Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 disappointed with graphics or is it just me?

I was really looking forward to Modern Warfare 3 but I have to say I am disappointed with the graphics. Maybe it's me as I am new to the m17x r3 but even maxed out it doesn't look how I expected. I have the xbox version of Black Ops and it looks very similar. Battlefield 3 looks much better I think as does Crysis 2 even though they are not quite as good in campaign gameplay.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong or missing something?

 

this is the 8th part CoD, which is based on the engine from 5th part of this series..

so what to expect...

 

Sort of what I thought but hoped for a lot more...

 

many hoped it to be not just another skin-mod of CoD, but it is

 

FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS SUCK! - YouTube This video show's exactly what COD is and you'll get a good laugh.

 

This review sums it all up.

Best MW3 review so far. - Imgur

 

Brilliant : )

 

I just got the game and for whatever reason, I get HORRIBLE frame rates (I've got the 6970m btw). It's night and day compared to MW2 and Black Ops for me. On max detail it looks great, but it looks like a slideshow. I guess I'll tinker with the ATI settings, but it's not looking good for 11.10 and MW3. Anyone else seeing this or is this just me?

 

Probably in need of a special driver for it like rage and bf3.

darn console ports...

 

While it doesnt come close to bf3 i thought it was a pretty good looking game. A decent jump in graphics.

 

Maybe your intel gpu is activated - runs smooth as hell on my 6790m. It would on my old MBP with 8600M GT as well with this old engine

 

after playing the beta of bf3 ans seeing gameplay in mw3 y decided to leave my days of cod behind, so i spent my money on FB2 engine

the guys form activision will have to work harder i think =O

 

I do however think that the COD stories are a bit, a small bit, better than BF3's. Not had enough encouragement to finish it BF3's but I know that I'm probably gonna finish MW3 SP. Mainly because I'll be rocking out BF3 MP because that stuff is awesomes.

 

MW3 graphics is pretty much exactly the same as MW2 graphics.
I have both BF3 and MW3, and I can say BF3 graphics is much better.

 

i agree on that, the story in cod is awesome.

 

Yeah, stories are much more interesting in the cod series.

 

bah who cares about stories multiplayer is where its at

 

But the characters from BF always have more personality!

 

It wasn't that, but I figured it out. It happens when I switch from IGP to ATI and start the game. If I reboot once I'm switched to the ATI, it all works great. In fact, I'm shocked just how well it runs. I only like QS sniping in MW2/3 and the 6970 doesn't miss a frame. Apart from a few glitches, it's a pretty incredible laptop. Thanks.

 

I think people are being a bit too hard on MW3's graphics. You have to remember the vast majority of it's users will get it for their consoles - PC gamers are in the minority. So they tailor the game to the consoles. They've made a nice graphical bump since Modern Warfare 2 with the inclusion of features such as SSAO, much better water simulation, much larger map scales, and much improved facial models and animations. The lighting has had quite a bit of work too. This is quite an improvement considering it still runs at the same silky smooth 60FPS while maintaining the same resolution as previous CoD games. Battlefield 3 does have much better graphics but console players pay for that by having the game run at 30FPS at 704p resolution (I found the controls to be sluggish in the campaign). With that being said, I found MW3 a lot more fun than BF3 - just goes to show, realism isn't always more fun.

 

mw3 is not about graphics after all, mw2 was already way behind BC2 in terms of graphics, DICE always works on graphics, infinity ward always works on story (we must somehow unite them ) still a computer is for nice graphics, so I will play MW3 on console (PS3), and rock BF3 on this one

 

Finished the campaign in 2 sittings. First level in Spec Ops "Stay Sharp" obstacle course I got under 23 secs solo. That what people have been getting? Nothing to compare to...

Graphics are OK though. Better than before. A bit more detailed and some ambient occlusion can be seen in places.

 

yeh people keep talking about graphics, it is like you start the game and lay back and just enjoy the graphics. JESUS. i pre ordered bf3 BECAUSE OF THE ADVETISMENTS AND STUFF but hahahah bf3 wannabe mw3 but no game will never ever will come not even close to COD series.


you people need to stop talking about graphics and start talking about how fun the game is.

BF3 = LAGGY DEDICATED SERVERS WITH 90% OF PEOPLE CAMPING WITH SNIPERS AND BLENDING WITH GRASS AFRAID TO GET KILLED HAAHAHHA.

go keep lying to yourself and acting like you enjoy bf3.
i stoped playing bf3 after 3 days of its release cuz it is so sucky. they graphics are great but they game is just sooooooooooo booooring and the maps are just biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig.

YOU WALK FOR HALF IN HOUR IN CASPIN BORDER(CUZ ALL THE PLAYERS TOOK THE CARS AND OTHER STUFF) AND AFTER ALL THAT WALKING YOU GET KILLED BY HELICOPTER OR A SNIPER.

COD SERIES WILL ALWAYS PWN AND WILL ALWAYS BE MORE FUN THAN ALL WANNABEE COD GAME.

IT IS A FACT AND NOW ALL TROLLS ARE WELCOME.

 

I dunno, no problems with BF3 servers for me. I haven't had that many problems with snipers although I've been taken out a few times when they out in difficult to reach places. I do prefer the story in COD though. BF3 is just boring. But I still love the multiplayer.

Overall in terms of fun, BF3 has given me much more in terms of multiplayer, COD was much better in terms of campaign.

 

the multiplayer of bf3 isnt booring ? no pristege ? no perks ? no killstreaks ? no customizations ? maps too big you wait 5 min to kill 1 ? tell me how many kills you get in a half an hour game ?

go keep talking about graphics. cuz graphics in games is the one that give joy to us not the gameplay.

 

all to the point! agreed

 

Haven't played MW3 yet and have nothing against it..... but BF3 has been a blast for me!

 

for having better quality on MW3:

Steam\steamapps\common\call of duty modern warfare 3\players2\config.cfg

adjust as needed by these lines:
seta ai_corpseCount "32"
seta r_aaMaxQuality "1"
seta r_aaSamples "8"
seta r_imageQuality "x" replace x by 4
seta r_ssao "2_High"
seta r_texFilterAnisoMax "16"
seta r_texFilterAnisoMin "16"
seta ragdoll_max_simulating "32"
seta r_multiGpu "0" ( Change this to "1" ONLY IF you have crossfire/SLI.)

And dont forget to put in ''read only''

Hope it can help for some,

 

sorry my english.

I think we can only compare cod and bf3 with campaign and graphics, no more. Cod campaing is much better than battlefield, but battlefield has better graphics. The battlefield campaign has so many fails, is not so good.

Online you cant compare this two games, one is many action and the other is more strategic. You need to learn before play battlefield , if u dont do this you cant enjoy it.

I am enjoying the two games, battlefield when I have time, and COD when I like to play 10 minutes with action

 

I guess if that's the opinion of the expert, then i must fall in line. Uninstalling BF3 now good sir. Will install MW3 asap. After installing will i really be able to pwn all BF3 players since they all play a terrible game? By installing mw3 do i get an automatic real life coolness level up? please help!

 

Guys, make sure you set the "Image Quality" in advanced video settings to "Native", otherwise the game is upscaled from 720p and not really 1080p. The difference is huge.

Otherwise take a look at Darcoders config optimization. Though setting the ragdoll stuff higher can sometimes use a lot of GPU ressources.

I really like the game, the graphics is very nice, much better than Black Ops, and it runs on max settings on my 6990m, without framerate drops.

 

In Darcoder's config:
seta r_imageQuality
should be "0" not "4" as 0 means native and that allows all the textures to be run at the native resolution.

 

First I was like "what?" and then I was like "whhhaaaat theeee heck?!"

This stupid little option makes such a huuuuuuge difference regarding image quality aka resolution. What the heck were they thinking?! For what reason should I set my resolution to 1920x1080p when I want upscaled crap coming from 720p? Thanks dear programmers, my LCD will take care of upscaling when needed.

This is so rediculous! Kudos to svl7 for point that out.

 

Thanks sv17 that really helped a lot and there's me thinking that "extra" must be higher than "native", what were they thinking?!