Now that we know when the 360 version of Call of Duty will be released --and that it will be identical to the PS3 version, snicker, snicker -- why not celebrate with some new screens? If screens don't do it for you, how about a movie (or two, or three)?
War may be hell, but it sure sells a lot of video games.
[Thanks, Matt T.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-11-2006 @ 1:41PM
Razer said...
So are we snickering because the Sony people expected some graphic superiority over the 360? Or are we snickering because the game has to be "downgraded" graphically because it is also offered on the 360? The 360 made this game what it is, I really hope Trey Arch give it a proper treatment since their Call of Duty 2 Big Red One was an absolute joke compared to Call of Duty 2. If it plays more like Big Red One it will be the instant death of this franchise..
Reply
7-11-2006 @ 2:11PM
sputnik said...
Um...Call of Duty 2 on the 360 played a heck of allot better than what I saw on my friends very capable PC with a $200 graphics card.
Gears of War among other upcoming games look way better graphics wise than Call of Duty 3, so I don't think there was any dumbing down on behalf of the 360. Nice try though.
Reply
7-11-2006 @ 2:51PM
xbox360dsPSP said...
The PS3 screenshots have anti-aliasing.
The XBOX 360 screenshots do not.
They may be graphically identical in terms of artwork and polygon count, but the PS3 is sporting fewer jaggies in these stills.
Of course, that says nothing of framerate or gameplay, but snickering may be premature, except that it can be up to $300 cheaper to play the 360 version.
Reply
7-11-2006 @ 2:52PM
Mark Felps said...
He's talking about the lack of 1080p, which means he's a de facto Sony fanboy, since they're the only ones delusional enough to think developers are actually going to release games in 1080p, when it profoundly effects the resources needed and virtually no one owns a TV capable of displaying it.
Reply