Modern Warfare 2 Comparisons – A war about nothing

The upcoming release of the sequel to Infinity Ward's monster hit, Call of Duty 4 is creating quite a buzz on internet gaming sites. So is it due to Modern Warfare 2's intense action? The perfect scores already being posted? The controversial airport segment?

Not quite. The internet is abuzz with speculation on which version of Modern Warfare 2 has a miniscule edge, the PS3 or the 360.

The gaming site, Lens of Truth, who apparently persuaded their local Play N Trade to break Modern Warfare 2's street date in order to provide them the opportunity to run the two versions against each other his succeeded again in fanning the flames of fanboyism with their most recent comparison. Lens of Truth are known for pitting both 360 and PS3 versions of the same game through a series of tests to compare how each game stacks up, often coming to eyebrow raising conclusions on which version comes out on top.

[iron_sheik]

with a slight edge to ps3 in graphics and x360 in frame rate. check cynamite de comparisons

[The Creep]

loool ps3 version hasnt got a slight edge in graphics

it lost on all accounts

graphics, performace, loading tmes and controls

there was alot more than one occasion were the ps33 version was at 30 - 40 fps and the 360 was at 50 - 60. thats around 20 fps difference thats friggin alot.

NO im sorry i will not be getting this on ps3 and il be advising all my friends and people i know to not get this on ps3.

AVOID THE PS3 VERSION LIKE THE PLAGUE unless you only own a ps3 ofcourse =)

[HDgamer]

You're not getting the ps3 version because you don't own a ps3, please stop with all the lies and ignorance supported by pure fanboyish delusions.

[Noob]

And yet this tool hasn't even played either version, smh.

[ThanatosDMC]

The NVG actually works properly! I'll probably get shot if i screw around the neighborhood though. Just be careful and try not to drop it. It doesnt feel durable at all. Basically a kids toy.

Like this: http://www.amazon.com/EyeCl...

[jadenkorri]

you must be comparing the first screen shot comparison, the one that was so obviously photoshopped.

[Maddens Raiders]

wake me up when GT5 drops....

the graphics in this game look like butt anyway so who cares what it's on...?

[Bodyboarder_VGamer]

You have both consoles and you want to buy the best version of the game available, even if its for a little bit, you just want the best... I don't see what's the problem with that.

[Anon1974]

If you have no way of verifying the results, how do you know which versions are the best when it's this close. As with most titles these days, when they're this close it's like the difference between having one thousand dollars and having one thousand dollars and one penny. Who cares?

If you install Tekken on your PS3's harddrive, are you really going to miss that 1.7 seconds difference in load time? In some random FPS, is a 2 fps difference in the drop of frame rate going to matter? A slightly blurry texture on a rock in the background if you pause the game and squint really hard?

Or are other factors like not having to pay for play online, where all your friends play, controller preference, hardware reliability or how much fun the game ultimately is more important than a momentary dip in frames per second that no one will ever notice, and no one will ever actually verify if it's true or not?

Don't get me wrong, if a game is truly inferior on one platform over the other, that's an issue that most respected game reviewers will address, but when it comes down to nitpicking like this - don't you think gamers are truly losing sight of what's really important?

[iron_sheik]

MW2 has no dedicated servers so paying 50$ to pay online isnt a good idea actually
also PS3 version has a very slight edge in graphics with the x360 version having a slight edge in frame rate

you cant go wrong either way but you can easily see the obvious winner if you are short on cash

[HDgamer]

Lol best version, it's the same damn game. If you have friends who's buying it for which console you buy the version they are going to play it on.

[Major_Failson]

PS3 wins on graphics once again just like dragon age origins poor xtards i think they actually believe if a multiplat isnt ported properly to ps3 then the 360 is more powerful LMAO

Face it devs are finding it alot easier now to develop on ps3 and not as many shabby ports of gimped 360 games.

The 360 is like a limp d!ck it just keeps flopping.

[Major_Failson]

And everything was working top notch, one thing i liked in this version was the mobile turrets.It will be a good game to tide me over for bfbc2 and mag

[iron_sheik]

However you can win either way
I would personally choose PSN though since there are no dedicated servers on either platform. I wont pay 50$ for online without dedicated servers

[Fatal Blow]

To be honest i can't tell the difference between both the ps3 & xbox360 unless your glued next to your tv lol come on guy's who cares as long as we all can play the game and no one console has exclusives items it's all good

[Darkeyes]

It all looks well and good if one takes off the fanboy googles. The simple answer to all these comparisons is just for hits. Who doesn't want to see probably the biggest game of the year runs better on which console.. With that said, I hate it when comparisons fail to put both consoles on their best settings while comparing. How hard is it to turn on the RGB and super white features on the PS3? Thanks to Cynamite, we at least came to know that changing a setting can mean the difference between pale and good colors...

The fact still remains that both games look really similar and hats off to IW for that (still pissed at AV though). I will probably wait for Digital foundry to pass the verdict as they always seem to know what they are talking about, but either ways if you end up even with one on any console, it won't mar your experience in any ways. This isn't 2007 so grow up. A crack missing when zoomed in at 250% doesn't really account to which version is superior....

I really loled when LOT compared frames where PS3 averages 58.5 FPS and 360 averaged 59 and declared 360 a winner, I mean seriously is someone even going to notice that!!??? Just flaming the fanboys thats all....

[Ju]

With that game, any comparison is a political problem. It is one of the most over-hyped games this year and it will be hard to argue if this is the best game or not simply because of the shear amount of numbers it'll sell and how many fans it has. Objectivity in that respect will be hard to achieve.

That said, I can only see a political correct answer here, and that is, whatever difference there is, its negligible. Its those tiny things which are getting amplified into extremes. On both sides. Those differences have no impact on a game play what so ever, and eventually it simply boils down to everybody's personal preference.

Personally I think the game will appeal more to the 360 shooter fans, but with, what, 2M vs. 1.5M (just to demonstrate a distribution here) sold its hard to argue, if that is really the case. Could simply be the install base; but I think the PS3 audience is more diverse (but that's just an opinion). And its definitively the biggest 360 title this year (not counting Halo ODST which sells over its name, no matter what - but another shooter).

I have yet to get it, and I am still on the fence. The shots and videos look awesome. I haven't played CoD4 that much, and its not my favorite game (play it for the DM usually). Kotick, and that terrorist shooting scene turn me off, TBH (that was totally unnecessary - total war propaganda). We'll see. Maybe later.

[alphakennybody]

I wonder what is so different about LOT and others site when it comes to comparing screens, I sure don't see any. They (LOT) use it to attract fanboys for just like any other site,yet no one hardly calling there's (LOT) flamebait but other site are :/ no matter how we look at it they're no different than any others, I might say even worse,they're like one of those colleagues who smile innocently everyday but in fact he's rotten bastard on the inside,but hides it whit the fake smile to protect his image outside his house.

[Taz Yamauchi]

This game looks the same on both consoles anyone who thinks 360 version looks better is just a fanboy, I will be downloading it for pc anyway but if I were to buy I would buy the ps3 version

[KingKionic]

Forget this !

Buy the game !

[Turbo Teddy]

By making an article where he states the flawed logic about the vs.war, he has given the war an extra push, was this intentionally ?

[CrippleH]

I'm generally a PS3 owner but my brother owns a 360 and I can say the 360 version is a tad better thanks to less framedropping. You won't be noticing it much anyways since the game hardly stays at 60 in the Lensoftruth test.

Might be only a tad worst but IW didn't deliver what they promised again. Equal performance for both consoles and said PC gamers will like what they see.

[Mc Fadge]

Is post 5 comparative pictures, naming each set with "Console X" and "Console Y". The console's names would vary between each picture, and viewers should be given a week to vote for whichever pictures they think look better.

This will allow the quality of the graphics to be a large scale, unbiased, subjective survey. But with such a sample size, it would more accurately depict which screens gamers actually think look better.

I personally think that would be a lot more interesting than, "Well, it has 500 more pixels" or, "The colours are washed out showing inferior performance".

[wotta]

What does this matter?

[CrippleH]

60 dollars is a huge investment, of course it matters. If it didn't people will gladly spend 60 for shovelwares on 360 and PS3.

[HDgamer]

60 is a huge investment for kids with allowances and petty graphical arguments.

[CrippleH]

Pretty big talk when people are getting laid off left to right in the world right now. OH WAIT YOU MUST BE FREAKIN LOADED!!!

[KingKionic]

The game is pretty darn good .

[kraze07]

"60 is a huge investment for kids with allowances and petty graphical arguments."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[nolifeking]

If people are getting laid off I doubt some insignificant graphical difference is really a blip on their radar.

[HDgamer]

I have two jobs in a recession. How's that for being owned.

[4point7BillionLoss]

and this stupid droid site tries to argue in this instance that comparisons don't matter ... but only when 360 comes out on top. Again.

Jaggies Costing Sony exactly $4.7 billion

[junk-3d]

This line made me laugh:

"...in 2009 the majority of multiplatform releases are either the same or better on the PS3 console."

Are you serious? How did you figure that one out? It really is simple when it comes to cross-platform development. Let me lay this out for you:
If the PC version is the lead sku, it will port to the Xbox 360 nicely then to the PS3. The Xbox 360 version would be the lead console sku. So the best the PS3 could do is tie.

If the game was developed on the Xbox 360 first then ported to the PS3, again, the best the PS3 could do is tie.

If the game was developed on the PS3 then ported to the Xbox 360, the best the Xbox 360 could do is tie.

See how simple that is?

[Anon1974]

@ junk-3d above: "Are you serious? How did you figure that one out?"

That's based on review scores and Metacritic averages. The majority of mulitplats reviewed this year scored the same or higher on the PS3. Given that sites like Gamespot, IGN, etc, will lower their scores if something is wrong with one version over the other, and given their weighting in the Metacritic scores, I would think this would be a more reliable gauge of how close versions are over the type of questionable comparisons sites like Lens of Truth provide.

A game reviewer is playing the game. A 2 fps drop here and there simply doesn't matter, and thusly won't factor into their review. It's sites like LOT that suddenly try to force the issue on us and, as I mentioned above, is that what's really important to gamers?

I'm not really sure what your oversimplified porting lesson was meant to accomplish, although I'm sure you meant well by it. The article was just looking at review scores as a measure.

[XboxGirl]

Why are you afraid of the truth? I own both consoles and I only want wats best for the money, and if one pixel is better on one version I want to know about it. Furthermore, let me make the final decisions which version is better for me not a pick and choose website like Metacritic..

Also IGN, Gamespot etc use copy and paste reviews for almost all of there major reviews and even the images galleries are from one version only (usually the Xbox 360 version). So you would rather trust them over a sites like Lens of Truth and Digital Foundry who technically break down each version and reveal difference like what happen with Ghostbusters? FYI IGN didn't mention any graphical differences in their review. WHY?

Pretended your buying a red 2009 Volvo, one cars paint was slightly brighter, and the same car for some reason went 2 MPH faster, and finally that same car used 2 less gallons per mile. Which one would you choose considering their the same car for the same price?

Don't be scared of the truth, aliens also exist..

[Anon1974]

That's not gaming, in my opinion. But you missed the point. This isn't about knowing which version is better than the other. These comparisons don't tell that. If they did, then every site that did these kind of tests would have the same results - all the time. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The real truth is with the majority of titles, you'd never notice the differences unless you hooked them up to some kind of measuring equipment. The real truth is these types of "comparisons" are just as subject to opinion and human error as any other review, except real game reviews look at far more than just graphical performance and load time. The real truth is LOT's findings are rarely ever verified. You're just taking their word for it, and in the past they've come to some pretty "out there" conclusions based on their own findings, and their findings are often at odds with measurements taken by other comparison sites.

And in the case, the truth is that 2/3 of their own staff seems to be buying the PS3 version. That, right there, speaks volumes.

As for your car analysis, I'd probably find myself another dealer. If they started to push those kind of details on me I'd probably be skeptical of the results because really, who cares? Why would anyone go through the trouble of telling me when the cars are that close?

Personally, I live in the real world. If someone I trusted told me there was really no difference, and someone else said "Wait! This one is slightly faster," it wouldn't factor into my purchasing decision at all. Who has the time or effort to sweat these kind of details. The human eye registers anything above 18 fps as fluid motion if blur is used. Am I really going to even notice or care about a 2 fps drop when it's already above 30fps, sometimes closer to 60 fps?

Edit: As for IGN's review of Ghostbusters, they did mention the graphical differences. They just said it didn't matter in terms of the overall finished product. This was their conclusion after discussing the differences "I'll save you the suspense and tell you both versions are getting the same score for graphics because the overall package is solid on each platform."
And this was before the patch. Having played the PS3 version, I was a blast and shouldn't be missed by Ghostbusters fans. A little short though. Worth a rent.

[evildeli]

Darkride(Kyle)'s got nothing better to do than hang on every word of Lens of Truth. Talk about holding a grudge over Blazblue, Wolfenstein, and Tekkan. If the only winning argument is because your system red ringed, get over yourself. Microsoft certainly doesn't care about their own red ring, as well as the millions who've had to send in their box for a new one.

[Anon1974]

You know someone doesn't have an argument when...

[evildeli]

"13.1 - What on earth does this have to do with any of the points I raised?
You know someone doesn't have an argument when..."

...when it's coming from Darkride...

[Joe Bomb]

Well everyone is intitled to their opinion. Just remember LoT's analysises are only that NOT a review. It is only informative for those of us who own both systems. I appreciate what they do since I own both and don't like to pay $125 to find out what the superior version is. If you have the ability to own the superior version of anything wouldn't you? On your article.. do a little research first, it clearly state's in LoT's site that they capture right from source, tv adjustments aren't included since they are subjective to the monitor that one owns. The analysis is NOT a review they barely get by the first stage it only compares technical issues not how good the game is. You are way off the point and if you want to complain about byass reviews go after the sites who get paid from game companies and clearly skew their scores. Remember the removal of Assassin's Creed's score?That was the most boring repetitive game ever. The original score showed that, then was removed. Where is your article on that? or are you getting some of that ad money too. Remember to pick and choose your battles Darkride66, and if you are a true gamer you would see the TRUTH.

[Anon1974]

No where did I criticize LOT's methods, or say gamers shouldn't be informed.
Far from it. The point of the article was to encourage gamers to GET informed.

Reading your post it seems clear you didn't read the article. No where did the article criticize LOT's methods. They can pretty much say whatever they want for that, it's their site. I have no idea if their measurements are accurate or not. Nor do you, at this point.

The point of the article wasn't to be critical of LOT's Modern Warfare 2 comparison. I haven't verified their findings or played either version yet, I have no idea if they're right. The point of the article is to question the validity of these types of comparisons and examine their usefulness compared to traditional, professional game reviews.

When commenting on an article, take your own advice about doing a little research. Reading the article you're commenting on might be a good start.

I'm not saying don't use LOT. Some people swear by LOT's comparisons like they're they only thing that matters. Bully for them, if that's their choice. All I'm trying to do is encourage a little thought rather then following these types of comparisons with blind faith. Personally, I don't find them nearly as useful as a reviewer I trust, but that's just me. To each his own.

[sleewok]

Great article!

[Joe Bomb]

You comment on me not reading, you keep saying REVIEW. They are not reviews they are analysis. Technical analysis over which version is technically better. a review is based on gameplay, story, controls..etc. This is an analysis of framerrate, screen tearing and loading times, not how good the game is. These analysis are not to deter anyone from buying the game, just which console version is TECHNICALLY better.BTW if you even have checked the site recently you would see that there is a program they are using to analyze these games not just their eyes. I would also like to know what yout criteria for a "professional" reviewer is. I have been playing games for 25 years and I'm wondering if this qualifies as a "professional" so I can get a job somewhere. Seems like I would have a Doctorate 3 times over.

[Qui-Gon Jim]

One is an analysis. With an "i" for singular.
Multiple are analyses. With an "e" for plural.

I'm picky with my grammar.

[cheapndirty]

The force is strong with you.

Man I am so glad for these comparisons. I actually lose sleep over which one will look slightly better.

[Joe Bomb]

" I have no idea if their measurements are accurate or not"

Nice comment how the hell did you even write an editiorial on them. Research, Research, Reasearch, It would be like me writing an article criticizing nuclear fusion. I have no idea how it is done, and you have NO IDEA how their analysis is done. so your article is B.S.. BTW, Did LoT turn down your application? Seems to me that you have an ax to grind.

[Qui-Gon Jim]

"In doing blind side by side tests at the office the ONLY person capable of picking the right version was the programmer responsible for a lot of the rendering code." Taken from this article.

You will not see a difference while playing the game. The people who are making a big deal out of this essentially just want to be able to say "Nya nya-nya nya-nya nyaa, my version is better than yours."