Call of Duty: Ghosts Visual Difference Is "An Individual Call"

[Strazdas]

I have a 4k PC Monitor and I have seen a few videos and games that allow 4k resolution. I still don't see that huge of a difference of what is supposedly twice as powerful as 1080p. I see even less of a difference between 720p and 1080p. It doesn't make that big of difference. It never has. The details are so minute, as I have said multiple times now that whining and complaining about it is just a sad, sad act.

The difference between 720p and 1080p and between 1080p and 4k is more noticable because 720p is significantly worse than 1080p comparin the two comparisons. the effect is higher because the more detailed things goes the less human eye actually cares. while it does surely see the difference, it is not 2x as effective. Also you have to realized that there are really no video games that run with 4k resolution graphics. yes they can do the 4k resolution in pixels, but their textures are still usually not even 1080p, so you end up seeing same tecture pixel over 4 or mroe pixels on your screen and thus dont see a difference. im not familiar with 4k video material to argue the non-games part though.
You say you see "less" difference, and that would mean that you do actually see a difference - the point i was making - people actually SEE a difference.
The details are minute, of course. we can watch VHS, who needs DVDs, the difference isnt that big right?

So both the XboxOne and your father's TV are both using Compressed upscaling?

I wonder if that's going to be a continual theme with the xbox one and all the system resource intensive titles.

My fathers TV do. As far as XboxOne, we dont really know yet. It claims it does not do upscaling, isntead it runs this particular game in 720p instead of 1080p. whether these launch game problems are just game developers not doig well enough with new system or inherent problem of XboxOne being underpwoered remains to see, but so far it does nto look good for Xbox.
What we KNOW uses upscaling is Xbox360 and PS3, because neither of the two runs on native 720p (PS3 is closer, but not 720p).

correct me if im wrong, but didnt Infinity said they sort of built a new engine for Ghost, something they havent done for other CODs?

You're not wrong, but Infinity Ward were talking out of their collective arse, as developers are want to do when it comes to hyping their new product.

IW6 (Ghosts) is a modification of the engine that Modern Warfare 3 ran on, which in turn is a modification of what ran Black Ops, Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 (although they renamed it IW4.0 for MW2), which in turn is based on IW2.0, which is itself an in-house upgrade of Id Tech 3.

Licensing game engine software is hugely lucrative, yet despite having this 'Roll Royce' software available Activision licenses it out to precisely nobody, they don't even use it on in house projects beyond Call of Duty (and one Bond game), because when it comes down to it, they don't own the keys to that particular license and likely never will.

I see, so it isnt the taunted new engine and just rebranded old one. Sigh, i do hope they do make new engines because current ones as streamlined as they are do are outdated by now. yes its expensive investment but who else than somoen that sells so many million games. besides as you say its very lucrative business. I mean look at Unreal Engine, the thing is ancient, and yet still reeks in masive profit and keeps a company of fools afloat.

 

[fix-the-spade]

I see, so it isnt the taunted new engine and just rebranded old one. Sigh, i do hope they do make new engines because current ones as streamlined as they are do are outdated by now.

I don't think it's really a problem to be honest, yes it's old technology but it's also well understood and much cheaper relatively than building from scratch, I don't think it particularly holds games back. Also, building your own game engine is so hugely expensive that you can have dumb situations like Tomb Raider selling 5 million copies, but still being a commercial failure. I think it's preferable to to be paying $2 per sale (or something) to Id/Bethesda or Epic/Valve etc than to lose half a game's budget before you can even start building models.

I don't like companies making out that their tech is all new all the time when it's not, but that's just marketing for you. We've still a long way to go to match aviation though, they've got Airbuses and Boeings trucking around on variants of engines first run in 1969!

 

[JazzJack2]

The difference between 720p and 1080p is so minute it doesn't make a difference.

Given that 1080p has more than double the number of pixels as 720p I think it's a little bit more than a minute difference, it certainly is to me anyway, I can tell the difference between the two almost right away and 720p makes games draining to play.

 

[Strazdas]

I see, so it isnt the taunted new engine and just rebranded old one. Sigh, i do hope they do make new engines because current ones as streamlined as they are do are outdated by now.

I don't think it's really a problem to be honest, yes it's old technology but it's also well understood and much cheaper relatively than building from scratch, I don't think it particularly holds games back. Also, building your own game engine is so hugely expensive that you can have dumb situations like Tomb Raider selling 5 million copies, but still being a commercial failure. I think it's preferable to to be paying $2 per sale (or something) to Id/Bethesda or Epic/Valve etc than to lose half a game's budget before you can even start building models.

I don't like companies making out that their tech is all new all the time when it's not, but that's just marketing for you. We've still a long way to go to match aviation though, they've got Airbuses and Boeings trucking around on variants of engines first run in 1969!

Right so i dg up though my memory this night while laying in bed and i think i did start this wouthout a reason. this is because i think i mixed COD with BF, as BF4 supposedly has new engine. or i could be mixing it up again. who knows.


I think its a problem when you start sering comments like "we would ahve done this but we couldnt due to engine limitation". Yes well understood and cheap, but being made so long ago it has some limitations, that while can be modified out, cosndering how much modifying has been done you may jsut as well make a new engine.
Tomb Raider kind of failed because while it had good engine it has bad everything else. To kickstart an expesive engine you need a really good game. However i do think that they will sell license of Tomb Riders engine (i got no idea what its name is) and that could still bring in profit in the long term. but hey, what company thing of long term, all we care are short term maximizing profits right?

The engines in airplanes are certainly not what they were in 1969. That would b like saying all combustion engines are just ariants of same combustion engine, which in a way could make sense, but that means that its not possible to ever make new combustion engine, and would in this alegory mean that all game engines are really same engine back from pacman times, just modified. so suck statements is kind of pointless.