**XBOX ONE** Official Thread

[Davey_Pitch]

As above - there's a large gap between what is possible on the hardware and these expectations from DICE. In short: I don't believe them.

I expect there to be compromises in image quality when the game is released to achieve 60 FPS or in reality sync drops to 30 in multiplayer due to the natural fluctuations in what can happen in gameplay (e.g. tank explosions, building collapses).

There's no doubt the PC version will be better but it'll cost a lot more to make it look significantly better .

I don't see what your problem is. Dice have never said the game will look as good on the next gen consoles as it does in the gameplay videos we've seen so far. Gaming sites have confirmed that the PS4/XB1 games won't look as pretty, but all have said and confirmed that it will run at 60FPS.

 

[Rusty0611]

The original point was that 60 FPS on the console was the be all and end all when deciding whether to update a PC and the Xbox One offered that as more easily and at a lower price point.

My point was that: a) I doubt in reality if that will actually occur b) if it does significant reductions in image quality will be required to achieve this compared to the PC version

It's not that difficult to understand.

I don't see what your problem is. Dice have never said the game will look as good on the next gen consoles as it does in the gameplay videos we've seen so far. Gaming sites have confirmed that the PS4/XB1 games won't look as pretty, but all have said and confirmed that it will run at 60FPS.

You're reading something I haven't actually said now though.

We'll see when the game is released. I'll be interested to see what they can get out of the hardware comparative to the image quality and at what frame rate. As I've said, I don't believe 60 FPS will be possible in reality. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. The equivalent hardware in PCs would struggle to keep 60 FPS in BF3 on medium settings is all.

 

[antijoke]

So Rusty which console are you buying from the next gen?

 

[Rusty0611]

PS4 90%. Still not fully decided. Final decision will be based on what my mates do but they're all cheapskates so are likely to get the cheapest one.

 

[Ryan-3]

Has anyone placed an order with Microsoft's store? I did and am just wondering what are they like for delivery? At the bottom it says standard delivery takes upto 7 business days.

By the way if anyone is still wanting the FIFA 14 with XBOX DAY ONE EDITION you can still order it from Microsoft...it's in stock now as I post.

Here's the link: http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msuk/en_GB/pdp/Xbox-One-Day-One-+-FIFA-14/productID.282127100

It won't be standard delivery and should come on release day unless you live in an area that is more remote. I ordered from them as they had the Day One edition and at the time there was mass confusion over whether FIFA was bundled with all, or just day one. They've took 3 pound for the pre-order (from my debit card.. ). I believe they use UPS for their deliveries too.

Forza 5 was ordered from game as only they sell the collectors

 

[Davey_Pitch]

The original point was that 60 FPS on the console was the be all and end all when deciding whether to update a PC and the Xbox One offered that as more easily and at a lower price point.

My point was that: a) I doubt in reality if that will actually occur b) if it does significant reductions in image quality will be required to achieve this compared to the PC version

It's not that difficult to understand.

No, it's not difficult to understand, but it's also completely obvious. No one expects the console versions to look like the PC version, so of course there will be a reduction in image quality to achieve 60 FPS. Still don't see what your problem is, as Dice has never said it will look the same on next gen and PC. Perhaps you've made the mistake in thinking that they'll have the same image quality on PC and next gen.

You're trying to argue a point that doesn't need arguing, hence my confusion.

 

[Thesnipergecko]

Must resist the temptation of getting a One just for Dead Rising 3.

 

[Davey_Pitch]

Must resist the temptation of getting a One just for Dead Rising 3.

Heh, just how tempted are you?

 

[Rusty0611]

No, it's not difficult to understand, but it's also completely obvious. No one expects the console versions to look like the PC version, so of course there will be a reduction in image quality to achieve 60 FPS. Still don't see what your problem is, as Dice has never said it will look the same on next gen and PC. Perhaps you've made the mistake in thinking that they'll have the same image quality on PC and next gen.

You're trying to argue a point that doesn't need arguing, hence my confusion.

All based on the assumption that it will actually run at 60 FPS which again based on experience of using roughly equivalent PC hardware in BF3, I strongly doubt.

I've not made any mistake - I know that of course it will need to have image quality reduction to achieve playable FPS never mind 60. My point was that does the assumed 60 FPS make the Xbox One automatically a better solution to an upgraded PC? I argued against this and provided reasons why.

The problem is that you've taken my reasonings as the actual thread of my point and as a sleight against the Xbox One (as in it needing to reduce IQ) whereas my original point was just that running at a higher frame rate isn't the be all and end all in this situation.

 

[beachBOYken]

Must resist the temptation of getting a One just for Dead Rising 3.

yeah looks good , I never got on with the controls or save game method in the first Dead Rising but this looks really good.

 

[Davey_Pitch]

All based on the assumption that it will actually run at 60 FPS which again based on experience of using roughly equivalent PC hardware in BF3, I strongly doubt.

Well call me naive if you want, but when the developer says it will run at 60 FPS, I'll take their word and assume it'll run at 60 FPS. I guess you're free to be as pessimistic as you want to be.

My point was that does the assumed 60 FPS make the Xbox One automatically a better solution to an upgraded PC? I argued against this and provided reasons why.

Assuming you're already getting an Xbox One, I'd argue that taking a graphical hit and paying £45 for the game is a hell of a better option than paying several hundred pounds for PC upgrades to get it running as nice as the previews look. Even more so now that the next gen games will have the same 64 player limit as the PC. If you'd rather spend the several hundred pounds on PC upgrades, that's your call.

The problem is that you've taken my reasonings as the actual thread of my point and as a sleight against the Xbox One (as in it needing to reduce IQ) whereas my original point was just that running at a higher frame rate isn't the be all and end all in this situation.

I haven't taken your comments as a sleight on the Xbox at all. Your original point was simply that "you highly doubt it will run at 60 FPS". I believe you will be proven wrong. I guess we'll find out in a few months.

 

[ps3ud0]

All based on the assumption that it will actually run at 60 FPS which again based on experience of using roughly equivalent PC hardware in BF3, I strongly doubt.

I've not made any mistake - I know that of course it will need to have image quality reduction to achieve playable FPS never mind 60. My point was that does the assumed 60 FPS make the Xbox One automatically a better solution to an upgraded PC? I argued against this and provided reasons why.

The problem is that you've taken my reasonings as the actual thread of my point and as a sleight against the Xbox One (as in it needing to reduce IQ) whereas my original point was just that running at a higher frame rate isn't the be all and end all in this situation.

So are you saying next gen BF4 would have been better for you if they target visuals (higher resolution or higher effects) over FPS (lets say they dropped to 30fps)?

Always going to be compromises, sounds like you dont like the method of compromise DICE chose

ps3ud0

 

[Fr0dders]

There's no doubt the PC version will be better but it'll cost a lot more to make it look significantly better .

Agreed. The next gen consoles have closed the gap meaning playing BF4 on next gen means you won't miss out on much compared with the PC version. You'll miss out on it looking better, and the ability to use a mouse and keyboard. Given his PC can't run "anything" (his words) I don't see the return on the expense needed to upgrade his PC given he's already buying an xbox one. The difference in game experience this time round is going to be minimal

There has long been a belief at Dice that battlefield was a PC game, and to get battlefield onto the console you couldn't just port it across. They did this with battlefield modern combat on the original xbox with the BF2 PC version and it bombed on the xbox.

The thinking at the time was that the target market of console fps gamers, had pretty much all played or owned one of the COD games at some point, and were expecting a COD experience. That's when the stripped back bad company series came out. No prone, no vehicles, small maps, basically just trying to copy COD. It improved in BC2, that had a decent PC version, but was essentially still BF lite with no jets, no prone, focus on rush gameplay etc...

But what weve seen now is an increase in the console battlefield fan base, to the point the console battlefield gamers don't want a COD clone, they want battlefield, in its full PC 64 player conquest large form, on their console.. Something that people didn't seem to want way back with the original battlefield modern combat on the xbox.

Lars has even publicly come out and said that they under estimated console gamers, and realises now that console gamers want the same game PC gamers have, not a dumbed down version to cater to those that like the COD style of gameplay

http://www.bf4blog.com/dice-underestimated-console-gamers/

 

[Clarkson]

Surely if a console and a pc were similar in specs, the console would run it better? Optimisation, etc, yada yada.

I'm just happy for 60fps and 64 players.

 

[Fr0dders]

Assuming you're already getting an Xbox One, I'd argue that taking a graphical hit and paying £45 for the game is a hell of a better option than paying several hundred pounds for PC upgrades to get it running as nice as the previews look. Even more so now that the next gen games will have the same 64 player limit as the PC. If you'd rather spend the several hundred pounds on PC upgrades, that's your call.

This was my point. If you have a PC capable of playing BF4 on PC at above medium graphics, then obviously the PC version is going to look better.

If however you don't, and need to spend many hundreds of pounds upgrading your PC to play it, you won't see much difference vs the xbox one compared with your outlay, given the xbox one version will play the same, run above 720p with 60 fps on medium ish graphics already

Surely if a console and a pc were similar in specs, the console would run it better? Optimisation, etc, yada yada.

I'm just happy for 60fps and 64 players.

Probably, but the beauty of a PC is you're free to choose whatever hardware configuration you want, even one superior to the xbox ones configuration .....

 

[TheVoice]

All based on the assumption that it will actually run at 60 FPS which again based on experience of using roughly equivalent PC hardware in BF3, I strongly doubt.

What's "roughly equivalent hardware" though? We still have no clear picture of what sort of performance we're getting from either of the next-gen consoles so it's very difficult to then draw a comparison to an equivalent PC when history has shown that a lesser console can outperform a 'similar' PC anyway.

If my two year old 6870 can manage 45-60fps (Vsync enabled) BF3 on high settings with some AA and AF at 1920x1200, I think there's a reasonable chance that the next-gen consoles can deliver what DICE are saying.

Not that it matters, because the real point is that it'll be far, far superior to anything we've seen on consoles so far, and with higher framerates to boot.

 

[Rusty0611]

Well call me naive if you want, but when the developer says it will run at 60 FPS, I'll take their word and assume it'll run at 60 FPS. I guess you're free to be as pessimistic as you want to be.

There's always talk of games (even recently) running at 30 FPS locked, 60 FPS locked, full 1080p resolution prior to release and then when the game is released there are compromises. I won't believe it until I see it. It's not pessimism - it's realism based on recent history and the hardware itself.

Assuming you're already getting an Xbox One, I'd argue that taking a graphical hit and paying £45 for the game is a hell of a better option than paying several hundred pounds for PC upgrades to get it running as nice as the previews look. Even more so now that the next gen games will have the same 64 player limit as the PC. If you'd rather spend the several hundred pounds on PC upgrades, that's your call.

This is where it becomes opinionated. I'd say it's better to have a mid range PC and upgrade incrementally from there but each to their own.

I haven't taken your comments as a sleight on the Xbox at all. Your original point was simply that "you highly doubt it will run at 60 FPS". I believe you will be proven wrong. I guess we'll find out in a few months.

That wasn't my original point though. My original point was that even if that was true you could end up (at the extreme end of the scale for arguments sake) with a polished turd running at 60 FPS. So it's important to consider the levels of image quality reduction which has occurred when tossing up a PC / console. Console is of course infinitely easier to get going in.

So are you saying next gen BF4 would have been better for you if they target visuals (higher resolution or higher effects) over FPS (lets say they dropped to 30fps)?

Always going to be compromises, sounds like you dont like the method of compromise DICE chose

ps3ud0

I'm a keyboard and mouse man for FPS so it was never going to be for me personally but I would have preferred they bump image quality to the max and run at lower FPS. You can't please everyone either way you go.

What's "roughly equivalent hardware" though? We still have no clear picture of what sort of performance we're getting from either of the next-gen consoles so it's very difficult to then draw a comparison to an equivalent PC when history has shown that a lesser console can outperform a 'similar' PC anyway.

If my two year old 6870 can manage 45-60fps (Vsync enabled) BF3 on high settings with some AA and AF at 1920x1200, I think there's a reasonable chance that the next-gen consoles can deliver what DICE are saying.

Not that it matters, because the real point is that it'll be far, far superior to anything we've seen on consoles so far, and with higher framerates to boot.

As it is architecturally similar to a PC you can draw comparisons albeit not entirely accurate ones. It is useful to get an idea at least.

Equivalent hardware is very roughly a 7850/7870. Assuming no CPU bottleneck then if you apply AA you're looking at average frame rates between 35-45. It depends on the AA method implemented as well. FXAA is cheap ish but introduces blurring whereas MSAA is better IQ but hits performance harder.

I've never disputed your last point nor really have any opinion on it not even mentioned it. It doesn't matter unless you're considering updating a PC or getting a console.

 

[quickshot89]

Now do I preorder one from work or wait till boxing day

 

[Tingtangmakadingdong]

Now do I preorder one from work or wait till boxing day

Surely work if your getting discount but I reckon there'll be better bundles after or just before Christmas if stock levels are good.

 

[Clarkson]

Probably, but the beauty of a PC is you're free to choose whatever hardware configuration you want, even one superior to the xbox ones configuration .....

Of course, I have a 2 year old PC that probably still has more go in it than the next gen consoles component wise.

My point was, saying a console won't be able to do something because a PC of similar spec can't is pointless due to better optimisation of the hardware for a console game compared to said PC of similar spec.

I'm actually getting a PS4 anyway, not that there'll be any noticeable difference between it and the ONE.