170°

Performance Analysis: Battlefield Hardline Multiplayer

With much to prove after Battlefield 4's stability woes at launch, the delayed Hardline takes no chances in getting it right. Having tracked the game's progress since its early E3 2014 reveal, the recent beta showed a clear advance in overall performance levels, promising a more polished end product on day one. Today, we have the final PlayStation 4 and Xbox One code to hand, where to varying degrees we see Visceral Games' efforts paying off - though it's clear a locked 60fps is still a hard won fixture on console.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
jackanderson19853379d ago

save to say frostbite 3 on the consoles is a mess... subpar resolutions and a choppy framerate

joab7773379d ago

Is 40fps w/ 64 olayers, destruction and map size really an issue. I know it isn't 60fps or 120fps, but is it really bad at 40 fps?

jackanderson19853378d ago

tv's generally don't refresh at 40.. .personally i don't have an issue but some do and considering they touted 1080p/60FPS when it was first announced it's kinda a disheartening thing to see

WellyUK3378d ago

It is bad considering a pc with similar specs would run it at a stable 60 on higher settings... Frostbite is well optimised on PC but it just seems to be not working on consoles.

dantesparda3378d ago (Edited 3378d ago )

Its not the engine that is the problem, its the systems. They got these pathetically weak low power tablet CPUs that have low IPC and are really just two 4 core CPUs taped together that are the problem. You show me any other game on these systems that has 64 players with maps and physics and destruction the size of BF with a better framerate and I'll eat my words. The systems are weak.

Izzy4083378d ago (Edited 3378d ago )

If the game is going to run at 720/900p, then this game should be running at a solid 60fps. In some cases, the fps almost dropped down to the 30s. WTF is that?

KingWookiee3378d ago (Edited 3378d ago )

BF4 is VERY CPU intensive, especially for 64 players. Both consoles do not have very good CPU so frame rate drops will happen at 64 and even 32 player counts.

m1armor3379d ago

You guys also have to realize these consoles have subpar components inside them so..

DivoJones3378d ago

Very true. Most of the good/higher end gaming video cards cost about the same as a console system. So i'm sure there's a fair amount of graphical 'optimizing' done to console versions of games to find that perfect compromise of quality vs performance.

WellyUK3378d ago

Ye but a pc with similar specs can run this game better... The engine just doesn't seem to work on consoles as at 720p this game should be sitting dead on 60 with no drops yet it isn't... You really don't need a good card to run BF games as they are quite well optimised on pc a 270x which is £130 now can run this on med to high at stable 60 heck even at ultra it can sit above 40 most of the time at 1080p.

JasonKCK3378d ago

I just got a gaming laptop as a gift 4 days ago that is on par with current gen consoles. It did cost $200 more than a console but still. There are people building PC's with better specs than PS4/X1 for about the same price. PC will be the only place to find 4k gaming for many years to come. PC is the heavy hitter this time around..

Gamer19823379d ago

Seems like frostbite is a very demanding engine especially once you crank that player count up. People can compare to other games like COD but games like that don't have no where near the player count.

hello123379d ago (Edited 3379d ago )

Nothing demanding about it,they just ported the same assets from BF4 over and redone the maps and campaign.

You can even tell what BF4 maps they redone there is visual cues everywhere.

Even two of the maps coming to Hardline look identical

Ark_3378d ago

You are right about the reskin.
But that doesn't change the fact, that their engine is demanding on CPU and GPU. Playercount, mapsize and ongoing action/destruction have quiet an effect on fps.

joab7773379d ago (Edited 3379d ago )

It's not just the player count. And Battlefield has always struck me as a PC game that was made for the console. What they do is pretty amazing, but obviously very difficult to optimize for current console specs.

In fairness ot is 64 players w some destruction.

Genuine-User3379d ago

720p for current-gen is unacceptable in my opinion.

joab7773379d ago

The problem is that price demand for current consoles was very low when they launched. We get what we get.

Genuine-User3378d ago

Both the PS4 and Xbox one are good enough for better results. Dice should re-work their engine for current gen.

Genuine-User3378d ago

It is, and it's not good enough in my opinion.
My custom built mid-range PC from 2011 holds up better while playing Battlefield than a PS4. Every other game seems to run better on the PS4.

kaizokuspy3378d ago (Edited 3378d ago )

@genuine that's great that your mid range PC is capable of it, but a lot of people buy consoles so they don't have to play on PC. PC games are great, but sometimes I just want to pay my money and have my trash console boot the game up, with out having to worry about viruses, norton security, or learning proper PC maintenance and new lingo for a more powerful, complex platform. In the end, console gaming may not be aesthetically pleasing to the majority of PC gamers, but it comes down to the simplicity of just buying something for $400 that will work with every game developed for it over its life-cycle. I agree though, all console games on all platforms should be 1080p. I think the answer will be Hololens and Morpheus to that respect. 120fps upscaling sounds nice, but let's wait and see.

Yukonsbud3379d ago

So if they made a new frostbite 4 engine could it have better frames and res on ps4 and x1?

joab7773379d ago

Yes. I would imagine it would be optimized for current tech. They could make an engine that works for consoles, but the engine was built for PC, and no way we're they going to build a new engine for Hardline. Most likely we may see it w Battlefield 5.

We realize that B4 was announced and released much quicker than anyone anticipated, and then Hardline. Hopefully, they take a yr off and give us F4 with B5 in 2017.

My worries are with Battlefront if it is using F3. It is a PC engine 1st and foremost.

Yukonsbud3378d ago

Thanks for the input. Hopefully in BF5 we can play with a better resolution than 720p.

Show all comments (34)
150°

Battlefield 1, Hardline, BF4 Servers Are Being Taken Offline by Cheaters; EA Silent on Issue

Cheaters & hackers have been causing grief on Battlefield 1, Hardline & BF4 servers, with nonstop DDoS attacks among other things. Unfortunately, EA has remained silent about it.

-Foxtrot806d ago

Course they are silent, they are hoping people flock to 2042

gamesftw250805d ago

Maybe it was a inside job then haha.

jeromeface805d ago

wouldnt be the first time, titanfall 1+2 anyone?

PapaBop805d ago

Not even if they paid me.. EA always do this with old games with less money potential, if this was Ultimate Team, they'd address and sort it faster than stories could spread. Why invest time in their products when they will just dump it in the following years? Then again EA never could see the forest for the trees.

Inverno805d ago

I imagine after those games were given out for free a couple months back through Amazon, anything that makes people go to 2042 is a plus for them

XiNatsuDragnel806d ago

They want people to go on 2042. My theory

excaliburps805d ago

Nah. I think they can't do anything about it or they want to sink money into fixing it.

Pudge102888805d ago (Edited 805d ago )

EA owns all BF servers so yes, they can do something about it but they refuse to because they dont want ppl playing their old games instead of the new one. Its EA we’re talking about here

pr33k33805d ago

if this happened in 2042, they'd have something to say. which is weird, considering battlefield 1 has more players on steam right now.

Pudge102888805d ago

Its so obvious that EA is doing this or hired ppl to mess up the games so that we’d be forced to have just 1 Battlefield working.

FPS_D3TH805d ago

Honestly it’s probably the devs themselves. They did an update to bf4 way back that kinda made assault rifles doo doo in hopes that people would flock to BF1 cuz BF4 was too perfect

Show all comments (15)
120°

Ranking All The Battlefield Games

From Xfire: "With the next game being a return to the classic XX42 formula, now is as good a time as any to make an utterly definitive and in no possible way controversial ranking of the Battlefield games we've enjoyed over the years, with which undoubtedly nobody will take issue in the comment section. Right? Okay then - here we go, from least good to best."

OMNlPOTENT1076d ago

Battlefield 1 above 4 and Bad Company 2? Not a chance.

Ruegrong1076d ago

battlefield 4 was broken as shit on launch same as battlefield 3

isarai1076d ago

Bad company 2 was still my favorite, sure it was a bit gimped compared to the rest if the series but more fun and far more satisfying weapon unlocks.

XxINFERNUSxX1076d ago (Edited 1076d ago )

Battlefield 1942 + both expansions are my all time favorite, it can still be played online to this day. Vietnam would be my 2nd, 3rd Battlefield 2, last BF2142 the rest I didn't care for. They really need to remake from the ground up in the new engine BF1942. Next year it will be 20 yrs since it was released. If they don't at least to me would be a disservice. ☹

CoNn3rB1075d ago

"erasing that simply reinforces toxic male privilege." I see the writer is one of those types of people...

70°

The Life & Death of the Season Pass

In a time not too long ago, a foul infection spread its way through the games industry. It was a vile illness that burrowed itself in deep, feeding off of greed and the incessant begging of teens desperate to receive funds from their parents. It divided friend groups, suffocated player bases, and was common practice up until recently—it was the season pass.

Read Full Story >>
play.jumpcutonline.co.uk
IanTH1305d ago (Edited 1305d ago )

This doesn't make a ton of sense. Season Passes may slowly fade out for multiplayer games, perhaps, but I don't see them going anywhere in games that are primarily single player. They don't seem to touch on this either, with every game being some kind of online/multiplayer/GaaS title, and nary a mention of a single player game - at least that I saw.

I mean, games like Borderlands 3 just asked people to buy in to the 2nd season pass. Battle passes can't really take over in places that have story driven content and such. So I'd say perhaps they missed a bit of a necessary distinction but, since they claim the death of season pass is at hand, it appears they may have missed how single player games factor into this entirely.