570°

MW3Blog: First Details of MW3

CarlosX360 Writes: "In the last 12 hours, we've seen a lot of information floating around, and so, MW3Blog breaks down each information and compresses them into an article that everyone can understand without being confused. All that's left; Is the new Call of Duty either Project Colossus, or Modern Warfare 3? Officially?"

crematory4769d ago

i just cant understand how an old fucking 10 years engine can
do destructible environments!

retrofly4769d ago

easy there tiger, the engine is only 4 years old. And its built for stability, side by side its looks better than BF:BC's engine, but BF:BC's scale is much bigger and has destruction, but its still clearer and crisper.

COD's engine is designed to run at 60FPS on console hardware, I doubt there is much they can do until a new console is released.

Will be good to see BF3's engine on the console to see what they can squeeze out, but I bet you it wont run at 60FPS.

Adding damage modling to COD's engine wouldnt be difficult, espeically if they've had 2 years to work on it, it all depends on if they can keep up the 60FPS perforamce.

Nitrowolf24769d ago (Edited 4769d ago )

It uses an upgraded Quake engine, so yeah pretty much its old. It's just been upgraded with better graphics and physics overtime.

4 years?

wellllllllllllll....

Black ops is based off a modified world at war engine, which is also based off cod COD4. And if you didn't know, COD4 engine is COD2 and this engine is based on Quake engine, which released in 1996.

it's literally 15 years old engine thats been heavily modified over time.

ITS AN OLD ENGINE JUST LOOK AT THIS CHART COD IS AT THE MIDDLE RIGHT
http://upload.wikimedia.org...

seriously it's gonna take a lot of work to get COD on the same level of damage as BF games.

retrofly4769d ago

Still one of the best looking games on the xbox, maybe the xbox can't cope with better graphics and still run at 60FPS.

There are brand new games with new engines that look shitter.

The unreal engine was created in 2009, are you saying GOW3 which uses an upgraded engine is shit becuase its 12 years old?

Do me a favour.

Trunkz4769d ago (Edited 4769d ago )

BF3 > MW3

Show us a new engine, and I'll show you new respect.

Solid_Snake-4769d ago (Edited 4769d ago )

its about 15/16 years old as far as i know activision still use the QUAKE engine.

theEx1Le4769d ago (Edited 4769d ago )

I don't know why you got disagrees, its a heavily modified I.d tech 3 engine. Just to put that into perspective, I.D have released several engines after this and one of the games they last used it was in quake 3.

SynysteR4769d ago

I bet they had a right old giggle in the DICE studios.

retrofly4769d ago

Really? Developers arn't fanboys, they more than likely respect eachothers work, instead of rag on it all the time like the kids on N4G.

SynysteR4769d ago

And EA & DICE haven't been ragging on it at all then? My mistake then, I guess they haven't been talking trash over the past 2 years with their mission to dethrone COD and regain it themselves, Just saying.

retrofly4769d ago (Edited 4769d ago )

Really, I havn't really noticed any of that. And them talking of de-throing COD, must mean they see COD in a good position and want to be better than them, thats them wanting to be the best, essentialy saying at the moment COD are the most successful but they want to be better.

Sounds like a compliment to me.

Gazondaily4769d ago

"Really? Developers arn't fanboys, they more than likely respect eachothers work, instead of rag on it all the time like the kids on N4G."

Really? So what do you call what EPIC games were doing with the Bulletstorm adverts where they ridiculued COD and even went to the extent of making a mini game doing the same? What about the developers behind inFamous and their various jibes at other games?

Hopefully you've learnt a lesson about making sweeping generalisations.

retrofly4769d ago

Its more tounge in cheek, the fact they acknowlege another game shows that it must see it in some higher stature, otherwise they wouldn't mention it.

If anything it's just pandering to the kids on N4G.

If anything the dev's dont come up with this stuff anyway, more likely the PR and marketing guys.

Im pretty sure if you sat down with the actual developers they would tell you they actually repect COD, maybe enjoy playing it.

Anyone in the industry can see how successful the COD series has ben and how much money it's made, and they will respect that. They arn't fanboys dicking about on a forum like most of the kids here.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4769d ago
GrumpyVeteran4769d ago

I knew the next COD would be infested with micro-transactions.

BIGBOSS084769d ago

we dont need first details. most of us have already played modern warfare 3. just play any of the past 2-3 cod's. its the same thing.

Gazondaily4769d ago

As much as I despise the idea of these additional micro-transactions, this could be a VERY clever move on the part of Activision. If you observe the number of people who bought additional content for the Battlefield Heroes game( the old cartoony one)and consider how popular the COD franchise is, these so-called 'micro-transactions' will be be making MEGA-bucks for Activision.

Whether they deserve it or not however, is an altogether different matter.

Show all comments (32)
60°

A 13-year mystery around a secret Call of Duty MW3 ending is over

Captain Price's fate at the end of 2011's Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 could've been very different, as this new post-credits scene reveals.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
60°

Call Of Duty On Game Pass Is A Big Risk Big Reward Gamble

Discover the impact of Microsoft's decision to include Call Of Duty in Game Pass. Explore the pros and cons and speculate about future changes.

Read Full Story >>
gamersocialclub.ca
Elda12d ago

Most folks that have a Gamepass subscription will not spend the $70, they will use Gamepass instead to play COD. MS will most likely make their money from some solely PC players & some solely PS5 owners. Even some PC players may opt to use Gamepass instead of spending $70. I would think MS would want to make every dime they could from retail sales. As long as they put new releases of COD day one on Gamepass, MS will lose out on some sales of COD.

porkChop12d ago

COD makes truck loads of money on microtransactions. That's likely the play. Get more people in the door through Game Pass and sell more microtransactions. Have a steady stream of events to keep people interested so they keep their sub, and then just the sub alone would double the revenue from that player each year.

Elda11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

Buying the game at $70 a pop including the deluxe versions is much better than people subs for a dollar to $15 a month. Die hard fans that usually buy the game also buy into the transactions. Again putting any new COD day one on Gamepass is definitely a sure loss of making some retail money for every copy of COD. With the last iteration of COD being bad most likely people are going to sub to Gamepass to play COD basically saving themselves $70, that is a loss of retail sales.

Kakashi Hatake12d ago (Edited 12d ago )

Most that don't have Gamepass will just buy the game and he done with it. People that do will just result in a retail sale being lost. Some will buy the subscription for the month then be done. This is lose lose. Casuals aren't going to pay almost 300 dollars a year for COD.

ApocalypseShadow12d ago

The reality is that Microsoft already knows the answer as stated by them in their documents. PlayStation gamers have built up an ecosystem of games and they aren't migrating over and dropping what they have to buy an Xbox to play one game in a service you have to pay monthly for. Cheaper to just buy the game. And, I'd bet many casual COD players don't know or care about the acquisition.

Which is why Jim Ryan pushed to make sure that that one game continues to be sold as usual on Sony's platform to keep the status quo. Every other IP owned by Activision are worthless. And Activision has shown they don't care about other IP like Tony Hawk by cancelling them.

Sales WILL be lost on Xbox. That's for certain. Microsoft can only hope that Xbox gamers continue to buy up those micro transactions to make up for those lost sales. Only positive for Microsoft is that they get to dip into PlayStation game sales that we all know from history and NPD, that Sony's console sells more games. But increase subs from Sony fans for game pass? Not happening in any way that matters.

Sony, on the other hand, can have their cake and eat it too. They get COD and they can continue dropping more content for their fastest selling GaaS game which is Hell Divers 2. As the game passes 12 million sales and doesn't beat you over the head with micro transactions, Sony has a win win situation and can support the game getting more content to keep players engaged.

As a side note, COD is probably going to turn into some version of Sea of Fortnite Duty. Games as a service sitting in game pass being milked dry with micro transactions and constant updates making you feel you're playing an unfinished game that keeps going and going with no soul.

Tedakin11d ago

I'm not sure why everyone is acting like COD is a surprise. That was always the plan. They said in court during the FTC case they were doing this. They have said repeatedly and recently all first party games are going to Gamepass.

badboyz0911d ago

gamepass like PS Plus are rental services. Games like COD you buy not rent. So in my case unless I plan on keeping gamepass for 2yrs minimum than the benefit of adding cod is pointless.

80°

5 Reasons Why Call Of Duty On Xbox Game Pass Is A Big Deal

We've put together 5 reasons why we believe the arrival of the Call of Duty franchise on Xbox Game Pass will be a big deal for Microsoft.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
peppeaccardo12d ago

Throwing bananas at the monkeys' cage.