Star Wars Battlefront Targetting 60fps on PS4, Xbox One and PC

Producer Craig Mcleod believes it delivers “the best gameplay experience”.

Posted By | On 17th, Apr. 2015 Under News

Star Wars Battlefront

DICE impressed quite a few of us with its reveal trailer for Star Wars: Battlefront. Rendered in-engine, the footage showcased an absurd amount of detail and technical wizardry. It looks ambitious and producer Craig Mcleod says that the development team is committed having it run at 60 FPS across all platforms.

“We’re making sure, first and foremost, to ensure it runs at 60 frames per second on everything because that’s what delivers the best gameplay experience.

“When you couple the talent that we have in the office with the technology and new generation of consoles has allowed us to achieve, that’s how you can get these environments that you’re seeing which simply wasn’t possible before.”

But will it run at 1080p resolution on the PS4 and Xbox One? After today’s reveal trailer, we’re not too sure but we are excited to find out. Star Wars: Battlefront is out on November 17th for PS4, Xbox One and PC.


Awesome Stuff that you might be interested in

  • ShoNuff

    Just to make sure the comments start off in the right direction

    My console of choice better have improved effects and gameplay over the competitors console because it’s the one I bought and I don’t like the other one.

    Ok it’s out of the way and we don’t need to make any more of these comments.

    • David

      What have you done…. They’ll be here now…

    • Mark

      Haha. It’s sad that no matter how much these fanboys trash the competing console, it’ll never improve their own gaming experience. Oh well. The foolish will be alive and well even when I’m dead. Lol

    • ShoNuff

      I agree. people just hate to hate and don’t have a real valid reason as to why they hate.

  • Mark

    I can def see why they want 60 frames here; there’ll be high speed chases and very fast action that will require maneuvers and quick reactions……and the motion of the animations will be 2x faster than 30fps. Man this is looking surprisingly good to me. Never been a Star Wars fan. EA pushing for DirectX 12 minimum-spec shows that they understand the need for low level APIs across the board, for what they wanna do. Wouldn’t be surprised if we hear them using Partially Resident Textures too (with PhotoGrammetry).

  • 900p/60fps confirmed.

    That’s okay. As long as it’s FUN!

    I’ll get my 4K/60fps plus my infinitely beautiful Clone Wars/Republic at War mods too on my MAXXED OUT P.C.!

    • Ricoh123

      2 x gtx 980 in sli mode runs GTA 5 in 4k ultra at 20 fps.

      PC gamers are full of crap with their 4k 60 fps talk.

    • Coovargo

      Well, I’m glad to see you’re still spreading misinformation. So let’s get started with some basic facts. As far as console variants are concerned, GTA 5 ran slightly better on PS4 than on Xbox one. Really, the differences aren’t even worth comparing. That said, regardless, they still both ran at 1080p at a locked 30 FPS with no anti-aliasing.

      A graphics comparison shows that the PC version is pulling a significant order of magnitude greater workload than the console variants, as demonstrated by these screenshots. There’s also a list of the general improvements on that page. They show the differences between Normal and Very High.

      PC version at very high has some effects and settings at a higher quality than the PS4 version of the game. Shadows are more natural and dense, better fog and smoke effects, a higher draw distance, and improved textures. (From above source).

      At 1080P on the Ultra preset will run perfectly fine at 105FPS average on 2x GTX 980 in SLI. At 4K in the same configuration you would yield an average of 56 FPS, with a 0.1% low end of 29 FPS, and a 1% low of 33 FPS. You have the option to lock the game at 30FPS. A Titan X alone would allow perfectly playable levels at 4K on high. Please tell me why you’re saying dual 980s yield a 50% lower framerate minimum, and a 300% lower framerate maximum.

      I don’t think PC gamers are the one in this thread that’s full of crap.

    • Ricoh123

      The xb1 version ran better than the ps4 version, which got choppy frame rates at high speed driving. It did have more grass though.

      Didn’t read the rest. I did vaguely see 4k at 29 fps though somewhere though. Petty much what I said.

    • Ricoh123

      PS – those figures you quoted were on the fabricated stress test which doesn’t really stress anything.

      Huge explosions and fast paced action sees the fps drop even further.

      Guess I was spot on correct after all.

    • Ricoh123

      Pps – it’s a 2 year old game.

      4k gaming on new games is a pipe dream.

    • Coovargo

      Yeah. I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. An explosion isn’t a stress on a graphical component. However I can understand the why it can be misinterpreted as so, so I’ll let it slide. Generally explosions are keyframe animations of generated models, nothing more, with the use of CPU to affect physics and other variables. Fast paced action scenes are what the stress test is designed around.

      Gaming hardware has changed a fair amount, but I guarantee you consoles wont change for much longer. A graphics card such as a GTX 770 can pull 60 FPS framerates in GTA 5 at high settings, and that card was released in the same period the Xbox One/PS4 came out. It can also run Ultra at 40. Both versions of GTV 5 performed equally based on my experience.

      I’m sorry you’re incapable of reading my argument. 20 FPS at 4K does not equal 29. Fixating on minimum values means you pick and choose your information, and ignore the rest of the picture. “Cherry Picking” is a logical fallacy and does not benefit your argument, so therefore by your own admission you have nothing further to add to your own topic of discussion.

    • Ricoh123


      Enjoy your stutter fest with your 2 year old game.


Copyright © 2009-2017 All Rights Reserved.