COD5: WAW - Better graphics on the PS3?

In their comparison, Eurogamer stated:

Scrutinising the captured video from both versions of World at War highlights an array of tiny changes here and there, but the most obvious differences concern texture quality and shadowing. The PlayStation 3 version of the game (like Modern Warfare before it) has better definition in its shadows, whereas the 360's are a touch more blurred in comparison. PlayStation 3 also seems to show what appear to be higher resolutions on items such as soldier uniforms, when viewed close-up.

The reflective textures are far more pronounced than they are on Xbox 360. We saw in the Fallout 3 comparison how the sheen/polish effect was almost totally absent in the 360 version of the game, making some objects appear flat in comparison to its sibling releases. Here it appears to have been used far more sparingly than on the PlayStation 3 version of the game, which in turn appears to be closer to the PC version.

Opinions?

I have played both versions and what you are claiming is untrue. The PS3 version is noticeably inferior to the XBOX 360 version in pretty much every aspect. It is very clear this game was developed for XBOX 360 first and than ported to PS3. 

So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.hopesfall2own

I have played both versions and what you are claiming is untrue. The PS3 version is noticeably inferior to the XBOX 360 version in pretty much every aspect. It is very clear this game was developed for XBOX 360 first and than ported to PS3. 

In their comparison, Eurogamer stated:

Scrutinising the captured video from both versions of World at War highlights an array of tiny changes here and there, but the most obvious differences concern texture quality and shadowing. The PlayStation 3 version of the game (like Modern Warfare before it) has better definition in its shadows, whereas the 360's are a touch more blurred in comparison. PlayStation 3 also seems to show what appear to be higher resolutions on items such as soldier uniforms, when viewed close-up.

The reflective textures are far more pronounced than they are on Xbox 360. We saw in the Fallout 3 comparison how the sheen/polish effect was almost totally absent in the 360 version of the game, making some objects appear flat in comparison to its sibling releases. Here it appears to have been used far more sparingly than on the PlayStation 3 version of the game, which in turn appears to be closer to the PC version.

Opinions?

thetruespin

"In short, both versions are nipped and tucked here and there in terms of visual quality, with neither having an overall advantage."

Multiplats in 99% of the cases look virtually identical. The fact that they had to look closely at captured video after playing it to make a distinction should show how silly all this "Game X looks better on System Y" stuff really is. And you know that this is only going to bring in lemmings talking about Fallout 3 and NFS: Undercover and their issues on PS3 as somehow proving that the 360 is the better console, when all these multiplats are so close anyway....SpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="Gaming_Guru_Guy"]

 

I have played both versions and what you are claiming is untrue. The PS3 version is noticeably inferior to the XBOX 360 version in pretty much every aspect. It is very clear this game was developed for XBOX 360 first and than ported to PS3. 

thetruespin

The difference is irrelevant to most people and it really comes down to what system do you want to play it on. 

So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.Floppy_Jim

So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Multiplats in 99% of the cases look virtually identical. The fact that they had to look closely at captured video after playing it to make a distinction should show how silly all this "Game X looks better on System Y" stuff really is. And you know that this is only going to bring in lemmings talking about Fallout 3 and NFS: Undercover and their issues on PS3 as somehow proving that the 360 is the better console, when all these multiplats are so close anyway....heretrix

[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Multiplats in 99% of the cases look virtually identical. The fact that they had to look closely at captured video after playing it to make a distinction should show how silly all this "Game X looks better on System Y" stuff really is. And you know that this is only going to bring in lemmings talking about Fallout 3 and NFS: Undercover and their issues on PS3 as somehow proving that the 360 is the better console, when all these multiplats are so close anyway....SpruceCaboose

It's amazing. And the funniest thing about it is that people don't realize how silly it makes them look bringing it up. The stuff that really cracks me up is when the word "superior" is brought in to it..:lol:

Fanboys need to realise that this isn't last gen. There is no huge difference in power between PS3 and 360 like there was between PS2 and Xbox. manicfoot

now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:

anyway, what you pointed might be well worth it, but i when i play my games, i hardly notice these little "extra attention to detail."

TBH, i'd prefer the 360 version, because of the controller, and the community(no, soulja boy's not my friend, but i got more friends from XBL than PSN).

even if the ps3 might have the SLIGHTLY better version. 

now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:joopyme

[QUOTE="joopyme"]now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:SpruceCaboose

Tbh anything that has the graphics of brawl is fine with me. Mayb this is why I'm a huge fan of cell shading in games rather than realstic graphix

[QUOTE="joopyme"]now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:SpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="joopyme"]now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:joopyme

Fanboy is not the same as saying "preference". A fanboy by definition is someone that is unusually devoted to a singular topic, brand, etc. I am not unusually dedicated to any of the systems. In fact, the thing that matters most to me in gaming is the games, not which box I play them on.

Yes, ATM I prefer the 360, but that is because it has the most games that entertain me at this particular moment. I am more than willing to change my views when the game situation changes.

With the extremely awsome cell processor and the advanced tech of the Blu ray disk Call of duty world at war is the most advanced looking game on any consoles and even the PC.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

spruce dude, why do i get the feeling that you are lecturing me like i'm bashing you or TC in any way. :?

 i'm very much well aware of what you have just mentioned. TYVM. :?

you could've quoted my WHOLE post... we have similar ideals when it comes to games, i dont know why we're posting as off topic as we should be. :?

now, i could use a good cup of coffee right about now. :D

spruce dude, why do i get the feeling that you are lecturing me like i'm bashing you or TC in any way. :?

 i'm very much well aware of what you have just mentioned. TYVM. :?

you could've quoted my WHOLE post... we have similar ideals when it comes to games, i dont know why we're posting as off topic as we should be. :?

now, i could use a good cup of coffee right about now. :D

 

joopyme

Why mention Fall out 3 comparisons? when they are total fud?
ROCKS do not have shine unless they are polished which seems to be forgotten in the ps3 version, WORN metal thats seen lots of use and age does not shine unless polished something forgotten in the ps3, Nearly every instance of shine they show looks like a layer of shiney glass or plastic ontop of the actual object it does not actually look like shine comming from said object because most of the time these objects are natrually flat toned or so worn in look and age that they wouldn't shine to begin with.

WilliamRLBaker

Is the OP on crack?

link: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=308281&page=1

Quotes:

"Both games drop from 60fps, but in all cases (bar the pared down forest scene we talked about earlier), the PS3 game drops harder and more noticeably."

"Multiple run-throughs of the same area on both consoles can give you a ballpark comparison though and in this respect Xbox 360 is consistently shown to be the smoother game."

"minor environmental objects are sometimes missing on the PS3 version,"

"There are plenty of examples of lower texture resolution on PS3 though - the soldier's boot in the video being a clear example." 

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.abuabed

now lems say it doesnt really matter. :roll:

joopyme

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]So it has better textures like in Fallout 3? That's suprising, I always thought the 360 was supposed to have the upper hand in textures. Either way, it doesn't really matter.hopesfall2own

Who cares? ITs just a mod too CoD4..

Since when do people care about mods? Especially mods that cost 60$..  

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]Hahahahahaha. Oh, my. Treyarch, you have unleashed the devil. For all lemmings: Eurogamer could by all estimates be considered 360 fans for all their comparisons that inevitably end up with 360 the winner. There are roughly a dozen (?) I think "multiplat" comparisons in Eurogamer. They use the exact same settings for both consoles, scrutinize IQ, TQ, performance, and other aspects through the exact same inputs....most important, they use actual framebuffer grabs. This comparison (and their opinion) is the most legitimate for these reasons. However, why not give us the screens?SpruceCaboose

This one is not, however. I'd like to thank the TC for being an alarmist and a pain in the ass. This is from Eurogamer's article: "In short, both versions are nipped and tucked here and there in terms of visual quality, with neither having an overall advantage."

I'll forgive you for actually throwing a question mark in the topic line.

"Multiple run-throughs of the same area on both consoles can give you a ballpark comparison though and in this respect Xbox 360 is consistently shown to be the smoother game." Both games have advantages in some areas in terms of details that put neither game above the other version, but the 360 has a consistently smoother framerate. That's what they said.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="BobHipJames"]Hahahahahaha. Oh, my. Treyarch, you have unleashed the devil. For all lemmings: Eurogamer could by all estimates be considered 360 fans for all their comparisons that inevitably end up with 360 the winner. There are roughly a dozen (?) I think "multiplat" comparisons in Eurogamer. They use the exact same settings for both consoles, scrutinize IQ, TQ, performance, and other aspects through the exact same inputs....most important, they use actual framebuffer grabs. This comparison (and their opinion) is the most legitimate for these reasons. However, why not give us the screens?BobHipJames

This one is not, however. I'd like to thank the TC for being an alarmist and a pain in the ass. This is from Eurogamer's article: "In short, both versions are nipped and tucked here and there in terms of visual quality, with neither having an overall advantage."

I'll forgive you for actually throwing a question mark in the topic line.

"Multiple run-throughs of the same area on both consoles can give you a ballpark comparison though and in this respect Xbox 360 is consistently shown to be the smoother game." Both games have advantages in some areas in terms of details that put neither game above the other version, but the 360 has a consistently smoother framerate. That's what they said.

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] And like I said, that they need to do all that to come up with the difference shows how insignificant it really is.,SpruceCaboose

This one is not, however. I'd like to thank the TC for being an alarmist and a pain in the ass. This is from Eurogamer's article: "In short, both versions are nipped and tucked here and there in terms of visual quality, with neither having an overall advantage."

I'll forgive you for actually throwing a question mark in the topic line.

"Multiple run-throughs of the same area on both consoles can give you a ballpark comparison though and in this respect Xbox 360 is consistently shown to be the smoother game." Both games have advantages in some areas in terms of details that put neither game above the other version, but the 360 has a consistently smoother framerate. That's what they said.

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] And like I said, that they need to do all that to come up with the difference shows how insignificant it really is.,SpruceCaboose

This one is not, however. I'd like to thank the TC for being an alarmist and a pain in the ass. This is from Eurogamer's article: "In short, both versions are nipped and tucked here and there in terms of visual quality, with neither having an overall advantage."

I'll forgive you for actually throwing a question mark in the topic line.

"Multiple run-throughs of the same area on both consoles can give you a ballpark comparison though and in this respect Xbox 360 is consistently shown to be the smoother game." Both games have advantages in some areas in terms of details that put neither game above the other version, but the 360 has a consistently smoother framerate. That's what they said.

This one :)AgentA-Mi6