Call Of Duty: Black Ops 3 Is Out, But A Bit Buggy

The Big Blopper, The Blopster, The Codchop, Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 [official site] launched last night, and it’s the first in the FPS series to really interest me in a while. Campaign co-op, customisable cyborgs filled with cyberbees, and Jeff Goldblum are right up my alley and oh! supposedly it’s a wee touch less corridor-y too.

It has a few problems at launch, though, with many folks reporting unreasonably poor performance. Developers Treyarch are looking into it, and have a few ideas for fixes.

Treyarch say in a post on Steam:

“There have been reports of certain i5 CPUs having performance issues causing very low frame rates – We are still working on the final solution for this issue, but we have had reports that changing WorkerThreads = 4 to WorkerThreads = 2 in your config.ini file can help (In the game folder, commonly located here, C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Call of Duty Black Ops III\players\config.ini).

“We have also noticed that some systems may get better input response with FPS Cap set just below refresh rate. If you have a 60hz monitor, you can try enabling Vsync and setting your FPS Cap to 58.”

Yeah, I’ll wait for a patch or two before jumping on this one. Our Adam says he’s downloading Blops 3 now, and I assume he’ll report back to us all with Goldnews.

You may be wondering, “Alice, you’re a hip cool cat on the UK games scene, what was the Blops launch party last night like?” The answer is, “Heck if I know, I was drunk in a ruined chapel up a hill watching Bonfire Night fireworks. Who do you even think I am?” But if you wish to sample the glamourous life, you can see it yourself (and some folks playing Blops 3) in the archived launch livestream:


  1. RCoon says:

    If you have less than 12GB of VRAM, it stutters like mad. Our site ran a performance article on it, and it wasn’t pretty:
    link to

    • RCoon says:

      And by VRAM I actually mean RAM. Curse the lack of editing.

    • ToxicTrip says:

      I have not had one issue with stuttering and I run the game with 8gigs of ram. I7 5820k possessor and GTX 960. So far runs butter smooth for me.

      • XxBrentos9xX says:

        Your $200 graphics card and quad probably make up for it. All components work together, I don’t agree with the 12 GB theory unless they tested different processors and GPU’s. Also different builds of OS’s can have different effects, as seen by many different game releases and the variety of issues people had with them, ranging from none to unplayable. Lot of other factors than RAM.

    • WALLS says:

      Its amazing to me that as a result of the problems with the i5’s that activision feel that enacting the final solution would solve it. I mean Judaism is irritating but is that really going to solve anything?

      • aircool says:

        Yeah, I was tempted (first time since CoD 2), but I think I might head into the loft and write a diary whilst it’s downloading.

        Day 1. Hid

        Day 2. Hid

        Day 3. Hid… you get the idea.

      • neotribe says:

        Not even remotely clever.

    • Psycold says:

      i7 3770k, two GTX 970 G1’s in sli, 1tbb SSD and 24gb of DDR3…still major stuttering so that is incorrect.

    • LazyAssMF says:

      Well, i have i7 2600k (still stock clocks), 8Gigs of RAM and r9 390x and it runs like a champ maxed, no stuttering. Could be that 8Gigs of VRAM are helping and ppl said they’re just a gimmick. I knew they’d come in handy eventually. :D

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        For every hour a 2600k spends at it’s stock clocks, a kitten somewhere dies.

        You monster.

        • LazyAssMF says:

          Haaahaha LOL I know, i’m such a cunt but i love kittens, i swear! OC-ing very, very soon, just waiting for my cooler to arrive, so no more kittens have to die by my low clocks. The world can be a happy place once again!

    • ramid100 says:

      Running pretty well with i5 and Radeon R9 270! Quit surprised, reasonable frame rates on 1080. There is hope for those without the latest gear! However, it started to stutter after 1-2 hours gameplay which was not fixed by a reboot. From this site, i learned:
      WorkerThreads = 4 to WorkerThreads = 2 in config.ini and now running fine again

  2. Thulsa Hex says:

    Would have sworn that leading screenshot was from Assassin’s Creed: NEO, or whatever.

  3. Spuzzell says:

    £60 for the game and £50 for the season pass.

    That’s a lot of paper rounds and tooth fairy money for the typical CoD player.

    • Bull0 says:

      What? Game + Season Pass is £69.99 on steam. Game solo is £39.99. £36 on amazon.

      The season pass isn’t a complete waste of time in the Treyarch CODs because they add new Zombie modes that tend to be really pretty good (new assets, celeb voiceovers, new mechanics, etc).

      • Spuzzell says:

        Ah, fair enough.

        I didn’t think of looking for PC prices as I really don’t see CoD as a PC game.

        It’s got that console whiff of Lynx and Happy Meal about it.

        • rumtotinggamer says:

          £39.99 is still alot for a new game, when Red Alert 2 came out in DVD packaging all those years ago apparently prices were going to fall, then digital distribution was going to make them fall further, now if anything they’re getting higher even past the hundred mark.

    • aircool says:

      What’s a season pass? Is it only playable off season and you have to pay in the summer time. I don’t get it… what’s a season pass?

      • SuicideKing says:

        It’s a way of milking more money from the player with even less ownership of the product/license. Or that’s what I understand of it.

    • fish99 says:

      I paid £20 for the base game. Maybe people should shop around.

  4. Bull0 says:

    I have played and enjoyed all the various CODs to a lesser or greater extent but I’m going to wait a while on this one – seems like folly with Fallout 4 releasing next week. It does sound pretty good though, will definitely pick it up in a sale in the new year.

  5. Eight Rooks says:

    By CoD standards it’s much more corridor-y, apparently. I was tempted, but decided not to bother after every site says apparently it’s dropped the branching campaign structure from 2 (and the story isn’t much cop anyway).

  6. Sirbolt says:

    *bleurp* Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little bit there. Wasn’t this series about semi-“realistic” depictions of war once? This is just so… ungh. It just has no human element at all, and i can’t for the life of me see the appeal. Give me CoD 2 any day over this. But maybe I’m just too old, too cold.

  7. mukuste says:

    Going off the Steam reviews, this is basically Arkham Knight all over again. Maybe every big publisher needs to get burned by refunds at least once before they learn… or they’ll just stop doing PC.

    • Beard_Arthur says:

      Sadly, the latter is the more likely of the two.

      Which sucks because even WB has had its fair-share of well-optimized games (see Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor). They just can’t be putting the PC ports in the hands of unproven or proven terrible PC developers.

  8. Amatyr says:

    “It has a few problems at launch, though, with many folks reporting unreasonably poor performance.”

    One day, a AAA PC game won’t have to have these words written about it. Probably when it’s released 4 months after the console versions.

    • yogibbear says:

      GTA V – 2 years.

      • aircool says:

        …and it mostly worked. I was happy with it, but then, I’d not really waited for it. I just bought it on impulse.

    • Blackcompany says:

      Mad Max ran like a dream from day one, to be fair.

  9. -funkstar- says:

    Is it too much to ask for a straight WW2 shooter these days?

    • Shadow says:

      Red Orchestra 2 (and the Pacific theater expandalone) is still pretty good, if you’re into multiplayer.

      Otherwise you might as well go back to CoD World at War. That was the last WW2 Call of Duty, wasn’t it?

      As a tangential note, Company of Heroes 2 is keeping WW2 alive in the strategy RTS front, too, so there’s that. And there’s Hearts of Iron 4 coming, from the serious grand strategy standpoint.

      • vahnn says:

        +1 so hard for Red Orchestra 2. It should be noted that if you buy Rising Storm, RO2’s “expandalone,” it includes all Red Orchestra 2 content as well.

        Also Company of Heroes 2 is phenomenal.

  10. XxBrentos9xX says:

    This game does, indeed, look exciting. But one thing that is really starting to bother me: A lot of recent AAA game (and indie game) releases have been buggy on release. I’m sorry, but this isn’t acceptable for the people who pre-order. It’s seriously pissing me off that these huge developers are somewhat screwing over what could be their most loyal or hyped customers who buy a brand new game they can’t even play for who knows how long. QA your damn product for a bit longer

  11. vahnn says:

    Running at a flawless 60 fps for me, no lag, stuttering, or any of the problems others are reporting. That’s not not to say they don’t exist, if course, I’ve been in that boat, too.

    Here are my specs for any curious:
    i7 3820k @3.8ghz, liquid cooled
    16gb ddr3 2133 ram
    Asrock x79 extreme6 mobo
    Radeon hd 7970 (actually underclocked from 1000 to 980 mhz)
    Win 10 installed on 850 EVO Pro
    Game installed on 2tb hdd

  12. Faults says:

    I’m pretty sure this is going to be standard fare for the foreseeable future. Both the XB1 and PS4 use a big blob of RAM rather than the usual segregation of VRAM like you get on PCs. On almost any modern videogame, materials and textures take up the vast majority of your RAM budget, so it’s not unreasonable to assume that, with that given, 8gb of VRAM should be taken as the new minimum for console ports, no matter what the stated requirements of any game are.

    So yeah, sloppy port is sloppy, but honestly, this is going to be the new normal for any game that’s also releasing on console, so we might as well just suck it up and get used to it.

    • Nucas says:

      i don’t think so. we’ve already had several “next gen” titles release; advanced warfare, shadow of mordor, and so on.

      i also recall reading in the past that developers only have about 4 to 4.5 gigs of ram to work with at the moment.

      • Faults says:

        Advanced Warfare has very similar issues though. The game outright crashes at random points in singleplayer when you have less than 4GB VRAM.
        Shadow Of Mordor is a better port for sure, but I’ve heard reports it’s also pretty hungry when it comes to VRAM – wasn’t it the game everybody got upset at Nvidia over because of the 970’s segmented memory issue?

        Eitherway, it’s the same old story of a sloppy port, but let’s not pretend that that’ll be the last of them, especially this early on in the current-gen console lifecycle.