Infinity Ward working on 'next-gen' Call of Duty?

[TEJ2025]

of course it looks LIKE MW2...again it uses the same engine...just like KZ3 looks like KZ2...and Uncharted 3 looks like Uncharted 2 and Uncharted...or Halo Reach looks like Halo 3...they use the same engines...but the graphical improvements from one to the next are there...just like from MW to MW2 to MW3...

im not trying to make them sound like their obvious...if you actually read what ive said you would notice that ive said they are not changes that slap you in the face, but there are significant improvements to the visuals of the game...

i have simply been defending the game against those that incorrectly state that the engine has not been given any sort of updates since CoD4...

I think you're confusing what I'm saying with other people. The engine they use now Is different but it isn't a big enough of an improvement between MW2 and MW3 to tell a difference. The maps are really the only thing that let's you know that its different.

Also, if you seriously believe that any of the uncharteds have progressed visually like COD then you're just delusional. Uncharted and uncharted 2 are like 2 completly different games. And uncharted 2 and uncharted 3 wasn't as big a leap as the first and second but they are obviously two different games. Killzone 2 and killzone 3 look similar and that's also a reason why killzone 3 wasn't as a success in a lot of people's eyes as killzone 2 was.

where have i ever said that the games don't look similar?...they use the same base Infinity Ward Engine...of course they are going to look similar as do all sequels that use the same engine...my point has simply been that the engine HAS been improved and updated...the graphics HAVE been improved from game to game (except BLOPS which used the IW 3.0 engine from CoD4/W@W)

Again I never said the engine hasn't been updated its just that when a game looks so similar that could pass as a previous version of a series then to me that's a problem. BLOPS is more different then the MW series but it's still too similar for me.

SOURCE

I don't really trust that site but I guess facts are facts lol

thats impossible...the game will perform the same from copy to copy unless there is a hardware issue with your console...

unless of course you're talking about online...then it could just be a crappy connection lol...

I have the slim edition and it's not even a year old yet so I doubt it's my console. And I was talking about online. I haven't even touched the story mode and most likely won't. Lol

[Inzane2050]

MW3 was the only game to get a visual update and all it was was added bloom. The tech sheets of their engine doesn't mean a lick of difference if you can't see it. Assassin's Creed games have seen many visual improvements, very few of them being technical. Call of Duty can do so better for enhancing the visuals, and slightly better textures is not better graphics. I could just buy PC if I wanted that slight difference.

[F34R]

MW3 was the only game to get a visual update and all it was was added bloom. The tech sheets of their engine doesn't mean a lick of difference if you can't see it. Assassin's Creed games have seen many visual improvements, very few of them being technical. Call of Duty can do so better for enhancing the visuals, and slightly better textures is not better graphics. I could just buy PC if I wanted that slight difference.

smh Met has already posted enough information to rebut your concerns. How can you blatantly just say, "can do so better for enhancing the visuals"? Care to give us some examples how they can do whatever it is that you want them to do, whilst maintaining 60fps, no tearing? Explain what you want to see in terms of better visuals? I can see plenty clearly, as also backed up by the quotes Met posted, that there have been plenty of improvements visually in the game.

[Metfanant]

MW3 was the only game to get a visual update and all it was was added bloom.

OMG No! LoL...somewhere in this thread I even talked about improvements from MW to MW2....

MW ran on the IW 3.0 engine...MW2 ran on 4.0...one of the additions to 4.0 was texture streaming...which has a HUGE impact on the visuals of the game...

As for this bloom argument of yours...what about the water effects? What about the increased scale? What about the improved textures? What about the improved character models? What about the improved weapon models?...

How are you just ignoring those things that I posted PROOF of begin improved in MW3!?!?!

The tech sheets of their engine doesn't mean a lick of difference if you can't see it. Assassin's Creed games have seen many visual improvements, very few of them being technical.

What are you talking about!?..

Of course the technical aspects of the engine make a difference...

What are these "non-technical" improvements did Assassins Creed make?? I'd love to hear this...

Call of Duty can do so better for enhancing the visuals, and slightly better textures is not better graphics. I could just buy PC if I wanted that slight difference.

Yes textures are better graphics! So are better lighting, water, environments, character models, gun models and other things...

My God dude...I really wish you would stop because you're making yourself look so foolish...its apparent you don't know what you're talking about, which is fine...but use this as an opportunity to LEARN something instead of being so stubborn...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[Inzane2050]

Fear~

60fps has has nothing to with IW's inability to improve the visuals. The first Assassin's Creed was 30fps just as Brotherhood is, but that never stopped them from improving and refining the visuals. Nor did this is stop Ninja Gaiden or DoA and for good reason. Graphics improving throughout a console's life is hardly about technical fidelity while it does add. It's more about getting accustomed to the new shading and rendering. Hence why Gears 3 looks substantially better than the previous two.

And why are you still bothering me, Met?... You are not even understanding what I say. All you've done is harass me for being displeased with the lack of visual improvements CoD games have had.

[F34R]

You keep saying they can improve on the graphics while maintaining the performance of the engine... even though they HAVE in fact improved the visuals, please list some things you'd like to have improved, visually. Keep in mind, those games you mentioned have dips in frame rate, tearing.. neither of which are prevalent, or present in MW3. Yes, 60fps, no tearing, does limit what they can do with the engine, or what improvements they can do to get better visuals out of the engine.

Saying your displeased about the graphic improvements is one thing; which isn't what you've been banging on this entire thread. You've been saying that they haven't improved on the engine, visuals, etc., until you're proven wrong. Then you go on some other tangent that is then also proven wrong. If you would have just said from the very beginning, "I'm not pleased with what they've improved on", then that is your opinion and you're entitled to that. I doubt there would have been much argument from anyone in respect to that opinion.

[Inzane2050]

They never improved the Call of Duty graphics aside from some bloom effect they just added, plain and simple. Slightly better textures is not improving the visuals, neither are really water reflections. You are simply not understanding what I am saying.

[keefy]

Its maintaining 60FPS on Xbox and PS3 that restricts them.

MW3 on PS3 xbox looks miles better than COD 2 on PC.

[F34R]

I'll just recap from earlier in the thread:

Modern Warfare 3′s levels now are so much bigger than the old ones because they go more vertically, they have a bigger footprint and on top of that, higher fidelity, more textures and a lot more detail.

If you put Modern Warfare 2 next to Modern Warfare 3 you would see a huge difference. Look at all the character models, look at all the gun models, look at the reflections, look at the water. There is so much that we’ve added, so when someone says ‘cut and paste’, I don’t even want to talk to them because they don’t know. They just don’t know. They have no idea.

If that isn't improving on the visuals, then I'd really LOVE to see a list of things someone things is improving on visuals...

[Metfanant]

They never improved the Call of Duty graphics aside from some bloom effect they just added, plain and simple. Slightly better textures is not improving the visuals, neither are really water reflections. You are simply not understanding what I am saying. And you're not exactly someone to be taken seriously, F34R.

Is this guy for real?...F34R...please tell me this guy isn't for real?...

How many times do I have to list what they have improved before you stop saying that all they added was a "bloom effect?" lol...its pathetic...

Texture probably have the biggest impact on the visuals of a game...I can't believe you say that improving textures is not a big deal...and as for water...how about the giant battle that takes place in NY Harbor?...if the water is improved from MW2 to MW3 I would say that it would have a massive impact on a level that takes place...on water...

I completely understand that you have no idea what you're talking about...IW has not only improved the graphics of MW but also the performance of the engine itself...by stabalizing the frame rate even more...

Graphics improving throughout a console's life is hardly about technical fidelity while it does add. It's more about getting accustomed to the new shading and rendering. Hence why Gears 3 looks substantially better than the previous two.

Before we go any further...we needs to confirm how little you know what youre talking about...

Please do me a favor and define what you mean by "technical fidelity" and then try your hardest to explain how shaders and rendering methods are NOT technical aspects of a game's engine...

rofl I'm waiting to hear this explanation...it might be the basis for will ferrel's next movie

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[F34R]

I just don't understand how anyone can say that the graphics haven't improved. Are they Uncharted level graphics? No. Are they in line with the leap between U1 and U2? Hell no. All the same, they have definitely improved the graphics, and that is a 100% fact.

[Metfanant]

I just don't understand how anyone can say that the graphics haven't improved. Are they Uncharted level graphics? No. Are they in line with the leap between U1 and U2? Hell no. All the same, they have definitely improved the graphics, and that is a 100% fact.

You don't understand it because it makes no sense...he has been spinning around and around this argument since I first called him out on it...its scary...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[Inzane2050]

Water reflections aren't used on the ocean in the NY harbor level. And slightly better textures is not improving the visuals. Call of Duty's graphics are static and repetitive. Unchanged and unimproved. Black Ops to MW3 is probably the only acceptable improvement, but just adding bloom really just doesn't cut it. Assassin's Creed series is a great example of an annual game getting a good boast in visual improvements, most of which are artistic unless you care to explain otherwise.

[F34R]

Water reflections aren't used on the ocean in the NY harbor level. And slightly better textures is not improving the visuals. Call of Duty's graphics are static and repetitive. Unchanged and unimproved. Black Ops to MW3 is probably the only acceptable improvement, but just adding bloom really just doesn't cut it. Assassin's Creed series is a great example of an annual game getting a good boast in visual improvements, most of which are artistic unless you care to explain otherwise.

So, no matter how much you're wrong, you're going to keep repeating the same thing over and over again? The guns look better, the characters look better, the structures look better, the environment looks better; these are facts. I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle. If you don't like the improvements in the visuals, or you think there wasn't enough improvement in the visuals, that's one thing. You can't say that they haven't improved though because that is just a false statement to make.

[Inzane2050]

It is not a false statements. By your logic, I'd be a moron to say Valve's engine graphics haven't improved. If I can't see the difference, then it's not improved. Slightly better textures, different gun models, and some bloom don't really count, imo; especially when looking at what everyone else is doing. Call of Duty's engine has largely been unchanged visually for the past several games now. There is no reason anyone should throw a fit when I say so.

[Metfanant]

OMG...this guy is unbelievable...successfully made himself look like a complete fool...

I'm completely blown away by the posts...its hard to remember anyone being so wrong and still spewing the same nonsense...

Edit: you still have not explained this "technical fidelity" crap you were talking about...

Oh and by the way...NO the improvements to Assassins Creed are NOT all artistic lol...same for Uncharted..KZ...or any other game

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[SchaffinOSX]

Guys, I love the debate you've got going on right now, but we're starting to get onto the personal end of things. Let's keep any personal remarks out of this thread.

[emmerich]

I think the start of the next generation would be the perfect time for an engine change for the CoD series. I hope they can change up the game a lot.

[Metfanant]

I think the start of the next generation would be the perfect time for an engine change for the CoD series. I hope they can change up the game a lot.

Yup...and that's when the game will get a new engine

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[DarkVincent07]

I certianly hope so. The series needs a face-lift, its growing very tired looking imo.

Not to say I didn't have fun with MW3.. just wanted more

[Metfanant]

I certianly hope so. The series needs a face-lift, its growing very tired looking imo.

Not to say I didn't have fun with MW3.. just wanted more

Oh i can promise the game will look much much better next Gen lol

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[Inzane2050]

A Call of Duty game with Frostbite 2-like graphics would be epic, imo.

[Metfanant]

A Call of Duty game with Frostbite 2-like graphics would be epic, imo.

It wouldn't run at 60fps..not on the PS3 or 360 anyway...and that's why you won't see it...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[BoyBettaKnow]

It would look very nice if it had the fidelity of BF3, jumping between BF3 on Ultra and MW3 on ultra made me realize how damn pretty BF3 is but MW3 is by no means an ugly game, it looks very nice when running on PC and i bet any money it'll look even nice next generation.

When it comes to consoles though, i'd rather they keep the 60fps than try to make it look prettier.

Framerate>>>>>>Graphics

[Cybertox]

I think the next gen COD will only have improved graphics and thats about it.