Originally Posted by bigjdubb
I wonder how much of the coding in the Cryengine and Frostbite engines carry over, are these engines starting completely from scratch with each new version? If they carry over some of the coding and add new features isn't it basically the same thing as modifying the existing engine save for giving it a new name? I think that hands down BF3 is better in the graphics department compared to COD but which one I prefer to play depends on my mood. I have been pretty impressed with videos I have seen of the upcoming games but judging by the responses I see on this forum I think it is impossible to impress some people.
Again, shouldn't reply but that brings up a good point. A lot of engines used old code, even MS does the same thing. People forget, it really isn't a new version of windows but a tweak on the old kernel. NT 5.1 was XP, NT 6.0 was Vista. The idea isn't new, it will be used again and again. The biggest thing is, the "better" (if you wish to say that, which I do) companies at least re-work or do a total re-haul of certain systems.
Many companies will completely tear down the graphics/physics parts of their engines. While it isn't a completely new engine, net code may be "old" and the sound code is probably just tweaked. The thing is, they change some of the biggest aspects of the engine. In a way, that as a coder, the engine would seem completely new to you
This is what has made the COD series seem a bit stale, or the same game over and over. The physics and graphics aspect of a FPS are pretty much the bread and butter of the engine. Since you are in a virtual world, as a visual species, those are the things we relate and understand the most. If you only tweak these here and there, the end result is going to seem too familiar.
The problem is, the developers on these engines can't really seem to do much more. Whether or not they are allowed and that is what is in question. They are a multi-million dollar company and the developers should have the ability and means to do so. The idea that they don't seems to fit that they haven't got the team to actually "create" a new engine. Even if most engines are extremely modular, major overhauls are done that ends up creating a new engine.
In C3, graphically they changed the engine entirely. Remember the segment on how they did the flora, the trees and bushes with their lighting? Can't find it now but the trees weren't done in DX11 but something else (can't remember). Yet they created extremely detailed trees without DX11 tessellation and displacement. That's pushing the boundaries, developer work that is worth supporting. Without that, we have AA (NOT AAA) games that are good but not worth what we give Activision.
So yes, a lot of companies use the same engine in a way. They just re-write the largest aspects of the engines, to push the boundaries or create something better. You won't see the COD series do this, unless a huge enough blowout occurs in which the fans make it apparent they want change. This only occurs a few ways, generally the biggest way is the fan base still playing a specific title and not playing the new title. They could by the next title, maybe even buying the next two. After that, expect a huge decline of sales as the fan base decides their is a line. If they still play one of the older titles (COD:BO2 for example) then you might see a huge overhaul in the series. Where there is a want for the game (a huge previous fan base) but a huge lack in sales from new titles.
Other than that, expect nothing to change. If they have the talent, that's probably the only way we will see it happen.