I guess I was nuts. I was excited in thinking it would be great. Each BF game the graphics were improved. Why did they go backward for BF2042? Some are saying it has something to do with crossplay. I don't know.

Map size + rendering twice as many players, you have to pull that performance from somewhere (as most aren't running 3080+ or 6800+ cards with matching top-end components, and that's not even counting consoles).We had a lot of talking points during the test and beta, but nobody really complained about 128 players (some were quite for it in fact)Now that we've seen all the maps and how it affects the game i guess it's "fair" to criticize, but i think that becomes just another stick to beat them with rather than anything people had a problem with from the outset.Not to excuse dice on any level for the state of 2042, but when it comes to straight visual fidelity and destruction of terrain, something had to go to make the player count and map size happen and that's one point I'll cut them some slack on.Wouldn't even be surprised if "levolution" at the level of BF4 was cut due to it grinding the clients to a halt seeing what just a few large explosions have done the last week.(if we really needed 128 players seeing the map design we got and all the other hilarity, yea.. that's a different matter though)

Can someone explain why BF2042 graphics are a step back from BFV?

19 Replies

CyberDyme
4 years ago
Absolutely nothing to do with consoles. Can we please stop offering such silly excuses to the EA dev team. Because there are none!
Though I do not personally play them, these games run at 120FPS at 4k resolution on PS5:
Borderlands 3.
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War.
Call of Duty: Vanguard.
Call of Duty: Warzone.
Destiny 2.
Devil May Cry 5 Special Edition.
Dirt 5.
Doom Eternal.
So why is the BF2042 game such a mediocre performer???
Certainly not because of the consoles. The application running on the PCs is a different one anyway, so if it hadn't been for the lazy EA BF programmers, you could have all the specs you wanted optimized for the PC world of this game.
Factually, BF2042 is a big step back on so many things "Battlefield". Even so that the graphics is not even among the most grave of those.
BFV was a step back versus prior releases on many aspects for what makes a great Battlefield game. (graphics one of the few things not so)
BF1 was a step back versus prior releases on many aspects for what makes a great Battlefield game. (graphics one of the few things not so)
BF4 was the last Battlefield game checking most of the boxes in my book, for what makes a great Battlefield game. And all prior versions gave for the most part steady improvements time and again versus their prior versions. While the last 3 instalments of 'Battlefield' have now been a deplorable tailspin into lost identity and soul for this franchise...
JRiv_Eagle
4 years ago
@Tha_Growler Imagine better graphics, the game would run even worse.
CyberDyme
4 years ago
@JRiv_Eagle wrote:
@Tha_GrowlerImagine better graphics, the game would run even worse.
Exactly right @JRiv_Eagle ,
The EA BF2042 developers have made a rather poor code so far and massive improvements are needed for the game engine to support better graphics and framerates.
EA have obviously run cheap by hiring devs with very limited experience and also running cheap on the specs for the central servers they use to run the game on for us.
ArchAngeL-PCX
4 years ago
@JRiv_EagleExactly, and I do think that's why the graphics aren't on the level.

I'm a long time player of MAG and Planetside 2. I've had friends make fun of those games for their graphics. Then they go back to COD and Battlefield with their pretty graphics, but capped out at 32 and 64 players. Now they get to see why.

With larger player counts, you get more explosions, more vehicles, more things in motion, and it's too much for the game to process while producing top shelf graphics. Guaranteed thats also why the destruction seems to have taken a step back. There's a processing cost to all that.

So games have to decide what they want to emphasis. MAG and Planetside 2 wanted to prioritize the large scale conflicts you don't get anywhere else. They were willing to sacrifice the graphics for that. Thats why MMO's in general never have top shelf graphics.
MogwaiWarrior
4 years ago
Who was even asking for 128 player counts anyway? BFV graphics are nice but for me nothing stands up to the way BF1 looks.
R1ckyDaMan19
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Tha_Growler Players have been crying about visibility and silly effects and stuff making it harder to see enemies, that combined with the player count is the main reason imo.
ArchAngeL-PCX
4 years ago
@MogwaiWarrior I think some people were, but the assumption was a next level combat experience would go with it
- new twist on Conquest, maybe even the return of Titan Mode.
- platoons
- commanders
- map design
- enhanced class structure (lol!!!)

None of that has happened. I'm coming from Planetside 2, and yeah...Planetside 2 has all that. MAG also did the same back on PS3.
BassMan_PC
4 years ago
@CyberDyme

Let's not get carried away. Many of those games are not running native 4K for their 120hz mode. They are using checker-boarding or other up-scaling techniques to output at 4K. A PS5 is only 10 TFLOPS. You have to be realistic on what it can achieve.
BassMan_PC
4 years ago
@MogwaiWarrior

BFV took a noticeable leap compared to BF1. Compare maps like Rotterdam or Devastation to something like Amiens and the fidelity and detail in BFV is much better. BF1 does have good atmosphere overall though which 2042 has very little of.
ragnarok013
Hero+
4 years ago
@Tha_Growler I don't see them as worse than BF5, I see them as cleaner as they removed the clutter so I can actually see the enemy. The graphics look like an updated BF4 to me which is great from a game play perspective.

I think some of the reason they went with the cleaner BF4 style is that they've drastically increased player count and map size so it makes sense that they'd want to remove as much processor overhead as possible, and the console processors are being hit hard. Currently consoles can't do 120FPS in 2042 due to the hardware limitation of their CPUs according to a recent dev post.