Which console serves up the hottest action?
PS3 version looks superior
nope, its the same, but it's still really generic
Ah no you can clearly see more detail in the textures.
Yup, its the same. How could you even justify that comment Mr Tentacle?
typical fanboy who didn't even watched the video
Ill maybe need to get my eyesight checked out. In what way is the PS3 version superior in that video? Not saying its not the best version but in that video they both look pretty identical, to me.
It's probably one of those FIRST! comments.
I honestly can't see a single difference.
They aim for parity and don't aim to gbigive either 360 or PS3 gamers the very bets game they could. Like every multi if there IS a difference it's not worth noting and rarely one you can see without really trying so who cares? Nobody can prove one console is better by using multiplats while the exclusives on both consoles look better than them and while parity is king and the install bases ensure it is(by being so close that making one version a lot better would lose you half your market)they always will be. Comparison-shomsharison! I'm suick to death of it and just wish they had the inclination to push the hardware a little sometimes. Not gonna happen, sadly.
The PS3 only game Killzone 2 looks superior
what those KZ2 have to do with MOH GTFO this guy makes ps3 fanboys look bad
Then their is nothing worth mentioning. That looked identicle. The sp runs on the unreal engine while the mp runs on the frostbite engine. I would like to see a comparison between the mp on each platform.
This is how it should be, make it the same on both systems, now we can just comment on if it's a good game, and I can buy it on whatever console I want and enjoy the experience without feeling like I got ripped. This is how you do it companies.. keep it the same on both consoles. I don't want to have to pay a penalty for playing on PS3, when I really shouldn't be.. If your game was cheaper on PS3 then ok, but if it's going to cost the same, then guess what, the game experience should be the same.. So hat's off to EA/Dice and whoever else is responsible for getting the game done right.. This is how you do it.. Well done. .____........___...____ .____||......||.......____|| ||.........___||.......____||
Seriously, why do you people give a shit? It's not like these differences ever truly impact playing and enjoying the game. (Or in this case, not enjoying the game.)
Looks pretty much the same on both. Would be more interesting to see a console vs PC comparison imo. The most important thing, considering it's a FPS, is that it seems to run at a smooth framerate on both the 360/PS3 versions. The MP shouldn't be any different considering it's built on the same engine as BF BC 2, which runs great on both consoles. Visually it's nothing spectacular. What really sets it apart from many other FPS games is the incredible audio. @MisterAV - At least it would show SOME difference instead of none.
console vs pc... what can you compare? low details: better console high details: better pc
low details: crappy PC high details: better pc
I think a PC vs console comparison is pointless, console gamers would only walk away with a bad taste in their mouth and disappointment. Let the console fratboys fight over each other for second place while the PC Master Race can hold their head high knowing they have the superior version.
You do know that even using phrases like "master race" in jest makes you seem a bit of a twonk sometimes? Also, while I USEd to play my shooters online on PC I grew tired of K/M(always looking for a better set up), grew tired of not knowing if I'd won or lost fairly or because of tech differences or some sly use of console mods(desaturating backgrounds etc)-he3wll even because my mouse was better than the next guys. I just found playing on consoles a more level playing field and, as such, a truer test of my skills(or lack of!!). Another thing is that some of us, while better in pure performance terms, with a mouse don't all find it the most immersive or realistic way of gaming. In some ways it's too quick and too accurate for any sense of realism and can ruin thew pace of SP campaigns for me especially. So while I'm not perfect I don't see why I'm a "fratboy" for gaming less on my PC these days and gaming more on my consoles. Sure,m my rig is capable of displaying higher res and more detail with better physics but it's hardly a hardship to game on PS360 as the quality is very acceptable and , as I said, in many ways I find gaming on consoles more appealing in some areas. I'll always prefer my RTS on a PC but the fact everyone(more or less) plays with the same tech and same controllers on consoles makes them my choice for shooters these days. ~horses for courses, mate, and no need for the arrogance or the name calling. I did find the "master race" thing to be in slightly bad taste too, sorry. Not a dig at you personally-I just find the arrogant and elitist attitude of some PC users a little bit much if I'm honest-but I AM a sensitive wee soul so there you go. I just don't think there's a right or a wrong platform for us to game on.
Valid arguments there mastiff. I personally like kb/m because it gives me the freedom to choose how to play. Controllers are static and you can only change the layout of controls so far. On PC you can change virtually any action and map it to a different key. Maybe you have a fucked up thumb, consoles would be like "well sucks for you pal" but on PC you have the freedom to change it to say.. C. Or any other of the 101 keys (literally - a standard keyboard has 101 keys). PC gives you the tools and you choose how you want to use them, not forced to use one of 4 or so variations of control scheme. Your points for "level playing field" due to tech limitations is found on console controllers as well. If you have a gimped analog joystick then of course your aim will suck. You just replace the controller. There are also things you can purchase to have "better accuracy" for the thumbsticks. Can't think of what it's called off the top of my head but they exist. On PC you have ways to use all the keys to your advantage. If you can't, then you should learn to take advantage of macros. And I don't know about you but I actually LIKE responsive and accurate controls, maybe you like to play with lag and have a craptastic experience -aka your "realism"- but not me, I like the precision mouse gives me.
I always found the ol' point and click less immersive and I think that is his best point. It is v.difficult (for me) to get into a game when I am pointing and clicking to shoot... But maybe that's just personal opinion... I am sure others (including yourself) feel different... Not to mention with an Xbox/PS3 you have all you need! You buy your console and your set for however long the lifecycle is... Odds are if you bought your PC back in 2005/2006 it would be incapable of running top spec now, right? Also, it annoys me that on a PC you can't regulate speed (well... I never used to be able to! But I haven't played a pc shooter for about 2 years). Ie, you either stand still, run, or go flat out.. There is no inbetween...
They look the same on both. The only thing I see is that the PS3 version slightly has a better DoF (Depth of Field) so objects in the far distance are better to be seen. However this is really minimal so I'd say they did a good job with MoH.
Both look great but if you want to really nitpick just take a look at the shadows, ps3 seems to have a slight edge.
the end CAN WE STOP THIS NOW LOL.
He just said his personal opinion. Why do you care?
To me, they look pretty similar, but maybe still shots will show a difference. Generally, all these game comparisons, when action is moving, generally look the same in my opinion with minimal differences between the 2. Owning all systems, these comparisons can be good to make a decision, but to me, this game is kinda disappointing and I will not even bother with a purchase.
As a dual Console owner , I go with the lead platform on all multiplatforms games ! So I went with the PS3 version , Black Ops is leading on 360 so I'll get that on Platform !
In that case the leading platform would clearly be the PC if you have a PC decent enough to play it. See below :D
I didnt think COD games had a "lead" platform. Unless Black Ops is any different, they used to have a team for each platform, developing simultaneously.
I WIN! :D
Hmmmmmm, It dosen't sound like you win, it sounds like you get to play a game with a high end graphics card.....
I meant in the playing it on PS3 vs XBOX battle, PC trumps all! Mwahahaha! But on a serious note, I play most my FPS's on my PC, BFBC2, CoD, ect...as they look quite simply, bloody amazing. I also play CoD on the xbox but that's just to play with my friends. I have a PS3 too but rarely play it as none of my friends have one, so it just gets relegated to BluRay duty.. If most my friends played their games on the PS3, that's where I'd play them. At the end of the day the way I see it is your online gaming experience should be all about enjoying and sharing it with your friends. Hence you go where your friends are, sod which platform a game is better on, it means nothing if you can't share that multiplayer experience with your friends.
The only difference I saw was the shadows on the PS3 version seemed darker and stood out more. Especially when looking at the metal fence. Apart from that I cant see any other differences. Digital Foundry will have a much better comparison up soon anyway so if your really interested then wait for their comparison.
It's a shame all of your accounts are not tied into the same one. Then you'd only have one bubble on each:)
PS3 version is superior, because you get MoH: Frontline HD packed-in for free.
I thought they both looked more or less the same if anything the PS3 game looked abit better then the 360 in single player but in Multi player the 360 looked abit better then the PS3 version but they are very very close on both.
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.