A look at the superior PC version of Call of Duty Ghosts showing off the opening moments of the single player campaign.
Doesn't look all that great especially maxed out on a PC, but it does look like it will be pretty fun though. Looking forward to this on the PS4.
why does everybody on this site end their comments with something about "getting this on myyyyy ps4" your comment is more about letting us know your console of choice rather than the game.
@thezeldadoth Because if he just left talking about any other system instead of the PS brand, he would have been torn apart. This site is HEAVY PS loyal so you have to leave a comment like "Looking forward to this on the PS4." at the end. Its sorta their way of saying "ALL HAIL PS!!!"
Well, that's the funny thing. I have the "big three". I'm getting the launch PS4, getting the X1 (although not launch), and I already have a AMD-based PC with a TITAN and 32GB of DDR3. The fact of the matter is simply that the most important factor in a game is how fun it is. If it was purely graphical fidelity, then some of the last gen titles could arguably bury next-gen Ghosts. One of the factors in MY decision making is what platform the game will be most fun on. PS4 gets Ghosts and KZ, PC will be running BF4, and the X1 will eventually get Halo. @thezeldadoth: If you want to prompt your insecurity with my decision on the PS4 for Ghosts, simply ask instead of complaining like a little bitch. @VINNIEPAZ: ALL HAIL PS!!! lol jk This site was heavy 360 loyal a few years back, so what changed? Surely, the pre-order count can't be mostly comprised of people that skipped last-gen consoles; it is more indicative of the market. With that said, is there a proclaimed MS loyal site that is similar in nature to N4G? By your argument, there should be, right?
The game looks FAR better on PC than it does on PS4. The textures on PS4 are horribly muddy, almost as if they used 720p textures to render a scene in 1080p. I'm starting to think Sony is doing their scaling on the front end of the rendering engine in order to claim their games are running 1080p. Battlefield 4 on PS4 has this same exact muddy look as well. Hmm... Here's proof: http://i1248.photobucket.co...
I think we're missing the point of the detail of which GPU was chosen for the max settings demonstration. If I'm not mistaken, isn't the HD7970 the GPU that both the X1 and PS4 are based off of? And let's face it, a well invested PC running nearly any game will always have better looking games than its console counterparts. The opposing argument is simply one of an idiot. What defines the schism between PC gamers and console gamers are obviously tech level and less obviously finances. And before we get drawn into the debate as to which one has the higher long term costs, lets consider... cars. Initial finances are a big factor if you want to jump into a next gen game right at this moment. Let's take a Ford focus with a price tag of $20,000... you get it because you need/want to drive. Over time, paying it down, you'll probably end up spending $35,000 at which point the vehicle can be considered obsolete. Now $35,000 up front could have gotten you a better vehicle, but it's not like you can realistically just wait that long for your finances to accrue. Hence, you settle for the happy medium (Ford Focus's or consoles) where you get what you want/need when you want/need it at the expense of the "shiny things" (BMW's or PC's). To demand that true passionate gamers ignore their situations to game on a PC is simply inconsiderate teetering on pigheaded.
...then again you are judging a compressed youtube video. seriously FFS can people stop posting comparison videos on youtube and anyways lets be honest COD never was a graphical powerhouse you are mostly judging which version looks less ugly
LoL. So its not a valid comparison even though BOTH videos are roughly the same size and duration, both are MP4 with the same resolution AND bitrate. If one were heavily compressed and the other not, you'd see evidence of that by comparing the metadata in each video. Even if you were right, it doesn't explain two different official Battlefield 4 videos posted on this site in the last week which also showed muddy textures. here is another good example. Both crappy textures and over-use of depth-of-field, and motion blur. I went through every frame of that 5 second rooftop clip and the image used in this comparison. http://i1248.photobucket.co...
@AndrewLB textures yes fair enough. but you don't judge the graphical fidelity of a game ONLY on textures. also you say " BOTH videos are roughly the same size and duration, both are MP4 with the same resolution AND bitrate. " which is precisely the reason why youtube comparisons suck because in reality they Don't have the same resolution and they don't have the same bitrate. whats the point of comparing a video that is made to be the same doesn't that defeat the purpose of a comparison? i am not dismissing the comparison entirely all i am saying is that going into next gen there are many more thing not visible through youtube the compose a HUGE part of the gaming experience like framerate for example. look trust me and see for your self download this http://blog.us.playstation.... and view it on a 1080p monitor it will blow your mind then compare it to youtube.
Seems to look about the same as the PS4 version. I don't think this game really demonstrates the power of any of the platforms tho. I think we all should really take all these games for what they are at launch, and enjoy whatever system you get this holiday season. That being said, I do believe KZ:SF is going to be the game to prove the PS4s worth from the get go. But then again, I like the KZ series, so I might be a bit bias. OT: Now that both series have released their latest entries, I found BF4 more impressive overall. I just like the options of BF over COD, particularly in the MP department.
OMG stfu about the ps4. Yes it is a cool console but pls give it a rest dude.
Lol. Seems like I hit a nerve. I stand by my comment. It's not like this game is any visual power house guy, chill the hell out. Seriously? Telling me to STFU about a video game? You would swear you have stock in PC or something. What a clown.
The PS4 version looks NOTHING like this. You must be drinking the koolaid. http://i1248.photobucket.co...
So basically you prove my point, thanks. Regardless of what your motivations are, reasonable people will see that ALL versions of this game are essentially the same. Now, if you want to sit here and get on your high horse over a few more puffs of smoke and dust, be my guest. You would swear I called your mom fat or something the way you PC guys get all up in arms. If your choice of gaming device is so superior, it seems like you should be comfortable enough not to have to defend it all the time. Unless you are getting an X1, your argument has fallen flat and now you are jumping on the PC bandwagon. Hmm... I strongly believe that could be true. Either way, just like I told your friend above, chill out man. We are talking CoD here after all.
LB to ascend? hmmmmm don't think this is pc... unless of course theyre using a controller instead of keyboard.
Yes more than likely they're using a 360 controller as I do as well.
A lot of games when using a 360 controller on the PC will have 360 key commands popup instead of the keyboard commands.
I guess tactical actually does mean galactical.
Doesn't look that great but it's probably just YouTube. I bet it's looks better in person.
The PC version is a port of the next-gen versions so it should probably look pretty much the same. The main thing it is over the console version is that it can support up for 4K resolution.
no, it has better textures better frame rate. btw: how can they say Max settings but the physx is disabled
If you mean PhysX then that is only dedicated to Nvidia graphic cards. AMD cards do not have that feature.
Its got a better framerate but the fps is also capped at 90fps so anyone that games on a 120hz/144hz monitor won't get that refresh rate. Its having the same stuttering framerate issues that people have reported about the Xbone and PS4 versions as well. Your only going to notice the better textures if your playing it at 4k. All the PC features are for Nvidia cards only. Phsyx is the only feature that can work with AMD cards but it offloads all of it to your cpu which kills your fps which is why that video doesn't have phsyx turned on. Also really all the disagree's? Its a straight up port with a few Nvidia features added on. People are really clueless about the PC version and the issues its been having. Just take a look over the Steam forums and you will see nothing but complaints. No FOV slider, no server browser, capped FPS. The specs ask for 6GB of ram even though the game is only eating up around 2GB. Its uses a system verify so if you don't meet the specs it locks you out.
@KING85 i know bro, but they can use it, and in graphic options there is no such thing as physx, i saw it last night, i guess "Fur" will add the option @Rubberlegs nvidia tweaked physx and optimized it very good, from now on it has less impact on cpus and that's a good news for AMD owners i guess.
Playing this game right now. The bitrate of this video is awful. This game looks amazing on the highest settings. EDIT: I will say this game is also the worst optimized COD on the PC ever. It needs to be patched ASAP. I can get the game looking amazing, but to get it at a steady 60 FPS i have to drop ALL the settings to their lowest. That shuoldn't happen with a high end machine.
It'll be like Skyrim; 35kb patch that makes it run 100x better.
I hear you. It needs a patch. Just like BLOPS 2 needed a patch when it came out. And it got it and ran great. I'm sure when the first PC patch comes out it will be there.
This game is fantastic. Sure it needs a performance patch on the PC to fix the graphics stuttering. But OMG they changed literally everything. Squad mode is rad. The extinction mode is great. Normal MP is fantastic. I have yet to even try the SP but im sure its fun. Coming from playing 650+ hours in BLOPS 2 to this game....The only thing similar is the name Call of Duty. outside of that, its hard to tell its from the same series. The weapons are super balanced. Anyone who says this is more of the same has NOT played it. Period.
This video is not representative of actual 1920x1080/60fps gameplay/quality. Youtube and most if not ALL streaming players do not upload full 1920x1080 native capture. Youtube compresses any video higher than 1440x900 into 1440x900 and then upscales the video to 1920x1080 (fake 1080p. - plain and simple.) also most if not all streaming players do not allow 60 fps (frames per second). ALSO. Even if there is an uploaded uncompressed video. Most of you are not watching these videos on a 1920x1080 / 60hz (refreshrate) (60fps).
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.