Bad Company 2 Superior On The 360?

Platform Nation writes: "Now, considering that DICE´s Battlefield: Bad Company looked and performed slightly better on the Xbox 360 console, will there be a noticeable difference between the two versions of Bad Company 2? It has been proven on numerous occasions that Sony´s PlayStation 3 is no joke; the exclusives speak for themselves, the graphical and performance quality of most PlayStation 3 exclusives to date have out-done anything the Xbox 360 has to offer. The question still remains, will DICE stick to what they know and perfect their craft on the Xbox 360 console, or will they try beat Naughty Dog at their own game on their own field?"

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
MetalGearRising3211d ago

Obviously it does have a superior GPU and CPU so this isn't hard to understand.

ipwnall3211d ago

Where's your proof? KZ2, U2, Heavy Rain, GT5, The Last Guardian, and GOW3 all jizzed in your eyes and made you near half blind.

dkgshiz3211d ago

Take a look at UC2 or KZ2. Its miles ahead any 360 game in terms of graphics. Go back to school or something.

chidori6663211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

only in the world of blind bots ;)

CWMR3211d ago

-"Take a look at UC2 or KZ2. Its miles ahead any 360 game in terms of graphics."

Oh please! Miles better? More like slightly better, if at all. I think Mass Effect 2 looks better than either of them.

Heavy Rain and God of War 3 don't even look as good as Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2, so why even bring them into the debate? God of War 3 has some very flat textures and is simply not hugely impressive on any technical front. It has great art combined with fairly good tech to create a nice looking game, but it isn't bar raising.

Look at the most recent GOW3 screenshots.
Look how poor most of those textures are.

The rest of those games aren't even out and what I have seen of GT5 looks no better than Forza 3.-

MGOelite3211d ago

ill let you have killzone 2 but uncharted 2 looks way better than ME2... and please try and remember killzone 2 is like 12 months old...

snaz273211d ago

oh please dont even go there! your really gonna argue graphics? so its pretty much, no it is universally accepted that ps3 exclusives beat anything on 360 but you still dont wanna believe? lmao.. do you know there are scenes in k2 that has 300+ independant lights? real lights! that is almost unheard of! the particle effects were effected by a real time weather system. as were granades and such! the death animations were varied and life like, it is an awesome game.

snaz273211d ago

people could argue its still better than u2, however i think u2 edges it, thats one damn good looking game, ive yet to hear any 360 game to be compared crysis! oh btw heavy rain beats u2 graphically, but there is less going on ai wise, however there are scenes with tons of people on screen at once!

snaz273211d ago

lmao ok so it blew away the media for no reason then? give me a break! the scale of the thing is mind boggling! and by all accounts the latest build beats u2! gt5 looks the same as forza? pmsl oh you know what mate yeah your right, me2 beats anything even pc lmao.

anti-gamer3210d ago

did you have a hard time to find 2 year old tec demo of GOW3 to improve you option.

and you say GT5 is dont look as good as forza 3.

pleas dont kid you self.

knowledge4lfe3210d ago

how can any idiot really think mass effect 2 looks better then uc2 or kz2?? im 15 hours in me2 and it has some of the worst textures i have ever seen. as a whole the game looks very good. but great?? what a joke. my gamertag is knowledge4lyfe if you dont believe i got me2. man you fools need to get a life. get a tv/monitor bigger then 19 inches.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3210d ago
neil903211d ago

I am completely confused.

PeterPanParadox3211d ago

I have both copies. The Xbox 360 has slightly better AA, better colour, and doesn´t screen-tear as much. I guess it wasn´t enough to upset people but he is right.

THE MAX SPEED 213211d ago

Angry fanboy Swag on

PEterPandarox you dont have both versions! >:(

You're lying I'll press the disagree button to get my frustration ooutttt!!!


yall some lames.

Hanif-8763211d ago

This article is bullshit. The PS3 was the lead platform for Battlefield Bad Company and Mirrors Edge and its more than likely also the lead for Battlefield Bad Company 2 :-)

deadreckoning6663211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

I actually just got back from my friends house after playing the 360 version. From what I rememeber, the colors are less washed out on the 360 and the 360 controller is better than the Dual Shock for me.

However, the last time I played Bad Company 2 was during the beta last year so if its better its probably because its an updated build, rather than a console difference.

Either way, the PC version will stomp BOTH the PS3 and 360 versions, so getting into arguments is pointless.

bjornbear3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

date of PS3 BETA - november 29th (approximation)

date of 360 and PC DEMO - January 26 (approximation)

difference in months -

roughly 2 months

2 MONTHS of difference between a BETA and a DEMO

but thats why the article is quite fair since it merely assumes it, and doesn't actually say there's any proof yet (there isn't =/)

now i would love to see someone to say 2 months doesn't count in terms of improvements taking place during and after a BETA, that would make my LOL day =P

i'm not doubting this game will be amazing graphically on all 3 platforms, but lets not get ahead of ourselves based on a 2 month old BETA and a 1 week old demo.

D4RkNIKON3211d ago

It is a multiplatform game, the differences are only going to be graphical and they are going to be just like every other multiplat game.. It will either look identical on both systems or it will look slightly better on one console (PS3 or 360). The graphic differences in multiplatform games are so small that you HAVE to do screen shot comparisons side by side at full res to even notice a difference. That is what is so funny about this. Fanboys on both sides try to argue as if it makes a single difference. The game will play the same on both consoles and every one will enjoy it equally.

Exclusive games are the only ones worth comparing. On that note I will quote the article
"It has been proven on numerous occasions that Sony´s PlayStation 3 is no joke; the exclusives speak for themselves, the graphical and performance quality of most PlayStation 3 exclusives to date have out-done anything the Xbox 360 has to offer."

pangitkqb3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

Crank every setting to maximum and make the consoles immediately look dated? Check.

Don't get me wrong, I love both my PS3 and 360. I just love ruffling feathers by reminding people - yes, i'm a horrible person and should suffer a long, painful death - that PC wins 9 times out of 10.

Go ahead rip me a new one, point out how expensive PC's are, etc... I don't mind, I got nothing but love for every platform, Wii included.

s8anicslayer3211d ago

Meaningless article, If your site is in need of hits use catchy titles like this when it's sure to ignite a flame war. If you read the actual article the author goes in a completely different direction and the fact that if you actually played the PS3 version it was "Beta" and should have minor issues, it is expected! Lastly who cares what version looks slightly better when everyone knows that if a game is made with the 360 as the lead platform the PS3 might be subject to some code difficulties depending on the Dev.

Maddens Raiders3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

"The question still remains, will DICE stick to what they know and perfect their craft on the Xbox 360 console, or will they try beat Naughty Dog at their own game on their own field?"

^^ poor/lack of editing and/or proofreading of your own article reflects negatively on the site and quickly turns readers like me away from speculative op-eds like this.

after all the tweaks and fixes gathered from the PS3 beta combined with the graphical advantages the PS3 has over the 360 [Dice even praised & admittedly aspired, to have vistas as breathtaking as Uncharted 2's] - this question marked "article" could easily read:

"Bad Company 2 Superior On The PS3?"

N4G. Fact checking, exposing FUD and regulating game journos on a daily basis.

Bathyj3211d ago

*sigh* I hate using the word "journalism" when referring to the games media. They're just such hitseeking hacks. The title had almost nothing to do with the article, it was just to get you to read it.

They might as well put a "S3X, now that we've got your attention" sign up.

But the fact it was even written will be enough for XBfanboy to go away and repeat it ad nausium, forgetting the source and the context, until they actually believe it themselves, like the "All games will be 1080p @120fps" lie.

To the real issue, I thought Gordon Van Dyke's humility and respect for Naughty Dog was great. He didnt come out flapping his gums and say, we beat Uncharted, he came out and said, thats the sort of quality we're shooting for. Classy.

SilentNegotiator3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

Both versions are jaggy, screen-tearing messes (Judging off the PS3 beta and 360 demo).

I actually found the screen tearing to be a little worse in the 360 demo, but maybe the latest build has some issues to fix.

CWMR3211d ago

-The first game definitely was better on the 360. Like others are saying, it had less screen tearing, a more stable frame rate, better color reproduction and a sharper look.

It wont's surprise me if this one is the same way. Most games I have compared have been better on the 360, so that is why I almost always get the 360 versions.-

TheDeadMetalhead3211d ago

"Now, considering that DICE´s Battlefield: Bad Company looked and performed slightly better on the Xbox 360 console"

What? No it didn't. :/

MGSR THE HD VERSION3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

there you guys go, info for both ps3 and 360's beta.


360's version also has 2xaa.

SilentNegotiator3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

"areas that show 2xMSAA" =/= 2xAA
Anyone with two working eyes and an HDTV knows that neither version had 2xAA.

"both ps3 and 360's beta"
You mean PS3 beta (Unfinished product) vs 360 demo (Representation of finished product)?

TheBand1t3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

MGSR, you're comparing a beta (unfinished product) to a demo (finished or near finished product).

No sh!t the mostly finished product is gonna have better performance then the unfinished product.

This is something that irks me with alot of console gamers. A beta is not the same as a demo like some of you seem to think it is.

MGSR THE HD VERSION3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

"sigh" it's not so surprising that 360's turns up once again being the definitive of the two console versions.

it's happened before with the first bad company.

so yeah, it was bound to end up being just an other tally mark for 360. :)

wicko3211d ago

Even if there are differences between the beta and the demo, the demo being much closer to the finished product. So hold your comparisons until we get our hands on the PS3 demo.

zeeshan3211d ago

Don't you just HATE these so-called "NEWS" with a question mark at the end of the title?

TheBand1t3211d ago

"Frostbite is one of those engines built from the ground up for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 and mooted to have equal performance on both platforms - claims we've heard before and rarely believe. However, DICE's coders are more open than most and they claim that PS3 performance has been substantially optimised. According to posts on the Beyond3D forum from one of Bad Company's developers, the game makes extensive use of the SPUs - everything from animation to the Havoc physics and even the generation of undergrowth are farmed off to PS3's satellite processing units. The result is a game that is pretty much identical to its Xbox 360 sibling."

That was taken, verbatim, from the eurogamer article you linked. The only difference being the 360 had slightly better textures on the ground.

You're going to stare at the ground the entire game? Won't that get you killed alot?

bjornbear3211d ago

campers tend to stare at the ground the most...=3

mikeslemonade3211d ago

Modern Warfare 2 looks better than Battlefield Bad Company 2 in general. So your basically saying your poo taste better than my poo while Modern Warfare 2 is the Pizza.

Battlefield Bad Company 2 is one of the most overhyped games I ever played. I actually liked the Battlefield Bad Company 1 better. The graphics have been updated so it looks a little better. Modern Warfare 2 is just like an "update", so I don't get how people downplay MW2 and overhype BFBC2.

MGRogue20173211d ago

There is no lead platform for Battlefield Bad Company 2.

Both version are being developed side-by-side simultaneously..

But the Xbox 360 version does in fact look better.

champ213211d ago

console versions will be very simular. If anyone is concerned about getting the CLEARLY superior version.. that thats on the PC.

Cueil3211d ago

DICE is most at home on the 360's architecture so it hardly surprising that and the engine works better on a general purpose CPU.

Consoldtobots3211d ago

they didn't,

if it hasn't dawned on anyone yet........what did you think the fanboy backlash would be for the stellar vs horrible year the PS3 had against the 360 in 09?

we already see IGN hard at work spewing more flamebait than the worst fanboys on N4G.

lindquist3211d ago

This is from twitter and @repi, one of the devs:

Yes the 360 and PS3 versions of #BFBC2 is very similar, some particles are bit sharper on 360 in a distance

But PS3 has a bit better lighting/bloom. But overall very similar between each other and BFBC1

PopEmUp3211d ago

just wait for both two version to be out, and then compare it it's wouldn't be too late would it?

The Happy Baby3211d ago

...if its not something positive about PS3, then its a failure and its a lie.

The Wii: doesnt exist
Motion Control: Stolen from Sony
360: Fail
Natal: Stolen from the Russians
MS: The devil
Windows: vaporware
PC: fake
Onlive: flop

Am I the only one who sees the pattern?

y0haN3211d ago

@DeadlySpartan just because the PS3 was lead platform doesn't mean you end up with a better game on the lead platform. In terms of GPU horsepower the 360 still wins.. example..

DelbertGrady3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

The PS3 was the lead platform for Ghostbusters as well and that game looked miles better on the 360.

If this happens to be true I can guarantee tons of PS3 fanboys will start saying BC2 is a crap game lol! They always do.

PoSTedUP3210d ago

am i the only one that cares? i paid $500 for my ps3 and $65 for a game, i want the best. this is the reason why people boycott s***. it is not that i am not a true gamer, i am a true consumer that pays good money for my s***. this has been going on for so long now and i may miss out on a good game because of my beliefs about being equal, i dont feel like i am being treated equal here.

this is me venting.

travelguy2k3210d ago

Battlefield: Bad Company not BFBC2. The original performed better on 360, but that was years ago when no one knew how to develop for the PS3.

gintoki7773210d ago

yea I played both versions AND THEY BOTH SUCK

seriously why couldnt this article come out after the actual was released at least -_-

+ Show (31) more repliesLast reply 3210d ago
Fishy Fingers3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

Strange article, there will be more than enough comparisons posted on N4G I'm sure, why not wait until then to draw your conclusions.

Oh, and nice operation flashpoint image. Just goes to show the quality of their craft.

PeterPanParadox3211d ago

Since when did operation flashpoint have such good graphics? :P

trancefreak3211d ago

Dude get another account your truth is ruined/finished/over. change it too something more on the lines of superuber360bot2010. Much more fitting in your case.

gamingisnotacrime3211d ago

Until you have to pay for online play
i wont pay for that, PS3/PC version is better just for that

Megaton3211d ago

That's the real comparison for me, not counting pixels on a 500x zoom.

Which version charges me extra to play online?

gamingisnotacrime3211d ago

PS3 version $60
360 version $60

Online gaming
PSN; free
LIVE; $$$

PS3 and PC offer more bang for the buck

mcnablejr3211d ago

xbox 360 £200 with year of live £240
Ps3 £250 (without cross game chat WTF!?

Pc £500... hmmm

gamingisnotacrime3211d ago

Blu Ray, WiFi, inexpensive HD replacements, bluetooth, and 256 players on MAG (lol just kidding)

randomwiz3211d ago (Edited 3211d ago )

in my personal opinion, pc offers more bang for the buck than the consoles because you miss out on so much detail in the console versions, but anyways:

if you have both ps3 and 360 and are deciding which platform to get it on, you're most likely not going to consider live as an extra charge since you're paying for it for other games anyway...

mastiffchild3211d ago

I gave up paying for L<ive last year as the games I played online on it eithner got ruined by P2P or by XGC(TF2, mainly, team based games are ruined when people are distracted talking to people elsewhere, not lstening to teammates etc)-I dearly hope XGC never makes it to PSN. Still don't get why MS don't lean on devs to provide dedicated serversn as when you pay you expect a premium service and having more games running better online would stop any argument unless Sony did the same but right now there's more games on PSN with dedicateds-and I chose that over a couple of features that I actually don't like every time. The fact PSN is also free is just a massive bonus.

As for the "differences" you get when playing multis on the two HD consoles:they're never worth talking about, imo, and on the VERY rare occasions where there IS an actual difference you'd be capable of noticing without running them side by side it's still rarely enough to change anyone's mind over what version they get. Where your mates are and what controller you like best are WAY more important than differences you'd neverv notice without being told by sites with more time than talent.

I'll also say this-I have both versions of the first BFBC and I never felt he two were anything other than identical on my TV online or offline, too. Another article making supposition in order to grow mountains from mole hills-they're aiming to make the games the same and the only failures are when they REALLY don't (tOB, for example but since then I haven't ever felt the 360 version was ever superior enough(if ever at all as sometimes, most times I can't see the differences in the shpts at places like DF which isn't shocking when they don't always use the human eye to check but bloody computer programs to detect tearimng and the like. It's a non issue 99% of the time and that's that.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3211d ago