140°

Does Battlefield 1's Campaign Prove Single-Player in FPSs is Still Relevant?

The single-player FPS experience has certainly waned over the years, but does the very solid Battlefield 1 campaign prove the concept still works?

Ricegum2765d ago

Titanfall 2 should be the topic of this article rather than BF1 in my opinion.

ChronoJoe2764d ago

Agreed, the campaign in TF2 is far better. If anything it's ironic to have people suggesting that Dice's approach of recycling MP content into a campaign is 'good enough' when TF2 demonstrates just one week later that campaign featuring carefully curated and specifically designed singleplayer experience is far superior.

BF1s campaign is 'good enough', but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone for that alone, it's campaign plays second fidle to its multiplayer. It makes sense though. I mean Battlefield has never been known for its singleplayer content. Personally my favourite was the original Bad Company. I liked the light hearted narrative and felt that it fit the atmosphere of the game. While battlefield is often visually authentic, there's a lot of gamey mechanics so watching it take itself too seriously can be awkward at times.

Kyosuke_Sanada2765d ago

What happened to Doom? The Killzone Series? Singularity? Looking for Dice as a saviour is barking up the wrong tree.....

UCForce2765d ago (Edited 2765d ago )

I don't think so. Now I haven't play the game yet, but it's 5 hours long and The story doesn't seem impactful in many ways. The intro was strong but went downhill in other chapters. So Dice still have a long way to improve their story and character development in BF series. I think Titanfall 2 campaign will do better.

Summons752765d ago

It maybe 5-8 hours long but that doesn't determine how impactful the story is. I'm really enjoying these character driven vignettes. It really shows that you are a tiny part of a much bigger picture. You aren't some super soldier who does literally everything for his group that you are usually put in because you just joined or you just recovered from a failed mission. "Go here, Clear this room, Take out that enemy, snipe that, drive this, use this, take point," you are just an average guy that rises to the moment.

UCForce2764d ago

True. But when i finished Titanfall 2 campaign, i will say this Respawn done better job on Campaign than Dice does. It's about character development which is very important in the game. And then Dice didn't nail that on BF 1, but Respawn did. That's just my opinion.

Kornholic2765d ago

No. Titanfall 2 does that better. (And Doom before that)

UCForce2765d ago

I agree with you about Titanfall 2 campaign.

Ricegum2765d ago

Titanfall 2 campaign is exceptional. They've done a fantastic job.

BloodWolf2765d ago

What about halo? Okay, H5's campaign was a dissapointment for some. But in general, the storyline, Canon and universe are pretty solid and intresting. Or GoW? Also a game with nice MP and story?

game4funz2765d ago

Fps. And yes halo also does overall. A much better job.

UCForce2764d ago

But Halo 5 failed character development.

Show all comments (18)
340°

Xbox Series X: 20 FPS Boost Games With Lackluster Upgrades

Xbox Series X's FPS Boost is game-changing when it works and disappointing when it doesn't. While frame rates are often consistent, many titles make concerning sacrifices. This lost compiles 20 FPS Boost games that make major sacrifices, detailing their drawbacks.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
darthv721081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

As someone with the Series S, it makes more of an impact there than on the X. From what i have seen, if the game already supported One X enhancements, then its best to just let it be on the Series X.

Darkwatchman1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

But there’s also 13 games that get FPS Boost on Series X that don’t get it on Series S and another number of game that have higher framerate targets with FPS Boost on Series X than Series S so it’s actually not that cut and dry. It’s pretty disappointing on both ends. The cases where it works as intended or as people may have initially thought it would turn out are too few.

XBManiac1080d ago

If you have Series S and you use backwards compatibility... it is not comparable to Series X. Series S runs vanilla Xbox One versions because of the lack of RAM to emulate Xbox One X ones, for example. Series X is far greater improvement on BC.

1081d ago Replies(3)
gamer78041081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

Great to have options I’ve gone back to playing dragon age inquisition and it runs superbly. Good article though detailing differences.

DJStotty1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

Wow, these downplaying articles are rife this week in the lead up to E3.

Funny how it is only this week these articles are surfacing, even though we knew about Series X not running upgrades from Xbox One X BC games months ago. As per article :-

"If a game doesn't run at a stable performance level, the Microsoft backwards-compatibility team can't adjust game settings or resolution to best reach the target frame rate."

Well yeah, you can not change some other developers game code, only they can enhance their own game via next-gen patches.

There is even one now on how Gamepass for PC is "broken".

Wonder what we will see next? We have had Xbox not making any money on any console ever, gamepass for PC is broken, FPS boost has lackluster upgrades, xbox division is being ran in the red at a consistent loss, gamepass has never been profitable, all in the lead up to Xbox and Bethesda's E3 showing.

Funny times, roll on E3 for me, can't wait.

Darkwatchman1081d ago

The issue with games not running One X enhancements as not as simple as you state as again, the first 2 batches had games that worked with One X enhancements. Prey, UFC 4, and Skyrim ran with Xbox One X enhancements. Then in the final batch, we got Shadow of the Tomb Raider. The issue is the inconsistency.

Microsoft taking the “exploit” away that used to exist for still running with One X code in Fallout 4. That workaround got removed which is disappointing.

“We’ve known for months”

Before the last batch of 74 games, we only had 2-3 games that lost the enhancements? So it’s actually only been ONE month that we’ve seen how much of a dramatic cut many games have had to make.

Regardless, this article exists to compile each title’s rendering set-up with and without FPS Boost. I don’t get why people are always so personally insulted when something isn’t praised to high heavens. I LOVED replaying Prey with FPS Boost because I got the best of both worlds. Also loved replaying Shadow of The Tomb Raider. Any of the games on this list however?? Not so impressive.

DJStotty1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

"So it’s actually only been ONE month"

https://www.ign.com/article...

Since before launch - September 2020

https://twistedvoxel.com/fp...

March 2021

So yeah, it has been known for months, 3 to be precise

All in all, the title description of "lackluster upgrades" is just the series console using the Xbox One S version of the game without the One X enhancements, to achieve the FPS boost.

Says it all when the article needs a disclaimer saying they are essentially "making assumptions"

"While this list compiles information as accurately as possible, some assumptions will be made about dynamic resolution. It is assumed that with the sheer horsepower thrown at base Xbox One code, the dynamic resolution scaler will always hit its peak even with the boosted frame rate. If a bullet-point is book-ended by saying DRS can't be discounted, it's because we didn't have enough information to make a safe claim. "

Darkwatchman1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

What you’re highlighting are from the first 2 batches, which my comment already addressed. It was a VERY SMALL number of games that needed sacrifices so it was safe to assume they were outliers. Now with 97 games, 20 of them using Xbox One base code(and a large portion also just being games that never got enhanced to begin with so it’s not actually 77 enhanced One X titles that keep them), it’s a much larger issue than the first 2 batches indiciated. It wasn’t until the final batch in late April or early May, that we saw just how limited the feature is and just how limited Microsoft’s lack of user choice in letting us keep the enhancements is.

Also, that first link is irrelevant because that’s about Series S, a whole separate conversation. This article and conversation is about Series X. Also, at least the article is transparent when it is making an assumption rather than many game journalists that simply regurgitate PR speak as fact, spreading misinformation. When those games revert to base Xbox One code, it’s a fact that they’re going to be using the Xbox One resolution range for that title. The assumption is whether it locks to the top-end or if it drops below the max resolution the DRS was set at for base Xbox One. For many games, we have the data to safely say it’s running at the max resolution. For others, we don’t. It’s not like the article is just pulling resolutions out of its ass.

DJStotty1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

I simply said the following :-

"We knew about Series X not running Xbox One X versions of BC games months ago" - Fact, regardless of how you want to spin it about batches. 20 games (the ones in the list) run the Xbox One code, like you said, but as stated by the teams themselves, this is to enable FPS boost.

It is only an issue, for those that want the FPS boost, along with the One X enhancements, for the majority, they will take the sacrifice of resolution downgrades, to play at a higher framerate, if that is what they want.

Best explained by the article itself :-

"Unfortunately, FPS Boost has hard limits because no game code is being touched. If a game doesn't run at a stable performance level, the Microsoft backwards-compatibility team can't adjust game settings or resolution to best reach the target frame rate."

So what they are essentially saying, is they can not reprogram games they do not own, to enable the resolution to be stable, along with using FPS boost, so they have to use the base code, to enable the doubling of framerate.

If they started delving and dabbling in other games source code, they will have a mightily fine and hefty lawsuit coming there way.

This will only be addressed for the 20 games in question, via a developer patch. Expect these to be fixed in due course as and when.

But to label things as "lackluster upgrades" when there is only 1 upgrade involved FPS boost, is nothing short of fanboyish.

DJStotty1081d ago (Edited 1081d ago )

In short :-

All 20 games on the list, are running at Xbox One resolution with FPS boost enabled, instead of the Xbox One X enhanced versions resolution.

This is a known issue, even when running the same games through the BC program.

Show all comments (18)
50°

Celebrate Armistice Day with These 4 World War I Games

This Armistice Day, take a few moments to revisit the early 20th-century war in a digital historical setting. The following games recreate elements of the Great War, immersing players in an experience that may help them appreciate the reality of the fight that cost more than 9 million lives.

Read Full Story >>
sjrresearch.tumblr.com
190°

4 famous games that completely butchered history

Bárbara writes: "History-inspired games have been around for a while and I’m pretty sure every gamer has come across one or two in their lifetime. And while they can be incredibly fun to play, their historical accuracy is often pretty shaky. Don’t get me wrong, in recent years developers have started to work harder to get facts right, but we’re still far from reality. Today we will explore 4 big games that butchered the chapters of history they are based on."

Read Full Story >>
squadstate.com
1375d ago
Sciurus_vulgaris1375d ago

EA tried to market Battlefield 1 as an epic WW1 period piece. It was really just a hybrid of stripped down Battlefield 4 and Star Wars Battlefront (2015) disguised as WW1 shooter.

KyRo1375d ago (Edited 1375d ago )

I'm not sure what it was you played but it certainly weren't BF1. The campaign showing the different periods of the war through the eyes of different soldiers was a good way to show the harsh reality of a WW. Was it groundbreaking? No, but it was a good effort.

It also played nothing like SW and added a whole heap of things to the BF formula to simply be called a reskin.

Sciurus_vulgaris1374d ago

The “harsh reality” of WW1 was not shown by BF1. There is mission where the player is wearing tank-like armour that is repeatedly stated as being near impervious to damage. Metal armour existed in WW1, but was quickly abandoned as it wasn’t effective against bullets or explosives. Or the other reality breaking mission we’re you play as a man with superhuman speed....

BF1 streamed down the guns mechanics making all weapons easier to use. Classes were marginalized and team-play was stripped down. BF1 focused on chaotic gameplay with no emphasis on strategy, just like Battlefront. Reduced gun skill , again just like Battlefront.

HyperMoused1375d ago

So you you are telling me historically you cant jump off a ten story building into hay and live.

Unknown_Gamer57941375d ago (Edited 1375d ago )

Indeed. Ezio actually died in ACII when he jumped off that tall building in Florence. If I recall correctly, that one was actually a cart with a pile of flower petals. Everything that happened after that was him in the afterlife envisioning where life would have taken him had he lived. Clearly the guy had a grim view on his future...

lonewolf101374d ago

I should of read this before I juuuuummmppee................. ............................... .....