COD3 PS3/360/Wiii Comparisons

wow.. if the wii didn't have the wii-mote, i would never buy it.. the graphics on the other two systems are amazing. ps3 does a lot better with dark colours too.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
Hmmmm I thought the 360 version looked the best out of the 3.
 
I think with the wii they could have done better with the graphics. When you look at Resident Evil 4 on the gamecube it looks better then cod3 (wii version). The wii has twice the power as the gamecube.
 
I suspect (and hope) that the development environment for the Wii was not ready for primetime at the point when the developers of the launch titles needed it. Instead, they would have used a gamecube dev system and port it over in a short timeframe to meet the launch. This would somewhat help explain the severe lack of graphical quality seen so far and be somewhat excusable... COD has other issues, though, than just development environments... Keep in mind that though the graphics in RE4 are really quite good on the gamecube, there isn't much movement within the game and therefore not a high demand is placed on the cpu/gpu for "moving objects". COD has *so* much more going on that it isn't a fair comparison. All the movement has to be tracked, polygons redrawn, textures filled-in, etc. That eats cpu/gpu cycles like crazy.

Though I'm quite disappointed with the Wii's graphics so far, I've decided to wait until the next generation of titles to be released before I pass my final judgment on whether or not to buy a Wii. In the end, though, I am fairly convinced that the graphics are going to be a mighty sore spot for a lot of current and possible Wii owners going forward. We'll see...
 
^ He's right. But honestly, if Nintendo would stop being retarded and allow online play for a bunch of games, graphics would mean nothing to me. As of now, though, I'm just angry at Nintendo so the graphics are making me angry as well because they are no better than the Gamecube's so far.

But as for the comparison video, 360 looks the best to me.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #10
clockworK` said:
its not all about gfx..when r u lil kids gonna realize this..

It is for a lot of people. Graphics are extremely important.
 
Ps3 get's the win for colors

360 for lighting

Wii get's a half a cookie for trying... I think they tried, right?
 
the controls for the game suck on the wii. i pretty much have to be point blank to shoot a guy instinctively with the wiimote. otherwise, i have to take some time to line up the shot. i might be bad at the game, but i'm not THAT bad. also, the gameplay is far too linear and there is no multiplayer. i should not have bought the game.
 
brian said:
the controls for the game suck on the wii. i pretty much have to be point blank to shoot a guy instinctively with the wiimote. otherwise, i have to take some time to line up the shot. i might be bad at the game, but i'm not THAT bad. also, the gameplay is far too linear and there is no multiplayer. i should not have bought the game.

I am hearing this more and more. Very glad I bought Rayman over this and now I am going to buy NFS:Carbon over it again. I am waiting for FarCry to get my Wii FPS filler.
 
The Wii's graphics definately could be better than COD3. This is pretty much a PS2 port. I think games could become better quality than Red Steel aswell. The majority of new titles are ports from ex-GCN and PS2 games. All of this is good because all of the PS3 footage I have seen have been of the system running overtime, I mean, sure Tony Hawk's looks nice on PS3, but its running at 10FPS (occasionally less), showing that the PS3 is being pushed to the max (60FPS should be standard). Whereas Wii titles run pretty damn smooth. I think we are yet to see the Wii being pushed to the max...
 
The gameplay looked like it should surpass the other versions. The graphics were what i consider good, not fantastic though.
 
Back
Top