Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 - DF face-off

AzaK said:
Yeah.



No, it''ll be pretty funny seeing how little work developers put into ports.

EDIT: Damn I fell for the bait!
Click to expand...

Nah everyone has seen much better on the PS3 but sometimes they get ports like this from rushing devs... I'm sure we would not jump to conclusions about the Wii U if that port ended up on the low end.

ah who am I kidding?
 
Just curious, would people be happier if they just left the low rez jaggies in the PS3 version without the AA filter? I'd like to see what that would have looked like...
 
Waaghals said:
Sure, but there really aren't that many 60 hz fps' around. There is Rage, that on X360 stays at 720p most of the time, but it is pretty graphically simple. No self shadowing etc.

A frame in BO2 is being rendered in half the time as a frame in Halo 4 or Killzone 3.

It isn't good, but it is most certainly understandable. What isn't understandable however is the god awful blur in the PS3 version.
Click to expand...
I don't play CoD, but I'm a fan of that decision. For me resolution is not nearly as important as framerate. Kudos to developers that are making the 60FPS effort.
Horsemama1956 said:
What's with the naked black dudes in the comment section? Be aware if you're at work.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the warning.
 
Z3M0G said:
Just curious, would people be happier if they just left the low rez jaggies in the PS3 version without the AA filter? I'd like to see what that would have looked like...
Click to expand...

I think people would be happy if it was on par with the 360 version.

I really don't see why this isn't the case. There is no excuse.
 
Mileena said:
This whole post is void because the Modern Warfare games on PS3 are about as good as the 360 ones. The only reason for this is that Treyarch are cluefucks.
Click to expand...

SolidSnakex said:
And yet Infinity Ward figures out how to put out quality ports on the PS3 and they've been doing it since the very first game they released on the console. There's no excuse for bullshit like this.
Click to expand...

Treyarch and Activision could have and should have done a better job but I still believe that the PS3's unique architecture is a major factor for why many multiplatform ports have suffered on the platform. Quality developers can certainly do a great job on the machine and it's more than capable. There are plenty of examples to prove that. However, if porting was simpler, which it should be next gen if the rumors are true and neither console manufacturer cripples their machine with poor hardware, then it becomes a non-issue and lower quality developers don't end up making noticeably inferior products on your platform.
 
JudgeN said:
God damn @ that comment section.
Click to expand...

Thankfully it no longer has the gay porn and just a pic of some balding guy... I'm at work for crying out loud.

Edit: Ah, the pics are probably blocked by my network... but now I'm probably flagged. lol
 
Felix Lighter said:
Treyarch and Activision could have and should have done a better job but I still believe that the PS3's unique architecture is a major factor for why many multiplatform ports have suffered on the platform. Quality developers can certainly do a great job on the machine and it's more than capable. There are plenty of examples to prove that. However, if porting was simpler, which it should be next gen if the rumors are true and neither console manufacturer cripples their machine with poor hardware, then it becomes a non-issue and lower quality developers don't end up making noticeably inferior products on your platform.
Click to expand...
Yeah it really is unfortunate. Obviously part of the blame goes to the developers but part of it has to go to Sony as well.
 
Rainy Dog said:
To quote myself from the official thread.

Treyarch need to repatch the game and correct whatever screwed up the AA in the last patch. And DF need to retest the PS3 version.

Seriously PS3 owners, try it.
Click to expand...

I'll try this for sure, but Im at work right now have to wait a few hours.
 
That PS3 blur filter should've been applied on that gay porn. Maybe everything would have been unrecognisable. Now I'm mentally scarred.
 
Valkyr Junkie said:
Have you posted this anywhere else? Might try reaching out to Sony or Treyarch's twitter feed if this is accurate and no place else picks up on it.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't use Twitter.

Can somebody else please verify it and tweet/contact Treyarch? Really important this gets sorted I feel.

Cheers.
 
Jack Scofield said:
Lol and people try referring to Treyarch as the a-team developer now? It's too bad COD was left in bad hands after IW was gutted.
Click to expand...

however the PS3 version turned out technically, BLOPS2 sure isn't resting on any laurels from a game design standpoint. if all you rate a game on is 'does the PS3 version have parity with the 360 version' then sure, IW are the better team.

if you can look past that for a minute, you'd understand where the praise is coming from.
 
chalkitdown1 said:
Much better.

Also, that comment section, holy shit. lol
Click to expand...

I like to dream as big as you. But 720p 60fps shooters with that engine is out of the question.

Not even Naughty Dog could pull that off. There is not enough RAM...


alr1ght said:
Has there been any footage other than some ugly youtube videos?
Click to expand...

It looked "crisper". And it's allegedly stated to be in HD. That's an automatic win over the previous consoles.
 
PC at 1080p and 8x MSAA running at 60 fps locked with DOF and everything else up full looks really nice.

Runs at a far higher framerate than 60 but I prefer a stable image with no tearing than a 100 - 120 fps.
 
Those comments.

QiR10.gif
 
Haven't read the article, but regarding the IQ, I don't understand why they bothered using any AA for the ps3 version. I'm sure no AA would have been preferred over what we see here.

NinjaFridge said:
Isn't PS3 pretty good at MLAA (or whatever they used on GOW3)? Why don't they use that? It couldn't be any worse than what they ended up with.
Click to expand...

MLAA is expensive and they may not have been able to fit it in their performance budget.

purple cobra said:
That's the most surprising thing. With IW basically gutted they were still able to produce the closest parity yet between PS3 and 360. WTF....
Click to expand...

Haven't played either BLOPS2 or MW3 but maybe BLOPS2 is just a more demanding game?
 
Reiko said:
I like to dream as big as you. But 720p 60fps shooters with that engine is out of the question.

Not even Naughty Dog could pull that off. There is not enough RAM...




It looked "crisper". And it's allegedly stated to be in HD. That's an automatic win over the previous consoles.
Click to expand...

well, the issue with the PS3 version always seems to be that RSX can't get the frames out as quickly as the 360 version can. the Wii U shouldn't break a sweat with a game like this at 60 fps. I don't think it's taxing the CPU.

where Treyarch seem to struggle is offloading more of the work to cell, which is why generally we see the PS3 version running at lower resolutions and/or dropping below 60 more frequently than the 360 version.

if they didn't try and spruce things up at all, I don't see how the Wii U version would run worse than the 360 version. the GPU is much more capable than what's in the 360.
 
Reiko said:
TIME. FOR. NEW. CONSOLES.
Click to expand...

How does that prevent throwing up stuff on the next platform? Even if the hardware ends up similar they know they churn it out and Sony can't turn them down.

Really wish Sony got sued for twice their licensing fees to ensure that they wouldn't be so complacent in regards to the stream of defective software on the their platform.
 
KageMaru said:
Haven't read the article, but regarding the IQ, I don't understand why they didn't just not use any AA for the ps3 version. I'm sure that would have been preferred over what we see here.



MLAA is expensive and they may not have been able to fit it in their performance budget.



Haven't played either BLOPS2 or MW3 but maybe BLOPS2 is just a more demanding game?
Click to expand...

BLOPS was terribly optimized too, it wasn't just BLOPS2. Treyarch are just incompetent at programming for the PS3. It's pretty ridiculous when they've been using the same exact engine for 5 years and another team that has had to replace more than half of the original talent is kicking your ass.
 
plagiarize said:
well, the issue with the PS3 version always seems to be that RSX can't get the frames out as quickly as the 360 version can. the Wii U shouldn't break a sweat with a game like this at 60 fps. I don't think it's taxing the CPU.

where Treyarch seem to struggle is offloading more of the work to cell, which is why generally we see the PS3 version running at lower resolutions and/or dropping below 60 more frequently than the 360 version.

if they didn't try and spruce things up at all, I don't see how the Wii U version would run worse than the 360 version. the GPU is much more capable than what's in the 360.
Click to expand...

They could have tried a dynamic framebuffer setup like RAGE/Doom 3 on consoles.


sleepykyo said:
How does that prevent throwing up stuff on the next platform? Even if the hardware ends up similar they know they churn it out and Sony can't turn them down.

Really wish Sony got sued for twice their licensing fees to ensure that they wouldn't be so complacent in regards to the stream of defective software on the their platform.
Click to expand...

Next Gen Consoles are just modified PCs in a box. All Activision has to do is copy paste the PC version code if the graphics engine isn't being updated.
 
Tallshortman said:
BLOPS was terribly optimized too, it wasn't just BLOPS2. Treyarch are just incompetent at programming for the PS3. It's pretty ridiculous when they've been using the same exact engine for 5 years and another team that has had to replace more than half of the original talent is kicking your ass.
Click to expand...
I thought WaW was more of a match, or am I misremembering?
 
Tallshortman said:
BLOPS was terribly optimized too, it wasn't just BLOPS2. Treyarch are just incompetent at programming for the PS3. It's pretty ridiculous when they've been using the same exact engine for 5 years and another team that has had to replace more than half of the original talent is kicking your ass.
Click to expand...

Yeah I understand that BLOPs was unoptimized, but I'm wondering more about BLOPS2 right now. =p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
DF: Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 - Every console tested
5
738
CyberCali replied
DF - Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 PS5 Pro Upgrades Tested + Tech Deep Dive!
46
6K
winjer replied
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 | Review Thread
32
4K
SteadyEvo replied
  • Locked
Report: Call of Duty Black Ops 6 budget was 450m-$700m
Rumor 
1
549
CyberCali replied
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 - Launch Trailer
Trailer  2
93
6K
Windle Poons replied
Top Bottom