Thursday, October 20, 2011

Then and Now: Graphics of Battlefield 3

Battlefield 3 is widely known for its absolutely incredible, breathtaking graphics. This is what sets this game apart from all the others. From my experience, i agree with these claims. I have never seen any other game as realistic visually as this one. For this blog post, i would like to go over the graphical technical aspects of Battlefield 3 and compare it to its predecessor, Battlefield 2. There are MANY graphical aspects i could cover such as lighting, shadows, textures, physics, smoke particles, weapons, explosions, destruction, and many others, but I'm going to focus on 2 main parts: Lighting and Textures. 

I'm also going to do some performance benchmarks comparing three different test scenarios. 1). Battlefield 2 on the highest settings. 2). Battlefield 3 on the lowest settings. and 3). Battlefield 3 on the highest settings. I'm going to do this to demonstrate the effects of increasing and decreasing lighting effects and textures and the impact they have on performance while playing the game.



Battlefield 2 Vs. Battlefield 3


Looking at the image below and the video above, you can clearly see the difference between the two games. I'm confident that if these images weren't labeled, most would be able to guess which is the newer of the two. Battlefield 3 utilizes the game engine Frostbite 2. The game designers actually waited to make Battlefield 3 to let the technology advance so they could make the game the way they wanted it.


Lighting

In Battlefield 2, the lighting is fairly static. I say fairly because while there are shadows in the game and a really basic sun glare, that's about all the lighting effects that are there. In the video above, you can see the basic lighting effects at 1:49-2:00. You see the shadows underneath the soldiers and when he dies, you can almost get a glimpse of the sun effect. In pictures 1 and 2 below, you can also see the shadows under the soldiers and a static flash from the soldiers gun. In battlefield 3 however, lighting effects are everywhere and it is majorly dynamic. There are three main parts in the video above that gives you a good idea of the newer lighting effects. In the beginning of the video, as he walks out of the car, you can see the sun not only in the sky but the reflection off the puddle in front of him, you can see the way the light streaks through the sky, and you can see the details of shadows. At 1:08-1:21, you get another good view of the lighting effects as the sun shines through some windows and streaks through the dusty air. You also see some sparks and the florescent light fall lighting a different part of the room. Lastly, at 1:45 while your dragging your wounded soldier away, you can see the flashes from your squad mates weapon lighting up the wall hes standing by and also some flashes from explosions that light up the surrounding area. You can see these comparisons in pictures 3, 4, and 5, i posted below also. This dynamic lighting is greatly improved over battlefield 2's lighting and greatly changes the game play. This is especially true when soldiers can equip flashlights and lasers to their weapons which actively blind whoever they shine it at in the game (pictures 6 and 7). Also, when a sniper looks at you just right, the glare of the sun shines off their scope and is visible, giving away their position (picture 8).

These lighting effects are greatly improved over Battlefield 2's. It not only gives the game a beautiful look but it gives the game an entirely new game play not seen in any other game. 



Textures


The comparison of textures in Battlefield 2 and 3 is about the same as the lighting comparison. That is, Battlefield 2 is much more basic and Battlefield 3 is much more detailed. In pictures 1 and 2 you see how simple the textures are in Battlefield 2. In the first image you can see the wall of the hotel that is a solid tan color for the most part. The ground the soldiers are standing on is very "flat", in that the only definition is some light dry cracks. The grass is clearly separate from the ground and you can see how it almost looks unnatural the way it comes out of the dirt. In the second picture you can see how the riffle he is holding has very little definition. You can see the way the tree tops, flag pole, and tops of the grass are over pixelated and look somewhat blocky. The ground, while it has a grassy underlay, still looks unnatural and detached from the modeled grass growing from the ground.

Battlefield 3 changes all that. Its textures are much more detailed and modeled accurately. The best example of these advancements are in picture 5. Looking at this image, you can see the concrete barrier in front of you. It looks weathered, there are chunks of it missing, there are bullet holes, and the steel mesh is showing. The street in the bottom right looks paved with little grains. There is debris scattered about from the battle. Each tire tread has its own pattern and amount of wear on the left. The containers in the far middle look corrugated along with the edge of the metal overhang. Dirt is shooting up from the ground near two of the soldiers in a fire fight. The truck on the right is on fire and looks burnt. The grass in the median looks noticeably better. Also, in picture 4 you can see the vivid detail of the weapon he is holding, unlike the sniper riffle from battlefield 2.

You can see how nothing looks pixelated, everything has a certain amount of definition, and everything looks natural, unlike Battlefield 2. The textures in Battlefield 3 are just simply better.




Battlefield 2

1

2 

Battlefield 3

3

4

5
6

7

8

Destruction 3.0
I included this image to show the sheer power behind the Frostbite 2 game engine and the level of destruction it enables. Just some eye candy.





****Benchmark Results****

 For Reference, here are the minimum and recommended system requirements for BF2 and BF3 and also my computers specs for comparison.

Battlefield 2 Specs

Battlefield 3 Specs (Beta)

My Computer's Specs

  • CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.67GHz (Quad Core)
  • RAM: 6 GB DDR3 @1866MHz
  • VGA: EVGA GTX 275 (1792MB Version)
  • OS:    Windows 7 64 Bit






Battlefield 2: Highest Settings


Prediction
 
Making a prediction for my results for the benchmarks of Battlefield 2 on the highest settings, i would guess that i am not going to have a single problem running the game on the highest settings. My computer is running above and beyond the recommended settings for Battlefield 2 and at the recommended settings for Battlefield 3. I am curious to see how my computer will run Battlefield 3 on the highest settings.
The video above and the following information in the image below was gathered using a program called Fraps. It also collects benchmarking data. In my tests, Fraps tops out at 60FPS, so the image below can be read as my computer handled BF2 at the highest settings the best it possibly could. Also, Fraps itself takes some resources to record HD video during benchmarking which may effect later results for BF3.

  • Frames: Total number of frames collected during the recording.
  • Time: Length of the recording.
  • Min: Lowest frame rate during recording.
  • Max: Highest frame rate during recording.
  • Avg: Average frame rate during recording.





Temperatures


CPU Temperature during test
I started recording the tempetures before i opened BF2 and ended it after i closed it. The jagged areas around the begining represent the game starting and loading, then the flat area shows my temps during gameplay, and the spike at the end is me closing the game.



GPU Temperature during test
These temps reflect the same time frame as the CPU temps. The temperature gradually increased during loading and game play and topped out at around 55-56 degrees Celsius, a low to average temperature for a video card that is playing a game. Temps dropped back down after the game was closed.


BF2 Results

What i gathered from this information is what i expected. Battlefield 2 ran at the highest settings as well as my computer could possibly run it, even with Fraps recording during the test. My CPU and GPU reflected temperatures in the low to mild range from my experience playing games.





Battlefield 3 launches TODAY! Expect my results for Battlefield 3 within the next few days in my next blog post on 11/11/11! 

I will be doing more in-depth benchmark testing on Battlefield 3 with two different graphics cards.



5 comments:

  1. I have read your blog post and will be sending you feedback via e-mail

    ReplyDelete
  2. Those are some in depth benchmarks, I like it! Also, I thought I'd throw in some information about the lighting since it was such a big part of your post. The lighting is blinding as in picture 6, but if it's coming from something other than a gun-mounted flashlight you can shoot it out. In campaign it works as an obstacle, you have to either shoot the lights out or have extreme difficulty seeing the enemies. I also don't know if you can shoot out gun-mounted flashlights, I'm guessing no, but I haven't tried it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A lot of information really great! The one thing I think that can be improved on it the engagement, although I found this topic interesting and still do, (and after reading this I reconsidered my decision to not buy the game) I was hard pressed to want to read through all the information. Specifically the how you start off the section 'Lighting' was listing the different parts of the video, we just watched, and saying the different lighting effects. I feel that i could of been done in a more interesting way then just a simple list, especially for an introduction to the section. The information in there was good though and it did point me to some real nice effects that are displayed in the video, so keep the information, change the presentation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I like it so far. Could you explain what settings were used in the actual game and maybe show comparisons of their results on performance? I know settings like anti-aliasing can be a pretty big performance hit when set to a high value (although this probably wouldn't affect bf2 very much I'm sure that it will make a difference once you start investigating bf3). Also, are you sure that fraps maxes at at 60fps? I'm pretty sure that it can record higher frame rates than that... did you have vsync turned on in the game? I think it caps your frame rate at 60fps.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nathangsxd, when you use fraps, video recording tops out at a set frame rate. this is only when your recording though, not benchmarking. so when i click the record button, the frame rates are maxing out at 60 fps, as in this picture.

    http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/2197/fraps1.png

    BUT...

    I am also doing benchmarking at the same time as the recording. So, fraps is throttling the allowed frame rates to 60 for the recording and the benchmark results are displaying that information.

    If i did the benchmark results without recording my numbers would be much higher I'm sure, but i wanted a visual representation for the reader so they knew what exactly was being tested. and since every test i did was capped at 60, my results were still accurate for the most part, though they do not represent how well my computer actually plays the game.

    ReplyDelete