The Battlefield 4 Thread 2015
- Thread starter ~Mike~
- Start date
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 7,438
Will EA do a sale on this game? Steam is having a Summer sale now, will EA do a Summer sale? I fancy getting this but don't want to spend more than £5.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 10,758
- Location
- West End, Southampton
Well, next best I can do is 31!
Might be of interest to a few, will probably get lost in all the bickering in "that" sub forum...
Got to say, I am very tempted by that 980ti for £500! If only Batman came out now
Its called clever marketing by gibbo, he does it all the time as do all businesses. If he has a product to sell quick, he'll come to forums and be persuasive which will get the buyer to think. Nothing has changed, we still have no reviews and gibbo still under nda.
fury still going to be an epic upgrade for me/us with aging cards.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 10,263
- Location
- UK
Good game of rush yesterday with xinami in bf3 Gulf of Oman. The opposite team couldn't snipe or mortar for **** so parachuting onto every high building was pointless for them. There was a brief Benny Hill moment at the first A MCOM, that thing must have been armed 6 times within a minute 
Whoever parked the amtrac at the side of the last B MCOM did well, provided a great spawn point for everyone and for me to charge in, kill the campers sitting by it and arm it.
I'm taking a liking to the kh2002 also, 2 burst kill when I get it right from medium distance.
Whoever parked the amtrac at the side of the last B MCOM did well, provided a great spawn point for everyone and for me to charge in, kill the campers sitting by it and arm it.
I'm taking a liking to the kh2002 also, 2 burst kill when I get it right from medium distance.
Yeah I completely agree Tony and have no doubt that the furyx is going to beat the 980ti or at the very least match it.
I was mainly referring to his statement about the price, which will likely be true due to very limited stock (apparently) and high demand. I also expect that once the fury x price normalizes, the 980ti will drop regardless of what gibbo says.
I was mainly referring to his statement about the price, which will likely be true due to very limited stock (apparently) and high demand. I also expect that once the fury x price normalizes, the 980ti will drop regardless of what gibbo says.
What server on CTE?
Was this on one of the new 60hz tick rate servers ? or are you on about standard retail ?
also, the update rate is now linked to your FPS which (in my case anyway) means 200hz update rate into the server (as 200fps).
The 3 bullet shoot - 1 bullet register problem has been fixed in latest CTE build. Still a problem in Retail and I won't be going back to Retail until it is fixed.
Check battlenonsense youtube video stream for demo.
It looks like these changes will be rolled into the Retail Summer patch.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,875
- Location
- Hastings
It's very simple to explain, you are missing them. The infantry play / hitreg is pretty good now except for 950rpm+ guns where until 60Hz comes out will always be broken.
Vehicles are completely borked but oh well, can't ask for everything :S
Standard ones 30 tick - I get 125fps (capped) most of the time - dunno if there would be a more optimal fps cap with the changes but I have 125 dialled in muscle memory type thing.
Its not a constant problem and far less glitchy than it used to be but I still find it more "ropey" at a fundamental level - I usually have the lowest or one of the lowest pings on the server and struggle quite a bit against people who have above the server average latency unless I lag myself out to nearer the average ping when its far more even a playing experience but not as responsive either. BF4 seems to converge towards the average ping and I'm used to games where the netcode performs better as your latency decreases to the point where with my ping its like playing on LAN.
I seem to run into that 3/1 bullet thing quite a bit though :S
Can't say my aim is particularly amazing these days but I do know when I'm missing and when I should be hitting. Besides even when I just spray and pray I usually kill people when the "netcode" is cooperating.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,875
- Location
- Hastings
No no the Atk Heli was OP as hell when it was first released. You could do the D flare trick for never ending flares and it had no reload time for TV Missile. Atk Jet was OP when it was released due to the same turning speed but much higher DPS than stealth jets. The SU-50 which had twice the turning speed of all jets was also nerfed fairly early on. So yes Stealth jets were pretty bad except the SU-50.
Unless you are dealing with famas / CZ the 2 bullets in 1 frame thing doesn't happen any more. By limiting your frame rate you are adding input lag and well that's just bad.
Infantry is perfectly playable even if the gunplay is bad, hitreg is now much better than BF3. It's just everything else that sucks
gsync @ 144Hz w/ 125fps framerate cap is pretty negligible input latency wise - atleast in regards to my skill level.
Definitely still getting some instances where the netcode just isn't coping especially in regards to having a low latency against players with over the server average latency - I don't really use burst fire, etc. sadly hard to get a good illustration of it without multiple people capturing footage to compare from the different perspectives and can't be reproduced on demand :S
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,875
- Location
- Hastings
BF4 was measured when it was still 10Hz this makes this test obsolete and doesn't relate to the current state the game is in. In a recent BF4 update they changed from animation as priority / first thing shown to bullets / hits being the priority.
Also he implies he's testing CSGO on a 64 tick server but doesn't say for sure. So kinda of irrelevant now
Also he implies he's testing CSGO on a 64 tick server but doesn't say for sure. So kinda of irrelevant now
BF4 was measured when it was still 10Hz this makes this test obsolete and doesn't relate to the current state the game is in. In a recent BF4 update they changed from animation as priority / first thing shown to bullets / hits being the priority.
Also he implies he's testing CSGO on a 64 tick server but doesn't say for sure. So kinda of irrelevant now
I doubt it. I can't see how GSYNC performance relative to higher frame setups would deteriorate with increases in tick rate. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Actually the increase between 60hz and 120hz in BF4 has little impact on input lag: https://youtu.be/4GnKsqDAmgY?t=4m5s
Ultimately it's your frames that matters of which GSYNC does not seem to be better or worse than running VSYNC off at 300fps.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,875
- Location
- Hastings
Hard to explain without a graph but the difference at higher FPS should show more with a higher update rate if there is even any difference. So the difference between 10 and 30Hz is massive 60 - 120Hz these differences get smaller.
What I am saying it, with a low sample rate it's going to be much harder to extrapolate meaningful data as due to the low sampling rate of 10Hz a hit gets a 1 in 10 chance of being recording where as in 30Hz has a 3 in 10 so any actually differences will (hopefully) be more pronounced.
I was saying 64tick about CSGO not BF4. 128 tick input lag is noticeably less. In CSGO I can tell the difference between 300 and 400fps but this isn't anyway near as apparent in BF4.
edit....What I was saying about priority is actually likely to be the most important change along with 30Hz for BF4. When this video was produced your screen showing the hit would be even more delayed than actuality as there was a focus on animations not dmg / bullets info so all hits are likely to be inaccurate, obviously this doesn't change how g-Sync actually seems to be a reasonable option.
What I am saying it, with a low sample rate it's going to be much harder to extrapolate meaningful data as due to the low sampling rate of 10Hz a hit gets a 1 in 10 chance of being recording where as in 30Hz has a 3 in 10 so any actually differences will (hopefully) be more pronounced.
I was saying 64tick about CSGO not BF4. 128 tick input lag is noticeably less. In CSGO I can tell the difference between 300 and 400fps but this isn't anyway near as apparent in BF4.
edit....What I was saying about priority is actually likely to be the most important change along with 30Hz for BF4. When this video was produced your screen showing the hit would be even more delayed than actuality as there was a focus on animations not dmg / bullets info so all hits are likely to be inaccurate, obviously this doesn't change how g-Sync actually seems to be a reasonable option.
Last edited:
Right but I thought we were talking about input lag? I don't see how an increase in tickrate would adversely impact either GSYNC or using uncaped frames. The reduction in input lag should be relative. The tests above are still valid.
Well regardless I've been playing FPS games long enough to be able to tweak settings to reduce any input lag below the level that would affect my gameplay (if the settings result in less than optimal input latency its below the level that would affect my game these days) or play something else if I can't.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 3,875
- Location
- Hastings
On mobile so a bit hard to do a graph to explain but.
10hz results can be up to 20ms + or -
30hz can be up to 6.66ms + or - depending on which tick you hit as shown by some of the variance in his graph.
That plus the showing damage delay (due to packet priority) that was in the game at the time leads me to conclude that this test is flawed for BF4 even though it does show a (likely) repeatable pattern.
Not arguing that g-sync is bad at all, just that this test due to methodology and the state of the game doesn't show what thr input lag is like now.
10hz results can be up to 20ms + or -
30hz can be up to 6.66ms + or - depending on which tick you hit as shown by some of the variance in his graph.
That plus the showing damage delay (due to packet priority) that was in the game at the time leads me to conclude that this test is flawed for BF4 even though it does show a (likely) repeatable pattern.
Not arguing that g-sync is bad at all, just that this test due to methodology and the state of the game doesn't show what thr input lag is like now.