Graphics comparison YouTube channel CandyLand has just recently released a graphical comparison between Ultra and Low settings for the PC version of Star Wars Battlefront.
Perhaps the first thing you’ll notice is how similar, comparatively speaking, Low and Ultra settings for the game look.
Actually, what you’ll first notice is just how good the game looks, a lot of which comes down to a new rendering technique, Physical Based Rendering (PBR).
From a technical standpoint, PBR “refers to a way of rendering that takes into account certain physical properties and laws.” It considers things like “energy conservation of a material, how we handle reflection, and how we render lighting”.
But once you get past its grandiose visuals, you’ll see that DICE has done a remarkable job of optimising the game for a variety of PCs.
Anti-aliasing is all but absent and textures contain decidedly less detail at Low settings, but lighting is fairly similar across the board, and has resulted in one of the better looking Low settings of late.
Check it out for yourself:
Battlefield 4, graphically at least, was a much more ambitious title than Star Wars Battlefront is; that’s according to a comprehensive, hands-on analysis of the game by Digital Foundry.
That’s not to say that Star Wars Battlefront isn’t the best looking game produced by DICE or powered by the Frostbite 3 engine, it is, but lighting isn’t calculated and rendered in real time but, for the most part, baked into the level.
By hard-coding the lighting directly into each level, and adjusting it for each mode through the level editor, there is much less compromise between the Low and Ultra settings for PC, and even less of a difference between consoles and PC.
For those PC elitists out who sport godly PC rigs, worry not; Star Wars Battlefront will happily cater to you, especially for those of you with PCs to handle the game’s magnificent 4k resolution.
It had better look superb given its recommended hardware requirements.