Lazygamer Investigates: The PS3 comes up short with COD5
Earlier this week, Videogamer.com posted up a 720p comparison of Call of Duty 5 on the PS3 and Xbox 360. I saw the video and started noticing differences between the two that I felt couldn't be ignored. So what I did is, I took a screengrab of the comparison to show you. Comparison videos always cause a general ruckus between the different console owners and this one is obviously doing the same. Truth be told, the Xbox 360 version looks significantly better and what bothers me the most is that I picked up the differences in the introduction cut-scene, which is a controlled environment that doesn't really have that much complexity to it. So why I ask, does the PS3 version look significantly worse?... You can click the above image to see it in full resolution, although take note that there is a little bit of compression on the image.... When you take a closer look you can clearly see that the texturing on the man's clothing and even the little badge on the bottom right is significantly lower and more "jaggy" or pixelated than the one on the Xbox 360. Not only that but you will also notice that the guy all the way in the background has some missing models on him. Now I have seen Uncharted and Metal Gear Solid 4 running on a PS3 and the graphics were phenomenal. So why again is the PS3 getting the short end of the stick. Why on earth, in a cutscene so simple, would Treyarch have to resort to lower texture resolutions and less geometry. I can't even see such small changes making a large difference to the framerate anyway. At the end of the day, small differences like this won't completely change a gamers experience but really, this doesn't make any sense because we know that the PS3 should be able to handle graphics like this without any issues. I ask again if it is just down to developer laziness because regardless of which was the lead platform, it can't be that damn difficult to make the graphics look equal in quality on both.