Originally Posted by Am*
Where the hell did I mention it used the GPL code? I said it used some "free" code,
GPL protects that "some free code" you pointed out, and i was pointing out that if IW only used the GPL'ed source code, then they would be bound by law, to release their modifications...that is how gpl works, you can use our stuff, but we want your stuff in return...with a bit of research more than just going to wiki, you would know that the source code that was used for the IW engine, was infact released to them under a proprietary license, which allowed them to modify and use the code how they want, for as long as they wanted, without having to pushing any of their modification back to the GPL'ed code...its called dual license. so yeah it is important to discern that they didn't use it...
Originally Posted by Am*
that's it. Couldn't care less about the rest, other than the fact that it's not their engine. End of story.
so when your argument fails, and you can't prove me wrong, the rest of the facts become irrelevant and you switch tactics?
Originally Posted by Am*
Battlefield owns COD because the game runs well, takes advantage of new hardware and DICE are trying to innovate with great graphics, physics; the works. If the so-called "IW engine" was one made from scratch, doing a Wii portover would be going arse-backwards since they would've had to build a whole new one from the beginning just for that console: idT3 is one of the few engines that will allow this, the updated (Doom 3 based) idT3 engine would NEVER run on a Wii since it is an overclocked Gamecube at best, and id themselves said PS2/Gamecube couldn't run Doom 3 (without looking like crap). Original Xbox (that 10-ish year old dinosaur) still kicks Wii's behind hardware-wise and it ran games the Gamecube/PS2 would never be able to run, so the Wii would have NO CHANCE running IW engine if it was built from scratch (which it isn't, id can take the credit for this).
again you seem to be confusing a lot of facts here.
a lot of game studios wont bother with creating their own engine, so they will lease a license from another company, there are actual companies out there, that all they do is create engines...and there are games developers out there that use many different types of engines inside a game...just not a single engine.
there are different levels of engines, along with type, some just do rendering, others handle physics, some do audio, video, there is even on that handles the lip syncing of rendered characters...
not sure how your logic works tbh...(example)each iteration of windows is based on the code before, so you essentially have code in windows 7, that was ported/forked/redone/remains the same as code that was in windows 2.0...windows didn't build their networking from the ground up, but chose to use BSD's as a framework...(example)
what IW does, is not abnormal or an exception to the rule, it is the rule...what DICE does, isn't always going to be the best solution...and it might even prove fatal if bf3 isn't all that it cracked up to be (it wouldn't be the first time we were mislead by pre-rendered cutscenes and "authentic gameplay" videos...) to claim greatness about an engine that no game that has be released, is using it, is not only foolish, but a poor argument maker...
again for what is red, i will retiterate for you:
doom 3's engine is not id tech 3 (i know it has to be confusing since they both have 3's in their name, but doom 3 uses id tech 4, id tech 3 was released a few years after doom 2, and released several years before doom 3.)
id tech 4 might use technology and code taken from id tech 3, but as stated before this is the rule not an exception.
and again, doom 3 uses id tech 4, probably why id said it would look like crap on a console of that era...as for why COD runs on the Wii, i'd imagine it is cause the engine is doing its job correctly, by being expanded upon for use for the wii, and its ability to port to it...again, this is a "feature" of most engines, the ability to port to several platforms using one code base...its where most gamers get the term "crappy console port" cause the game was designed for a console, and then the engine was used to port it for use on a PC...
on a side note, a personal note, an opinion, not to be confused with being a fact or stated truth...i like the COD series, i don't like BF series...frostbite 2 might be a great engine, i don't know since there are no games out that use it, and from last i heard, it will be several months (i think November) before anything that is said about it can be backed up with actual proof...
i think people get so caught up in these "engine" wars, that they miss the fundamental fact...engine's do not establish game play, they do not build story line, and they definitely don't care if you like them or not...there is a lot more to a game than what engine it uses. a lot of peoples "opinions" about this subject do not reflect the abilities of an engine...its simply ignorance of what an engine does that gets people all in a twist or have them beating the war drums for one over the other.
DICE produces their engine, but it doesn't automatically make any of their games better cause they have chosen to produce in house, over "renting" some one else's engine. we wouldn't have a lot of great games that we love, if we were really so gung ho about supporting developers that only use in house engines...
COD is a very successful franchise, millions of copies have been sold, tons of people play online, is it the ideal game, maybe not for you, but for millions who have bought it, and play, i'd imagine would disagree with your assertion it is a crappy game.
there will always people who are going to hate, and that is great cause we are allowed to develop our own opinions, but please for all things that stand for intelligence, if you are going to argue, please verify before you claim something is a fact.