Top
170°

Black Ops 2: Sacrificing Graphics for Frame Rate

We hear a lot about "the best of both worlds" - brains and beauty, wealth and happiness, strength and speed, youth and wisdom. The same applies to our psyche as gamers: When we play a game at 60 frames per second, we want it to look fantastic; when we play a game that looks fantastic, we want it to render images and events faster than the eye can see.

Read Full Story >>
gamerant.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Yodagamer1387d ago

I think call of duty could have had better graphics at 60 fps, seeing that i haven't played a cod game in a year or two black ops 2 seems to be a pretty big improvement, while it's not perfect or as good as it could be

Neonridr1387d ago

It will have better graphics (Wii U). Wait until the 360 / PS3 / Wii U comparisons start. The reason that the 360 and PS3 have uglier versions is because the hardware can't keep up. Sure you could bump up the visuals, but you'd be sacrificing frame rates in a twitch shooter game.

knowyourstuff1387d ago

Honestly, I always prefer to have better graphics instead of 60 FPS. Like most people you won't care about the difference between 60 and 30 FPS, but you sure can appreciate the massive graphics leaps you can get with just 30 FPS, just look at Battlefield 3 and look at Call of Duty.

GuyThatPlaysGames1386d ago

I would lean far more towards the framerate side than for graphics. Everyone these days are just screaming "GRAPHICS GRAPHICS OMG EVERYTHING LOOKS SO SHINY AND AWESOME". A good solid framerate outweights visuals in my opinion. What good is a visually spectacular game if it only runs 25-30 fps???

ninjahunter1386d ago

Maby on pc. Using joysticks you might as well be aiming with your elbows. I honestly cant feel a "smoothness/responsivenes s difference between halo and call of duty (on console), ones at 30 the others at 60.

ATi_Elite1386d ago

Consolers point of view = 60 frames per second is a MUST especially seeing how your not gonna get much better visuals outta COD anyway so i think it's smart to go with good frame rates especially seeing how COD console does NOT have dedicated servers so a good frame rate across the board helps keep things even.

COD console has a huge community like how Counter Strike on the PC has it's huge community and both games are NOT visual Benchmarks but do have the game play that each community likes.

PC Gamers point of view = I'm currently playing Planetside 2 Beta at 60 fps! What the hell is a Battlefield or Call of Duty?

IWentBrokeForGaming1387d ago

COD had graphics to sacrifice?

COD 2 has been the best looking COD this gen TO DATE!

3GenGames1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

COD4*

Honestly, comparing COD4 to each more modern COD, I still personally like COD4 looks a lot better. It looks like it has much higher resolution/better looking textures. While games like Black Ops looks like they took all the textures, and blurred them all.

Yangus1387d ago

CoD not CryEngine,Frostbite 2,id Tech 5 its true,but not ugly game,(MW 1-2-3 and maybe Black Ops 2)cool and 60 fps.

Next-gen CoD using new engine 100%.I wait.

Hazmat131387d ago

COD is like apple small improvements from lighting to facial animation cuz compare MW to MW3 there is a different. not much of one but a difference. black ops really focused on play control from vehicles to certain actions and a unique one, giving the player a voice and a face. but yes when it all comes down to the graphics could be better

taquito1387d ago

what console game doesn't sacrifice graphics for framerate?

if devs tried to run 5 year old pc quality graphics on console it would either;

A. destroy the console due to overheat or

B. run at 2 frames per second

thats why all cod games are 1024x600 on console, low even for console standards

Neonridr1386d ago

I doubt the Wii U version will run at that low of a resolution, but I understand what you are saying.

Christopher1386d ago

That still doesn't explain why CoD games on the PC also look like crap, though.

Regardless, games on consoles still look really good. As good as HQ on PC? No, but still really good for 6-7 year old hardware. Better than what my PC from the same year can do (sans upgrades).

Show all comments (28)
The story is too old to be commented.