There's an interesting contrast in how a lot of the gaming community feels unimpressed with Battlefront's graphics, while all I see on the CG pro mailing list from VFX supervisors and such high level guys from all round the world is complete awe 
L. Scofield
Veteran
I maintain that the only thing that sucks is the awful bloom on particle effects. Everything else is great, particularly the terrain.
Billy Idol
Legend
Console or PC on ultra?There's an interesting contrast in how a lot of the gaming community feels unimpressed with Battlefront's graphics, while all I see on the CG pro mailing list from VFX supervisors and such high level guys from all round the world is complete awe
cannot access the jakku DLC even after having bought the game day one + season pass, thank you EA
Same message happened when I tried to access it. Then reitried later, linked me to PS Store page, donwloaded it. Then had to relaunch the game and could access it.
There's an interesting contrast in how a lot of the gaming community feels unimpressed with Battlefront's graphics, while all I see on the CG pro mailing list from VFX supervisors and such high level guys from all round the world is complete awe
Maybe gamers are less impressed because they've also played the previous Battlefield games which offer more in terms of destructible environments, map size, player count, vehicles and so on. Gamers can actually tell what's missing and why it looks so good, therefore it's less impressive when you know what's missing and more impressive when you don't :smile:
Kinda like some personal projects where all you think about is what's wrong with it and people keep telling you it's perfect yada yada yada
There's an interesting contrast in how a lot of the gaming community feels unimpressed with Battlefront's graphics, while all I see on the CG pro mailing list from VFX supervisors and such high level guys from all round the world is complete awe
Ehh? It's looked at as almost universally exceptional graphics from what I see, youtube/neogaf/etc. People criticize other things while noting it's undeniably impressive visuals.
Of course you will always get a few nitpickers.
"combat zone" may be bigger in BF4, due to the bigger player counts, but overall background size are the same it's evident when you fly around, plus big starships in the air moving around, tie fighters and X-wing fighting each others and exploding.
There is no destructivity in the environment though.
As for BF4 levolutions they where pre-canned, always the same, I doubt there was much physics involved there.
I liked BF4 a lot, played regularly for one year and a half, had bought the season pass day one. But Battlefront is really refreshing and I like it as much as I liked BF4 back then.
And visually it's really impressive. I don't know if it's doing amazing technical things, or if it's just the combination of great art + photogrammetry + tessellation alone, but the end result look a lot better than BF4 and hardline (at least on PS4)
There is no destructivity in the environment though.
As for BF4 levolutions they where pre-canned, always the same, I doubt there was much physics involved there.
I liked BF4 a lot, played regularly for one year and a half, had bought the season pass day one. But Battlefront is really refreshing and I like it as much as I liked BF4 back then.
And visually it's really impressive. I don't know if it's doing amazing technical things, or if it's just the combination of great art + photogrammetry + tessellation alone, but the end result look a lot better than BF4 and hardline (at least on PS4)
L. Scofield
Veteran
So that's what a current-gen Rogue Squadron game would look like. Not bad but needs more enemy ships.
Billy Idol
Legend
Yes, for me it doesn't look great, it looks good (as I said, the blaster sparkles and effects are great!). One question I asked: did the CGI people really look at the console version, or at PC ultra. The game has lots of aliasing artefacts on PS4, especially when moving around. This degrades the onscreen graphics imo. TAA or higher resolution would be highly welcome imo.
The other problem I have with it is that the world lacks interactivity. It is super static in my personal opinion. The terrain looks superb, like a photo most of the times. But it also plays like a a photo! I can easily see why CGI people are impressed by the games graphics. It must be due to their photogrammetry technique or what it is called that the terrain looks so photo real, but lacks complete interactivity. Maybe, I am also spoiled by the Battlefield games...
I think it is 20 v 20 with an extra 10 or 20 bots on each side.
People who pre-ordered get it a week early. Kind of dumb.
Similar threads
