Next gen multiplayer.

[Roxor]

Considering how much fun I've had with Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament, I can't understand why any developer wouldn't include bots in their game. You've already got the AI for single-player, so just reuse that for the bots if you're in a hurry. Sure, they may be a bit thick, but it's better than nothing, and for me, multiplayer support with no bots is effectively nothing.

 

[spartandude]

well considering PS3 has MAG which has a couple of hundred on its servers and PS4 is getting Planetside 2 i dont think 64 players of BF4 is too much of a benchmark

 

[MetalDooley]

well considering PS3 has MAG which has a couple of hundred on its servers and PS4 is getting Planetside 2 i dont think 64 players of BF4 is too much of a benchmark

Considering BF3 on consoles was capped at 24 players upping that to 64 is a significant upgrade I reckon.Still nowhere near as impressive as other games though

I bet Battlefield 3 on the PC could have a lot more players at the same time but the maps (and basicly everything else) are designed with a limit of 64 players.

That was the problem with BF3 on consoles.Everything was designed for 64 players but you only had 24 max.Made some of the maps feel pretty empty at times.Having the same amount of players on both PC and consoles is a good thing

 

[Glongpre]

Can't wait for huge Star Wars Battlefront battles. I'm not worthy!

 

[Soopy]

well considering PS3 has MAG which has a couple of hundred on its servers and PS4 is getting Planetside 2 i dont think 64 players of BF4 is too much of a benchmark

I wasn't using it as a benchmark, simply an example. AI these days is exceptional these days. Crysis 3 is a testament to this. But is such AI able to be utilised in a multiplayer scenario such as Battlefield or Planetside?

 

[Alfador_VII]

Only 64? Just have a look at EVE, it frequently has battles with many hundreds of ships on each side.

The problem is not the client hardware, it's the servers, and the network infrastructure