Call of Duty popular because it feels 'fluid' claims Treyarch

Design director David Vonderhaar says running at 60 frames per second is "super essential"; DICE defends 30fps rate on console.

The secret to Call of Duty's mass popularity is due, in part, to how smoothly the game runs, according to Treyarch design director David Vonderhaar. Speaking to Eurogamer, the developer explained that running at 60 frames per second is an absolute necessity for the series.

Call of Duty's fluidity is of utmost importance, according to Vonderhaar.

"We think 60 frames is super essential," he said. "Any time you have any kind of input latency at all, players can feel that. I'm pretty convinced Call of Duty is as popular as it is because of how fluid it can feel. You can feel the difference, and we go to a lot of trouble to try to keep the game running at 60 frames all the time."

Vonderhaar's comments came as part of a larger feature that looked at the frames-per-second debate between first-person shooter franchises Call of Duty and Battlefield. DICE executive producer Patrick Bach defended Battlefield's console rate of 30 frames per second, saying, "In the end, everything is a compromise."

"On console we have to make some compromises," Bach said. "We love our vehicles and we love our destruction and we love the pretty graphics and the awesome sound. We think 30 is pretty decent. Some people complain because it's a number, and you can compare numbers. And then there are a few people who complain because they say it's a worse experience. That group has their needs and their urges, and then you have the other group that says, you know what? I'd rather have destruction, vehicles, graphics, audio because it's fun. So, it's a compromise."

Written By

Want the latest news about Call of Duty: Black Ops II?

Call of Duty: Black Ops II

Call of Duty: Black Ops II

Discussion

447 comments
realguitarhero5
realguitarhero5

That's probably true.  It's not like people buy it for the balance or developer support...

fps_d0minat0r
fps_d0minat0r

so in conclusion.....BF3 need a better frame rate and COD needs better resolution.

until then, most people will play the game which is more fun which is COD at the moment.

ActionHero29
ActionHero29

60 frames per second is what sold me. gives you full control of your character and that's why the multiplayer became so popular.

Mortos13
Mortos13

I dont give a damn about your crappy graphics. I care if the game is fun. And the cod series, i lost hope after they hypothetically decided that they just cant make a Call of Duty 5.... Bring on the clones!! they said

djpetitte
djpetitte

i wish they would include that Cod's native resolution is 600p LMAO

wexorian
wexorian

I want to thank Activision with voice from most players in world ,we are happy to see New game every year thank you.. we all  agree with this 199%, We love Outdated graphic games, with Soo manny inovations every year with thousand DLC every month (i'm getting exicted with every new map Bought every dlc wohooo ), i'ts so cool Gj ,Treyarch is doing most amazing and hard thing ever, it's damn hard to do ctrl+a ctrl+v. Soo EA greedy bastards we Don't need way more Cool BF games from you we Don't like amazing graphics with Frostbite engine 2.0, neither we want tank, jets and Helicopters we want Buggy crap game tha get's boring in 1 week. Suck it noobs :)))) 

Bangerman15
Bangerman15

or you can play pc and get 60fps on both games lol

rmthomson2
rmthomson2

Bf3 is really for next gen console just they ain't here yet. Had to sacrifice heaps just to get it to run on current gen.

destroyeur
destroyeur

It's funny that someone at Treyarch says that, when Modern Warfare is perfectly fluid while World at War and Black Ops are clunky and jittery at times.

Kenji_Masamune
Kenji_Masamune

treyarch is gutter filth and bastardize everything they touch.  Don't get me wrong, Infinity ward is no better, since all the main players left, leaving only the interns, temps and gofers behind to tend to the franchise.  

theshonen8899
theshonen8899

So this is how they defend their crappy graphics.

shinobiprophetx
shinobiprophetx

Meh, FPS is only necessary for reaction time in Multiplayer. Most films are shot in 24FPS and no one knows the difference. 

ScouseLemon
ScouseLemon

Call of Duty popular because it feels 'fluid' and is 'easy mode' claims Treyarch

 

Fixed.

Eruu
Eruu

These kids nowdays are so blind you could release a Call of duty Easy-bake Oven they would still buy it, just look at the amount of COD Elite subcribers out there. Don't give us crap like ''it runs at 60fps'', they couldn't care less about that.

leandrro
leandrro

bf3 could push 45 frames on 600p, its so not important to have 60fps that they sacrificed that to have 720p

Nexrad
Nexrad

oh REALLY Treyarch?????? I didnt know it was popular because it was accessible...

 

what idiots. Yes we all know its very easy to play and supposedly runs at 60 FPS which means nothing at all. Most gamers have no idea what that even is let alone see a difference. If you claim theres a massive difference between 30 and 60 your a liar, there isnt. 

 

Its not hard when your garbage engine hasnt changed in a decade and looks so bad that your games look like they are xbox games. Games are not all about graphics but for a greedy company who has billions from this franchise youd think they would be able to have a dev team that could make a new engine every few years.

 

they obviously have to market these things about their games because what else do they have? The same EXACT gameplay over and over with a few perks here and there and the same imbalanced kill streaks. The games should be like 29.99 and sold as DLC.

leandrro
leandrro

in truth cod is so inferior in any aspec to any modern multiplayer fps that they have to appeal to something as stupid as giving value to the fact the game is so old it runs at 60fps on 7 years old console hardware

leandrro
leandrro

 CALL OF DUTY DONT HAVE 60 FPS, it is reaches 60 fps in some moments but most of the time the fps count is very near bf3 console frame rate, check digital foundry frame rate analisys on black ops

TxtBin
TxtBin

Ironically I found Battlefield 3 to be much more smoother than MW3 (and also much more worthwhile).

leandrro
leandrro

some americans are stupid, some teenage americans are really stupid, teenage american console players are super stupid, teenage americans console players that never played a fps before 2007 are incredibly stupid, so when they released a "go be a super soldier in iraq" game in 2007 all these bunch of stupid people bought it, despite the fact that there was better shooters out there, with keyboard and mouse, for 32 plus players etc etc, activision released the right garbage in the right moment for the right stupid people, now they must stick with it to not disapoint the stupid

Mills79
Mills79

Everyone can hate on CoD all they want, but honestly this franchise is a "cash-cow" getting milked every year by their huge fanbase. It is the most anticipated game every year, and has the biggest midnight launch lines I have ever seen every year. They must be doing something right.

Eruu
Eruu

@wexorian As if Battlefiled is any better...

blackwing55
blackwing55

 @theshonen8899 Want crappy graphics go play ps2 personally as long as a game is good its fine by me. Battlefield may look good but it plays terrible.

realguitarhero5
realguitarhero5

 @shinobiprophetx Actually, most people I have talked to it about agree with me that 24fps takes a few minutes to get used to at a movie theater.  It is even more noticeable in a game.

Nexrad
Nexrad

 @Eruu i mean hell they have CoD edition JEEPs like WTF

 

its so bad its like WoW. I think its the dumbest game ive ever seen but over 11 miilion people were on it because it was a social gathering. People i watched play barely even played they just chatted. 

 

CoD is the same way its so easy and its socially accepted to where you jump on with all kinds of friends and anyone can be decent. This doesnt mean its "GOOD"

bobnice
bobnice

 @leandrro

 That is one fact that COD fanboys dont realize, COD runs at only 600p which is last gen resolution, then the xbox 360 and PS3 Hardware upscale it. Thats not anywhere close to current gen's 720p resolution. Its kind of like cheating the system.  And its also a big reason why COD games run at 60fps, that and the graphics are incredibly outdated as well. 

The1stFishBone
The1stFishBone

 @Nexrad " If you claim theres a massive difference between 30 and 60 your a liar, there isnt. "  These are the words of a massive, unbelievable, idiot. Also, THERE'S, ISN'T and YOU'RE! Do you know what an apostrophe is? Why is someone who is so ignorant that they have no experience looking at different refresh rates, feel they have a need to voice their opinion? Everyone can tell the difference visually if you put 30 and 60 fps side by side. Not to mention the improved control responsiveness that is also gained. from a higher refresh rate.

leandrro
leandrro

think about the cost per unit, 30 million copies and a development cost of less than U$3 millions, 1 tenth of dollar per copy, they could sell these games at 0,20 dollar (20 cents) and have a 50% profit as DLC

djpetitte
djpetitte

 @Nexrad 

I mostly agree except the 29.99 deal I think they would be totally worth it for less then that. lol

djpetitte
djpetitte

 @leandrro 

And dont forget to mention the very low native resolution of 600p upscaled.. any game would run flawless pushing that rez LOL

Curarai
Curarai

 @leandrro That's hardly fair and too broad of a statement. I love the Modern Warfare games as well as BF3, Halo and Killzone. I have played shooters before 2007, and still the MW games are probably my favorite shooters. When I pick it up it has a fluid and accurate feel I don't get out of any other game. Your assumption that only stupid people play it is baseless and stupid in itself. It's only been 3 games. Hardly enough to produce considerable fatigue unless you've been playing it too much, which is a different matter. Halo,Killzone,Uncharted, Gears of War and God of War hardly varied their formula. Patrick Bach put it well when he mentioned compromise.

Hey, if you don't like it just go ahead and play something else.

the_requiem
the_requiem

 @Mills79 It is easily explainable. What %ge of population you think have an IQ less than 100, from 100-120, from 120-140, 140-160 and above 160? The very stupid and very intelligent are in minority. Majority skews towards lower end of average. Quality never guarantees popularity and nor is popularity a mark of quality. It has always been like that. Avatar made more money than Avengers, Dark Night . Phantom Menance made more money than any other movie produced by George Lucas [including ones directed by Spielberg]. Twilight vampires are more popular than Bram Stoker's Dracula.

M3o5nster
M3o5nster

 @Mills79 They must've done* something right. - Fixed that for ya...

 

COD4:MW really put the game on the map, and now it's become more of a "all my friends are playing it" kind of thing.

blackwing55
blackwing55

 @Nexrad  @Eruu Yeah but when i play a game I hate it when it gets choppy and messes with my aim screen ect ect Plus look at battlefield premium how many people are on that everybody has their own cake.

Nexrad
Nexrad

 @leandrro lol i just threw out a number. Yes they could be more like 19.99 i was just saying they are not worth anywhere near 60$

blackwing55
blackwing55

 @djpetitte  @Nexrad Really I say almost no change inbetween battlefield 3 and bad company 2 actually I think Bc2 was much better.

leandrro
leandrro

 @Curarai you´re saying that you are not stupid to give 100% of your money to cod, you play a lot of diffent games, but these stupid people im talking about give 100% of their money to cod, giving activision a 90% market share of shooters before bf3, just like you i play a lot of shooters including cod wich was my top favorite until they insisted on using cod2 engine 

travo0159
travo0159

 @M3o5nster  @Mills79 must've implies they've already done something right and they aren't doing it anymore, they are still in the process of the right doing so that would go "must be doing something right"

djpetitte
djpetitte

That or your playing it on a low end pc or console.

leandrro
leandrro

 @Nexrad think about the cost and profit math, nobody thinks that cod fanboys are stupid as much as activision thinks, they are laughing everyday about it in their ferraris and lamborginis

Curarai
Curarai

 @leandrro "giving activision a 90% market share of shooters before bf3" That sounds like you have a specific preference which you are trying to defend. So what if they spend their money on it? They probably spend there money on Madden and Fifa too. It's the way things are. Look at the popularity of anything like movies such as Transformers and Twilight or technology like iPhone. You could argue that they don't deserve to be but it won't change anything. The call of Duty engine is fine and it makes sense to use it since it allows it to add plenty of enemy's and effects such as fire, smoke and other atmospheric effects while keeping the frame rate up. I personally like the way MW uses a kind of checkpoint system to make it feel like you are pushing forward and the enemies back. I like the Survival and the newly added Chaos mode. Not much into the multi-player since I'm not good at it or willing to put in that much time. I would almost pay full price for a game that consisted of the spec ops missions.

Something is always going to be the most popular. As long as you accept that fact then you don't have to get into a twist about it and waste your breath. Enjoy the games you enjoy playing and even dabble in the games you think you might not. Who knows you might enjoy some of them.

M3o5nster
M3o5nster

 @x_hunter00 He's saying popularity and past reputation have more to do with sales than the quality of the actual product. Since majority of people aren't very critical, it's easy to pass on an inferior product to the masses.

 

He basically took what I said, and gave some specific examples.