Robert Bowling: “We’ve Moved Beyond the MW2 Engine”

So Modern Warfare 3 looks pretty . Real pretty. Parts of what we see in the new trailer look like they could fit in previous Modern Warfare titles, and then others look way, way beyond it, like in the above in-engine image. Oh hey, so that’s not just my imagination — Infinity Ward’s Robert Bowling tweeted this:

We haven’t gone into detail on the engine yet but we’ve moved beyond the MW2 engine and added a lot of cool stuff for MW3.

Like I said above, anybody with eyes can tell they haven’t built a whole new engine for the new game, but damn if it isn’t obvious that they’ve made some major, major alterations. It actually looks like Crysis 2 in a few shots, but that may be more because of the scale of the set pieces, which is of a size we’ve only very rarely seen in games. Crysis 2 is the last game with that kind of perspective in New York, and so it’s the logical comparison. Either way, got damn.

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

6 Comments on Robert Bowling: “We’ve Moved Beyond the MW2 Engine”

anas

On May 24, 2011 at 10:55 am

i on game play

xbabaganooshx

On May 24, 2011 at 11:36 am

“It actually looks like Crysis 2 in a few shots”

Are you stupid or high? You are EXACTLY the reason why the CoD franchise is still in business.

God damn stealth clowns.

SupremeAllah

On May 24, 2011 at 11:56 am

The screenshot above does look somehwhat similar to WALLSTREET in Crysis2 MP.

Of course, as we all know already, Crysis looked way better than Crysis 2.

Not that it matters, because we’re discussing the very thing I’ve been talking about for ages now, the COD games being churned out on the same dated tech, and we’re expected to pay full price. And don’t get me started on paying 15 bucks for maps.

There’s a reason I quit buying these games after World at War. I take that back, there’s many reasons and I’ve listed a few of the most valid.

Seriously, why does nobody call out these people on any of this stuff? Moved beyond the MW2 engine…but we’re still using the same engine from the first Modern Warfare. Sure buddy. And I’m a chinese jet pilot.

Anthony S

On May 25, 2011 at 4:17 pm

SupremeAllah said it… I don’t know if I could put it better myself. Look at EA — I don’t particularly like the company as a whole, but their decisions on how to move forward in their Battlefield franchise is what Activision needs to recognize will build a successful and supportive fanbase.

Right now they’re banking on the fact that their fanboys will continue to support them indefinitely, paying big bucks for a game that’s got a great story- but is mediocre when it comes to true advancements in aspects that will provide a long-term fulfilling experience. (Just look at how they treat their customers. Right now ALL of there COD games cost 40+ dollars, and are rarely on any sort of sale. MW2 is still going for $50, and its years old… They treat us like garbage. BFBC2 on the other hand, is a mere $20, and I’ve seen it on sale for under $10 twice in the past year.

The Frostbyte 2 engine, and EA’s decisions as of late are the epitome of good business. Though they may not have as large of a fanbase, their games are more enjoyable and I feel more satisfied with them as a whole. As of right now I’m not interested in MW3. Just my two cents!

Brandon James Clark

On May 28, 2011 at 1:31 pm

Stupid college frat boys will eat this game up thinking they are cool for discovering the word “frag” and “noob”.

The rest of us on PC will be playing BF3, and loving every minute of it.

Snowman

On September 28, 2011 at 7:44 am

@SupremeAllah
I don’t think you’re right about the screenshot looking like Crysis 2. Maybe on a design level. It’s NYC in ruins. But the effects that are in Crysis 2 and Crysis 1 and most games nowdays beats Mw3 by a long shot. Especially when you get into the details.

Like this, any game can be misstaken to look good if you take a quick glance at a low resolution screenshot (estimate 1.5-3 seconds or so). But look beyond that, cloth effects. The fire, flares, explosive effects, smoke, most things we look at with exception of textures (I assume they didn’t cripple the game here, I have yet to see proof but it wouldn’t make sense.) are far below what should be expected by a 2011 game.

I understand their choices though. Updating to a better engine (newer actually, the Quake 3 engine is an amazing engine, it’s simply outdated) is necessary. I’m expecting the next cod game to not be on this same engine. Most likely they will move to iD tech 5. Since their dev team is used with it’s predecessor. And Carmack makes amazing engines..