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

Forums - Sony - Star Wars Battlefront Dev Speaks Highly On The Game’s Graphics On PS4

Jaywood2010 on 01 May 2015

Star Wars Battlefront’s producer, Sigurlína Ingvarsdóttir, recently spoke on the game’s development on thePlayStation Blogcast.

Ingvarsdóttir revealed the reason that Star Wars Battlefront looks so great on PS4 is because DICE is more familiar with the hardware. DICE learnt a lot the first time when making Battlefield 4 on the PS4. That game was a launch title, so the team didn’t have time to fully understand the hardware of the console.

With Star Wars Battlefront however, DICE feels they are getting much better results out of the PS4 console. Ingvarsdóttir said DICE was “able to get the maximum out of the hardware, and really able to sort of harness that power“. DICE also collaborated with the engineers from Sony to help them get the most out of the PS4.

http://attackofthefanboy.com/news/star-wars-battlefront-dev-speaks-highly-ps4/




       

Around the Network
Mordred11 on 01 May 2015

Might be a 5M+ seller on the PS4 if they play their cards right.



Mr.Playstation on 01 May 2015

Good to hear, we definitely need to have more developers trying to get the best out of each and every console. This was also especially important during last generation too.



Send a Friend Request On PSN :P

mornelithe on 01 May 2015

You should do yourselves a favor and just ignore that line of PR nonsense. AAA developers don't make engines that leave extra resources just kicking about, but they sure do love regurgitating this buzz phrase. The question isn't have they used the 'maximum' of the hardware. The question is how efficiently are they using it? How optimal is the code? Is the code using the GPGPU to it's fullest? These things aren't ironed out in the first 2 years of hardware's lifecycle (any PC afficianado can attest to this). It can take many years for them to refine their engine to a point where it cannot be improved any further (Think about how long it took for devs to use 4-cores of a CPU properly...years).

Take Uncharted, for example. ND said they'd used 100% of the PS3 for Uncharted...then again for Uncharted 2...and again for Uncharted 3, and again for TLOU. If anything, just think about what the engine will look like in 3-4 years...let alone 5-6. That's the butter zone, when familiarity of the hardware is at it's maximum.



SweetTalia on 01 May 2015
mornelithe said:
You should do yourselves a favor and just ignore that line of PR nonsense. AAA developers don't make engines that leave extra resources just kicking about, but they sure do love regurgitating this buzz phrase. The question isn't have they used the 'maximum' of the hardware. The question is how efficiently are they using it? How optimal is the code? Is the code using the GPGPU to it's fullest? These things aren't ironed out in the first 2 years of hardware's lifecycle (any PC afficianado can attest to this). It can take many years for them to refine their engine to a point where it cannot be improved any further (Think about how long it took for devs to use 4-cores of a CPU properly...years).

Take Uncharted, for example. ND said they'd used 100% of the PS3 for Uncharted...then again for Uncharted 2...and again for Uncharted 3, and again for TLOU. If anything, just think about what the engine will look like in 3-4 years...let alone 5-6. That's the butter zone, when familiarity of the hardware is at it's maximum.


Basically this.   So many dev keep using the word "maximize" so early.. it makes me laugh everytime lol



Praise the One.

Around the Network
Guitarguy on 01 May 2015
mornelithe said:
You should do yourselves a favor and just ignore that line of PR nonsense. AAA developers don't make engines that leave extra resources just kicking about, but they sure do love regurgitating this buzz phrase. The question isn't have they used the 'maximum' of the hardware. The question is how efficiently are they using it? How optimal is the code? Is the code using the GPGPU to it's fullest? These things aren't ironed out in the first 2 years of hardware's lifecycle (any PC afficianado can attest to this). It can take many years for them to refine their engine to a point where it cannot be improved any further (Think about how long it took for devs to use 4-cores of a CPU properly...years).

Take Uncharted, for example. ND said they'd used 100% of the PS3 for Uncharted...then again for Uncharted 2...and again for Uncharted 3, and again for TLOU. If anything, just think about what the engine will look like in 3-4 years...let alone 5-6. That's the butter zone, when familiarity of the hardware is at it's maximum.


So very true. If it really were the case, console's would be maxed out 2 years after release and any future games would not look any better. We only have to look at past consoles to see that the best looking games mostly came at the very end of the consoles life. Perfect Dark looked better than Goldeneye. Ocarina of Time looked better than Super Mario 64. Killzone 3 looked better than Killzone 2, Gears 3 looked better than 2 and 1 etc.



Augen on 01 May 2015

Sigurlína Ingvarsdóttir sounds like an awesome Star Wars character.



ArchangelMadzz on 01 May 2015
mornelithe said:
You should do yourselves a favor and just ignore that line of PR nonsense. AAA developers don't make engines that leave extra resources just kicking about, but they sure do love regurgitating this buzz phrase. The question isn't have they used the 'maximum' of the hardware. The question is how efficiently are they using it? How optimal is the code? Is the code using the GPGPU to it's fullest? These things aren't ironed out in the first 2 years of hardware's lifecycle (any PC afficianado can attest to this). It can take many years for them to refine their engine to a point where it cannot be improved any further (Think about how long it took for devs to use 4-cores of a CPU properly...years).

Take Uncharted, for example. ND said they'd used 100% of the PS3 for Uncharted...then again for Uncharted 2...and again for Uncharted 3, and again for TLOU. If anything, just think about what the engine will look like in 3-4 years...let alone 5-6. That's the butter zone, when familiarity of the hardware is at it's maximum.


I can only find them saying it about Unchatrted 3? 



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

mornelithe on 01 May 2015
ArchangelMadzz said:
mornelithe said:
You should do yourselves a favor and just ignore that line of PR nonsense. AAA developers don't make engines that leave extra resources just kicking about, but they sure do love regurgitating this buzz phrase. The question isn't have they used the 'maximum' of the hardware. The question is how efficiently are they using it? How optimal is the code? Is the code using the GPGPU to it's fullest? These things aren't ironed out in the first 2 years of hardware's lifecycle (any PC afficianado can attest to this). It can take many years for them to refine their engine to a point where it cannot be improved any further (Think about how long it took for devs to use 4-cores of a CPU properly...years).

Take Uncharted, for example. ND said they'd used 100% of the PS3 for Uncharted...then again for Uncharted 2...and again for Uncharted 3, and again for TLOU. If anything, just think about what the engine will look like in 3-4 years...let alone 5-6. That's the butter zone, when familiarity of the hardware is at it's maximum.


I can only find them saying it about Unchatrted 3? 

Yeah...and explain TLOU? :D  That's the point.  Devs make this claim all the time.  It's a buzz phrase.



kitler53 on 01 May 2015
Mordred11 said:
Might be a 5M+ seller on the PS4 if they play their cards right.


it's star wars releasing right around the time of the next star wars movie.  they don't really even have to play their cards right to hit 5+ million imo.