Top
180°

“You don’t ship an engine, you ship a game,” says Sledgehammer

GamesRadar - We like a good fight. So when Sledgehammer Games’ co-founder Glen Scofield had something to say about Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3’s biggest rival, Battlefield 3, we listened. Speaking to AusGamers, Scofield emphasized the importance of delivering a game that can run at 60 frames-per-second on consoles. While he didn’t specifically mention DICE’s Frostbite 2 engine or Battlefield 3, you can read between the lines and connect the dots.

Read Full Story >>
gamesradar.com
The story is too old to be commented.
ATiElite2357d ago

Sure is funny how console Devs have gone from bragging about Next Gen graphics to 60FPS to cover up the fact that most of their games are sub HD running @ 60FPS with no AA.

Sure 60 FPS is nice but how about removing jaggies, getting rid of objects popping in and out, more detail on draw distance and other things as well.

Even on PC if i can pump up the eye candy and Vsync my game to 30 FPS i'm happy. sure 60 FPS is better but full eye candy with no graphical errors locked at 30fps is great also.

DICE has truly brought next gen graphics to the consoles while the COD series is happy to pump out old and dated material as long as it's 60fps.

Army_of_Darkness2357d ago

We don't ship great graphics!! We ship same ol shit at 60fps bitches! Why!? Cause we know y'all will buy it still:-P

Paradicia2357d ago

Cod wouldn't be the same game if it was locked at 30, ATiElite. The reason its so popular among dudebros is because of it's fast gameplay. Jump in, jump out mentality.

StanLee2357d ago (Edited 2357d ago )

COD needs to run at 60 fps. It's arena combat with fast paced action. Control input needs to be responsive to give players the best chance to compete. Battlefield is very team and strategy oriented which is why 30 fps works. Halo Reach runs at 30 fps and uses reticule bloom to compensate for the controller input lag which makes the game a bit more fluid.

That said, Frostbite 2.0 isn't a new engine. It's just the evolution of the Frostbite engine. DICE didn't build a new engine for Battlefield 3. If that were true, the game wouldn't still look like Bad Company 2 on consoles.

evrfighter2357d ago

Just think no matter what they do or say dice has the magic ace up it's sleeve. Once they drop multiplayer aerial combat footage, any momentum sledgehammer has built up is gone.

I'm guessing this is why we havnt seen much mp. Mw3 is goin for an all out blitz and dice is holding steady with sp footage. Looks like the downward spiral has begun.

ATiElite2356d ago

some of you guys have made a really stupid comment about COD needing 60 FPS because COD is a fast game and controller issues blah blah blah.

Controller input Lag has ZERO to do with Framerates per second. Even if that were true and being fast was an issue then why gimp COD with P2P instead of dedicated servers?

60fps just insures crisp graphics and no detail loss during huge explosions and other graphics intense operations. Controller input precision is the same at 30fps, 60fps, or 260fps.

I've played Quake at 30fps and i don't think any online FPS game is faster than that. SF2 online is faster than COD. But my point is Framerate does not hinder or improve controls.

PhantomT14122356d ago

@StanLee

Frostbite 2 was done from scratch by DICE, it's not an improvement over the past engines. It just share the same philosophy.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2356d ago
wwm0nkey2357d ago

Well DICE managed to do both :)

theEx1Le2357d ago

BFBC2 on consoles barely runs at 30fps nevermind 60. Sure on PC it looks glorious but on consoles its no were near as good.

wwm0nkey2357d ago

It runs at a solid 30FPS and I dont care about 60FPS, 60FPS doesn't just magically make the game fun you know.

Shok2357d ago

The game is BASED off the engine.

Geniuses.

Elvfam5112357d ago

Shhh dont tell'em that.....

Show all comments (38)
The story is too old to be commented.