Recommended Posts

Please elaborate..

 

Well it seems to me a fancy word made up to make a whole lot of standard level interactions seem groundbreaking. 

You can turn lights off, open and close doors, use lifts, blow up things like trees and small statues. And there's one scripted set piece when the building falls. 

So nothing special. You can't blow through most walls. windows etc. just like in BF3. And when the building collapses you cant ride it down the screen goes dark straight away and you die before it has really starting tumbling. Hopefully they fix this.

 

After some more play it seems like the recoil has been tonned down and this is maybe why it feels slightly call of dutyish to me. Time will tell if it feels better over time but right now guns don't feel very solid due to it. Pretty fun so far regardless. 

  • Like 1

Just upgraded to Windows 8 and the difference is amazing! No more drops of fps at all so far. In a game right ow. Alt Tab is so much quicker too.

 

Now got all Ultra settings 4x AA and 16x AF on.

 

 

Edit: I may go back to windows 7 to see if I can fix the stupid fps dips but not sure yet. Just upgraded to Windows 8 to at least test it. I plan on doing a fresh Windows 8 install and reinstalling all my stuff when I get time. I hated the dips to 3 to 7 fps because it really effected gameplay. No it wasn't for a long time but for a split second. So far none of that in Windows 8. I wonder if this means DirectX 11.1 really does make a difference? I thought Windows 7 had DirectX 11.1 from a update but guess I was wrong.

I thought Windows 7 had DirectX 11.1 from a update but guess I was wrong.

Windows 7 has parts of DX11.1 but not all of it...that's not likely to be what's causing the difference though.  7 is also using an older WDDM (windows display driver model) among other things.

 

I could probably go into more detail but alas I'm about to fall asleep.

Windows 7 has parts of DX11.1 but not all of it...that's not likely to be what's causing the difference though.  7 is also using an older WDDM (windows display driver model) among other things.

 

I could probably go into more detail but alas I'm about to fall asleep.

 

Same here.

Well it seems to me a fancy word made up to make a whole lot of standard level interactions seem groundbreaking. 

You can turn lights off, open and close doors, use lifts, blow up things like trees and small statues. And there's one scripted set piece when the building falls. 

So nothing special. You can't blow through most walls. windows etc. just like in BF3. And when the building collapses you cant ride it down the screen goes dark straight away and you die before it has really starting tumbling. Hopefully they fix this.

 

That's exactly what it is, a made up word for something trying to prove to be fancy when it's not. What's more annoying is the fact they keep using the word "new" to features like this or others from previous Battlefield games, which just goes to show the new target audience is COD kids who have converted over. After all, it's the hip thing to bash COD.

I'm pretty sure every BF game that comes out has been on a declining trend to destruction.

 

I haven't got premium on PC so haven't been able to try it out, I have however tried the beta on Xbox and can say that if anyone buys it for that platform must be delusional. The game looks like an arcade cartoon game, the frame rate is terrible, and even the controls are nasty. I played for 20 minutes and the first 3 minutes I got sniped by nearly everyone on the enemy team hiding on roof tops with no flags.

Well it seems to me a fancy word made up to make a whole lot of standard level interactions seem groundbreaking. 

You can turn lights off, open and close doors, use lifts, blow up things like trees and small statues. And there's one scripted set piece when the building falls. 

So nothing special. You can't blow through most walls. windows etc. just like in BF3. And when the building collapses you cant ride it down the screen goes dark straight away and you die before it has really starting tumbling. Hopefully they fix this.

 

After some more play it seems like the recoil has been tonned down and this is maybe why it feels slightly call of dutyish to me. Time will tell if it feels better over time but right now guns don't feel very solid due to it. Pretty fun so far regardless. 

I find it hard to believe that the game is anywhere near as polished as it will be on release. It sounds like you're taking the beta too seriously. I've found that certain objects are destroyed more accurately than others which leads me to believe they will implement more. That, and the destruction is really, really, clunky meaning there are missing transitions and fire. The trails of bullets and especially rockets is all very low-detail. I would bet that this is all going to be added but it isn't necessary for beta testing and would likely just introduce more server stress for the sake of looks.

 

I do agree with the Call of Duty comment only for the fact that gun noise sounds like you're firing paintballs which has been my biggest gripe in CoD. But, like I said, I doubt that's how it will be on release.

Well I went back to Windows 7 64 bit but I am still thinking about doing a fresh install of Windows 8 64 bit soon. I haven't decided for sure yet. Still like Windows 7 and kinda prefer it but Windows 8 seem to just work better with Battlefield 4. Supposedly DirectX 11.1 gives better cpu performance too. Wonder what 11.2 update will bring ?

 

Like for example I got well over 100 fps in Battlefield 4 during sky looking in Windows 7 not even close. Though of course it is not kept once you look around. It is just a comparison. There seems to be no choppiness in Windows 8 whenever there is heavy fire fight or like when in the chopper. At least from what I tested while in Windows 8.

 

The biggest difference is Alt Tab is so much quicker in Windows 8! Wow. I can alt tab out of full screen in secs then back in. Not sure what is up with that. Windows 7 it works but the game goes all full screen to windowed mode then I can click on Firefox in the taskbar fine.

 

However, I?d still tell you to wait before upgrading. Windows 8 looks great, feels very responsive and is quicker than 7; but in the long run you tend to miss the stability of Windows 7. Wait out until you can see how much a difference the new OS will bring before shifting over.

 

That's from the second link you posted, max22. I've no idea what they're talking about. Windows 8 has been as stable as a rock for me. The new system I've built is also going to be running Windows 8 Pro. Currently, it's what I game on now, and it's been a great experience.

That's from the second link you posted, max22. I've no idea what they're talking about. Windows 8 has been as stable as a rock for me. The new system I've built is also going to be running Windows 8 Pro. Currently, it's what I game on now, and it's been a great experience.

 

Good to know. Thanks!

This probably only applies to the people that have a DirectX 11.1 compatible GPU.

And there are LOTS of DX 11.1-ready GPUs - basically any AMD GPU from HD5xxx (including Mobility) and newer OR any nV GPU from the GeForce 500 series up.

 

If you upgraded for Crysis 3 (or Civ V), unless you have less than 1 GB of on-GPU memory, you should be able to play any DX 11.1 game on at least medium detail, if not high detail (sans AA, of course).

 

Naturally, this leaves out a lot of portable computers.

 

I have two days to wait yet.

DICE engine programmers rock. 

 

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=72860391&postcount=50

We use DX11.1, there are some optimizations in it (constant buffer offsets, dynamic buffers as SRVs) that we got in to the the API that improves CPU performance in our rendering when one runs with DX11.1. This will be in BF4.

yup, and besides, i'd rather pay $500 for a better GFX card for performance increase than upgrade to windows 8, :p which i already own.

 

I'm kinda annoyed with the beta. I love playing Support, but man they should've included the c4 in the beta, or something. Airburst gun is nice and can take out a vehicle, but you can't reload it, which is stupid. I'm always getting messed up by the tanks.

 

But i love being able to camp and take people out with my support gun from a distance, which is something you couldn't do in bf3.

 

I'm loving it though :D

 

There is C4 in the beta. They have wisely given it back to the recon class. 

Well I went back to Windows 7 64 bit but I am still thinking about doing a fresh install of Windows 8 64 bit soon. I haven't decided for sure yet. Still like Windows 7 and kinda prefer it but Windows 8 seem to just work better with Battlefield 4. Supposedly DirectX 11.1 gives better cpu performance too. Wonder what 11.2 update will bring ?

 

Like for example I got well over 100 fps in Battlefield 4 during sky looking in Windows 7 not even close. Though of course it is not kept once you look around. It is just a comparison. There seems to be no choppiness in Windows 8 whenever there is heavy fire fight or like when in the chopper. At least from what I tested while in Windows 8.

 

The biggest difference is Alt Tab is so much quicker in Windows 8! Wow. I can alt tab out of full screen in secs then back in. Not sure what is up with that. Windows 7 it works but the game goes all full screen to windowed mode then I can click on Firefox in the taskbar fine.

 

 

I would recommend going to 8. Your going to end up there eventually in the next couple of years regardless.

 

I upgraded a month ago and noticed a great improvement in multitasking, alt tabbing in and out of games, system start up time. 

It's definitely no less stable than Windows 7 was. 

 

Not a big fan of the start screen, but I literally only see it when the computer first turns on, then I am on the desktop the rest of the time. Considering I didn't really use the start menu in 7, it's hard for me to see why people hate it so much? I guess there's some parts I don't use that aren't as intuitive, or is it just people being stubborn and scared of change? 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!