Lens of Truth: Call of Duty - Modern Warfare 2 Analysis

Lens of Truth writes, "...the Lens of Truth got its hands on one of the most anticipated games this year. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. If you are in the market for this game, sit back and get your trigger finger ready because this is one war you're not going to want to miss! Hooraah!"

[Sea_Man]

I've been waiting for this one!!

[YLOD Service Tech]

The PS3 version looks washed out. Seems to be a typical problem for most multiplatform games.

[Sea_Man]

My money goes to PS3. The differences are too minor to even care!

[IcyJoker187]

Since the differences are so minor, PS3 for me.

[SL1M DADDY]

Try using the right settings on the game there guys. If you want the real comparison, go to http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

At least they use the settings provided by the PS3 to make sure the game looks as though it would on your TV and not so washed out. LoT is getting unnecessary these days.

The other thing they don't tell you is that if you are going to play this on the 360 for the next two years the cost to you for the game will be 160 bucks instead of the PS3 version being only 60 bucks.

See what I did there? I thought so.

[StanLee]

Just wait for Digital Foundry's comparison. They're the most legit.

[YLOD Service Tech]

After a second look, the PS3 version seems to have lower res texture as well.

In light of this, I'll be getting the 360 version for sure.

[Carlton Banks]

lol Who cares what you think, your name is YLOD Service Tech, an obvious 360 fanboy.

[junk-3d]

Funny thing is that they don't judge based on the color differences, as that can be fixed with in game settings. Everything is judge with straight out of the box settings so they are on equal playing field. Don't hate because Infinity Ward jacked the default settings up on the PS3.

Color differences aside, the Xbox 360 version is the winner, but not by much.

[Anon1974]

We really know nothing about them and quite often their conclusions defy logic. Anyone check out the conclusions they made for Wolfenstein, Tekken6 or BlazBlue?
With Wolfenstein they said the 360 version tore almost every time you took a shot. The PS3 version had 8 seconds more load time between levels. Tie. Really? A tie?
BlazBlue was identical almost in every way according to LOT except they expressed maddening frustrations with the 360's controls. Tie again. Really?
Or Tekken 6. Both games nearly identical. PS3 version had slower load times unless you install on the hard drive and then the difference is 0-1.7 seconds. Winner! 360. Come on, guys? Can you really declare one version superior when the difference is 1.7 seconds of load time?

And the problem is, almost no one does these type of comparisons so there's no one to compare LOT's findings against. Eurogamer does these from time to time, but that's Eurogamer. They're partnered up with Microsoft in business matters and have a proven pro-360 and anti-PS3 bias. You really can't take their word for it because they're clearly compromised. IGN does head to head's every now and then, but they only do a fraction of games, much like LOT.

I think I'll stick with Metacritic scores and reviewers I trust rather then these comparisons. If IGN says they're practically identical and get the same score, that's good enough for me. And Metacritic gives you an average of thousands of professional reviews. I think that's far more useful then these type of questionable comparisons. Besides, the gaming industry itself uses Metacritic as a measure. If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for the rest of us.

Edit Below: Actually, I don't know what they said. I can't get into their site to see what the comparison was. It's really irrelevant to my point though. Doesn't matter if they said the PS3 or 360 version were better, my point was I simply don't trust these guys.

Funny how so many are quick to criticize me personally but can't be bothered to actually address my points. Am I to assume you have no counter arguments?

[Sea_Man]

That was funny!! God you look like such a baby!! Did you read the article? It's funny how 2/3 guys that worte the Head 2 Head are buying the PS3 version. Play that violin!!

[evildeli]

blah blah blah, blazblue, wolfenstein, blah blah blah. Move on Dark.

[shazui123]

this game looks worse than I thought, definitely no killzone 2 in the looks department :( looks like another biased LOT review to me also, whats with the contrast settings? cynamite did it the same, why cant LOT? oh i forgot, tekken 6 and blazblue, shows theyre a bit biased really doesnt it?

[facelike]

Funny, the 360 won according to the site, but 2 of the 3 staff members from the site bought it on PS3 instead of the 360.

[SL1M DADDY]

"Funny thing is that they don't judge based on the color differences, as that can be fixed with in game settings. Everything is judge with straight out of the box settings so they are on equal playing field. Don't hate because Infinity Ward jacked the default settings up on the PS3."

Then you agree with me. Good to see. You, by your own admission have agreed that Lens of Truth is no longer necessary and that they admittedly do not allow for their audience to see the game as it could be on both consoles but rather what the games default is. So the games with slight tweaks of the console (perfectly permitted by anybody that can play the game) would in fact look identical and thus proves that LoT is full of douche-baggery and only tries to paint the 360 in the better light. Thanks for the admission of fanboyism on LoT's part.

[Bubbles_Kitty_Cat]

Wow, you can really tell that the "lensoftruth" guys must get a TON of hate mail from PS3 fans.

Seriously, most of the article reads like an apology for pointing out that the 360 version is superior.
I understand why they are walking on eggshells, but it is rather tough to read after a while.

It's a shame that people take videogames so seriously that sites like lensoftruth can't speak openly and frankly about which version is better.

But, I'm sure they are getting tired of the death threats. lol

[DelbertGrady]

This article must be false and biased since the PS3 version didn't come out on top.

Or could it be that most of you commenting in here are biased towards the PS3 and just can't accept it? Impossible!

[Anon1974]

Soda said "This article must be false and biased since the PS3 version didn't come out on top."

It has nothing to do with bias and everything to do with LOT's results being questionable. With so many questionable conclusions reached by LOT in the past, how can you trust a site like this on anything?

[kws1065]

if it's true. The site is really lame. They write the article just for hit, not considering user purchase.

[O2_Addict]

They're both equally ugly.

[LiquifiedArt]

More stable and all around better.

One of the reason I dont buy multi-platform games that don't fully utilize the hardware. I might not buy this now. So dissapointing.

[Anon1974]

When games are this close, I'll always buy the version that runs on reliable hardware and doesn't charge me extra fees to play the game like the developers intended it to be played, online.

I really can't get over why so many people accept this. When I buy a game, I expect to be able to play 100% of that game, not half the game until I shell out extra money to Microsoft for subscription fees. It amazes me to this day that so many people fell for this cash grab when there were viable alternatives on the PC and PS3 for free. I paid for XBL for two years before, because of another dead 360, I was forced to get my gaming fix on my PS3 and finally wised up to the fact that really, all that matters is being able to play online. Both do it, one charges for it. Nothing else really matters.

I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but it's just my opinion. Lots of people feel justified in paying Microsoft extra to play their games. I'm just not one of them.

[slayorofgods]

Well, I guess that some people need to disillusion themselves somehow when their gaming console has a poor line up.

[ABizzel1]

Ha, I called it. That goes to show the 4 people who disagreed with me. The PS3 version looked washed out, but you have to read why. There was no Full RGB, when it was turned on and using HDMI, the PS3 version looked a lot better.

[Statix]

In the following screenshot comparison, you can plainly see that the PS3 version features more detailed texture quality on some surfaces (note the metal stove on the right side of the screen, revealing significantly sharper texture detail on the PS3).

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

This screenshot also shows an instance where the bloom/overbright effect is actually slightly more prominent and visible on the PS3 version; we know the effect is there on both platforms, but there might be variation between them in terms of where they are prominent and visible.

I personally do not have the game yet, but based on the many comparison screenshots I have witnessed, it would appear to me that this particular comparison by Lens of Truth is somewhat flawed and shortchanging the PS3 version.

Again, here's the link to the screenshot:

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

[vhero]

you guys should look at a better comparison site rather than lens of truth who have proven time and time again they are a bunch of 360 fanboys. If you use ps3 with all its abilitys which obviously ps3 gamers will be doing they both look so near identical theres no telling the differnce but no that wouldn't make the 360 look good eh?

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

a) better colors
b) glare/bloom effects
c) better shadows
d) better frame rates!
e) better load times

Doesn't justify a win for the 360, I don't know what will?

If anything the better frame rates alone should justify the 360 win since they are so similar anyhow.

[Statix]

ALSO: Here's another screenshot comparison showing BETTER, more prominent BLOOM/OVERBRIGHT/GLOW effects on the PS3 version:

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

Not to mention that the Lens of Truth staff mentions the "smoother shadows" of the 360 version, but neglects to mention that the PS3 version's shadows appear to be slightly more well defined and detailed, albeit more jaggedy because of the lesser filtering.

The more I see other screenshot comparisons from other sites, the more I arrive to the conclusion that this particular comparison by Lens of Truth is flawed in some form or fashion.

[Tempjf]

God I can't wait for Digital Foundry's comparisons to come out. It's gonna confirm the LOT's comparison and make you look like the cumtart that you are..

When it happens I be sure to let you and vhero know how wrong you guys were and how right the LOT was....

[QuackPot]

Don't read these stupid multiplat comparisons. They only perpetuate fanboyism.

Fact is, most developers know how to program both consoles properly now and the only excuse for any crappy or poorer versions of a multiplat is a lazy developer.

So don't read these flame bait comparison posts.

[Statix]

Why don't you take a look at my screenshot proof, and respond to them in a logical manner, point by point? Rather than resort to namecalling, proving yourself to be an overly emotion fanboy with a biased agenda.

I guess debating with facts and logic has never been a strong suit of Xbox fans. They don't seem like the smartest kids around.

I also find it comical that 360 fans such as yourself pretend like graphics don't matter at all, when it comes to graphical powerhouses like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2--"Graphics don't matter, gameplay does," right? Yet when it comes to Modern Warfare 2 and other multiplatform releases, you Xbox fans are splitting hairs and arguing over the SLIGHTEST graphical differences, like slightly better shadow filtering, or a few frames of framerate difference.

[Tempjf]

so you took those screen shots your self? That means that http://www.cynamite.de/_mis... is your site. All that web site show is images no article to support his images. On the other hand LOT explaines why.

All I am saying is I have the game like many of you do and it looks exceptionally like what they show on the LOT site. Of course at it's default settings. Regardless, I'm telling you, wait till Digital Foundry does his comparison then well see..

EDIT: Oh and yes I am a fanboy, never said I wasn't!

[Statix]

It's not my website.

You say that the website just offers screenshots without "explaining them," but that's actually the LEAST biased way to present comparison images and videos. I much rather have a website present images to me so that I can analyze and compare them MYSELF without the possibility of a bias or agenda.

When you have a website like Lens of Truth providing an "analysis," there's way too much room for things like bias, or human error, or just some people MISSING stuff. Humans are not perfect; their analyses are not perfect and are subject to BIAS and ERROR.

Therefore, I much prefer a website just give me screenshots that allow me to do the comparisons myself WITHOUT adding in their own commentary (which can be flawed).

[Tempjf]

Ok then how do you know what settings he using? If he is adjusting the contrast for one is he doing it for the other. I mean think about it. Is he using HDMI or component there is soo much room for fowl play. That way is completely biased. I've been following the LOT from the beginning and yes they are only human and they have made mistakes in the past but they are not the end all be all. They are merely expressing their opinion about which one they preferred. Like they say in the article the final decision always come down to you. You got to respect that

[pangitkqb]

But I still think Lens of Truth does a bang up job.

[slayorofgods]

It is very interesting how much the comparisons differ. It also explains why I don't care about seeing these websites giving comparisons. There is just something not to trust.

The first modern warefare looked like clone on both 360 and PS3. Why would they regress now? They are to good of a company to struggle with making games for two consoles. They aren't Valve, so I'd expect quality on their PS3 support, YET AGAIN!!!!!

[Mr Logic]

PC FTW! Yeah the 360 looks better, but I only play multiplat games on PC and exclusives on consoles.

[randomwiz]

"In light of this, I'll be getting the 360 version for sure."

its not like you have a choice...

[Mikerra17]

the 360 fanboys are all over this one, I think we have gotten to that point where the PS3 is starting to surpase the 360 in terms of fan base. It used to be semi rare to see 360 fans come onto the chat and bash PS3. Looking as if the tide has turned 360 fanboys are starting to get desperate

[kwicksandz]

the difference in the snow level looked quite drastic, ps3 seemed to have a very muted colour pallete. otherwise i didnt notice many differences.

still boycotting for the treatment of pc version though.

[DaTruth]

Almost every game has a brightness scale in the options. It almost never matches your screen right out of the box!

If you were to go to the options and set the brightness scale, these games would look exactly the same.

Also, all my TV settings are set to RGB and Super white on. If I were to turn those off for the purposes of a comparison, my television would not be set right for my PS3 settings!

[commodore64]

SO yeah... um....

360 version:

- better bloom/flare (proven)
- slightly faster framerates (proven)
- much faster load times (proven)
- better shadows (proven)
- better colours (debatable)

Did anyone else notice how LOT went OUT OF THEIR WAY to explain why and how they do these comparisons?
Were they expecting a backlash from angry fanboys?
... they sure got it!

I am just glad they present their accurate findings.

It is interesting to note the usual ps3 diehards alleging LOT is biased.
That's so sad.

Fact is, LOT cannot fake ps3 increased loading times
Fact is, LOT cannot fake ps3 inferior shadows
Fact is, LOT cannot fake ps3 slightly reduced framerates.
Fact is, LOT canNot fake that MW2 is demonstrably technically better on the 360, even if the differences are subtle.

That's the truth of it.
Thanks LOT, for providing such strength and truth amongst all the subjective and inaccurate reports on the net.

We need more sites like LOT that just tell it like it is!

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

I agree. I mean frame rate alone given all else is roughly equal is enough to give the win to the 360!

Unless you prefer the PS3 controller, but I will take smoother game play anytime.

[SL1M DADDY]

Even after showing everybody how the PS3 version is exactly the same in every way with pictures to boot the 360 fans still can't seem to see the truth. Now that is dedication to MS... I wonder, what is it that you get from MS for your blind admiration?

[commodore64]

@ slimdaddy

Heres' what you said:
"the PS3 version is exactly the same in every way"

Dude, the LOT article PROVED that this isn't the case.
Other posters, including me, even went to the trouble of pointing out the exact areas where this isn't the case.

Yet, then you come along and completely ignore the evidence?
What is wrong with you?

Do you work at ignorance, or is it a natural talent you have?

[SL1M DADDY]

To sum it up for ya. One is not bias, the other is. One tells the truth, the other does not. One shows true representation of both copies, one does not. LOT is a pathetic excuse for a site and Cynamite is not. You can trust Cynamite and only fanboys trust LOT.

[commodore64]

*groans*

..but slim daddy...
can you not read?

LOT accurately measured and compared framerates, load times and shadows.
In these areas, the 360 undeniably came out on top.
That is a fact.

What did cynamite do?
They posted some screenshots that look about the same.
They did no comparison at all, and the interpretation of the screenshots is no different than the interpretation of the screenshots of the LOT article itself.

Read the article if you don't believe me.

Your argument is very weak indeed and your adherence to it is making you look very foolish, friend.

[SL1M DADDY]

*facepalm*

I did read the dribble but dribble from a bias media outlet is just that, bias media. When a bias media outlet runs tests, there is ultimately bias ingrained into the test as with the LOT tests. LOT has a rep of bias and has had so since they came about. They are a flamebait site that thrives on fanboys like you so please, don't use them as an argument aid, that is as bad as using VG Charts for sales numbers.

[DelbertGrady]

That's some true Jedi denial you are displaying there lol!

The sh!tty german site must be right since it shows the PS3 version looking more like the 360. Even though it has no explanations and lo-res screenshots.

Sour grapes ftw! Anyways. No one in their right mind would play an FPS game using that clunky 10 year old controller design. Not to mention the dead quiet desert that is PSN.

[Serjikal_Strike]

that washed out...i just seen in another screen comparison(diff. website) and they looked identical...

lens of truth? i dont think sooo!

link to what im talkin bout...
http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

[evildeli]

I don't think it looks washed out.

[Sea_Man]

Some proof please!

[PirateThom]

Lens of Truth use "default" settings. Which seems to be make sure the limited mode is on for PS3.

It's why these comparisons are questionable, there's a huge difference here, but none on the other screens.

[AK46]

Something fishy going on here.

[evildeli]

They show the differences in the first rollover. I question if you read the article

[PirateThom]

I did read it and, yes, they do show the differences.

And, the screenshots after it, show the similar washed out "limited" range on the PS3 version against the crisper "expanded" range on the 360.

Unless Cynamite is lying as well.

[junk-3d]

Having played the game, you have the ability to adjust gamma. It looks like cynamite.de did tweaks on both systems to make the colors match.

[Noob]

Can easily be fixed by adjusting the brightness/contrast, which is something they don't do. These pictures tell a different story.

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

But they are right about everything else and the bloom effect, which makes the 360 version look worse in some scenes IMO. Makes the game look too bright.

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

[archemides518]

just compare their "screenshots" with those of the other links in this thread. the ps3 version in the other links looks slightly sharper than the 360 on ALL of them (just look at the posters), but yes likes in the LoT article there is no "bloom" but that in my opinion in most of the shots looks bad (shiny heads). the colors are NOT off, and if u look at lens of truth, in their screenshots on the PS3 side are taken from a slightly more far off distance perspective, so OF COURSE it makes the 360 textures look sharper, but surprisingly in the other comparison they are slightly worse on EVERY identical frame. just look at the evidence HERE and say i'm wrong--lens of proof biased confirmed

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

[Fel]

Everyone who realises this setting exists for PC monitors, raise your hand!

*crickets*

Limited is correct for televisions. The extra bit of range at either end exists to prevent clipping. If you turn on "Full", you're just smacking your games with black crush. The correct way to do it is to use "Limited" and then properly calibrate the brightness and contrast on your television set.

Don't take your advise from a bunch of 14 year olds either... if you don't believe me, go ask in a mature AV forum and they'll tell you the same. Understand what you're talking about.

[Golfcoachh]

Just a question, why are the "default settings" not the best settings, or do you need to tweek settings on the ps3 for all games? Not trying to be a fanboy, but I see it alot when it comes to these types of comparasins. I have never tweeked my settings for any game on any system after the initial set up. Why would sony make the default settings not be the ones that show off the games the best? Please everyone dont hammer me for asking a question. I got my Ps3 in january so I didn't know it needed constant tweeking to get the most out of games.

[TheReaper42]

@above

First thing i did when i bought my tv is to change its setting for best visuals. The same thing was done on the PS3. Change it to "FULL" instead of "limited." What's so hard about changing your setting once? And I seriously doubt you even own a PS3.

Do yourself a favor, take your imaginary PS3 and turn on your imaginary "Full" setting.

[shadow2797]

Wow, The Reaper, that was just sad. Look a couple posts above yours and you would see that Limited is the correct setting. And you also claimed he didn't have a PS3 for asking a valid question. Geez.

To answer the question, basically, no two HD TV's are identical. You need to find the settings that look best with your set up. Sony most likely set the defaults to look best on the majority of sets, which are SD. If you don't want to go through the trouble, you don't have to, but there are ways to make the game look better. Some games make you set the brightness on the first start up (such as Killzone 2).

I know Limited is correct for TV monitors, but does any knowledgeable person know when the correct time to use "Super White" is?

[Qui-Gon Jim]

The default setting on PS3 is for "limited" which IS correct for almost all TV's. The problem, though, comes in that if you are doing screen-shot captures, you are going to be doing it on a computer, and the proper setting for computer monitors is "full." When i bought my HDTV in January i did some research on this on avforums and other places, and it was consistently stated that "limited" is for TV, "full" is for computer monitors. So for screen grabs, they SHOULD be using "RGB full."

I don't know how much difference that would make with this comparison, but as others have pointed out, cynamite shows the two as being virtually the same with perhaps a slight edge going to the PS3 (imo). One site shows 360 version looking better, one shows both being the same, believe which one you want. I, for one, can enjoy a game without needing to say "I can enjoy it more than you can."

[Golfcoachh]

my psn id is hutch2355 just like my live id is. The question was asked because I honestly didn't know, so do you have to do it to the 360 as well? I have a 52 inch toshiba lcd 1080p. I think the games look great. you are a typical fanboy. Someone can't even ask a question here anymore. What a moron you are. Thanks to the others for your honest answers, and proving that n4g isn't just fanboys, but fans of gaming unlike that idiot.

[TheReaper42]

CALM down hutch, look at your little 14 year old barrage of insults. I set my option to FULL because it makes the graphics more vibrant and not washed out. Unless you're dumb, you would know how to do it too.

Your question on the 360, I leave my settings alone. On my PS3, I leave my setting on FULL for ALL GAMES. My LCD monitor is calibrated perfectly. Are you people too stupid to comprehend how easily it is to switch between full and limited?

SO I guess in your term, telling the facts = fanboy now huh? Go back to school and get educated.

[shawnsl65]

Lol... no wonder Hutch couldn't see the difference between FULL and Limited.. he has a toshiba nuff said. My samsung can tell the difference between full and limited, but my toshiba.. well.. it doesn't make a significant difference. Typical 360 fanboy trashing the ps3.

[Golfcoachh]

No its morons like you two that make this site almost unbearable. When I see people acting like fanboys, sure I post rants against them. At one point I could be called a 360 fanboy, that was before I purchased my ps3 and found out how incredible it was. Now back to the point, this is not bashing of the ps3 idiot, it is a question, or do you not know the difference. I have never changed my settings on my ps3 so no I don't know the difference between the two, but i guess with my 3 year old 52 inch tv I couldn't huh? What a couple of morons. I gather that the two of you must be the teenagers, based on your past comments, lol Geez I should have read your past comments before commenting, I wouldn't have wasted my time. Thanks again to the people that answer questions and don't just bash like the two idiots above. So you two, go ahead and bash, I won't have any bubbles left to respond. Once again it will prove how fanboyish you two and your comments are.

[Treylove99]

telling facts doesn't = fanboy, but treating people like you did, for asking a question, is. YOU proved how ignorant someone can be on this site. The poor guy asks a serious question, and you and the other guy just bash the heck out of him. I agree with hutch, you two are proof how bad this site has become. Real gamers look at people like you two and probably don't even bother posting on this site. It is so much worse now than it was when the 360 idiots were hammering everyone, now if you even meniton a hint that you might like the 360 over the ps3 you are hammered and your bubbles disapear. Its no wonder most ture fans have bailed on this place. Mostly because real gamers don't stand up and hammer back you idiots like you two. Two peas in a pod. Acting like little children. So sad you have nothing better to do with your lives than just hammer a poor guy for asking a question. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[shawnsl65]

Nice two accounts same IP, you are truely pathetic. More lil babies added to the ignore list.

[The Meerkat]

360 wins again.

and it got the best controller for FPS FFS

[AK46]

Microsoft wins what?

[ExPresident]

Wins what exactly? A maybe slightly better looking multi-console title? Congrats. Lemme know how that works out for you while I keep enjoying KZ2 and Uncharted 2 among a huge list of other things that aren't multi-console.

[OmarJA]

"and it got the best controller for FPS FFS"

Unfortunately that's all it good for.

[mastiffchild]

And it entirely a matter of opinion which controller you prefer anyway. There is NO RIGHT or wrong one it depends on the person. I've often put it down to me being left handed that the 360 pad feels too awkward to use for most games for me but it's also just way too bulky for my tastes and if my modding mate won't hurry up and make me a 360 pad innards in a DS3 shell then I'm gonna have to buy one of them adapters as I'm sick to death of struggling with the 360 pad.

Honestly, I find it really odd that people think one is automatically better than the other and ignore personal preferences, hand size and whether you're left or right handed.

I've seen the game running on both systems myself now and think the cynamite shots are more like what you se in real life with your PS3 set up properly-there's so little difference and sites like LoT need to find them to justify their existence. So there's an agenda I do NOT trust.

[table]

360 nearly always looks better in multiplats but nothing noticeable that makes a game worth getting over the other version. 360 controller is a joke though I dunno how anyone can use that piece of crap to aim a gun; shooting at snail speed with sluggish triggers whilst unable to aim as a result of the disgustingly sticky and clunky anologue stick. Not to mention disgusting fees for xbox live.

[corneliuscrust]

what? rly?

[ape007]

yes the 360 pad is better for shooters

360 pad give more accurate aiming and more satisfying shooting feel due to its awesome triggers

guys here need treatment

[facelike]

Yet two of the three people on this site bought the PS3 version.

[shadow2797]

Umm because people disagree? I prefer R1 to the triggers, personally. But the 360 analogue sticks are miles better than but DS3's. However, I don't like the placement of the bumpers on the 360 controller.

It's called personal preference. I don't mind using either one but I'm more at home with a DS3.

But at the end of the day, it just matters which version your friends are getting. Which is why I'm getting this for 360, even though I have the first one on PS3. I know, I'm a rebel ;-).

[JeffGUNZ]

See, this website does it right. It gets the SAME picture. The other website some of you are talking about is someone taking pictures at slightly different spots, which affects the lighting and shadows and can't make real judgments. I think they both look fantastic, but I have to agree with the website, the 360 looks a little clearer and better shadows.

[JeffGUNZ]

From those pictures, the 360 wins.

[Sea_Man]

Big deal the 360 has a bloom effect... wow.

All I care is the textures look exact!! PS3 for me all the way

[Bot Smasha]

Wow what are they taken from? Amagazine with a phone camera? get over yourself, why dont you go play dragon age on your 360..oh wait it looks like crap as it shows the true limitations of the 360 a huge open world rpg with lots of scenery and loads happening on screen.

[JeffGUNZ]

http://www.tampax.com Looks like someones on the rag.

[electricshadow]

@ muDD

Wow, my brain hurts after reading that. Ever heard of a period? Holy crap. Have you also heard of this thing called grammar? XD

When you try to make a point and you can't even use proper grammar, capitalization and spelling, people are going to think you're retarded.

[4point7BillionLoss]

looks better than any exclusive ....

360 version wins too ... and they said the 360 was maxed out two years ago and here it is with a hot looking game nearly identical only slightly better than the PS3 version ... and still looking better than any exclusive on any system.

I bet it didn't cost $4.7 billion though ....

[yippie1234y]

i got mw2 for both systems because i have a lot of friends (thanks to uncharted) on each. and truth is it looks better on my ps3. and my ps3 is on composite cables where as my 360 is on hdmi.

people in the distance look blurry on 360, maybe because of the filters? and the blood on the screen is not as good. just some things i noticed.

[Kiroe]

They do default out of the box settings for the game only. They always show the differences between full/limited in the first rollover. The PS3 just has some contrast issues this time around.

[LIVE_FR0M_NY]

every head-2-head looks like this, PS3 is always washed out for some reason ONLY on this site. ill wait for digital foundrys take on the matter... they actually know what they are talking about

[Joe Bomb]

because thats how the PS3 version looks, washed out.

[YLOD Service Tech]

HAHA! Once again, the 360 wins. Expect Bad Company 2 to look better on the 360 as well.

-1 for the droid camp

[Sea_Man]

Yeah the 360 won but they said it was minor!

[YLOD Service Tech]

They said it's minor to calm you PS3 fanboys down. In reality this shows how inferior the graphics are on the PoS3.

[Ninji]

They will buy/rent/play the PS3 version anyways. Nobody cares if the game looks a bit lighter or darker. More people care if they can play the same game online for free or not.

Not to mention these multiplats are looking better than the 360's exclusives (now I know why you bots are hyping them up so much). On the PS3 this is just yet another game in the PS3's growing library of games but it doesn't look better than PS3 exclusives like Killzone, Uncharted, & God of War.

[OmarJA]

Most of the 360 runs at 585/640p resolution + frame rate problems & they don't even look impressive...

Can you tell me why?

[FailureRate54]

LOL
inferior graphic on PS3?

Ohh, that's why GT5, GoW3, UC2, UC1, Heavy Rain, and yes... even Super Rub a Dub, own EVERY FlopBox game?

ouch...

[Gobuz]

Dude, you sound like a fckin pr!ck. Does it really matter to you so much? Have you nothing better to do than make a stupid username and trash the PS3? if you love the xbox that much just play it, nobody gives a flying f*ck what you think.

[randomwiz]

and yet, 2 out of the 3 staff members chose the ps3 version

[WildArmed]

yeah totally!
Have fun with Modern Warfare 2.. EXCLUSIVELY ON XBOX 360.
Oh wait.. -.-

[OmarJA]

*Sigh* can't blame the bots really...

It's really funny & embarrassing how these multi-platform titles looks better than the 360's exclusives.

[MeatAbstract]

I just can't tell the difference

[devilhunterx]

XB2 has the best controller to shoot civilians with.

[devilhunterx]

And PS3 has the best controller to shoot terrorists with.

[shazui123]

this game looks like crap compared to killzone 2! really dissapointed with this, still no FPS game on the 360 or any other game for that matter that beats KZ2 graphics

[Nitrowolf2]

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...
honestly its all about settings and really can't argue with "but on the ps3 you need to change the settings" Its there for a reason and thats to make games look allot better.
@YYLOD Service Tech
Reall what do you say about that comparison right there? They look identicle.

[DK_Kithuni_71]

..the PS3 version looks a lot clearer and much better than the Xbox version.

[The Creep]

yeah sure it does

(BIGGEST SARCASM)

[dkgshiz]

The PS3 has nothing to prove anymore. Its clearly the most powerful console on the market. UC2,KZ2, MGS4! Theres no reason to even post this crap. Deal with it xbots.

[Bot Smasha]

I bet you dont even have a console.

[PLAYstar]

A comparison? To prove what? Which system is more inferior than the other? If you're born with eye balls you would've noticed that on the graphical standpoint MW2 sucks~!

[divideby0]

after playing UC2...sorry this game just dont get it done graphically and the diff. between these games is a frigging NIT..
plug in UC2, than put in MW...you will see the diff.

[LIVE_FR0M_NY]

how can anybody disagree with this statement? lmao obvioulsy unchartted 2 looks better than anything on the market, its a FACT fanboys

[divideby0]

yea.....just before EB closed last nite..we were playing both games...albiet diff. kiosks, but you would have to be blind not to see the diff...

yea..disagree and respectfully please get a pair of glasses

[JonnyBigBoss]

Wow, this game is god-awful looking. I thought devs learned how to make decent looking games now in 2009.

[uso]

I do not understand in this site the two versions look equal.

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

I am alredy playing the PS3 version and the picture is fine in my TV

Great game, to short

[LIVE_FR0M_NY]

funny that PS3 owners think this game looks awful, but this is one of the best looking titles on 360! hahahaaaa "LensOfLies" is a load of bullshit anyways, its not just MW2, every head to head the PS3 has washed out colorless screenshots, when in REALITY my tv dont look like that. it dont matter which version you play if you go and jack up the brightness and contrast of course its gunna look like washed out garbage

[corneliuscrust]

on default settings

there are much better looking games on both systems. MW looked good for its day...but that was years ago

[tatotiburon]

xbox 360 version for me as always, i only buy exclusives and br movies for my PS3, the rest is just a waste of money...

and besides the code comunnity is bigger on XBL

[mrmikew2018]

I don't know why people listen to these clowns, If anybody believes that MW is better than one version over the other is a fool. Especially if it's coming from a site like LoT.

[AliTheBrit19]

"The win was marginal with slightly better visuals, quicker loading times and a higher average fps on the Xbox 360"

The Xbox 360 also has the superior online, thanks to having an online service that WORKS, unlike PSN I'm afraid

Exclusive DLC, better loading times, looks MUCH better on the 360
(seriously why can't PS3 multi-plats get the colour right!?)

Face it people, the BIGGEST game of 2009, is without a doubt Superior on the Xbox 360.

Alas, some people will deny this, but no worries, these are the same people who deny basic logic and factual evidence :)

[Bumpmapping]

Hows that RROD 3sh!tty of yours?

[Double07]

Wow theres so much wrong with your comment in only a short space so im not even gonna bother trying to correct you or whatever. Im just gonna Lol.

[AliTheBrit19]

^^ Bumpmapping

Broken right now

But will be fixed within a few hours of getting MW2 so no worries, oh and to the guy above me, I would love to see you point out exactly what is wrong?..

No?...Too hard?....Don't worry nobody expects much :)

[Double07]

I dunno why Im bothering replying because pretty much everyone knows your a troll but i'll bite.

"The Xbox 360 also has the superior online, thanks to having an online service that WORKS, unlike PSN I'm afraid"

Its down for 3 hours/ 180 minutes and your saying it doesnt work full stop? Really? And if you actually sign in before the maintanence it doesnt even affect you. And if people are crying that they cant play the Multiplayer for 3 hours then they need to take a look at themselves.

"Exclusive DLC"

Its timed exclusive so wrong there, it could be timed for a week or months but personally I couldnt even care seen as I never buy map packs for any game and Im not even getting MW2 for a while.

"better loading times, looks MUCH better on the 360"

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News...

"Face it people, the BIGGEST game of 2009, is without a doubt Superior on the Xbox 360."

Who decides its the biggest game of 2009? You? The Media? The millions of sheep who will buy it because "Cod iz the bst game evar"

[AliTheBrit19]

^^ I'm barely a troll dude, not by the standards set on THIS website

What makes it the biggest game of the year? well I'll put aside pretty much every journalist in the industry thinking the same, and go with sales, yes sales, sales are the only fair thing, everything else is opinion, sales are cold hard facts and numbers, which cannot be denied.

And I go by what I know, COD4 and WaW on the PS3 for me where TERRIBLE, after every match I got an error and had to find a new match, on the 360 with the same connection set up never once had the problem, not to mention added things like the amazing party system.

[Double07]

Lol, alright I take back the troll comment especially when just looking at some of the comments in this article >.>

And I cant really say much about the problems you had with COD4 or Waw. For one I never even bothered with Waw and I havent played 4 for a loooong time.

[THE-BODY-BAG-MAN]

and guess what the ps3 version is best if set right
and
o my god its free to play online
and
o my god no lag
and
o my god i was a xbox 360 fanboy
now it is deff ps3 all the way
no reason
to have a xbox 360

[kenjix]

Hurry get your COD4 with an added incentive of paying $50 for Live Sweet . Win Win for you guys heh?

PS3 MW2 see you manana but tonight Uncharted 2 and more Demon's Souls :)

[BreakNeckSpeed]

Note the consistency of the 360 frame rates while the PS3 dips a lot.

[Ju]

...dips a lot. Yeah, down to 58fps instead of 59. Wait, on one occasion I think its 59.91 vs 59.11. Yeah, definitively. Don't buy this sh!t. LOL.

[Hudahudahuda]

To be perfectly honest I think the PS3 looks more in tune with a real life color scheme when compared to the 360 version. The 360 version looks oversaturated to me and I can automtically tell it's a video game from far away.

[cyclindk]

They're lucky Amazon has a 50 dollar pre order credit deal going, or I'd skip this and wait for Bad Company 2 and Mag.

Is this NOT the WORST screen you've ever seen?! For either system, what ugly graphics:

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

[cyclindk]

I meant 20 dollars and the game goes for around 56 dollars...

[NotSoSilentBob]

Pretty sad that 360 fans have nothing better to play then argue which one is better.

[GameOn]

Did you not notice all the PS3 fans arguing over the same thing?

[The Dude]

Its got to hurt ps3 fanboys like you that one of the biggest games of 2009 is sub par compared to the xbox 360. And then to hear you all cry about how you aren't going to but it is just icing on the cake. I hope the 360 version outsells the ps3 version 4 to 1. :)

[NotSoSilentBob]

Subpar? Idk about you but there is BARELY any Difference and any that is should be in the TVS settings. Multiplats these days are equal. 2007 has come and gone and yet 360 owners INSIST that everything is better on the 360. The only way you can tell 90% of the freaking games between systems is the controller now. Jesus you children are PATHETIC.

[FairFight]

Listen guys, I have both a ps3 and an xbox 360. I use the same calibration settings for both systems through hdmi. My samsung tv uses the low hdmi setting with the ps3 set to limited and the xbox 360 set to standard. This and only this is the correct setting for both of these consoles through a tv. Expanded and RGB full are for monitors and nothing else. Some multiplatform games just tend to look washed out on the PS3. That's just life. It has nothing to do with the settings. Quit trying to blast the site when it's convenient to do so. Cough... cough... Batman Arkham Asylum...

[Pika-pie]

So the 360 has an ever so slightly better version. They really are looking at the game in minute detail to spot things like that so its not going to swing my opinion in anyway. Is the human eye really gonna notice a difference between 55fps and 57fps on some scenes, ummm no. Im fine with that

Well il be buying the PS3 version for trophies and the pleasure of playing it on a quite system. Oh and free online :D

I just hope the differences in Assassins Creed 2 are this small

[jmmurillo86]

X360 version uses a cheap trick to "blur" the edges, while in PS3 they actually do it. Look at the protagonist's hands in this picture:

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

[darthv72]

both look good. Anyone buying this game will enjoy it regardless of system.

[Henry Cain]

BS comparison both version look the same. The only difference is how bright the PS3 version looks. You can adjust the brightness anytime. Both version look good.

[PJ]

They also said the the xbox had better frame rate and load times. Did you even read the article?

[Pirateogta]

Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu-bu-bu-bu-but teh Blu-Rays!

[muDD]

non-non-non-non-non-non-Factor !

[kaz-hirai]

BU BU BU BU HALOZZZZZZZZZ AND GEARZZZZZZZZZ

Id rather play a clearler MW2 and play it online for free on PSN ;-D!!!!!

[Tron_Rocks]

Ok ps3 Bots,Tools,Droids and Fanboys. This is just another reason in the long line of games that look and play better on the Xbox 360.

Cry me a river, cuss me out, make all the lame lying replies you want the truth is that your precious PS3 can't get the job done as good as the Mighty Xbox 360. BWBWHAHAHAHAAH

GAWD it's great to own a Xbox 360 today and getting this most AWESOME game tonight!

[Minute Man 721]

this for both systems

[GameOn]

But why, You're spending double the amount of money you need to.

[ArthurLee]

compared to Uncharted 2 this game looks like garbage.

[Minute Man 721]

I have friends on both networks

[Death2494]

I could really care less. I said i wasn't buying this game if it didn't show me anything new as far as multiplayer. The minor upgrades i saw didn't sway me the least. I'm just going to wait for Bad Company 2 and head to Gamestop tomorrow so i can receive the beta code. Good luck swallowing that pill.

P.S. 360 version is always darker than the ps3 version. It's just common knowledge.

[seifer085]

isn't any difference from the screens I'm seeing, looks good I'll probably buy at a later date cause i am broke for now :(

[rob6021]

What i really want to know is how come on the other comparison they look exactly the same, yet on the lens of truths comparison there's a noticeable color difference. It's like they left rgb full off on the ps3 version or something. One of the sources is lieing.

[Anon1974]

The problem with sites like LOT is there's usually no way of checking if they're accurate or not. In this case, there was a recent screenshot comparison of this title to compare, so we know that something's up because that site's PS3 shots had nice light bloom that wasn't always on the 360 version and the colors looked better.

Most of the time, the only other site doing these types of comparisons is Eurogamer, and Eurogamer has a proven pro-360, anti-PS3 bias compared to the average game site. On top of that they're actually partnered up with Microsoft to deliver Eurogamer content exclusively to XBL. It's no wonder they have a pro-360 bias, it's in their best interests.

So, where else can you go to verify that what LOT says is actually true.

I'll take Metacritic scores and reviewers I've trusted over the years versus these questionable "comparisons" any day. Half the time they don't even bother comparing the final, retail code but instead use demo's at various build stages against each other. That says a lot right there.

Edit: And how the hell did these guys get an advanced copy of this title? You can't tell me Infinity Ward knowingly advanced them copies of each version of this title so they could pick apart one version over the other. Oh wait. They didn't. A Play and Trade broke the street date, just for LOT. How nice.

[Thoreau]

i doubt the differences between each version of mw2 are that great. i believe they are biased. the game batman/arkham a. looked very washed out for the ps3 and i watched the game being played and it was not washed out at all. in fact 2 out of 3 staff writers preferred the ps3 version. hmmm i wonder.

[sofocado]

I don't know why you have to fix the screen for the ps3 and not for the xbox 360. Once again Xbox 360 is the superior version.

[Thoreau]

you would know you don't have to fix anything, or you have a bootleg television.

[xxxxx01]

look at the video fps are higher on the xbox 360.

[Thoreau]

proud owner of the ps3(southpaw79) and 360(heavensboxer), i can say my ps3 games don't look all washed out like that...take it as you will. i cant help if i work and can get what i want.

[condorstrike]

LOL....

the difference like in the previous mw2 is actually big, for god's sake in the last pic the guys don't have shadow behind their ears...lol

good thing i have both systems... my buy goes to the Xbox though.

[Gago]

but obviously the 360 has less FPS drops and better graphics

I mean look -

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

[Ares84PS3]

Seriously.

[Timactionfigures]

Who cares which system this POS "war simulator" looks better on? I won't be buying, renting, or in any way contibuting my money to this horrible franchise.

I would suggest you all do the same as to avoid yet another COD sequel the same as the last. No...it's really not THAT good!

[DJ]

I.e., they're a bunch of liars. Check out the true comparison here, at Cynamite:

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

The game looks absolutely identical on both platforms.

[junk-3d]

I love how everyone posts the http://www.cynamite.de/ link as if they are 100% truthful. It is called adjusting the in game gamma, LoT left all game settings default like they always do and http://www.cynamite.de adjusted each system to match.

So, if you are adjusting which one is correct? The washed out PS3 or the overly contrasted Xbox 360. Last I remember it isn't up to the consumer to choose what is right visually, it is the art directors job. IW failed at matching the visuals with their default out of the box settings.

[horndog]

We already knew that the xbox360 version was the better version. Duh. Game of the year here i come.

[DK_Kithuni_71]

Personlly I cannot understand why you would accept an inferior product and not buy the PS3.. but hey, that is just me.

As Nitrowolf2 above clearly proves the PS3 version looks better. Lens of Truth is a hack but you poor poor Bots would like it so much to be the real deal.

Click the link. See. Think. Decide.

http://www.cynamite.de/_mis...

The PS3 (again) blows the Xbox 360 out of the water.

[skeletonss]

plus the map packs first.

ps3 in 3rd as usual.

[ambientFLIER]

So, no bloom, jaggier shadows, washed out colors, longer loads, and a worse framerate on the PS3? Lol.

Seems like you guys would have actually benefitted from a forced install :P

[ipe]

2 guys ll get ps3 version,i guess ey cant stand that boing 747 noise or ey forgot to buy live subs.

[VanHalen]

So much hype for this game. I will pass on both versions as this is just another boring seen it all before typical COD fps. Getting SO sick of these same old god damn military games. Cant they think of anything new for a change? I will stick to Borderlands for a very long time when it comes to a fps. At least that is different and has an awesome theme setting!

[ceedubya9]

when the real factors that separate them both are considered to be:

Load times
frame rate

Those are the things that you really have no control over, unlike screen settings and such.

Either way, the differences don't add up to much to complain about.

[jellycopter]

As someone who owns both a 360 and a PS3, I'll be getting this on the 360 because I once caught my PS3 looking at kids.