|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 10, 2010 20:40:01 GMT -6
Well I played a big chunk of the single player on PC. It's not bad from what I played so far, although I'm really dissapointed with the quality of the textures on PC. I'm running 1920x1200 16:10 aspect ratio. They literally look like horribly low res PS2 textures even on max settings. For God's sake I have everything maxed out and my frame rate is still like 100+ even in heavy combat and it's not like I have a super computer. The game will purposely give you a close up view of Reznov or some other characters face or something, and they look ugly as a chunk of bear shit because their facial textures are so washed out. I also noticed that explosions and smoke effects and the sky boxes also look really low res and kind of cheap, like they only last for a quick second. (cough console shit cough) Idk maybe it's just me? I swear WaW has prettier graphics than Black Ops. Actually, I'd bet my life that Call of Duty 2 has much better graphics. Why? Because it was MADE for PC. I just played WaW last week and I remember thinking to myself how good the game still looked. And then when I started playing this it hit me immediately how washed out everything seems. Even the blood and gore effects seem cheaper and less realistic than they did in WaW. Here we are in the age of technology when PC's should shine, and we are getting jipped because of consoles and money grubbing marketing teams. I have to say the animation is pretty smooth and the subtle facial animations can be cool at times, but the textures just ruin it for me. They only good when you look at the game from far away, or the picture is downsized a lot. The story seems interesting, though a little confusing and hard to keep up with. Probably a bit short too. Reznov is a cool character. There was one cool flash back type of level that I really enjoyed where you get to fight Nazi's. Based on my initial reaction up to this point and how I felt this far into WaW, I'd say I was def enjoying WaW more. Not just because of the historical aspect but because the game felt more solid and polished for PC. You could tell it was designed a bit for younger console boys but still had a good core of what CoD was about. I feel like Black Ops sadly moved more towards what IW was doing with MW2. So far I'd give it a 7/10 based on the SP. If I was a console fanboy and had this on 360 or something I'd prob of given it a 9/10. But being a PC gamer my whole life this doesn't cut it. Especially for a $60 fucking dollar price tag. Us PC gamers get less than what we should these days, and they up the price. The new generation of consoles ruined PC gaming. EDIT. I actually think I'm going to make a screenshot comparison of Black Ops, WaW and even CoD2 sometime this week to see if I can prove my point with the visuals. Idk if it would be visible in a screenshot on here though cause they will all be downsized way down from what I see on my monitor, but I'll prob do it anyways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2010 20:03:13 GMT -6
Got my copy today, installing now!!
|
|
|
Post by Kool_Aid on Nov 13, 2010 20:07:16 GMT -6
Well I played a big chunk of the single player on PC. It's not bad from what I played so far, although I'm really dissapointed with the quality of the textures on PC. I'm running 1920x1200 16:10 aspect ratio. They literally look like horribly low res PS2 textures even on max settings. For God's sake I have everything maxed out and my frame rate is still like 100+ even in heavy combat and it's not like I have a super computer. The game will purposely give you a close up view of Reznov or some other characters face or something, and they look ugly as a chunk of bear shit because their facial textures are so washed out. I also noticed that explosions and smoke effects and the sky boxes also look really low res and kind of cheap, like they only last for a quick second. (cough console shit cough) Idk maybe it's just me? I swear WaW has prettier graphics than Black Ops. Actually, I'd bet my life that Call of Duty 2 has much better graphics. Why? Because it was MADE for PC. I just played WaW last week and I remember thinking to myself how good the game still looked. And then when I started playing this it hit me immediately how washed out everything seems. Even the blood and gore effects seem cheaper and less realistic than they did in WaW. Here we are in the age of technology when PC's should shine, and we are getting jipped because of consoles and money grubbing marketing teams. I have to say the animation is pretty smooth and the subtle facial animations can be cool at times, but the textures just ruin it for me. They only good when you look at the game from far away, or the picture is downsized a lot. The story seems interesting, though a little confusing and hard to keep up with. Probably a bit short too. Reznov is a cool character. There was one cool flash back type of level that I really enjoyed where you get to fight Nazi's. Based on my initial reaction up to this point and how I felt this far into WaW, I'd say I was def enjoying WaW more. Not just because of the historical aspect but because the game felt more solid and polished for PC. You could tell it was designed a bit for younger console boys but still had a good core of what CoD was about. I feel like Black Ops sadly moved more towards what IW was doing with MW2. So far I'd give it a 7/10 based on the SP. If I was a console fanboy and had this on 360 or something I'd prob of given it a 9/10. But being a PC gamer my whole life this doesn't cut it. Especially for a $60 fucking dollar price tag. Us PC gamers get less than what we should these days, and they up the price. The new generation of consoles ruined PC gaming. EDIT. I actually think I'm going to make a screenshot comparison of Black Ops, WaW and even CoD2 sometime this week to see if I can prove my point with the visuals. Idk if it would be visible in a screenshot on here though cause they will all be downsized way down from what I see on my monitor, but I'll prob do it anyways. I thought I was the only one that noticed that about the newer call of dutys.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 13, 2010 20:52:03 GMT -6
Well they can get away with it because of all the hype and because their biggest fan base is console players most of whom don't give a shit about details like that. I think their claim was they wanted to keep the game smooth at 60 frames so they had to cut back on the textures or something
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2010 22:25:33 GMT -6
Black ops on PS3 has bad frame rates, only way to fix it is to delete 95% of your friends, and clear your inbox, which i did, and that fixed it mostly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2010 0:28:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 14, 2010 0:36:01 GMT -6
Well they can get away with it because of all the hype and because their biggest fan base is console players most of whom don't give a shit about details like that. I think their claim was they wanted to keep the game smooth at 60 frames so they had to cut back on the textures or something I have nothing to say about textures on PC. It looks pretty nice here. And I hope you weren't expecting for a "Crysis-like" from Treyarch. Graphics aren't really important for FPS games im ny opinion. Well I was expecting at least the same quality that we had in WaW, if not a little better. IMO WaW is 10 times better looking than Black Ops. The smoke effects alone in WaW were much more complex and visually appealing than anything I saw in Black Ops. I still enjoyed the game but for me I think the good looking graphics just pull you in more and make it all the better, especially as a PC player. Here's a prime example of what I'm talking about and its the very first thing you see when the game starts. Look at the pack of smokes on his arm and their clothing, even their faces dont look too good. This small version of the pic even does it a lot of favors. Here's a handfull of shots from WaW. This guys just a random character who you'll never see again and hes got more detail than the main characters in BO... Compare his USMC patch to Brooks' pack of cigs I don't think there were really any sequences in BO where the characters really seemed into what was going on and reacted like in this part of WaW. Even their facial expressions are great in this game. With the motion capture and stuff used in BO I expected to see some better things than I did. Blood and gore effects in this game own. In this pic you can see the detail on Sullivan's clothing. Nothing like that in BO... Here's a good example of how in WaW entire environments would fill up with 3D smoke and it would actually hang there for a while. I don't recall seeing anything like this in BO, at least not to this level of immersion. The fire effects in WaW were much better too... Overall I just think WaW was a much more immersive and visual appealing game and felt a lot more like the CoD I know and love and less of a cheap hollywood movie. And it was $50 bucks.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Nov 14, 2010 20:04:25 GMT -6
I played it today at my brother in law's place on his PC. Nothing special. You're also right about the textures, weak texture resolution. I'm not impressed with this game at all. World at war was a way better game in terms of graphics, I like the gameplay better too. I dunno, there's just nothing special about it.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 14, 2010 20:15:36 GMT -6
Yeah I can also safely say I like WaW more. Its like you said its not a BAD game its just nothing new and nothing to make it stand out really. And I feel a big step back visually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2010 21:56:50 GMT -6
World at War is my favorite CoD. I love everything about it.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 14, 2010 22:47:09 GMT -6
I think the one I enjoyed most was Call of Duty 2. I remember when that game came out the graphics literally made my mouth hang open as I played and even today they are still great. The amount of effort they put into the visuals alone in that game made me feel good that I spent my money on it. Plus I'm a big WW2 buff. It's when CoD was CoD and not an attempt of a cheap B action movie in 3D. I had a lot of good times with Call of Duty 1 and United Offensive too, especially multiplayer. Note the $49.99 price tag and the fact it was a PC exclusive! I miss the old days of PC gaming!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2010 22:59:55 GMT -6
Black ops is nothing awesome. If i wanted to play zombies, i will buy WAW. If i want the old age, I will play COD4. Its all way better than black ops. Only thing worthwhile in Black Cops is the Wager Match's. Those are interesting, but eventually get boring.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Nov 15, 2010 0:14:44 GMT -6
Yeah call of duty 2 was epic, but it was way too easy. The graphics were epic too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2010 0:00:03 GMT -6
Its pretty nice, I've just really started to play it on 360. But so far I like what I've seen, the graphics are a step up from some pretty good graphics from MW2
|
|
|
Post by Rowboat on Nov 16, 2010 6:44:48 GMT -6
That cigarette pack looked way better on my pc. I totally love this game, the best story of all CoD so far. It's like a damn movie. Has anyone gotten to the end with the zombie killing yet? I usually skip that cus zombies freak me out but I was pleasently suprised by the fact they put you in a certain person to kill the zombies.
|
|
Darrell
Gold Certificate Member
Posts: 4,936
|
Post by Darrell on Nov 16, 2010 10:32:06 GMT -6
i like this game everyone does but i dont. The graphics arent the best in the world Id thought it would of been better than that. I play this game on xbox and its oright good game but the only thing that enoys me is the graphics. Id thought thy would try and improve every cod
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 16, 2010 12:27:07 GMT -6
Are you saying that first pic I posted is a PS3 shot? That's a PC shot I took from my PC. I would of taken more but I wasn't about to play through the whole thing again. If you think Im lying I'll post more pics later. The only reason I can think of why you guys' doesn't look like mine is because I'm playing on a 24in monitor in 1920x1200 in HD which I stated above and it really brings out the low res textures but I don't know. All I know is that is a pic from my game with max settings and it looks like shit. I'm not the only one who's complaining about this. All of my buddies who have played the game agree with me and so have many other people. Type "Call of duty black ops bad gr" in Google and it will already fill it for you. You can't deny that the graphics in this game are worse than previous ones (on PC at least) and thats completely retarded in my book.
|
|
Arctic Cat ZRT
Frequent Flyer
2010 & 2011 Maple Grove Drag Racer #887
Posts: 609
|
Post by Arctic Cat ZRT on Nov 16, 2010 15:30:51 GMT -6
For me I got it for the Xbox 360. On my 32" Plasma, the graphics are awesome, I don't get the choppy graphics as you do. The only thing I can think of is that Treyarch knows were the money is, they care more about the consoles than the pc because the consoles bring in the money. Im not saying that is right, but this game is built for consoles.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 16, 2010 15:42:55 GMT -6
Well I can't argue with that lol. If people today realized they could build a gaming PC for the same if not less than what they pay for a console everyone would be getting amazing games on PC probably for still $50 dollars. Whatever the case is I'm starting to wonder why it seems like certain people get better graphics than others. Some people like me have completely horrible graphics and others not so bad. Idk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2010 15:53:26 GMT -6
I think the one I enjoyed most was Call of Duty 2. I remember when that game came out the graphics literally made my mouth hang open as I played and even today they are still great. The amount of effort they put into the visuals alone in that game made me feel good that I spent my money on it. Plus I'm a big WW2 buff. It's when CoD was CoD and not an attempt of a cheap B action movie in 3D. I had a lot of good times with Call of Duty 1 and United Offensive too, especially multiplayer. Note the $49.99 price tag and the fact it was a PC exclusive! I miss the old days of PC gaming!! Agreed. Man COD2 was probably my favorite PC gaming experience. Now it seems like MW2 and BO are just shoot em ups for a half an hour and cut it off.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 16, 2010 18:58:44 GMT -6
tom I bought boxed version from Best Buy. I used a gift card but now I kinda wished I saved the money. @ced, yeah that game was great. That's the feeling I miss when playing a CoD.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2010 2:29:02 GMT -6
Black Ops Multplayer for PC fails lol
But the Single Player is amazing love the story line and love playin zombies
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon Negotiator on Nov 17, 2010 9:46:52 GMT -6
I've played every CoD even the consoles ones and MW1/WaW and CoD 1+2 had the best MP in my opinion.
|
|
Arctic Cat ZRT
Frequent Flyer
2010 & 2011 Maple Grove Drag Racer #887
Posts: 609
|
Post by Arctic Cat ZRT on Nov 17, 2010 18:59:40 GMT -6
I have to agree MW1 was beast. The only thing that really ticks me off in Black Ops is that the weakened the snipers so much they are pointless. I am a sniper kinda guy, let everyone come to me hahaha. Of course I still use them and am getting used to how to use them. Lets just say WA2000, acog, and extended mag = AWESOME. but anyway, i want my Barrett .50 cal back
|
|
Chidori457
Diesel Jockey
Coke-a-Cola is best.
Posts: 1,616
|
Post by Chidori457 on Nov 17, 2010 20:51:18 GMT -6
Im probably not getting this game until the price drops to like $30, I'll stick to WaW cuz it has great graphics, great MP, and great zombies all on 360.
|
|