So i know alot are wondering, if Dice upgraded there frostbite engine from 3 to 4
FB3 Engine has been out for quite sometime and is in real bad need of improvements/fixes and so on
Anyone have any ideas?
Battlefield 1
I preferred the old frostbite engines from the Bad Company series. They had more destruction.
I thought it still was FB3 but with some upgrades. If it needed to go to 4 it would have a major change.
FB3 has known issues and stuff, But if they upgraded to FB4 it would be improved graphics/same destruction but better, better game audio, etc
I was thinking the same thing. If you noticed in the trailer. it only showed the word Frostbite. they didn’t have Frostbite 3 listed, so it makes me wonder if BF1 is going to have Frostbite 4 and they just haven’t revealed it yet.
battlefront uses FB3 and they gonna use the same engine for battlefield 1…
Star Wars Battlefront featured an un-numbered version of Frostbite however that was clearly an upgrade of the engine. I suspect that the engine is going to constantly be upgraded instead than Frostbite 4.
Also in terms of the destruction in Bad Company Games, the mechanics that are used in the engine for that still exist in Frostbite 3, just not used to the the extent that Bad Company did. According to multiple sources Battlefield 1 will have a Bad Company destruction.
If you remember the reveal some people said that the was too much destruction in Battlefield 1 at the moment and it needed to be balanced still.
They also said the same thing (too much destruction and needs balanced) with BF3 though. I mean, what they say is true, there is such a thing as too much…but I hope they have like a combination of BC2 and BF3. Small buildings that could be easily destroyed can be legitimately destroyed…and then in like cities and such it would be more like BF3 were you blow off facades and leave things in rubble but not quite completely demoed.
well the frostbite engine is best in the world lets just qualify that up front. I think there were server provider issues at fault more so than game engine issues. Look at whats taking place youve got scale, lighting, draw distances, varying heights and levels, vehicle mechanics/physics, a tonne of weapon variants and considerations (velocity/rof/bullet spread/ recoil/damage, hipfire. ads,ttks, dmg over ranges and attachments) for each class like no other shooter in the marketcrisp graphics and nice colour tones. The attention to detail in smoke. haze. rubble,flares, varing gadgets, attachments, infareds, water effects, sounds and excellent levolution advancements that provide atmosphere and variation as well as interactivity and still keep a decent amount of destructible environments depending upon map. Most office buildings come down on most maps. BFBC2 destruction wasnt more prelevalent there was just less buildings of smaller size and easier to collapse.
BF4 has thankfully added a return to varying heights, building tops to two layered water system which is the best in any game ive played. Its the perfect accompanyment that allows gunplay at surface while a form of evasion underneath. You dont want dudes hiding under the water and being able to shoot you 360deg motion requirements. Forcing battles to surface is clever and keeps it lean, manageable.
Elevators and ladders add depth and a relatively safe advantage for snipers. Many complain but really if choppas did their job clearing the rooftops thosee who bang em deserve what they get. I think its the beacons that are unnecessary. Often the reason rooftops remain crowded comes down to a beacon. When you take the risk by going up to a roof to clear the advantage is def to those holding prepare positions. If an attacker gets one kill a time then over time should be rewarded for the often high cost. Beacons ruin that balance. Using the jets and more so choppas to reach these structures is good enough. It would be improved if you could somehow relay a msg to pilot to drop you off at your pref location. hoping as this gen gets better full team chat becomes available which was a highlight of BF2MC you really got to engage with your community more. You could also lay off flags to farm, and liase with vehicles better.
Having full team chat off course would be encouraged by owners of server, but yeah that would be a huge development for 64 player. Those servers where it was requested team chat only would easily be most popular. They were on BF3.
Not sure where the BF4 bashing comes from, this is clearly the most advanced BF weve seen and brings some huge gains not found in other games. I think some better map design required, Seige is still full of good flag battles and Zavods a winner as is thee Dragons Teeth DLC. The BF3 remakes are all excellent. The China Rising are dull, too open, too many vehicles. The Naval Strike has a couple of ok maps but a couple of ordinary. Last Stand are pretty bad tbh, Karelia is ok but Hangar 21 would be better with no vehicles just pods. Hammerhead has too many heavy vehicles, maybe limit to one choppa rewarded to those who cap a certain flag. Most of that map is no go for infy due to large distances to traverse between flags you often get caught in open or capping a flag to only have a tank roll in before you finish thus forcing you to pretty much use a mbt or lav yourself. Its a bit soleless. Dragon Valleys a nice map.
The problem last few years for Premium owners though is not enough DLC servers up n running, or at least full rotation playlists so over a 2yr lifecycle as DICE prefer with BF series it does get a little stale and prematurely ends the game.
I understand this is because non owners cant play, however having a quickmatch full rotation or just call it THE PREMIUM SERVER where premium owners at least have a chance to congregrate.
Currently mixing DLC or creative variety of maps from each here in Australia dont stay up very long as they dont pick up Quickmatch searches being that the moment you mix they become ranked. Only official servers get quickmatch searchers. Its an issue.
Either DICE reduce the cost of Premium and cutdown the DLC content or they take better care of their PREMIUM/FULL ROTATION options thru Quickmatch. 9maps over 2yrs is killing your community at end of each game. Many arent buying Premium at all (bloody kids and late comers) so maybe a more attractive price point is needed… Id rather 20 maps played than 32 where 23 of them dont get a look in because premium is $69. In countries like Australia it was a real issue for BF3 and even worse BF4. You need to do less for like $29.95 max for 20maps or $39.955 if youre gonna do 32.
If BF1 goes the same way Aussies arent going to bother with PREMIUM as we dont have the uptake. The kids dont buy it, its another expense. If there was a way where you could promote premium all map rotation or all premium members get notification if a server starts. Maybe a special way of identifying PREM members when scanning other servers soo you can target those members directly if you try getting full rotation up.
Your PREMIUM def needs a fresh approach so that more take it up…reward those who have it as 2yrs 9maps isnt good enough. Be nice if you start looking at larger Vanilla base to 15 or 16 even if it means higher cost. As long as PREMIUM comes down so kids can justify the purchase. Currently 9maps base and LIMITED ed bonus maps that arent inc in base vanilla rotation is again hurting your base/longevity of game.
Its back ended, dont offer the no frills standard edition just start out with 13maps at the LIM ed price. Why? cos majority of users take this option, the is counter productive to rewarding those customers who buy it all but get little value for doing so if the damn bonus content hasnt the support. Standard edition is undercutting your LIM ed Prem customers. You real pitchpoint should be how many vanilla maps are we delivering over 2yrs or youre better off doing annual titles cos you aint carrying your market thru the full term and opening the door to other titles.