DICE Claims Frostbite 3 "Truly Takes Advantage" of Next-Gen Machines

DICE Claims Frostbite 3 "Truly Takes Advantage" of Next-Gen Machines

Frostbite 3

DICE executive producer Patrick Bach claims that Battlefield 4 is one of the best looking next-gen games due to Frostbite 3.

DICE's Battlefield 4 might not be the most stable game on next-gen consoles, but it's hard to argue against the notion that it's one of the most visually impressive titles out right now -- a thought not lost on DICE executive producer, Patrick Bach. Speaking to OXM in its latest issue, Bach thinks they have one of the best looking next-gen games in BF4, and states that the shooter's game engine, Frostbite 3, is an "engine that truly takes advantage of the next gen machines."

We're still, I would argue, one of the best looking next gen games - I don't want to say the best-looking next gen game, but we have an engine that truly takes advantage of the next gen machines.

In the same interview, Bach claims that he thinks they made the right move a couple of years ago when they started work on Frostbite 3, and adds, they can see now that the level of next-gen on the engine is "pretty stable."

I think we made the right move a couple of years ago when we actually started, a couple of years before Battlefield 3 was even announced, we said what do we want games to be five years from now?...And we can see now that the level of "next gen", if you want to call it that, on Frostbite is pretty stable.

Seeing as EA will be using Frostbite 3 to power Dragon Age Inquisition, the next Mass Effect and other games it has lined up, let's hope the engine scales well on next-gen hardware and titles using it won't be as bug-riddled as BF4.

Do you agree with Bach's statements or should they improve the engine's stability first before touting how impressive their games look?

Source: OXM

Permalink

Bugs? Rushed out the door? Who cares.
It looks pretty at least. And with looks pretty we mean graphics are okay I guess.

Frostbite 3 is a good engine. There's no denying that. And I am a bit excited when I think about Mass Effect on that engine.

It's a great looking game engine. I guess the secret is going to be putting creative people on making the games because there was some great looking versions of some truly unextraordinary things in BF4. Imagine that capability in the hands of someone who can create actual interesting things. Yeah... I'm saying the game is not special or good in some not so strait forward ways. But it is a great looking game! Which is all that DICE cares about these days. It's a shame. CryEngine 3 was amazing as well, but it had some very lackluster titles that used it. Don't make that same mistake.

For some reason, I thought that the next Dragon Age and Mass Effect was using Frostbite 2, not 3.

(after Googling) Oh hi, Twitter.

So another generation of graphics graphics graphics? Oh wonderful, wake me when they actually try something new.

It is very pretty. And runs surprisingly well on my aging hardware. Still, Battlefield 4 was bugged up the ass. Here's hoping other games on the engine don't share the same fate.

Will Battlefront 3 be using that Engine as well? Hopefully that is not to Buggy and *fingers crossed* actual gameplay footage at E3 this year.

Frostbite has some amazing lens flare effects, and that sun....... so next-gen

mirage202:
So another generation of graphics graphics graphics? Oh wonderful, wake me when they actually try something new.

Nope. Frostbite 3 is good because it does a lot of things well. Huge open levels, lots of destructible environments, lots of things on screen happening at once and it looks pretty. It does everything. And it scales well on the PC.

Make a functional game before touting how purty it is. Seriously, priorities.

RedEyesBlackGamer:
Make a functional game before touting how purty it is. Seriously, priorities.

That and make it bloody affordable, none of that 40-50 for the game and then 40 for the DLC that's not even out bullshit.

Honestly DLC that costs that much is multiplayer only coming from them and the more players dancy from one map pack to the other, the more the first few packs have lose their value really fast.

Battlefield Map DLC these days feels more like a holiday, one week we're on Pack one, the other week everyone's gone to pack 2 and i can't play on pack one because everyones migrated to the next pack, I just wish the packs came in one big pack or at the very least the friggin game.

Shadow-Phoenix:

That and make it bloody affordable, none of that 40-50 for the game and then 40 for the DLC that's not even out bullshit.

Honestly DLC that costs that much is multiplayer only coming from them and the more players dancy from one map pack to the other, the more the first few packs have lose their value really fast.

Battlefield Map DLC these days feels more like a holiday, one week we're on Pack one, the other week everyone's gone to pack 2 and i can't play on pack one because everyones migrated to the next pack, I just wish the packs came in one big pack or at the very least the friggin game.

If it's that bad, have you considered not supporting the practice?

shirin238:
Bugs? Rushed out the door? Who cares.
It looks pretty at least. And with looks pretty we mean graphics are okay I guess.

Hey EA, how are you trying to fix that game that was supposedly a 'AAA' title you released with tonnes of simple bugs and glitches that were identified in the Beta but you ignored calling the testers Objectively Wrong and then eventually admitted that it was broken to an inexcusable degree and you wouldn't spend any more time on extra content until it was fixed to a standard worthy of the AAA price tag?

EA: It's so pretty, Isn't it pretty? Look at those graphics! It has ALL the pixels! I think it's pretty, don't you agree?

Zachary Amaranth:

Shadow-Phoenix:

That and make it bloody affordable, none of that 40-50 for the game and then 40 for the DLC that's not even out bullshit.

Honestly DLC that costs that much is multiplayer only coming from them and the more players dancy from one map pack to the other, the more the first few packs have lose their value really fast.

Battlefield Map DLC these days feels more like a holiday, one week we're on Pack one, the other week everyone's gone to pack 2 and i can't play on pack one because everyones migrated to the next pack, I just wish the packs came in one big pack or at the very least the friggin game.

If it's that bad, have you considered not supporting the practice?

I stopped way back at BC2 which was back in 2010, me having stopped hasn't really done anything to them let alone sent a message.

Getting everyone to suddenly stop isn't an easy feat.

Hero in a half shell:

shirin238:
Bugs? Rushed out the door? Who cares.
It looks pretty at least. And with looks pretty we mean graphics are okay I guess.

Hey EA, how are you trying to fix that game that was supposedly a 'AAA' title you released with tonnes of simple bugs and glitches that were identified in the Beta but you ignored calling the testers Objectively Wrong and then eventually admitted that it was broken to an inexcusable degree and you wouldn't spend any more time on extra content until it was fixed to a standard worthy of the AAA price tag?

EA: It's so pretty, Isn't it pretty? Look at those graphics! It has ALL the pixels! I think it's pretty, don't you agree?

you poor fool.

you actually thought that was a Beta?

That was nothing more than a demo.

no, game companies wont ever do actual beta's anymore because that would mean having more content than just one map and a handful of weapons and vehicles.

So next time some company has "EXCLUSIVE BETA ACCESS IF YOU BUY 7 MILLION TONS OF MTN DEW AND DORITOS" just laugh. Beta's are supposed to help the developer fix the game, and so far it's only been used to build up hype.

I mean, honestly, when was the last time someone in a "beta" identified a bug, recreated it, and had documentation on what causes it?

Unless you plan on making a game in which cyborg ninjas riding dinosaurs fight against terminators then I don't really give a flying shit about how much boobametric lighting you stuff into your engines.

Adam Jensen:

mirage202:
So another generation of graphics graphics graphics? Oh wonderful, wake me when they actually try something new.

Nope. Frostbite 3 is good because it does a lot of things well. Huge open levels, lots of destructible environments, lots of things on screen happening at once and it looks pretty. It does everything. And it scales well on the PC.

While I'll acknowledge that yes it can do that, Red Faction Guerrilla did that in 2009 with the Geo-Mod 2.0 engine, so I stand by my point of it's still nothing new, just prettier.

Hero in a half shell:

shirin238:
Bugs? Rushed out the door? Who cares.
It looks pretty at least. And with looks pretty we mean graphics are okay I guess.

Hey EA, how are you trying to fix that game that was supposedly a 'AAA' title you released with tonnes of simple bugs and glitches that were identified in the Beta but you ignored calling the testers Objectively Wrong and then eventually admitted that it was broken to an inexcusable degree and you wouldn't spend any more time on extra content until it was fixed to a standard worthy of the AAA price tag?

EA: It's so pretty, Isn't it pretty? Look at those graphics! It has ALL the pixels! I think it's pretty, don't you agree?

Well to be fair, Dice almost certainly had balance and gameplay in mind... and let's be honest the vast majority of people have no clue on what they want in an internet game...

Example: If WG actually listened to the whiners, we'd have a broken game where every two months a new class was OP and German tanks were alien killing machines...

I actually believe them when they say that all those other games coming out will look great. The problem here is that the only reason they feel forced to defend Frostbite is that so far the only thing that have to show off with it is BF4, which inspires exactly 3% confidence in the company and its engine. So long as they make their upcoming single player titles TRULY single player, aka offline with no dumb gimmicks, then they'll get some faith back.

I personally think that if EA hadn't been trying to shoehorn reliance on crappy servers into their games some of them would have been much better. I don't think they'll learn, but one can hope, right?

"we have an engine that truly takes advantage of the next gen machines."
Pfffft!!! So does pretty much any PC game made in the past MANY years, dude...
They are now just X64 PC's, with all standard PC parts for it's major internals.

So yawn-o-rama! Funny to see them whoring their engine again, though!
Just look at the Zero Punctuation for the last Battlefield ;-)

There's a difference than taking advantage of next gen machines and computer hardware and having a buggy mess of a game. Fix your stuff, DICE.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here