Welcome to mXm Gaming Community

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
kotaco

COD Ghosts Engine / My thoughts on the game in general.

Before going into this I know a bunch of you are fans of the franchise and that's 100% fine, this is my own opinion based on an article and I don't want anyone to feel the need to defend themselves because at the end of the day you play what you like and that is all that matters.

I brought this up with Balz last night and he didn't think I was correct, so here's my source article. Old engine just "upgraded" for next-gen.


Infinity Ward’s animation lead Zach Volker has been talking about Call Of Duty Ghosts’ new next-gen tech and explaining the difference between a completely new, from scratch, engine and one that’s been upgraded enough to be called new. Call Of Duty Ghosts new engine explained OPM Why wait to make a new engine? Was it because the current engine could do what you wanted, or because it was too big a job? Zach Volker Developing a new engine comes out of a necessity of something. So it comes out of necessity of what we have now is an open bandwidth that can accept more things going on and so maybe the current engine can’t push that. Or it comes out of a certain particular feature that we want to create that we haven’t been able to in the past. So looking at our current situation, focusing more on the next generation of hardware, we are now going to have the bandwidth to build many more things and our engine just can’t handle as much as we’d like to throw at it right now. And that necessitated the need to go onto a new engine. It’s a fine line when you define a new engine, and augmentations to an engine. What you want to be careful of is making too much of a distinction of a new engine. As we develop and we add features, at what point does it become a new engine? Because it’s impossible to develop a new engine from the ground up in a two year cycle. You would need an army of 200 engineers. So what we do is we say ‘okay what are the things that are significant and that we would say that are encompassing of the engine or its visual quality? Are those being upgraded in a significant way? Alright then, I think that warrants that we’ve got a new engine on our hands. OPM Can you say what tech the new engine’s built on? ZV The original engine years ago was built on Quake engine. We’ve done so many new engines and overhauls on top of that I’m not sure any of it still exists. OPM Is it still built from the original tech or is it built on something new? ZV When we’re talking about a new engine we’re talking about upgrading significant systems within in that engine. We’re not talking about throwing it all away and saying we’re starting from the ground up. It comes down to the systems we’re augmenting and upgrading, and trying to decide what is the significance of this upgrade. So there is certainly going to be remnants here and there of our pieces of our last engine, where it was appropriate when, you know what, this doesn’t need any changing. It’s good the way it is. Because at Infinity Ward we make a really clear point to make sure we only upgrade the things that are necessary for driving the things and the gameplay experience we want to push for that project. So just because we could do some cool 3D smoke, that if you walk through it, it ‘poofs’ and moves to the side, if that doesn’t aid in the gameplay experience we’re trying to push then we’re not going to pursue that technology even though we would have the capabilities for it. We make sure the engine is built the way we want it to be built so that it handles as efficiently as possible the things we want to show on the screen.

This statement is what gets me in this interview:
Because at Infinity Ward we make a really clear point to make sure we only upgrade the things that are necessary for driving the things and the gameplay experience we want to push for that project. So just because we could do some cool 3D smoke, that if you walk through it, it ‘poofs’ and moves to the side, if that doesn’t aid in the gameplay experience we’re trying to push then we’re not going to pursue that technology even though we would have the capabilities for it.

They are going into the next-gen of gaming, they are using an old engine that is beginning to show its age, even with the updates they've put in, and yet they still have the mindset that "cool 3D smoke that poofs when you walk through it" more or less doesn't aid in the gameplay experience?

Gameplay immersion is built on the little things in a game, the dynamic environment, the ambient noise, the dynamic lighting and weather, the 3D poofing smoke, and COD doesn't want to go there on their first next-gen game? This is why I think they are a franchise that started great and dulled over time.

Take this issue that's been prevalent in all the COD games with dynamic lighting on there engine:


Sure it doesn't affect where my bullets go, but that's not the point, and doesn't mean it deserves any less attention to detail. This is a screen cap from their first next-gen game and they still aren't up to par with the rest of the big name developers out there. Even Frostbite 3 does a better job than this. Not to mention the really lackluster textures on that soldier there.


This is why I'm not a fan of this series, they strictly follow the same formula and rarely make any significant changes to ensure they can churn out essentially the same exact product with a few face lifts and new maps every 2 years. Really in my eyes what they are doing is they made the base game, and what could be released as DLC is just repackaged and sold again milking the franchise and taking advantage of their brand identity and marketing to woo gamers. And it works, so good for their marketing directors and producers, really I'd say they are the "Apple of gaming."

I'm also not a fan of the FPS stuff, I've always preferred the TPS over it, along with the lack of real communication aside from name calling and questioning sexuality of your teammates and opponents that seems prevalent, nor the extremely fast gameplay that fits well with the short attention span of youth today. I think Rockstar hit the nail on the head in their spoof of the series in their "Righteous Slaughter 7" commercials.

Yes there is S&D mode where you can play same 1 game mode over and over if you want 1 death per round, but sorry, I just don't find that very fun either, and it still is fairly fast paced, at least every time I played it.

Yeah, I liked COD at first, they were great for a while, but now I think they are just playing it safe and milking the franchise until it's sales finally do start to fall at which time they can either do what good game designers do and take risks and be adventurous, (and that doesn't mean just throw in a space level) or they can retire it. And that is a brief summation of why I'm not interested in Ghosts in the least bit and don't plan on purchasing it.























Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each to their own really . I am not a big fan of COD but it is the only Shooter out there that supports People being able to play together . .
You cant find that on any other game title out .

In my Opinion Socom 4 Is better than Any of the COD even though Socom 4 does have its Obvious Issues that does not support Clans like in the past . So COD is the Best Alternative IMO . That is one of the only reasons I have played it so long .

That is all I can say really as to why I choose COD at this point
If Battlefield would support 12 person Squads would make it better but 4 man squads
pissed me off about that game and choose not to get it again till they support more people in a squad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Induced_Horizon' timestamp='1382137491' post='3436']
Each to their own really . I am not a big fan of COD but it is the only Shooter out there that supports People being able to play together . .
You cant find that on any other game title out .

In my Opinion Socom 4 Is better than Any of the COD even though Socom 4 does have its Obvious Issues that does not support Clans like in the past . So COD is the Best Alternative IMO . That is one of the only reasons I have played it so long .

That is all I can say really as to why I choose COD at this point
If Battlefield would support 12 person Squads would make it better but 4 man squads
pissed me off about that game and choose not to get it again till they support more people in a squad


I much prefer Battlefield over COD. Although it put people into 4 man squads the type of gameplay really rewarded teamwork and communication over lonewolfing, but those who wanted to run off on their own still could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Induced_Horizon' timestamp='1382273654' post='3439']
It just seems really hard to get 3 of 4 squads that can't communicate with each other to act as a team IMO ..


We didn't bother trying to force the entire room to play our way, we usually had 4 on at a time and would just hook up in a squad and do our thing, but we did it together. Most of the time if we led others would follow our example and we had a variety of strategies setup for different maps that worked very well. We really had no trouble finding like minded players to help out either, I think Battlefield tends to have people who are more into that teambased play than COD.

COD is great for more casual gaming, get in shoot some people and get out if you're busy and just want to play a few quick rounds. I've found in my experience with MW4, BO, MW3, etc that people tend to be out for themselves, team play isn't an important aspect to most. There may be a clan system in which you can wear tags and do battles, but lone wolf play is the go to for that game. That type of thinking/gameplay is reinforced through killstreaks, KDR, points and prestige. Rather than taking one for the team or sacrificing some kills you may need to that next killstreak so you can operate as a group, people would prefer to go out and do it all themselves.

I experienced this with Black Ops as well, while we as a clan would wear the tags, we didn't see the teamplay that we did on BF there. We would play together but for the most part the kills determined the wins so we'd just kinda do our own thing to get kills and killstreaks. One of the many other reasons I wasn't a fan of that game. It also got some of our members into a "must rank up, must get trophy, must prestige, must have good KDR" mindset that hurt the overall "play for fun with friends" experience a bit.

But again, that's just my opinion of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you bean for sure .
COD was just for the Community Value of it .. not the competitive value ...

The Only time you can have a Competitive match on COD is set in a private room opposed against like minded gamers ..
set to one death per round kind of game play . I have Experienced this kind of Game Play with COD in Competition ...
and yes you do have to fight the urge to just run and gun . It was a slow pace on a small map . Something you
would never find in a public room .

I never got to experience a Slower style of game play with Battlefield . The Tactical side is there in battlefield for sure .
but not the slower game play . With the helo's, jet's ,and Tank's there is almost no place to hide and camp for a bit .
I think all the Vehicles are what turns me off from battlefield the most .

Kind of a catch 22 so to say .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to chime in since at 2 points in my life I have carried the torch for both of these franchises. Here is my beef with Battlefield franchise. (this Gen)

BF I just cant deal with 30 fps in a shooter. It's 2013 and playing a shooter that is 30fps is just not acceptable. Also, the PC version has 16 v 16 which is really what this game was built on and the console version is 12 v 12 which at times the game just never feels like you are in an epic battle. I spend most of my time running back to the area where I got shot. Overall, for me, the fun factor was just not there. The maps were bland and boring as well. Yes, team tactics were somewhat there on console but this game is built for PC gaming with an inferior port to the consoles. I do feel this will change with the PS4/Xbox One coming).

Also, I don't care to be locked into a 30minute battle that I have to complete. Being an older gamer with kids, Its hard to commit to that type of timeframe when I need to drop my controller at any given time. When I was younger with less responsibility I loved this type of stuff, but with smaller chunks of gaming time, the appeal of Epic Scale Battles I believe is passed me by.

This does not mean I carry the COD torch either. I do feel a sense of fatigue with the franchise, but also feel this type of game appeals more to my lifestyle at this point. Quick, easy, and just plain fun in small chunks. I have seriously considered picking up Killzone: Shadowfall as the VITA version on the handheld is extremely fun and it looks beautiful on the PS4.

Overall, I will buy both games. And simply play the one I like the most and possibly trade the other one like I did for PS3. Both games serve different purposes so I don't think there is a need to choose between the two.

I enjoy still playing Blops 2. I like them better than the Modern Warfare Series.

Cmon November 15th!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='ODIN' timestamp='1382389028' post='3443']
I want to chime in since at 2 points in my life I have carried the torch for both of these franchises. Here is my beef with Battlefield franchise. (this Gen)

BF I just cant deal with 30 fps in a shooter. It's 2013 and playing a shooter that is 30fps is just not acceptable. Also, the PC version has 16 v 16 which is really what this game was built on and the console version is 12 v 12 which at times the game just never feels like you are in an epic battle. I spend most of my time running back to the area where I got shot. Overall, for me, the fun factor was just not there. The maps were bland and boring as well. Yes, team tactics were somewhat there on console but this game is built for PC gaming with an inferior port to the consoles. I do feel this will change with the PS4/Xbox One coming).

Also, I don't care to be locked into a 30minute battle that I have to complete. Being an older gamer with kids, Its hard to commit to that type of timeframe when I need to drop my controller at any given time. When I was younger with less responsibility I loved this type of stuff, but with smaller chunks of gaming time, the appeal of Epic Scale Battles I believe is passed me by.

This does not mean I carry the COD torch either. I do feel a sense of fatigue with the franchise, but also feel this type of game appeals more to my lifestyle at this point. Quick, easy, and just plain fun in small chunks. I have seriously considered picking up Killzone: Shadowfall as the VITA version on the handheld is extremely fun and it looks beautiful on the PS4.

Overall, I will buy both games. And simply play the one I like the most and possibly trade the other one like I did for PS3. Both games serve different purposes so I don't think there is a need to choose between the two.

I enjoy still playing Blops 2. I like them better than the Modern Warfare Series.

Cmon November 15th!


All valid points, I don't carry the torch for Battlefield either so to speak, its just the lesser of two evils for me. I have to get one of the two as the clan will probably be focused on those games for the initial launch of next-gen.

I am looking forward to many other games such as The Division, South Park, LEGO Marvel, etc much more than any FPS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play either of them because you all do. Otherwise, if there was a good TPS on a console, I'd be with Unit gettin tactical, hell we would all be gettin tactical.

Lookin forward to The Division and H-Hour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='BalzOnYer4Head' timestamp='1382751481' post='3455']
I play either of them because you all do. Otherwise, if there was a good TPS on a console, I'd be with Unit gettin tactical, hell we would all be gettin tactical.

Lookin forward to The Division and H-Hour.



BS, you play so you can prestige and call people homosexual slurs. Be honest. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='kotaco' timestamp='1382838802' post='3457']
BS, you play so you can prestige and call people homosexual slurs. Be honest. :P


Haha! BLOPS2 is the only one of the series that I have ever maxed prestiged in. And the homosexual slurs I save for Kory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0