Slashdot Mirror


Star Wars Battlefront Game Trailer Is So Realistic It Looks Like Movie Footage

MojoKid writes It has been a tremendous week for Star Wars fans. First we got to see Han Solo and Chewbacca make an emotional reappearance in the newest Star Wars: The Force Awakens trailer (the second official trailer Disney has put out). Now, Electronic Arts is treating us to a visual smorgasbord of cinema-quality footage showing the forthcoming Star Wars Battlefront game. Battlefront will support to up 40 players divided between the Rebel Alliance and Galactic Empire, all shooting it out and playing with some of the coolest Star Wars vehicles and weapons around. We're talking jetpacks, AT-AT war machines, AT-STs, TIE Fighters, X-wings, and more. Though the trailer allegedly shows actually "game engine footage," it's questionable whether or not it's actual gameplay or just pre-rendered cut scenes from the game engine. Either way, it's still pretty impressive.

87 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. Render farm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do they give you a render farm to run this thing on for free, or do you have to buy that yourself?

    1. Re:Render farm? by Cley+Faye · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ignoring the fact that EA is involved and will probably screw customers one way or another, what part of "game engine footage" did you miss?

    2. Re:Render farm? by taustin · · Score: 2

      You probably believe that movies "inspired by the title of a true story" bear some resemblance to the actual events, too.

    3. Re:Render farm? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      AC, Americans don't say "representative to" (or at least they don't in any part of the country I've ever lived in). It sounds unnatural. I would assume that the previous AC either made a typo or isn't a native speaker of English.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    4. Re:Render farm? by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      No, it looks just like any other PS4 game. That is... Not like a movie (yet).

      The headline is just trying to grab clicks by lying.

    5. Re:Render farm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I would assume that the previous AC either made a typo or isn't a native speaker of English.

      Yeah. He might be American.

      ducks

    6. Re:Render farm? by maugle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes... and we've certainly never been misled by "game engine footage" before.
      *cough*Killzone*cough*
      *cough*Watchdogs*cough*

    7. Re:Render farm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I missed absolutely nothing. Just because a cinematic was rendered using the same engine as the game does not, in any form, indicate that the game will look anything close to that. It is a completely pre-rendered video. It is *very* common for companies to use their engine to create these sorts of pre-rendered videos using models and techniques that will most definitely not be used in the game.

    8. Re:Render farm? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Rule of games, the better the graphics the worse the game play, the better the graphics the buggier the product upon release, cut scenes are often claimed to be part of the game. So the game engine produces the cut scenes at maximum capability on a very high powered machine over with minutes of processing to create seconds of imaging ie really, really shitty frame rates. The empty hype of modern corporate marketing. I'll wait until a year after release and let everyone else deal with B$.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    9. Re:Render farm? by edittard · · Score: 2

      Wrong on two counts. One, "you fucking American idiot" doesn't have a finite verb so it's not a complete sentence. Had he written "you're a..." you might have a point.

      Two, it's correct to use a comma to separate the addressee. http://www.grammarerrors.com/p...

      Many people here omit it, sometimes changing the meaning somewhat.

      "There's an orange, doctor" vs. "There's an orange doctor"

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    10. Re: Render farm? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't separate your vocative from the main clause with a full-stop, you idiot.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    11. Re:Render farm? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well it just looks better than the recent sw releases, so it looks better than a movie or a tv series.

      that doesn't need too much though you know.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:Render farm? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Given the number of times we've seen trailers and teasers from games which look stunning; sometimes even the demos look stunning only to have the final version look like absolute crap, I'm going to wait for the release before I declare the game to be visually good in anyway.

      Studios have a long history of promising the earth and then delivering garbage. All of them, not just EA. Everyone should be highly sceptical given the history of the industry.

    13. Re:Render farm? by rioki · · Score: 1

      Actually I like to point to Star Citizen. The cinematic and trailers for that game are at the same level of graphical fidelity than the highest in game settings. The issue is that, first you probably can't afford the system that renders this smoothly, second the game absolutely feels differently. Game play is restricted by the input space and thus is almost always clunky; the more realistic the graphics, the more jarring the disconnect feels.

  2. Questionable? by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's questionable whether or not it's actual gameplay or just pre-rendered cut scenes from the game engine.

    It's not questionable at all. When devs actually use in-game footage, they'll rub it in your face in every way possible. In-engine footage is marketing speak for "We wish we could do something like that, but right now it's running at 2 fps on SLI Titan Xs and all the animations are static".

    1. Re:Questionable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      totally pre-rendered - disclaimer at end makes it pretty clear demo of the 'game engine' not actual gameplay

    2. Re:Questionable? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I expect "game engine" demos to look the same as gameplay -- rendered cutscenes have been done with the game engine for years now, rather than playing pre-renderred video clips.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:Questionable? by gregor-e · · Score: 1

      Plus, on the final credit page it reads "FROSTBITE GAME ENGINE FOOTAGE REPRESENTATIVE OF PLAYSTATION 4. NOT ACTUAL GAMEPLAY."

    4. Re:Questionable? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

      I think we all know that EA is lying and actually gameplay won't look like that.

      But, more importantly, the phrase "So Realistic It Looks Like Movie Footage" is now meaningless. Yes, it does look "just like a movie" due to the fact that many scenes from movies are now done almost entirely in CGI.

    5. Re:Questionable? by SuperDre · · Score: 1

      No it's not, it's in-engine footage, BUT! it's a cinematic which means it can be of much higher quality because the engine only has to deal with what's shown and nothing else like during regular gameplay, it's like a 'photo-mode' which you see in some games now, which are also only available in a rerun of what you actually played. But I guess the in-engine footage is also propably shown on a very highend GPU...

    6. Re:Questionable? by tsa · · Score: 3, Funny

      In reality it looks like this.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    7. Re:Questionable? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      In reality it looks like this.

      That's "game engine" footage, not "in-game". The final release won't have the same rich colour-depth.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  3. Photo realistic? by __aardcx5948 · · Score: 2

    Sure, the lightning is good. But photo realistic? Not even close. It looks awesome but come on.

    1. Re:Photo realistic? by ericloewe · · Score: 1

      It looked good, until they were no longer able to not show faces.

    2. Re:Photo realistic? by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Its honestly pretty competitive with CG effects in movies. I mean, go back and watch the prequel starwars movies again. All the CG was obvious. The lighting is almost never perfect.

      My personal favorite bad CG was that scorpion king mummy scene where the rock was turned into a giant insect and it looked seriously off. I'm not sure what it was... I'm assuming something with the lighting or shaders or something.

      But really, if this is at all representative of what the game will look like, then I think it should be great.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    3. Re:Photo realistic? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      on a bad youtube video on my tv, I had to do a double take as the scene i was watching could have been in ROTJ.

      on my computer yea I agree it looks awesome but I can see the differences.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    4. Re:Photo realistic? by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would say even the scorpion king looked better than rubber neo vs plastic smith clones in Matrix II, that wasn't even cartoon, it looked like something off of robot chicken lol.

      As for the trailer? Everybody just has to face reality and reality is 1.- The 2 new "next gen" consoles are AMD netbook APUs with GPUs that would run around $130-$150 USD, the fanboys can scream and gnash their teeth but anybody that looks at the AMD whitepapers on the jaguar arch will see its not even on the level of the Athlon wrt most functions, much less an FX or i5/i7, 2.- The Steam hardware survey gives those designing on the PC side a good idea where the "sweet spot" to get the most customers will be and last I checked that is GPUs in the $100-$150 range and quad core CPUs, and 3.- With current technology the only way you would even get close to that is a pair of XFire or SLI'd top o' the line cards and even then I doubt you'd even hit 30 fps.

      So unless they come up with a way to make technology such as ray tracing and the rendering of tens of millions to hundreds of millions of polygons a LOT cheaper? Yeah you aren't gonna see anything like that, I don't care if your PC cost more than a new car. It certainly isn't gonna even be in the same ballpark with a PS4 or XB1 which is the platform that will be the primary focus of the devs, no way in hell.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re:Photo realistic? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      The faces give it away no matter what you watch it on.

  4. Not interested by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 1

    Energy weapons don't provide the satisfaction you get when gibbing someone with a gun that shoots bullets. Even the sound of them is lame.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    1. Re:Not interested by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Man, I disagree. Kinetic weapons are great, but a good blaster or plasma weapon is the coolest thing to nail someone with in multiplayer in pretty much any game that does service to the scifi weapon types.

    2. Re:Not interested by itzly · · Score: 1

      As long as you get to shoot first.

    3. Re:Not interested by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Surely you realize those weapons are not realistic, right?
      They behave pretty much like normal guns, and not like lasers would.

  5. "A DICE GAME" by NotInHere · · Score: 1

    Now I know everything.

    Disclaimer: I know it isn't THE dice, still funny.

    1. Re:"A DICE GAME" by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      What I don't get is why you need dice for a computer game....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  6. Gameplay is king by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's obviously not straight from a player's POV, no one switches views that fast, and there's no way it's smart enough to give the right one of the tens of points of view in the first part of the video.

    It also doesn't look like a movie, not a high-budget one anyway. With the luxury of pre-rendering movies are already 15 years beyond those plastic faces. But enough complaining. Did you see the actor covering his face from the explosion? The smooth teamwork? The variety of vehicles? Maybe I'm behind the times but the non-graphics-related material; the gameplay, that's what I'm really into. And this has some good stuff.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    1. Re:Gameplay is king by loufoque · · Score: 1

      It's done by DICE under EA, they're the makers of the Battlefield series.
      It will be a casual shooter. They attract people with visuals and pseudo-cinematic aspects, not with actual gameplay.

    2. Re:Gameplay is king by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      the gameplay, that's what I'm really into. And this has some good stuff.

      Battlefront has never been disappointing in that regard and the previous 2 versions are still worth getting on a LAN and playing with friends. Hopefully this version of BF will allow the type of gameplay that has been available in the past to continue, instead of forcing you to be online like many games are now.

      After all the gameplay has to be good AND it has to be fun to play.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    3. Re:Gameplay is king by Xest · · Score: 1

      It's just Battlefield 4 in the Star Wars universe. All of this including the great visuals already exist in Battlefield 4 since about 18 months ago.

      The upside is this is star wars, which makes it awesome. Let's just hope that it actually works, unlike BF4 which was broken and buggy for months after release, and still to this day has some launch day bugs present in it.

      Even BF3 before it had most of this stuff from a gameplay perspective so I don't really see anything new or groundbreaking here, but I'm happy it's being made, because I love BF3 and BF4 (well, when it works), and I love Star Wars.

      The only downside to this game is no single player, and I don't think I've ever bought a multiplayer only game (excluding MMOs) and enjoyed it because no proper single player is typically just code for "Half-arsed game, we couldn't be arsed to put much effort into and want to make a quick buck from." - I've found this to so far be a universal truth, from Quake III to Titanfall. Let's hope this is the exception that breaks the rule.

  7. Re:DICE game? by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'd be happy if Slashdot was owned by a EA subsidiary?

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  8. Game Engine footage != Game footage by overnight_failure · · Score: 2

    Just before everyone wets their pants

  9. what? by bigdavex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since modern Star Wars cinema looks like a video game, this isn't much a stretch.

    --
    -Dave
  10. Fan boy review much? by o_ferguson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously, drop the false exuberance. As a long time fan of Star Wars and the Battlefront series, I'm more concerned about the stuff they killed from the title while reverting back ot the same name as the first version of the game. No single-player campaign. No content from Eps 1-3. No ground-to-ship warfare. This is basically just Battlefield with Starwars sprites added. Call it out for what it is.

    --
    - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
    1. Re:Fan boy review much? by captjc · · Score: 2

      There is offline single player. I am a bit miffed on the space battles thing. However, the space-based combat in BF2 was hardly the end-all-be-all of Star Wars dogfighting. X Vs Tie or Rogue Squadron it was not. As for the Prequel era stuff, They more or less said it will be DLC While I hate EA's DLC practices and it is pretty shitty they can't include them what is a $70 game, if they can bring back Gungan genocide mode, playable Palpatine, and the Naboo and Mustafar maps, I might consider buying them.

      Either way, Battlefront 2 is still on steam and still works very well on Windows 7 (and Wine for the Mac / linux gamers) in 1920x1080.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    2. Re:Fan boy review much? by kamapuaa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > No content from Eps 1-3.

      This is a complaint?

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:Fan boy review much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pretending 1-3 don't exist is a FEATURE not a bug.

    4. Re:Fan boy review much? by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Meesa thought you would say that...

    5. Re:Fan boy review much? by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      I basically agree, but I'm not sure I understand the relevance.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
  11. Microtransactions by FlynnMP3 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Your blaster battery is low. You can either wait and let it recharge or for 20 EA bucks, purchase an unlimited charge battery."

    1. Re:Microtransactions by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 2

      Followed by: I should have never bought that blaster battery from EA. I switched over to force sensitive for 100$. They didn't tell me advancing to deeper levels costs incrementally more money. But I get powers other players don't get, soooo worth it. The downside is that there is now permadeath for force sensitive characters, but I can revive myself at any time for 1$ with no loss of experience!

    2. Re:Microtransactions by Venerable+Vegetable · · Score: 1

      "Pre-Order and get bonuscontent early."...

    3. Re:Microtransactions by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Like EA would ever be that generous. 5 recharges, expiring after 24 hours, for 40 EA bucks (real value $19.99).

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Microtransactions by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      Pre order for $99.
      Release date price $65.
      Super premium version $189.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    5. Re:Microtransactions by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      If people didn't pay for it, it wouldn't exist. I'm not talking about any specific game, but the pay-to-play/pay-to-win trend itself. People have shown that they're willing to pay to overcome obstacles -- even obstacles that exist solely to get them to pay, which would be extortion in any other context. The only way to eliminate extortion is to ban it, otherwise it's really damned effective.

    6. Re:Microtransactions by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

      Hey, I've used micro transactions in games I wrote in the past to be honest! I just personally avoid games I pay for that also have micro transactions. I have enough games in my library that I don't have to lower myself to that level. Also I am not a fan of EA ever since they've been shutting down so many company's offices to slow competition. That is toxic for the game player who wants quality games being released.

  12. Gameplay looks great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The closed booth presentation they gave at Celebration shows actual gameplay on a PS4. It is not quite as great looking as the trailer, which is clearly using scripted animations and heavy editing but pretty impressive none the less. It's very beautiful, the sounds are incredibly authentic and the ATSTs and ATATs look and sound lethal.

    It felt like people died way too quickly for a video game but it looked, sounded, and felt very much like what it would be like to assault the shield generator bunker at the battle of Endor.

  13. It's a trick of your brain by Echo_Hotel · · Score: 2

    This is only going to look good for an hour or two till you've seen all the animations a few times and the lack of variation to things kicks the realism down a few notches.

  14. Frostbite by Zarjazz · · Score: 1

    The Frostbite Game Engine is the best looking one around at present so yes, these scenes may have been generated real-time but it will be just like those in other games using the engine. Cut-scenes like this turn off unwanted background game processing and then set gfx settings up to the max. In game =/= In engine.

    Sure it looks pretty but there are enough negatives to make me want to avoid this

    > EA
    > DLC, DLC, and some more DLC with a side helping of micro-transactions.
    > Buggy DiCE software
    > Combat is even more simplified than Call-of-Duty.

  15. Re:Love the stupid energy shield by captjc · · Score: 2

    It's a game. It is supposed to be fun. If you want gritty realism, why are you looking at a Star Wars game? Go play America's Army

    --
    Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
  16. Energy weapons are satisfying by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    There have been plenty of Star Wars games over the years where I have taken great satisfaction in dispatching foes with energy weapons.

    But beyond that, as long as they have Thermal Detonators, you will probably gets the gibs you are looking for.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  17. Look at the last few seconds of the video by Ragnarok89 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Come on people, why so much discussion and speculation? It is printed in black and white, plain as day: Frostbite game engine footage representative of PlayStation 4. Not actual gameplay. During the final few seconds where you see âoelearn moreâoe, the game studio logos,etc. Case closed. Discussion over.

  18. But wait theres more! by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

    EA Star Wars Battlepacks only 4.99$ Act now and you can get the Super Deluxe Version for 199 dollars with access to the beta!

    EA is screwing over everyone with micro transactions in all their games. The grind to unlock gear, and reducing quality. Where is Battlefield 5? Hardline is an absurd step back and it seems to be a fluff game so they can rape consumers by using the BattleField name.

  19. How long by Brad1138 · · Score: 2

    Till this is actual game play? My guess would be 10-20 years.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    1. Re:How long by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That being said, it isn't the graphics that make a game good.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    2. Re:How long by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      Along with the music, graphics helps a little.

      However, I often find 3D makes a game worse.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    3. Re:How long by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Right but a Battlefront game is gonna have good game play.

    4. Re:How long by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

      The exception was the late 80s. Better graphics = better production budget = more likely to be quality. Judging a game by its graphics ended somewhere around the time 3d was being experimented with, then everything was hit or miss. Even a lot of big budget companies had no idea how to make a 3d game early on...

    5. Re:How long by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      There were plenty of games on the C64 with good graphics but shitty gameplay. They were usually also crippled by a horrendous multiload.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  20. Re:DICE game? by peragrin · · Score: 2

    Sure EA doesn't upgrade anything. slashdot Beta would never have existed.

    not to mention the DRM would prevent AC's from getting their frosty piss.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  21. Only 40 players by koan · · Score: 1

    Won't buy it then.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Only 40 players by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      42!! (Oops.. wrong geeky sci-fi.)

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  22. Re:This is EA. Expect Greatness! Oops, I mean shit by koan · · Score: 1

    I agree, if you need evidence of this claim look to Hardline.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  23. Questionable?? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    "it's questionable whether or not it's actual gameplay or just pre-rendered cut scenes from the game engine. Either way, it's still pretty impressive."

    Uh, I don't think it's questionable at all. This 100% looks like pre-rendered in engine footage. Just because they say it's in engine graphics doesn't mean it's real-time. While I'd love it if this looked this good there is just no way I'm buying it right now.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  24. Re:DICE game? by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

    We'd probably get something even worse, like Slashdot Origin.

  25. Trailer? by garyoa1 · · Score: 1

    The problem with ALL game trailers is... none of them give an idea of actual game play. Best thing to do is wait til someone posts some real game play on youtube. Then you'll get an idea if it's worth it or not.

    --
    Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
  26. EA? Pass. by Scutter · · Score: 1

    EA will never get another dime of my money. I don't care if they somehow manage to pull off a miracle and actually deliver a playable game for once.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  27. Re:EA? Pass. by cfalcon · · Score: 1

    As a Star Wars fan this shit always leaves me so conflicted. Such a lucrative license with so much good stuff.

    EA's umbrella companies vary in quality, but many are very good. The corporate burden of being under EA is just fucking immense though, and they put shit into games that should not have shit.

    I'll definitely buy Battlefront. My general dislike of the corporation is simply far less than my desire to play some fucking Star Wars. It definitely feels like a captive audience trick, though.

  28. Realistic?? by tsa · · Score: 1

    For your information: Star Wars is fiction. I know for many people it seems very real but I have to disappoint you. Nothing about it is realistic.

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:Realistic?? by tmjva · · Score: 1

      You beat me to this.

      The idea of "realism" in fiction, especially science-fiction/fantasy genres is truly odd. Although their saving grace is comparing to whether it is like a movie or not.

      (Historical fiction not so much, except when they make up major events that never happened. Invented love interest however is always a given that can be lived with.)

      --
      Tracy Johnson
      Old fashioned text games hosted below:
      http://empire.openmpe.com/
      BT
  29. Still the dead carp eyes. by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    If they had even just put goggles on the characters then it might fool people who watch the whole thing. The characters' skin was a bit dead carp as well but the eyes were completely devoid of life like every game so far. Some day some genius will crack how to do eyes in a real time rendering but so far, no joy.

    But on that note, I may very well have to buy a PS just to get this game.

  30. It has been a tremendous week for Star Wars fans. by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    It has been a tremendous week for Star Wars fans.

    One got a job and one got laid?

    Not the same one, obviously. Let's not step into the realms of fantasy.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  31. So they have this great tech but they use it to by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    rehash an old movie with "speeders" and whatever those stupid giant walking machines/targets are called, but they left out the one thing that made it Star Wars: the frickin' teddy bears! Where are the damned teddy bears? I want teddy bears!

  32. Re:Love the stupid energy shield by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

    If you want gritty realism, join the actual army.

  33. Re:DICE game? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

    We'd get a different /. every year, and many of the existing assets would be incompatible with the new engine. John Maddening /. 2015.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  34. It's GAME ENGINE FOOTAGE not INGAME FOOTAGE by Fattyman1971 · · Score: 1

    Don't think this video shows something that will be seen in this quality in the later game. It is only a demonstration what the engine CAN do. Scripting, many expensive connected - via SLI or Crossfire - gfx cards will show you this kind of footage. Think of the "INFILTRATOR"-demo of the UNREAL-Engine. This one also shows nice sf-centric engine footage - but not real ingame footage. You will need 4 connected 980gtx cards to render this big scripted scene.

  35. Slashdot Article is So Pandering... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    ...it looks like advertising!

  36. X-Wing VS Tie Fighter by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Call me when X-Wing VS Tie Fighter comes out again, otherwise I am not all that interested. Also 20 VS 20? Please. Those are some cute systems you go there.

    Hopefully when/if X-Wing VS Tie Fighter ever does come back it will be designed for PC's and not crippled for this console garbage.

    Maybe with the re-release with the film, it will happen...

  37. PhysX? by phorm · · Score: 1

    One thing I note is that the particle effects are quite impressive, including explosions and sparks, etc. I'm guessing those are PhysX enabled or possibly Mantle? Whatever is being used, it definitely helps lend a bit of a Starwars/movie feel to things.