Many have called for a new Call of Duty engine. They're not getting it with the upcoming Black Ops II , but Treyarch boss Mark Lamia says we shouldn't waste our time worrying.

In speaking with One of Swords , Lamia addressed concerns that the Infinity Ward (IW) 3.0 engine (used in the first Modern Warfare , World at War , and the first Black Ops ) just isn't cutting it. Lamia says the engine has seen a large number of tweaks and upgrades, though, and they're trying to "push":

"I think what people are asking for is for us to push. They want us to make a better-looking game; they want things. I don't think those are things people can't ask for. We asked ourselves that very same question – we wanted to advance the graphics. I think the questions are valid. The answer may not need to be an entirely new engine, but you might need to do an entire overhaul of your entire lighting system. The trick is, we're not willing to do that if we can't keep it running at 60 frames per second – but we did that this time."

Lamia added that there's "a lot of good still in that foundation" and creators merely alter what's built atop that foundation; they don't necessarily change any aspect of the core construction. He also said you "can't make a competitive product" if you're not willing to continually upgrade, which makes sense. Then again, many gamers have pointed out the aging visuals and the game still sells like crazy, so…

Related Game(s): Call of Duty: Black Ops II

Subscribe
Notify of
20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

I'm wondering if this is a prepared statement or if it's just off the cuff. If it's prepared, this part could be very well constructed to sound like something it isn't:

"The trick is, we're not willing to do that if we can't keep it running at 60 frames per second – but we did that this time."

The wording there sounds like it could be a little misleading. When he says "but we did that this time", it's structured in a way it sounds like he's saying they upgraded the system while keeping it 60 fps, but it grammatically reads that they just kept it at 60 FPS, and the upgrading part could be left out of that statement.

I just don't find it well worded enough for me to really know what he's saying here.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

I found that extremely curious as well, it doesn't fit.

Killa Tequilla
Killa Tequilla
8 years ago

I didnt understand anything whatsoever!

Ludicrous_Liam
Ludicrous_Liam
8 years ago

As far as I can tell, these guys – the bosses, executive producers etc – always come out with ready-made statements like this. This is the reason why I never pay attention to them. The only exception is if its a company like Naughtydog, where the people that actually make the game, do all the financial/buisness side of things aswell – so, you know, it's straight from the horses mouth 🙂

AshT
AshT
8 years ago

this guy is funny 🙂

Deathb4Dishonor
Deathb4Dishonor
8 years ago

no they definitly need a whole new engine not just new lighting… they make million and million of profit of the fans that keep buying the game… The least they could do is get a whole new engine and dedicated servers so the games don't disconnect so often… Jeez stop being so cheap and take care of your franchise fans

daus26
daus26
8 years ago

So basically they either don't have the talent, or the willingness to invest in a new graphics engine. I find it hard to believe that it took them all this time (since Modern Warfare) to all of a sudden figure out how to push their engine more for better lighting.

If Activision would reflect on their success by giving their fans the improvements they deserve (graphics, servers, etc.), I'd respect them a lot more. For example, Apple is one company I respect, because they continue to innovate, even if their prices are way premium. For the success Activision has, their products don't reflect it.

karneli lll
karneli lll
8 years ago

I would love to work at activision or treyarch; i dont have to work hard,50% effort or less, and work with outdated tools.

Underdog15
Underdog15
8 years ago

lol, that's kinda funny actually.

I would hate it! I'd never get any better at anything and I'd have nothing to take pride in! Goodness knows the profits my company makes aren't coming to me beyond my salary! lol


Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/15/2012 12:43:29 PM

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

CoD is a lean machine, the less money put into it the more money they get out of it. It's as simple as that. They are counting on their audience to not care that it remains behind current tech.

Killa Tequilla
Killa Tequilla
8 years ago

There are only 3 type of humans in this world, those who hate cod, those who love cod and those who dont game at all. (Sorry Max Payne, youre wrong about your theory). Yet no one trully knows why it sells so much, no matter what. It has been four years now? Five? The game still sells like cofee. Now, i dont mean to contradict myself, but out of curiosity… What would happen if their engine changed?

AcHiLLiA
AcHiLLiA
8 years ago

I wonder when we will see a new engine upgrade?, as it's getting out of control.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
8 years ago

Next generation only, and even then it may just be another overhaul.

ulsterscot
ulsterscot
8 years ago

yeah i think its pretty clear they will wait until the next gen for a new engine.

Luckily for Activision – game play trumps graphics for a lot of people.

BTNwarrior
BTNwarrior
8 years ago

"Well when we hear people talking about new graphics engines I agree with… wait did you just see that! Is that the bat mobile over there! Quick before you miss it"

bigrailer19
bigrailer19
8 years ago

I'll admit the games are aging only due to the fact that the engine is aging. But it is still good enough to compete still. Every CoD entry looks as good and better than most other game releases. But there is a time when they need to upgrade and maybe it should have been a couple years ago, but regardless.

I think they should probably just not talk about the engine though at this point and say things like "The answer may not need to be an entirely new engine, but you might need to do an entire overhaul of your entire lighting system." because it's just going to arouse those who can't stand the idea of using the engine again.

___________
___________
8 years ago

its funny how everyone assumes oh its a new engine so it will make everything perfect, like a magic wand.
COD DOES NOT need a new engine!
there are so many things they could do to update the game, make it as good as it should be, and all without replacing the engine!

what they need is to hire some competent engineers so they can up the games resolution and still attain the 60FPS their obsessed with!
hell if lucas arts can develop technology that renders at 60FPS but at the resource cost of 30FPS, than surely the highest selling game of all time, and the richest publisher in the world, can manage!

exactly what i was saying the other day, so many people hate COD simply because its the leader yet instead of leading its doing nothing but holding us back!
you expect the companies making the biggest dollars to be setting the benchmarks, but if anything there the ones lowering them!
i mean MW3 for example, theres games several years older than that which have higher production values!
its like lucas arts releasing a new starwars movie but with the budget of a cheap crappy indie film festival flick.
you go to the best you expect the best!

Ricochet
Ricochet
8 years ago

It's really interesting to see apologists defend COD for the sake of 60fps. It is as if a game suddenly reaches 60fps there is automatically no room for improvement at all – compared to the likes of 30fps games. Let's take the Uncharted series for example:

I'm pretty sure if they didn't bump up the graphics they could run Uncharted 2 at 60fps with a bit of improvement of Uncharted 1. However, moving on with UC3, I'm sure they can optimize it further to make it look even better (a bit not to the degree of a 30fps variation) but enough to make a distinction between the sequel and the initial game itself.

But assuming the COD argument is valid, why are the 30fps games getting technologically better each sequel? It's as if that "extra" FPS acts like some sort of barrier preventing any advancements to the visual and gameplay tech. The premise is ridiculous no matter which way you look at it. It's like saying BF3 should not have a new engine simply because they may not even maintain their 30fps due to the enhancements of their previous engine.


Last edited by Ricochet on 5/16/2012 7:13:52 AM

Grathan
Grathan
8 years ago

It's too bad Treyarch or whtever they are called don't fully grasp the engine, as is obvious by how buggy and poorly it performs in their games. Even Infinity Ward is showing it is starting to fall apart from hacking. The original engine was amazing, it is obvious that it will never be amazing again.

oldguy
oldguy
8 years ago

"…we're not willing to do that if we can't keep it running at 60 frames per second"

A true perfectionist.
(lol)