Modern Warfare 3 Looks Disappointing on Maxed Out PC Settings

With Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 now launched worldwide, its PC version has finally made its way into gamers’ possession; the shooter’s PC version wasn’t showcased much during preview and press events.

[doctorstrange]

Same engine, same graphics

[badz149]

anyone expecting mind blowing graphic from a CoD title these days?

[Autodidactdystopia]

But I like My games Covered In a inch thick layer of Grease.

[dillydadally]

Your guys bias and hatred for the series make you say such ridiculous things. It's so much improved from MW1. Have you even played it? I've played MW3 and it looks incredible in action. On PC, it isn't BF3 for sure, but MW is a console focused series, and is still no slouch on PC.

I dare you to name 5 xbox titles that are as graphically impressive as MW3. I'll bet you can't. (I'll give you a hint. BF3 isn't one of them. BF3 on consoles was hugely disappointing graphically after those amazing promotional videos)

[awi5951]

@dillydadally

UHHH call of duty started on PC first Man the original one never came to console.

[badz149]

"It's so much improved from MW1"

you mean THAT game from 2007? hello, this is already Nov 2011! and by "improved" you mean DX11 kinda improved or just the same stuff from 2007?

[Urbz7870]

@ dillydadally LOL MW3 graphics better then BF3? My older brother 2yr old son drawing looks better then MW3.

[cannon8800]

Their potato engine that's powering this game is like nine years old or something. They could easily invest in a new engine. Heck they could freaking but the unreal engine and use that if they wanted. Lazy buttholes.

[Heartnet]

Yeh but they change parts of the engine over the years lol.. if u compared this engine to the one they used at the beginning their will be alot of difference...

and the UNreal Engine is just as old -_- and then they would have to pay royalties to epic so it makes alot of sense to use the one there familiar with :) makes development time alot quicker and easier if ur familiar with the tools :)

[dillydadally]

These comments are so stupid. Have you played it? I've played both BF3 and MW3 on xbox and MW3 looks better (unbiased opinion). Calling it a Potato engine is either insane or ignorant. Not to mention it runs so much smoother and has so fewer graphical glitches than BF3. I would be disappointed if MW3 was on the BF3 engine.

I've currently played the first 3 levels on MW3 and it looks mind blowing, especially in action with all the particle effects and everything going on.

On PC, yes, BF3 is unbeatable graphically - you'd be just as ignorant or insane to say MW3 touches BF3 graphically on PC. But I'd hardly call MW3 disappointing on PC seeing as how on the ages old XBOX it looks incredible! This is blind fanboyism at its worst. The MW3 engine is vastly improved from MW1 and unless you're unbiased, I can't think of many games that compare graphically on consoles (at least on xbox).

[Iroquois_Pliskin]

@dailydadally

your comment is so retarded that i dont even know what to call you a dumbass for

[ATi_Elite]

they use the same cheap engine so they can crank out COD faster than McDonalds can crank out burgers but it's sad that Activision has made billions off of this game and can buy the CryEngine 3 and use it if they wanted to but they choose to be CHEAP.

I don't think skipping a year to make a really graphical and kick but COD would hurt if anything it would boost sales.

[Heartnet]

Cheap? Activision have probz spent millions creating the CoD engine and u want them to throw that all away and then pay Crytek so they could use their engine? get real lol

and a realistic looking CoD wouldnt be CoD and risks losing a chunk of its audience because of that...

[STONEY4]

The COD engine is a modified Quake engine made by iD. Millions spent creating engine my ass.

[dillydadally]

You obviously have no idea what goes into programming and altering an engine. First off, it cost money originally to license the engine. Second, it is so drastically altered now by years and years of development that it without a doubt has cost them millions. You're stupid if you think this is anything similar to the old quake engine still. And the only engine I can think of that can run at 60 fps and look this good is Rage.

[bviperz]

The multiplayer graphics are horrendous. Someone said they stretched low resolution textures to fit higher resolution monitors. I use a 30 inch and I am highly disappointed. I think they sacrificed too much for solid frame rates and screwed PC gamers over.

[AAACE5]

I don't know... my Tv said the game was running at 1080p.

[hadriker]

I don't really see how thats possible, considering both console only support 720p

[JebusF]

Depends really, what is more important, high fidelity visuals, or 60fps?

[LightofDarkness]

PCs can do much higher fidelity with 1080p/60FPS and 4XAA. BF3, for example, will do this on my computer on ultra settings (depending on the map), as do many other games.

This still looks like a 2006/2007 game. Not that anyone expected any differently, really, only a fool would think that they'd put some actual effort into a COD game, nevermind the PC version of a COD game.

[Heartnet]

Yeh but they have to make it look good on all consoles.. and not everyone wants to put in, what im going to call mandatory, a 1.6gb install just to make it look slightly decent...

and BF3 looks like shit without that texture pack on console..

[TLG1991]

@HEARTNET

yeah battlefield 3 looks bad without the pack compared to the pc version and what even worse is MW3 looks even worse than BF3 without the texture pack!

the thing is if people thought hmmm wait if i skip this game this once activision will see a massive decline in sale and realise its time to update there engines and designs. but they see it as they are still making billions from this franchise as it is so why bother spending money well its still making the best profit in the video game indsutry.

[JsonHenry]

LOL! High fidelity or 60fps? how about 80+FPS running across 3 monitors?

[Nitrowolf2]

"high fidelity visuals, or 60fps?"

PC can do both and Beyond (not trying to start anything there). Your comment is pointless and just plain stupid

[capcock]

ummm this is on PC not console. I'm pretty sure that an average gaming PC from 2008 can max out this game @60fps since it isn't demanding at all.

[papashango]

Fps its not a factor comparing titles. Those that want 60 or higher fps, will get 60 or higher. I play bf3 on high at 75ish fps

[cannon8800]

It doesn't matter how high your controller sensitivity is, a mouse will always be faster and more accurate. Even if cod runs at 60 fps, a 30 fps pc running cod will still be better.

[Majin-vegeta]

You can polish a turd but it's still a turd.

[cannon8800]

a shiny turd

[NYC_Gamer]

never expected this game to have beautiful visuals with that old engine

[psb]

@Jebus: Both can be achieved, at least you should try to improve. Activision's offering the same package in a brand new wrapping for a few years now. Appalling how people still fall for this crap.

smh.

[TheBeast]

mw 2.55555555555

[capcock]

I would rather call it:

Modern rip-off 2 volume 2

;)

[JebusF]

@PSB yeah, but let's face it - it keeps selling. So they aren't to blame, the people buying it are.

You can't argue with those sales figures.

[Chnswdchldrn]

Yo is anyone else only get 45 fps? wtf?

[SnakeCQC]

nice to know my 6850 could max this at 1080p at 60 fps

[M1chl]

I would say that 3850 can do this too...

[SnakeCQC]

LOL BUUUURRRN(that 70's show reference)

[Harelgur]

I hate COD games but the graphics are the only good thing about these games.
Modern warfare 2 blew me away on the 360, im sure MW3 PC is not dissapointing graphicly.

[SnakeCQC]

it blew you away?

[LightofDarkness]

I would say they look OK for console games, but on the PC it's really showing just how far behind it is.

[trenso1]

same thing i was thinking.

[pctrollv4]

BAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHA HAHAAA....my god

[saladthieves]

Mate, you clearly forgot to add a /s at the end of your comment. Better fix that, k?

[trenso1]

lmao couldnt help but laugh at "Modern warfare 2 blew me away on the 360" look at U3, BF3, KZ2/3, Rage even LBP(to an extent) look better that MW2 lol too funny

[Harelgur]

I dont compare games.
I play what i play and i get impressed by what impresses me.
I dont care uncharted 3 is looking better.

[franko]

Looks like crap on ps3 too...

[kcuthbertson]

and 360...

[_Aarix_]

And wii

[Majin-vegeta]

This i can approve my bro is playing dam levels look all dead with no colors-_-.

[lugia 4000]

Why does my GTX580 and i5-2500k get 45fps?

Tell me please.

[caboose32]

CoD games lately have been horribly optimized on PC.

A game that looks this bad should be able to run on a wide range of PC's without a problem.

[poo342947294792]

thats odd I set vsync on if not i'd get like 300plus frames in single player lol....try locking the frames to your refresh with vsync works for me with 2 580s in sli

[Der_Kommandant]

IMHO it looks stunning!!! for 2007

[Fishy Fingers]

Well I wouldn't say it's an ugly game by any stretch, but it's basically just the console version at higher res, some AA and maybe a few other standard PC features.

Side by side its much better than the consoles but not close to setting any PC benchmarks.

[papashango]

Ya its not even gonna pop up in video card benchmarks as thats how irrelevant this engine is to the gpu industry

[GraveLord]

Most people play COD games for you know....fun, ever heard of it?

[_Aarix_]

I have gears of war, portal, mass effect and many integers for that

[Richdad]

COmon Battlfield 3 for PC is as good as Crysis 2 without a doubt. COD4:MW 3 is console based game as of now. It deliver high if not max settings on consoles at smooth 60 frames per second.
I don't think COD 4 stands a chance. The only good thing about COD is that it has lot effects like haze, smooth etc. Its also crisp but it looks very dated and cheap in comparison to BF 3.

[kevnb]

Cod on console is like medium at a low Res, it doesn't matter though.

[Richdad]

Yeah but still the visual effects in Battlefield 3 and Crysis 2 are lot more taxing to hardware thats what I wanted to say. Call of Duty as of now is using cheap visual effects which is giving it better performance.

[Harelgur]

youre all graphics sluts

[ATi_Elite]

I refer to myself as a "Graphics Escort" which isway more classy than a High Class Graphicstute!

which is on the complete opposite end of the spectrum as a low down and dirty "8 bit Spite Whore"!

[kevnb]

It looks ok, and runs on almost anything.

[caperjim]

I was hoping for gamepad support like black ops had for PC multiplayer. From what im hearing there is none. Most new games have built in support since many PC gamers use gamepads instead of a mouse + keyboard now.

MW3 seems like a step backward in many areas when it comes to the PC version.

[artdafoo]

And in other news water is wet.

[ARTISAN]

i find it funny how its call of duty 4: modern warfare and then they never add another number into the series but rather black ops and what not maybe cause it really is still cod 4 with a new dull paint job

[Pana]

Should have been obvious the game wouldn't be graphically pleasing when my shitty work laptop can run the campaign at a constant 60fps with maxed out settings. I'm just glad it runs well enough.

[Pledius]

someone make a mod! MW3 gameplay with BF3 graphics!

[poo342947294792]

well....dual 580s here and I can say sli is not supported yet but to make the game look better in NCP force 32AA on the game to get some use from sli and that sure beats the games 4xAA :/

Great fun MP needs new engine like BF3....

solid hectic online fun tho

only issue is if I play it after playing BF3 on Ultra then play cod is like going from snes to atari 2600 lol

[_LarZen_]

Running it on max on a GTX590 and even tho it aint a gfx beast like BF3 it looks great.

And more importaint....its FUN.

[Urbz7870]

tsk tsk tsk *shakes head in utterly disgust*.