Ben-DutkaYeah, yeah, DICE has the Frostbite 2 engine. So what? Do you really think the new Call of Duty won't stack up with its 6-year-old engine?
Developers have done a lot with that engine and they've got more updates in store for this year's Modern Warfare 3 . Infinity Ward boss Robert Bowling stated before that it's "counterproductive" to make a new CoD engine and instead, it's better to keep updating the current one. So it'd be wrong to think MW3 uses the "same" engine, as Bowling says in a new Twitter update :
"We haven't gone into detail on the engine yet but we've moved beyond the MW2 engine and added a lot of cool stuff for MW3."
Remember that a whole lot of the features included in Battlefield 3 might be seen in MW3; destructible environments and more vehicles have been rumored. Maybe we'll get a great look at the game tonight, when the new CoD is unveiled during Game 4 of the NBA Western Conference Finals. They better show us some gameplay, damnit!
Related Game(s): Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
I find it difficult to be believe the MW3 "engine" will top Frostbite 2!
My money is on Frostbite 2 being the definitive engine of this generation.
(Excluding of course the insane engines developed by Sony studios for PS3 exclusive titles you all know so well)…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Last edited by Qubex on 5/22/2011 9:35:56 PM
That^
Q,
You honestly believe Sony's 1st party engines can compete with the latest engines on the PC? Its already been reported BF3 will have to be lowered in quality for consoles.
I love my PS3 but thinking its hardware can outperform the most recent PC technology is being unrealistic.
Last edited by LimitedVertigo on 5/22/2011 10:31:53 PM
PCs don't count.
Fair enough. I took Qs comments as within the context of all gaming devices. If we're simply talking consoles than yes, I agree. Nothing compares to Sony's 1st party engines.
that might be true that theyll lower the quality for consoles, but whats the point of bragging about that, when most third party games are optimized for just one console rather than both?
Cesar_ser_4,
No one was bragging about anything. I was simply pointing out an example of a developer being unable to fully utilize their engine on consoles.
My posts had ZERO to do with multi-platform gaming within the context you're attempting to use it.
There's also a difference between "graphics engine" and "graphics quality/performance." The engine just defines what types of things can be done…which can include optimizations and such that affect quality/performance, but just because an engine is currently only used for a specific piece of hardware doesn't mean it couldn't do far more on more advanced hardware. I would HOPE a newer gaming PC w/ a video card that alone costs up to as much as a console would be capable of more.
LV – I hear you. Question is, can we really "differentiate" that much? What I mean specifically is that an engine is code, its an engine… only difference is how far you could push it.
The PS3, as in any platform, is essentially a computer. It computes mathematical algorithms and the like. Now the engine itself could be same on the PC and PS3, only real difference is how it executes and at what speed.
Let us say the engine was exactly the same – and I believe at its core, for BF3 specifically – they will be; then understandably if the polygon counts on the PC version are kept exactly the same, inclusive of the physics routines and post processing effects, due to the PS3's luck of GPU grunt, teh game may run at 10 frames per second rather than the PC's 60 frames per second or higher. Simply put the PS3 in this case, while running the exact same engine, just would not have the memory and processing bandwidth to deal with it. BUT, the PS3 being a computer, can process the math, as can the PC, there would be no difference inherently, the only difference would be the result when both platforms are compared side by side when running, essentially, the same code…
So I was talking generally in that I believe the core of the engine will be the same, what will differ will be overall polygon counts and texture resolution. I don't think the physics and object destruction routines will differ. In fact everything should be about the same; what will be different is the sampling and granularity of the lighting, shadow casting, object polygon counts and overall texture resolution…
Also, an important observation I made a few weeks ago, that may add credence to what I have stated above. I was on Euro-gamer watching tech videos on the performance of the Crytech 3.0 engine and differentials in scene detail between the XBOX360 and PC.
I took specific note of 2 areas, the lighting and shadow casting, and the texture resolution. Firstly, on the PC, when jacking the settings on extreme in Crysis 2, it was overwhelmingly evident that the lighting and shadow casting looked far better than the console version.
The console version was not bad, but the PC had the edge on the high settings. Just to add to this the simulation of liquids, such as water, looked better on the PC as well… combination of better lighting, refraction and reflection; and the addition of more polygons made liquid matter look very realistic.
Surprisingly though… and it really did surprise me was that the team seemed to have used the same textures for both the PC and XBOX360 version (and probably the same for the PS3 version). I observed in the video that when the difference was shown between medium, high and extreme – the actual textures never changed!!! I was concentrating on a specific area of the ground which included some big boulders. After this I doubled checked some other elements as well – verdict – no change!!!
The textures for these elements looked the same across both platforms even when the PC setting was being pushed higher and higher. There was no change in the granularity of the ground or rock texture and the bump mapping effect on these particular textures did crisp up or become more defined as one would expect on an extreme setting.
The only thing I noticed was that vegetation, light and the shadow casting on the PC looked better on the extreme setting than the console. Polygon count must have been enhanced somewhat too, when observing liquid in the Crysis 2 world.
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Thank you all for your comments thus far 🙂
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Q,
Im on my phone now so Im unable to give you the detailed reply you deserve. Look for it tomorow.
No probs LV… I will await for your reply. Thanks so much for your input…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
hey Q, did you ever buy your new pc? 🙂
I made a slight typo on this line… originally it stated; "There was no change in the granularity of the ground or rock texture and the bump mapping effect on these particular textures did crisp up or become more defined as one would expect on an extreme setting."
It should have read; "There was no change in the granularity of the ground or rock texture and the bump mapping effect on these particular textures did NOT crisp up or become more defined as one would expect on an extreme setting."
I missed out the all important "NOT" word in that one… The sentence should now make more sense…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
"you" should of been a "we"
replied to the first comment.
Hey LW… no, I haven't bought my new PC yet. ^ _ ^
This will probably be around the end of the year, or early 2012 at the latest. It all depends how strong the pull is for BF3 on the PC. It looks phenomenal on the PC, but I could also play it on consoles until I get the PC either way.
I will surely let you know when I do though 🙂
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
"we" as a community as gamers not the word you.
@LimitedVertigo
Try building a PC for $299 (ignore tax) that can match or outperform the PS3.
All parts, the Case, Operating System, Keyboard and Mouse must all fit with the $299 budget.
We'll see what happens when the games strut their stuff. The proof should be in the pudding.
I don't think "old engines" are so much an issue as it is keeping your engine evolving. The UE3 engine has grown a lot over the years, and will continue to into the next gen. Same goes for CryEngine etc.
I'm curious if the CoD engine will abandon the more 360-centric optimizations and be more pliable to a PS3 environment.
Something else I want to add, 60fps. CoD does make detail concessions for getting their game to flow at the ultra fluid 60fps feel. If the CoD games stick to this frame rate then there will be no doubt, the competitor's games will look more detailed.
FPS on PC side are a beautiful thing. 115fps is heaven.
yeh thats what i think alot of people love about cod because its so smooth gameplay wise at 60fps
Can't really hate on their engine since I'm a Valve guy and I've been enjoying the Source engine for 7 years now. But my biggest complaint with the MW series has been the gameplay, I don't see a new engine fixing the issues I have with the series.
Worked great for Portal 2 because the focus was definitely elsewhere.
…but I'm warning you. If they use that same engine with no visible upgrades for Half-Life 3 or something, don't be surprised when I rip the snot out of that archaic crap in my review. 😉
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 5/22/2011 10:04:43 PM
Haha, yeah. I and plenty of other HL fans feel the same way. I think that's why we still haven't seen an Episode3/HL3. I think Valve is holding off for something big (new engine) just like they back in 2004 with HL2 and CounterStrike-Source.
You probably already know but I heard a few days ago that Valve won't be showing anything at this E3, bummer.
I agree with you limitedVertigo but at the same time i think the CallofDuty franchise needs a engine upgrade and fresh new ideas to stack up to the new Battlefield… But then again it does have a crazy fanbase and is likely to sell like hot cakes regardless
Please refer to me as LV. My full name is far too formal 🙂
to me the source engine still goes strong and is still very impressive….on pc episode 2 did look better than half life 2
If ur full nickname is bothering u, make a new account using a different email address.
*Oh I am sure this new engine is going to greatly out-do its predecesor* (Sarcasm)
yea… I've been patiently waiting for HL3 but now i starting to get frustrated… I don't kno how much longer i can wait… It makes it worse that they don't announce anything either or offer any sort of info on it
Well it was a 6 year gap between the original and HL2 and the last new edition to HL was only 3 years ago (Episode2).
Relax, there are plenty of other games to take up your time. Valve likes to take their time but in the end it always pays off.
So…….is it a new engine or just a heavily-modified IW 2.0?
The latter.
Then it would be a wise choice to ignore what Bowling said now.
Wow, they are trying to convince chumps that they can push the Xbox 360 further when anybody with a brain knows it has been maxed?
Call of What now?
Doodie
In honor of the new I.W. Antivision puppets re-defining their old Etch-a-Sketch engine to 1.5…….
"Call Of Doodles"
they'll be trying to squeeze an already juiced lemon ( and i do mean *lemon*) The can try to add to it but there is no way they are going to make enough leaps and bounds to outwiegh frosbite, at this point it'll be impossible in every sense of the word. So they add a bit of "soft cover" elements to it or more real player movement. lol try taking down entire skscrapers, or piloting a freakin F16. COD CAN NOT DO THAT IN ITS CURRENT STATE. IMO COD wouldn't be what it is today without the pioneering of battlefield, so none of it'll matter come November. Battlefiled is one of the original shooters (at least military shooters) and they'll prove their tenure with their latest installment, that i can garuntee.
@LV
of course BF3 will be better on PC. Any schoolboy could figure that out. Fact of the matter is consoles are far too popular for PC based companies to exclude, so unfortunately we'll have to settle for a still amazing, yet dumbed down version.
You'd be surprised how many people don't figure it out.
Also speak for yourself, I won't be settling for anything but the best (getting it for PC).
Seriously? You think the industry leader is looking at the bottom of the top ten list wondering how to imitate them? I don't think so. What might be happening though, is three devs fighting for publisher attention and making a mess of the MW franchise.
Just because you're at the top doesn't mean there isn't anything to learn from those below you. Especially since the MW's success has little to do with quality.
"Learn from those below you?" How cliche of you. Gimme a break. That's the line sour grape devs give when they're out of ideas.
And MW's success has everything to do with its quality.
MW has as much quality as a BigMac.
A Burger Time Big Mac from the urban shopping center shoot out in MW2? tasty
i dunno cod4 and mw2 were both great games…the only annoying thing is the engine always seems to allow for so many glitches and stuff
Really Alienange? Battlefield is most definitely not at the bottom of the top ten list. If anything, its near number 2 or 3 amongst FPS's out there. I don't think there've been any other FPS's except for CoD to beat Bad Company 2's sales of 5 million.
Do you have some kind of biased hate against the Battlefield series or something? Or do you just hate the greater freedom and far better gameplay the series provides? Yeah, you can whine all day about how CoD sells more and how that somehow makes it superior, but at the end of the day, when a game is higher quality than another game, its still higher quality, no matter how much the sales difference is.
Oh, and please don't pull out these stupid "sour grape" analogies, because DICE is obviously not out of ideas. I don't even know why you would make that comparison in the first place when the series you're defending (CoD) is perhaps once of the greatest "sour grapes," as you so cliche-ly put it, of this gen. Just sayin.
@LV
I was wholly speaking for myself. Like i have the means to play it on the PC. Right not gonna happen.
And trust me ive been barkin up this tree for ages and the responses i get are pretty hilarious. People are like, MW is just so much easier to pick up,or BF gets boring, COD is the game that is ALWAYS fun. What is this amatuer hour? If you are truely a gamer, you dont complain about accessability Cod is similar to just about every other shooter. BF3 though… i know where im droppin the 60 and it wont be another so called tried and true installment of the COD franchise. I have never bought a COD and never will. Well i think i've been pretty clear as to where i stand on this subject.
If I met you in person I would shake your hand and probably slap your butt too. 🙂