or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › Call Of Duty: Ghosts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Call Of Duty: Ghosts - Page 2

post #31 of 273
Well, I think they're going to need more to compete next gen, as typically a change in hardware means wiping the slate clean for expectations and what people will flock to. It's part of the reason devs are clamoring for new hardware.

I guess well see, but if Activision thinks they can just keep the tiny iterative formula going into next gen, I think they're going to find it a failure. 6 games in 6 years and jump to nextgen without a major update is going to be hard.
post #32 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Well, I think they're going to need more to compete next gen, as typically a change in hardware means wiping the slate clean for expectations and what people will flock to. It's part of the reason devs are clamoring for new hardware.

I guess well see, but if Activision thinks they can just keep the tiny iterative formula going into next gen, I think they're going to find it a failure. 6 games in 6 years and jump to nextgen without a major update is going to be hard.

I can agree with some of that.
post #33 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Source is a engine built from scratch by Valve for HL2 (HL1 wasn't it's own engine, but a modified engine based on Quake 1), but it's long been showing it's age as well. Valve's going to need a new engine sooner or later as well, which is why they confirmed they're already deep into development on Source 2 engine. Source itself was built to be modular, and allow easy updates that wouldn't break past functionality.

COD's engine is worse off and much more patch worked than Source. We're already up to ID Tech 5 among other propitiatory engines. COD is wasting a lot of rendering resources just trying to keep that old code running at 60FPS.

Source wasnt built by scratch:
Quote:
Source distantly originates from the GoldSrc engine, itself a heavily modified version of John D. Carmack's Quake engine, as is explained by Valve employee Erik Johnson on the Valve Developer Community:
“ When we were getting very close to releasing Half-Life (less than a week or so), we found there were already some projects that we needed to start working on, but we couldn't risk checking in code to the shipping version of the game. At that point we forked off the code in VSS to be both /$Goldsrc and /$Src. Over the next few years, we used these terms internally as "Goldsource" and "Source". At least initially, the Goldsrc branch of code referred to the codebase that was currently released, and Src referred to the next set of more risky technology that we were working on. When it came down to show Half-Life 2 for the first time at E3, it was part of our internal communication to refer to the "Source" engine vs. the "Goldsource" engine, and the name stuck. ”
Source was developed part-by-part from this fork onwards, slowly replacing GoldSrc in Valve's internal projects[41] and, in part, explaining the reasons behind its unusually modular nature. Valve's development of Source since has been a mixture of licensed middleware (Havok Physics, albeit heavily modified, and MP3 playback) and in-house-developed code.
John Carmack commented on his blog in 2004 that "there are still bits of early Quake code in Half-Life 2"

Its no different than the current cod engine, which probably bares as little resemblance to the q3 engine as source does to quake 1. I'm sure UE 4 still has some unreal 1 code in it too, same for BF1942 code in frostbite.
post #34 of 273
Edit: I didn't notice that there was a page 3 until after replying. I see it's already covered by bd2003.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Source is a engine built from scratch by Valve for HL2 (HL1 wasn't it's own engine, but a modified engine based on Quake 1), but it's long been showing it's age as well.

There's information out there directly from Valve that proves that Source is a heavily evolved version of what they've retroactively labeled as GoldSrc (The Half-Life 1 engine) that was a heavily modified version of the Quake engine from 1996.

There's probably just about as much of id Tech 3 (Which itself is an evolved version of Tech 2 which was an evolved version of the original) in the latest Call of Duty as there is GoldSrc in the latest Source game.

Which is likely relatively little.
Edited by Leo_Ames - 5/5/13 at 4:58am
post #35 of 273
And if anything, its probably more efficient code than the more recent engines like crytek and frostbite....it was a lot more difficult to get away with sloppy code when you game needed to run on a pentium 75mhz. Games based on idtech, even in the distant past, have always run very fast compared to other games. Source games always run great, they got rage running at 60fps on consoles with idtech 5....it's an excellent foundation to build upon going forward. Rage, quake wars and source have proven the engine can even handle large, sprawling environments as well as the corridors. They'll build terrain destruction and deformation into the engine when they feel the hardware is ready - portal 2 had some pretty impressive environmental destruction physics (although it was mostly pre-baked). Word on the street is respawn's new game, supposedly next gen only, licensed source as well (and then probably modified the hell out of it too). These will be the games that run at 60fps while others struggle to maintain 30fps.
post #36 of 273
Most interesting part of the teaser was at the end. The relationship between COD and Xbox as we move to nextgen is interesting. The fact that Xbox and COD are planning their reveal together makes me wonder what this means to us PS4 folks who will be looking for content within the first 3 months of the new consoles release.
post #37 of 273
Since Black Ops II was the last for the 360 DLC timed exclusive deal they had, I think if anything it will just be another timed exclusivity of content.
post #38 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

Since Black Ops II was the last for the 360 DLC timed exclusive deal they had, I think if anything it will just be another timed exclusivity of content.
Thats my hope as well. I've never purchased COD DLC so that doesn't matter much. Would there ever be enough incentive for MS to successfully delay a game on PS, especially with so much at stake in this nextgen race we are seeing? Are there just too many Playstation users where a tactic like that wouldn't ever be realistic?
post #39 of 273

I would expect and hope that next gen engines like Unreal 4, Frostbite 2 etc are being heavily optimized for next gen consoles, DX11 and above etc, and would work just as well for games. It will probably come down to the cost of retooling all your assets to work with a new engine and basically starting from scratch, vs making more tweaks.

post #40 of 273
post #41 of 273
Yeah, they are touting a new engine for this cod. but it's still the same quake engine they've been running for years now. They aren't moving onto unreal 4 or crytec or anything new. But they do have a new dog!

This may be the first Cod I skip since Cod 4.
post #42 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by crippldogg View Post

Yeah, they are touting a new engine for this cod. but it's still the same quake engine they've been running for years now. They aren't moving onto unreal 4 or crytec or anything new. But they do have a new dog!

This may be the first Cod I skip since Cod 4.

roll the tape
post #43 of 273
?
Frostbite
Unreal Engine
Valve
Whatever Killzones engine is.

What is the shock when these engines are investments and upgraded time after time?
post #44 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

?
Frostbite
Unreal Engine
Valve
Whatever Killzones engine is.

What is the shock when these engines are investments and upgraded time after time?

LOL, no.

There is a difference between restoring a car and throwing on a new coat of paint. I won't get into the details, but it's all out there if you want to research those other engines in comparison to what Activation has been doing. If you want see it in action, compare the screen caps from the MS Ghosts demo to BF4 which is a true next gen engine.

And none of that really matters. Just don't tell me it's a new engine or that the graphics are amazing.
Edited by TyrantII - 5/23/13 at 11:34pm
post #45 of 273
You can't keep dressing up a turd and calling it something else, it's still a turd
post #46 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post


Those two don't look anything alike. The newer one is easily much better. Just look at the streams of light coming in with the shadows. The newer one looks more realistic. It easily looks nextgen compared to the 2007 pic.
post #47 of 273
heh
post #48 of 273
Crysis was a game that was so far ahead of its time, at the time, no one believed they could even get it to run on the consoles. Eventually they did, at medium-ish settings....at 30fps or less.

Whereas ghosts needs to run on the current gen at 60fps.....that's the baseline over which the next gen candy coat is added. The geometry and level design in particular is going to be shared between the two versions, so I'm not surprised at all that a jungle scene doesn't blow me away. That jungle still needs to work on 360. The faces are more easily replaceable with full next gen features, and those looked pretty sweet.

I haven't been really impressed by the visuals of any of the split gen games we've seen so far, nor do I really expect to be. Eventually they'll shed that legacy, first by dropping the current gen to 30fps in a year or two, eventually by dropping it entirely.
post #49 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

LOL, no.

There is a difference between restoring a car and throwing on a new coat of paint. I won't get into the details, but it's all out there if you want to research those other engines in comparison to what Activation has been doing. If you want see it in action, compare the screen caps from the MS Ghosts demo to BF4 which is a true next gen engine.

And none of that really matters. Just don't tell me it's a new engine or that the graphics are amazing.

That's your problem. You seem to think everyone thinks it is all about graphics. I prefer COD gameplay over BF. The graphics look better than the previous version. I don't care if it doesn't look better than BF4 today. You can compare all you want but CoD got my money Crysis 3 didn't and BF4 might get my money and I am looking forward to both single & multiplayer COD and it will get my money. No one is getting cheated. It is just a game not the end of the world that they didn't go with a from scratch brand spanking new engine.
post #50 of 273
Thread Starter 
Naughty Dog's going to use the "Same engine" from ps3, for the ps4.. Just heavily upgraded obviously.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/31/naughty-dog-explains-its-next-gen-game-engine
post #51 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcclayton View Post

Naughty Dog's going to use the "Same engine" from ps3, for the ps4.. Just heavily upgraded obviously.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/31/naughty-dog-explains-its-next-gen-game-engine

Naughty Dog's engine runs circles around the one COD uses. COD needs a ground up rebuild. Not just for the visuals, but also for the way it runs in multiplayer. At least ND admitted they were updating their current tech, where IW won't.
post #52 of 273
After the Uncharted series, I don't care how they do it, I just know that their PS4 games will look amazing.
post #53 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcclayton View Post

Naughty Dog's going to use the "Same engine" from ps3, for the ps4.. Just heavily upgraded obviously.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/31/naughty-dog-explains-its-next-gen-game-engine

Might not be such a smart idea when you realize how well the Uncharted engine has done them since 2004-6 when they created it. Last of us is looking to be the nicest looking game this gen on any console, and combined with their story telling and gameplay experience, it's a must have ware. My PC master race brother who hates consoles is ga-ga over it and has already asked to borrow my console to play it.

Also, if ND was smart they've created it from the ground up like Valves rebuild of Source (or unreal), and make it very easy to scale with new technology. Still, that only lasts for so long.

COD keep adding tricks, but the underlying engine is very old and very limited in what it's rendered can do. They're still using BSP map files and baked in texture lighting.
Edited by TyrantII - 5/31/13 at 6:09pm
post #54 of 273
I just played The Last of Us demo and the graphics are sweet. I'm thinking they make all their games next gen and just scale them back for PS3.
post #55 of 273
Whenever a 3rd party developer is coy about a game or features making its way to another platform than the one named, it almost always means that it will but they can't talk about it ($$$). That appears to be the case with the question of whether Activision will use dedicated servers for the PS4 version:
Quote:
"Well we're having to not talk about all of it right now," was Mark Rubin's initial comment, almost evading it entirely.
Quote:
Finally Rubin reiterated his point, dedicated servers are "on PC and it is on Xbox One, but I can't talk about any other platforms."
post #56 of 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Whenever a 3rd party developer is coy about a game or features making its way to another platform than the one named, it almost always means that it will but they can't talk about it ($$$). That appears to be the case with the question of whether Activision will use dedicated servers for the PS4 version:

Nice.

Reminds me of when blizzard announced diablo 3 for ps3/4 at the ps4 reveal. Then Geoff keighley straight up asked them if they're bringing it to other platforms, and they reply "it's a sony event, we're just here to talk about playstation." No surprise when a few weeks later the Xbox version get announced.
post #57 of 273
Dedicated servers really would make me pick a copy up. I know its not vogue to talk about COD on this forum as there is predominately BF love here, but COD just scratches a itch for me.
post #58 of 273
They had "dedicated servers" in blops 2 when playing league matches and the lag was still bad.
post #59 of 273
Unfortunately, many people hear "dedicated servers" and think it is a panacea for any and all online lag issues. It's not. Peer-to-peer usually works great for the vast majority of games.

IMHO, the best solution is to allow both options, especially since companies usually end server support at some point, killing online play altogether. Allowing gamers to choose which experience they want to use should cover almost any situation.
post #60 of 273
So was COD so bad w/ lag just because of poor design than? On MY screen I would pump 5 shotgun shells into somebody and die by a couple handgun shots. On the replay, I never even fired my weapon ....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PlayStation Area
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › Call Of Duty: Ghosts