waht does such a big brand have such outdated graphics??

[Maichevsky]

I really don't get it, it is weird as hell

[Maichevsky]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Hillbilly:

The one thing I focus on while trying to gun down people in a fast paced fps shooter is the graphics. Man those leaves better be spot on while I am slaying my enemies. I just hate it when they take my focus away from all the action because how bad they are.

Running a 6900xt at medium graphics because it's a multiplayer shooter. I say screw ultra and focus on higher fps. Ultra is saved for coop or single player games where a higher fps isn't as important but graphics are. Any program used to enhance the gaming experience also brings in higher lag as they are dealing with generated frames.

yeah I still play Rocket League daily, game play is always more important then graphics. But we are talking about the GRAPHICS here. You know it is possible to separate those two things don't you? Not that hard to understand. Also even BF 5 looked way better, and that game is many years old, so the point you are trying to make is complete nonsense. It is 2023, a massive multiplayer game doesn't have to look like it is 2012 :)

[Maichevsky]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Henlooo:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Maichevsky:

have you played the fist new Modern Warfare from like five years ago? Well bf 2042 looks like 10 years older then that game. Also the BF before this one even looked way better

stop lying mw3 looks very very bad compared to bf 2042

you must be blind to thinks so are you crazy? MW is full of realistic detail, this BF had almost none and looks at least 10 years old

[Boro666]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Maichevsky:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Henlooo:

stop lying mw3 looks very very bad compared to bf 2042

you must be blind to thinks so are you crazy? MW is full of realistic detail, this BF had almost none and looks at least 10 years old

CoD maps usually look more natural, but in reality there's very little fine detail. Also in most modes you're playing on a very tiny map with only a handful of players. Unfortunatelly majority of PC gamers have really (I mean REALLY) weak and outdated hardware, so game developers must sacrifice fidelity in order to make their game playable for those people. And even then internet children whine constantly that hardware requirements are too high... Sure, something like RTX3060 is beyond reach...

[Foxxy Renamon]

This guy genuinely thinks that because a game like Cod can have ultra realistic graphics and run perfectly translates to Battlefield, a much, much, much more resource intensive and bigger game should be able to. You need to sacrifice a bit of graphics quality to keep a game with maps as big as Battlefields running smooth, especially with 128 players, tanks, planes, etc.

And before you bring up Warzone, that game absolutely does not look as good as Battlefield lmao, they had to tone down the graphics as well just so their terrible servers could keep up.

[Muttley]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Maichevsky:

yeah, it is also generic and boring looking!

ah yes, lets head back to the dime a dozen modern shooters. Not like there isn't a ton of them

[tfa]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Foxxy Renamon:

This guy genuinely thinks that because a game like Cod can have ultra realistic graphics and run perfectly translates to Battlefield, a much, much, much more resource intensive and bigger game should be able to. You need to sacrifice a bit of graphics quality to keep a game with maps as big as Battlefields running smooth, especially with 128 players, tanks, planes, etc.

And before you bring up Warzone, that game absolutely does not look as good as Battlefield lmao, they had to tone down the graphics as well just so their terrible servers could keep up.

Even then I think BF 2042 looks far better than MW 3. On top of BF 2042's better graphics it also has much better sound effects.

Activision creates sound fx on their pc's while Dice actually record real world weapons and equipment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNm3FtE1I0A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuPleFegKYo

[꧁El care Larry ꧂]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย twitchie1:

Sounds like ya all got ♥♥♥♥♥♥ pcs i run everything on ultra looks amazing... If your having to run DLSS its pretty obvious why your crying about ♥♥♥♥♥♥ graphics DLSS is terrible

looks horrible, 4090 here, 83" oled.

[torar]

I agree... graphics is kinda cheap and whole environment and map design is boring.
Classes makes no sense to me. They had ONE JOB!...
Bring back BF4/3 with better grahics and new maps and they failed even at that.

What surprise me is that how many EA bootylickers are here.

edit: What pisses me the most is weapon desgin... its just bad and feels bad when firing compared to BF4 and 3.

[CitizenKing]

Compared to what? I'm on max settings and things look great.

[PhatPhuc69]

its not an issue with graphics, but of art style imo

[Blueknight719]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย PhatPhuc69:

its not an issue with graphics, but of art style imo

Yeah, I agree. Coming from COD MW ll, 2042 graphics almost seemed Cartoon like.
I really don't see much difference between medium and ultra settings.

[FataI Pro]

I think OP needs to get his eyes checked.

[Gimlis]

I have no issue with the graphics . But the last BF title played before this was 2142.
though I do suppose if I had $1200 GPU I'd also be disappointed at all the games that it didn't make look better.
The game release for PS4 and targeted 3060 or RX 6600 for the recommended. with the minimum being a GTX 1050 It was designed targeting much older hardware than a 4080.

Maybe you'll get better visuals from the next in the series .