bo4's graphic is trash

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

and waste more more system resource more more than ww2.
like a cod ghost. i remember, ghost has 3-40 frame in very low setting, gtx550, but ghost's full graphic setting is not diffrent than MW3.
i thinks IW is better than bo4. now, treyarch's graphic tech is trash.

[DotYourEyes]

You lost me at gtx550. Time for an upgrade. You're playing with early 2011 tech. That card was mid range back then.

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

Opprinnelig skrevet av DotYourEyes:

You lost me at gtx550. Time for an upgrade. You're playing with early 2011 tech. That card was mid range back then.

my card is gtx1050ti.

[Papa Shekels]

Zombies looks really nice. Can't speak for mp/blackout since I have no intention of playing it, but the blackout beta was awful. Max settings ran at 30fps on a gtx 1070 with 16gb ram and i7-7700 and it looked like trash anyway

[Dwane Dibbley]

Its not worse than WW2 graphic. It has same ♥♥♥♥♥ settings (upscaling/filmic tsaa) which makes it look as ♥♥♥♥♥ as ww2. If u want to cry about something, its respawn system which is worse than MW3. In DOM, lock enemies on 1 point, run to their spawn and just spawnkill them as they respawn infront of your firing guns - its almost impossible to force spawn swap.

[VAL]

WW2 graphics are worse ,the game is ugly in ultra settings.
Bo4 is superior in graphics than WW2.
IW too.

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Vallex:

WW2 graphics are worse ,the game is ugly in ultra settings.
Bo4 is superior in graphics than WW2.
IW too.

just ur thinking.

[HairyPoppins]

BO4 graphics is good,better than WW2. I got an ♥♥♥♥♥♥ computer and i can get 140-150 fps,
In high settings

[Dwane Dibbley]

Opprinnelig skrevet av BO4 = NOT COD:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Vallex:

WW2 graphics are worse ,the game is ugly in ultra settings.
Bo4 is superior in graphics than WW2.
IW too.

just ur thinking.

Well, and your "thinking" is otherwise. Why your opinion is more valuable?

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dwane Dibbley:

Opprinnelig skrevet av BO4 = NOT COD:

just ur thinking.

Well, and your "thinking" is otherwise. Why your opinion is more valuable?

my computer, WW2 Ultra Option = 60fps/BO4 = 4-50fps (and terrible frame drop on explosive)
its real. like a cod ghost.

[VAL]

my computer : WW2 80 fps drop to 40, CPU 100% when loading
Bo4 : 80 fps, cpu not at 100% all times like ww2, maps loads faster

:)

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Vallex:

my computer : WW2 80 fps drop to 40, CPU 100% when loading
Bo4 : 80 fps, cpu not at 100% all times like ww2, maps loads faster

:)

loading speed is fastest. i agree too. but, that's all.

[Dwane Dibbley]

Opprinnelig skrevet av BO4 IS TRASH OF TRASH ON COD:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dwane Dibbley:

Well, and your "thinking" is otherwise. Why your opinion is more valuable?

my computer, WW2 Ultra Option = 60fps/BO4 = 4-50fps (and terrible frame drop on explosive)
its real. like a cod ghost.

So cuz u cant set graphic properly and probably has some ♥♥♥♥ in your PC, u make general rule about performance. Logic on par with trollando.
I have way better performance in BO4 than in WW2, better graphic and faster loading times. Why is your "experience" superior to mine?

[EZ2ON IS GOD GAME]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dwane Dibbley:

Opprinnelig skrevet av BO4 IS TRASH OF TRASH ON COD:

my computer, WW2 Ultra Option = 60fps/BO4 = 4-50fps (and terrible frame drop on explosive)
its real. like a cod ghost.

So cuz u cant set graphic properly and probably has some ♥♥♥♥ in your PC, u make general rule about performance. Logic on par with trollando.
I have way better performance in BO4 than in WW2, better graphic and faster loading times. Why is your "experience" superior to mine?

yes, low option is no problem. but its really sucks than WW2. you didn't played ww2 on ultra option?

[Dwane Dibbley]

Opprinnelig skrevet av BO4 IS TRASH OF TRASH ON COD:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dwane Dibbley:

So cuz u cant set graphic properly and probably has some ♥♥♥♥ in your PC, u make general rule about performance. Logic on par with trollando.
I have way better performance in BO4 than in WW2, better graphic and faster loading times. Why is your "experience" superior to mine?

yes, low option is no problem. but its really sucks than WW2. you didn't played ww2 on ultra option?

No, im not braindead kid who relly on some ♥♥♥♥♥ preset settings. I set everything manually so i dont endup with some ♥♥♥♥♥♥ graphic and poor performance (like in WW2 with superblurry filmic tsaa2x)

[UK Old Git]

Look if I cant play it on Ultra or whatever the highest setting it must be trash lol

Who's got time to look at the graphics. I've got a old I7 4790k, 16gb ram, GTX 980 and it defaults everything to high but looks better when options are set medium. Runs great, looks like all of the BOPs games, just a different use of colours to other CODs.