[PCG] Treyarch on why Black Ops 2 doesn’t need a new engine - Page 16

Valve does use engine version numbers.

I mean as obviously as say, Crytek.

We all know about Cryengine 1, Cryengine 2, etc but I doubt many people remember Source only had multi-threading enabled not too long ago then backported to a lot of their games.

Crytek tries to sell the game engine licence to other game companies. That is why they put that huge number after every engine update. It is all marketing.

Valve develops Source engine for internal usage. They are not like Crytek or Epic Games where they try to sell game engine licences.

Definitely; I can see why Valve doesn't bother but my point being it'd stop people complaining about such an old engine when it's just as updated as most of the other engines.

Stop blaming consoles for it. BF3 is sold most on consoles yet here is Frostbite 2 and it looks better on consoles than anything CoD has ever brought forth.

Activision needs to get itself a new and better engine created. End off.

I'm not going to participate in this retarded flame going on, but what I will say will probably shock a few. I think (and can back up) that Black Ops looks WAY better than Modern Warfare, and I actually enjoyed Black Ops more than Modern Warfare 2 or 3. But this is about visuals so....


First you have to look at what visuals mean. A lot of people think that the visuals of a game are just the technical graphics, and if the graphics are bad, the visuals are bad. This is not true whatsoever. The visuals of a game depends on TWO factors. The technical graphics, AND the visual aesthetic of the game.

The technical graphics of a game are what is running in the background to render what you see. It's the engine shaders, the models and collision detection, the textures, and so on. All those little technical issues. The aesthetic of a game is the art style in which the developers use in inspire their title. Visuals depends on these two things, and personally I feel that the aesthetic of a game is more important.

For example, Katamari Damacy has terrible GRAPHICS, but it's AESTHETIC is amazing, and therefore I feel that the VISUALS are great. See what I mean? Now lets talk about say... Call of Duty. In terms of technical graphics Black Ops, and Modern Warfare 2 (the game to truely compare Black Ops to in terms of graphics) are exactly alike, and hell Black Ops and MW3 are also incredibly alike too.

However, then there's the aesthetic of both the games, which is where Black Ops shines. Modern Warfare games have an obsession with the colors brown and grey, and it shows. The visuals are all sorts of bland and bleak, just due to how boring and grey it's visual aesthetic is. However Black Ops can't stop throwing enough colors at you. In Black Ops you are treated to a diverse, and amazing color palette and visual aesthetic that makes the game look so alive, and that's why I feel that Black Op's overall visuals are better than MW, and it's one of the reasons why I prefer it to MW. Now could Black Ops use a new engine? Possibly higher resolution textures or more complex shaders running in the background? Sure I guess, but it would barely do anything I assure you. I think the overall visuals of Black Ops, and all of Treyarch's games is great, and doesn't really NEED much improvement, but could use it.


Ehh... yeah. I also guess I'm back....

Why make a new engine? The game will sell a gabillion copies anyway. All they need to do is put another RC controlled vehicle in the game...maybe a submarine, this time?

Hit the nail on the head!

I've not played any of the COD series since MW2 but honestly I wish they would fix their selfs. The game has not changed. A bunch of stupid gimmicks to attracked the attention of kids and immature gamers. Now before anyone says I'm a COD hater. I've got around 1,600 hours on COD4. I love the hell out of that game. But I see no reason to pay $60 for a DLC yearly. That's what COD has turned into to me. A $60 DLC. No real changes in gameplay, they reuse alot of older games. They re-use maps. It's just gotten stupid.

I play more Battlefield 3, but I gotta admit they don't even have a good feeling game. I much prefered Bad Company 2 myself. It had a great feeling, and a great experience. Battlefield 3 just lost that.

If COD ever went back to their roots, allowed for better competitive play, upgraded the engine, stop adding stupid RC stuff. I might buy back into the series. But I've been away for about 3 years and I have zero intention of returning till they drop this money grubbing sceming.

If it hasn't changed since the first one, then why are all the rest aimed at immature gamers but the one you played is for real men?