New engine in Black Ops 2 a dealbreaker
Most of the Call of Duty community are focused this week on the apparent leak of a logo for the next COD game, Black Ops 2, which has since been debated among fans for its authenticity. The one thing that has made some gamers think there could be a reveal later this month is the fact that this image has since been removed from the official forums.
The dealbreaker for Black Ops 2 – whether a “2” has been added to the original Black Ops logo by a fan or not is not what some gamers really need to know about the next Call of Duty game, and instead there are certain features that need to be included for some fans to even considering buying the game. It’s pretty well known among gamers that the Call of Duty engine needs a major upgrade, and while Frostbite 2.0 launched with Battlefield 3 and other games have also received game engine improvements, it seems that Call of Duty has been recycled too much for some fans to enjoy in the next game.
If Black Ops 2 didn’t get a new game engine would you still buy the game? Personally we wouldn’t and we bet there are a massive amount of Call of Duty fans that feel the same way, so it seems obvious that there will be a new game engine for Black Ops 2 that will include features to change the Call Of Duty brand for years to come. Unless the development team are not listening to the fans, share a comment below.
Why would a logo be removed from the forums? Some people think the image would only be removed if it were real, although we’d have to disagree considering someone trying to pass a Black Ops 2 logo off as the real thing could also end in it being removed.
- StoryToys launches Grimm’s Bookshelf, a free app with a free game
- Xbox One games potential revealed in specs list
- New COD: Ghosts Xbox One reveal, release date window
- Xbox One specs vs. PS4 specs
- Xbox 720 launch event meets PS4 console tactics
- PlayBox: PS4 and Xbox 720 as one console
- GTA 5 release date avoided by Killzone Mercenary
COD uses lag animation and has to calculate what animation its going to show when you shoot someone, thus resulting in weird animation lag in multiplayer. COD requires no strategy. Spawn, run like hell hoping you have 3 seconds to shoot someone before you die again. Why is their even sniper rifles? A real sniper hides and crawls around picking people off at 100's of yards away. In COD you cant hide, the maps are so tiny and oddly blocked off you cant get a clear shot from a distance. COD is a MELEE FPS. Battlefield is a real war FPS, if you dont have a strategy you die fast. If I launch a grenade at a wall that someone is hiding behind, they run away unharmed in COD. In Battlefield the wall destructs or you can even bring a building down on enemies. No hiding behind a tree in battlefield. Sure COD is fun if all your worried about is overly saturated award system. Battlefield is for those looking to play a game online with multiple other people and still have the ability to use strategic warfare to win. Im not bashing COD(well Kinda) COD follows the APPLE Inc business plan. Polish the same turd and put a different number after it.
thats well said but they should aim graphics like BF3 on console It would be good because we have no big graphic improvement since cod4
Ok first of all I stopped playing COD a long time ago jus for the simple fact of the game engine. COD is the only franchise in the gaming industry that does not update. It is setting a bad standard for the industry and can ultimately kill gaming. NO it is not a graphics thing. COD has had the same problems since COD4. Guess what else it's had since COD4. The same engine. They are putting out a product that they are not putting time in and still charging you a new price. They are doing the same thing everywhere else and people are stupidly allowing it to happen. People are still buying and playing and complaining all at the same time about COD. STOP BUYING IT! Every company out there improves their product every year in the gaming industry except COD. Wake up! If you continue to buy COD like this your only the problem. Even if they do put another engine in the next one I probably won't buy it because they have enough of my money as it is. They honestly should put out the next one free. I might have a little bit of respect for them after that. And as far as the zombies aspect, they will never separate the two. They would lose too much money because it's a Trearch product. It was originally created as a side project. COD will never allow them to separate it unless COD buys the rights for it. But do you really think they will do that? NO!! They won't because if they were willing to spend money in the first place then they would have done it by updating the game engine by now. All they are concerned about is that dollar that they are getting from stupid people that keep buying their game over and over.
zombies no because peaple will just play that there is a forum on cod website that stated that treyacr would not make zombies again but would might release a zombies only version so there would not be problems with peaple buying the game for zombies only and not playing multi player wich would bring down there ratings for the online exspience
Yes there well be zombies. Tryarc is in the making of zombies And as people dont know actvistion is Not making it but its a call of duty game so They have to put actvistions name on there project So yes zombies.
black ops rocked, and bf3 is beast. add me on psn it is superfootbal, its spelled right i only put one l in superfootbal purposely.
They don't even need a new engine, Black Ops was far better than this latest MW3 shite, and I do mean Shite!.. all they need to do is shell out on dedicated servers to sort out the horrendous connection issues black ops 1 suffered from, keep the awesome community and video sharing features and you've got an awesome game! its not like they cant afford dedicated servers is it!? Im really looking forward to Black Ops 2 because MW3 is so bad i was forced to convert to battlefield...
so basically what you are saying is: anyone writing an article is not allowed an opinion as long as it matches yours?
Are you dumb? The question was "If Black Opos 2 didnt get a new engine, would you still get it?" His answer was" Personally we wouldn’t... so it seems obvious that there will be a new game engine for Black Ops 2" Read his article and understand it before you blast it...
Its fake!! Look closely it says "treyerch" and if ou look at the text on the bottom right it says "2013" if you agree tell me.
The fact of the matter is, if it still sells with the old engine, there is no incentive for the company to change engines. Black Ops sold an insane number of copies, why fix what is not broken - at least according to the sales numbers - And I agree with everyone who says this article is awful. It is a bunch of fluff. Basically, it was written in about 10 minutes and thrown up here because it had the name Call of Duty.
FALSE, no new engine is needed. This article holds no weight. This is the smoothest first person engine, and he wants a new one.
What we need in bo2 is dedicated servers and good graphics. ( I wonder if they need a new engine for better graphics answer me plz, if they do then a new engine is primordial) + better host choosing I hate those who go offline if they have a bad game + they must not put OP perks like stalker and steady aim pro in bo2.
This is a dumb article. Mr. Chubb is clearly in the minority. And who is "we" as in fans? Modern Warfare 3 is the best selling COD to date despite all the internet fan boy hate prior to the game release. With every game, the fanbase is growing despite using the same engine for 6-7 years in a row. According to sales, the same graphic engine is what fans want or the sales of subsequent COD game wouldn't increase. Until there is a sales dropoff in the next COD game, there is NO reason for change to a new engine. Mr. Chubb and his pseudo COD fans can boycott the next COD game, but I bet the next Black Ops will probably be the best selling COD game to date.
To be fair, on 30 fps you dont see much of delay and mw3 on ps3 looks like ass, but as far as i am concerned if an fps cant get the gunplay right, its dead to me. Any bf2 veteran will tell you dice netcode has a delay issue, this aint new, not my fault if you dont notice it.
NO IT DOESNT. How its better? You shoot someone and it takes 1 second to register, so you basicly wasting ammo that would have killed the enemy long agol. At that time the other guy has put shots in you and when he dies you take damage...while he is dead, not to mention taking damage behind cover because thats when the bullets of my opponent register. That was before lag compensation, with that, its random instadeaths or instakills. Real skill here bro. "It doestn need lag compensation" WRONG , dedicated servers do not change that, mw3 has dedicated servers on pc, did not change a thing apart from reducing lag, every bf veteran will tell you the hit detection is crap in bf. FACT. Elite is free, yes it has a free mode which APPARENTLY does more than battlelog on its free subcription mode, how about that eh? Bf3 is garbage until it gets its gunplay right, till then its a pointless skilless game with vehicles.
It is not an amazing game, it is not a great game, it is a good game, on pc its nice with recoil and all, but bf has shitty delay in hit register, id rather play homefront instead.
in bf there is bullet drop and bullet time travle which bullet time i am refuring to the time it takes to travle from your gun to the target if your 60 ft 100 ft or whatever the distance it takes time thats why ...so there for you have to plan your shots you have to lead them if there running its more real then point shoot dead thats the diffence between the 2 games
I'm guessing this is fake, not 100% sure but the logo placement for the bottom corner logo's is off. There should be a little more space beneath them. Just my guess though.
"making it worse" How by winning in both sales and ratings? So your opinion is that all those games sucked? My opinion is that all bf games sucked apart from bf2. Bf sucks, accept it. Really mature discussion here. Medal of honor is by no means nowhere near as good as cod. The campaign was booooooring and repettive and it was only 3.5 hours with such a broken gameplay, drop the m249, tada, you are no longer able to finish the level. Cod is polished and well made moh isnt. Not to mention the horribly generic and simplistic mp with dice's crappy netcode that made gunplay a complete skilless joke. EA is far worse than activision, atleast activision has not butched franchises and kept licenses without using them. Activision keeps delivering game, doesnt reboot them or buy licenses just to killl competition and not give us games. Infact, ORIGIN, it sucks, enough said, ea deserves all they got. If you think they really are better, then you propably dont know much about sims and how the franchise has been milked to death by them.
I agree with you bf2 was outstanding cod 4 was epic mw2 was good but they putted so mmuch gay perks(one man army, commando, danger close...) black ops I really disliked it in the beginin so I went back to mw2 but after getting bored at mw2 I went at bo and had a lot of fun then I bought mw3 with a lot of expectation (like many others) and since then I rage at almost every game for the bad connection and the ggay perks ... (so mainly now I do private srimages with my Gamebattle friends .. no lags no gay perk or guns... Yay) I hope they will just make a fair online gameolay in the next one.....!!!!
I don't see why people want a new engine so bad. The IW engine is fine and runs smoothly. I am a PC gamer but I doubt that Treyarch is going out of their way to create a new engine just for PC seeing as Activision has no support for PC. The only thing I want to see is gameplay changes. Keep the fast paced FPS gameplay that CoD is known for, but change it up a little like the changes from CoD2 to CoD4. Also please let us host ranked dedicated servers without only a single third party renter, give us a FOV slider, free DLC, 32+ players max, lean, mod tools, map editors, Elite integration, LAN support, and ping numbers instead of latency bars. I know that is a lot but those are basic PC functions that were standard before (besides not getting Elite)!
LOVe what you just said exactly what cod needs but shouldn't they improve graphics. Its always fun to have epic graphics like bf3 (console version... I know on pc its way moregood)
yeah yeah, for your information ea came up with "one medal of honor every year" first but couldnt keep up and delivered mediocre products that didnt sell. Activion is destroying them in both sales and ratings and they are pissed. EA is crying trying to retake the fps crown.
Enough with this nonsense. Current consoles are weak as hell, you cant make a 60 fps game no matter if you use a "new engine" how will a "new engine" take advantage of old hardware? The real question is, do you want cod to run on 30 fps for just better graphics? Considering cod is a yearly game, it will be illogical and plan stupid to work for years on a new engine for dated consoles that wont take advantage of it and all that when the game has to be put together fast, somethin that current id engine is best at, not even unreal engine can put things together so fast.
That's ignorance. The PS3 in any game, still hasn't surpassed the 70% performance benchmark for hardware usage. That being said, i have no idea about the xbox 360.
Dude how come then do games like BF3 look that much better on PC than PS3 ? (granted it still looks slightly better than the Xbox version) The developpers are hardly capable of using 100 % of the hardware but that will always be the case. The fact is there are still plenty of gorgeous games that have yet to come on consoles but in terms of actual game engines... Consoles have lost the race to PCs a while back... The brand new engines such as frostbite 2.0 only truly shine on PCs the console version might as well be updated versions of frostbit 1.0 (for example)
Dont believe the hype lies they serve you. If what you say its true, then how come no game has actually comed out that blows everything out of the water? Ps3 is actually weaker than the x360. Hell i saw crysis on a ps3, the whole thing is laughable, the pc version looks miles superior and its from 2007. The stuff you gotta remove to make a game run on those 2006 consoles are trully insanely funny.
This is a stupid article... yeah sure man, keep praying for a better engine rather than another round of excellent story telling and tighlty paced action sequences plus a massive dose of superbly honed multiplayer. What's the point in fixating on the engine? Black Ops was way better than BF3... because the story, pacing, miltiplayer and additional modes(zombies/2D shooter) was superior. When are people going to learn that fun has little to do with the engine?! BF3 only has Frostbite2 to talk about, the rest is sub-par. The Black Ops engine was just fine, Black Ops2 will be better than BF3 with the Black Ops1 engine(plus some tweaks) for the above reasons. Don't expect a new engine until InfinityWards next game which will debut on the new Xbox(720) November 2013. You'll see a new engine then.
really? so you like a game that the gunplay and hit detection is way off timing and therefore results into a random skilles unreallistic shooter? Yup nice taste there bf fanboys, how about dice fixing their game first?
I'm sure that Treyarch has been working on a new engine before they released Black Ops, Treyarch actually cares unlike infinity ward.
Treyarch hasn't cared either. Neither has cared since the MW series started. If they cared, they'd still be supporting and protecting the servers from hacks on CoD 3 and WaW, not just BO. I can guarantee that anybody who is working on a CoD game doesn't give two shits about it.
They can't protect from hackers anymore, hackers can just block the patch. Security needs to be built into the game.
What I'd really like is for them to let me decide what is/isn't in the game. I'm tired of all the nonsense that's included like the HBS, Launchers, Deathstreaks and B.S. Perks.
Seeing that MW3 is built on the same engine as the first MW i doubt that Black Ops will be any different, this franchise relies on it's DLC to maximise sales with minimum outlay. Creating a new engine is expensive but MW3 is stale and has had a lot of negative press with a lot of players commenting that the graphics in MW2 were better. MW franchise is in danger of imploding because it hasn't ploughed in much of the money it has made for new ideas and gameplay. BF3 on PC shows a new engine but it's too powerful for the current consoles to handle well, hopefully the next gen consoles will be able to use the frostbite 2 engine because it's much better, BF3 wasn't a very good game but i think it had some great new things that i hope a Bad Company 3 game could use. The graphics for games like RAGE, Uncharted and Dead Space2 make MW look pretty tame Black Ops will just be more of the same and the franchise will plod along until the format declines in popularity.
its not exactly the same engine, i have cod4, mw2 , black ops and mw3 on my pc. I dont know how bad they look on consoles but they are miles better on pc. MW3 has clearly far higher geometry and lighting than the previosu games and on pc it has SSAO Mw3 might not be bf3 but it looks better than all multiplats outhere. Dead space 2 and uncharted look like crap in comaprison and rage is a pile of crap. Rage graphics are terrible, the textures are inferior than doom 3 a 2003 game, the shaders are ancient, the surfaces look plain and some textures are filled with pixels, the game doesnt even have lighting, it uses HDR to simulate brighter and darker areas, the whole thing is a joke, people whot think rage has better grahics than cod, clearly have a pretty weak concept of graphics and only look to what looks good to their eyes. Rage engine is a freakign disaster and a streamign nightmare. A joke.