bit-gamer.net

DICE devs talk up the Frostbite 3 engine

DICE devs talk up the Frostbite 3 engine

EA's DICE studio has released a video demonstrating some of the features and advances due to drop in Battlefield 4 and its next-generation Frostbite 3 engine.

Electronic Arts is building up the buzz ahead of the release of Battlefield 4 with the unveiling of new features introduced in the next-generation Frostbite 3 game engine, including promises of scalability right the way from mobile devices to next-generation consoles.

In the video, developers from the company's DICE subsidiary extol the benefits of the new iteration of Frostbite, which will be one of two engines - the other being Ignite, designed for EA's sports games - driving the company's next-generation output. Since development started in 2006, Frostbite has been used for games including 2008's Battlefield: Bad Company, 2009's Battlefield 1943, and with the launch of Frostbite 2 in 2011 with Battlefield 3 has found its way into EA's Need for Speed racing series as well as third-party titles.

Frostbite 3, however, is the company's attempt to make it more appealing to cross-platform developers - hence the company talking up scalability. Games already confirmed to be based around Frostbite 3 include the predictable - from Battlefield 4, Need for Speed: Rivals and Mirror's Edge 2 - to casual titles including tower-defence follow-up Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare. While none of these have been confirmed as smartphone games yet - with companies concentrating instead of promises to launch on Windows, Xbox and PlayStation - comments from DICE executives certainly suggest that's the way the company is heading.

'We have one unified program where you can create content that will run on everything from an iPhone to a next-gen console,' claims Frank Vitz, DICE's creative director in charge of the Frostbite engine. 'Now it's really coming on-line and enabling the game designers to do more than they've ever been able to do before.'

It's not just about scalability, however: DICE is promising some significant improvements in the graphical fidelity and believability of the engine, too. 'Frostbite [3] allows everything to work together, claims Vitz. 'The waves on the beach, the wind blowing the whitecaps - even the clouds overhead all move consistently with the forces of nature. It's sort of subtle, but it creates this sense of seamless reality. So, the large world coupled with a lot of people running around interacting with you really pays off in [Frostbite 3-based] Battlefield 4.'

With impressive demonstrations of destructive environments, powered by what the company calls 'Levolution' - a system that allows multiplayer maps to be modified with the destruction of objects up to and including multi-story skyscrapers - and promises of dynamic ocean combat and more realistic wave interactions, the video is certainly worth watching both for fans of the Battlefield series and those who are interested to see what the next console generation will bring to the PC gaming.

The official video is reproduced below, with more information available on the Frostbite 3 micro-site.

32 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
pantalaimon 25th June 2013, 12:49 Quote
Hope that dynamic water makes it into the multiplayer. Water is god awful in BF3 and the clips from the video that are definitely MP only look slightly better. Other clips look like SP.
sixfootsideburns 25th June 2013, 13:00 Quote
awesome.
damien c 25th June 2013, 13:58 Quote
I must admit this is making me feel the upgrade itch coming on, to replace my GTX 680's for 2 GTX 780's or even 2 Titans unless EVGA bring out some 6Gb 780's.

The amount of detail I saw in that one video, compared to the previous BF4 has just made me realise just how good the Frostbite Engine is but I just hope they have made the player movements feel smoother, rather than feeling like they do in BF3.

That is one of the things that the engine that is used for the Call Of Duty games has over the Frostbite engine is, the player movement is just so much smoother but it lacks in the graphical detail.
konstantine 25th June 2013, 14:09 Quote
Been playing the pre-alpha, and while I can't judge the graphics yet, although from what I've seen in the E3 trailer, no noticeable changes have been made to graphics.
Mechanics wise, it[s as bad as it is in BF3. The game uses some very primitive mechanics and the so called destruction is all scripted and cherry picked.

Dice has wasted most of its time developing a DLC for 10 different platforms. There's nothing new in the upcoming BF that justifies a new BF title.
thom804 25th June 2013, 14:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Been playing the pre-alpha, and while I can't judge the graphics yet, although from what I've seen in the E3 trailer, no noticeable changes have been made to graphics.
Mechanics wise, it[s as bad as it is in BF3. The game uses some very primitive mechanics and the so called destruction is all scripted and cherry picked.

Dice has wasted most of its time developing a DLC for 10 different platforms. There's nothing new in the upcoming BF that justifies a new BF title.

Are you sure you're not just playing BF3?
Everything i've seen from E3 and other gameplay videos seem completely changed
I don't know how you could possibly say the graphics haven't improved. Go take a look at the 17 minutes preview vid on youtube and tell me it's not vastly improved.
Again, not sure how you can say the destruction hasn't been improved. There are vids on youtube where the map has been totally levelled by.

Generally, I just think you might be having a go at BF4 for the sake of it. And, as you've already said, it's pre-alpha....
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 14:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Been playing the pre-alpha, and while I can't judge the graphics yet, although from what I've seen in the E3 trailer, no noticeable changes have been made to graphics.
Mechanics wise, it[s as bad as it is in BF3. The game uses some very primitive mechanics and the so called destruction is all scripted and cherry picked.

Dice has wasted most of its time developing a DLC for 10 different platforms. There's nothing new in the upcoming BF that justifies a new BF title.

Not sure primitive mechanics is really apt for BF. It has a lot going on to make the environments feel real.

Some of the multi-player BF4 looks pretty impressive with destruction and FX. I think we become spoiled rather quickly and don't really appreciate all that goes into it. Same with BF3... It's a few years since release but it's still a visually stunning game.
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 14:26 Quote
DICE have stated in that video that the new ocean wave simulation will be something players can use to their advantage and also that different players see the same waves.... so it's pretty clear that's going into the multi-player regardless of whether it's in alpha.
dyzophoria 25th June 2013, 14:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom804
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Been playing the pre-alpha, and while I can't judge the graphics yet, although from what I've seen in the E3 trailer, no noticeable changes have been made to graphics.
Mechanics wise, it[s as bad as it is in BF3. The game uses some very primitive mechanics and the so called destruction is all scripted and cherry picked.

Dice has wasted most of its time developing a DLC for 10 different platforms. There's nothing new in the upcoming BF that justifies a new BF title.

Are you sure you're not just playing BF3?
Everything i've seen from E3 and other gameplay videos seem completely changed
I don't know how you could possibly say the graphics haven't improved. Go take a look at the 17 minutes preview vid on youtube and tell me it's not vastly improved.
Again, not sure how you can say the destruction hasn't been improved. There are vids on youtube where the map has been totally levelled by.

Generally, I just think you might be having a go at BF4 for the sake of it. And, as you've already said, it's pre-alpha....

err, I've been in the pre-alpha as well, not sure, but Im pretty sure the graphics are way way better than before (and to think frostbite 2 already has awesome graphics), and im pretty sure everything is not scripted on Multiplayer pre-alpha.
Griffter 25th June 2013, 14:32 Quote
can play on anything yet they said they could not get the frostbite engine to work on the wii-U. all these companies are such big damn liars!!!
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 14:35 Quote
I think Konstantine must have been on the COD ghost alpha... obviously mistaking it for BF.
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 15:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griffter
can play on anything yet they said they could not get the frostbite engine to work on the wii-U. all these companies are such big damn liars!!!

Nintendo still making stuff?
konstantine 25th June 2013, 17:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley Tweedle
I think Konstantine must have been on the COD ghost alpha... obviously mistaking it for BF.

The graphics in the pre-alpha look like s**t, so I'm not judging my assessment of the visuals on the pre-alpha but rather on the game-play demos released at E3.

The mechanics in the game are not different at all from what we got in BF3, which isn't much different from what we've been getting in the past 10 years or so.
Moving the soldier feels like moving a robotic vehicle. You can't perform most of the basic and necessary movements and postures a real-time soldier does.
You can't put your back to the wall and shoot with you're arm only exposed, jump sideways instead walking sideways slowly while being shot at, hold onto ledges and climb up...
You get stuck by every little object, even by a 10cm high sidewalk and have to jump like a rabbit to pass over, instead of simply stepping over and normally bypassing.
You sometimes miss jump when hoping, which is quite silly. So you get a completely scripted feel from any form of mechanics in the damn game.

It's not that different from COD Ghost, graphics or mechanics wise.
Corky42 25th June 2013, 17:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
The mechanics in the game are not different at all from what we got in BF3, which isn't much different from what we've been getting in the past 10 years or so.
Moving the soldier feels like moving a robotic vehicle. You can't perform most of the basic and necessary movements and postures a real-time soldier does.

Isn't this a limitation imposed on all games, we are interacting with a virtual environment with virtual avatars. expecting it to mirror what you can do in real life is perhaps beyond what is possible with today's technology.
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 17:26 Quote
"Moving the soldier feels like moving a robotic vehicle. You can't perform most of the basic and necessary movements and postures a real-time soldier does. " <<< I think you're confusing BF with Arma. I think if you want more detailed movement you need to be on Arma 3. BF3 is arcade fun with visual realism. Ultimately all these FPS games are limited by the control method. Sitting with mouse and keys or numpty controller isn't a natural way to control a human body. Until motion sensing is integrated in a more practical way then there will always be these limitations. I would find the numerous keys required to allow extra body movement on Arma 3 quite off-putting and tedious to learn. From the way you're talking... I think you're also waiting for that more natural and realistic method of FPS control. Back when I was playing CSS many years ago... I setup some foot-switches to use for jump and crouch. It was a more intuitive way of playing an FPS.
konstantine 25th June 2013, 18:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley Tweedle
"Moving the soldier feels like moving a robotic vehicle. You can't perform most of the basic and necessary movements and postures a real-time soldier does. " <<< I think you're confusing BF with Arma. I think if you want more detailed movement you need to be on Arma 3. BF3 is arcade fun with visual realism. Ultimately all these FPS games are limited by the control method. Sitting with mouse and keys or numpty controller isn't a natural way to control a human body. Until motion sensing is integrated in a more practical way then there will always be these limitations. I would find the numerous keys required to allow extra body movement on Arma 3 quite off-putting and tedious to learn. From the way you're talking... I think you're also waiting for that more natural and realistic method of FPS control. Back when I was playing CSS many years ago... I setup some foot-switches to use for jump and crouch. It was a more intuitive way of playing an FPS.

Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound. Jumping sideways, stepping over things like the sidewalk instead having to jump, holding onto things to climb, putting your back to the wall, rolling sideways when laying prone ... don't really require extra input controls

Now if you know how to type, you should be able to access ~25 keyboard keys with your left hand. And with a ~9-button gaming mouse, you've get crap load of buttons to use. Those Madcaz mice with horizontal scrolls can be put into great use in many ways.

The point is: We're not getting a new game. It's not visually or mechanically different, not at least noticeably.
And there is a reason for that; a reason why they didn't improve those aspects in the game. It's because it's cross-platform. They had multiple platforms to code for, but most importantly, they had to take into consideration the limits of those weak-a*s consoles, including the upcoming ones.
damien c 25th June 2013, 18:28 Quote
Well let's see what the Beta looks like and the actual release of the game to see how the graphics look.
Corky42 25th June 2013, 18:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound.

But they do make a game that is meant to be a fluid and enjoyable experience into a complicated game of finger ninja.

And you may say 'We're not getting a new game' but the marketing blurb says Frostbite 3 is 'one unified program where you can create content that will run on everything from an iPhone to a next-gen console' and even if you doubt we are getting anything new visually or mechanically it is different as its called frostbite 3 and not 2
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 19:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley Tweedle
"Moving the soldier feels like moving a robotic vehicle. You can't perform most of the basic and necessary movements and postures a real-time soldier does. " <<< I think you're confusing BF with Arma. I think if you want more detailed movement you need to be on Arma 3. BF3 is arcade fun with visual realism. Ultimately all these FPS games are limited by the control method. Sitting with mouse and keys or numpty controller isn't a natural way to control a human body. Until motion sensing is integrated in a more practical way then there will always be these limitations. I would find the numerous keys required to allow extra body movement on Arma 3 quite off-putting and tedious to learn. From the way you're talking... I think you're also waiting for that more natural and realistic method of FPS control. Back when I was playing CSS many years ago... I setup some foot-switches to use for jump and crouch. It was a more intuitive way of playing an FPS.

Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound. Jumping sideways, stepping over things like the sidewalk instead having to jump, holding onto things to climb, putting your back to the wall, rolling sideways when laying prone ... don't really require extra input controls

Now if you know how to type, you should be able to access ~25 keyboard keys with your left hand. And with a ~9-button gaming mouse, you've get crap load of buttons to use. Those Madcaz mice with horizontal scrolls can be put into great use in many ways.

The point is: We're not getting a new game. It's not visually or mechanically different, not at least noticeably.
And there is a reason for that; a reason why they didn't improve those aspects in the game. It's because it's cross-platform. They had multiple platforms to code for, but most importantly, they had to take into consideration the limits of those weak-a*s consoles, including the upcoming ones.

I differ-gree. BF has been cross-platform for a long time. Nevertheless DICE coded first and foremost for PC with an engine that scales DOWN to poorer platforms. Nothing has changed in that regard. I can see visual differences in BF4... more particle FX, higher res textures... yes there is more super-destructo-ness too. If you're expecting a completely different game then that's a big mistake. But from the images I have seen and from the videos... BF4 has increased in FX and fidelity.

I personally have no trouble in getting around. I don't need a whole bunch of lean positions and have no interest in learning the plethora of keys you say is easy to pickup. BF works for me... it's fast to play but still takes months to perfect.

For some reason you have a downer on the game... that's the problem when people have unrealistic expectations.... I've played BF3 long enough to know the differences visually to what I've seen on BF4 pics and vids and I can certainly spot the improvements.

The times I got stuck on scenery in BF3 were few and far between. I don't mind jumping over things because that's what people do in FPS games. In fact I think It would be great to make a hollywood blockbuster in the style of an FPS game. Bad Company with real actors and every FPS gaming cliche... Would make for a funny movie.
konstantine 25th June 2013, 23:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound.

But they do make a game that is meant to be a fluid and enjoyable experience into a complicated game of finger ninja.

And you may say 'We're not getting a new game' but the marketing blurb says Frostbite 3 is 'one unified program where you can create content that will run on everything from an iPhone to a next-gen console' and even if you doubt we are getting anything new visually or mechanically it is different as its called frostbite 3 and not 2

You're contradicting yourself. Most of the effects, as I mentioned in my previous comment, do not require extra controls. They're just natural enhancements to the mechanics of the game.
For example:
-Jumping sideways would normally require pressing the jump key + a side key
-Rolling sideways would really require pressing a side key while laying prone
-Not getting stuck by objects on the ground and simply stepping over should be automatic
-Putting your back to the wall and shooting with you're arm only exposed can be done by pressing the forward and sprint key towards the wall
-Tossing a C4 should be more realistic man. The way a C4 explosive is placed is ridiculous. It's a sideway handshake. WTF....

Again, those are basic and elementary movements and postures a real-time soldier can perform.

What's the point of getting the new BF4 if it's no different from the previous BF3? It's like getting a new COD game.
Stanley Tweedle 25th June 2013, 23:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound.

But they do make a game that is meant to be a fluid and enjoyable experience into a complicated game of finger ninja.

And you may say 'We're not getting a new game' but the marketing blurb says Frostbite 3 is 'one unified program where you can create content that will run on everything from an iPhone to a next-gen console' and even if you doubt we are getting anything new visually or mechanically it is different as its called frostbite 3 and not 2

You're contradicting yourself. Most of the effects, as I mentioned in my previous comment, do not require extra controls. They're just natural enhancements to the mechanics of the game.
For example:
-Jumping sideways would normally require pressing the jump key + a side key
-Rolling sideways would really require pressing a side key while laying prone
-Not getting stuck by objects on the ground and simply stepping over should be automatic
-Putting your back to the wall and shooting with you're arm only exposed can be done by pressing the forward and sprint key towards the wall
-Tossing a C4 should be more realistic man. The way a C4 explosive is placed is ridiculous. It's a sideway handshake. WTF....

Again, those are basic and elementary movements and postures a real-time soldier can perform.

What's the point of getting the new BF4 if it's no different from the previous BF3? It's like getting a new COD game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZjSykcTGrNc

^^^ what's not to like?

Reading your long list of complaints I get the feeling you should be starting your own Kickstarter to produce a wargame to your own standards. I actually agree the things you list in your most recent post would be good. It's just that well... BF is still great fun to play even without and you have made some mistakes in your previous posts as well when you fail to see any improvements in the graphics and then suggest that the game engine has been compromised/dumbed down to run on all platforms. That's incorrect and suggests that you don't know the game that well. How many hours have you put in on BF3?

As I mentioned already... Frostbyte is one of the few engines that is optimised first and foremost for PC. BF3 runs on PS3 and egg box 360 but it's a PC game first and that shows in the performance.

BF4 is no different. It begins on PC and scales down to low end systems like PS4 and Egg box 1.
konstantine 25th June 2013, 23:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley Tweedle
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Quote:
Originally Posted by konstantine
Not necessarily. Most of the effects I mentioned are not controls bound.

But they do make a game that is meant to be a fluid and enjoyable experience into a complicated game of finger ninja.

And you may say 'We're not getting a new game' but the marketing blurb says Frostbite 3 is 'one unified program where you can create content that will run on everything from an iPhone to a next-gen console' and even if you doubt we are getting anything new visually or mechanically it is different as its called frostbite 3 and not 2

You're contradicting yourself. Most of the effects, as I mentioned in my previous comment, do not require extra controls. They're just natural enhancements to the mechanics of the game.
For example:
-Jumping sideways would normally require pressing the jump key + a side key
-Rolling sideways would really require pressing a side key while laying prone
-Not getting stuck by objects on the ground and simply stepping over should be automatic
-Putting your back to the wall and shooting with you're arm only exposed can be done by pressing the forward and sprint key towards the wall
-Tossing a C4 should be more realistic man. The way a C4 explosive is placed is ridiculous. It's a sideway handshake. WTF....

Again, those are basic and elementary movements and postures a real-time soldier can perform.

What's the point of getting the new BF4 if it's no different from the previous BF3? It's like getting a new COD game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZjSykcTGrNc

^^^ what's not to like?

Reading your long list of complaints I get the feeling you should be starting your own Kickstarter to produce a wargame to your own standards. I actually agree the things you list in your most recent post would be good. It's just that well... BF is still great fun to play even without and you have made some mistakes in your previous posts as well when you fail to see any improvements in the graphics and then suggest that the game engine has been compromised/dumbed down to run on all platforms. That's incorrect and suggests that you don't know the game that well. How many hours have you put in on BF3?

As I mentioned already... Frostbyte is one of the few engines that is optimised first and foremost for PC. BF3 runs on PS3 and egg box 360 but it's a PC game first and that shows in the performance.

BF4 is no different. It begins on PC and scales down to low end systems like PS4 and Egg box 1.

The point remains valid; the new release offers nothing new in terms of gameplay, as the mechanics are pretty the same and no real changes have been made elsewhere.

You're missing the point. It was fun, but it wont be fun anymore. Doing the same thing over and over again is not gonna stay fun. That's why people demand more realism in game,s so that they can further and further immerse into the game and have that vivid experience.

This doesn't contradict people's complaints about COD games.

Lastly, we don't know for sure which platform the game is optimized for. You dot any inside info or som'in?
Stanley Tweedle 26th June 2013, 00:40 Quote
Dice have always optimized for PC. I'd be disappointed if the did a u-turn now. Any sequel is bound to be more of the same and it does sound very much like you're expecting BF to transform into an ultra realistic battle sim. Are you going to be playing Arma 3?

There is always a danger of people tiring of it in the way they have COD but I'm not going to make any assumptions on BF4. I think you need something like Arma rather than BF4. As far as doing the same thing over and over? Welcome to computer gaming.... endless repetition. Metro 2033... Tunnel crawling for PC gamers.. Metro Last Light... more tunnel crawling but dumbed down for console gamers.

I suspect Battlefield has enough in it to make the new content interesting enough for gamers even if the fight mechanics are the same. New maps, a few new modes. Yes it will be more of the same but given BF3 is still fun to play... I don't think too many will be disappointed.

I would like to see a sequel to 2142. Again that will be more of the same too. BF fight mechanics... it's never gonna be Arma in terms of control and detail.
DriftCarl 26th June 2013, 00:45 Quote
I think konstantine is expecting a little too much. I dont want a super realistic war game, how annoying would it be to not be able to shoot someoen because all he is doing is poking his gun round a corner.
The mechanics are the same for a reason, people like it (cant please everyone ofcourse) I loved BC2, i liived BF3 and play it every night still basically. If it were to change significantly then I wouldnt like it so much.

From what I have seen of the PRE-ALPHA footage, it looks pretty good, the events are not scripted in multiplayer, you need to take down pillars to take down the skyscraper. Scripted is the tower in Caspian boarder going down with 10 tickets left.
The graphics will be much better, and there are new mechanics, the water has waves, its much more dynamic water than any other game I have seen.

It is a shame that you are in pre-alpha, I guess you dont even submit feedback, this is going on your lack of respect for the NDA that you signed that you shouldnt even mention you are in pre-alpha. So either you are lying, or just dont know a good game when you see it
GeorgeStorm 26th June 2013, 00:49 Quote
I wouldn't consider what konstantine is suggesting ridiculous at all (the gun round the corner being the least likely) and it certainly doesn't suddenly make BF a realistic battle simulator like ARMA.

Stuff like jumping whilst shooting would most likely make it less realistic and more 'fun' and +10000000000 to getting stuck on tiny objects on the ground you need to jump over to get past, always baffled me in games when that happened.
Corky42 26th June 2013, 00:54 Quote
@konstantine you are totally missing the point. The BF series of games have never been about realism, as Stanley Tweedle said if you want realism you should play Arma 3.

The BF series of games is about a fluid and enjoyable experience, adding all the thing you list would just get in the way. maybe you need to play a game of DOOM where you couldn't even jump and then play a game of Arma 3 to understand how the mechanics of the game can have a negative affect on how enjoyable a game is.

And BTW can we give the quote walls a rest :(
konstantine 26th June 2013, 02:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
@konstantine you are totally missing the point. The BF series of games have never been about realism, as Stanley Tweedle said if you want realism you should play Arma 3.

The BF series of games is about a fluid and enjoyable experience, adding all the thing you list would just get in the way. maybe you need to play a game of DOOM where you couldn't even jump and then play a game of Arma 3 to understand how the mechanics of the game can have a negative affect on how enjoyable a game is.

And BTW can we give the quote walls a rest :(

Arma 3 sucks. I have the alpha and I just couldn't get into playing it. It's heck of a boring game, and it doesn't make any sense.

Have you seen some of those Syrian Rebels fighting the Syrian Regime army videos on youtube. Those fights look like Battlefield fights.

We the progressive gamers want realism and sensibility in games. We want to be able to make choices in games that we would normally make in a real situation. We don't wanna have to choose from some pretty stupid choices that in a real situation we would never make.

Not being able to put your back to the wall or a lower-hight object so that you can protect yourself while shooting is not acceptable. Not being able to jump sideways and having to move slowly is another limitation.

Just like in real time, you don't have to make them., but, we want CHOICE. And as i explained in my previous comment. Adding all those mechanics wont result in an increase in the number of required input controls, at least not in a big way.
Stanley Tweedle 26th June 2013, 08:12 Quote
The Syrian rebels fighting the Syrian regime use the same physics engine... ANT character animation but running under the Reality engine.

Ultimately your points about movement control are valid... The biggest limitation however is the current control systems we have. My GF can't play FPS because she is used to using her legs to move around rather than pressing keys and moving a mouse. The system is clunky and far from ideal. Not intuitive.

Where we disagree is your expectations for Battlefield 4. You're basically trashing it because it hasn't been fitted with your list of features for the perfect FPS.

I've heard others on bit tech say Arma 3 is good so far.

I've been thinking about more intuitive control systems for FPS games... not relying on keyboard and mouse. The systems where you're strapped in to a baby walker and wear special slippy shoes... they're too bulky and force you to stand. They're never gonna replace the current system. So we have to look at something that would allow foot control for someone sitting. Well I used to use my real feet to jump and crouch in counterstrike source... An intelligent pad under your feet you can use to initiate movement and change of direction... combined with hand motion sensing and Oculus rift. So you see my list for the perfect FPS extends far beyond adding a few extra movement controls tied to an outdated keyboard and mouse system.
greigaitken 26th June 2013, 10:05 Quote
This would have my money by default if it wasn't for all the EA bull.
Currently my gaming pc and business pc are one. That could not be the case should i go down the origin route. Also i'd need a new origin account, my last one got hacked and stolen.
Corky42 26th June 2013, 10:13 Quote
@konstantine, look i get your point you want to play a game where you are able to control your avatar in a more finite way, But the BF series has never been and will never be about that.

The list of FPS is almost endless, some offer a high level of realism with the ability to fully control your avatar, some go for a more fluid faster paced style of game play.

My point is your free to choose what type of FPS best fits the desired features your looking for, to expect a game developer to change the underlining mechanics of a successful game and potentially ruin that game is just pie in the sky thinking.
jon 26th June 2013, 14:11 Quote
All this argument and discussion, but what I really pulled away from the article was this:

Mirror's Edge 2

:)

-J
Stanley Tweedle 26th June 2013, 14:46 Quote
Mirror's Edge would be the ultimate Oculus rift FPS.
ferret141 26th June 2013, 20:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantalaimon
Hope that dynamic water makes it into the multiplayer. Water is god awful in BF3 and the clips from the video that are definitely MP only look slightly better. Other clips look like SP.

The video says it's in there.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums