New engine in Black Ops 2 a dealbreaker

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

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.

 
 
  • Anonymous

    It’s Activision, personally I do not feel they can push out a new, or even highly updated engine in two years, three years maybe, but two? So, if we do NOT see a Treyarch COD this year, then yes, I am sure it will be a new engine. If we do see a Treyarch COD this year, expect it to be on the same engine. Activision, just like every publisher, is in it for the money, and charging $15 DLC for recycled maps plus other rather crummy maps, it is obvious they are swindling people. Because of this, I feltt EA did not deserve worst company, they don’t swindle nearly as much as Activision, but because COD sells millions of copies every year, gee, they must be 100% for the people. Sad state of gaming we are in, so much potential, but nobody wants to take the time to use it.

    • dakan45

      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.

      • Anonymous

        EA could have come up with it but Activision is making it worse. They deliver COD yearly and it has been mostly garbage every other year, COD4 was amazing, World at War sucked, MW2 sucked, Black Ops was good, MW3 sucked… each released yearly, and only 2 of the 5 were even remotely good. EA is doing what any company would, if they “lost” the crown, they would do their best to take it back.

        Activision would be the EXACT same if they lost the crown, they would be even more ruthless in their crying to take it back, Bobby Kotick is the worst. EA isn’t any better or worse, these publishers suck. COD is no more mediocre than Medal of Honor, its quite obvious, only the fanboy would say otherwise. Both games suck, accept it.

        • dakan45

           ”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.

          • ButtCheekLlama

            I don’t like you

          • Jasgoogleded

            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…..!!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

    we all know it wont have a new engine till next gen it will still sell alot anyways cause kids dont care about graphics 

    • dakan45

      “Cause kids dont care about graphics”

      On the contrary its kids who were always facinated about graphics, real gamers apreciate a good game and dont care about the graphics, you will be suprised to see that most people really are “kids” and cant really understand graphics or how exactly they are made and what makes a game have better graphics than the other.

      They just look at a game and decide if its shinny enough and wherver it looks good to them, they cant go on techinical terms or artistic design and direction.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

         meh its a too way street alot of kid gamers buy games for graphics and sometimes for gameplay

    • Jasgoogleded

      I do 

    • Jasgoogleded

      but I prefer a better gameplay than better graphics

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002367454310 Jonathan Stoffregen

         same if i cared more about graphics i would have never bought dark souls XD

  • Razzer

    After being a long time fan of COD I’ve gone off it after MW3, I stupidly wasted my money on the elite which is a load of BS. I then played BF3 Beta and though this is way better than any COD game I’ve played! I never really played BF before and I regret it now, it’s really hard to play COD after playing BF3.

    I will never buy a COD again and this new Black Ops will just be copy pasta of number 1, like MW2 &1

    • dakan45

      really? so you like a game that the hit detection has one second delay since 1947? By all means, then go play your random kill/detah game that takes no skill.

      • Gal5473

         and COD takes skill to play? COD’s a lagfest infested with campers and 12yr olds.

        • dakan45

           TRUE, true, but its better to play a game that doesnt take 1 freaking second to register a bullet, a defect in the netcode of bf that existed since the first game in 2002 and its still nto fixed. So you shoot someone multiple times to the head, he is not dead because the crosshair has not flashed and registered the hits yet, at that time he has time to shoot you and when he dies, chances are the hits will register and take damage too, that was my experiance in their latest bc2 and moh which used the same cod. As for bf3, its the same but it also has “lag compensation” so you might get instadeaths at full health randomly.

          The whole thing is one random mess of chance rather skill on gunplay,its not reallist either.

          • Anonymous

            HAHA, I’ve seen you post this crap twice now. BF3 has way better hit detection than MW3. It also has dedicated servers, which means it doesn’t need lag compensation. 

            I bought MW3 and made the mistake of getting Elite, NEVER AGAIN! I bought BF3 months after I bought MW3. The better overall game is BF3. Hands down.

          • dakan45

            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.

          • Gal5473

             are you a fan of mw3?

          • dakan45

             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.

          • Anonymous

            I guess we play different Battlefields and CODs. Maybe it’s because I play on PS3. 

            In the end you have your opinion and I have mine and again to ME BF3 is miles ahead of MW3. I don’t have this hit detection problem that you seem to have. I pretty much live on the Battlefield forums and have never seen a post of someone complaining about hit detection. 
            Maybe COD is awesome on pc but on PS3 it’s a second class piece of garbage… again my opinion.

          • dakan45

             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.

          • Anonymous

            to each his own buddy. Shitty P2P connections with lag compensation really make the gun on gun gameplay the best /s

          • Hjimenez1485

            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

          • Darkan props

            it does that all the time in mw3 …. late bullet damage

  • D…

     I guarantee you that they either break MW3′s sales record or come very close with or without a new engine. Deal breaker my ass.

  • Dominic Blake

    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.

    • dakan45

      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.

      • Aaron

        Rage maxed out on pc looks fantastic in my opinion. I agree the lighting in doom 3 still seems better, but the textures are far better in rage. Overall rage looks amazing.

  • Aclient

    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.

  • Dj123431

    I’m sure that Treyarch has been working on a new engine before they released Black Ops, Treyarch actually cares unlike infinity ward.

    • Steve

      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.

      • Dj123431

        They can’t protect from hackers anymore, hackers can just block the patch. Security needs to be built into the game.

  • Beta_is_final_build

    Frostbite2 is horible on PS3!!

    • Anonymous

      What?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/QE6GSH7MUIUA3576H4UKVQHO24 Adecco

      lol, I think your bass ackwards

  • Grobertson

    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.

    • Gal5473

       HAHAHA. Black ops better than Bf3! Your either 12, or your taste just sucks.

      • dakan45

        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?

  • dakan45

    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.

    • Ajith Sukumar

      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. 

      • Ichiru

        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)

      • dakan45

        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.

  • Whogivesafuck

    Why was this even written?

  • Rockycrab

    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)!

    • codneedimprovements

      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)

  • http://www.facebook.com/matthew.starkey Matthew Starkey

    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.

  • Anonymous

    I think if Activision wanted to push a new engine, it would have been done with MW3. It would be nice, but the current one at 60fps runs great on consoles. The COD games aren’t anywhere near BF3 on PC, but Activision seems to focus mainly on consoles.

    • cod…needimprovements

      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

  • Activision

    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.  

  • Tyrant21mos

    FALSE, no new engine is needed. This article holds no weight. This is the smoothest first person engine, and he wants a new one.

    • callfodutyneedimprovements…

      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. 

  • Anonymous

    Did the article just say, ‘we wouldn’t buy it if there was a new engine, so it’s safe to assume that there will be one’ – seriously? What a terrible article.

    • MurdagameB

      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…

      • Anonymous

        I have. You can’t go around saying you “wouldn’t buy something unless it has this feature I want, so I’m pretty sure it will have this feature”

        Besides the point, it won’t get a new one anyway. Why would it. Millions of people buy “rehashed CoD4″ over and over. This is Activi$ion, remember.

        • mozzerman

          so basically what you are saying is: anyone writing an article is not allowed an opinion as long as it matches yours?

          • Anonymous

            Nope. What I’m saying is you can’t presume stuff is going to happen based on your opinion of it. The author said “I wouldn’t buy it unless it has this feature” and then says “so it’s safe to assume that it will have this feature”. You can’t write like that. That’s just wrong.

  • http://twitter.com/ButtonCombo ButtonCombo

    I’m not particularly a fan of the Call of Duty franchise but this article is just awful. 

  • -M

    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.

  • Kittypop

    I would buy it not matter what black ops has been the best call of duty ever made by far

  • sethscp

    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.

  • mozzerman

    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…

  • Jeremylokolhsf

    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.

  • Israelgarcia14

    would there have zombiez?

  • Israelgarcia14

    would there have zombiez?

  • Bob

    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.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001516135684 Ashley James Edmund

    when is it out and how mut ch

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001516135684 Ashley James Edmund

    MW3 is the shitest cod ever

  • Mrmnealy

    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

  • Biancahallion

    the zombie map is going to be a pyramid in eorope

  • Nil

    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.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QE6GSH7MUIUA3576H4UKVQHO24 Adecco

    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.