Battlefield 2042 [PS, XB, PC]
- Thread starter iroboto
- Start date
DICE just being DICE. It has always been like this and always will. Remember BF2?
Server browser was broken for half it's life. BF4's server browser still shows servers being populated with 40+ players but are empty.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Have to at least commend them for working hard to address launch issues (as expected but still worth commending).
Battlefield Briefing - Launch Update & The Road Ahead
Lots of bug fixes.
One thing that I believe they are under-representing that is a real concern.
I don't think it's nearly as rare as they think or want players to believe. But more concerning is that they have still not been able to identify why it is happening so they can't currently address/fix the issue.
Regards,
SB
Battlefield Briefing - Launch Update & The Road Ahead
Lots of bug fixes.
One thing that I believe they are under-representing that is a real concern.
I don't think it's nearly as rare as they think or want players to believe. But more concerning is that they have still not been able to identify why it is happening so they can't currently address/fix the issue.
Regards,
SB
Well it's not as though they have decades of experience with online multiplayer shooting games... oh wait nevermind.
It reads like they have no confidence in the dreadful framerates being improved.
Game is a huge regression. All of the hud customization is gone. The net graph is gone, I think. The netcode they perfected after the disastrous launch of bf4 is gone. Squad management is messed up. It feels like they tried to build the whole thing from scratch instead of leaving the infrastructure in place. I doubt this one will get fixed. I doubt it’ll have enough sales behind it.
Really weird that it would go that way.
Why restart from scratch? I get some things may need a complete overhaul, but to do everything is very awkward.
Yeah graphically it looks outstanding
but from what I read they have neglected the gameplay, so perhaps they spent so much time on the engine they ran out of time to make it fun, though with the heavy lifting done now, the next game with this engine should look and play good (one would think, then agian they might decide to start from scratch again)
we've heard the horror stories of Frostbyte hurting the non DICE developers. I didn't think it would hurt DICE.
It may actually show case how deficient frostbyte really is in supporting the other features that weren't in the traditional battlefield games. I suppose that some form of hot swapping attachments etc was likely more annoying than expected given the challenge bioware had with it with Anthem.
Yeah, maybe Dice forgot how to use version control (like Bioware never figured out during the development of Anthem).
When I visited a computer shop, someone upgraded to an i9 (from an i5) to be able to play this at high frame rate.
He say it was a really fun game. So it seems some people do really like it.
Maybe like how I ignore loot and dislike the various busy work in Destiny 2 of doing things on repeat just to get x to unlock step Y and then need to repeat Z to progress to step a and so on. But people on Destiny subreddit really really like the ludicrous amounts of loot and the busy work.
If by high framerate he means 50-90 fps then maybe. I have 1080ti, 6700k and 32GB ram all overclocked. My experience is similar to BF4 on a PS3. So even ignoring all the other issues that alone makes it bottom of the barrel. This is with every setting at the lowest possible too btw so the game looks terrible.
People shouldn't be surprised by "low" frames for this game on PC. The PS5/XSX performance target is 60 FPS with a modern 8-core Zen2 CPU. There's no guarantee that even a 5950X or i9 could run that same workload at 144Hz.
Hypothetically, if you have a 8-core CPU peg at 100% utilization and only managing 60 FPS and you want to double the FPS, you'll need to double the clock (and hope your memory subsystem can keep up) or double the core count (and hope the engine scales perfectly), good luck with that. Last gen Jaguar CPU's were such crap in comparison to any modern CPU that I think it was really easy for PC games to brute force 120/144 FPS.
I've been playing this game on PS5 and the performance here has been very stable and pretty decent. I don't really notice many frame drops or anything like that.
Hypothetically, if you have a 8-core CPU peg at 100% utilization and only managing 60 FPS and you want to double the FPS, you'll need to double the clock (and hope your memory subsystem can keep up) or double the core count (and hope the engine scales perfectly), good luck with that. Last gen Jaguar CPU's were such crap in comparison to any modern CPU that I think it was really easy for PC games to brute force 120/144 FPS.
I've been playing this game on PS5 and the performance here has been very stable and pretty decent. I don't really notice many frame drops or anything like that.
No PC in existence can even maintain 60 fps on all low settings. This is a very poorly developed game.
