Activision: Stop Being Console-ist

Hello Activison,
Look at Black Ops on the PS3,
Now look at it on the 360,
Now back at your PS3,
Now back at the 360.
Sadly, the PS3 version doesn’t look or play like the 360 version.

[Pedantic91]

Made me smile :)

[Masamori Sumimura]

What kind of article is this?

[Elvfam511]

a funny one?

[Quagmire]

A creative one, what were you expecting, a top 10 list?

But anyway, i'd rather EA side with Sony rather than Activision, as EA has more to offer such as Dead Space 2, Medal Of Honor, Battlefield, Need for Speed, Mass Effect etc...

[visualb]

its an "Opinion piece"

its written under the picture.

they do differ.

[STiRacer]

______________________________ _____________________

[badz149]

I'll take EA over Activision any day of the week! even with CoD, Activision is just a mediocre company with mediocre games with deep pocket and dumb followers!

[ash_divine]

For those of you who don't get the joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[Quagmire]

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

This was a joke?

[frostypants]

Dude, you're clearly too cool to find it funny.

Teach us your ways.

[tacosRcool]

Its too bad that what Activision did is true

[Christopher]

I can't believe that anyone on the Internet wouldn't get the reference...

[multipayer]

It is like the hitler skit, both are funny the first time you hear them and then not so much... I really couldn't care less if Call of Duty had better graphics either, which it will-->NEXT YEAR!(Don't buy it, Battlefield 3 is out)

[headwing45]

I assume this joke is about the PS3 version not having multiple PSN log ins, but I believe the 360 version doesn't have 3D support. If that's the case, I'd say the 360 version got screwed over.

[AlienFodder]

The 3D support for Black Ops is actually available for the PS3, 360 and PC.

[headwing45]

Oh really? I thought you needed blue ray to do this, but I guess not.

[Christopher]

The type of 3D support is different. 360 utilizes the standard red and blue glasses, IIRC, and the PS3 version the new glasses that use interlaced frames to create 3D.

[edgeofblade]

cgoodno... that is 100% wrong. You could not be more inaccurate. You are making shit up off the top of your head. This is criminally incorrect, and you should... well maybe not burn in hell for pretending you know anything about 3D on 360... but something bad should happen to you for your egregious error.

I just went over to verify it. I don't have a 3D TV, but if you put the game in 3D mode, it puts the images side by side. If I had a 3D TV, it would also be sending a signal to page-flip the two images which, combined with a pair of LCD shutter glasses, would yield a 3D image.

No red/cyan glasses.

Same as the PS3.

Again, just to be clear:

[alex3369]

haha thanks your comment made my day. lol you are actually 100% correct and cgoodno is indeed incorrect.

[edgeofblade]

And while I'm on a roll, headwing45.... why would a Blu-ray disk be necessary to 3D? IN A GAME, no less. All the strain is on the rendering side, not on the disk space. Now, a 3D MOIVE takes could take twice the space, depending on compression methods and whether or not only half the frames are present for each eye of the movie... but probably not.

There has been quite a bit of scuttlebutt about the 360 not having the right version of HDMI for 3D (which is evidently wrong as well). But this is the first I've heard of a Blu-ray disk being technologically necessary for 3D.

For gods sake you sheeple... Blu-ray is not fucking magic. It's larger. That's. It. It does not enable any new technology, just more the technology you already know and love.

This is why I have such a beef with Sony... their advertising and marketing breeds morons who swallow anything their fed because they don't know any better. They don't reason through it. They just accept it.

[headwing45]

You really have nothing better to do, do you? 0_0

The reason why I thought it is because 3D has been heavily advertised on PS3 and not at all on 360, that's it. I'm not in a fantasy world were I sit in my corner pretending that the PS3 is all mighty, I'm just not a 3D expert like you claim to be. I also herd rumors that the PS3 3D is a little more advanced the the 360 because of the mix of blue ray and PS3 updates Sony has been giving us for the last couple months. I don't know weather or not it's true, that's why if you read my comment above, I said "I thought."

EDIT: I found an article detailing the differences between 360 3D and PS3 3D

http://n4g.com/news/461517/...

3D on the Xbox 360 can't do the same thing as to what the PS3 can do, 360 can't have HD at the same time as 3D and the FPS gets reduced to 30, which can cause headaches overtime. I think the people advertising the 3D on PS3 (the people who don't no anything) say that blue ray mixed with the PS3's power can achieve a full 3D experience.

[Christopher]

***cgoodno... that is 100% wrong. You could not be more inaccurate. You are making shit up off the top of your head. This is criminally incorrect, and you should... well maybe not burn in hell for pretending you know anything about 3D on 360... but something bad should happen to you for your egregious error. ***

Cute, let's see where we end up with this...

***I don't have a 3D TV, but if you put the game in 3D mode, it puts the images side by side.***

Oh, you mean just like standard 3D viewers that require the red/blue glasses do? You see, shutter glasses rapidly swap between the two images, they're not present on the screen at the same time.

***If I had a 3D TV, it would also be sending a signal to page-flip the two images which, combined with a pair of LCD shutter glasses, would yield a 3D image.***

Which is impossible on the 360 since... it can't buffer enough data to keep the 120fps needed for both images to result in a 60fps view in 3D.

Seriously, I may not have been 100% accurate, but I'm way more accurate than what you're spewing out here. The 3D between 360 and PS3 are vastly different. 360 utilizes sub-HD images at the same time while the PS3 is capable of buffering through double the frame of images at HD resolutions. Certain TVs are capable of handling both methods of 3D display and can make it much easier on the eyes to view 360 games in 3D, but they will, at this time, not equal up and feel less dynamic in the result.

***why would a Blu-ray disk be necessary to 3D?***

Constant high video buffer output rate for 120fps requirements utilized with the shutter lenses.

[TheLastGuardian]

Activision are biased. They showed it off at Microsofts E3 event and at the end of every trailer it say Xbox 360 this and Xbox live that. I haven't played Black Ops on the 360 but I'm having so much fun playing it on PS3. I just stayed up all night and played it like 10 hours straight.

[CrIpPeN]

haha funny :D

[mrb3ar]

the article and hilarious photo

[Gam3s4lif3]

lol :)

[Supman]

I agree with this article,
activision sucks.

I mean only advertising on 360?
stupid activision.

[Nariko-2011]

Why is nobody complaining about EA's love for PS3? oh because it's PS3 we can look aside?? Fifa had some ads in the UK that omitted the X360, why is nobody pitch forking about that?
Lets drop console favouritism, ok...but lets drop the double standards as well shall we?

[big_silky]

good point about ea, i didn't see too many tears about moh and dead space 2 on ps3 coming with free games...plenty of tears about this and the 360 getting first crack at fallout dlc though...

i love hypocrisy.

[Motorola]

Tears for Fallout New Vegas? Really? There are enough quests in that game to not want DLC....I havent seen any tears for that

[InFAMOUS1]

I agree about advertising and etc, however MoH plays almost identical on both consoles, where as CoD does not.. The article is not about advertising issues, but rather technical issues.. Activision and Microsoft are too in bed together on ALL levels... It is just wrong! It 3 years, when PS3 is 5 million units ahead of 360, Activision is going to cheating on M$ with Sony, cuz that is the company that they are....

[pixelsword]

Nariko,

Were the games you listed for the PS3 broken on the 360?

That's what we're talking about here.

[Silly gameAr]

EA doesn't completely ignore the 360, or act like it doesn't exist. Get off your soapbox for a sec.

It's so easy to buy respect this gen then earn it. The only thing Activision should known for when we look back on this gen, is how much they whored themselves out and ignored a whole console and it's fanbase because MS put a few mill in their G-string.

[Supman]

I know, why do they even make thier games multi-platform
if they only want to sell it on one console?

[wedgie]

I have not made up my mind on Call right now- I promised myself that I would skip it, but we'll see.

But I am all about dropping all MULTIplat console favoritism in general, for both the xbox and ps3. I feel that let the first party studios show off what each system is about, for they are the ones designed for that system.

But when it comes to multiplat, buying DLC, buying extras, buying ads to omit the competition is just silly.

First, anyone who is a little bit informed knows that it is being sold for both systems.

Second, exclusive Multiplat and DLC annoys the snot out of me. Waiting a few months for the game to release on the other system, as well as DLC, should not happen. Exclusive DLC is another point, as seen with Fallout 3 DLC, GTA, and the Batman AA Joker, EA games, etc. All parties should be annoyed at this, for this is killing gaming. Advertising for just one system is pointless. Delaying the other systems games is infantile. Like Bioshock, DLC, and most other games, it comes over eventually, and so waiting just for the sake of waiting is stupid. If you are going to make people wait, do it because you need to optimize or tweak the game for that system.

Third, the point being made in this article was not about the advertising love on XBOX (which is annoying, and I agree, PS3 is just as guilty of, and it should all stop) but the development of the game on PS3. I understand that their largest fan base is on XBOX, but PS3 gamers still want to play and enjoy the game as well. The game should have had as much care and quality put into it for the PS3 as it did for the XBOX. The same can be said for games crafted for the PS3 and then over to the XBOX as well.

In the end, time and care should have been put into developing both versions of this title. It is a multiplat for a reason. The fact that it is not is a sad fact about the industry today, and something that ALL gamers should decry.

The game should have had the same amount of developing into both systems. Whether it is a good game, though, is another point, and that is for you to decide.

[10thnightvolley]

add ubi's assasin brotherhood for ps3

[Lawliet]

Because EA had a solid partnership with Sony? They always has been, even before Microsoft came into the gaming market. They even on many occasion show their great friendship on stage! Why would anyone complain about that when they knew all of these commotion? The only ones that will complain are those who are totally clueless about the market.

However that would lead you into thinking why they signed exclusives deal with Microsoft. EA is a money badger, that will never change and Sony couldn't be bother as they've confidence that those games will sooner or later be on their platform as well. And instead invest those money on first-party.

VALVE used to favor Microsoft, because they hated Sony for their system complexity, and the man came on stage to make an apologize and now taking all matters of PS3 ports being the BEST version.

But how is Activision relate to Microsoft? Is what bugging everybody.

[No Way]

You see.. only what you want to see.

[xAlmostPro]

i know it shouldn't have been an issue, and i agree they are totally erm 'console-ist'.. but the PC game is also wrecked to so its more 'platform-ist' lol..

but yeah, taking microsofts money for timed exclusivity is one thing, but it truely seems that maybe some of microsofts money is to cover the game not being 'as good' on other platforms so they can keep making statements like "the 360 has the best COD experience"..

meh

[BlackTar187]

I don't remember any tears for fallout. Well nothing like your explaining.

[Dark360]

LOL...Nice one!!!HAHAHAHAHA

[chazjamie]

it looks awful on the ps3. i dont know why though. the spilt screen looks disgusting and they removed the levelling up as well. mw2 looks 100 times better than black ops in relation to the spilt screen.

so not really hahaha. advert parodies are funny. but...

[ZombieAssassin]

LOL nice, I don't blame Treyarch that much though it's mainly Activision and not giving them time or resources for proper optimization.

[theonlylolking]

Its both of their faults. Activision for not giving them the resources and possibly time. Treyarchs fault for not doing the best they could with the time they had and the resources. It could have easily been just as great as the 360 or better but NOOO.

[Ducky]

Eh?
How do you know Trey didn't do the best they could?
How do you know that it could have "easily been just as great as the 360 or better"?

Meh.
If both 360 and Ps3 versions were same, you'd have less people complaining. Seems people don't care about actual quality of a game... all they care about is whether someone else is getting a slightly better experience.

[theonlylolking]

@fat old man

If they did then the game would be just as great as the 360 version.
Naughty Dog, Dice, etc... where given 2 years to do some of their games on PS3 and look at their games. Now look at treyarch's...see the difference.

[Adrela]

@the_only_lol_king;
Again, how do you know that they didn't do the best that they could? Simply because the game has flaws on the PS3? Not every company can tweak and manipulate a game to work fine on every console just the same, relax...

[skip2mylou]

treyarch has had time to figure out what they wanted to do since W@W except for the fact they went after other games like 007 which failed

[Nariko-2011]

I've heard people complain about developers not putting enough time and money into making ps3 versions of games to get them to 1st party standards. Ok, but are you willing to wait? Will you be ok with a game releasing 6-12 months later just so that they can get the ps3 version up to snuf? Will you be happy playing the game a year later than the other platforms every single time? And what about the extra cost, would you mind footing the bill for that too?
For dual console owners such as myself, I'd rather buy the version that is out rather than wait until it is available at a later stage.

[Godmars290]

But then you get situations like when Oblivion finally released on the PS3 looking better than 360 with that set of fanboys getting upset. You can't win.

Unless of course, devs treated both systems equally from the start.

[edhe]

A slightly improved ground texture & distance LOD after a year is hardly upsetting to fanboys.

At least it was better than the bioshock ps3 demo :x

[Godmars290]

You'd think so, but the devs got enough complains they said they'd patch it.

Promised to at least. Either that or some mag made up and printed the story.

[pixelsword]

What PC and 360 counterparts? IT ALSO STUNK ON THE PC which made no sense whatsoever.

[wedgie]

Depends on the amount of time it takes to get the game out. If it only will take one more month or so, delay both versions. No big deal. Patience is a virtue

If the wait will be 6 months or more though, then sure. Release the ready version. I am a PS3 only owner, but I can wait for game. Would be more enjoyable when I play it with all the kinks worked out. No problem. It is better than spending a bunch of money just to get something 2 months earlier.

Also, usually if you have to wait, the developers try to make up for it by giving some pretty cool stuff. For example, Mass Effect 2 with the included DLC.

[DrDreadlox]

Sony should just make "Cell programming for dummies" for these so called developers.

[edhe]

They did - it's why multiplats are almost similar these days.

[Pillville]

The do have some programming articles online, for anyone interested.

http://research.scee.net/

[BlackTar187]

thats a good find I always wanted to look more in depths into this stuff do they have one for xbox? I know its super boring but informative if you can somewhat understand the material.

[theonlylolking]

That is just awesome.

[newflesh]

Both versions are shit

[Bass_fisherman]

Now you said it

[theafroman]

developers needs to put that extra 10 percent on development on ps3 but its worth it i say.

[pixelsword]

Fans: boycott them if they don't.

[elmaton98]

Bullshit I thought trey was gonna do a better job but noooo they didn't why because of the god Damn greedy activison sucking Microsoft Dick for more dollars and if it wasn't for the deal they have together trey would've done a better job but this is America people money buy everything

[HDgamer]

I have the ps3 version and I don't see any of the problems people are talking about. However my friends for some off reason where complaining about how hard it is to kill online on the 360 version. I guess they love mw2 bs.

[HungPHATx]

This is why I own and play both consoles on a daily basis ! I do my research before I pick a multiplatform version of a game regardless of console brand its on ! Metal of Honor lead on PS3 so that's what version I bought , Black Ops lead on 360 so I bought that version !
Next week both ACBH and Hot Pursiut are leadplatform on PS3 ! so I'll get them on PS3 . I don't do Ports .

[N4WAH]

I know him personally and that is what he does.
A lot of multiplats I get for the 360 but only because my son has a 360 and it saves me from purchases one of each. On big market titles I usually end up getting them for both. My son goes to college next year so I will be joining Hung. Which ever it leads that, that is the version I will buy.

[RandomDude655]

Activision just makes shitty games. That's really all there is to it.

[Bass_fisherman]

Yeah no point comparing a turd to a fly spawn point cause is the same thing.

[RandomDude655]

What about a flying turd?

[zack61]

This article is awesome.

[carreirabr]

Call of Duty 3 = 1088x624 (2xAA)
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare = 1024x600 (2xAA)
Call of Duty: World at War = 1024x600 (2x AA)
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 = 1024x600 (2xAA)
Call of Duty: Black Ops = 960x544 (2xAA)

Thanks Activision!

[raztad]

You cant blame Activision for Treyarch lack of talent.

[newflesh]

No, you can

[visualb]

and buying / funding **** games with by lazy rude developers published by money mongering fan-ignorant ****y superiority-laden a-hole publishers

people who bought this game:

-its your fault we get content cut from the game at the start and sold back to us over priced DLC

-its your fault we get half ***ed ports on consoles/PC because of lazy-ness

-its your fault we get no betas because you prove betas don't matter, no matter how broken MP is, you'll swallow it

-its your fault activision milk gamers as much as they can, you've proven as"gamers" we have no voice, thus, why bother presenting a quality product to consumers across all platforms?

-its your fault gaming's going to ****

-and its your fault ***** half ***** games with outdated graphics, broken gameplay, non-existent single player (the SOUL OF VIDEOGAMES) sell more than amazing masterpieces worthy of praise (countless games...many better than COD:BO)

so **** people that call themselves "gamers" but are really just slaves
Activision is teasing you with their **** and you take it like a *****

*censoring due to brash moderation related to my comments on this website*

[BlackTar187]

bub +

[gypsygib]

I blame Treyarch for this one, how they release a game 2 years later and make it look worse than the previous game they made is beyond me. WaW looked better on PS3, and had a higher frame rate. IW kept MW2 in 50+ FPS rate. Has Treyarch become less talented or what's going on over there.

[edhe]

Would you rather have a feature rich game that runs better or a less feature rich game that hits an arbitrary 'good' resolution number and runs slower?

[SkyCrawler]

Great post :D

[xXxSeTTriPxXx]

this article should be posted on every major gaming site, roflmfao.

[alb1899]

Thats why i have play the 360 more than my ps3 this gen.......better not exclusive games so all multiplataform games i buy it for 360.

[SKUD]

TreyArch failed. Again. They sure aint no IW. Never will be.

[Figboy]

i can say they don't give a SHIT about the PS3.

i respect the NDA's i've signed, so i won't go into a LOT of detail, but while me and the team were doing memory tests on a particular multi-platform project for Activision, i noted that the 360 version was using all 512MB of the console's memory. the PS3 version of that same game was only using 256MB, and, understandably, it was running like shit. but the developer's had the audacity to bitch and complain about the performance of the PS3 version, when they weren't even USING the tools/specs available to them in the PS3 SDKs! this was last year, so it's not like the PS3 was new and the SDKs were super old.

by that point, many a game had been released on the PS3, from Activision no less, but they bitch and moan every single TIME they have to produce a PS3 title. and because they can't just copy paste code from the PC/360 to the PS3, and actually have to, GASP! CODE for the PS3 architecture.

in either case, Activision is a shit company that makes a lot of money for producing mediocre garbage. there was a time when they actually DID have some good games, but then they ran them into the ground. example: Guitar Hero 6, in relation to Rock Band 3. key words being 6 (SIX), and 3(THREE).

Guitar Hero came out in 2005. Rock Band came out in 2007. at the LEAST, the franchises should be a game apart. not 3 and a shit ton of spin offs i didn't bother to list.

i refuse to support Activision products, and i'm a much happier gamer because of it. number of Activision games i've purchased in the past 2 years: 0.

number of games i've purchases from developers that make QUALITY GAMES: too many to count, actually.

i may be one of the few, but i choose to speak with my wallet, and not support shit products from shit publishers. which is a shame, because Activision has a few developers that show genuine promise, but they are hindered by Bobby Kotick and Co.'s greed.

[jdktech2010]

2 things....

1) Doubt you work for them....anyone can say anything on the internet

2) COD is fun but I'm not a fan of the rest of their games (minus Blizzard games but they're not really activision....some weird hybrid while being seperate)

[DaBadGuy]

Not true.

My uncle works at the Pokemon factory and get's me all the free cards I want.

Everyone had a "connection" at the Pokemon factory when I was growing up.

I mean it's possible he worked for Activision but I doubt it, since when Bobby fires someone, he "fires" someone.

He brings them to his office and makes them fall forward and sacrifice themselves on a scythe in his honor then dumps the body in the Activision/Blizzard Industrial Incinerator.

[wedgie]

@ DaBadGuy

That incinerator is what they use to heat their building. Kotick trying to cut costs all over the place

[Figboy]

after the merger with Vivendi, me, and most of the folks there were laid off.

then i worked on Blur back in September of last year. that was the last project i worked on for Activision.

i'm currently employed at Konami, though we're in between projects.

also, why the FUCK would i mention working at ACTIVISION of all companies and not some awesome company like Sony or Naughty Dog?

i was a QA Tester, then Floor Lead at Activision back in 2003 or 2004. it was the first job in the industry i ever had. i worked on Spider-Man 2 as my first project, then moved on to X-Men Legends and a bunch of other projects. it used to be an enjoyable gig until Kotick took over and started treating us employees like doormats with their inane policies.

living in Los Angeles, it's not hard to get a job in QA or the gaming industry. i've worked for Activision, Square-Enix, Obsidian Entertainment, Vivendi Games, and now Konami.

Obsidian and Konami have been my two favorite employers. i've worked on some of everything, from Neverwinter Nights 2, to Grandia 3, to 50 Cent: Blood in the Sand (i try not to think about that one too much), etc, etc.

i have no need to pass myself off as anything other than what i am. and i certainly don't see a point to boasting about working at Activision. like THAT'S something to be proud of. lol. you guys are hilarious.

you can google the credits of games like X-Men Legends, Doom 3, The Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena, and look for the name Stefano Terry. http://www.mobygames.com/de... that's me. just a few of the titles i've worked on.

[The Lazy One]

@"so i won't go into a LOT of detail, but while me and the team were doing memory tests on a particular multi-platform project for Activision, i noted that the 360 version was using all 512MB of the console's memory. the PS3 version of that same game was only using 256MB"

the PS3 has split memory. That's one of the big complaints. That's far more likely the reason that it was using 256MB.

Surprise. Developers like developing on easier to develop for platforms.

[BlackTar187]

out for multi plats unfortnatley.

[Figboy]

but at any point, the developers can have the Cell or RSX utilize that full 512MB, or they could, oh, i don't know, actually bother to LEARN the architecture and how to code for the SPUs.

the SPU usage when we were running those memory tests was VERY low. maybe 1 SPU was active at once. for a console that has 6 active SPUs, that's pathetic.

we are now 5 years into this generation, 4 years into the PS3's life cycle. there simply isn't any excuse for this sort of thing, and yet ATVI is still pulling this crap with EVERY PS3 version of their games.

even if they didn't make shit games, i still wouldn't give them my money on that principal alone. i'm trying to support a progressive industry, and there are too many developers out there that are pushing what this industry can produce, not cashing in on licensed drivel that sells on name alone.

i'll support the Naught Dogs, Bungies, Bioware's, Insomniacs, Sucker Punches, etc. not Activision. hell, even EA has stepped it's game up this generation. Kotick is a cancer on the industry. he's brilliant at making money for ATVI, but he has no desire to produce quality products. it's horrible.

[The Lazy One]

Dude I'm just saying if you're developing a multi-plat and you're main platform is the 360 you'll obviously use all the memory on the PS3 before you port and optimize for it.

[Gamer_Z]

You have to remember this is Treyarch when have they ever made a good COD game?

[BlackTar187]

and i still do :)

[Gamer_Z]

Lol. Yeah Zombies are fun though

[CrzyFooL]

Look at your comment.
Back to mine. Back to yours
NOW BACK TO MINE.
Sadly, it isn't mine.
But if you stopped trolling and started posting legitimate crap it could LOOK like mine.
Look down, back up, where are you?
You're scrolling through comments, finding the ones that your comment could look like. Back at mine, what is it?
It's a highly effective counter-troll. Look again,
MY COMMENT IS NOW DIAMONDS

Anything is possible when you think before you comment or post.

I'm on a computer

[GoldPS3]

LOL

[Otheros00]

What?? I don't get your comment.

[ThaTeflonDon]

Its sad ppl don't get the jokes ... but nice one crzyfool

[XabiTheHumble]

LOOL! Your crazy fool XD (pun intended)

[DaBadGuy]

Bobby is a racist and an anti-dentite too.

But nobody ever mentions that because Bobby has Fox News and Murdoch in his pocket.

[edhe]

If you think *anyone* has Murdoch in their pocket then you're delusional.

[Athlon]

Everyone one calls for a boycott of Activision, but the thing is most of the gamers buying it are unaware of how they're getting gypped. They just know they're friends are getting it and see the ads. Thus, they buy the game as well. If someone were to put together a class action lawsuit against activision for charging owners of the gimped PS3 version the same amount as the 360 version, they would have a case, considering how popular this game is in the media. Lawyers would definitely want to cash in. Heck, it would force Activison to change its ways since all their previous crappy efforts would be put in the limelight and they would see themselves losing money in the future.

[DAS692]

They prioritise the work they put into each version and the 360 usually wins because of the fans they have backing it... Perfect examples are, Uncharted 2, MGS4, KILLZONE 2/3.... I mean honestly... the ps3 is definitely capable... the developers are just not willing...

[Garnett]

Fuck the PS3 version, you seen the PC version? Its completely unplayable and not superior at all, whats the point then?

*Sigh*

[DAS692]

Activision doesn't care enough....

[granthinds]

I laughed! Great writing. Mad Props! :)

[Masterchef2007]

What do you expect they only had one year to make this.

[Paralex]

They made it in 2 years. Neither version runs any different. I have both versions. Both run pretty much the same.

[Mottsy]

to be fair the game plays shitty on the 360 too lol. i miss games like call of duty 4. i dont get companies logic sometimes. make a great game like that then flush it down the toilet with games like black ops. glad i didnt buy this pos!

[OGharryjoysticks]

I bought it on PS3 and have yet to see a 360 version running, but I don't doubt there's a difference and problem. What's so funny is how the game was being marketed by Microsoft as the best on 360 before it even released. I'm not going to come out and say Microsoft obviously had some dirty deal lined up to sabotage the PS3 version, and use that as a marketing tool, but if it was it worked whatever they did. Almost gives me flashbacks to Madden that one year when Microsoft brought Reggie Bush on stage at E3 to hype their version of the game while bashing Sony's version for being inferior. How convienent even though NHL released identical less than 20 days later like EA figured out the PS3 immediately after the show. And I wonder how Microsoft knew for the first year ever in Treyarch's Call of Duty history on PS3 that this would be the year they have trouble.

[olLANDSHARKlo]

I have both copies PS3 and 360, and they look the same and play the same, a few minor things here and there are different, but this is being blown out of the water.

[Incipio]

Well done.

[HungPHATx]

I knew this would happen when you never seen a PS3 add anywhere , I mean little stuff here and there but nothing like the XB commercials on TV ! and it's funny on how you never seen the PS3 version till after the launch MS PAY Check must of been HUGE to keep it hidden ! But as usual Sony doesn't care cause it's all about in house exclusives by there 30 plus Sony owned studios world wide and begin a technology company not a
Software company trying to be a console company with there wallet , my buddy said years ago when MS entered the indrustry that they would destroy it with there sneakie tactics , guess what ? He was right %100

In the End MS is doomed by a little company named Google ! Watch see how Android/Chrome free OS takes off

[KaiokenKid]

The reason no one cries when PS3 gets Exclusvie whatevers with a game is because it dosent happen very often. 360 was so associated with getting exclusive DLC for pretty much everything, so when they get it, people graon, but when PS3 gets it, its no big deal.

[jacobie74]

how can you guys like a system that takes the longest to load no party no friends and a crappy controller for fps i just dont understand ps fans i have all three system the ps3 strickly 3rd person action games and movies everything els xbox360 espn last nite i watch boston put the smash down on miami after that i racked up some kills on black ops plus i have att uverse it just keep getting better ps3 fans should just give microsoft its props thats do for giving ps3 a a hellava run for its money

[XabiTheHumble]

How can you like a system that was built to literally blow up in your face and than have the nerve to go a full year with only one major exclusive?

[frankrobs3]

ps3 just sucks hard

[XabiTheHumble]

What I do understand is how these developers have the nerve to sell me a shit product yet i have to pay the same amount as the superior version.

[Ronster316]

Thats just the way it is now, certain developers/publishers prefer one console to another.

PS3 gets/got stuff like exclusive Mafia 2 content and EA favours them.

360 gets/got exclusive Dead Rising 2 content and Activision favours them.

If you dont get the extra content for a game you like on the console you prefer, then don't you think its finally time to invest in "the other" console?

Now a days you hear about which console is going to get exclusive blah blah blah before the game is actually released.

So it's time to own both...... simple as that.