By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Call of Duty: Ghosts vs Battlefield 4

Badassbab on 23 May 2013

Based on those screenshots Battlefield 4 looks better but not by a great deal. Based on THAT BF4 trailer vs the trailer of Ghosts then BF4 wins by a landslide. I very much doubt Ghosts could compete against BF4 on PC on a technical level since it's still a (highly) modified Quake 3 engine vs Frostbite 3 but on next gen console I wouldn't be surprised if DICE dropped the frame rate down to 30FPS and up the graphics (especially on PS4) while Ghosts runs at a silky smooth COD standard of 60FPS. And actual fixed 60FPS not the 'perceptual' 60FPS we see on current gen console.






Around the Network
hinch on 23 May 2013

Just going to leave this here



Shinobi-san on 23 May 2013

Any chance we might get to see 60FPS for Battlefield 4 on PS4? Considering they need to account for the XBone version....

Or will they probably just increase the IQ and effects and leave the game at 30FPS?

OR will they just keep the games completely on par? That would be a damn shame



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Shinobi-san on 23 May 2013
CGI-Quality said:
Shinobi-san said:
Any chance we might get to see 60FPS for Battlefield 4 on PS4? Considering they need to account for the XBone version....

Or will they probably just increase the IQ and effects and leave the game at 30FPS?

OR will they just keep the games completely on par? That would be a damn shame

No clue. I do know where you won't have that concern, though.

On PC...

Yeah i need a new gpu though considering the PS4 GPU is better than mine



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Andrespetmonkey on 23 May 2013
kowenicki said:
Carl2291 said:
kowenicki said:

it is not microsofts fault that there was only 3 seconds of COD gameplay.

you feeling ok today?


Im talking any gameplay. Over the entire show. 1st party. 2nd party. 3rd party.

3 seconds of gameplay in an hour conference to announce your console. Its Microsofts fault that Microsoft didnt have any meaningful gameplay to show.

E3

hello?  HELLO?

anyone listening.

exhibit a) a console reveal that showed a console and little gameplay - e3 to follow 2 weeks later

exhibit b) a console reveal that didnt show a console and a little bit more gameplay - e3 to follow 4 months later

Because how a console looks is more important than the games it plays? 

Also, almost twice as many games and twice as many games with gameplay shown is more than "a little bit more". 



My Music

Around the Network
Wagram on 23 May 2013

Battlefield looks insane, shame I don't really care for most military shooters. Only really ever cared for Killzone.



superchunk on 23 May 2013

BF is visually better and has better gameplay IMO plus the realism in destructible environments is awesome.

Too bad its published by EA. CODGhosts is all I'll likely purchase.



the2real4mafol on 23 May 2013

Why even compare them? They are both FPS and that's about all they have in common. They play massively different to each other and cater for different audiences. Plus Battlefield 4 looks much better, where's the 17 minute video of call of duty ghosts to compare?



Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030

AndrewWK on 23 May 2013

Battlefield runs on a new engine and CoD doesn´t so the graphical superior game is battlefield.

But CoD will run at 60fps no matter what and Battfield probably wont.



Busted on 23 May 2013

BF4 looks much better.