Why is Caspian Border so ugly in BF2042?
Here is a quick comparison of it in Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4 and Battlefield 2042 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdct5LVip6U
Forum Discussion
@an3k My suggestion is to go load up Planetside 2 on PC or PS. It's free. Check out the graphics compared to even BF4.
I was on PS5. Played over 5 hours after launch last night. I played Caspian Border last night. I was at C flag and it just felt off. I couldn't explain it until this thread. Really, anyone saying BF2042 graphics are good are kidding themselves. It looks like a remaster of a 10 year old game basically, not a brand new next gen experience on a new Frostbite engine.
I do think 128 players is the reason for this. While Warzone does that, BF has to account for a LOT more vehicles and explosions, not to mention the weather effects.
Why do I think this? I've got hundreds of hours into both MAG on PS3 and Planetside 2 on PS/PC. The constant knock on those game from COD and BF players has always been graphics. They can't do the detailed graphics and the massive increase in player count. No MMO has graphics on that level. Not a single one.
What you'll see in Planetside 2 is things like missing grass and lack of detail in a lot of the textures. Buildings will look more plain and standard. None of the detail we are used to in big budget AAA games.
Honestly, I came away from Portal very underwhelmed. Am I the only one who feels like BF4's Second Assault DLC was a better taste of BF3?
Second Assault DLC added Caspian Border, Operation Metro, Operation Firestorm, and Gulf of Oman to BF4. It was fan voted from what I recall...favorites from BF3. I never even liked Noshar Canals all that much. Would have rather had maps from the Back to Karkand DLC or Kharg Island.
Look at this
