Infinity Ward creative strategist Robert Bowling has contacted CVG to clarify comments he made on Twitter this week regarding the developer's Call of Duty engine.
As previously reported, Bowling responded to a comment suggesting Activision and IW need to invest in a brand new engine for the franchise by stating that such a move would be "counter productive". Being a Twitter response limited to 140 characters, though, his message didn't come across as clearly as he would have liked.
He told us: "I was speaking hypothetically and from a top-line philosophy that building a ground-up engine is counter productive. [I was] not referring to any specific project, simply clarifying with that user that we never - for any game - build a 'brand new' engine, but iterate on a solid base as you noted in your article, adding what's needed and innovates it.
Unsurprisingly, Bowling didn't drop any hints regarding the studio's current work when we pinged him back, but he reiterated that Infinity Ward has "a great team working on a great project".
Whatever Infinity Ward is up to, and we imagine it's a title set in the Modern Warfare universe, it will be going up against DICE's Battlefield 3 and the game's impressive-looking new engine, Frostbite 2.
Comments
17 comments so far...
chamony on 3 Mar '11 said:
so he basically saying they will tweak the old game engine here and there,
but they wont build a new one from the 'ground-up'
so despite chucking in, they are working on a new project, on a slightly tweaked old game engine.....
all previous posts/comments/disses regarding activision using out of date game engines etc whereas others have caught up and surpassed them still stand, nothings changed
Gambini on 3 Mar '11 said:
*Applauds* Well said, Good Sir.
monkfish82 on 3 Mar '11 said:
don't give a toss what engine they're using. still not buying anymore call of duty games.
Nick33 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Saying you are not buying anymore COD games is cutting off your nose to spite your face. MW3 could be the greatest FPS of all time. It might be rubbish. But until you know it's silly to say you are not buying it. It's like saying you will never date girls with brown hair because two girls with brown hair dumped you.
Get over it and stop being a dumb ass.
monkfish82 on 3 Mar '11 said:
medal of honor was better anyway. black ops could of been way better
Very_Silver_Ownz on 3 Mar '11 said:
the engine was good until World at War which like i said in my other comment the engine was leaking and creaking.
the Smackdown and CoD series must be the only series to still be using their broken ancient engines from the ps1 and ps2.
MANYOO4EVA on 3 Mar '11 said:
Battlefield 3, Crysis 2 and Rage all have far superior engines than COD's which is basically ten years old and gets minimal parts added to churn out the same stuff every year.
My money is going on the first games I mentioned. For me COD can R.I.P.
craiglackenby on 3 Mar '11 said:
The only way I'd jump on the Boycott CoD bandwagon is if after the next game is release they release the first sales figures and they are down, it would have to be by at least a million otherwise it isn't worth it. Enough people claim they aren't buying another CoD but whether they do or not is a different story. It can be very enjoyable when it works well so it would be cutting your nose of to spite your face imo.
As much as I want BF3 to take CoD down, I'm sceptical because battlefield sells what, a 3rd of what CoD does? That's a lot of customers to convince BF3 is the superior more sophisticated smooth running game (we know the former is true.)
We haven't seen BF3 on a console yet and I think that will be a big deciding factor, if or not it turns out half as good as what we've seen already. Probably more than 2/3 of BF3 will be console sales so that will most certainly be the decider imo.
DonnerKebab on 3 Mar '11 said:
Gobble gobble
eye.of.despair on 3 Mar '11 said:
What a load of tripe.
gmcb007 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Call of Duty: Same s**t, different year
aawells07 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Im not a COD hater but i do get annoyed at the fact that its pretty much the same stuff every year i do think that if they want to remain on top for the forseeable future that they are gonna have to do something different at least make it seem that they are
aawells07 on 3 Mar '11 said:
You would think that a brand that makes the money they do would be the one pushing the boundries and setting the standards for the industry to stay on top no matter the cost or time it takes. I couldnt sleep at night if i was in there shoes knowing so many people were angry about a game i so passionatly made and yes it does sell out the cozue but still i dunno my rambling thoughts are done lol
chronicwombat on 3 Mar '11 said:
the real story here is the limitations of twitter, and its potential for stupidification
beaky09 on 3 Mar '11 said:
no more stupid killstreak rewards & bulls**t perks
DoucheVader on 4 Mar '11 said:
What a tool. COD is using Quake 3 code. That crap has to go, day 1 hacks exist because that source code is over 21 years old.
Update to a next gen engine and stop putting out crap with COD on the cover an expect us to buy it.
The Bossman on 8 Mar '11 said:
I didn't know that until a few days ago, amazing to think they've stuck with that engine up to now. Would have been better to ditch it after MW1, then they could have said 'if you loved MW1, then you're gonna adore MW2', with a brand new engine or something.