PS3's Aging Hardware is Limiting Call of Duty Says Sledgehammer CEO

Then why isnt DICE complaining about ps3 limiting battlefield 3? instead theyre trying to make it look the best it can for a console and that game has a next gen engine..

ksko

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

[QUOTE="gmaster456"] This guy speaks the truth (at least with this post)theuncharted34

What does that mean, huh? :evil:

You know what it means! :evil:

:P

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

What does that mean, huh? :evil:

DarkLink77

You know what it means! :evil:

:P

You so know what I'm talking about. :o

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

What does that mean, huh? :evil:

DarkLink77

You know what it means! :evil:

:P

Blasphemy! :x

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

You know what it means! :evil:

:P

gmaster456

Blasphemy! :x

[QUOTE="gmaster456"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] I know nothing of the sort. :oDarkLink77

Blasphemy! :x

Neither do I. :P

Way to spin the article to make it seem like a dev is bashing the PS3 Playstationlifestyle. :| He said consoles in generalnavyguy21

I didn't spin the title, that is the title of the article.

Besides, what's the difference? Consoles are PS3 and X360, one in the same. :roll:

Then build it for pc and port down, not rocket science here.

[QUOTE="ksko"]

Then why isnt DICE complaining about ps3 limiting battlefield 3? instead theyre trying to make it look the best it can for a console and that game has a next gen engine..

ShadowDeathX

Well DICE still seem to be putting an equal amount of effort to both platforms , ofcourse pc will be best , but that doesnt mean that consoles will get a half done product. Unlike cod where the game looks bad on consoles and on pc.

Would seem to me they say ps3 cause its playstation lifestyle. But the article says all consoles.

There are many people who are great at PR talk, and gaining attention and fame for their games. There are also those who are awful at it and just end up making themselves look silly. Sledgehammer is the latter of the two. First they claimed that CoD (Modern Warfare in particular) had a great story with great characters. I really have nothing to say about that because the Modern Warfare campaign is basically action scenes pasted together (MW1 less so than MW2). Now, blaming the consoles for "limiting" Call of Duty? How about you guys use an engine that isn't outdated, and take a look at games like Battlefield 3 and RAGE that are tenfold more technically advanced than your games, yet run perfectly fine on current gen consoles (especially RAGE). Despite this, there's no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 will be a great game. I'm playing the heck out of Modern Warfare 2 right now, and loving it so. I like the small changes they're making in the game, though I don't expect any major improvements to the CoD formula (although more balancing and a better Spec Ops mode are welcomed changes).

I've never liked Treyarch's games, they never satisfy me. Black Ops felt boring and lacking IMO, something just felt off. I always find that Modern Warfare games tend to be very satisfying in the way they handle guns (guns really pack a punch in MW2 unlike Black Ops where they feel like toys). MW2 is also a lot more addicting and has better maps than Black Ops. It's clear Treyarch tried hard with Black Ops, but they just can't beat out Infinity Ward. We might see something interesting going on with MW3 since there are 3 studios that are developing the game. Either way Battlefield 3 will trump Modern Warfare 3, and I'll probably end up getting MW3 many months after it comes out.

lol wut? id bet my entire life savings that its more the same game engine they've used for over a decade!

There are many people who are great at PR talk, and gaining attention and fame for their games. There are also those who are awful at it and just end up making themselves look silly. Sledgehammer is the latter of the two. First they claimed that CoD (Modern Warfare in particular) had a great story with great characters. I really have nothing to say about that because the Modern Warfare campaign is basically action scenes pasted together (MW1 less so than MW2). Now, blaming the consoles for "limiting" Call of Duty? How about you guys use an engine that isn't outdated, and take a look at games like Battlefield 3 and RAGE that are tenfold more technically advanced than your games, yet run perfectly fine on current gen consoles (especially RAGE). Despite this, there's no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 will be a great game. I'm playing the heck out of Modern Warfare 2 right now, and loving it so. I like the small changes they're making in the game, though I don't expect any major improvements to the CoD formula (although more balancing and a better Spec Ops mode are welcomed changes).

I've never liked Treyarch's games, they never satisfy me. Black Ops felt boring and lacking IMO, something just felt off. I always find that Modern Warfare games tend to be very satisfying in the way they handle guns (guns really pack a punch in MW2 unlike Black Ops where they feel like toys). MW2 is also a lot more addicting and has better maps than Black Ops. It's clear Treyarch tried hard with Black Ops, but they just can't beat out Infinity Ward. We might see something interesting going on with MW3 since there are 3 studios that are developing the game. Either way Battlefield 3 will trump Modern Warfare 3, and I'll probably end up getting MW3 many months after it comes out.

XVision84

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

There are many people who are great at PR talk, and gaining attention and fame for their games. There are also those who are awful at it and just end up making themselves look silly. Sledgehammer is the latter of the two. First they claimed that CoD (Modern Warfare in particular) had a great story with great characters. I really have nothing to say about that because the Modern Warfare campaign is basically action scenes pasted together (MW1 less so than MW2). Now, blaming the consoles for "limiting" Call of Duty? How about you guys use an engine that isn't outdated, and take a look at games like Battlefield 3 and RAGE that are tenfold more technically advanced than your games, yet run perfectly fine on current gen consoles (especially RAGE). Despite this, there's no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 will be a great game. I'm playing the heck out of Modern Warfare 2 right now, and loving it so. I like the small changes they're making in the game, though I don't expect any major improvements to the CoD formula (although more balancing and a better Spec Ops mode are welcomed changes).

I've never liked Treyarch's games, they never satisfy me. Black Ops felt boring and lacking IMO, something just felt off. I always find that Modern Warfare games tend to be very satisfying in the way they handle guns (guns really pack a punch in MW2 unlike Black Ops where they feel like toys). MW2 is also a lot more addicting and has better maps than Black Ops. It's clear Treyarch tried hard with Black Ops, but they just can't beat out Infinity Ward. We might see something interesting going on with MW3 since there are 3 studios that are developing the game. Either way Battlefield 3 will trump Modern Warfare 3, and I'll probably end up getting MW3 many months after it comes out.

DarkLink77

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="XVision84"]

There are many people who are great at PR talk, and gaining attention and fame for their games. There are also those who are awful at it and just end up making themselves look silly. Sledgehammer is the latter of the two. First they claimed that CoD (Modern Warfare in particular) had a great story with great characters. I really have nothing to say about that because the Modern Warfare campaign is basically action scenes pasted together (MW1 less so than MW2). Now, blaming the consoles for "limiting" Call of Duty? How about you guys use an engine that isn't outdated, and take a look at games like Battlefield 3 and RAGE that are tenfold more technically advanced than your games, yet run perfectly fine on current gen consoles (especially RAGE). Despite this, there's no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 will be a great game. I'm playing the heck out of Modern Warfare 2 right now, and loving it so. I like the small changes they're making in the game, though I don't expect any major improvements to the CoD formula (although more balancing and a better Spec Ops mode are welcomed changes).

I've never liked Treyarch's games, they never satisfy me. Black Ops felt boring and lacking IMO, something just felt off. I always find that Modern Warfare games tend to be very satisfying in the way they handle guns (guns really pack a punch in MW2 unlike Black Ops where they feel like toys). MW2 is also a lot more addicting and has better maps than Black Ops. It's clear Treyarch tried hard with Black Ops, but they just can't beat out Infinity Ward. We might see something interesting going on with MW3 since there are 3 studios that are developing the game. Either way Battlefield 3 will trump Modern Warfare 3, and I'll probably end up getting MW3 many months after it comes out.

XVision84

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

I'm the biggest COD fanboy but i had to LMAO at this.

Sledgehammer i think you should take a look at these games

Killzone 2/3

Gears 2/3

Uncharted 2/3

Mass Effect 2/3

Crysis 2

Far Cry 3

Rage

Witcher 2

Forza 4

Bioshock

Enslaved

BF3

and many more

I wonder why the spin in the title (playstationlifestyIe), he said that about consoles in general :!:

IronBass

Yeah the title is pretty misleading.

Anyways I both agree and disagree. Consoles generally follow a 5 year cycle, and while they are MUCH more relevant today then before (still pulling what would pass as medium specs on a PC game after 5 years), they are showing their age. At the same time though, you can't blame consoles for that when BF3 is on the way with a slew of upgrades compared to BC2.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="XVision84"]

There are many people who are great at PR talk, and gaining attention and fame for their games. There are also those who are awful at it and just end up making themselves look silly. Sledgehammer is the latter of the two. First they claimed that CoD (Modern Warfare in particular) had a great story with great characters. I really have nothing to say about that because the Modern Warfare campaign is basically action scenes pasted together (MW1 less so than MW2). Now, blaming the consoles for "limiting" Call of Duty? How about you guys use an engine that isn't outdated, and take a look at games like Battlefield 3 and RAGE that are tenfold more technically advanced than your games, yet run perfectly fine on current gen consoles (especially RAGE). Despite this, there's no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 will be a great game. I'm playing the heck out of Modern Warfare 2 right now, and loving it so. I like the small changes they're making in the game, though I don't expect any major improvements to the CoD formula (although more balancing and a better Spec Ops mode are welcomed changes).

I've never liked Treyarch's games, they never satisfy me. Black Ops felt boring and lacking IMO, something just felt off. I always find that Modern Warfare games tend to be very satisfying in the way they handle guns (guns really pack a punch in MW2 unlike Black Ops where they feel like toys). MW2 is also a lot more addicting and has better maps than Black Ops. It's clear Treyarch tried hard with Black Ops, but they just can't beat out Infinity Ward. We might see something interesting going on with MW3 since there are 3 studios that are developing the game. Either way Battlefield 3 will trump Modern Warfare 3, and I'll probably end up getting MW3 many months after it comes out.

XVision84

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

I also like Treyarch more. I feel like they have done more for the series. They have the best in campaign in Black Ops and have introduced more features as well as the mega popular Zombie mode.

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]Way to spin the article to make it seem like a dev is bashing the PS3 Playstationlifestyle. :| He said consoles in generalBlazerdt47

I didn't spin the title, that is the title of the article.

Besides, what's the difference? Consoles are PS3 and X360, one in the same. :roll:

Well he is right.... no way around that. COD on a new engine at 60 FPS would not be possible. Unless it was PC exclusive.

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Disagree. Treyarch > Infinity Ward. :oDarkLink77

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

I thought that you hated everything Call of Duty, guess I was wrong :P

[QUOTE="Blazerdt47"]

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]Way to spin the article to make it seem like a dev is bashing the PS3 Playstationlifestyle. :| He said consoles in generalnavyguy21

I didn't spin the title, that is the title of the article.

Besides, what's the difference? Consoles are PS3 and X360, one in the same. :roll:

Oh sorry, just trying to prove my innocence. ;)

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Disagree. Treyarch > Infinity Ward. :oBlazerdt47

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

I also like Treyarch more. I feel like they have done more for the series. They have the best in campaign in Black Ops and have introduced more features as well as the mega popular Zombie mode.

True, they've done all of the above. I just find that Black Ops, despite all the content, is extremely lacking in satisfaction or gameplay in comparison to Modern Warfare 2.

Four series behind what's available? I wonder what CoD's engine is then.

There're using an engine that produces sub-hd textures at 60fps on consoles.I don't even think if the devs were able to develop on a more powerful console the COD franchise would look better then it is now.They may be able to produce a higher resoultion, but the textures won't be improved by a lot.

What a joke. Has Sledgehammer games ever made a game before? And the CoD series runs at pitiful resolutions and are generally ugly to begin with

Is Activision's code name "PS3"?navyguy21

[QUOTE="mrmusicman247"]id Software isn't complaining. >.>IronBass

Time for new systems, I tell you. Heil68

They say this, yet they clearly aim for the lowest common denominator -- they even keep pumping out Wii versions of the game.

[QUOTE="Heil68"] Time for new systems, I tell you. IronBass

im not ready for next gen console until next 2 years, i bought my ps3 on winter 2008, my console lifespan is 7 years, so i will be getting ps4 in 2015, and i hope ps4 come out on 2014. So please sledgehammer just make the gameplay more fun, dont just focus on graphic.

im not ready for next gen console until next 2 years, i bought my ps3 on winter 2008, my console lifespan is 7 years, so i will be getting ps4 in 2015, and i hope ps4 come out on 2014. So please sledgehammer just make the gameplay more fun, dont just focus on graphic.

fachriunited

Oh, wow, I gained new respect for Sledgehammer, having a CEO with a sense of humor nowadays is a rare thing.

Wait, he was joking, wasn't he?

I love Sledgehammer. The guy interviewed at the Gamespot E3 booth seemed like an idiot, I'm not sure if it was the CEO or not but he was fun to listen to by how he was the very definition of a "bro gamer". Bad enough they're riding the coat tails' of Infinity Ward's success but it's comments like this that make me wonder if they even know the game they're working on and how dated it is.

Whatever. I'm still pissed Raven is wasted on this freaking franchise now.

unlike sony's first parties, sledgehammer isn't required to say what sony wants them to say. but as expected, this is already making some sony fans pretty angry.

They say this, yet they clearly aim for the lowest common denominator -- they even keep pumping out Wii versions of the game.

SakusEnvoy

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="XVision84"]

:o you like Treyarch? I must admit, I'm surprised DL :P

XVision84

I thought that you hated everything Call of Duty, guess I was wrong :P

[QUOTE="SakusEnvoy"]

They say this, yet they clearly aim for the lowest common denominator -- they even keep pumping out Wii versions of the game.

lawlessx

Meanwhile at EA.

Crysis 2.....

Battlefield 3......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMuqCeDH6F0

Are they serious?

Meanwhile at EA.

Crysis 2.....

Battlefield 3......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMuqCeDH6F0

Are they serious?

LegatoSkyheart

Don't Crysis 2 and BF3 run at 30fps on consoles (Crysis 2 often less than that)?