Call of Duty: Ghosts - PhysX Fur To Be Introduced Via A Patch, First PC Screenshots

DSOGaming writes: "Call of Duty: Ghosts has just been released in a number of regions, and we have some good and some bad news for PC gamers. The good news is that Infinity Ward will introduce PhysX Fur (same technique that will be used in The Witcher 3) via a future patch."

[SonyNGP]

From Nvidia's website:

"On the PC, Call of Duty: Ghosts players receive the definitive experience, with assets, display resolutions, and textures that best the 720p and 1080p experiences offered by the “next-gen” Xbox One and PlayStation 4."

pfffft

@Slap

Kinda agree with you on that. The game doesn't really look that great graphically :/

[MadLad]

Dickish, yes.
But not inaccurate.

That said . . . the game looks very dated no matter what you play it on. Some nice looking fur physics isn't going to change that.

[john2]

The RAM requirement is simply ridiculous

[joe90]

Those graphics are not as bad as everyone said.

[MadLad]

Looking at those screens, they honestly are not. That said, they seem a lot better than any of the live footage I have seen of the game and will only make judgement when the game drops.
The graphics shown here are actually pretty decent all around.

[OrangePowerz]

nVidia exec 1: They didn`t want to buy our overpriced GPUs for their consoles what should we do?

Exec2: Let`s make a useless "handheld" and later make fun of the "next gen" consoles for their 720p and 1080p resolutions and show 4k screenshots that make the PC version look a bit better although nobody can afford 4k and mention Riley and GPU-accelerated animal fur because it sounds cool.

[Shredmeijster]

Second screenshot in the right column:
I absolutely love the fact that he's wearing one of those floating watches that never touches your skin, supposed to be really expensive!

Skipping this game, as usual.

[joe90]

Think i might ask for a refund with them kind of game breaking features.

[Welshy]

Whether it's game breaking or not isn't really the point is it?

Next gen is supposed to be a step up in fidelity, so if you're going to showcase a screenshot to show off how great your game looks, you could at least make sure your character models are refined.

I don't expect flawless games, especially crossing a generation gap and a first attempt at new machines, but basic stuff that can be seen clearly could at least be ironed out.

[Maxor]

This could be the year when the COD gravy train finally stop. The game clearly isn't doing anything worthy of being called a nextgen tittle when everything on release date is yearning to distinguish itself.

[TIER1xWOLFPACKx]

Those screenshots actually look better than I had expected

[Sarcasm]

Don't know what it is.

It's actually very detailed. But there's that weird flat texture look to everything which makes it look last gen.

[Eck0]

agree.. its like bad graphics with good make up on... by that i mean the levels have low polygon count.. but they just throw in an HD texture and call it a day... dont get me wrong.. ima COD fan.. i dont care what people say.. those battlefield people.. most of them switched.. cause they heard somebody that knows somebody that knows somebody.. and they think that person is cool and makes awesome decisions so they want to be like them.. battlefield to me is like a really pretty girl that everyone wants to get with... but after awhile they realize that her personality makes her boring and bad...where call of duty is the alright looking girl that has an awesome personality to where it almost makes her sexy.. but everyone looks at you weird for being with her..

[annus]

I think it's the complete opposite. Everyone gets into CoD and realises it's the same crap over and over so they jump ship.

CoD died to me once they thought it was a good idea to expand upon the killstreaks once they realised people enjoyed them in CoD4, then came riot shields and dual weapons and I left.

Quite surprised about the graphics on this though, amazed they didn't try and show these earlier in hopes to get people from complaining that it's identical to current gen consoles.

[OrangePowerz]

nVidia still butt hurt that neither Sony or MS picked their GPUs?

Also PhysyX fur was a good joke :D

[MadLad]

Butthurt. Sure.
AMD recently coming out and saying PC is where it's at, even for them.
Guess, somehow, AMD is butthurt too.

Let us not forget, it was Sony and Microsoft who couldn't foot the bill for Nvidia. They went with the cheaper choice is all that happened. Nvidia freely walked away from the deal.

[OrangePowerz]

Obviously they still make most of their money on PC.

AMD had the better package. Their GPU`s are on the same level as nVidias overpriced cards and cheaper compared to what they do and nVidia can`t do APU`s. having an APU is cheaper and provides better performance compared to having an equal separate CPU and GPU.

[MadLad]

If AMD is better and cheaper at what Nvidia does, why did the console makers, for the second time in a row, go to Nvidia first?
Seems silly if any of that is true.

All AMD does is release something somewhat more powerful than what Nvidia had out for the better part of the year. They sell within a small window of Nvidia's current and next cards and then play catch-up for eight months or so. Rinse, repeat. They are a budgeter's friend, but not and enthusiast's. Let's see if that change's with Mantle.