Call of Duty 2 (Xbox 360 and PC comparison)

[imported_JHL2859]

What settings on COD2 on a PC would compare to the image quality of the Xbox 360 running the same game? I personally think the Xbox 360 runs COD2 at 1280 x 720 2XAA Anisotropic with everything else maxed. However, does the Xbox 360 run the game with VSync turned on? I'm not sure, but I highly doubt it.

As for performance, what PC configuration do you think would match an Xbox 360 running COD2? I think Xbox 360 GPU = nVidia GeForce 7800 GTX 512.

What do you guys think?

 

[Justin343563611]

All I know is the game runs beautifully on my 360, the green smoke effects in the one part of the game are freaking amazing.

 

[Crescent13]

From what I have seen/heard, the xbox360 will not support 2xAA until the next generation of games. I think it runs it at 1280x720, no AA, no AF, everything on medium. I also highly doubt VSYNC.

no. The xbox 360GPU doesn't come close to the 7800GTX 512.I think it would be between a 7800 vanilla, and a 7800GT.

 

[BFG10K]

The CoD2 DX9 path on the PC is heinously poorly programmed and runs far slower than it should. It slideshows even at 640x480 on my X800 XL while the DX7 flies at 1856x1392.

 

[mehmetmunur]

I was reading that some of the games were not even running 1280*720 native, but were being upconverted before getting sent to the display. I think it was on gamespot, and they were talking about PGR3. That could be the case with COD2 as well. I also remember reading somewhere that COD2 was a PC port and was developed for the XBOX360 to begin with. Rumors rumors....

However, if high resolution is your thing (it is not mine, I only have a 6600GT) then you will probably enjoy it more on the PC.

 

[Sonikku]

I reckon a ATI 500 series is about equal to a 7800GT or perhaps a little less. But everyone seems to forget however how much of an advantage optimization is. When Gamespot had a side by side comparison between the 360 and the PC version on a top notch rig, they went on to say that if not for the limited multi-player on the 360, it would be the hands-down better version of the two.

 

[tuteja1986]

check the gamespot video review for xbox 360 version... they do have a whole comparision. who ever said xbox 360 have no aa is crazy or don't have a good HD-TV, I own a xbox 360 and i can see aa on my games. check anand blog... even he said the aa makes the game look more better

 

[professor1942]

Originally posted by: Sonikku
When Gamespot had a side by side comparison between the 360 and the PC version on a top notch rig, they went on to say that if not for the limited multi-player on the 360, it would be the hands-down better version of the two.

Obviously they weren't taking into account the fact that you have to play it with a pair of thumbs on a clumsy gamepad. That would drive me nuts.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: professor1942

Originally posted by: Sonikku
When Gamespot had a side by side comparison between the 360 and the PC version on a top notch rig, they went on to say that if not for the limited multi-player on the 360, it would be the hands-down better version of the two.

Obviously they weren't taking into account the fact that you have to play it with a pair of thumbs on a clumsy gamepad. That would drive me nuts.

well its not as worse as PS2 controller. you literally can't play any FPS on PS3 because controller design sucks for them. XBOX one is playable and Xbox 360 is best controller I have seen so far. Anyways what some people make it controller sound like a horrible for FPS when somearen't but thoes gamers are just ignorant.

 

[ZimZum]

Quoting my response in another thread:

Originally posted by: ZimZum

Infinity Ward developed this sequel on the PC, yet knew that with the Xbox 360's tech specs, their baby would, at least, run like margarine on the new console. But I refuse to believe that anyone expected Call of Duty 2 to run like absolute butter on the 360. In fact, I'll even go out on a limb and say that, side-by-side, I'll take the 360 version over the PC counterpart. Have I gone mad? Perhaps--but for the price of a rig that you'll need to get the latter up to speed, the former actually somewhat justifies the $300-plus tag on the Xbox 360. And with 720p widescreen support, normal and specular mapping, dynamite particle effects, and lighting-fast load times, you might not even miss your mouse.

Link

The first thing you notice about Call of Duty 2, whether you?re a ?graphics whore? or a gameplay fiend, is just how gorgeous it is. The developers at Infinity Ward claim the game looks better on Xbox 360 than its PC counterpart, and by all accounts, they?re right. The difference is minimal, but it?s definitely there, particularly for gamers whose PCs crawled to a halt with all the normal-mapped, high-resolution action. Snow, sand and stone kicks up into clouds as bullets slam into the ground. Soldiers bound, duck and strafe across the environments with animations ripped straight from reality. Light filters through dust-filled alleys, and clouds of steam billow believably from smoke grenades thrown to conceal your position. Every graphic element in the game succeeds at putting you ?on location.? But that?s just part of what makes Call of Duty 2 for Xbox 360 so immersive.

Link

Activision and Infinity Ward were one of the first to release a title for the 360, and the benchmark has been set. Ok, yes, this is essentially the same game that was featured in a PC review in late October. And the term ?essentially? is operative here because while the game bears all the marks of its PC brethren in terms of the story and linear nature of the game, graphically it feels like a whole new animal.

As stated, the game itself is more or less a mirror of its PC counterpart. The major differences occur in the graphical presentation and the control scheme. While it may not be the popular thing to say (and consider this is coming from a predominately PC gamer), the graphical quality of the 360 version exceeds the PC title. Crisp, vibrant and sporting remarkable detail across a much larger screen, CoD 2 is a benchmark title. And it should be noted that this game was not played on a high-def set. This game was jaw-dropping.

Link

Most reviews that have directly compared the two give the 360 the clear edge in visual quality, even the Game's developers state the same thing.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: Crescent13
From what I have seen/heard, the xbox360 will not support 2xAA until the next generation of games. I think it runs it at 1280x720, no AA, no AF, everything on medium. I also highly doubt VSYNC.

no. The xbox 360GPU doesn't come close to the 7800GTX 512.I think it would be between a 7800 vanilla, and a 7800GT.

There is AA on plenty of games. Maybe even all of them?

And I do think it does have at least the same capabilities of a 7800GTX... Just look at the screenshots for Fight Night 3. There's nothing on the PC that compares, no matter what hardware you have.

And yes, these are actual gameplay screenshots... And yes, it really does look that good!

• Pic 1
• Pic 2
• Pic 3

 

[McArra]

ZimZum, that's placebo effect IMO, they look so similar that you couldn't tell the difference. PC has more power (less optimization also) and can manage Xbox360 level graphics in 7800 X1800 series already w/o SLI.

 

[slash196]

I've played it both on my comp and on an HDTV (360 version) and to my eyes, the PC looks quite noticably better.

 

[alimoalem]

i think the 7800 gtx is better but there's two things that go for the console system: the price and the fact that it's a console. controllers make it feel like you're more into the game, at least imo

 

[McArra]

You can also buy controllers for the PC, that's not a valid point

 

[lopri]

Still deating Consles over PCs?

http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=a6il.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=b6ga.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=c2af.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=d6vz.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00020zt.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00030fl.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00106ex.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00100mn.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00144nl.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00313vf.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shot00326ci.jpg

/end thread

 

[JRW]

Originally posted by: Crescent13
From what I have seen/heard, the xbox360 will not support 2xAA until the next generation of games. I think it runs it at 1280x720, no AA, no AF, everything on medium. I also highly doubt VSYNC.

no. The xbox 360GPU doesn't come close to the 7800GTX 512.I think it would be between a 7800 vanilla, and a 7800GT.

Ive compared both side by side and 360's version actualy runs better (go figure) than my X2 4800+ / 7800GTX 512mb running the game,360's runs with 2X AA / No AF and Vsync enabled, When I run COD2 on my PC with those settings @ 720p (1280x720) the only way it competes is if I disable Vsync ,with vsync enabled the framerate hovers around 30fps-40fps. Graphicly both versions seem identical when running PCs at above settings.

 

[BroadbandGamer]

I picked up a 360 on launch day and sold it on ebay a week or two later.

None of the games I played were using V-Sync and most if not all were using no AF and 2x AA.

Until I see some true next gen games running at 1280x720 with 4x AA, AF, and V-Sync turned on, I'm not going near another 360.

Also, the 360 version of CoD doesn't come even close to the visual quality of my PC. Yeah, my PC may not run it at 60fps but is sure as hell looks a lot better with AA, AF, and V-sync.

 

[CalamitySymphony]

This game is too short (though good) on the single player end, looks too crappy for the frames it outputs, and has no lasting multiplayer value for anyone to waste so much effort and words in comparison.

 

[JRW]

Originally posted by: BroadbandGamer
I picked up a 360 on launch day and sold it on ebay a week or two later.

None of the games I played were using V-Sync and most if not all were using no AF and 2x AA.

Until I see some true next gen games running at 1280x720 with 4x AA, AF, and V-Sync turned on, I'm not going near another 360.

Also, the 360 version of CoD doesn't come even close to the visual quality of my PC. Yeah, my PC may not run it at 60fps but is sure as hell looks a lot better with AA, AF, and V-sync.

Makes me wonder if you really did own a 360 or just Flaming? , If you did own one you should know COD2 certainly has Vsync enabled on 360s version ,also both PC & 360's version are the *SAME* graphicly with the exception of Anistropic filtering on PCs version..All I know is your claim of "doesnt even come close of the visual quality of my PC" is total BS. Or perhaps you wern't playing 360's version on an HDTV, Makes a big differance.

 

[xtx4u]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: professor1942

Originally posted by: Sonikku
When Gamespot had a side by side comparison between the 360 and the PC version on a top notch rig, they went on to say that if not for the limited multi-player on the 360, it would be the hands-down better version of the two.

Obviously they weren't taking into account the fact that you have to play it with a pair of thumbs on a clumsy gamepad. That would drive me nuts.

well its not as worse as PS2 controller. you literally can't play any FPS on PS3 because controller design sucks for them. XBOX one is playable and Xbox 360 is best controller I have seen so far. Anyways what some people make it controller sound like a horrible for FPS when somearen't but thoes gamers are just ignorant.

PS2/3 has mouse/keyboard support for FPS games, whose ignorant now?...

 

[xtx4u]

Originally posted by: JRW

Originally posted by: BroadbandGamer
I picked up a 360 on launch day and sold it on ebay a week or two later.

None of the games I played were using V-Sync and most if not all were using no AF and 2x AA.

Until I see some true next gen games running at 1280x720 with 4x AA, AF, and V-Sync turned on, I'm not going near another 360.

Also, the 360 version of CoD doesn't come even close to the visual quality of my PC. Yeah, my PC may not run it at 60fps but is sure as hell looks a lot better with AA, AF, and V-sync.

Makes me wonder if you really did own a 360 or just Flaming? , If you did own one you should know COD2 certainly has Vsync enabled on 360s version ,also both PC & 360's version are the *SAME* graphicly with the exception of Anistropic filtering on PCs version..All I know is your claim of "doesnt even come close of the visual quality of my PC" is total BS. Or perhaps you wern't playing 360's version on an HDTV, Makes a big differance.

Maybe you aren't sitting close enough to ur HDTV to notice the jaggies. 360's graphic sucks, next-gen my ass it doesn't even have 16x AF hahhahah

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: xtx4u
Maybe you aren't sitting close enough to ur HDTV to notice the jaggies. 360's graphic sucks, next-gen my ass it doesn't even have 16x AF hahhahah

If the graphics suck so bad, then how come Fight Night 3 looks the way it does? And if the PC's is so great, then how come the PC has no equivilent character models to FN3?

(See my post above for screenshots... I don't feel like reposting it, yet again.)

 

[aznpxdd91780]

Remember EA's Madden 360 Demo and how "real" it looked, and now look retail version for 360, they look nothing alike (the real game looks way worse). I wouldn't count on Fight Night's graphics until it is released.

 

[JRW]

Originally posted by: aznpxdd91780
Remember EA's Madden 360 Demo and how "real" it looked, and now look retail version for 360, they look nothing alike (the real game looks way worse). I wouldn't count on Fight Night's graphics until it is released.

uhm the playable Fight Night 3 demo is available for download on xbox live right now, and yes it really does look like that.