MW3 Has No New Engine, and comments on FrostBite2.0(BF3)

Infinity Ward creative strategist Robert Bowling has said that building a new engine for the Call of Duty franchise "would be counter productive".

When it was put to him on Twitter that "someone just needs to spend the $ and construct a new engine for the CoD franchise... Ground up," Bowling replied: "That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

His comments were made at the same time the internet started going Battlefield 3 crazy over the COD rival'sfirst gameplay trailer, which showed off DICE's impressive Frostbite 2 engine,described by EAas "incredible technology that takes animation, destruction, lighting, scale and audio to new heights".

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/291588/news/modern-warfare-3-new-engine-would-be-counter-productive-infinity-ward/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-General-RSS

"That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

Translation: Activision's tight schedule for games forces them to use a modded quake engine forever.

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

So - hate whats popular? Root for what sucks?

Does not compute.

It would be counter productive...why would you waste your money and time building a new engine when you throw out more Call of Duties and the mass will spend their $$$ on it. Profit$$$ =DShadowDeathX

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

If it did score higher than BF3 then GS would be getting a lot of hate for selling out so much. Its already known that no matter what MW3 is, BF3 will be better.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]It would be counter productive...why would you waste your money and time building a new engine when you throw out more Call of Duties and the mass will spend their $$$ on it. Profit$$$ =Dhaberman13

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]It would be counter productive...why would you waste your money and time building a new engine when you throw out more Call of Duties and the mass will spend their $$$ on it. Profit$$$ =DShadowDeathX

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

There are lots of good games on console. Zelda, Lost Oddesey, Halo (some of them), God of War, etc. And none of those games would be better on PC.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

Not the best logic. Good game design is good game design.

I would sure as hell rather play Uncharted 2 than Sniper: Ghost Warrior, for example.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

:lol: It's cute that you think that. :lol:

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

haberman13

So - hate whats popular? Root for what sucks?

Does not compute.

I didnt root for CoD.

My post is aiming at the people who think BF3 will be teh best fps ever based on a 30 second trailer and screenshots...

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/fault-line-battlefield-3/711133

It looks great. I hated BC2 but this one looks all right.

It is not counter productive to make great looking games.

It is counter productive to whine while their whorish company is forced into slave labour to put another CoD rehash on the shelves.

Well if you have been making games for quite some time with one engine, and it's still holding up, there is really no need to change engines.

However once BF3 comes out the game will completely change on them.

It takes a whole different set of skills to create a new engine from the ground up. It's usually best to stick to something you know.

DICE had a focus with their engine and had been creating it for many years. They didn't develop this engine overnight. They had a focus, they knew what they needed out of it, and they have created all of their engines in the past. They have the skills and experiance needed.

It would be counter-productive to their goals right now to stop and make a new engine.

That is pure laziness, I hope they deduct points for graphics, this engine is getting old even with enhancements.

Nothing wrong wiht the engine they have now at least the IW 4.0 engine. But I think they are already working on an engine for the next gen consoles or are waiting for them before they decide to upgrade the engine or use a new engine altogether.

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

I actually want MW3 to outscore BF3 too. Simply because it might be able to get it into people's heads that all scores are opinion and not fact. I mean, i think we all know BF3 will be the better game right?

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

MobilechicaneX

I actually want MW3 to outscore BF3 too. Simply because it might be able to get it into people's heads that all scores are opinion and not fact. I mean, i think we all know BF3 will be the better game right?

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

So - hate whats popular? Root for what sucks?

Does not compute.

I didnt root for CoD.

My post is aiming at the people who think BF3 will be teh best fps ever based on a 30 second trailer and screenshots...

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

So - hate whats popular? Root for what sucks?

Does not compute.

I didnt root for CoD.

My post is aiming at the people who think BF3 will be teh best fps ever based on a 30 second trailer and screenshots...

or they could be bigtime bf2 fans

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

So - hate whats popular? Root for what sucks?

Does not compute.

Jankarcop

I didnt root for CoD.

My post is aiming at the people who think BF3 will be teh best fps ever based on a 30 second trailer and screenshots...

or they could be bigtime bf2 fans

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

MobilechicaneX

I actually want MW3 to outscore BF3 too. Simply because it might be able to get it into people's heads that all scores are opinion and not fact. I mean, i think we all know BF3 will be the better game right?

in other words: why create a new engine when our game is gonna sell 5+ million on the first day? we have better things to do then making a new engine, kotick's new airplane won't get brought by itself you know.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

sigh give me the trailer for MW3 already!

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]It would be counter productive...why would you waste your money and time building a new engine when you throw out more Call of Duties and the mass will spend their $$$ on it. Profit$$$ =Dhaberman13

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

how ignorant and cute of you to say that.

It would be hilarious if MW3 outscored BF3. And i hope it does, all these people on SW are proclaiming "BF3 is gonna b AAAAAAAAEEEE GOTY 10/10 best FPS eva!!11!!". It would be great

DroidPhysX

how so?

one company that actually spends money to innovate by building a new game engine is a GOOD thing for gamers. It advances technology and gameplay possibilities.

while Activision releases a game every 12months for 4 years straight using the same engine!

very funny indeed!

"That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

Translation: Activision's tight schedule for games forces them to use a modded quake engine forever.

Upparoom

[QUOTE="Upparoom"]

"That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

Translation: Activision's tight schedule for games forces them to use a modded quake engine forever.

Zaibach

Well he is correct, a lot of the people who buy call of duty games don't really know much about video games. I think making a new engine with better graphics would boost their sales, but why would they when they make a huge amount of money releasing a game every year?

Am I the only one on this board that kinda likes CoD? :P For real now, people. It's not like CoD looks like garbage on it's engine, it looks fine. It's probably one of the best looking multiplats out there, honestly. enterawesome

Really no new engine i thought for sure we would be getting a new on for a new MW game. Anyone else feel as if Activision just wants money and doesn't care if their game is good they know its going to sell, so i guess hes right why waist money on a new engine when you know with minimum effort your going to sell. I hope BF3 knocks em down a peg, though i highly doubt it i think someone needs to knock em down soon.murat8

Not defending activision here.. But it should not be expected to have a new engine every sequel inless the old one has aged poorly... I would rather they focus their time on gameplay mechanics and what not..

[QUOTE="enterawesome"]Am I the only one on this board that kinda likes CoD? :P For real now, people. It's not like CoD looks like garbage on it's engine, it looks fine. It's probably one of the best looking multiplats out there, honestly. the_ChEeSe_mAn2

[QUOTE="murat8"]Really no new engine i thought for sure we would be getting a new on for a new MW game. Anyone else feel as if Activision just wants money and doesn't care if their game is good they know its going to sell, so i guess hes right why waist money on a new engine when you know with minimum effort your going to sell. I hope BF3 knocks em down a peg, though i highly doubt it i think someone needs to knock em down soon.sSubZerOo

Not defending activision here.. But it should not be expected to have a new engine every sequel inless the old one has aged poorly... I would rather they focus their time on gameplay mechanics and what not..

Why wasting time/money on a new engine when you know it'll sell millions with their garbage engine? This is just pathetic and funny at the same time lolz. It'll be released wut? at the end of 2011 and look like a 07 game rofl gg keep the same engine for next gen. Never loved nor will like CoD so don't care.silversix_

Yeah, it is ridiculous that it probably won't look better maxed than vanilla Crysis on medium settings.

wow you are even making your own topics now? I'm proud of you, Jankarcop

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="murat8"]Really no new engine i thought for sure we would be getting a new on for a new MW game. Anyone else feel as if Activision just wants money and doesn't care if their game is good they know its going to sell, so i guess hes right why waist money on a new engine when you know with minimum effort your going to sell. I hope BF3 knocks em down a peg, though i highly doubt it i think someone needs to knock em down soon.murat8

Not defending activision here.. But it should not be expected to have a new engine every sequel inless the old one has aged poorly... I would rather they focus their time on gameplay mechanics and what not..

it's not a question of the COD engine having aged poorly. its a question of getting a rehashed game every 12months!

2007 - COD4: MW

2008 - COD: WAW (COD4 in WW2)

2009 - COD: MW2 (Sequel to COD4)

2010 - COD: BO (MW2 set in Cold War)

2011 - COD: MW3 (Sequel to MW2)

5 games back to back using virtually an unchanged game engine. Aside from WAW which is set in WW2- all the games play VERY similarly. And the Story has gotten worse each time. Rehashed games, released 12months apart. I honestly hope things improve for gamers sakes.

"That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

Translation: Activision's tight schedule for games forces them to use a modded quake engine forever.

Upparoom

They also want the game to run at 60fps, for that I think they look pretty good, but BO still looked dated compared to new games.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.

reminds me of Halo CE... a 2 year old console FPS scores a 9.0 on PC. :lol:

Let alone all the genres PC loses to consoles on.

"That would be counter productive. An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

Translation: Activision's tight schedule for games forces them to use a modded quake engine forever.

Upparoom

you missed something in the translation. what it actually means is that activision sees that making a new engine is counter productive to making money. making a new engine from scratch requires spending millions where as taking last years game and putting on a new skin costs pennies.

[QUOTE="murat8"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Not defending activision here.. But it should not be expected to have a new engine every sequel inless the old one has aged poorly... I would rather they focus their time on gameplay mechanics and what not..

CwlHeddwyn

it's not a question of the COD engine having aged poorly. its a question of getting a rehashed game every 12months!

2007 - COD4: MW

2008 - COD: WAW (COD4 in WW2)

2009 - COD: MW2 (Sequel to COD4)

2010 - COD: BO (MW2 set in Cold War)

2011 - COD: MW3 (Sequel to MW2)

5 games back to back using virtually an unchanged game engine. Aside from WAW which is set in WW2- all the games play VERY similarly. And the Story has gotten worse each time. Rehashed games, released 12months apart. I honestly hope things improve for gamers sakes.

Oh god...they confirmed destructibility in Battlefield 3? I hate destructibility all it makes is for every one completely destroying the map instead of actually doing objectives like planting charges...*shakes head*

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Bam - you just summed up the console game library.

haberman13

Good game on console == mediocre game on PC

I'll take 1 great PC game over the entire console library; the disparity is that great.

So I disagree, there aren't good games on console, there are good console games.