Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2019 edition

R

RobertR1

Pro
Legend
Played a few rounds of the beta. 32 vs 32.

+ It's already more way more refined than Battlefield 5 after a year of Dice working on it
+ Shooting feels amazing along with movement
+ Runs very good with everything maxed out at 3440x1400. No one will have an issue getting 60fps out of this with a mid range setup
+ Kill streaks seem well balanced so far
+ No whacky slings and shit. Just a well done version of the original Modern Warfare (thank god!)
+ Online was so smooth. No lag or stutters

- LoD pop in
- Some very low textures
- Spawn points need refining. You can spawn in the middle of a bullet storm over and over if you choose to

PSA:
* game defaults to 50% render scale of max res so adjust this or it'll look really bad
* disable film grain
* change AA mode to SMTAA 2x instead of the filminc one
* motion blur in this game gave me motion sickness so make sure you disable that if you get the same thing

But yeah this is certainly going to my MP game going forward.
 
i don't know if i like this mode
feels weird, map is a bit tiny for the player count, you li avend die in seconds. It's quite hard to take a point.
need to play more
 
RobertR1 said:
...
+ Runs very good with everything maxed out at 3440x1400. No one will have an issue getting 60fps out of this with a mid range setup
...

PSA:
* game defaults to 50% render scale of max res so adjust this or it'll look really bad
* disable film grain
* change AA mode to SMTAA 2x instead of the filminc one
* motion blur in this game gave me motion sickness so make sure you disable that if you get the same thing

...
Click to expand...

I set everything to off/low and struggle to get more than 80fps on a GTX 1060 6GB. Actually looks pretty awful. That's a pretty low-end card at this point, but I definitely have games that look and run better for a TDM style map. Renderscale defaulted to 84% at 1080p and it looked like complete trash. It actually looks like the AA does not work at all, or something. Not sure what it is. Had to set renderscale to 100 to be able to see anything. I'll try the other AA modes and see if they look better. So far I can't tell the difference between AA on or off.

Gameplay is just standard cod. Looks like a re-skinned version of a 10 year old game. Actually pretty disappointing. I thought the weapons would have interesting recoil or mechanics. I'd rather have gadgets and wall running than another vanilla cod game.
 
Maybe the game was just bugged. Went back in and it looked much better. The 2x smaa looks better as well. Also added nvidia sharpening because it's a soft looking game when you lower render scale. Render scale 100 is a huge performance hit, but you get a very soft image at anything lower. I'll deal with the soft image for the performance.
 
On further investigation, ground war I had minimum fps of about 65 if I render the game around 1280x720 (everything off or low, even textures) with smaa T2 or whatever it's called. It looks super soft and blurry which makes that mode very hard to play. If I drop down to smaa T1, the game honestly looks horrendous. It looks like an xbox one launch title. The average fps is quite a bit higher, but the times when it drops during fights are noticeable.

Definitely a skip for me. Wouldn't touch it unless you have a gtx1070 or better if you're interested in ground war.

edit: smaa t1 I can increase my render scale to 83, around 1600x900. I think my low is around 70, and it looks ... not great, but more playable. Still not something I'll spend money on. Not going to get a new gpu until the end of next year.

Also, wtf is with the weird halo of dots around my reticle? It's like they try to put some kind of shadow on the reticle and it's super low res, and in combination with the dof you can't turn off it just looks terrible. Probably not noticeable at higher resolution, but it looks really bad at lower resolution.
 
Last edited:
This is one the game looks like if you set everything low, rendering at approx 1600x900. As you can see performance is passable on a gtx 1060 6GB (overclocked), but it doesn't look great.
 

Attachments

  • MW.jpg
    MW.jpg
    623.9 KB · Views: 15
Scott_Arm said:
This is one the game looks like if you set everything low, rendering at approx 1600x900. As you can see performance is passable on a gtx 1060 6GB (overclocked), but it doesn't look great.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity do you have a 3 GB or 6 GB 1060? With that long draw distance, I could imagine a 1060 with the lower RAM amount having some significant issues.

Regards,
SB
 
I've been quite happy with the gun play. I'm just using the beta to die as much as possible so i can get back in the cod mindset after years of no shooters except battlefield series.

The time to kill is quite nice. Not insta kill and not bullet sponges either.
 
Silent_Buddha said:
Just out of curiosity do you have a 3 GB or 6 GB 1060? With that long draw distance, I could imagine a 1060 with the lower RAM amount having some significant issues.

Regards,
SB
Click to expand...

6GB. According to the settings menu I shouldn't be hitting my vram limit.

Edit: I looked at it again with a bunch more stats turned on. I'm under my vram limit and I'm not cpu limited. None of my cores go over maybe 70% in ground war. I'm strictly gpu limited. I'm wondering if maybe it's just the geometry or something? Like, if I compare this games performance and visuals to control or gears 5, it does not hold up well at all. I imagine it looks quite nice on a high-end PC. Unless you can play at high res or afford the performance hit of smaa t2, the image quality is very bad.

The game does have very nice frame pacing, so even if you're at 60 or 70fps it feels pretty smooth. Gunplay feels solid like COD. I really don't notice much difference from this one to any of the other MW games I played. Just the same thing with a new coat of paint. Ground war is kind of meh, but the 2v2 mode looks cool and unique.

Edit: AA off is actually the best option for me. The SMAA seems to not do much unless it's on the highest option.

Able to make the game much better by turning the static AO on. Doesn't seem to have much of a performance hit. The reflections look really messed up though. Wish I could turn them off because they add a ton of noise to the image.
 
Last edited:
i'm sure they are still fine tuning, dynamic res will be more efficient at release and framerate should be more stable on X.
 
RobertR1 said:
That was a rough end. I got kicked mid game and got asked to uninstall lol
Click to expand...

I ended up liking the basic modes. Feels good to play. Not sure I'd pay full price for a TDM game anymore. Ground War is a skip. It's like a really simple version of battlefield, but without the destruction. Would almost be better just to play BF4 if I had that itch for a modern battlefield game.
 
Scott_Arm said:
I ended up liking the basic modes. Feels good to play. Not sure I'd pay full price for a TDM game anymore. Ground War is a skip. It's like a really simple version of battlefield, but without the destruction. Would almost be better just to play BF4 if I had that itch for a modern battlefield game.
Click to expand...

Yeah I like the normal modes a fair bit, esp hardcore. Forgot how fun that was and makes the gameplay a lot of on edge.

I think ground war is something that can certainly refine and I’m sure they’ll work on it. Just cleaning up spawning would help a lot and make the radar not as noisy somehow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Are modern GPU's really offering a worse level of performance than historic GPU's??
Replies
16
Views
2K
Kaotik
Kaotik
F
Launch of the Kickstarter campaign for the video game named 100%!
Replies
2
Views
1K
freeman119
F
D
Quick Resume List
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
20K
Omegaxyz
O
S
NPD November 2019 Results
Replies
0
Views
1K
Silent_Buddha
S
D
Call of Duty WWII Frustrations
Replies
3
Views
2K
Deleted member 86764
D
Back
Top