-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Call of Duty 4: Exploding Car Clone Wars Official Thread
- Thread starter chapel
- Start date
Woo-Fu
Banned
I think COD4 is just making a different trade-off than Gears, GRAW, or Resistance made.
COD4 is spending its horsepower on having much more action in the environment than any of the rest of those titles and the tradeoff is that it isn't going to excel in comparison when evaluating specific graphical features.
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts at times, though, IMHO.
I'm playing it on PC and when I first played the demo it was an immediate letdown compared to the footage I saw come out of E3.
I suppose my biggest complaint is how incredibly small the multiplayer maps are. Take Karkand, and put all the grenade spam into one block instead of the entire map and you'll have your typical CoD4 map.
COD4 is spending its horsepower on having much more action in the environment than any of the rest of those titles and the tradeoff is that it isn't going to excel in comparison when evaluating specific graphical features.
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts at times, though, IMHO.
I'm playing it on PC and when I first played the demo it was an immediate letdown compared to the footage I saw come out of E3.
I suppose my biggest complaint is how incredibly small the multiplayer maps are. Take Karkand, and put all the grenade spam into one block instead of the entire map and you'll have your typical CoD4 map.
Looking at these framerate issues...TTP said:
The bridge mission pictured above is a good test. When that mission starts, the framerate is not a solid 60 fps when facing straight ahead. Could someone test this on 360? Go to that point and spin around. Do you see any mild hitching?
Hmmm, while it certainly has more action than GRAW or Gears, I wouldn't say they are throwing around more than Resistance. There were some massive battles in Resistance...
CajoleJuice
Member
Anyone that wants to talk about the game and not the graphics, come into the online thread!
MickeyKnox
Member
Yeah.... Is it a resolution issue, does 1920x1080 just show the flaws more or what?
Fantastic.
Fantastic.
Phoenix
Member
FartOfWar said:
The experience of this cannot be taken without the context to the missions bound to it. This mission completes the experience of the fight on the ground. Taken by itself - sure you could probably do similar in Flash 9 since the detail required is negligible and can be implemented by sprites since the path is fixed (level on rails). So I'll stand by my statement as part of the larger mission in which it takes place, it is an excellent gameplay experience.
I know how framerates work and realize that slowdown would vary slightly from version to version, but you can honestly confirm that the 360 version does, in fact, drop frames fairly often?f@luS said:
Well, to be fair, that first training area was REALLLLY bland looking compared to other missions in the game.
anachronous_one
Prologue Type S Alpha
.urk said:
What this thread has devolved into is not up to my standards.
Synless
Member
I've been playing both versions, My brother has the 360 version and I have the ps3 and I'm convinced they run at the same framerate, they both dip depending on how much is going on trust me it's not just a ps3 issue.dark10x said:
*Edit* I don't mean the slowdown happens in the same area's but both versions have it. Seriously though the slowdown is so minor it is barely noticable I can't figure out how it bothers some people.
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
MickeyKnox said:
Sure thing. Don't forget "sharp knees" as well.
It takes 2 seconds from execute to main menu, 3 seconds to connect to the server I frequent in my favorites, and 4 seconds to load the map. It takes 11 seconds total to go from desktop to choosing my loadout. I could probably shave that time by using Xfire and bypassing the main menu and server browser.
The game loads faster than CS 1.6. Good stuff!
The game loads faster than CS 1.6. Good stuff!
Big-E said:
I didn't say Resistance MP is better. Or didn't mean to. All I wanted to say is that Resistance impresses me more that COD4 technically. Even if it's "just" 30fps. The only thing that annoys me about the COD4 MP is the shimmering/jaggies that weren't there in the 360 beta. And that aren't there in Resistance as well. They are not terribly bad, but they are there. And this is enough for me to say that 360 version is > PS3 version.
Heck, even Warhawk pushes more stuff around than COD4 considering the hugeness of it and the amount of shit going on in the air and on the ground. Basically, Resistance and Warhawk (and R&C) clearly show the difference between a port and a game made just for the PS3.
Phoenix
Member
The one thing that somewhat bothered me with their realism is when they broke it on the missile base mission:
While I know they did it for dramatic effect, once an ICBM drops its last stage (which they showed in an animation - its entirely ballistic at that point and you can upload as many codes as you want, there is no engine left to change its course. The only thing that can be done is to disarm the warheads themselves, but their trajectory is pretty much defined by physics. And yes I know this to be a fact 
Look it up if you like.
Look it up if you like.rubso said:
CoD4's lighting is the exact same as Resistance's lighting...it's totally faked. That's the reason the game can keep 60fps. If it had real lighting I'd be surprised if it could hold 30fps. Still, they do a daaaaamn good job at faking it and it looks really nice in some missions like the daylight ones.
The fake lighting is pretty much the only reason I like the graphics but aren't "wow, best looking game ever!" about it. Halo 3 and Bioshock were more impressive framerate aside.
Anyhow, game is great. After doing a few missions on regular I restarted on hardened and it seems about the same for the most part difficulty-wise, so I'll stick with hardened for the rest of the way.
CajoleJuice
Member
I saw a fellow MP player cast a shadow on a wall when standing next to a flaming barrel. It was all wavy too. It was awesome.Synless said:
God, why I am jumping into this discussion?
Synless
Member
In single player there are more then enough times when I stand in front of a light and nothing gets casted on a wall, I'm not saying it doesn't happen at all but it certainly doesn't happen when it should.CajoleJuice said:
And I am talking from experience of the ps3 version that I own, I'll post some pics when I get out of class tonight for you non-believers and it's the same for the 360 version I played at my brothers.
CajoleJuice
Member
Yea, I don't know why I decided to jump in. I just felt compelled because that was one graphical touch I managed to notice in the madness of MP.Synless said:
This is the DS version, btw.
actually no, the true HDR lighting in CoD4 is just insane imo, it cast shadows very well, and it casts dynamic shadows as well, so it feels like real life.Bebpo said:
simply put, comparing RFOM lighting to CoD4 lighting is wrong.
maintaining 60fps is another story, less polycount, more mapping, texture quality, ....
I'm gonna go back and play some MP matches.
Shadows have nothing to do with HDR.rubso said:
"HDR" is thrown around too easily these days and I do not believe CoD4 is actually performing any such operations. It's true that when walking from a dark room into a bright environment you will see a brightness shift, but that is the only example and it does not function as you'd expect in most situations.
It's honestly a corrugated tin roof. You can see the pattern along the front, and towards the back on the right. The sheets of metal are sitting on top of the plywood =)Woo-Fu said:Is that a corrugated tin roof or are those jaggies on the top of the watch tower?
Pride, lad. Pride.Eric WK said:
anachronous_one
Prologue Type S Alpha
dark10x said:
dark10x said:
dark10x said:
Since we're down to nitpicking . . . "CoD4 is not performing any such operations, but there is an example of it performing such an operation"?
Next you're going to tell me that VF5 on the PS3 displays at a higher resolution in 720p mode than in 1080p mode.
dark10x said:
The only time I've really noticed a framerate drop was when I was essentially standing inside three collective rpg trails, and trying to fight. I've got a pretty keen eye for framerates, and the 360 version is certainly consistent to the point that there's no reason anyone should even be complaining about it.
And the shadows in call of duty 4 are great. Everything has them!