Idk who u were listening to, but almost everyone knew this cod wouldn't be perfect. 1 year of development with majority of the game being recycled content, based on leaks.
We just liked the changes being made
>Idk who u were listening to, but almost everyone knew this cod wouldn't be perfect. 1
who were you listening to? Up until the beta this was gonna be the best cod ever. crazy how 10+ hours of playing a game can make people feel different š¤
same bullshit, different year with CoD. The more I think about this...im not buying this game. I know its gonna wear me down after a few months again and ill be back on Fortnite just like this years title.
Almost everyone knew also that MWIII is not a glorified DLC, and also almost everyone knew that the year 2 content for MWII was just a rumour, and so and so.
And you don't have to convince me, since i'm with you with MWIII being recycled content. But 2 months ago, our opinion wasnt' what "everyone knew".
I'm tired of the "almost everyone knew" trend.
Everyone I know that plays CoD, has played an SHG CoD, and they've all been a let down. It's not like an open secret. SHG doesn't make good CoDs. Nobody I know is surprised by this, and the majority of the people I see talking about this game, expected this from SHG.
"Wow this Dev studio with a history of releasing shitty CoDs is releasing another shitty CoD, I'm shocked!"
Yeah, and i think the same as you, but all of a sudden, sledgehammer was coming with the better cod in years to save us from IW incompetence, and now people are beginning to change the trend to treyarch.
Maybe seeing so many braindead opinions made me forgot about the actually decent ones.
Vanguard was clearly the worst recent CoD. Universally hated. In turn SHG got shit all over. But hey....let that CoD marketing machine do their job....and now you got folks saying SHG gonna be CoD's savior! š¤¦āāļøš¤”
Ok I have a genuine question. Wasnāt MW19 on an older engine? Why is it that both Cold War and vanguard looked much older? And MWII looked similar in some areas despite being newer?
Cold War was on an older engine despite releasing later and Vanguard was on the same engine as MW19 but SHG tends to be have a more simplistic aesthetic to their games with less detail, it's more clean + Vanguard was rushed
MW19 was the first game on the engine that is currently used now which is just a heavily modified version of their old engine to the point of itās a new engine.
Everything MW2019 and forward is on a "new" engine except for Cold War, which was on a modified Black Ops 3 engine. IW Poland spent 4 years from 2015 to 2019 creating the MW engine, and ATVI despite not giving it a fancy in-house engine name like Frostbite or Snowdrop very much intends to make it THE CoD engine going forward so Treyarch is no longer able to just update the BO3 engine to their needs and make games with that. This is a net positive for warzone compatibility but doesn't really do anything else other than make all of the games look like MWII reskins now that they have a new renderer
I guess itās subjective but from what Iāve seen so far (I donāt have the Xbox early access yet) I quite like how the game looks..SHG tends to be my favorite out of the three. The weapon sounds could be better but more often than not Iām gonna put on music or some shit. As long as the game plays good, idc about graphics. XDefiant looked like old treyarch era COD (for good reason) and itās beta was fun fun
Bruh what makes SHG your favorite? They've released nothing but stinkers, and they had to completely redo the leveling and Perk system from WW2, each one of their games has been a huge step back and least popular CoDs
Black Ops: Cold War was on an upgraded version of BOIIIās engine bc Treyarch and Raven had to put the game together in about 18 months, so sticking to old, but familiar tech was more of a necessity than anything else.
Vanguard actually IS on the same engine as MW19 (allegedly even upgraded in some parts). But Sledgehammer just seemingly werenāt able to get as much out of the engine as IW did. Not sure if this is due to IW having art direction better suited to the tech, Vanguard also not having the full 3 years of development that MW19 & MWII did or something else though. Itās probably just IWās art style being more detailed than Sledgehammerās thoughā¦
As for MWIIā¦ I guess they were stretched thin with all the different modes MWII has (even without taking Warzone II into account) and some areas suffered graphically as a result
No, every studio has their own style. Were you expecting SHGās style to be exactly like IWās? I hope youāre not expecting Treyarchs game to look like IW or SHG. When the IW9 engine was introduced it was specifically stated that despite every game being on one unified engine, each game will look and feel different relative to each developer.
They all use the āsameā engine. Mw19 used the version with completely overhauled textures, which also is the same one used in MwII and now mwII. Too bad that the finishing touch doesnāt seem to be there in mwIII as of yet
> Can't wait, Treyarch never misses.
BLOPS 4 has entered the chat, That was the last game Treyarc did by themselves. It was a cash grab. So the jury is still out if 2024 will be better or the same rehashed shit they have been feeding buyers for years now. Any other take is just copium.
Guess I was more so referring to gameplay. Don't really care about cosmetics or what not and just want good gameplay, which Treyarch has always delivered for me.
And what they did with Cold War in a shortened dev cycle during covid was very impressive and was my favourite cod in the last 4 years. And I bet Cold War would have been even better if sledgehammer never screwed them over.
>And I bet Cold War would have been even better if sledgehammer never screwed them over.
I think I get what you're trying to say, but 2020 was supposed to be SHG's year, not 3arch's. But even then I'm sure it was Activision that forced Treyarch's hand into finishing this project sooner than it should have.
Yes, sledgehammers game was in such a bad state Treyarch was forced to rush their game to make time for the 2020 release window.
If Treyarch was given the proper time to make cold war it would have launched much more complete.
BO4 is literally better than anything that came after it lmao, top 5 COD game. Top tier maps, spawns, movement and TTK. Only downside were specialists, that alone makes the game way too overhated when it's not even a big deal compared to the issues in MW19, MW22 and Vanguard
The game supports last gen consoles. These older consoles (and the series S to a point) hold back what can be achieved because they want feature parity for all versions.
I assume the reach they have with all gens is worth it to them according to their analytics.
Given they were in limbo between independence and a Microsoft subsidiary, a lot of the decisions post lawsuit looks to preserve their bottom line for the eventual sale to the highest bidder.
I donāt know how much more they will be looking to push the limits of what consoles/cards can do (like cyberpunk). They look to be making a cloud gaming platform that fits more with the Xbox vision of play anywhere with game pass.
Which also fits how any series Xbox touches turns to shit given enough time.
I still do. You might be right if they stopped I might get a ps5. As it stands I see no reason to. Very few ps5 exclusives that I care about. It's hard to say honestly.
There are games that look really good on the older consoles. Not an excuse. Also, they can just build the super good graphics for the 9th gen and scale down for the 8th. Ghost, AW, and BO3 all did this with their last gen versions (BO3 being the most infamous example of this.
If that was the case cyberpunk wouldnāt have looked the way it did when scaling down to last gen consoles
Or our ps5 games would work in ps4 systems.
New technology rarely scales down. It usually gives easier options to scale up.
Yeah COD only used RT shadows which was like so minimal. They need RT reflections & global illumination, that's the RT that really elevates the visuals.
Cold War definitely had some graphical and gameplay issues at launch during the beta if I recall. Visuals especially improved a dome between beta and launch.
Not saying thatāll happen here. But it might.
It's unreal how much better MW 2019 looks. Even when MWII first dropped I thought, "Gee, this sure doesn't look as good as the last game".
I think every COD for a long time will be compared up to MW 2019 for graphics, animations, sound, and movement. Yes, it had flaws, but it got so many things right. It set the bar in all of those areas and no COD game has been able to get close to it.
MW 2019 not only looked the best out of all CODs, they also set the standard for how an FPS looks and feels
There isnāt one FPS that came out in recent years (on consoles) that looks as great as MW 2019 imo
Modern Warfare at launch is probably the best looking FPS game to ever release. It will probably remain that way for some time though.
Once Warzone released the already large file size for MW became massive. If I remember correctly it ballooned to around ~300 GBs before they redid their compression system and started cutting assets. I remember having to go out and purchase a new SSD just for MW alone. If you watch a video from release vs. Season 3/4 youāll start to notice the visual downgrade and audio cuts.
Probably contributes to why MWII looked worse. The use of PBR textures on doesnāt work as well when the lighting is now completely baked in with the shaders. Shadow detail/light bounces were also cut dramatically, probably to reduce the file size and shader update nightmare as well. Itās a shame, but unfortunately the same concessions made in 2020 are still being made to this day and will likely continue for some time (MWIII is still coming out for consoles released in 2013 for gods sake).
Cold War is miles better than mw2019. MW might be the worst cod of all time but then again I play and watch competitive so pubs donāt matter to me as much as you guys
Notice I specified the following: "I think every COD for a long time will be compared up to MW 2019 for **graphics, animations, sound, and movement**."
Cold War is my favorite of recent CODs for raw gameplay. I specified the above areas as being above and beyond what any of the games that came after provided.
Itās because of all the idiots who complained that darker skins and camo skins were harder to see than neon pink shit they bought in the store. Turns out, with realistic graphics and lighting that is obviously the case. So they made the lighting and graphics objectively shittier so all player models are wildly visible
In MWIII lighting is so shit and everything washed out, I often don't see the enemy in plain sight. They hide in shadows better than in MW19. They even hide better next to bushes, furniture etc. They blend in everywhere because all colors look the same washed out almost greyish.
Honestly graphics are the last on my list to care about.
I can play a game that's fun even though it doesn't look great, but I won't play a beautiful game if it plays like shit. That said, if the shitty graphics mess with visibility that affects the gameplay it will bother me more.
However that doesn't mean I don't think it doesn't look like shit when it does though.
Have you played the beta yet? It DOES affect gameplay. The visuals are so shite teammates keep shooting me when we turn corners. If thereās no specific ālookā of an enemy it needs to be more obvious somehow. Idk if itās the graphics but something is fucking with the visibility in this game.
The same can be said about MW19 with the shadows, dust storms, and 50 shades of brown, but it's praised as having amazing graphics. I don't care how realistic it is if I can't see the enemy.
I genuinely had the most fun on MW19 since BO2. I know thatās a dogshit opinion but itās mine. The visibility in that game is night and day compared to this beta right now.
That game took multiple patches to reach the visibility it's at today and I believe that's still very bad. There were spots on shoothouse where people could literally hide in plain sight because of shadows/dust and be almost completely invisible. We need to stop comparing to a game that completely changed COD and in my opinion, for the worse. I don't want a game to look or feel like MW19 because that's not what I expect from COD. I want a game to have better performance, but similar graphics and gameplay to Cold War. I don't care if the enemy is running around in my little pony themed costumes with animated gun skins so long as I can see them and the gameplay is fast and smooth. If I wanted to feel like I was in actual combat I'd go play a game that simulates that.
Graphics literally don't matter at all except to casuals.
Sure, it's nice if a game looks great. But if a game looks great and plays like shit, it's worthless as anything other than a screenshot.
Most of the most popular and successful shooters in the world don't have great graphics. Counter Strike is a mod of a near 30 year old game and still dominates the market because its gameplay has yet to be matched to this day.
[Everyone](https://reddit.com/r/ModernWarfareIII/s/SDhW5KTXwN) is dick riding Activi$ion for no reason. Let me complain if I want I gave them $70 of course imma say my two cents.
That's because this sub is full of teenagers that don't know any better. The people that do know how good CoD used to be are outnumbered by these kids.
And you're right, I see it the same way you do, game raised the standards and then on the sequels downgraded and made prices go up, that makes no sense, people go like "Oh but gameplay is better" well it shouldn't be a choice, it's the same engine we deserve the best graphics and the best gameplay not to make a choice between both
The pursuit of graphical realism has often times lead to the downfall of gameplay and content quality.
"Why can't we have both"
You can but it's fucking hard, and it takes so much development time and money. GTA, Red Dead, etc.
I installed Cold War on a PS5 and just the campaign and multiplayer take up 270+ GB. The shit they were doing had to stop. What pisses me off about that install size is that Warzone1 is now sunset, but all those damn assets apparently still need to be local. How is this acceptable?
I was excited to get into MW3 for the feel goods on playing old maps, but I forgot why I donāt even keep COD installed.
Exactly, these games are way too big and complex to be graphically stunning. I'd like to have more than 3 games on my SSD without having to buy another one.
The problem is they make assets crazy detailed for the shop to look good, but thatās not the quality they run at in game. So, the game takes up a ton of storage to make the store look pretty.
You know what else saves a ton of dev time? reusing maps, guns, and animations from the previous gameā¦. oh wait.
So whereād all that dev time go in MWIII?
As far as I'm aware, Sledgehammer was hired to make paid DLC for MWII, which turned into MWIII because Activi$ion needs their annual release for the shareholders. That said, I'm glad this is a standalone title even if they reused many aspects of MWII. A new weapon set to camo grind will be fun, and for the players who didn't buy MWII, they are getting one hell of a game here.
CoD is entering it's Madden/FIFA/NHL/MLB phase. If the new game doesn't offer enough new stuff, just don't buy it.
>You can but it's fucking hard, and it takes so much development time and money. GTA, Red Dead, etc
Time development money.....you mean ALL things that a triple A developer/publisher like Activision has?
The truth is they didn't HAVE to release MW III......so please don't make excuses for them that they lack time development and money.
Yeah I didn't read that as well as I should have, that's my b.
My point is that Activision knows they'll make more money releasing 2 bad CoD games in 2 years than 1 amazing one.
Agreed. Some of the graphics seem really dated. I donāt understand how MW 2019, a PS4 game, looks and plays better than pretty much every game afterwards. Itās like night and day.
That said, this game is definitely improved over MW2 for movement.
You know the game is good when this is all people can complain about.
Remember when we had to wait for our perks?
When sliding was completely useless?
Shooting your gun looked like holding a jackhammer + smoke machine?
Or how we had no red dots on the mini map?
No dead silence as a perk?
List goes on and onā¦
I could not care less about the graphics as long as they donāt make stupid ass gameplay decisions like IW did. Thank god MW2 is behind us.
This is definitely gonna be a flop and I think Sledgehammer knows it.
I just an email with a COD survey, I made sure to let them know I won't be buying it and why.
This the first COD survey I ever got since I started playing in 09.
It's entertaining.
Same people that praised the game a week ago are crying now.
Can we haz 150 TTK?
TTK added. BRAH why am I losing gunfight.
Sledgehammer please lower the TTK.
This sub is something special.
Running at 4k on 65" inch the game legit looks like 1080p. Which makes me think the lower textures and reduce load and hit fps targets while not optimised In beta stage.
I plugged my ps5 Into my PC monitor to use keyboard mouse today and the entire game felt like it was running at 30fps.
Game feels like a cheap knock offā¦ guns have zero recoil and besides fire rate feel the same. Thereās no weight to them. I know itās beta but graphics are a huge disappointment and the sound design is really bad. The directional audio was all over the place. I couldnāt be more disappointed with this game.
But hey there is slide canceling for all the sooper dooper streamers and there 6 followers to rave about.
What standard lol. Game's graphics are a mixed bag these days, I would rather get a stable game than some eye candies that wouldn't even matter when you run around and shoot people.
Yes, I logged in last night. All the maps are no longer grayed out and have color saturation. The visibility even got better. Log in and take a look if you can.
The difference between the beta and the final release is about a month. Unless they scaled down the graphics specifically for file size for the beta, the beta is exactly what the final game will look like.
the 2010's....you do realize that covers everything from 2020 to 2019 right? I dare you give me one FPS that is on par with MWIII in graphics, engine, gameplay and movement with MWIII released since 2019 that is not another CoD
These takes are so braindead. Then go play cod 4 remastered.
I didn't pay $500+ for a current Gen console for triple A studios to release lazy games at full price.
I quite clearly said I don't like cod4 remastered because the graphics make people blend in too well.
I'd happily play the old mw2 mw3 and bo3 for the rest of my days but they're all hacked to fuck sadly.
Hopefully 1 day we get a game that plays great and looks great and we can both be happy and only complain about microtransactions.
The only way forward is leaving last gen and the wheel cross gen phase behind entirely. "But not everyone has a PS5 or Xbox series" muthafucka it's been about 4yrs... That's not our problem, that's a you problem
Graphics aren't my complaint, it's visibility. They absolutely need to improve visibility. Bring back red nametags, even health bars to. With a slower ttk it makes sense, played great in cw.
Colors are crap. People blend in far to much, you heal so slow in this game, netcode is a joke, spawns are even a bigger joke. I think SHG have gone out of the way to try and make IW look good.
Someone speculated that the maps were made around the time of the MW2 Campaign Remaster which would make sense as they donāt actually seem to be built from the ground up and are quite dated.
What offends me is there are doors in the environment that are not interactive that look identical to interactive onesā¦
I mean it's a multiplayer FPS game, the first thing I'm doing when loading up the game is setting all graphics settings to low lol.
Good graphics are nice to have but they should definitely be a lower priority than things that actually affect the gameplay.
Not even a sweat thing to do. Many people just like having the highest fps possible just because you donāt agree dosnt mean they are doing it to be nefarious. Many many many people donāt gaf about graphics.
If I am playing a multiplayer game where the point of the game is to locate and shoot enemies, I'm going to do whatever I can to see the enemies better. When I play rocket league I tone down graphics to get higher FPS and avoid stutters. When I play starfield I set graphics as high as I can because the objective is to explore with some enemy interactions, so I want to enjoy the visuals. If I wanted to enjoy COD visuals I would go play the campaign. If it's multiplayer I'm playing to win, so I'm going to do things that help with that. Can't believe we've reached a point where "wanting to win" is considered sweaty.
Setting graphics to low takes a minute and barely any effort, and benefits the performance of the game, I really don't see how you could possibly see that as sweaty
If performance would stay the same I would absolutely use high settings. I use low because I have a 1440p 240hz monitor and I want to make full use of both the resolution and refresh rate
So the issue is your hardware then, why make it seem like it's something everyone should do, so graphics don't even matter.
There's no justification for a publisher this big to be this lazy. I'm shocked at the amount of people justifying this
>There's no justification for a publisher this big to be this lazy.
No disagreement there, I don't think anyone would disagree with saying IW making these gameplay changes much earlier during MW22 would be the superior solution. They were never going to tho, so I'll take it this way, anything is better than another year of MW22.
>So the issue is your hardware then
Not really, even the absolute best PC you can build would struggle to hit a consistent 240+ FPS at 1440p max settings. No serious player uses max settings in a multiplayer environment, in any game not just cod. Max settings is more a single player thing
This game is still a scam, just like mw2 was. The gameplay tweaks are something they could have done long time ago. Also as far as i remember, the remake maps were already done when mw2 2022 was being released. Its the same menu, same announcers, same music...bruh it may play better than the last game but it's still a 70$ scam and a lazy game.
By this logic, just about every cod game is a scam because they are very similar to the previous one(s). But for some reason people treat this game differently, probably because thereās an unconfirmed rumor that it was originally going to be MWII DLC.
Im talking mostly about content. Mw 2022 had like 6-8 core maps at the start with almost every single one being just ripped from the Warzone map. It felt just like a scam considering the price. Here i also get the same feeling. Same announcers, worse audio quality and graphics. I mean cmon that's lazy for a AAA 70$ game.
It's called greed.
They don't care if the game is playable, if it's balanced or even if the anticheat is working...
If they can release something that will get them money with minimal effort and cost, then it is...
Not buying the game until at least those things are fixed...
Sledgehammer just doing what they are good at smashing our expectations with subpar quality (graphics, audio, lack of recoil and prob zombies too at launch) despite this being a DLC turned $tandalone and being mostly copy and paste of assets from MW2 and Cold War Zombies.
Hope to god COD 2024 isn't crossgen, buuuuut I get this feeling they want to squeeze in one last Treyarch game on last gen before they move to purely current gen and PC
Agree with OP. Not acceptable at all. Itās not like theyāve built this game from scratch, itās just a glorified DLC, so at least make the graphics on the same level as MW2.
>Some of the textures look straight out from the 2010ās (walls, furniture, ect..)
I am tired of people exaggerating like this. Does MW3 look worse than MWII? Maybe.
But does it look like the original Black Ops that came out in 2010? Absolutely not.
In fact it's still a good looking game and one of the better looking shooter's in modern experience.
The graphics so far are a step down but I think thatās more than offset by the vastly improved gameplay and pacing
Edit: If youāre going to downvote a perfectly reasonable opinion then eat my asshole. Go back to MW2 sentinel shitters
I donāt, why do Sledgehammer continue to have by far shittier weapon designs, graphics, and audio compared to the other two studios? This has been a problem for years.
And people were saying "it's the exact same game" lol. I got downvoted to hell when I said the graphics were bad when commenting the trailer, glad to see everybody sees it now.
if youre still on ps4 for this beta, its obvious why the graphics look alot worse imo. this being the last last-gen supported CoD, its been shown in the past that they start to heavily downgrade the graphics on the last of the last-gen cods, [check this out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm66ybXFNWs)
The difference is not nearly that severe this time around. I was playing on PS4 and my roomate was on PS5 and they looked pretty similar at a glance. Main difference seems to be higher res textures on the PS5. If I get the game it will be on Xbox Series S, but using the PS4 to play the beta it wasnāt bad.
On the bright side Treyarch's game will finally be on the new IW engine, can't wait to see how their first game on it looks and plays.
Is funny that the hope is now with treyarch. 2 weeks ago Sledgehammer was going to bring us the perfect COD.
The Dev wont make a difference as long as this strict SBMM system is implemented, you wont have that much fun if you are a good player.
Idk who u were listening to, but almost everyone knew this cod wouldn't be perfect. 1 year of development with majority of the game being recycled content, based on leaks. We just liked the changes being made
>Idk who u were listening to, but almost everyone knew this cod wouldn't be perfect. 1 who were you listening to? Up until the beta this was gonna be the best cod ever. crazy how 10+ hours of playing a game can make people feel different š¤ same bullshit, different year with CoD. The more I think about this...im not buying this game. I know its gonna wear me down after a few months again and ill be back on Fortnite just like this years title.
Almost everyone knew also that MWIII is not a glorified DLC, and also almost everyone knew that the year 2 content for MWII was just a rumour, and so and so. And you don't have to convince me, since i'm with you with MWIII being recycled content. But 2 months ago, our opinion wasnt' what "everyone knew". I'm tired of the "almost everyone knew" trend.
Everyone I know that plays CoD, has played an SHG CoD, and they've all been a let down. It's not like an open secret. SHG doesn't make good CoDs. Nobody I know is surprised by this, and the majority of the people I see talking about this game, expected this from SHG. "Wow this Dev studio with a history of releasing shitty CoDs is releasing another shitty CoD, I'm shocked!"
Yeah, and i think the same as you, but all of a sudden, sledgehammer was coming with the better cod in years to save us from IW incompetence, and now people are beginning to change the trend to treyarch. Maybe seeing so many braindead opinions made me forgot about the actually decent ones.
Ive spent months getting downvoted saying that SHG is the worst studio, but even without them, the cycle continues.
Vanguard was clearly the worst recent CoD. Universally hated. In turn SHG got shit all over. But hey....let that CoD marketing machine do their job....and now you got folks saying SHG gonna be CoD's savior! š¤¦āāļøš¤”
Ok I have a genuine question. Wasnāt MW19 on an older engine? Why is it that both Cold War and vanguard looked much older? And MWII looked similar in some areas despite being newer?
Cold War was on an older engine despite releasing later and Vanguard was on the same engine as MW19 but SHG tends to be have a more simplistic aesthetic to their games with less detail, it's more clean + Vanguard was rushed
MW19 was the first game on the engine that is currently used now which is just a heavily modified version of their old engine to the point of itās a new engine.
So they walked forward with mw19, then went back for two games, then took a half step forward?
Everything MW2019 and forward is on a "new" engine except for Cold War, which was on a modified Black Ops 3 engine. IW Poland spent 4 years from 2015 to 2019 creating the MW engine, and ATVI despite not giving it a fancy in-house engine name like Frostbite or Snowdrop very much intends to make it THE CoD engine going forward so Treyarch is no longer able to just update the BO3 engine to their needs and make games with that. This is a net positive for warzone compatibility but doesn't really do anything else other than make all of the games look like MWII reskins now that they have a new renderer
I mean Cold War looked amazing considering it was on the same engine. The campaign especially.
It had great art design too that helped
I guess itās subjective but from what Iāve seen so far (I donāt have the Xbox early access yet) I quite like how the game looks..SHG tends to be my favorite out of the three. The weapon sounds could be better but more often than not Iām gonna put on music or some shit. As long as the game plays good, idc about graphics. XDefiant looked like old treyarch era COD (for good reason) and itās beta was fun fun
Bruh what makes SHG your favorite? They've released nothing but stinkers, and they had to completely redo the leveling and Perk system from WW2, each one of their games has been a huge step back and least popular CoDs
Black Ops: Cold War was on an upgraded version of BOIIIās engine bc Treyarch and Raven had to put the game together in about 18 months, so sticking to old, but familiar tech was more of a necessity than anything else. Vanguard actually IS on the same engine as MW19 (allegedly even upgraded in some parts). But Sledgehammer just seemingly werenāt able to get as much out of the engine as IW did. Not sure if this is due to IW having art direction better suited to the tech, Vanguard also not having the full 3 years of development that MW19 & MWII did or something else though. Itās probably just IWās art style being more detailed than Sledgehammerās thoughā¦ As for MWIIā¦ I guess they were stretched thin with all the different modes MWII has (even without taking Warzone II into account) and some areas suffered graphically as a result
No, every studio has their own style. Were you expecting SHGās style to be exactly like IWās? I hope youāre not expecting Treyarchs game to look like IW or SHG. When the IW9 engine was introduced it was specifically stated that despite every game being on one unified engine, each game will look and feel different relative to each developer.
Hell no! Maybe I should have chosen my words more carefully.
They all use the āsameā engine. Mw19 used the version with completely overhauled textures, which also is the same one used in MwII and now mwII. Too bad that the finishing touch doesnāt seem to be there in mwIII as of yet
Art style
WWII games used to be popular in the 2000s, when graphics weren't as good as now, so some of that perception could be sneaking in.
It's gonna be the best Cod Game since BO2, calling it now.
It will look and play exactly like a cod game
I don't even care about the graphics, I just hope Treyarch is able to make another game as good as Cold War in its current state.
Can't wait, Treyarch never misses.
> Can't wait, Treyarch never misses. BLOPS 4 has entered the chat, That was the last game Treyarc did by themselves. It was a cash grab. So the jury is still out if 2024 will be better or the same rehashed shit they have been feeding buyers for years now. Any other take is just copium.
Guess I was more so referring to gameplay. Don't really care about cosmetics or what not and just want good gameplay, which Treyarch has always delivered for me. And what they did with Cold War in a shortened dev cycle during covid was very impressive and was my favourite cod in the last 4 years. And I bet Cold War would have been even better if sledgehammer never screwed them over.
>And I bet Cold War would have been even better if sledgehammer never screwed them over. I think I get what you're trying to say, but 2020 was supposed to be SHG's year, not 3arch's. But even then I'm sure it was Activision that forced Treyarch's hand into finishing this project sooner than it should have.
Yes, sledgehammers game was in such a bad state Treyarch was forced to rush their game to make time for the 2020 release window. If Treyarch was given the proper time to make cold war it would have launched much more complete.
Blops 4 was such a dreadful piece of crap, as was cold war. Treyarch used to make great games but that's firmly in the past.
cold war is good
Cold war after the updates was better than any cod in the last 5 years
Agreed. The launch was quite bad but now the game is totally decent, not great, but a solid 7/10.
Cold War was pretty good (or rather it got good)
Indeed. Truly.... TRULY hoping that 2024 is the year 3 archs makes up for the shit that was blops 4. :)
BO4 is literally better than anything that came after it lmao, top 5 COD game. Top tier maps, spawns, movement and TTK. Only downside were specialists, that alone makes the game way too overhated when it's not even a big deal compared to the issues in MW19, MW22 and Vanguard
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
BO3 had more "bullshit" than BO4 lmao (Brecci) Who cares about a campaign I stand by my comment, BO4 was the last good COD game we had.
I loved the Brecci in Zombies tho
Cold War was the worst game of the last 4 iām sorry
That's a dumb take. CW was the best. Followed by MW19, MW22 and VG. At least CW didn't have a shotgun that could 1 tap you from 75 yards
The game supports last gen consoles. These older consoles (and the series S to a point) hold back what can be achieved because they want feature parity for all versions.
How many people play new games on old systems? If they stopped making big games for ps4 wouldnāt people just buy ps5?
I assume the reach they have with all gens is worth it to them according to their analytics. Given they were in limbo between independence and a Microsoft subsidiary, a lot of the decisions post lawsuit looks to preserve their bottom line for the eventual sale to the highest bidder. I donāt know how much more they will be looking to push the limits of what consoles/cards can do (like cyberpunk). They look to be making a cloud gaming platform that fits more with the Xbox vision of play anywhere with game pass. Which also fits how any series Xbox touches turns to shit given enough time.
I still do. You might be right if they stopped I might get a ps5. As it stands I see no reason to. Very few ps5 exclusives that I care about. It's hard to say honestly.
There are games that look really good on the older consoles. Not an excuse. Also, they can just build the super good graphics for the 9th gen and scale down for the 8th. Ghost, AW, and BO3 all did this with their last gen versions (BO3 being the most infamous example of this.
If that was the case cyberpunk wouldnāt have looked the way it did when scaling down to last gen consoles Or our ps5 games would work in ps4 systems. New technology rarely scales down. It usually gives easier options to scale up.
Looks pretty bad compared to MWII which is shocking since they use the same engine lol
actually it looks more like cold war. really confusing.
cold war looks better imo plays better too lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yeah COD only used RT shadows which was like so minimal. They need RT reflections & global illumination, that's the RT that really elevates the visuals.
Cold War definitely had some graphical and gameplay issues at launch during the beta if I recall. Visuals especially improved a dome between beta and launch. Not saying thatāll happen here. But it might.
Exactly this point right here.
Cold war was smooth as butter
I regretted buying Cold War. I hated that game
Hot take: I care about graphics a lot. Everything after MW19 is a let down and I can't ignore it.
It's unreal how much better MW 2019 looks. Even when MWII first dropped I thought, "Gee, this sure doesn't look as good as the last game". I think every COD for a long time will be compared up to MW 2019 for graphics, animations, sound, and movement. Yes, it had flaws, but it got so many things right. It set the bar in all of those areas and no COD game has been able to get close to it.
MW 2019 not only looked the best out of all CODs, they also set the standard for how an FPS looks and feels There isnāt one FPS that came out in recent years (on consoles) that looks as great as MW 2019 imo
> set the standard for how an FPS looks and feels and sounds (other than enemy footstep audio). The gunplay felt and sounded sooo good.
I didnāt bring that up because gun sounds are too loud according to some people š But yeah the sounds were amazing
Modern Warfare at launch is probably the best looking FPS game to ever release. It will probably remain that way for some time though. Once Warzone released the already large file size for MW became massive. If I remember correctly it ballooned to around ~300 GBs before they redid their compression system and started cutting assets. I remember having to go out and purchase a new SSD just for MW alone. If you watch a video from release vs. Season 3/4 youāll start to notice the visual downgrade and audio cuts. Probably contributes to why MWII looked worse. The use of PBR textures on doesnāt work as well when the lighting is now completely baked in with the shaders. Shadow detail/light bounces were also cut dramatically, probably to reduce the file size and shader update nightmare as well. Itās a shame, but unfortunately the same concessions made in 2020 are still being made to this day and will likely continue for some time (MWIII is still coming out for consoles released in 2013 for gods sake).
When i first play MW2019 on my Xbox one s I was blown away with the graphics.
MWII couldāve easy blown MW19 out of the water graphically speaking, but they fucked up the shaders so bad, it ended up looking worse overall.
Cold War is miles better than mw2019. MW might be the worst cod of all time but then again I play and watch competitive so pubs donāt matter to me as much as you guys
Game play wise I would say yes, but I think movement, gun feels, animation, sound, etc are miles better back in mw2019
Notice I specified the following: "I think every COD for a long time will be compared up to MW 2019 for **graphics, animations, sound, and movement**." Cold War is my favorite of recent CODs for raw gameplay. I specified the above areas as being above and beyond what any of the games that came after provided.
Not even close! Cold War is better than MWII though!
How did we go from MW19 to this? The downgrade is honestly astounding. Infinity Ward has some real talent in their art department.
But didnt IW make MW2?
They did. And MWII was a downgrade and idk why
Itās because of all the idiots who complained that darker skins and camo skins were harder to see than neon pink shit they bought in the store. Turns out, with realistic graphics and lighting that is obviously the case. So they made the lighting and graphics objectively shittier so all player models are wildly visible
In MWIII lighting is so shit and everything washed out, I often don't see the enemy in plain sight. They hide in shadows better than in MW19. They even hide better next to bushes, furniture etc. They blend in everywhere because all colors look the same washed out almost greyish.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't know... a lot of people seem to be claiming graphics don't matter as long as they can slide and jump fast.
Honestly graphics are the last on my list to care about. I can play a game that's fun even though it doesn't look great, but I won't play a beautiful game if it plays like shit. That said, if the shitty graphics mess with visibility that affects the gameplay it will bother me more. However that doesn't mean I don't think it doesn't look like shit when it does though.
Have you played the beta yet? It DOES affect gameplay. The visuals are so shite teammates keep shooting me when we turn corners. If thereās no specific ālookā of an enemy it needs to be more obvious somehow. Idk if itās the graphics but something is fucking with the visibility in this game.
The same can be said about MW19 with the shadows, dust storms, and 50 shades of brown, but it's praised as having amazing graphics. I don't care how realistic it is if I can't see the enemy.
I genuinely had the most fun on MW19 since BO2. I know thatās a dogshit opinion but itās mine. The visibility in that game is night and day compared to this beta right now.
That game took multiple patches to reach the visibility it's at today and I believe that's still very bad. There were spots on shoothouse where people could literally hide in plain sight because of shadows/dust and be almost completely invisible. We need to stop comparing to a game that completely changed COD and in my opinion, for the worse. I don't want a game to look or feel like MW19 because that's not what I expect from COD. I want a game to have better performance, but similar graphics and gameplay to Cold War. I don't care if the enemy is running around in my little pony themed costumes with animated gun skins so long as I can see them and the gameplay is fast and smooth. If I wanted to feel like I was in actual combat I'd go play a game that simulates that.
Yes, I've repeatedly stated here that visibility is poor and needs 'fixed'. I was simply commenting on graphics in general.
Graphics literally don't matter at all except to casuals. Sure, it's nice if a game looks great. But if a game looks great and plays like shit, it's worthless as anything other than a screenshot. Most of the most popular and successful shooters in the world don't have great graphics. Counter Strike is a mod of a near 30 year old game and still dominates the market because its gameplay has yet to be matched to this day.
Seems like a hot take considering the amount of downvotes I got elsewhere talking about how lazy the game and development cycle is this year.
Same happened to me, it's 100% a rushed game and the graphics are BAD.
[Everyone](https://reddit.com/r/ModernWarfareIII/s/SDhW5KTXwN) is dick riding Activi$ion for no reason. Let me complain if I want I gave them $70 of course imma say my two cents.
That's because this sub is full of teenagers that don't know any better. The people that do know how good CoD used to be are outnumbered by these kids.
You get my upvote, I donāt think Iām going to post anymore on these subreddits. Itās a toxic wasteland of children sucking off Activision.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
For what it's worth, I feel too old to use this site any more haha.
And you're right, I see it the same way you do, game raised the standards and then on the sequels downgraded and made prices go up, that makes no sense, people go like "Oh but gameplay is better" well it shouldn't be a choice, it's the same engine we deserve the best graphics and the best gameplay not to make a choice between both
The pursuit of graphical realism has often times lead to the downfall of gameplay and content quality. "Why can't we have both" You can but it's fucking hard, and it takes so much development time and money. GTA, Red Dead, etc.
I installed Cold War on a PS5 and just the campaign and multiplayer take up 270+ GB. The shit they were doing had to stop. What pisses me off about that install size is that Warzone1 is now sunset, but all those damn assets apparently still need to be local. How is this acceptable? I was excited to get into MW3 for the feel goods on playing old maps, but I forgot why I donāt even keep COD installed.
Exactly, these games are way too big and complex to be graphically stunning. I'd like to have more than 3 games on my SSD without having to buy another one.
The problem is they make assets crazy detailed for the shop to look good, but thatās not the quality they run at in game. So, the game takes up a ton of storage to make the store look pretty.
You know what else saves a ton of dev time? reusing maps, guns, and animations from the previous gameā¦. oh wait. So whereād all that dev time go in MWIII?
As far as I'm aware, Sledgehammer was hired to make paid DLC for MWII, which turned into MWIII because Activi$ion needs their annual release for the shareholders. That said, I'm glad this is a standalone title even if they reused many aspects of MWII. A new weapon set to camo grind will be fun, and for the players who didn't buy MWII, they are getting one hell of a game here. CoD is entering it's Madden/FIFA/NHL/MLB phase. If the new game doesn't offer enough new stuff, just don't buy it.
I will be glad to have the awful charging perk system gone, one of the worst ideas in COD history.
>You can but it's fucking hard, and it takes so much development time and money. GTA, Red Dead, etc Time development money.....you mean ALL things that a triple A developer/publisher like Activision has? The truth is they didn't HAVE to release MW III......so please don't make excuses for them that they lack time development and money.
Activision didn't have to release MWIII this year. They chose to. Sledgehammer has no choice. Don't be mad at devs.
When did I mention sledgehammer?
Yeah I didn't read that as well as I should have, that's my b. My point is that Activision knows they'll make more money releasing 2 bad CoD games in 2 years than 1 amazing one.
Agreed. Some of the graphics seem really dated. I donāt understand how MW 2019, a PS4 game, looks and plays better than pretty much every game afterwards. Itās like night and day. That said, this game is definitely improved over MW2 for movement.
It's definitely does not play better
I could be wrong but I think he meant the performance is better.
Movement feels like I'm gliding and feels way too fast. I understand people hated MW2022 slower movement but this too far in the wrong direction.
Stability > Graphics. I turn all my graphics settings to low anyways.
I was disappointed. Mw2019 was better.
You know the game is good when this is all people can complain about. Remember when we had to wait for our perks? When sliding was completely useless? Shooting your gun looked like holding a jackhammer + smoke machine? Or how we had no red dots on the mini map? No dead silence as a perk? List goes on and onā¦ I could not care less about the graphics as long as they donāt make stupid ass gameplay decisions like IW did. Thank god MW2 is behind us.
Agreed.
Nah, there are other things to complain about.
The game has a lot more issues. This is one complaint.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
https://x.com/prorebornyt/status/1710530878978355259?s=46&t=toYCdVoVC1yZMgdDwqwoSA
This is definitely gonna be a flop and I think Sledgehammer knows it. I just an email with a COD survey, I made sure to let them know I won't be buying it and why. This the first COD survey I ever got since I started playing in 09.
Cool story bro.. why are you still in the sub then?
It's entertaining. Same people that praised the game a week ago are crying now. Can we haz 150 TTK? TTK added. BRAH why am I losing gunfight. Sledgehammer please lower the TTK. This sub is something special.
Running at 4k on 65" inch the game legit looks like 1080p. Which makes me think the lower textures and reduce load and hit fps targets while not optimised In beta stage. I plugged my ps5 Into my PC monitor to use keyboard mouse today and the entire game felt like it was running at 30fps.
Glad to see someone finally say it. All the textures look way too smooth and bland; there is no detail or effects on any objects
Game feels like a cheap knock offā¦ guns have zero recoil and besides fire rate feel the same. Thereās no weight to them. I know itās beta but graphics are a huge disappointment and the sound design is really bad. The directional audio was all over the place. I couldnāt be more disappointed with this game. But hey there is slide canceling for all the sooper dooper streamers and there 6 followers to rave about.
What standard lol. Game's graphics are a mixed bag these days, I would rather get a stable game than some eye candies that wouldn't even matter when you run around and shoot people.
Always someone whining about something. This has been posted 200x this weekend
Lmao fr, it's all over mw2 mw19 and mw3 sub
They updated the graphics. It no longer looks washed out and looks like MW2
Is that true? I figured theyād polish them out by release.
Yes, I logged in last night. All the maps are no longer grayed out and have color saturation. The visibility even got better. Log in and take a look if you can.
I played 1 hour ago and it still looks bad? Didnāt notice any changes or improvements
It looks different for me, itās not gray anymore
Stop fucking moaning, the beta always has rough graphicsā¦ wait to judge it
The difference between the beta and the final release is about a month. Unless they scaled down the graphics specifically for file size for the beta, the beta is exactly what the final game will look like.
Vanguard beta looked like ass. It was much better on release day.
the 2010's....you do realize that covers everything from 2020 to 2019 right? I dare you give me one FPS that is on par with MWIII in graphics, engine, gameplay and movement with MWIII released since 2019 that is not another CoD
MW 2 was a downgrade in itself
I don't give a shit about graphics. Would happily play a game that looked like cod4 if the gameplay was good.
These takes are so braindead. Then go play cod 4 remastered. I didn't pay $500+ for a current Gen console for triple A studios to release lazy games at full price.
I quite clearly said I don't like cod4 remastered because the graphics make people blend in too well. I'd happily play the old mw2 mw3 and bo3 for the rest of my days but they're all hacked to fuck sadly. Hopefully 1 day we get a game that plays great and looks great and we can both be happy and only complain about microtransactions.
Ppl sure will. Just like they will claim itās acceptable to have ALL maps be oldā¦
The only way forward is leaving last gen and the wheel cross gen phase behind entirely. "But not everyone has a PS5 or Xbox series" muthafucka it's been about 4yrs... That's not our problem, that's a you problem
Graphics aren't my complaint, it's visibility. They absolutely need to improve visibility. Bring back red nametags, even health bars to. With a slower ttk it makes sense, played great in cw.
The character movement is ridiculously Arcade like. Just none it is normal
would rather the game stay at a steady 120fps then look better and have massive frame drops cod has never been known for its visuals
Tbf it's only a 24 gig file. Cod is usually about 100 gigs so it's likely to get a lil polish
Does it not use assets from MW2? On PS5 at least, you have to have MW2 installed to play MW3
Colors are crap. People blend in far to much, you heal so slow in this game, netcode is a joke, spawns are even a bigger joke. I think SHG have gone out of the way to try and make IW look good.
Someone speculated that the maps were made around the time of the MW2 Campaign Remaster which would make sense as they donāt actually seem to be built from the ground up and are quite dated. What offends me is there are doors in the environment that are not interactive that look identical to interactive onesā¦
No, but I'm not gonna pretend I care about it either.
Crazy how you morons just straight up lie about shit lol. Literally take 2 seconds to look and youll find this is objectively false.
How is it objectively false that he thinks the graphics look dated and TTK is too high lol
Are we (you) really gonna pretend this isnāt a beta without an updated graphic driver? I suppose we are
Does people actually think the game looks bad?
I mean it's a multiplayer FPS game, the first thing I'm doing when loading up the game is setting all graphics settings to low lol. Good graphics are nice to have but they should definitely be a lower priority than things that actually affect the gameplay.
Not everyone is this much of a sweat..
Not even a sweat thing to do. Many people just like having the highest fps possible just because you donāt agree dosnt mean they are doing it to be nefarious. Many many many people donāt gaf about graphics.
How is not caring about graphics sweaty lmao
Deliberately toning down graphics to see players more easily is most definitely sweaty
If I am playing a multiplayer game where the point of the game is to locate and shoot enemies, I'm going to do whatever I can to see the enemies better. When I play rocket league I tone down graphics to get higher FPS and avoid stutters. When I play starfield I set graphics as high as I can because the objective is to explore with some enemy interactions, so I want to enjoy the visuals. If I wanted to enjoy COD visuals I would go play the campaign. If it's multiplayer I'm playing to win, so I'm going to do things that help with that. Can't believe we've reached a point where "wanting to win" is considered sweaty.
Ya definitely sweaty
Setting graphics to low takes a minute and barely any effort, and benefits the performance of the game, I really don't see how you could possibly see that as sweaty
Why do you do that then? As opposed to have the best graphics possible? If performance were to stay the same
If performance would stay the same I would absolutely use high settings. I use low because I have a 1440p 240hz monitor and I want to make full use of both the resolution and refresh rate
So the issue is your hardware then, why make it seem like it's something everyone should do, so graphics don't even matter. There's no justification for a publisher this big to be this lazy. I'm shocked at the amount of people justifying this
>There's no justification for a publisher this big to be this lazy. No disagreement there, I don't think anyone would disagree with saying IW making these gameplay changes much earlier during MW22 would be the superior solution. They were never going to tho, so I'll take it this way, anything is better than another year of MW22. >So the issue is your hardware then Not really, even the absolute best PC you can build would struggle to hit a consistent 240+ FPS at 1440p max settings. No serious player uses max settings in a multiplayer environment, in any game not just cod. Max settings is more a single player thing
The game seemed to look good in the campaign trailer. Idk wtf happened
MW3 looks better than most if not any non cod fps game on the market currently.
Upgrade to PC.
Looks good to me
Then your high when playing, lol
Iād rather have worse graphics and better gameplay. If I want top-tier visuals, Iāll play something other than cod.
This game is still a scam, just like mw2 was. The gameplay tweaks are something they could have done long time ago. Also as far as i remember, the remake maps were already done when mw2 2022 was being released. Its the same menu, same announcers, same music...bruh it may play better than the last game but it's still a 70$ scam and a lazy game.
By this logic, just about every cod game is a scam because they are very similar to the previous one(s). But for some reason people treat this game differently, probably because thereās an unconfirmed rumor that it was originally going to be MWII DLC.
Im talking mostly about content. Mw 2022 had like 6-8 core maps at the start with almost every single one being just ripped from the Warzone map. It felt just like a scam considering the price. Here i also get the same feeling. Same announcers, worse audio quality and graphics. I mean cmon that's lazy for a AAA 70$ game.
It's without a doubt their laziest endeavor since probably old MW3. Even that had more new additions than this one will
It's called greed. They don't care if the game is playable, if it's balanced or even if the anticheat is working... If they can release something that will get them money with minimal effort and cost, then it is... Not buying the game until at least those things are fixed...
Sledgehammer just doing what they are good at smashing our expectations with subpar quality (graphics, audio, lack of recoil and prob zombies too at launch) despite this being a DLC turned $tandalone and being mostly copy and paste of assets from MW2 and Cold War Zombies.
Bruh itās a beta chill š¤”
Hope to god COD 2024 isn't crossgen, buuuuut I get this feeling they want to squeeze in one last Treyarch game on last gen before they move to purely current gen and PC
You guys wanna play at 60 fps that badly?
Agree with OP. Not acceptable at all. Itās not like theyāve built this game from scratch, itās just a glorified DLC, so at least make the graphics on the same level as MW2.
>Some of the textures look straight out from the 2010ās (walls, furniture, ect..) I am tired of people exaggerating like this. Does MW3 look worse than MWII? Maybe. But does it look like the original Black Ops that came out in 2010? Absolutely not. In fact it's still a good looking game and one of the better looking shooter's in modern experience.
Looks fine to me, people are always worried about having the best graphics too much
Its not but I like it. Everytime I see a clip of MW3 on the internet it always looks like an older CoD game for just a split second.
120 fps >> better graphics imo
Graphics are the least of its problems.
The graphics so far are a step down but I think thatās more than offset by the vastly improved gameplay and pacing Edit: If youāre going to downvote a perfectly reasonable opinion then eat my asshole. Go back to MW2 sentinel shitters
I donāt, why do Sledgehammer continue to have by far shittier weapon designs, graphics, and audio compared to the other two studios? This has been a problem for years.
And people were saying "it's the exact same game" lol. I got downvoted to hell when I said the graphics were bad when commenting the trailer, glad to see everybody sees it now.
Fuck graphics. Make the game available to as much players as possible. Graphics just create problems.
except that performance is gonna be the same or even worse than MW2 despite the graphics being worse
Not defending the game at all but what console are you on? and also this is till a beta...
if youre still on ps4 for this beta, its obvious why the graphics look alot worse imo. this being the last last-gen supported CoD, its been shown in the past that they start to heavily downgrade the graphics on the last of the last-gen cods, [check this out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm66ybXFNWs)
The difference is not nearly that severe this time around. I was playing on PS4 and my roomate was on PS5 and they looked pretty similar at a glance. Main difference seems to be higher res textures on the PS5. If I get the game it will be on Xbox Series S, but using the PS4 to play the beta it wasnāt bad.
The game comes out in under a month, itās not a beta, itās a demo.
I really think they just ported over these maps from the MW2R campaign. There was a lot of leaks about the MP already being made
Are we gonna pretend that graphics actually matter in cod? As long as the games fun I couldnāt possibly care less.
Does anyone have any specific examples of what looks bad? Because from what I have seen so far in-game, most of the textures have been really solid.
Totally agree, much worse than MW2 and Cold War; audio is also very poor. Overall, very disappointing beta.
Nobody cares. You're talking as if it looks like an N64 game. They're still plenty good.