Support NeoGAF

[nib95]

Imo it's one of the best COD games in a while, and the MP is a good improvement over MW2's (not much new, but certainly more refined), so I'm happy for them.

 

[Guileless]

In my day, it was popular to condescend to Halo 2 as the dudebro game of choice.

 

[[Nintex]]

Because your justifying developer laziness.

And you call developers lazy

 

[Nemo]

All that money and no dedicated servers. -_- We're being fucking robbed.

Wait what? Don't they have DS for PC?

 

[TacticalFox88]

Wait what? Don't they have DS for PC?

I'm talking about consoles.

 

[VASPER]

Wait what? Don't they have DS for PC?

I'm pretty sure they do.

 

[sajj316]

I'm pretty sure they do.

for PC via Gameservers.com but at a cost

 

[crazy monkey]

I for one happy that wii version came out at the same time and was good comparatively.

 

[jedimike]

Because your justifying developer laziness.

I can see why you were all teh funnies then because I thought I was explaining the economics of game development. I didn't know that part of Treyarch's employment process was to hire only teh lazy programmers.<sarcasm>

Look, pretend you are the CEO of Treyarch and your task is to deliver a AAA game. You have limited resources. The most limited resource is time. You have 104 weeks from the day you ship your last COD title. Where would you spend the bulk of your resource development? PS3 or 360? Oh and let's throw a kink in it... IW will release it's MW2 game 52 weeks before you and you'll have to improve upon everything the fans hated about it. Oh and 360 has better develoment tools and a larger consumer base of your target audience.

Treyarch answered up... they did the best they could possibly do given the resources they had. I doubt they had a case of lazy workers.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I can see why you were all teh funnies then because I thought I was explaining the economics of game development. I didn't know that part of Treyarch's employment process was to hire only teh lazy programmers.<sarcasm>

Look, pretend you are the CEO of Treyarch and your task is to deliver a AAA game. You have limited resources. The most limited resource is time. You have 104 weeks from the day you ship your last COD title. Where would you spend the bulk of your resource development? PS3 or 360? Oh and let's throw a kink in it... IW will release it's MW2 game 52 weeks before you and you'll have to improve upon everything the fans hated about it. Oh and 360 has better develoment tools and a larger consumer base of your target audience.

Treyarch answered up... they did the best they could possibly do given the resources they had. I doubt they had a case of lazy workers.

Now pretend that you're working on an engine that you've used before and that was designed to run near identically across all platforms.

 

[jedimike]

Yeah, you should try that yourself.

... :lol :lol :lol

My god... that is easy. After all these years of thinking GAF was a discussion forum. I was doing it wrong this whole time. I should have just been using emoticons and gifs.

 

[NullPointer]

Now pretend that you're working on an engine that you've used before and that was designed to run near identically across all platforms.

Were they using the same engine? I thought COD4 had most of the improvements, but WaW and Black Ops felt like an upgraded COD3 engine.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Were they using the same engine?

It's the same engine that CoD has used all generation. That's what makes the Black Ops port so laughable.

 

[TacticalFox88]

I can see why you were all teh funnies then because I thought I was explaining the economics of game development. I didn't know that part of Treyarch's employment process was to hire only teh lazy programmers.<sarcasm>

Look, pretend you are the CEO of Treyarch and your task is to deliver a AAA game. You have limited resources. The most limited resource is time. You have 104 weeks from the day you ship your last COD title. Where would you spend the bulk of your resource development? PS3 or 360? Oh and let's throw a kink in it... IW will release it's MW2 game 52 weeks before you and you'll have to improve upon everything the fans hated about it. Oh and 360 has better develoment tools and a larger consumer base of your target audience.

Treyarch answered up... they did the best they could possibly do given the resources they had. I doubt they had a case of lazy workers.

The PS3 has been out for four years. FOUR FUCKING YEARS! And developers consistently drop the ball because they refuse to learn something that could possibly have mind blowing results (Have you seen Sony's first party games?!) All it takes is some dedication to learn the hardware and once you do that's it, it gets even easier. But no, they want to take they want to half ass EVERYTHING and try and cut corners.

 

[jedimike]

Now pretend that you're working on an engine that you've used before and that was designed to run near identically across all platforms.

Given the complexity and variations of ALL platforms, I would say such an engine is not as universally compliant as we might assume.

 

[sajj316]

Were they using the same engine? I thought COD4 had most of the improvements, but WaW and Black Ops felt like an upgraded COD3 engine.

WaW used "enhanced" COD4 engine. BLOPS did not use the MW2 engine as far as I know so one would guess its an "enhanced" x 2 COD4 engine.

 

[TestOfTide]

BLOPS erases all the negativity I've had against the franchise since after the glory days of COD4.

This. The game still needs a few fixes (shotgun buff, idle sway on full auto ARs, nerf the 74u, etc.) but it's miles better than the bullshit in MW2. Literally the only thing MW2 and W@W were better at was balanced stages.

 

[Lunchbox]

Were they using the same engine? I thought COD4 had most of the improvements, but WaW and Black Ops felt like an upgraded COD3 engine.

they all run on a modified quake engine

 

[sajj316]

they all run on a modified quake engine

Right, the core engine is id Tech 3 (I think)

 

[SolidSnakex]

Given the complexity and variations of ALL platforms, I would say such an engine is not as universally compliant as we might assume.

IW didn't seem to have a problem with it. Yes, there were differences but nothing really significant in a way to turn you off one version of the game. In the case of Black Ops the game runs at an even lower resolution (960x544) compared to the other games (1040x604) and despite that the game still has a lower framerate than the other versions of the game. It's ridiculous and makes perfect sense that many gamers wouldn't be so forgiving of such a botch of a port.

 

[RedStep]

People buying the same $60 game over and over again year after year with only slight variations of the others slapped with a different title as confirmed to me how the masses are mindless 'sheeple.'

Good for you Activision. You can bank on churning out yearly variations of the same game with no incentive for creativity or innovation. Man, what an easy money maker.

American Idol is still the highest rated show, a cliche, formulaic movie about blue aliens is the highest grossing movie, people with no talent are famous (Kardashians) and rappers like Lil Wayne sell millions of records. Surely America is declining.

You figured it all out, dude.

 

[NullPointer]

they all run on a modified quake engine

Yeah, I'm mostly trying to figure out the code branch between IW and Treyarch.

OK, so did COD4 work fine on the PS3? And if so, why all the problems with the current version? (So I've heard. I've only bought them on the 360).

And MW2 was the first COD that ditched infinite enemies for the majority of the campaign. I take it that's why we didn't see some of those same improvements in BLOPS?

 

[Lothars]

Exactly how I feel. It's redeemed my faith in COD.

I am honestly surprised by that, I mean MW2 wasn't a great game but neither is Black Ops, it has an decent multiplayer but a pretty mediocre singleplayer heck i would say MW2 and Black Ops are about equal but they both don't hold a candle to COD4.

 

[jedimike]

The PS3 has been out for four years. FOUR FUCKING YEARS! And developers consistently drop the ball because they refuse to learn something that could possibly have mind blowing results (Have you seen Sony's first party games?!) All it takes is some dedication to learn the hardware and once you do that's it, it gets even easier. But no, they want to take they want to half ass EVERYTHING and try and cut corners.

You're not seeing the big picture. Of course 1st part studios can do it because they only have to program for one specific set of architecture and typically take much more time. When you make a multiplatform game, you have to account for two (or more) very different architectures. Compromises have to be made to get the game out the door to meet very strict release dates. No way would Activision allow Treyarch to push the game back to polish the PS3 version.

 

[sajj316]

Yeah, I'm mostly trying to figure out the code branch between IW and Treyarch.

OK, so did COD4 work fine on the PS3? And if so, why all the problems with the current version? (So I've heard. I've only bought them on the 360).

And MW2 was the first COD that ditched infinite enemies for the majority of the campaign. I take it that's why we didn't see some of those same improvements in BLOPS?

Yes. I played COD4 on the PS3 to death and despite network hiccups the first couple of weeks, it was great!!!

Yes, IW did not give code to Treyarch for BLOPS. They just enhanced on what they did with WaW and re-programmed in some aspects of MW2 while improving it.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

You missed the point... individual friends lists are irrelevant. I'm quite certain that if Sony were to publish on-line stats, Black Ops would be the most played game.

I understand the PS3 version is not as polished as Xbox (par for the course with most multiplatform titles), but that doesn't mean the PS3 version is unplayable or isn't getting played.

I think the negative feedback stems a lot from PS3 owners just being butt hurt that Black Ops provides a better experience for 360 owners. But hey, that's the price of playing on a console with the least sales. Developers have to spend the majority of their resources where they can get the biggest return on investment. Economics 101.

This would hold weight if COD4 and MW2 weren't complete contradictions. My friends list which has only grown in the years since MW2 was completely dominated by COD4 for almost a year and a half and MW2 for a solid year. BLOPS has been out for only a couple months and already there is a significant drop-off from the first 2 weeks when everyone was playing it.

 

[mYm|17|]

The multiplayer is really chock full of great ideas the execution is horrid. The game is almost unplayable sometimes if your connection is not humming.

I'm getting so frustrated since I am losing so many 1v1's even though it seems I'm getting the headsup on the person but killcam says otherwise.

 

[SolidSnakex]

OK, so did COD4 work fine on the PS3? And if so, why all the problems with the current version? (So I've heard. I've only bought them on the 360).

All IW made CoD's run fine on the PS3. That basic engine is what Treyarch has and that's why people aren't willing to cut them any slack for the way that Black Ops turned out. Given how much the series sales and the fact that the engine was designed to run well on all platforms, there's just no excuse for how it turned out on the PS3. You've got developers making multiplatform games that won't sell anywhere near as well as Black Ops and yet they somehow managed to figure out how to spread resources so that all platforms have versions of the game that run well yet a company making a game that's going to sell 10m+ in around a month can't figure out how to do that?

 

[palpabl_purpura]

Last year after I was suckered into buying MW2, I said I will never buy another COD game on day 1. It looks like that advice to myself paid off. The PS3 version was half done. I refuse to spend $$ for a poor quality product.

 

[jedimike]

IW didn't seem to have a problem with it. Yes, there were differences but nothing really significant in a way to turn you off one version of the game. In the case of Black Ops the game runs at an even lower resolution (960x544) compared to the other games (1040x604) and despite that the game still has a lower framerate than the other versions of the game. It's ridiculous and makes perfect sense that many gamers wouldn't be so forgiving of such a botch of a port.

Who knows what hurdles they were facing... they added in bots, co-op, a more polished zombie mode, etc. The MP implementation is vastly improved from MW2. I can't tell you why the PS3 version is not as polished as MW2.

But I refuse to believe it is because the developers are lazy or they don't care about PS3 owners or any other BS statements.

One thing I think Activision has done right is split the franchise between the studios. It creates competition and I'm positive that Treyarch wants their CoD to be better than IW's COD. Whatever PS3 issues remain (it has been patched twice) will likely be ironed out soon.

 

[EricHasNoPull]

Since I don't play online FPS games much.

The best four words I could use to describe Black OPs is: Good, Quick, Disposable Fun

 

[Nizz]

Yeah, I'm mostly trying to figure out the code branch between IW and Treyarch.

OK, so did COD4 work fine on the PS3? And if so, why all the problems with the current version? (So I've heard. I've only bought them on the 360).

And MW2 was the first COD that ditched infinite enemies for the majority of the campaign. I take it that's why we didn't see some of those same improvements in BLOPS?

PS3 version of COD4 was one of the first multiplatform titles to look pretty close on both systems. The SP did dip in framerate a little more than the 360. But where the meat of the game is, the MP, PS3 version ran fine.

Matter of fact I popped in COD4 the other night for some MP and was pretty surprised how much better it ran than Black Ops. In Black Ops, the game doesn't have that 60fps "feel". I say feel because even if the game's not running at a full 60fps, it at least hangs in the 50's and still feels pretty smooth.

From what I understand, Black Ops uses the COD4 engine which powered that game plus W@W. Those games ran fine, which is why it's baffling why Black Ops runs like it does on PS3. Certain maps can be pretty rough with the framerate (Jungle and Firing Range come to mind).

 

[sajj316]

PS3 version of COD4 was one of the first multiplatform titles to look pretty close on both systems. The SP did dip in framerate a little more than the 360. But where the meat of the game is, the MP, PS3 version ran fine.

Matter of fact I popped in COD4 the other night for some MP and was pretty surprised how much better it ran than Black Ops. In Black Ops, the game doesn't have that 60fps "feel". I say feel because even if the game's not running at a full 60fps, it at least hangs in the 50's and still feels pretty smooth.

From what I understand, Black Ops uses the COD4 engine which powered that game plus W@W. Those games ran fine, which is why it's baffling why Black Ops runs like it does on PS3. Certain maps can be pretty rough with the framerate (Jungle and Firing Range come to mind).

There is still a COD4 community that plays this game on PS3? Haven't played MW2 in months, I assume the community is still live and kicking ..


regarding that pick by EricHasNoPull ... I just spit up my coffee ...

 

[SolidSnakex]

But I refuse to believe it is because the developers are lazy or they don't care about PS3 owners or any other BS statements.

Whatever that reason may be one thing is for sure and that is that Black Ops is a bad port (one of the worst on the platform given the situation). And that's something that an IW developed CoD has never been described as.

 

[Square Triangle]

Joystiq



Wow. That's a loooooooooooooooot of money. It's a shame it had to be the worst(and only bad) COD game released to do it.

Let's concentrate on this.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Still didn't get any of my money, Bobbeh.

 

[Nizz]

There is still a COD4 community that plays this game on PS3? Haven't played MW2 in months, I assume the community is still live and kicking ..


regarding that pick by EricHasNoPull ... I just spit up my coffee ...

Yep, believe it or not I had no problems finding a game (I jumped into TDM). I'm sure there's way less people than before, so you might get put into a game with people further away from you, but I was getting three green bars.

I'm sure the MW2 community is still going strong on PS3.

Whatever PS3 issues remain (it has been patched twice) will likely be ironed out soon.

I doubt they can fix the framerate with a patch.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I doubt they can fix the framerate with a patch.

That seems like a safe bet since it seems like they're struggling to even make it so that PS3 players can play online without any hassle.

 

[rvy]

.. so Kotick wiped his ass (past tense) with your money ...

Yes. But you don't feel so bad once you realize that, at least, you're not giving money to a shitty developer.

 

[sajj316]

Yes. But you don't feel so bad once you realize that, at least, you're not giving money to a shitty developer.

I don't think the good developer got their money .. seems Bobby rather set his iron sight to their forehead. At least they re-spawned

 

[rvy]

I don't think the good developer got their money .. seems Bobby rather set his iron sight to their forehead. At least they re-spawned

And the future shall be glorious.

 

[Lackmus]

Quad core processor with 2 4890s in crossfire and no problem here. The core duos seem to be hurting though Treyarch isn't the best at optimizing their engine.

It requires a modern computer. I was bummed when my 486 stopped running games too.

i7 and GTX 460 here, still 10FPS with constant drops.

 

[Scott32020]

1. CoD3 is by far the worst.

And yet it was the first Call of Duty game I played, which got my hooked and I couldn't even play multiplayer :lol (played on PS2, only have network connection)

 

[Mooreberg]

Looking forward to hearing EA's take on this

"We have Battlefield 3 coming out next year!!! What do you mean people on consoles don't care about objectives? They like to run around and shoot people? We're publishing Bullet Storm!"

Gotta be ridiculous to be one of the guys who had a hand in creating this franchise and then getting it swiped from you. What is the status of that lawsuit?

 

[jedimike]

Whatever that reason may be one thing is for sure and that is that Black Ops is a bad port (one of the worst on the platform given the situation). And that's something that an IW developed CoD has never been described as.

But is it really a "bad" port? Or is it more a case of GAF coming to conclusions based on a vocal minority? I honestly don't know because all of my close friends have 360's. The few people I know in real life who have PS3's and bought Black Ops haven't been complaining. The conversation "at the water cooler" is more about the gameplay... What weapon do you like? What prestige are you? Not once, from PS3 owners I know, have I heard, "this game sucks", "I can't ever connect", or "the framerate is terrible." or any of the other GAF negative responses to the port.

I'm not saying they don't exist... I'm just saying does it qualify as a "bad" port? Or is the game generally an enjoyable experience for the 8+ million owners?

The one complaint I have heard is about hit detection. But that is common across both platforms and was bad in MW2 as well.