GameZine writes: "Modern Warfare 2 will support a resolution of 600p like its predecessor. Infinity Ward once again justifies a sub-HD video game during a high definition console era with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2."
Still looks great.So does not bother me at all.
Nor I. I think it looks great and frankly if you weren't told it wouldnt concern you. Still I can get my higher res fill from the PC version, but judging by the videos released so far this games gonna look great on what ever platform you choose. Plus, a nice smooth 60fps.
At least you get 60fps ;)
resolution and frames per second dont matter! its still gonna be a good game and its still will sell millions
I simply just don't understand, whos the source and where the heck they find this legit info that it is gonna be same as 600p. there is not a damn single analysis report anywhere. Who the hell approved this article.
I could have run COD4 in 480p on an 18" screen and it wouldn't have bothered me, the gameplay is just that good
"I could have run COD4 in 480p on an 18" screen and it wouldn't have bothered me, the gameplay is just that good " This should be the attitude about most games.
then go play Mario on nintendo yes GRAPHICS do matter and they are a huge part of making a good game
Resolutions and all that don't bother me. Activision's price hike bothers me. At the RRP, this game should be beating everything, not just in gameplay, in graphics as well, including resolutions.
60fps should make the game butter smooth! The resolution shouldn't be a big factor considering the graphics itself isn't exactly like a movie. Resolution is over rated, but 60fps should make the game controls extremely responsive! I'm hyped for this game!!! edit: @G3TDOWN above Graphics do matter, but only to a certain level. Generally graphical differences between consoles in the same generation isn't earth shattering unless we are comparing it to the super under powered Wii. To me unless the graphics is as different as going from Xbox 1 to 360, it really has negligible effect. Do you ever get the feeling you are playing last gen games on a current system? I don't, and I'm currently playing Splinter Cell Double Agent.
Of course sub-HD resolutions don't bother you. But it would if it were Halo and you were in a snarky mood... As long as the game still runs at 60Hz no gripes here.
Not 60fps! COD4 runs with 50fps.. xD just for info..
@1.7 - Yes graphics do matter, but pixel counts do not matter. As long as the game looks good overall it shouldn't bother any gamer.
Oh well. That just further justifies why I will get MW2 on my PC instead of my 360 or PS3. I plan on playing MW2 in 1920 x 1200 @ 90fps with precision accuracy by using my keyboard and mouse!!
I'm getting it on the PC. It's not that it is the end of the world to play it with lower resolution and graphics, but given the choice I prefer to play games like this on the PC.
meh, 60fps is that great, since your eyes can't see that many frames 600p, man, that sucks
I have been playing Modern Warfare for nearly two years now and love it as much today as I did when I first played it. Would those extra lines of resolution made the game any better? Nope.
Oh well, who's really surprised? It's 600p but still looks better than Left4Dead running on a high end PC. But if this was Modern Warfare 3, then they'd be pulling a Valve using the same engine over and over again. IW put a lot of effort into making the COD4 engine to run great on PS3, 360, and PC. So at least this time, they can focus on other gameplay assets. I just hope it's not COD4.5 though.
I would like it alot if they could bump it up to 720p but i think it's worth it the way the game looks even now at (hopefully) 60fps. The resulting fluid and beautifully flowing game awesome in motion.
the price..... =/
so they obviousley havn't done any major works to the engine then, so how can they justify the price hike?
Wow. PC MW2 FTW. Seriously though, i have MW for my PS3, and I thought it was the **** until I played it on my computer with an ATI 4850. Running at 1680x1050 is sweet crap, Yes, you'll crao in your pants because it looks soooo good.
sucks for you console boys. I'm gonna be playin @ 1080p AAx8 AFx16 on my 40" and with this engine I already know I won't drop below 60fps on my pc :D Don't worry I'll post screenshots when that time comes
It doesn't matter, I'm hearing alot about this game everybody I know is looking forward to this game more than any other game...they don't read n4g or beyond 3d forums, even if they did I'm sure they would laugh at those who count pixels and buy the damm game anyway. I know Iam. JOY
Boo-freakin-Hoo! to those who think 600p sucks. Last I checked, everyone loved COD4 and it was below 720p res. It wasn't until people found out that the res. was below 720p that they started making a big deal out of it.
I totally agree with you! they are using the exact same engine for CoD4 2 years ago with nearly no tweak what so ever and name it MW2, and then trying to raise the RRP of the game?? this is rip-off at its finest and I'm sad that there'll be a lot of gamers out there that will just bow to this decision by activision! the longer we are in the concole cycle, the games should be getting cheaper, not more expensive! I'm glad I'm not buying this and any other of their games from now on! and I hope a lot more people will boycott or just pirate this game instead of buying it! let activision sees the power of consumers!
Its due to pure laziness, I have no doubt the game will be fun, and I will end up spending months and months like its predecessor but its a shame they didn't make any graphical improvements, they had 2 years to make it after all.
I'd take 60fps any time before HD resolutions, but I hate Call of Duty
The price bothers me a lot more than the resolution.
In the past generations of gaming, we never really worried about 480p and 1080 p and such! But now gamers are so wrapped up in games being in "HD", that I wonder if alot of gamers really enjoy the games... or if they get more of a kick out of the graphics. Every game can't be in 1080p and every game doesn't have to have ultra super graphics. Games are meant to provide entertainment! As long as the graphics look good, that's all that matters. The HD generation has just gotten started, and it will take some time before we reach the point where all games reach this visual utopia that alot of gamers crave so badly! But until then... Just enjoy what we have now!
My Pc version will run at 1920 x 1080p at 125fps so im not worried =P
Actually you can tell the difference up to about 100 fps - it's just that 24fps is about the lowest you need for persistence of vision, which is what films rely on to avoid slideshows. Honestly anyone that thinks that 30fps is all you can see needs a showroom telly demonstration.
I would prefer a higher resolution myself so that the gun does not take up half of my screen. Oh well, that is why I have a PC. 1920*1080 (NATIVE) at OVER 60fps and servers with more than just 16 people on them. The ONLY way to play the game.
i much rather have 60 fps then maximum pixels any day. i mean who wants to drop to 20 fps just because an air strike is called in or a smoke grenade is thrown. call of duty games are meant to be played competitively. back in the counter-strike days i played in 800x600 with 100 fps. wasnt as pretty as 1280x1024 but i played better. and MW2 still looks great anyway. filters ftw.
Funny how the COD fans justify that crap. Right, CRAP! WTH is wrong with you? If anybody else would pull off that stunt you guys would be all over them, but Infinity Ward ? No way. Those visuals are so sub standard. If they don't add 200% in MW2, I'll skip that (again). CoD4 looks pretty, but there is simply nothing going on on screen. Lack of debris, effects what not. World at war has the worst texture resolution I've ever seen (in a high profile game - ever look close to the ground texture when you were looking down ? WTH). Have fun with the (next) arcade shooter. Because that's what it is, nothing else. Enjoy 60fps. Well, not surprised there.
For extra cash compared to other games I want real 1080p! They want to charge more I want them to put out more!
its not IW fault that xbox/ps3 are limited. when playing competitively 60 fps is bare MINIMUM. i turn resolution on PC shooters down as low as it goes and put AA and AF down to 2x so i can have 100 fps. its true that the diff between 200 fps and 300 is not noticeable but anything under 60 is crap. I would say this about any game/developer so dont make this an IW fan thing. Thats just lame.
Maybe that matters for you, and maybe some people have this disorder to be able to react within 10ms (== 100fps), but I doubt thats the case for the majority. If an average gamer can pull the trigger within 25ms, that's already a huge achievement (40fps). 33ms for 30fps, 17ms for 60fps. Turn/raction speed and game design decisions factor in way more then the refresh rate of the visuals.
im not talking about my reaction time to the game. i talking about what i see. i dont want to see choppiness in the games to the point where it feels like internet lag. do yourself a favor and before you start giving statistical feedback about human reactions, go and play a shooter on your COMPUTER and cap the fps at 100. then cap it at 60 or 30 which ever you like. When you "SEE" the difference and realize it your perspective will change guaranteed. although i know you would never comeback here and admit it.
Oh my god, we aren't getting our pixels worth. It's a conspiracy. They be stealing ma' pixels. We should be reimbursed for the pixels they took from us. Seriously, you really are a moron of the highest order if you need everything to be certifiably HD before you can be satisfied with your purchase. Either you are or you aren't.
The 100fps don't give you any benefit if you can have 30fps sustained. The higher refresh rate just gives you head room that the worst case scenario does never drop below a certain threshold. Your eye recognizes every single "latency" (to a certain degree). That is minimized by a higher refresh rate - the exception is, if you can guarantee it never dips below that threshold anyway. Then the max frequency does not matter. And, especially on a PC that latency is always present, no matter how fast the game runs (not an embedded system, any background process or IRQ could trigger a frame skip).
That is whats wrong with gamers today. Yes graphics are important up to a point but gameplay is what should matter. If the gameplay isn't there then graphics mean diddly squat; Substance is the key word here. anyways, MW2 will be great regardless of graphics.
if it was any other game or dev everyone would be up in arms. But since it is the over rated COD & IW everything is ok. I don't want your game weather it is HD, low def or any other def because you are associated with Activision.
and they are just milking the modern warfare name, even tho i didnt think cod4 was THAT great anyway, pretty average if you ask me... but cos so many people bought it, no matter what they do it will get a free pass... i havent bought any cod game this gen tho i played cod4, it was not enough to make me wanna buy it... and the fact they are associated with activision just tops it all off.
The lower resolution the better framerate. PC 101. Games struggle to keep 30 fps when they run at 720 and 1080p. But when you reduce resolution, it will easily achieve that fps
cod4 is one of the most highly acclaimed games ever released, i'm trying to figure out how that is "just average" if cod4 were average nobody would care about mw2, if it were average it would also mean most shooters are on the same level, of which they are not...few even get close
CoD4 was surrounded by a sky-high HYPE or superhype! it's a great game but hardly the best! it got great reviews but that didn't proof anything that it was the best, just like GTAIV! I've never seen a game got too many perfect scores before GTAIV yet I was hugely dissapointed with that game! CoD4 was generic! short! no co-op! CoD4.5 will not be any different! you can enjoy being ripped-off by acti but props for those who stands to go against them!
@outlife: "cod4 is one of the most highly overrated games ever released" There, fixed it for you.
Didn't matter then and doesn't matter now. Just a testament to the fact that half the people who own 360s don't have HDTVs
I don't think it's the superior graphics...
But thats XBL 360 games graphic wise are along par with the exception of a few, PS3 however has games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 that make MW2 graphics look bad, thats why im waiting for reviews before I purchase honestly it looks the same as COD4 and thats not a bad thing but if im spending money on a new game I expect improvement.
you would think with the same engine and previous game iterations.. that they would be able to up the resolution and get more pixels on the screen... especially for those of us rocking larger screens. But if bungie couldnt do it.. then I wouldnt expect infinty ward to.
They're adding more content, more game. Not more pixels. Hurrah!
Meaning PS3 owners won't be able to play it. Let's hope they release a 1080p patch so you guys can enjoy it like the rest of us gameplay>resolution gamers. It's understandable though. Playing FPS games with a 10 year old controller design whose triggers makes you feel as if you have hoofs instead of hands leaves little joy to be had other than watching the pretty graphics.
I must admit the triggers on the PS3 controller are pretty much the worst thing I've ever used.
While i will be able to play it at 1920x1200 on my PC and get over 60 frames :D
"anybody got a mic?"
Unfortunately I have had sex with real live women so I don't own a PC gamer rig. C U @ virginCON! @shutupandplay - What's a 'mic'? Only own a Hoofstation 3 and I've never heard of such a thing. What's it good for? Does it improve graphics?
Well soda, it allows you to communicate with players remotely via internet. Great for teamwork or just talking to friends. If you have a cell phone, you can use that cute little headset as a mic!
5 dollar snap on real triggers from gamestop says high. Every ps3 owner should have them.
Go get a pair of "Real Triggers" from Gamestop and stop bringing it up. Yes, the triggers are less than optimal... but that can be fixed.
Soda bragging about having sex with a girl that happens to be a group of sheep is nothing to annouce in public. Nothing like getting trained by a bunch of sweaters. Remember baa always means yes. Now stfu. Ot who cares about rez no one
Really there are snap on's for the PS3 triggers... I really was unaware of that...Kudos to you for informing me of this. Honestly i was unaware. +bubbles for you for being the first to mention this. I was thinking of getting that converter thing that allows you to play 360 controller on the PS3 and vise versa but you just saved me some money. I will check that out at my Local EB. http://www.ps3daily.co.uk/2... Thanks again. @cyborg6971 "Now stfu. Ot who cares about rez no one" - That's not true, you must be new to this site if you haven't seen a particular group down play the 360 since some of its high profile games don't run at 1080p or 1080i or 720p or 720i but around the 640 area.....*cough" Halo3 *cough* but to be fair it does run on 2 seperate frame buffers for some of the best lighting i have seen in a game to date.
@man I the year. No I'm not new to the site and I know who all of the bots and droids are. What are you trying to warn me?
this site is so funny. arguing over resolutions, graphics, ps3 is better! nu uh 360 is better! i saw an extra texture!! you kiddies run your MW2 at 600p. the big boys will play at 1920x1200.
Yea they are made by Giotech I think. All my controllers have them. Def worth 5 bucks, they also extend the L2 and R2 buttons a little so they make the controller a little bigger. Really you can only use them for cod though cause that is like the only FPS that supports L2 aim and R2 shoot.
you say your a "enjoy it like the rest of us gameplay>resolution gamers." yet you have a Ghostbusters 360 version FTW avatar because Ghostbusters on the 360 had better resolution?! Oh and the fact that you brought up the DS3 triggers in a "CODMW2 runs @ sub-720" is priceless. Upset about something I think, maybe Halo3odst running at sub-720 and being the 360 top exclusive is pretty lame....or maybe the fact that you can't say delaystation anymore because of Splinter Cell? Stop trolling Soda, your not good at it.
@Solar "you kiddies run your MW2 at 600p. the big boys will play at 1920x1200" As many years as I've had my 1200 res Sammy monitor, I still prefer playing on my Flatscreen. 1200 res is impressive no doubt but my eyes feel better when I play on my tv. @Talltony Yeah, I was pretty upset when the likes of Uncharted, MGS4, etc. set the aim & trigger buttons to L1 & R1. As much as I personally like the Dual Shock controllers, I'll never play another shooter with it. I'll have to make an exception with Uncharted 2, though.
Wrong. The 360 version of Ghostbusters has better everything. Textures, framerates, loading etc. Anyways, when is Gran CGIsmo Forever coming out? I think it won't be out until Forza is at 5 as well lol! Halo ODST will be bigger than any PS3 exclusive this holiday. Look at Halo 3's install base and think about it. Personally I consider Forza 3 the biggest exclusive. L4D2 will be great as well. Don't know about Magnacarta 2 and Risen. Meh. Then there's Shadow Complex and a barrage of other great looking XBLA titles. And Fallout 3 + GTA IV DLC. Enjoy Unsharted 2. It's all you have for the rest of the year.