Call of Duty 4: Modern combat trailer up
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
what happened to matchmaking?
Got it (PS3 version) played it, and mildly impressed.
The PC demo that ran on my 8800GTX was much more detailed (duh), but I am VERY impressed by the frame rate. I've only experienced one rememerable slowdown, which was jumping off a helicopter. Other than that, very, very smooth.
I suspect COD4 MW on the PS3 to be 720p with no AA. The prologue training session had some telephone lines in the far background that seems to suffer from the line disappearing, which I recall to be a frequent artifact from no AA.
Well, who can count the pixels
The PC demo that ran on my 8800GTX was much more detailed (duh), but I am VERY impressed by the frame rate. I've only experienced one rememerable slowdown, which was jumping off a helicopter. Other than that, very, very smooth.
I suspect COD4 MW on the PS3 to be 720p with no AA. The prologue training session had some telephone lines in the far background that seems to suffer from the line disappearing, which I recall to be a frequent artifact from no AA.
Well, who can count the pixels
djskribbles
Legend
someone from IW posted on neogaf that both console versions "use the same level of AA", so i'm assuming there is AA on both versions.
hope this is ok to post (i'm sure it is as we all should know this by now) but someone at AVSForum saw the IGN "head-to-head" with all 3 versions and it was the PC version followed by the PS3/360 version tied for second. they said the console versions were virtually identical except the PS3 version had shorter load times (possibly because it installs some files on the HDD? dunno as i don't have it yet).
hope this is ok to post (i'm sure it is as we all should know this by now) but someone at AVSForum saw the IGN "head-to-head" with all 3 versions and it was the PC version followed by the PS3/360 version tied for second. they said the console versions were virtually identical except the PS3 version had shorter load times (possibly because it installs some files on the HDD? dunno as i don't have it yet).
Last edited by a moderator:
Great, you can let us know how smooth online is (getting into games, matchmaking, lag, voicechat, local buddy list, racism
I do mind length of single player campaign hence online is the main reason for me but I won't be able to play for the next two weeks so I appreciate any input.
Also how much will I be punished for being late to the game?
I am not feeling so good now... (feels like throwing up after playing 3 levels continuously).
As expected, the game is chaotic and noisy. Visual is good (Don't ask me to judge it. It's good enough for me. The levels so far are mostly corridor-based but stuffed with details). There are some open fields. Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to explore. Don't know what later levels will bring.
I played with regular difficulty (instead of recruit). It's somewhat challenging but manageable for a first time CoDDer. Does the game keep respawning enemies until I charge past the spawn points ? It feels like it that way. Perhaps this is why the reviewers can complete it in 5 hours in the default recruit level: They simply rush past the spawn points asap.
The mission objectives are indicated by a circular marker. So if you're lost, just look at the map. I got very lost in level 3 (operating Javelin, destroying some weapon and also plant a beacon). If I had chosen the recruit level, may be the game will elaborate on the how-to's ?
The strongest point about CoD4 is the atmosphere. InfinityWard went through _a lot_ of trouble to recreate the immersive battlefield (from long, interactive cut scenes to elaborate level starting/ending moves). There are also a lot of activities happening at the same time (but I think R&C and Lair have even more).
The weakest part ? Can't really think of any since the production value is quite good. I am sure people who nitpick at graphics and animation will spot some less than stellar moments.
The most interesting part to me are the weapons. It looks like they have quite a good collection of them. I have not tried MP yet (Heard there is some sort of weapon customization ?). In SP, you do get to try different weapons because the battlefields are littered with them.
The control feels natural and works really well. For someone who's been playing RFOM for a long time, I keep getting confused with the controls. I wanted to sprint (Hold L3 in CoD4 but toggle L2 in RFOM), and ends up throwing the Flash grenade all the time.
For the most part, the game AI feels scripted.
This is a tactical shooter. So the play style is also totally different from RFOM. Personally, I still prefer RFOM's free form run-and-gun approach, but I can totally see someone preferring CoD4.
About the "realistic" look, I think some "artistic re-interpretation" may give it more punch, but that's just me.
Will try MP tomorrow. I think this is where the meat is.
Yep, IGN said the PS3/360 are virtually identical, with PC version best of course. And slightly better load times on PS3 in some cases (talking a couple seconds) They did not go into much detail though, just stated they are nearly identical, which is kinda questionable. They do have a vid, I'll watch maybe.
If Assassins Creed is also similar, than PS3 ports will have really come an amazingly long way. I just hope it's not because they're being cut back in any way to facilitate easier concurrent PS3 develoment (basically, what ID has talked about with RAGE).
If Assassins Creed is also similar, than PS3 ports will have really come an amazingly long way. I just hope it's not because they're being cut back in any way to facilitate easier concurrent PS3 develoment (basically, what ID has talked about with RAGE).
No installs on the HDD
not even an option to do that
I would think it is because of the more stable read rate+reasonably fast read speed of the Blu-ray?
Using the C-130 is very, very satisfying. Firing a 105 mm cannon from the air is something that you don't get to do everyday.
After you fire, wait for a few seconds and you'd hear a Kablamo and see some bodies fly around. Although being black and white takes away some of the fun, it is still very satsifying.
There's no real advantage there for ps3 in terms of drive speed. Perhaps its just use of redundancy(content on there more than once for load speed on ps3) or more compression on the 360.
Does PS3 support a version of "TrueSkill"?
TS has always been poor for since it tries to match faster connections over similar skillsets.
No, TS is from MS Research. I don't know if it's available outside of MS platforms, but I know IW has not licensed it.
Interesting, so does TS generally match players from the same area?
According to IW, they have implemented their own verison of 'TrueSkill' in the PS3 version. I of course have no idea how well it works, but I'm sure that if they have to give certain parameters out to Microsoft to support TrueSkill, they can fairly easily make something similar themselves.
Obviously the nice thing about TrueSkill is that it works across multiple games, I think?
I can only speak for myself - but even in relatively crowded games I get matched with people who are much, much better than I am all the time, which is really what TrueSkill is supposed to prevent.
As an example, in my first Uno game online, I was matched against number nine-hundred and something (with 1 being best in the world). After a sullen defeat, I was number 50,000 or something silly like that. Surely a "smart matchup" system would prevent this from happening, so I can only assume it's got a few things to iron out.
I don't imagine it would be hard to implement. At a high level, the algorithm would need to:
* keep a list of all people waiting for a match at that point in time
* identify each person's skill level (win/loss ratio, number of matches, etc)
* quick sort the list every n seconds
* assign matches based on sorted order
I'm sure I'm missing something, but online gaming can be awful if you're playing out of your skill level. I can't tell you how many games I've booted up and quit after a couple of games of ass-kicking and griefing, never to play again
I don't imagine it would be hard to implement. At a high level, the algorithm would need to:
* keep a list of all people waiting for a match at that point in time
* identify each person's skill level (win/loss ratio, number of matches, etc)
* quick sort the list every n seconds
* assign matches based on sorted order
I'm sure I'm missing something, but online gaming can be awful if you're playing out of your skill level. I can't tell you how many games I've booted up and quit after a couple of games of ass-kicking and griefing, never to play again
You missed the most vital thing, connection, all those things on that list become irrelevant unless everybody has a nice connection to the host, and the host isn't a retard who thinks he can host 18players lags free with 500k upload.
Why would Uno need a fast connection (besides voicechat)? Isn't it turned based?
It's also possible that not enough people were waiting for a match at the same time, hence the poor matching.
Here someone ask why single player has more blood, the IW guy says disc space.
So why does that hold PS3 and PC back they have plenty of space.
http://www.charlieoscardelta.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=69545&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
So why does that hold PS3 and PC back they have plenty of space.
What? Of course there is a real advantage. If critical data is spread out on the 360 in multiple parts of the disc, the read speads are not consistent, which can cause irregular load times for different parts of the game.
I'm pretty sure that constant read speed + disc space = advantage. Even if they duplicate some data on the disc, it's *still* a constant read speed, which is *still* and advantage.
On topic: I actually managed to pick up both versions (employee discount ftw), mainly because my Girlfriend bought me a copy, so I just got the other copy (since I have friends on both systems I wish to play with).
I think TrueSkill works a bit better, at first glance, than the match making on PS3. Anyone else experience this?
I don't imagine it would be hard to implement. At a high level, the algorithm would need to:
* keep a list of all people waiting for a match at that point in time
* identify each person's skill level (win/loss ratio, number of matches, etc)
* quick sort the list every n seconds
* assign matches based on sorted order
I'm sure I'm missing something, but online gaming can be awful if you're playing out of your skill level. I can't tell you how many games I've booted up and quit after a couple of games of ass-kicking and griefing, never to play again
TrueSkill is a lot more complex than that. It's not just "kill/death" ratio, it takes into account many factors such as quality of your opponents as well. A 10-1 kill/death ratio on a server full of newbies is not the same as a 10-1 kill/death ratio on a hardcore clan server.
Similar threads
