Post by KostaAndreadis @ 02:11pm 20/09/16 | 6 Comments
The Battlefield website now lists the PC system requirements for Battlefield 1, letting you know what sort of horse power you'll need to effectively horse around. On horseback! And they're not too shabby, with the latest version of DICE's Frostbite engine being touted as the most optimised yet.
The recommended video cards are the GeForce GTX 1060 and the Radeon RX 480, which is good to know. Here the specs.
oh yes, those jaw dropping particles of sand we've grown so fond of in modern games.
game devs what do we want? gamers MORE SAND! devs when do we want it? gamers apparently we want it now and forever more.
Seriously, stop making games in the sand, give us more jungles n s*** to fight in. Jungles, rivers, dams. Unless I see Indiana Jones and what's his face mr Nazi man riding through this map somewhere, BF1 can go fk itself.
I saw a video the other day where one guy in a room full of other people had connection issues where he magically lost connection to the server while everyone else was fine. I wonder out of all the good videos we see, how many people experience crashes and disconnects. After being exposed to TWO battlefield games exactly the same on that front, server crashes, glitchy net code, client disconnects, complaints about losing connection to the server only to immediately start up another game and have no issues.
Whoop, did you play Star Wars BF? BF1 has a very very similar engine and the quality technical-wise was fantastic. SWBF is one of the least glitch games that EA/DICE have released in a long time and this Beta was quite good too. Remember it was a beta.
In contrast, I 100% agree with you on BF3/4. Hands down the most disappointing BF games I have ever played. S*** maps, s*** balancing, very buggy, very glitchy, stupid physics issues and BF4 had broken netcode for a good 3 months at least.
I recall seeing some pretty lush forest/jungle scenes in the original trailer? its the part where you see the mustard gas exploding in that gully, and theres a block wall in the background cover with vines and stuff. That looked pretty heavy vegetation wise. Maybe that is in the single player part of the game, but I do hope it is a MP map though.
I found Battlefield 3-4 to be good games. Yeah, they do have issues but I never experienced too many of them myself. Battlefront did not have many issues....except for the game itself.....So DICE can make a polished product, but I assume they had to because Disney would have all over EA if they pushed Battlefront out with BF4 type problems.
I want to play it again. Waiting a whole month is going to suck but I have a bunch of games to keep my occupied with I guess.
Posted 03:29pm 20/9/16
game devs what do we want?
gamers MORE SAND!
devs when do we want it?
gamers apparently we want it now and forever more.
Seriously, stop making games in the sand, give us more jungles n s*** to fight in. Jungles, rivers, dams. Unless I see Indiana Jones and what's his face mr Nazi man riding through this map somewhere, BF1 can go fk itself.
I saw a video the other day where one guy in a room full of other people had connection issues where he magically lost connection to the server while everyone else was fine. I wonder out of all the good videos we see, how many people experience crashes and disconnects. After being exposed to TWO battlefield games exactly the same on that front, server crashes, glitchy net code, client disconnects, complaints about losing connection to the server only to immediately start up another game and have no issues.
Nope.
Posted 04:23pm 20/9/16
Posted 05:50pm 20/9/16
In contrast, I 100% agree with you on BF3/4. Hands down the most disappointing BF games I have ever played. S*** maps, s*** balancing, very buggy, very glitchy, stupid physics issues and BF4 had broken netcode for a good 3 months at least.
Posted 06:13pm 20/9/16
Posted 09:37pm 21/9/16
Posted 04:14am 22/9/16
I want to play it again. Waiting a whole month is going to suck but I have a bunch of games to keep my occupied with I guess.