fixed. But that does nothing. The bugs still wouldn't get fixed any quicker. And you run the risk of people getting bored with the game if there is no new content. They could release the DLC for free (like some MMORPGs). But another thing about DLC is that it helps deal with the increasing costs of game development even while games are now cheaper than they ever have been in the history of gaming. If they can't generate revenue from DLC, and they can't increase the price of games to at least match inflation, they are going to be in trouble. MMORPGs can release periodic free content because they have a constant revenue stream. Stand alone games don't have that luxury.
Ideally a game will only release when it's finished and bug free. Unfortunately few developers or publishers have the luxury of doing that. On the PC small developers get around this via Early Access, which allows them to start selling the game despite it still being in development and being in an unfinished state.
Large developers that mainly release on console do the same thing but don't call it Early Access. They call it releasing the game (The latest Street Fighter and Hitman games are prime examples of what should have been called an Early Access release).
Regards,
SB
(((interference)))
Veteran
Some of the new mechanics/features sound pretty interesting:
https://www.vg247.com/2016/05/07/battlefield-1-heres-five-things-you-need-to-know/
https://www.vg247.com/2016/05/07/battlefield-1-heres-five-things-you-need-to-know/
That and the minimum online multiplayer maps should be 64 player capable designs.
No more of this 6 versus 6 CoD war is a joke theme in games...war isn't really fun...and while the videogames should be an escape into fantasy there should be a real sense of danger instead of the joke of surviving a grenade twelve feet away or hiding behind an indestructible wooden or glass or brick door wall thing.
I actually like 6 by 6. The big scale battles were always a bit much for me to be honest. Fun when you are playing with people you know and in a coordinated way, not however if everyone is playing for himself, doesn't care for the objectives and plays it like a TDM game. These people should keep playing 6 vs 6 matches, so they don't clog up the matches where people actually want to combat each other with planes and grandscale warfare.
I haven idea what is going on in that game
