Check out a HD screenshot comparison between the PS3 and Xbox 360 version of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Hint: Click on "Picture in original size" to view the screenshots in original size.
this is pointless, 360 version gets all the attention. all previous COD titles are an example of this, I can't see this being any different and from the Screens the 360 does look slightly crisper. showing more age of this tired old engine.
Modern Warfare 2 run good on both consoles. I'm sorry but honestly MW3 looks a lot more like MW2. I don't see any graphical improvements or changes in engine.
You cannot get any better graphics at 60fps on the 360 unless you want the game to have mega texture pop in like rage.
ps3 ver looks better
you gotta get your eyes checked.
Tesco do free eye checks
Pointless as always, same prehistoric engine, different setting. It look exactly the same as the last 300 COD games. A blurry, outdated, low resolution mess.
Xbox looks cleaner. Its only a slight difference, but its noticable.
I got the PS3 version of BF3 because it was the better version and now I'm gonna get the 360 version of MW3 because it's the better version. I just hope you can use the right bumper too shoot and left bumper to aim because triggers are too slow and create too much recoil on the controller.
Better bloom and slightly sharper on 360.
Honestly i think the gamma on the PS3 version is messed up as usual with these head to heads. But lets be realistic COD never set out to be graphically great they just want to be familiar for all the fans so when we play the game it isn't something different. So by now..its not a matter of "which is better" cause they both pretty much look the same. The engine is really really old. Still using the IW engine from COD 2. But that hasn't stopped me from enjoying the Micheal Bay like action.
360 looks only ever so slightly crisper. either way still buying it on PS3.
Who gives a Sh!t. The X360 version looks slightly better just like PS3 version of BF3 looks slightly better. I get all my Third party shooters on X360 due to my friend's list and controller/online preference. Other might like the PS3 version better.
Xbox version looks better but graphically both look terribly old.
Why are we even comparing graphics? History has already told us that it's the same crappy engine over and over again. Good thing I'm buying a GAME and not an engine. I'm going to have a blast with this game!!! If its anything like MW2 (and so far it looks like it may be) I'll love it. See, unlike the BF3 fanboys, I actually WANT the game I love to stay the way I love it. I think we saw with Killzone 3 that you shouldn't change the formula.
This is POINTLESS they both look like trash. We are going into the year 2012 and its way below sub par HIGH DEFINITION. THis game looks just like MW2 and MW3. ITs renders at a whooping 600P resolution with very very blurry textures. The console versions of BF3 blow it away. NIGHT and day. ANyone doesnt degree is in denial or a COD FANBOY.
For the people that say at 60 Frames per second the game cant look better are in denial. Thats just an exuse Activision uses so they dont have to invest anything in this NOW CASUAL GAME. LOOK at RAGE. THATS HIGH DEF and runs at a silky smooth 60 FPS. Activision would rather just sit on that billion dollar mountain of money they have while their fanboys stay in denial.
What looks better? Doesn't matter. Both are old. Besides, if you go play COD4, it actually looks better than them somehow. I think MW2 looked terrible compared to COD4 myself on multiplayer.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.