New COD engine "counter-productive"

By Robert Purchese Published 2 March, 2011

Infinity Ward's Robert Bowling is back.

Whereas Battlefield 3 boasts a new engine that gamers are raving about, Call of Duty has made do with a modified, ageing IW engine - version 4.0 was used for Modern Warfare 2.

So what about this autumn's Call of Duty game? Has Infinity Ward - rumoured to be co-developing with Sledgehammer - gone back to the engine drawing board?

Doesn't sound like it.

"That would be counter productive," tweeted IW community man Robert Bowling. "An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

In March 2010, Infinity Ward was torn by the sacking of studio bosses Jason West and Vince Zampella. Their departure leached ranks of loyal staff. But Bowling stayed put, tweeting that, "I work at Infinity Ward and plan to remain here. We've got a great team and working on a great project."

When Activision will lift the lid on this autumn's big new Call of Duty game is unknown. Is a summer reveal at E3 too far away?

This fan-mad Modern Warfare film tricked us.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds. @Clert on Twitter.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (69) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Pastici #1 1 year ago

    So the COD franchise is going to be looking the same again? Wow. Innovation right there...

  • yeahetc #2 1 year ago

    "An engine takes years and years to develop and get right." - so we're just not going to bother.

  • tachometer #3 1 year ago

    That old engine is too worn and needs to be binned. Come on Activision invest in your product and give us a new engine!

  • NewbieZilla #4 1 year ago

    There are other ways to innovate than graphics. Will we see that in MW3, though? Unlikely.
    Edited by NewbieZilla at 02/03/11 @ 16:27

  • matrim83 #5 1 year ago

    Cant say I am surprised.

  • Shikasama #6 1 year ago

    yeahetc - That's not what he said. It is entirely possible they HAVE been working on a new engine for years, but he is sayign that regardless of whether it does or does not exist, it won't be in the next COD game.

  • Golgo #7 1 year ago

    I think Bowling is a bit confused over the meanings of words. A new engine would be 'productive', not 'counter-productive'.

  • randompanda #8 1 year ago

    So it'll just be a bunch of new textures then. Worth every penny!

  • Yodith #9 1 year ago

    I read this as, "Bobby doesn't want to spend the money when he knows the plebs will lap up whatever old toss we squeeze out come November, so long as it has the CoD name on it".
    Edited by Yodith at 02/03/11 @ 16:24

  • StolenGlory #10 1 year ago

    Seems like producing the same stinking, festering piece of shit each and every cunting year is way more 'Counter-Productive'.

    Fuck you Bob.

  • Murton #11 1 year ago

    I'm not usually the one to play "grammar Nazi" but the word is "leeched" not "leached"

    As for the engine, a modified version of a modified version of a modified version of the Q3A engine will not be able to compete with Frostbite 2.0 or ID tech 5, it's graphically inferior and boasts very limited features by comparison, they have to update sooner or later because as strong as the COD brand is, it will lose momentum between rapid releases and competition and as Activision's only big franchise is it fails Activision will fall over along with it, I seriously doubt Marvel games on their own will support the weight of Activision.

    Activision would have done better to get Sledgehammer or IW working on a new engine while the other, along with Treyarch, maintain the franchise, another shortsighted decision from Activision who really need to get their shit together or they're going to find themselves in serious trouble.

  • captain_Carl #12 1 year ago

    Making your game better would be counter productive?

  • Golgo #13 1 year ago

    @Shikasama: how is your own speculation about a mysterious engine secretly under development somehow closer to what the man "said"?

  • Tryhard #14 1 year ago

    New engine.Just rearrange the corridors on the maps.It works every year.

  • Amgzone #15 1 year ago

    I'm done with the cod franchise, Black Ops was the final nail in the coffin for me.

    But that film is pretty awesome, considering its made by normal shmucks!

  • Deckard1 #16 1 year ago

    Why build something new when people will continue to buy the same old shit.

  • CaptainQuint #17 1 year ago

    Ha ha ha, love it!

    Fucking garbage franchise is fucking garbage.

  • KevvyMetal79 #18 1 year ago

    Guitar Hero gone, next up - Call of Duty.

    Run that shit right into the ground.

  • ubergine #19 1 year ago

    I think this is great news!

    The only way it could be better is if they announced they are building Modern Opscraft 2 Part 8: Black Warfare World on the Warriors of Rock engine. Then the beige incest orgy will complete itself with Activision folding up into every available plugged sphincter.

  • Captain_Jono #20 1 year ago

    I don't see why we should expect brand spanking new graphics engines for every sequel. Time was a sequel meant recycling game assets to tell a new story. Now we get the same story told through wizzbang new skin shaders!



    Edited by Captain_Jono at 02/03/11 @ 16:47

  • carrotcake #21 1 year ago

    Activision have so many studios, can't one of them be making a next gen engine while anothers pump out the annual COD games. Use the new engine when it is ready instead of forever postponing development of one.

  • speedjack #22 1 year ago

    Erm... I actually thought COD looked pretty good. Does it really need a new engine ? I can see problems occasionally with hit detection, but being a luddite I can't tell if that engine or netcode?

    Oh - and whilst I can completely accept that COD/MW2 isn't to everyone liking its most definitely not a 'stinking, festering piece of shit'. Its probably one of the most consistently decent FPSs out there.

    I do however agree that it would be ashame if Activision milked the franchise dry... but they probably will.

  • jonharrispro #23 1 year ago

    Oh Dear. Black ops looks tired so this is gonna be even worse. Battlefield 3 looks stunning......might be switching.

  • Vlad27145 #24 1 year ago

    @Captain_Jono
    "I don't see why we should expect brand spanking new graphics engines for every sequel. Time was a sequel meant recycling game assets to tell a new story. Now we get the same story told through wizzbang new skin shaders!"

    Except that Acti isn't serving us any of the two, now are they?. Trivia time: How do you make "we get the same story" through the "recycling" of "game assets" to sound good? You can't. But a lot of people will buy it anyway if it has the COD name slapped on the cover.
    Edited by Vlad27145 at 02/03/11 @ 17:14

  • paketep #25 1 year ago

    Like we're going to believe anything coming from fourzerotwo's lying mouth.

  • effinjamie #26 1 year ago

    jonharrispro 2011-03-02 17:02:35
    Oh Dear. Black ops looks tired so this is gonna be even worse. Battlefield 3 looks stunning......might be switching.
    Well I hope most of the Cod plebs don't think the same

  • Physically_Insane #27 1 year ago

    WAAAAAGHH!!!! WAAAAAGH!!! I HATE THAT COD IS POPULAR AND ANOTHER GAME THAT I LIKE ISN'T AS POPULAR!!!! I HATE HATE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE EVERYBODY WHO PLAYS COD. THEY ARE STUPID BECAUSE IT IS SHIT AND THEY ARE PLAYING IT!!!! BLACK OPS IS THE WORST GAME OF ALL TIME AND ALL THE CHAVS BUY IT! WAAAAGHH!!

    Some people need to grow up. No new engine, so what. How many other sequels get new engines? Hardly any.

  • NimbusTLD #28 1 year ago

    That fan made movie is amazingly produced!!!!!!!!

  • tobsen #29 1 year ago

    Hahaha that is so obviously pathetic for everyone to see! Not surprised in the least though.

    "Developing" something, and "over years" at that, is obviously not part of Activision's business strategy in the first place.

    Robert Bowling must get so much shit as a community rep, I seriously hope for him that this is not his actual real name. Otherwise this guy is stigmatized for the rest of his life.

  • ronuds #30 1 year ago

    It's just a shame what a joke this franchise has become. I remember a time not too long ago when I actually couldn't wait until the next COD released. Now I couldn't care less.

    If Activision can't see that the franchise is coming to a head - then they're blind. They might be able to get away with one more me-too game in the franchise, but will people really stick around for yet another one after that?

    "How many other sequels get new engines? Hardly any."

    I don't know of any game that re-used the same engine 5 times in a row.
    Edited by ronuds at 02/03/11 @ 17:49

  • photoboy #31 1 year ago

    Unless there are serious architectural flaws with the COD engine, no programmer would just dump it and start again from scratch. A more likely and reasonable course of action is to slowly improve and update each section of the engine as weaknesses and flaws become apparent.

    The problem with COD isn't the engine, it's Activision mandating annual sequels that stick to the formula. A new engine wouldn't fix COD's problems, a reboot that re-thinks the gameplay and the style of the series is what's needed to improve the franchise.

  • Iliad #32 1 year ago

    They do it because they know idiots will continue to buy a franchise that peaked at MW1 and has got progressively worse with each iteration since. Still, it's nice to have a game for the children while the adults play Battlefield.

  • Bonders99 #33 1 year ago

    As I have said before my interest ended in the franchise with COD4 Modern warfare. The irony is Killzone on the PS3 and Gears on the 360 really piss all over black ops but sadly it's all about the brand and the masses will lap anything up that's got COD stuck on it. Remember Acti mooted the idea of moving the brand to "Modern Warfare" and drop the COD tag ? then realized pretty quickly it might sink without COD on it.

  • rojjer #34 1 year ago

    yay, call of doodie!

  • ronuds #35 1 year ago

    @photoboy

    Agreed - they don't necessarily need a brand new engine, but a giant upgrade to the current one. COD started looking outdated at MW2... we've had 2 of them after that. It's becoming one of the worst looking FPSs on the market. While Halo, KZ, Gears, etc., all try and improve their visuals, COD has remained stagnant.

    I'm also in agreement that a complete re-boot is what's needed. No more upgrading perks and killstreaks and thinking that's worthy of being a new game.

  • tobsen #36 1 year ago

    All that being said - let's not forget that the COD franchise has the very important function of keeping the idiots away from the Battlefield servers.

    My gaming time is also quite limited and I am all the more happy if I don't have to spread it thin among multiple online shooters that all beg to be played. Actually even having to make the general choice between Chrysis 2 (whose MP demo I really liked) and KZ 3 is already unpleasant because I am missing out on some good stuff either way.

    In that sense - please stay as shit as you are, dear COD!

  • bodhi85uk #37 1 year ago

    I personally dont mind games that arent the best graphically, but i suspect the mostly fickle CoD'ers will do once they see their latest game stacked up against Rage, BF3 and probably Skyrim too - and thats when they will start becoming disgruntled, hope they dont mass migrate to BF.

    Speaking of Skyrim, who'd have thought the latest version of Gamebryo (all new engine my ass) would get revamped before Acti bothered to update CoD

  • IMD1_Pk #38 1 year ago

    So apparently most of you haven't heard of Valve and their source engine.....

  • bodhi85uk #39 1 year ago

    To be fair Source has been updated almost constantly since its inception.

    Also, its Valve, they make fucking great games and that trumps all

  • Shikasama #40 1 year ago

    Golgo - Didn't say it was did I? Seems to me I was pointing out that him saying it takes years to make a new engine doesn't mean they aren't doing it in the next game because they can't be arsed and says nothing towards the future of the game.

    Fair enough though, I'll do the acceptable thing - Fuck Kotick! Fuck Activison! CoD is shit! Anyone who plays it is a dickhead! I am superior to all of them because I have a contrary opinion about something that is succesfull!

  • kirankara #41 1 year ago

    @Murton
    "and as Activision's only big franchise is it fails Activision will fall over along with it, I seriously doubt Marvel games on their own will support the weight of Activision.
    "
    thought they owned blizzard and thus wow too?? maybe im wrong, but thought that was their biggest earner.

  • Raiten #42 1 year ago

    @Ronuds, funnily enough, i can't for the life of mine remember ever having looked forward to a new CoD game, not even when the series was compleatly new. At it's birth it was badly made MoH:AA, wasn't untill cod2 that it finaly managed to stand on its own, and it took again till CoD4 to make a good CoD game, yet it went downhill again after CoD4.. it sure is the least consistant game series regarding quality, having more rubbish releases over good ones.
    Seems like the only way they'll ever manage to make good CoD games is by doing "reboot" ala CoD4 style. But we can't count on activision in risking to do something as innovating as that.

  • LazyNinjaUk #43 1 year ago

    They know the chavviest and simplest of people who don't give a shit about quality graphics and gameplay, will lap any COD game up regardless of what engine is used, as long as they get to kill things.

  • Syrette #44 1 year ago

    Great, another CoD that plays and looks like the last one.

    /yawn

  • Syrette #45 1 year ago

    And IW/Activision have had "years and years" to create a new one. They've got the resources to do it con-currently with any title in development.

    Pathetic in all honesty.

  • evnewell #46 1 year ago

    keep buying CoD, you uncreative, fastfood, pulp consumers. Just close your eyes, stop thinking and open your wallets. How many times are you going to repurchase the same game over again?

    Oh well.

  • Pehmu #47 1 year ago

    "An engine takes years and years to develop and get right."

    Sounds good. It would be good idea to spend a couple of years to renovate the whole CoD franchise. Come up with some fresh ideas, instead of selling us the same scripted tunnel shooter every year.

    Then again, since people clearly don't mind buying the same game every year so why bother?

  • Syrette #48 1 year ago

    Imagine that. A year without a CoD update.

    A year to work on a new engine or maybe even an IP.

    Wait, this is Activision. SILLY ME.

  • inutaihanyou #49 1 year ago

    The translation is "all our innovation went right out the window, so we can't afford to make a new engine over small tweaks, and obviously Treyarch is just an off year seller, great modders so they could never helm a project like that". Simply put, we better wait for Respawn for anything of the sort

  • Dudeofmanynames #50 1 year ago

    "New COD counter-productive"

    Fixed :p

  • Climhazzard #51 1 year ago

    Just carry on playing CoD4 and MW2, the 'new' iterations aren't worth the money although the fanboys will no doubt go buy it in their droves...

  • dsmx #52 1 year ago

    What he actually means is that developing a new graphics engine takes time and money both of which Activision is not willing to pay for so were going to have to make do with the current engine.

  • Quixz #53 1 year ago

    Frostbite 2 is giving Activision sleepless nights. LOL

  • minxamo #54 1 year ago

    A great trailer ruined by a retarded English accent...

  • sherpa1984 #55 1 year ago

    The engine is fine- it looks good enough for consoles.

    It's the gameplay that's starting to get old.

  • dredd97 #56 1 year ago

    I think what he means is they can't build a new engine because the guys who made the original one now work at Respawn ;)

  • NHDavid #57 1 year ago

    "An engine takes years and years to develop and get right." - so we're just not going to bother because all the chavs lap up the same shite year after year anyway.......

    fixed

  • king26 #58 1 year ago

    As much as I hate CoD, it's good in a way as it attracts so many unwanted gamers. One of my favourite fps games is Killzone 3 and it is easy to see who the CoD players are (campers and K/D ratio chasers). Hopefully in time they will fuck off back to the reskined cash cow

  • rochyroch #59 1 year ago

    I reinstalled Call of Duty : World At War last night
    i'd forgot how much fun it is,
    but it also made me ask what the f**k has changed in Activisions COD series?
    not a f**king lot, black ops will probably be my last.

    Come to think of it WaW should have been my last!
    Edited by rochyroch at 03/03/11 @ 06:15

  • NeverWinter78 #60 1 year ago

    Looks like IW are following activisions motto. "milk it till the tits bleed"

  • ruddiger7 #61 1 year ago

    It has been out of date for years yet people still buy this crap? Battlefield will dominate this shit.

  • apoc_reg #62 1 year ago

    The second i booted up Black Ops i regreted buying it, the engine needs changing just to freshen it up! Felt like a game id played 20 times already.

    Not saying its not good but when there so many other games that are newer or at least new to me COD needs to change it up.

  • mashk #63 1 year ago

    We all bitch about COD, and how the games have become derivative and a joke. But wasn't the last COD one of the biggest selling games of all time, and the biggest seller in the series?

    They'd be mad to change it, wouldn't they?

  • Jonny5Alive7 #64 1 year ago

    If they weren't so obsessed on bringing a game out annually they would probably have time to build a new engine. On the other hand though, could they really make an engine that was that much improved from the current one? The current consoles don't have much more power in them than is already used.

  • Sir_STRESSHEaD #65 1 year ago

    I dunno what you're all bitching about... MW2 looked sweet! Who's to say they've milked all they can out of the current engine? don't understand why the Call of Duty franchise continues to get such stick from everyone when as far as I can see they are a bench mark in quality with every release. Yeah, Battlefield is great and I'm sure that their next game will continue to be great but don't write off IF or Treyarch... those guys know what they're doing.

  • apoc_reg #66 1 year ago

    Counter-money making more like...

  • Machiavellian #67 1 year ago

    We all bitch about COD, and how the games have become derivative and a joke. But wasn't the last COD one of the biggest selling games of all time, and the biggest seller in the series?

    They'd be mad to change it, wouldn't they?

    That's the trap. Change it to much lose your customer base. Do not innovate enough lose your customer base. Keep it the same lose your customer base. So what you do, make more than one COD. Creating a new engine is very costly but they should have a team working on it for the future new console or PC.

  • KayTannee #68 1 year ago

    "gaming for the xfactor generation. There is nothing wrong with it "

    I think you've just summed up exactly why I don't play it.

    Thank you

  • BlinkeredAxis #69 1 year ago

    Sir_Stresshead,

    MW2 did actually look good when it came out, but that was a long time ago, and frostbite is better in all departments. Bear in mind that Black Ops is the latest COD, and it looks worse, if anything, than MW2. And the story is far worse.

    Surely, if there is a franchise that can AFFORD a new engine, this is it. Battlefield, Halo, and Killzone have all done the job, despite having lower revenues than COD. They all look fabulous, and can nail that 30+ frames/s easy.

    Get your finger out ACTI and reinvest some of OUR hard-earned cash that you've got in the product. It makes business sense.