New engine or old?

#1 Posted by natetodamax (19170 posts) -

I'm really hoping that they go with a new engine for MW2. The CoD4 engine is nice, but after two games I think it's time for a change.

What do you guys think?

#2 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -

Needs a new engine, Don't want the same one for 3 games.

#3 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -

I don't think making an entirely new engine would make sense, but I seriously hope they've spent some time to further optimize it.  Improvement is always possible.

#4 Posted by addictedtopinescent (3645 posts) -
CL60 said:
"Needs a new engine, Don't want the same one for 3 games."
This. 
#5 Posted by macandcheese (223 posts) -

I doubt they will change the engine, I agreee that it would be better with a fresh engine but I think that Inifinty Ward would hold off on the new engine until the next game after Modern Warfare 2. I still think Modern Warfare 2 is a cash in for IW

#6 Posted by Sushbag (327 posts) -

I'm assuming it will be heavily based on the Quake 3 engine like every CoD game thus far has been.

#7 Edited by neoepoch (1293 posts) -

They have been working on this engine since before Call of Duty 2. I don't think they are going to change it to a new one in 3 years. It takes a lot of time, money, and work to make an engine. As long as they improve on this engine who cares? Valve still uses Source and it is about five years old. Sure it is showing its age, but it still is fine.

#8 Posted by Mattalorian (594 posts) -

Considering the development time, I doubt they developed a new engine, though I wouldn't be surprised if they cleaned it up a bit.
I wouldn't be largely disappointed if they are using a carbon-copy of the CoD4 engine, but I definitely wouldn't mind some kind of small graphical upgrade.

#9 Posted by Godzilla_Sushi (1084 posts) -

Whoa no way! That game runs at 60 fps. There are even other developers that wonder how Infinity Ward managed to optimize that game. If they keep anything, keep the engine....

I can't think of any game that performs at a higher level more consistently then Call of Duty 4.

#10 Posted by fillmoejoe (1469 posts) -

As long as it looks as good or better than COD4 and it runs at 60 FPS, I don't care. It'll probably be COD4 engine with tweaks.

#11 Posted by MasterOfPenguins_Zell (2093 posts) -

I think we would of heard if there was a new engine. It's probably upgraded a bit, but mostly the same thing. Look, Valve doesn't change make a whole new engine after using the same one a bunch, they just upgrade it every time, why can't IW?

#12 Posted by Alexander (1721 posts) -

Why don't you worry less about what engine it's using and concern yourself that the Game Informer scans showed something of sheer beauty.

You do realise that the iD Tech3 engine was used in Quake III Arena and also Call of Duty?





You can do a lot with one engine.

#13 Posted by Godzilla_Sushi (1084 posts) -
Alexander said:
"Why don't you worry less about what engine it's using and concern yourself that the Game Informer scans showed something of sheer beauty.

You do realise that the iD Tech3 engine was used in Quake III Arena and also Call of Duty?



You can do a lot with one engine."
Voice of freaking reason right here!
#14 Posted by natetodamax (19170 posts) -

I should have worded my opinion better. Making a whole new engine wouldn't be possible. I just want it to be upgraded so that the game actually feels new. One of the things I disliked about WaW was the fact that it felt like a reskinned CoD4. I don't want that for MW2

#15 Posted by Oriental_Jams (3063 posts) -

They'll probably just give it a bit of a revamp, which will be fine.

#16 Edited by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -
Diamond said:
"I don't think making an entirely new engine would make sense, but I seriously hope they've spent some time to further optimize it.  Improvement is always possible."
I agree.  Making a new engine when the old one works great isn't smart.  ... but eh, I'm getting tired of call of duty, I'm more interested in MAG right now. 
#17 Posted by Chaser324 (6325 posts) -

Yeah, there's basically zero chance of them making an entirely new engine for this game. In my opinion this is a positive considering how well it has worked in every game that has used it so far.

Moderator Online
#18 Posted by Agnogenic_delete (1034 posts) -
fillmoejoe said:
"As long as it looks as good or better than COD4 and it runs at 60 FPS, I don't care. It'll probably be COD4 engine with tweaks."
Yeah, that would make the most sense. It runs great so they just need to maybe upgrade it a little.
#19 Posted by KingOfIceland (654 posts) -

I would perhaps reserve judgement on this until I can more than a 10 second teaser that doesn't show a lot.

They also have time until Q4 to work their magic on this so again, wait until you see the game running proper to judge.

#20 Posted by TheHBK (5463 posts) -

They should keep the engine if only because there is too much work that goes into making a new engine, besides, from the few seconds of footage, it looks like the same engine.  It was a great and smooth looking experience, but the textures and stuff were never that high res and also, I could tell something was weird, it happened with Halo 3, the game is not full 720p so that kind of explains why it runs at 60fps.  Still, i will take that trade.

#21 Posted by Psytek (174 posts) -

It takes a long to time to customise an engine to use the way you want it, even longer to be the team that writes the engine.

I think people are confusing the quality of the models and the fidelity of the graphics as being intrinsic to the engine.

The same engine can be used to animate and model stickmen but also high res textures and human-like bodies like in crysis.

The quality of the graphics is only loosely tied into the engine used.

From the scans of the game informer article, the models and textures are definitely improved from COD4, the guns look much more detailed, and the characters look a lot less rigid.


Don't forget, we're talking about IW... its not like they are going to spend 2 years making a game and not make it awesome...

#22 Posted by crunchUK (5963 posts) -

don't count on it...

#23 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

It'll probably be the old engine, making a new one is resource and time intensive. However I'm hoping they do make some tweaks with the engine and revamp it a little bit, don't make it feel exactly the same as Call of Duty 4.

#24 Edited by Al3xand3r (7574 posts) -

It's the old engine and it looks amazing. Missed the teasers? Then you aren't paying attention. Go find them. I don't see how people expect the same console to magically put out 5x as good graphics or something for the next game of a franchise... That's not gonna happen, not when the developer is so talented they use most of the system's juice the first time around. Lesser studios who need more time can enhance their next games more, but if your engine and assets already exploit most of it, you can only do marginal improvements... But make them count. That's what they seem to have done with MW2 and it's worked wonders. The new feel will come from their new gameplay ideas and situations they thrust you into, and of course change of environments, not a magical engine that will somehow put out 5x the polycounts and texture sizes... Anyway, players shouldn't worry about that stuff, that's for the devs to worry and studios like IW know their stuff much better than any of you...

#25 Posted by Pazy (2561 posts) -

If the engine is actually diffrent it will, most likely, only be an upgrade. They have essentially been using the same engine since the original call of duty (idtech3) and just upgraded it through development. Granted a lot of the engine has been changed and upgraded but as far as the engine (and as far as im concerned the gameplay) they have never really "upgraded" (like from Unreal Engine 2 to Unreal Engine 3 for example) anything just improved.

#26 Posted by Pazy (2561 posts) -

If the engine is actually diffrent it will, most likely, only be an upgrade. They have essentially been using the same engine since the original call of duty (idtech3) and just upgraded it through development. Granted a lot of the engine has been changed and upgraded but as far as the engine (and as far as im concerned the gameplay) they have never really "upgraded" (like from Unreal Engine 2 to Unreal Engine 3 for example) anything just improved.

#27 Edited by Al3xand3r (7574 posts) -

What? As you mention yourself, it's the Quake 3 engine that was used in the first COD game, but 2 was done on a proprietary engine, and that's the one they're probably still using, albeit far improved, not that much unlike Unreal Engine's different editions... 3 is an improvement, not a completely new engine either. I think so at least...

#28 Posted by shadows_kill (3165 posts) -
Chaser324 said:
Yeah, there's basically zero chance of them making an entirely new engine for this game. In my opinion this is ... [more]
agreed. not to mention thats its really hard to make a new engine but use a new engine for 2 games so far and dump it? and not to mention the engine is really good. i wish more games would use it...
#29 Posted by Mikemcn (6955 posts) -

I heard they were makeing a new engine, somewhere anyways, ya i guess i need some more evidence......

But from the game play we've been given( All 10 secs of it) it doesnt appear there has been any major changes so i don't see why they need to change engines.

#30 Posted by jakob187 (21642 posts) -

As it stands, Call of Duty 4 is still one of the most gorgeous games around.  All of IW's games age incredibly well because they know how to make what they wanna make.  In turn, I can almost guarantee that they aren't doing anything more than upgrading their existing engine.  Personally, I'll be fine with that.  I care more about the gameplay anyways.

#31 Posted by Gizmo (5389 posts) -

Killzone 2 has raised the bar, if this is a reskinned COD4 engine game, I for one, will not be making a purchase.

#32 Posted by Al3xand3r (7574 posts) -

Lol.

#33 Edited by jakob187 (21642 posts) -
Gizmo said:
Killzone 2 has raised the bar, if this is a reskinned COD4 engine game, I for one, will not be ... [more]
You are SERIOUSLY going to not buy what is almost assuredly going to be an astounding game strictly because of GRAPHICS?

FUCKING
FAIL!
#34 Edited by Al3xand3r (7574 posts) -

What's even more ridiculous is to pretend the videos and images we've seen so far are somehow inadequate.... The game looks fucking amazing... And it will probably keep a silky smooth 60 fps even on the consoles for the most part. Or it should, I'll be getting it on PC anyway...

Personally, I hate the trend introduced since the first Xbox and mostly western devs where they push a given system harder than it can handle just to wow people with videos and screenshots, resulting in a lock @ 30 fps and with often times a very inconsistent frame rate (as in KZ2). For the sake of gamers with good eyes, I hope that's not the route they take with MW2 on PS360 (and any other system). I don't think IW would do that.

It works for some games but I find it really noticable in FPS titles. I can deal with it of course, but I'd rather not. On PC I used to just reduce visuals a little bit to keep the frame rate up (I won't have to anymore for some time), of course without making them butt ugly in the process (so I'm not one of those people that make everything look like Half-Life 1 to keep the fps up). Still, the skilled artists at IW mean even COD4 still looks great, and MW2 looks greater and will suck you in with another awesome campaign that constantly hurls new things to make your jaw drop.

#35 Posted by natetodamax (19170 posts) -
@jakob187: Agreed
#36 Posted by Godzilla_Sushi (1084 posts) -
Gizmo said:
Killzone 2 has raised the bar, if this is a reskinned COD4 engine game, I for one, will not be ... [more]
And from the looks of it, you just lowered the bar for broad sweeping opinions everywhere.
#37 Edited by Gizmo (5389 posts) -

Don't get me wrong, I thought Call Of Duty 4 was a nice looking game, but I can't take buying 2 mods of a game, if they raise the bar slightly on the current engine I will be getting it, if it is just a simple re-skinning, re-modelling job( which it probably won't be) , i'm not interested, I don't want new maps, weapons and perks from this. In my eyes, Killzone 2 is a better game then Call Of Duty 4. Yeah, CoD4 was awesome in 2007, but now, well, it's starting to show its age.


COD4 pretty much nailed the gameplay, now maybe they could nail the graphics/physics?
You know i'm right.


#38 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -
Mattalorian said:
Considering the development time, I doubt they developed a new engine, though I wouldn't be surprised if they cleaned it ... [more]
From the screen shots in my Game Informer, it's a quite noticeable graphical upgrade :D
#39 Posted by pause422 (6172 posts) -

I'm sure its the same engine with some changes. If you didn't know, that engine is the same engine that powered quake 3 at its core, so it just goes to show you how far its come, and how much a existing engine can be modified and last.

#40 Posted by theMcNasty (741 posts) -
Voxel said:
I'm really hoping that they go with a new engine for MW2. The CoD4 engine is nice, but after two ... [more]
Agreed.  If they must... give us CoD4 Version 2.0 at least.
#41 Posted by Jeffsekai (7026 posts) -

Well judgeing by the FULL trailer they just put out...it deff looks hella better.

#42 Posted by Whiplash (106 posts) -
Godzilla_Sushi said:
Alexander said: "Why don't you worry less about what engine it's using and concern yourself that the Game Informer scans ... [more]
yes
#43 Posted by lemon360 (1102 posts) -

whats so damn bad about the same engine? as long as devs update them its all good, unreal 3 had SOOO many updates and gears 3 will use u3 and it came out in 05

#44 Posted by YoConraaa (50 posts) -
@Gizmo: No. It actually isn;t shoing any age. It still is one of the top 3 most played in Live, for example.
#45 Posted by stephengotlost (703 posts) -

Modern Warfare 2 will just need new assets such as new environments, textures, and models. If it can look more diverse than Call of Duty 4, then I will be satisfied.

#46 Posted by TheHBK (5463 posts) -

Are you fucking serious?  Have you guys been playing games for only a year or something.  Two games and your done with the engine?  Do you know how much goes into making an engine?  You cant just make a new one because you feel like it.  What would be the point unless you have some new hardware to work with.  Well I guess if Gear 3 came out tomorrow it would suck that they still use Unreal 3 because they used it for two games already, no wait, a lot more games use it too!  Should have been killed off a long time ago.  Sorry, but seriously, when you have a great looking game like COD4 and you say its time to change the engine just because its been used 2 times already, I just want to know if the 360 is your first console ever and what you have in your crack pipe. Crack?

#47 Posted by RHCPfan24 (8609 posts) -

Tweaks and refinement are going to be present in the current engine, but, yeah, don't expect an entirely new engine from the ground up. I still that Modern Warfare is one of the best-looking FPS's ever, so they don't need to reinvent the wheel for the next game. As long as the game doesn't feel like Modern Warfare 1.5, I am content.

#48 Posted by spinoir (43 posts) -

I think its about time they added some fully destructable enviroments/buildings at least. After playing Battlefield 1943 i find it adds so much to the experiance.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.