Are they finally gonna update the engine? or recycle the same shit again.
I should hope a pretty meh computer could run it, it's only CoD4 with more poly's and more GUI shit cluttering the screen
Aren't Treyarch CoDs usually not very good at launch performance wise?
Wait that a soldier enhanced with an exoskeleton, AR tech helmet, enhanced with augmentations, with a mech behind him as well as a drone fleet flying in the skies. And he's using an AK (p much)?
All right so now that the obligatory "IT'S THE SAME THING EVERY YEAR HURR" posts are done let's actually discuss.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;47609042]Compared to Cod Ghosts this is pretty close.
Also 6GB of ram? lol let's not have a cod ghosts repeat[/QUOTE]
It was the same for Advanced Warfare, in case you missed that one.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;47609140]I should hope a pretty meh computer could run it, it's only CoD4 with more poly's and more GUI shit cluttering the screen[/QUOTE]
It's really not but if you want to believe that go right ahead. Just like how CSGO is CS:S with more polys and more GUI.
the other specs fair game but 6gb of ram?
[QUOTE=ashxu;47609778]the other specs fair game but 6gb of ram?[/QUOTE]
COD games always have had an enormous amount of unique textures they use in their maps. Which is why games like Ghosts were 60 gigs. They aren't necessarily high-res, there's just a huge amount of them.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;47609974]COD games always have had an enormous amount of unique textures they use in their maps. Which is why games like Ghosts were 60 gigs. They aren't necessarily high-res, there's just a huge amount of them.[/QUOTE]
That many textures allow them to give each level its own identity, but at the cost of space which people don't like. If you cut down on textures but reuse assets, people will call you lazy. It's a bit of a lose-lose situation, but I prefer the higher file size with more textures over reuse of assets.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
