Call of Duty: Ghost (Consoles)

[Billy Idol]

COD looks fine for me. Proper next gen (already on PC) tec.

But I am starting to wonder the following: do we see a convergence of game looks?

The example I am thinking about is FPS: with all the next gen tec games start to look quite similar. BF3/BF4 and Crysis 3 and Metro LL and also COD: GHOST...look quite similar to me. I am not talking about the art and such things obviously, but some (post) processing effects which make up the overall style. E.g. Metro LL had a lot of lens flare effects that remembered me of Crysis 3 lens flare stuff.

 

[ultragpu]

If it's 1080/60fps with this level of visual then I'll be impressed, would be very disappointing if only 720p/60fps tough.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I don't like the lighting/shading either. Geometry amount and animation are okay. The human head was terrible, especially the ears and the overly smooth facial features.

 

[messyman]

GT says when asked about native resolution they didn't answer it.

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/kg3iin/call-of-duty--ghosts-first-take

 

[Wynix]

GT says when asked about native resolution they didn't answer it.

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/kg3iin/call-of-duty--ghosts-first-take

I guess 1080p can be ruled out then.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Needs more blown-out whites and pitch-dark shadows to be truly next-gen.

I mean, I guess it looks fine, but the COD series really hasn't been much of a graphical showpiece since MW2. And even then, I wonder how much of that was due to a few key artists being clever, since Treyarch's games using the same tech always looked like a significant step back.

I wonder if having a high ping will still mean my shotgun doesn't fire at the correct rhythm.

 

[snarfbot]

oh my god lol, that trailer. it reminded me of deep thoughts by jack handy. gotta remember, not to forget... remember forgetting, dont forget the dog harness, remember to chew completely, bring me my slippers hed say.. ol grampappy, never forgetful, gotta remember.

cheese overload

 

[messyman]

Found this on GT forums.

http://i.imgur.com/QpG784w.jpg

 

[L. Scofield]

Found this on GT forums.

http://i.imgur.com/QpG784w.jpg

Yeah, I noticed that right away. That is hilariously bad

 

[RenegadeRocks]

I don't like the lighting/shading either. Geometry amount and animation are okay. The human head was terrible, especially the ears and the overly smooth facial features.

Theres no detail in it, it is smoothing for smoothings sake. Wierd ! Looks like they just want u to be impressed by the polygons.

 

[milk]

I always wanted to see the day all geometry was properly rounded, and there was no sharp edges and obcious polygons to speak of. Most artists and graphic programers usually dismiss that saying improving texture, lighting and shading quality can bring much more significant visual improvement for the same cost. I wasn't so sure of that, but this demo made me realise tha this is probably true.
There's been little footage, but from the looks of it, their "sub-d" has little effect on the realism of models compared to what we already have today, which is pretty high-poly already. They probably have the most geometrically acurate gun moddels and helmets out there, with the roudest sillouettes I could wish for, and yet thanks to the still archaic lighting, shading and HDR, the game barely looks better than an early 360 title. Sure there is the cross-generational nature of this title to be blamed for, but to me this was an eye opener to me. Geometry complexity of today's games are prety much good enough for now. Sure they are not perfect, but there are dozens of other graphical features to spend the GPU's cycles on with much higher impact than making curved surfaces smoother, and polycounts, as many already pointed out, certainly won't be terribly higher then they were last gen.

 

[scently]

I always wanted to see the day all geometry was properly rounded, and there was no sharp edges and obcious polygons to speak of. Most artists and graphic programers usually dismiss that saying improving texture, lighting and shading quality can bring much more significant visual improvement for the same cost. I wasn't so sure of that, but this demo made me realise tha this is probably true.
There's been little footage, but from the looks of it, their "sub-d" has little effect on the realism of models compared to what we already have today, which is pretty high-poly already. They probably have the most geometrically acurate gun moddels and helmets out there, with the roudest sillouettes I could wish for, and yet thanks to the still archaic lighting, shading and HDR, the game barely looks better than an early 360 title. Sure there is the cross-generational nature of this title to be blamed for, but to me this was an eye opener to me. Geometry complexity of today's games are prety much good enough for now. Sure they are not perfect, but there are dozens of other graphical features to spend the GPU's cycles on with much higher impact than making curved surfaces smoother, and polycounts, as many already pointed out, certainly won't be terribly higher then they were last gen.

Indeed. To me it seems like they are just adding tessellation to the engine since that is probably standard and easy to use across the next gen consoles and PCs.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Via Kotaku:

Priceless.

I don't understand why people are giving them so much flak over the dog. I watched the live reveal and didn't think they put that much emphasis on it. Nonetheless, some of the reactions have been very amusing.

 

[DieH@rd]

 

[RenegadeRocks]

A MUST watch !

 

[(((interference)))]

LOL

 

[Graham]

Like all the trailers shown at the conference, this looks really early. I'm a bit concerned if this is [strike]out in just a couple of months[/strike] gold in just a few months .

There are some parts of that trailer that are visually extremely confusing.
There is little sense of where light is coming from, it seems almost arbitrary from surface to surface.

This shot, for example;

Despite the giant fireball in the background, you could quite easily miss the helicopter that is the central focus of the shot. There is just no sense to the ambient lighting at all. The helicopter's spot light doesn't even seem to be modelled...

I'm not sure where to begin with this one:

Light is coming from all over the place, with no obvious source (is the moon green?) buildings are a weird mix of ultra bright blown out white and pitch black. And is it just me or are all the vehicles just a bunch of spheres?

Finally, it looks like they are doing screen space reflections:

I was hoping linear-space gamma-corrected HDR would be standard next-gen. How disappointing.

At first I thought you were joking, but... Sigh. Of all the shots, I think this one leads the most evidence toward that being the case. The highlights just don't pop at all in the reflection. Stupendously disappointing (especially as I felt later COD's actually did a pretty decent job of their lighting)

 

[Gitaroo]

feel kind of sad, infinity ward used to be god teir, first time I played COD4, I was impressed with how they use those cheap effects and put them together to make a nice looking game for 60fps. Now I think treyarch is better....

 

[BRiT]

feel kind of sad, infinity ward used to be god teir, first time I played COD4, I was impressed with how they use those cheap effects and put them together to make a nice looking game for 60fps. Now I think treyarch is better....

That has a lot to do with nearly all the top talent leaving to form Respawn Entertainment after Activision ousted Jason West and Vince Zampella and delayed the rightfully earned bonuses to the staff who made COD: Modern Warfare 2.

 

[orangpelupa]

yeah cod have a habbit of suing cheap effect and trickey to fool me