Battlefield 4 Chat

ktulu123

Not a huge amount of suppression in this dude. Sure there is visual but no random bullet deviation like BF3. So it's just your terrible aim im afraid :P

5uspect

ktulu123 wrote: »

Not a huge amount of suppression in this dude. Sure there is visual but no random bullet deviation like BF3. So it's just your terrible aim im afraid :P

Ah I know, I'm just looking for excuses. I'm still tweaking my mouse sensitivity so we'll see. Played a few domination games there and it was decent enough.

It feels a bit hollow, I must take a look at my audio settings.

BlitzKrieg

heh I like obliteration

probably because its a new game mode that actually puts the whole map to use.

too many of Battlefields alternative modes tend to cut the map up, or in the case of rush segment it only offering a limited selection of vehicles per stage. Nice to have one which gives you the full range of vehicles and the size of the map for its entirety.

Really think parsel storm was a bad map to introduce obliteration on as Siege of Shanghai is clearly the more clear design for the map, there is a nice solid frontline that is pushing back and forth, which makes it really exciting a sort of odd mix between conquest and Rush.

but I will admit the blithering drooling mongo teammates where in force in most of my games. So many players ignoring the bomb and going sniping on the rooftop and people running the wrong way with the bomb etc (1 guy took it all the way back to our spawn, he thought it was CTF)

but once you got a good match going it was pretty intense.

I like how the traffic bollards are much more dynamic in this then conquest. blocking tank support and a quick jeep rush with them.

though I did a brainfart when I popped them up when we were retreating back to our line chasing the bomb carrier, thinking it would slow down any tank support for the sole bomb carrier, when after we secured the bomb our own jeep with me driving ran right into them and I got shot trying to put them down

Alos learnt the hard way that there is a triple A tank spawning in the map. Which dominated the first third of our match until someone finally got an abrams up to kill it.

cherryghost

Is it just me or is FPS performance after the 60mb patch the other day worse than it was previously?

fl4pj4ck

cherryghost wrote: »

Is it just me or is FPS performance after the 60mb patch the other day worse than it was previously?

it got better for me

and yes, the new mode is the business

BlitzKrieg

Does the AAA only spawn for china? Cause it can seriously mess things up on the usa side.

mozattack

Well I played Obliteration;

Love it, some laugh… if you are precious about your k/d this isn’t for you especially if you are planning to be a bomb carrier.
One game I played lasted 9 minutes, the next lasted 64 minutes – the last one was epic.

Serious BF moments in one night;
- Killed a guy in a transport chopper with a grenade!
- Killed a chopper with the M320
- Killed a scout chopper with a RPG (no lock on)
- Took out a tank with the TOW launcher – the 2 kills are as many kills as I have with that weapon as BF3 amazingly enough.

Was brilliant, some laugh.

fl4pj4ck

is that me or does it take more than one RPG to kill a chopper now?

SherlockWatson

fl4pj4ck wrote: »

is that me or does it take more than one RPG to kill a chopper now?

Scout Chopper takes two I think.

Nologogo

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Does the AAA only spawn for china? Cause it can seriously mess things up on the usa side.

Pretty sure there was one on either side.

spitfireIRL

fl4pj4ck wrote: »

is that me or does it take more than one RPG to kill a chopper now?

I think it actually depends on where you hit it, I've seen choppers take two and go down/explode, and I've also seen one get blown up by one RPG.

deadeye187

Played a few more rounds of the BF4 last night, the more I play it the less I like it. Its the opposite of the BF3 Beta.

When I started to play BF3 after BFBC2, I could not stand the demo, then the more I played it the more I wanted to play it.

With the so called BF4 BETA I want to turn it off after 2 rounds, BF has lost its charm for me, all I meet on there is CoD players crossing over!

Its a game aimed to mask CoD with weapon addons, run and gun style maps and everyone worried about their k/d(not one real BF player would ever worry about k/d)

mozattack

TireeTerror wrote: »

Well maybe you are right, softcore can be more difficult purely because the enemy can see you all the time more or less. I know Battlefield is hardly a simulator, but I like to try and play it in a way that rewards tactics, rather than just gunning everything down. In softcore using smoke is virtually pointless and not having friendly fire on is dumb. Ive went on a few softcore servers, especially on Metro, all I was faced with was the enemy camped out at the choke points with heavy machine guns on bipods spraying constantly and being nade spammed throughout. It was a horrific experience. It was very tough to try and sneak through by crawling through the smoke as often you would show up on the minimap just because an enemy glanced in your general direction, regardless if he could physically see you due to the smoke.

Hardcore IMO is way better and affords many more discrete tactics, giving much more depth to the game.

With regards to how slow it is, I dont really know what youre saying to me, but the game is slow. It plays slow. The physical speed that the player moves on the map is much slower. I play on PC and have decent hardware, its not that, its just the game itself.

For some reason I feel like Im playing a childs game, its hard to put into words what it feels like, but it just doesnt feel like Im entirely in control. As soon as I go back to BF3 I feel much more connected to the game, whereas in BF4 it feels simulated.

Ive no idea what its like on consoles, I wouldnt ever play any FPS on them, they are horrific for all FPS games in comparison to the PC.

Nice to know that I disagree with everything this guy says!

FPS on PC is like me at work using my mouse to click on software programmes, could do without I am afraid.

Hardcore is fine but it is sniper invested and takes the fun out of it.

fl4pj4ck

forgot to mention: when you start the game, go back to your desktop, bring up the task manager, right click on bf4.exe and change the cpu priority to low. really improved my fps, which was unplayable sometimes (with 4670k and 6950)

mozattack

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Anyone else not seeing the big deal with BF4?

I have owned and played every single battlefield game, and have enjoyed them all.

I stopped playing bf3 a few months ago so I would hit bf4 a bit fresh and get the full enjoyment out of it ........... to be honest it really feels like bf3.1 , it feels a bit slower than bf3

I appreciate the improved gun sounds, the gun play seems a little better. Vehicles seem a little clunky at the moment. But to me its just an update to bf3 no real innovation or change.

For the first time I can say I wont be getting this on launch day.

Not being smart here but what do you actually want? It is a modern milatry shooter, the potential change is somewhat capped especially when graphics are almost at tipping point (on PC anyway).

There has been some major changes though:

- commander (could be great, who knows)
- 64 players for console (yes i know this is a console only change)
- 5 players per squad (makes a big difference)
- obliteration (was unreal last night)
- medic trains dead or at least reduced
- suppression changes (makes equiping a bolt action no longer pointless_

I have been critical too but if they sort out the cartoonish graphics/HUD, i think it will be unreal

deadeye187

I want a BFBC3!


BFBC2 was the best fun ever on the xbox....loved that game!

Best online shooter ever!

DeWinterZero

Another patch out for the beta.

54.4mb in size.

Updates in Beta Patch #2 for PC (Oct 10)
-Two fixes for the long/permanent loading times
-Various improvements in performance for users running quad core or six core CPU's
-Fixed a crash that happened for some dual core CPU users after loading
-Fixed a crash relating to DirectX10 graphics cards
-Various stability fixes
-Various crash fixes

TireeTerror

mozattack wrote: »

Nice to know that I disagree with everything this guy says!

FPS on PC is like me at work using my mouse to click on software programmes, could do without I am afraid.

Hardcore is fine but it is sniper invested and takes the fun out of it.

???

Have you played any FPS games on a modern PC with a decent GPU? The level of control afforded by mouse and keyboard utterly obliterates control pads. Im not against consoles, I have a PS3 and I will get a PS4, but I play sports games etc on them. I would play FPS if they were good, but the graphics are poor, the framerates are dire, but mainly its the controller. I even tried using my 360 controller on my PC to try BF3, just to see what it was like. It was embarrassing. I was getting owned by much lesser players as they could accurately and quickly spin around and headshot me. Meanwhile Im pushing as hard as I can, wil;ling it to rotate faster. If I turned the sensitivity up, it loses accuracy, so its always a compromise.

Gaming on your PC using mouse and keyboard is nothing at all like using a PC at work for applications. That comment really makes me think youve never had a go, or given yourself enough time to try and adapt.

A while back there was a trial, and what happened is that even mediocre PC players were wiping out the top console gamers when the platforms were crossed over. It was purely down to the control input.

BlitzKrieg

scored a pretty decent graphics card second hand cheap this morning to replace my clearly outmatched gt560ti. Got it so cheap that by christmas I'll hopefully have rebuilt my pc with all new components

Shiminay

I've got 2 6950's in Crossfire and I have an appalling framerate. For a game that supposed to be "optimised" for AMD gear, I'm far from impressed. It's pretty much unplayable on anything except Domination as that's the small map.

fl4pj4ck

see my post here
now with a single 6950 I can easily play in 1680x1050 in High

Dcully

Remember guys its a beta, nowhere near the finished product.
4-5 very good maps with decent teamwork can make a top class online fps experience.
Atleast wait for the full game before passing judgement.

Performance for me is sorted with the CPU priority set to low fix,im running a mix of high/ultra and achieving a solid 60-90 fps @ 1920X1200 [it looks and plays stunning now],this has dramatically improved the enjoyment of the game from the previous stutter-fest.

I could ramble on and on about the pros and cons of the beta and what the finished product might be like but Ill just leave this video by jackfrags here instead, i couldnt agree more with what he says about the game.


edit : just read this

FPS on PC is like me at work using my mouse to click on software programmes, could do without I am afraid.

I dont mean to sound like a dick but sweet mother of God you so obviously havent a clue what your talking about,i highly doubt you have played with kb&mouse before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE-EqSY562w

BlitzKrieg

yeah the cpu priority low fixed a lot of issues with my cpu causing fps issues, but my poor card was not up for the task of the beta even with that my fps barely stayed above 30, wouldnt have upgraded and hoped full release was more lenient except I saw someone selling a radeon 7870 2gb OC for less then £100 and snapped it up.

Snapped it when I saw it was the card topping the benchmarks for the beta here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graphics-card-performance,3634.html

Shiminay

Nice one, I knew someone here would have some advice I'll definitely try that this evening and see how I get on.

It's a Beta, I'm well aware, but it's had a lot of problems for me. I've had to completely disable Eyefinity (I have 3 X 1080 monitors) and whilst I wasn't daft enough to expect fantastic playability on 5760X1080 res, it simply wouldn't render at all and every attempt forced a hard reset. Similarly, when trying to get a 1080 window to play in so I could attach it to the middle monitor resulted in a max of a 1280X720 window which, to be fair, ran ok.

For comparison, BF3 is adequately playable (with some settings turned down) on 5760X1080, but it's just too much screen to try and keep in my FOV (they're 24" monitors and I can't sit any further back and still use the mouse and keyboard).

mozattack

deadeye187 wrote: »

I want a BFBC3!


BFBC2 was the best fun ever on the xbox....loved that game!

Best online shooter ever!

I loved that game too (PS3) and put a rake of hours into it but please go back and play it and it is quite flawed in retrospect.

mozattack

Dcully wrote: »

edit : just read this



I dont mean to sound like a dick but sweet mother of God you so obviously havent a clue what your talking about,i highly doubt you have played with kb&mouse before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE-EqSY562w

Ok, I haven't a clue what I am talking about but yet you know how much time I have spent playing games with kb and mouse - bow to the all knowledgeable one so.

Petition to get a mod on boards.ie that doesn't throw his toys out of the pram when someone has the audacity to not say how brilliant PC gaming is?... tiresome.

Reminds me when I was a teenager and perhaps insecure, could be jealous that a friend got a CD or T shirt you'd love... funny thing is though I kinda grew out of that phase a few decades ago.

TireeTerror

mozattack wrote: »

Ok, I haven't a clue what I am talking about but yet you know how much time I have spent playing games with kb and mouse - bow to the all knowledgeable one so.

Petition to get a mod on boards.ie that doesn't throw his toys out of the pram when someone has the audacity to not say how brilliant PC gaming is?... tiresome.

Reminds me when I was a teenager and perhaps insecure, could be jealous that a friend got a CD or T shirt you'd love... funny thing is though I kinda grew out of that phase a few decades ago.

Are you for real? There is not even a debate these days about what is better or gaming. PC far surpassed consoles a long time ago, and that gulf is increasing all the time. The next gen consoles are also not up to current high end PC's. With each passing week Im reading about the next gen versions of games being reduced from an expected 1080 @ 60fps down to 720. Its the only way they are able to maintain the 60 FPS, by reducing the resolution.

PC gaming has everything a console has and more. If you hate using a keyboard and mouse, then you can of course use a controller with your PC, I do for Fifa and some arcade style driving games. The points being made were purely comparing FPS games, and it doesnt matter really what you may think, its purely fact that a mouse and keyboard is much better.

I dont think any mod threw out their toys, they only passed a comment based on that ridiculous statement you made comparing FPS gaming on PC being the same as using a keyboard and mouse at work for applications. You must surely be able to see how ridiculous that is, unless your work consists of gaming all day!

ktulu123

Gonna have to put a stop to this before it progresses lads. The PC vs Console debate is old & tiresome at this stage, each side has pro's & con's. This thread is for talk about the BF4 Beta, lets try keep it at that. Cheers!

mozattack

mozattack wrote: »

Not being smart here but what do you actually want? It is a modern milatry shooter, the potential change is somewhat capped especially when graphics are almost at tipping point (on PC anyway).

There has been some major changes though:

- commander (could be great, who knows)
- 64 players for console (yes i know this is a console only change)
- 5 players per squad (makes a big difference)
- obliteration (was unreal last night)
- medic trains dead or at least reduced
- suppression changes (makes equiping a bolt action no longer pointless_

I have been critical too but if they sort out the cartoonish graphics/HUD, i think it will be unreal

There's still only 12 per side in the xbox 360 beta. Are you talking about the next-gen consoles when you talk about a 64 player limit?

ktulu123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

There's still only 12 per side in the xbox 360 beta. Are you talking about the next-gen consoles when you talk about a 64 player limit?

Yes he is