When Star Wars: Battlefront was revealed, a lot of gamers wondered whether the forest moon of Endor would look THAT good in its final build. After all, most games look less visually impressive than their reveal trailers/screenshots. Well, that’s not the case with Star Wars: Battlefront. The game has been released in some regions and Reddit’s member ‘Antiax‘ has shared the following images, showing that particular environment in its full glory. Star Wars: Battlefront is a really beautiful game. Enjoy the screenshots after the jump!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
It’s 2015, so it should, Crysis has been doing it since 2007 with big open levels.
I love Crysis as much as anyone, but let’s not circlejerk here. Crysis looks average at best these days. Battlefront is, audiovisually, light years ahead.
Average? Hardly. It still looks damn amazing and to this day still has some of the best physics in a game. How many games can you shoot down trees that actually fall and land realistically? Not to mention still having some of the best textures too.
Oops. Wrong person. My bad.
Any Mod feel like pressing Delete? Thanks.
I’m not comparing it to Battlefront, you made that assumption.
not in terms of photorealism…not at all.
Eh. Crysis leaves a whole lot to be desired in lighting. Sure, you can match CE2 to a photo under particular circumstances, particularly if the photo was high contrast or chiro oscuro, but in general the lighting of Crysis was very much a hacky way. The shadows were way too dark, the light didn’t propagate with no indirect illumination. There’s also plenty of places where the texture quality significantly drops off.
It still looks pretty freaking good especially for being how old it is, but there’s quite a bit the engine could not replicate that a photo could.
Eh. Crysis leaves a whole lot to be desired in lighting. Sure, you can match CE2 to a photo under particular circumstances, particularly if the photo was high contrast or chiro oscuro, but in general the lighting of Crysis was very much a hacky way. The shadows were way too dark, the light didn’t propagate with no indirect illumination. There’s also plenty of places where the texture quality significantly drops off.
It still looks pretty freaking good especially for being how old it is, but there’s quite a bit the engine could not replicate that a photo could.
Deferred rendering and lighting wasn’t around much then at all, most modern games now use it and why they look better in the lighting department. Crysis 3 uses used all the new tech except PBR and the thing is, Frostbite can’t even be used by users to mod or make levels with, so all we’re going to see is console style levels, Frostbite can do more than this limited multiplayer game.
“If you think a repetitive jungle multiplayer map is more impressive than Crysis there is something wrong with you and gaming as a whole now days”
Not that I disagree with you, but Cryis is basically a series repetitive jungle maps with a snow and an alien level thrown in for good measure. They do a good job of mixing it up, but if you have a good eye, you’ll see a ton of repetition of the exact same assets. The gameplay was nice and varied until you hit the aliens.
Well it’s a Caribbean island not a jungle, there is plenty of coastline, sea areas to move off to, including different paths.
Actually shadows in vanilla Crysis are too bright. Most mods went overly dark in response to how bland vanilla Crysis looks at most times of day. It’s true that indirect lighting is missing from Crysis but frankly most modern games do indirect lighting so badly (faking it with very simple methods) that Crysis still looks more realistic in many scenes. Just adding a bunch of deferred lights to every scene does not make it look more real. And textures, same thing, you’ll find some textures in modern games… any way, the sketchy SSAO is the second point of valid critisizm. Add good (!) indirect lighting and better ambient occlusion to Crysis and it would look better than most current games. Without them it still looks above average because most devs simply don’t invest that much in graphics.
Just leaving this to draw your attention to the just-posted Article regarding Crysis’ 8th Birthday & how amazing it looks when properly Modded.
Oh, the timing on that one….. Nice going DSOG ;D
P.S. Re-posting because wrong person. My bad.
Yep. This should be the norm.. i fail to see why games like Fallout 4 still look so bad. At least its super fun.
Speaking of the gfx.. this game looks fantastic. I cant even imagine what the next game is going to look like.
Because
40 Players + Frostbite Engine v3.0 vs.
Rehashed Skyrim Engine, which in turn is just a rehashed Oblivion Engine, which in turn is just a rehashed Morrowind Engine, regardless of what Bethesda claims.
Not to mention how they spent most of their budget making Mega-Ultra-High-Resolution scans of the Movie props in Lucas’ Star Wars Museum (check out their Behind-the-Scenes videos), & going to the actual Filming Locations in order to replicate the stuff as closely as possible.
Unfortunately at the expense of any actual depth to the Gameplay, Environment size, etc. as always.
Photogrammetry rules! 🙂
All right, I’m impressed.
Not with the graphics, but with keeping up with the reveal.
Are you saying the game doesn’t look impressive?
Not at all, the game sure does look good (specially lighting).
It’s just that I don’t get much more impressed with graphics these days (I’m more found of art style, than raw gfx I guess), it’s just me being jaded.
This also comes from the fact that it is a big budget titled, so it is kinda expected to look good at least, I get more impressed when a indie dev achieves something that looks nice.
Fallout 4 isn’t graphically impressive but they nailed the style this time, love the radiation storms, weather, lighting, far better than Fallout 3 p*ss filter everywhere.
The problem with Fallout 4 gfx IMO is the models and the inconsistency, for what I’ve seen it looks really nice in a few places and in others it looks awfully dated. For me two games nailed a post apocalyptic atmosphere and presented gfx that got me: S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Metro series.
This graphics and 90fps+ should be a standard in 2015 on PC.
Battlefront graphics + Fallout4 content = Good game
Eh, you can cut the battlefield graphics and still have a good game.
Shame it’s all style and no substance.
im talking about like a singleplayer starwars game
It was so real, till I looked inside his foot armor part. Sorry but as a designer, I believe this needs a teedy tiny minor adjustment. We live in the era of Pixel perfect designs.
Witcher 3 graphics + Witcher 3 content = excellent game
It was so real, till I looked inside his boot. Sorry but as a designer, I believe this needs a teedy tiny minor adjustment. We live in the era of Pixel perfect designs.
WOW. dem clear gfx. Color me impressed. I loved the beta but Rainbow and CoD zombies got in the way 🙁 now i regret buying cod.
game is s**t. a good looking s**t is still a s**t. and a re*ard publisher is still a re*ard publisher.
Making money is re**rd now? You’re probably a genius then huh?
(It’s a joke about you having no dollars)
Yeah… What?
lol wut ? money ?
yeah sure, your mom must working hard at nights to earn money.
(it’s a joke about you having a w***re as a mom)
EA is a terrible company but they never over hype graphics IMO. BTW did you guys notice how some low scores were removed from metacritic of Battlefront on PS4? Damn, everyone is corrupt in game industry.
Any publication do a write up about it?
I just watched the original reveal trailer. This game has definitely been downgraded. Not as much as some games, but it simply is not up to the fidelity in the trailer, not by a long shot.
Seems like it lacks of content, and that’s the problem. I’d rather play Battlefront 2, but almost no one is playing it anymore, and GameSpy is gone for good.
not enough difference in quality as expected over properly modded 8 years old crysis
real time graphics advancement has been seriously slowed down 🙁
Actually making CryEngine 2 look this good (in a large map, not for one screenshot) would slow it to a crawl on NASA computers. Battlefront has solid performance from what I’ve heard. And CryEngine 3, well, look at Crysis 3. There are similar looking environments with translucent foliage and everything, and they neither look this good nor run well. Crytek pioneers (which always involved more brute-force, less sophisticated methods), DICE refines.
Dice also uses real life scans, that’s why you have such detailed assets.
DICE can use real life scans because their engine is powerful enough to render them at an acceptable level. Photogrammetry or whatever it’s called wouldn’t have been worth it ten or even five years ago because hardware and engines simply couldn’t support high fidelity assets like that.
My point was, if you put DICE’s current level of assets into CE2 it wouldn’t be playable. CE2 couldn’t handle a forest like that, even on current high end hardware.
Not true. Check THE VANISHING OF ETHAN CARTER, it uses the same stuff on UE 3 originally and now it’s on UE 4 I think. Was running great on UE 3 and looked way better than other games.
I know about Ethan Carter. I don’t agree though, it doesn’t look particularly good. The textures themselves are good but the geometry is last-gen (understandably). If you want to make great textures today you’ve got to go ham with parallax mapping or tesselation. Look at this flat, boring road and how there are dark shadows in the source material:
http://images.pushsquare.com/news/2015/07/the_vanishing_of_ethan_carter_appears_on_ps4_next_week/attachment/0/original.jpg
They might have innovated in some ways but overall the textures aren’t on par with Crytek’s, DICE’s or Epic’s. And the rest of the engine, well, it’s UE3.
Overall it does look good. Photogrammetry is not a system killer by itself, that was the point I was trying to make. 🙂
Yeah, CE 2 is old now, but Crysis is still looking remarkably good for such an old game and offers great interactivity with the environment. It needs some nice textures, though. 🙂
Looking at Fallout 4 on the other hand… 😀
This swedish guys from DICE just pis…s on CDPR polskakrap
Pretty graphics cannot hide the fact that the game is total crap