Modern Warfare 2 will render at 600p

GameZine writes: "Modern Warfare 2 will support a resolution of 600p like its predecessor.

Infinity Ward once again justifies a sub-HD video game during a high definition console era with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2."

[green]

Still looks great.So does not bother me at all.

[Fishy Fingers]

Nor I. I think it looks great and frankly if you weren't told it wouldnt concern you. Still I can get my higher res fill from the PC version, but judging by the videos released so far this games gonna look great on what ever platform you choose. Plus, a nice smooth 60fps.

[N4PS3G]

At least you get 60fps ;)

[Trollimite]

resolution and frames per second dont matter! its still gonna be a good game and its still will sell millions

[deadpoole]

I simply just don't understand, whos the source and where the heck they find this legit info that it is gonna be same as 600p. there is not a damn single analysis report anywhere.

Who the hell approved this article.

[IzKyD1331]

I could have run COD4 in 480p on an 18" screen and it wouldn't have bothered me, the gameplay is just that good

[Alcon Caper]

"I could have run COD4 in 480p on an 18" screen and it wouldn't have bothered me, the gameplay is just that good "

This should be the attitude about most games.

[G3TDOWN]

then go play Mario on nintendo

yes GRAPHICS do matter and they are a huge part of making a good game

[PirateThom]

Resolutions and all that don't bother me. Activision's price hike bothers me. At the RRP, this game should be beating everything, not just in gameplay, in graphics as well, including resolutions.

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

60fps should make the game butter smooth! The resolution shouldn't be a big factor considering the graphics itself isn't exactly like a movie. Resolution is over rated, but 60fps should make the game controls extremely responsive!

I'm hyped for this game!!!

edit: @G3TDOWN above
Graphics do matter, but only to a certain level. Generally graphical differences between consoles in the same generation isn't earth shattering unless we are comparing it to the super under powered Wii.

To me unless the graphics is as different as going from Xbox 1 to 360, it really has negligible effect. Do you ever get the feeling you are playing last gen games on a current system? I don't, and I'm currently playing Splinter Cell Double Agent.

[edgeofblade]

Of course sub-HD resolutions don't bother you. But it would if it were Halo and you were in a snarky mood...

As long as the game still runs at 60Hz no gripes here.

[bnaked]

Not 60fps! COD4 runs with 50fps..

xD just for info..

[gaffyh]

@1.7 - Yes graphics do matter, but pixel counts do not matter. As long as the game looks good overall it shouldn't bother any gamer.

[NOOBKILLA]

Oh well. That just further justifies why I will get MW2 on my PC instead of my 360 or PS3.

I plan on playing MW2 in 1920 x 1200 @ 90fps with precision accuracy by using my keyboard and mouse!!

[Traveler]

I'm getting it on the PC. It's not that it is the end of the world to play it with lower resolution and graphics, but given the choice I prefer to play games like this on the PC.

[a_squirrel]

meh, 60fps is that great, since your eyes can't see that many frames

600p, man, that sucks

[Syronicus]

I have been playing Modern Warfare for nearly two years now and love it as much today as I did when I first played it. Would those extra lines of resolution made the game any better? Nope.

[Sarcasm]

Oh well, who's really surprised?

It's 600p but still looks better than Left4Dead running on a high end PC.

But if this was Modern Warfare 3, then they'd be pulling a Valve using the same engine over and over again.

IW put a lot of effort into making the COD4 engine to run great on PS3, 360, and PC.

So at least this time, they can focus on other gameplay assets.

I just hope it's not COD4.5 though.

[pixelsword]

...who cares?

[Ballistic Jay]

I would like it alot if they could bump it up to 720p but i think it's worth it the way the game looks even now at (hopefully) 60fps. The resulting fluid and beautifully flowing game awesome in motion.

[jammy_70]

the price..... =/

[RussDeBuss]

so they obviousley havn't done any major works to the engine then, so how can they justify the price hike?

[omni_atlas]

Wow. PC MW2 FTW.

Seriously though, i have MW for my PS3, and I thought it was the **** until I played it on my computer with an ATI 4850.

Running at 1680x1050 is sweet crap,

Yes, you'll crao in your pants because it looks soooo good.

[evrfighter]

sucks for you console boys. I'm gonna be playin @ 1080p AAx8 AFx16 on my 40" and with this engine I already know I won't drop below 60fps on my pc :D

Don't worry I'll post screenshots when that time comes

[JokesOnYou]

It doesn't matter, I'm hearing alot about this game everybody I know is looking forward to this game more than any other game...they don't read n4g or beyond 3d forums, even if they did I'm sure they would laugh at those who count pixels and buy the damm game anyway. I know Iam.

JOY

[specialguest]

Boo-freakin-Hoo! to those who think 600p sucks. Last I checked, everyone loved COD4 and it was below 720p res. It wasn't until people found out that the res. was below 720p that they started making a big deal out of it.

[badz149]

I totally agree with you! they are using the exact same engine for CoD4 2 years ago with nearly no tweak what so ever and name it MW2, and then trying to raise the RRP of the game?? this is rip-off at its finest and I'm sad that there'll be a lot of gamers out there that will just bow to this decision by activision! the longer we are in the concole cycle, the games should be getting cheaper, not more expensive! I'm glad I'm not buying this and any other of their games from now on! and I hope a lot more people will boycott or just pirate this game instead of buying it! let activision sees the power of consumers!

[LoVeRSaMa]

Its due to pure laziness, I have no doubt the game will be fun, and I will end up spending months and months like its predecessor but its a shame they didn't make any graphical improvements, they had 2 years to make it after all.

[Timesplitter14]

I'd take 60fps any time before HD resolutions, but I hate Call of Duty

[JBaby343]

The price bothers me a lot more than the resolution.

[AAACE5]

In the past generations of gaming, we never really worried about 480p and 1080 p and such! But now gamers are so wrapped up in games being in "HD", that I wonder if alot of gamers really enjoy the games... or if they get more of a kick out of the graphics.

Every game can't be in 1080p and every game doesn't have to have ultra super graphics. Games are meant to provide entertainment! As long as the graphics look good, that's all that matters.

The HD generation has just gotten started, and it will take some time before we reach the point where all games reach this visual utopia that alot of gamers crave so badly!

But until then... Just enjoy what we have now!

[kwicksandz]

My Pc version will run at 1920 x 1080p at 125fps so im not worried =P

[edhe]

Actually you can tell the difference up to about 100 fps - it's just that 24fps is about the lowest you need for persistence of vision, which is what films rely on to avoid slideshows.

Honestly anyone that thinks that 30fps is all you can see needs a showroom telly demonstration.

[JsonHenry]

I would prefer a higher resolution myself so that the gun does not take up half of my screen.

Oh well, that is why I have a PC. 1920*1080 (NATIVE) at OVER 60fps and servers with more than just 16 people on them. The ONLY way to play the game.

[yippie1234y]

i much rather have 60 fps then maximum pixels any day. i mean who wants to drop to 20 fps just because an air strike is called in or a smoke grenade is thrown.

call of duty games are meant to be played competitively.

back in the counter-strike days i played in 800x600 with 100 fps. wasnt as pretty as 1280x1024 but i played better.

and MW2 still looks great anyway. filters ftw.

[Ju]

Funny how the COD fans justify that crap. Right, CRAP! WTH is wrong with you? If anybody else would pull off that stunt you guys would be all over them, but Infinity Ward ? No way. Those visuals are so sub standard. If they don't add 200% in MW2, I'll skip that (again). CoD4 looks pretty, but there is simply nothing going on on screen. Lack of debris, effects what not. World at war has the worst texture resolution I've ever seen (in a high profile game - ever look close to the ground texture when you were looking down ? WTH). Have fun with the (next) arcade shooter. Because that's what it is, nothing else. Enjoy 60fps. Well, not surprised there.

[vhero]

For extra cash compared to other games I want real 1080p! They want to charge more I want them to put out more!

[yippie1234y]

its not IW fault that xbox/ps3 are limited. when playing competitively 60 fps is bare MINIMUM. i turn resolution on PC shooters down as low as it goes and put AA and AF down to 2x so i can have 100 fps. its true that the diff between 200 fps and 300 is not noticeable but anything under 60 is crap.

I would say this about any game/developer so dont make this an IW fan thing. Thats just lame.

[Ju]

Maybe that matters for you, and maybe some people have this disorder to be able to react within 10ms (== 100fps), but I doubt thats the case for the majority. If an average gamer can pull the trigger within 25ms, that's already a huge achievement (40fps). 33ms for 30fps, 17ms for 60fps. Turn/raction speed and game design decisions factor in way more then the refresh rate of the visuals.

[yippie1234y]

im not talking about my reaction time to the game. i talking about what i see. i dont want to see choppiness in the games to the point where it feels like internet lag.

do yourself a favor and before you start giving statistical feedback about human reactions, go and play a shooter on your COMPUTER and cap the fps at 100. then cap it at 60 or 30 which ever you like. When you "SEE" the difference and realize it your perspective will change guaranteed. although i know you would never comeback here and admit it.

[edgeofblade]

Oh my god, we aren't getting our pixels worth. It's a conspiracy. They be stealing ma' pixels. We should be reimbursed for the pixels they took from us.

Seriously, you really are a moron of the highest order if you need everything to be certifiably HD before you can be satisfied with your purchase. Either you are or you aren't.

[Ju]

The 100fps don't give you any benefit if you can have 30fps sustained. The higher refresh rate just gives you head room that the worst case scenario does never drop below a certain threshold. Your eye recognizes every single "latency" (to a certain degree). That is minimized by a higher refresh rate - the exception is, if you can guarantee it never dips below that threshold anyway. Then the max frequency does not matter. And, especially on a PC that latency is always present, no matter how fast the game runs (not an embedded system, any background process or IRQ could trigger a frame skip).

[unknownhero1123]

That is whats wrong with gamers today. Yes graphics are important up to a point but gameplay is what should matter. If the gameplay isn't there then graphics mean diddly squat; Substance is the key word here.

anyways, MW2 will be great regardless of graphics.

[Roper316]

if it was any other game or dev everyone would be up in arms. But since it is the over rated COD & IW everything is ok. I don't want your game weather it is HD, low def or any other def because you are associated with Activision.

[snaz27]

and they are just milking the modern warfare name, even tho i didnt think cod4 was THAT great anyway, pretty average if you ask me... but cos so many people bought it, no matter what they do it will get a free pass... i havent bought any cod game this gen tho i played cod4, it was not enough to make me wanna buy it... and the fact they are associated with activision just tops it all off.

[sunil]

The lower resolution the better framerate. PC 101.
Games struggle to keep 30 fps when they run at 720 and 1080p. But when you reduce resolution, it will easily achieve that fps

[outlawlife]

cod4 is one of the most highly acclaimed games ever released, i'm trying to figure out how that is "just average"

if cod4 were average nobody would care about mw2, if it were average it would also mean most shooters are on the same level, of which they are not...few even get close

[badz149]

CoD4 was surrounded by a sky-high HYPE or superhype! it's a great game but hardly the best! it got great reviews but that didn't proof anything that it was the best, just like GTAIV! I've never seen a game got too many perfect scores before GTAIV yet I was hugely dissapointed with that game! CoD4 was generic! short! no co-op! CoD4.5 will not be any different! you can enjoy being ripped-off by acti but props for those who stands to go against them!

[Ju]

@outlife: "cod4 is one of the most highly overrated games ever released"

There, fixed it for you.

[deadreckoning666]

Didn't matter then and doesn't matter now. Just a testament to the fact that half the people who own 360s don't have HDTVs

[kewlkat007]

I don't think it's the superior graphics...

[vShinobi]

But thats XBL 360 games graphic wise are along par with the exception of a few, PS3 however has games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 that make MW2 graphics look bad, thats why im waiting for reviews before I purchase honestly it looks the same as COD4 and thats not a bad thing but if im spending money on a new game I expect improvement.

[SmokeyMcBear]

you would think with the same engine and previous game iterations.. that they would be able to up the resolution and get more pixels on the screen... especially for those of us rocking larger screens. But if bungie couldnt do it.. then I wouldnt expect infinty ward to.

[edhe]

They're adding more content, more game.

Not more pixels.

Hurrah!

[DelbertGrady]

Meaning PS3 owners won't be able to play it. Let's hope they release a 1080p patch so you guys can enjoy it like the rest of us gameplay>resolution gamers.

It's understandable though. Playing FPS games with a 10 year old controller design whose triggers makes you feel as if you have hoofs instead of hands leaves little joy to be had other than watching the pretty graphics.

[-MD-]

I must admit the triggers on the PS3 controller are pretty much the worst thing I've ever used.

[fossilfern]

While i will be able to play it at 1920x1200 on my PC and get over 60 frames :D

[shutupandplay]

"anybody got a mic?"

[DelbertGrady]

Unfortunately I have had sex with real live women so I don't own a PC gamer rig. C U @ virginCON!

@shutupandplay - What's a 'mic'? Only own a Hoofstation 3 and I've never heard of such a thing. What's it good for? Does it improve graphics?

[shutupandplay]

Well soda, it allows you to communicate with players remotely via internet. Great for teamwork or just talking to friends. If you have a cell phone, you can use that cute little headset as a mic!

[talltony]

5 dollar snap on real triggers from gamestop says high. Every ps3 owner should have them.

[edgeofblade]

Go get a pair of "Real Triggers" from Gamestop and stop bringing it up. Yes, the triggers are less than optimal... but that can be fixed.

[cyborg6971]

Soda bragging about having sex with a girl that happens to be a group of sheep is nothing to annouce in public. Nothing like getting trained by a bunch of sweaters. Remember baa always means yes.

Now stfu. Ot who cares about rez no one

[Man_of_the_year]

Really there are snap on's for the PS3 triggers...

I really was unaware of that...Kudos to you for informing me of this. Honestly i was unaware. +bubbles for you for being the first to mention this.

I was thinking of getting that converter thing that allows you to play 360 controller on the PS3 and vise versa but you just saved me some money. I will check that out at my Local EB.

http://www.ps3daily.co.uk/2...

Thanks again.

@cyborg6971 "Now stfu. Ot who cares about rez no one" - That's not true, you must be new to this site if you haven't seen a particular group down play the 360 since some of its high profile games don't run at 1080p or 1080i or 720p or 720i but around the 640 area.....*cough" Halo3 *cough* but to be fair it does run on 2 seperate frame buffers for some of the best lighting i have seen in a game to date.

[cyborg6971]

@man I the year. No I'm not new to the site and I know who all of the bots and droids are. What are you trying to warn me?

[solar]

this site is so funny. arguing over resolutions, graphics, ps3 is better! nu uh 360 is better! i saw an extra texture!!

you kiddies run your MW2 at 600p. the big boys will play at 1920x1200.

[talltony]

Yea they are made by Giotech I think. All my controllers have them. Def worth 5 bucks, they also extend the L2 and R2 buttons a little so they make the controller a little bigger.

Really you can only use them for cod though cause that is like the only FPS that supports L2 aim and R2 shoot.

[SmokingMonkey]

you say your a "enjoy it like the rest of us gameplay>resolution gamers."

yet you have a Ghostbusters 360 version FTW avatar because Ghostbusters on the 360 had better resolution?!

Oh and the fact that you brought up the DS3 triggers in a "CODMW2 runs @ sub-720" is priceless. Upset about something I think, maybe Halo3odst running at sub-720 and being the 360 top exclusive is pretty lame....or maybe the fact that you can't say delaystation anymore because of Splinter Cell? Stop trolling Soda, your not good at it.

[likedamaster]

@Solar

"you kiddies run your MW2 at 600p. the big boys will play at 1920x1200"

As many years as I've had my 1200 res Sammy monitor, I still prefer playing on my Flatscreen. 1200 res is impressive no doubt but my eyes feel better when I play on my tv.

@Talltony

Yeah, I was pretty upset when the likes of Uncharted, MGS4, etc. set the aim & trigger buttons to L1 & R1. As much as I personally like the Dual Shock controllers, I'll never play another shooter with it. I'll have to make an exception with Uncharted 2, though.

[DelbertGrady]

Wrong. The 360 version of Ghostbusters has better everything. Textures, framerates, loading etc.

Anyways, when is Gran CGIsmo Forever coming out? I think it won't be out until Forza is at 5 as well lol!

Halo ODST will be bigger than any PS3 exclusive this holiday. Look at Halo 3's install base and think about it. Personally I consider Forza 3 the biggest exclusive. L4D2 will be great as well. Don't know about Magnacarta 2 and Risen. Meh. Then there's Shadow Complex and a barrage of other great looking XBLA titles. And Fallout 3 + GTA IV DLC.

Enjoy Unsharted 2. It's all you have for the rest of the year.

[SmokingMonkey]

great reply, I love how you forget to mention Sixaxis control for Ghostbusters, it's interesting on the PS3 you should try it. It makes the gameplay more enjoyable. My guess is you're going to be changing that dumb pic pretty soon because no one except you and me care about Ghostbusters.

I'm also buying Demon's Soul. I'll enjoy that and Katamari Forever, MW2 and maybe one or two others.

I don't hate dude, I'm just not a hypocrite is all.

Enjoy Halo3.

[Man_of_the_year]

Why would you bother asking "No I'm not new to the site and I know who all of the bots and droids are. What are you trying to warn me?" after you just wrote "Now stfu. Ot who cares about rez no one "?

You say "No One" in your question. Well that is wrong. You are wrong. There are plenty that feel resolution is very important and make a big fuss over it. I can agree to an extent if resolution is sub HD in games. Why are we buying $300 - $600 gaming consoles and $1200 - $5000 HDTV's to play sub HD games?

I am not warning your cyborg6971, i am just clearly pointing out your ignorance to everyone on this site. =P

@TallTony - Thanks for the insight. I will be looking into getting those at my local EB.

[bennyace]

Most of the lcd or plasma full hd screens can't keep a full hd resolution (1080P) depending on what it has to display. Meaning that the resolution drop dramatically. So even if the game was running in full hd that's not the resolution you would have on screen.

[cyborg6971]

The peeps b!tching about the rez are probably the same turds who can't tell the difference between 600p and 720p can you? I doubt it I doubt you'd be able to find more than a handful of peeps on this site that could.

[goflyakite]

"Unfortunately I have had sex with real live women"

Funniest thing I've heard all day, you'd have to first get off N4G to have sex soda.

[Gue1]

bragging about having sex with a girl = pathetic virgin

[swiftshot93]

I dont want to hear any sh1t about this being sub-HD. Its the smoothest running FPS there is running at 60 FPS.

[CryofSilence]

Ermm.... Several people have upped their PC FPSes to run at up around 250 FPS. They did the same with COD4 on PC too, I believe.

[WaitStation 3]

C'mon. Even you know that's overkill. I run Halo 2 on PC @almost 300fps -- it does not make me a better shooter. 60fps is the sweetspot 90 is the best especially for twitch shooters. 30fps is pushing it but still very much playable, e.g. Killzone 2, Halo, Gears, etc.

[evrfighter]

with my upgraded pc Im now one of them but nobody will ever see that on an lcd.

because of current lcd limitations 75fps is all they'll ever see. However that's no longer true with the recent introduction of 120hz monitors.

So in the next-gen, 120fps will be what I will be gaming at. TBH I don't think console gamers would be able to tell. There's a HUGE difference between 60-100+fps, a night and day difference. Old school pc gamers back when crt was king know what I'm talking about.

[RustInPeace]

I just want to know, since TVs now top at 1080 i/p, why is everything being rendered at a lower res? If it's advertised that a game is presented at 720p/1080i/p, then that should be what it is and not something WAAAY lower. I understand if it takes up more storage space on disk, but is there any other reasons for it? Why are these new games coming out under 720p/1080i? And on top of that, who are these people that keep spouting these tidbits of resolutions, and how are they even able to figure it out? I know the whole ??x?? thing, but just staring at my own TV (40" 1080p Insignia) I can't figure that out. How do these people "find"/figure out the missing pixels/ sub-HD quality?

[CryofSilence]

It's more pixels than you realize. It takes alot more muscle (and manipulation of the machine) to render that many more.

[Poopface the 2nd]

but they would have to sacrifice other things. They found a balance and lowered the res to upgrade something else, like textures, # of polys and framerate, maybe AI(doubt it tho).

The simpler the game is the easier it will be to have in a higher native rez.

The machines are capable, but its not often that a game is over 720p native. There are some, but most aim for 720p native. some dont get it, some are more.

the rez of a game doesnt have anything to do with disk space.

also rez is one of the biggest factors in performance. A small decrease to rez, can do alot for the other grfx features.

[Ju]

There are quite some games out now who render way more details then CoD4 did, and run full 720p (or even higher), most 30fps, though. But that's no excuse. 60fps is not a requirement for a shooter (UT3 is one of the fastest shooters - faster then CoD - and runs 30fps butter smooth). This is a stupid excuse.

[Poopface the 2nd]

I didnt state any opinion there, so I dont get it.

If you think disk space has to do with rez then I feel bad for you(hint: tahts only for movies)

[skwidd]

thats not even 720p?! Well, like above, glad they have 60fps. It better be solid though cuz thats what makes COD so great; gameplay.

[PirateThom]

I like how it's a higher RRP than other games, but can't even run in HD.

[Vicophine]

LOL true that.

[vickers500]

Well, to tell you the truth, I think Infinity Ward figured out that people would rather have good graphics with an amazing framerate than great graphics with a framerate that dips below 30fps quite frequently. I'll let you guess which game I'm talking about.

[RustInPeace]

@ Vickers
.....Killzone 2?

[Vicophine]

Eh, just like COD4, seems I was right, MW2 will be just a slight improvement, if any, over the orignal MW.. :/

[Bigbangbing]

a true 720p with a 30FPS or 600p with 60FPS hmmmm...

[edgeofblade]

Take the framerate over graphic fidelity any day.

[ShabzS]

same .... it has to run smooth before it looks even half as good as what mw 2 looks right now...

Edit@ below : funny you should mention that.. only after reading the article i realised that the first one was sub hd as well ... didnt notice any differences on my 32 " before this ...

[siyrobbo]

the thing is, would anybody really be able to tell the difference between 720p and 600p? i know i probably wouldnt, and i'd rather have more detail and a lower res than low detail in a higher res.

[Wisewind]

I would have to go with the performance (60 FPS). Performance will always enhance gameplay which is the heart of any good video game.

[ShabzS]

woah it still looks good ... 60 fps man ... thats the key

[Qdog]

However, I must say that it's hard to Bargle nawdle zouse, with all these marbles in my mouth...hahaha, just kidding, though I agree that those with a higher level of articulation and understanding as well as those with multiple accounts, tend to have more bubbles....Maybe it's just a coincedence though.

[Funky Town_TX]

Say it ain't so. We are so caught up in specs now that it's sad.

[gamingisnotacrime]

After spending money on tv, console and game one can see the importance of getting what is being paid for. A $60 tag should guarantee quality. Suit yourself

[edgeofblade]

If you think you are "paying" for standards, you really missed the point. Do you also complain that your cereal "may have settled during shipment"?

[DaTruth]

Actually yes! If my burger comes without pickles and I ordered them, I will send it back! Who wouldn't? Especially for $60!

And I don't care about the res of this game, because I'm not buying it! But if I was I still wouldn't care!

[Ballistic Jay]

really i mean since when is graphical capability more important than gameplay?

[Poopface the 2nd]

they would miss out on alot of games. The resolution is the only thing that the HD consoles had to upgrade(over last gen) to show these games.

Im sure its better how it is then if they had a 720p game with other features downgraded.

[Unicron]

Disappointing, but if it means 60fps, so be it.

[gamingisnotacrime]

Why pay the same price for a sub quality game. Starting to wonder what improvements are being made over CoD4 (which i liked)
Rental for me

[DaTruth]

Actually, in UK they are paying more for this game. Also in Canada we pay more depending on how our currency is stacking up to the USD.

[raztad]

600p? BIG FAIL, it will look like poo on my 1080p capable TV. 60fps? why does it need it? is COD a racing game?

I think COd:MW2 is not up to current standards, technically inferior game with twitchy gameplay. Passing on this one easily. Looking forward to MAG.

[Fishy Fingers]

COD4 didnt look poo on my 50" 1080p TV. Dont see why this would. I imagine they use a low res to keep the 60FPS, which I'd personally prefer over a few pixels.

[Bigbangbing]

I think 60fps is most important in fighting games.. and if you play PC FPS games you'll know the difference and "why does it need it"

and for the "it will look like poo on my 1080p capable TV" did Halo 3 and MGS4 and GT5P demo (1280x1080 is not a true 1080p) and COD5 and COD4 looked like poo on your BIG 1080p TV? all of them had a sub HD res.. I'm pretty sure it's just something psychologically and if you didn't read this article you'll be enjoying COD:MW2 thinking that it's running at Native 1080p.

sorry for my bad Enrish and the Typos :P

[pixelsword]

GT5P isn't sub-HD; anything below 720p qualifies as sub-HD.

[Bigbangbing]

@pixelsword

I didn't meant GT5P by saying sub HD, I said "(1280x1080 is not a true 1080p)", I assumed that he wants a 1080p games, if he wants a consoles games that runs at true 1080p then he'll be forced to play a downloadable ones, such as Super stardust HD and WipeOut HD.

[Motion]

600P= 1024x600 = 614,400px
1080p 1920x1080 = 2,073,600px

I don't know about you, but I consider 1,459,200px a bit more than a few. Each to their own though.

[Raoh]

Its a combination of both at the end of the day. and if you can pull both off the better.

not so great graphics and great framerate on a fast action game? acceptable. (COD series)

not so great graphics and a terrible framerate on a fast action game?? not acceptable. (Damnation)

great graphics and great framerate on a fast action game? Ideal (killzone 2)

[Ninji]

This game could've been done on last gen systems (and in some cases it is since it will be appearing on the 360). I guess they added those cheap quality NVGs to try and make up for their sub-HD game. I don't see why this game isn't on the Wii as I'm sure the Wii would be able to handle it too.

[DelbertGrady]

Maybe you should skip it and wait for the solid AAA title MAG instead? If that ain't a bag of sh!t with turd written all over it I don't know what is.

Maybe you should try playing COD with a proper controller suited for 3D games and mic compability? That way you might see what all the fuzz is about. Can't blame you for not liking it when playing it on the Dismaystation.

[TheMART]

You're badly informed.

As the Wii can do 480p at highest a game @ 600p is impossible. Wii just gets the shiatware, no great games.

[RockmanII7]

Super Smash Bros. Brawl owns, Mario Kart Wii, Animal Crossing, and New Super Mario Bros are all awesome.

[dawgsfan117]

Nothing you said was either correct or informative in anyway shape or form. I own a PS3 and 360 but ill be getting MW2 (which will have the best online play this year) on my 360 because people on tht system actually have mics and its got a better online setup.

[Hoolock]

@SODA. Your really hunting for those disagree's on this article, jesus stop bad mouthing the PS3, it aint like the 360 has no problems.

[criticalkare]

Don't care just release the game already :)

[dorron]

If this news was about any other game being 600p people would have burnt the developers in hell...

[PLAYSTATIONGENRATION]

prolly a comprise for more content on the disc....lower the res more game..ill be happy plying it on my 360

[Ve3tro]

Is this all being based on the YouTube video? If so you can't justify a games resolution on a video which has been compressed.

[timestoby]

i wouldnt care ither,but it is supposed to be hd. and isnt that wrong advertisement. next,can we get rid of jaggies lol. id rather have jaggie free edges then some fancey lighting

[oneDMAC]

I love how the same people who rave about COD4 looking fantastic are complaining that MW2 will be rendered at 600p. News flash COD4 also runs at 600p and wait for it..........Halo 3 ran around the same. Please quit crying. If the game plays great and looks good who really cares?

[PLAYINB3YOND]

i'll forgive it for the sub-HD, but if I get even a whiff of a "connection interrupted host left the game" i'm trading it in, we shouldn't be subjected to that in any game let alone one of this calibre.

[Pandamobile]

I'll be playing COD:MW2 at 2560 x 1600 at like 90 FPS. Booyah

[Halo3 MLG Pro]

Your the PC gamer, right? You do know that resolution is pointless.

[Pandamobile]

How is it pointless?

[Halo3 MLG Pro]

Well unless your using a 80 inch monitor, your eyes can't tell the difference.

[perseus]

Incorrect. Especially for a PC user, higher resolutions make a big difference. The distance from the screen determines what resolution your eyes can resolve.

http://carltonbale.com/2006...

[Pandamobile]

I sit about 2 feet from my 30" monitor. The screen envelopes all of my vision except my peripherals.

So yeah, 2560 x 1600 is not useless.

It's all about the amount of pixels you cram into a given amount of space. A PC 24" monitor at 1920 x 1080 will look a lot better than a 60" TV at the same resolution.

[evrfighter]

looks like you pissed off the console gamer lol.

However you won't be seeing any fps past your refresh rate. For me sadly that's only 75fps :(.

[Pandamobile]

Seeing is different from feeling. My monitor may only be 60 hz, and the game's running at 90, but my mouse has a track rate of I think a couple thousand FPS. Which translates into smoother mouse action at higher FPS even if your eyes can't tell the difference.

[Halo3 MLG Pro]

Actually you might be right. I forgot PC gamers play with their face pretty much glued to the screen so that might make a difference.

[1ikedamaster]

720p to 1080p with a small screen is unnoticeable. But 1080p to 1200p or even 1600? Yeah, major difference there buddy. It could be the smallest of screens, there is a difference.

I'm currently using a 24" 1920x1200 native screen and it bothers my eyes until I turn down the res on my games. After years my eyes still aren't used to it.

[Troll_Police]

If this was Killzone 2 it would be Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!! Suck it PS3 fanboys!!!!!!

[siyrobbo]

MGS4 should have been your example, as that game renders at an even lower resolution, and yet looks so so good

[edgeofblade]

If this were Microsoft, it would be "HAHHHAHHAHH, Gaylo."

[Troll_Police]

Killzone 2 got blasted for not having co-op but MW2 gets a pass.

[Bigbangbing]

if killzone 2 runs at 60fps I wouldn't mind playing it at 540p :P

[raztad]

@nbnt

Why KZ2 should run at 60fps? It plays damn well and smooth at 30fps as most shooters.

@nbnt bellow

That is my point, lower resolution sure impact the visual fidelity. Why would you like to run it at lower res and faster framerate?

Agree about PC being the better version, IF textures are really high res/better AA, anything else is like to run the same game but with with higher resolution.

[Bigbangbing]

@raztad

who said it should? killzone 2 runs smooth most of the time at 30fps, 30fps is smooth but 60fps is smoother, if I can play killzone 2 at 60fps then hell, I wouldn't care if it 600p or 720p

if you have a good PC why don't you download CoD4 demo and lock the Frames at 30fps, then play the demo again but this time try it at 60fps or even more..

anyway I'll likely get CoD:MW2 PC ver, since I can run it better than the consoles.

[evrfighter]

30 fps is crap for first person shooters and racing games.

For rpg's and 3rd person shooters it gets a pass.

[Ju]

That's funny. Now all of a sudden 60fps is a must for shooters while 99.9% run 30fps and we didn't complain. Interesting.

[evrfighter]

"Now all of a sudden 60fps is a must for shooters "

for you console gamers maybe...

60fps avg has been a must for me since counterstrike

[bym051d]

That's 1p / $.

[mittwaffen]

Thats why you buy games for PC.

1080P (1920X1080)

Beats consoles ugly look big time.

[NaiNaiNai]

Resolution and graphics are 2 entirely different things. TT^TT sad how stupid the gaming community is these days.

[tripewire]

your comment fails on about 13 different levels. Go play crisis at the lowest rez and tell me it doesnt influence your impression of the graphics.

[NaiNaiNai]

yet again let me explain it again. You could watch advent children in SD and then again in HD 1080p they were done with the same graphics just a different Res.

As well for crysis, if you run it on a 19" screen at its max setting, it will look good, along with if you run it on a 30" screen at its max setting it will look good. just because your raise the Res doesn't mean your raising the graphics of the game. just the image size its displayed at. go back and play any old PC shooter like unreal, raise the Res to its max, the game still has the same number of polys as before.

stop living in this fanboy world, and realize the truth.

[1ikedamaster]

Correct in that assertion.

-nai-

[TheMART]

Doesn't matter to me as COD4 looked badass on 600p. Infinity Ward knows how to work sub HD reso's and still look insanely great.

And it was expected seen it uses the COD4 engine on steroids. Its made to work on 600p...

But PS3 fans won't play this game as its not 720p. At least thats what I always hear them saying about Halo 3. But whats up with GTAIV on the PS3 then on 640p?

[felidae]

yeah, unlike Bungie .. they don't know how to work sub HD resolutions!!

[TheTruth89]

Only on "DVD CAPABLE 360°C MINI-FURNACE" with an integrated "Wustel Grill"

[Gun_Senshi]

I don't care. I will play this game at over 2000p with 100+ FPS.

PC FTW!

[Pandamobile]

Unfortunately, 2000p monitors don't exist.

[1ikedamaster]

LOL. He probably meant 1200 or something. Max for consumers right now is 1600.

[keysy420]

this drives me crazy how the controller is a issue. this has never been a issue on the ps1 ps2 but now the same controller that has been being used for years is a problem. i was talking to my guy on the phone today and i pointed out that its inhis head and he sound like a idiot. i told him when we played ps1 and ps2 their was never a controller issue but now theirs a issue.please a bunch of garbage. the trigger button on the bottom arent usually used for shooter anyway its usually the r1 button.

[TheMART]

Uh no... The controller also wasn't optimal on the PS2. It gives pain in the hands if you're not a 6 year old with small hands. If you're a grown up the controller is painful playing it for some time. The analog sticks aren't optimal, the 360 asymmetrical ones are much more ergonomically. And the R1 and R2/trigger feel sh!tty cheap.

WHat is said, is that Sony didn't innovate the old controller at all because they had to dump the stupid banana shape controller and use the PS2 one.

[shutupandplay]

3 ps2 controllers, 12 crappy jammed up triggers, and plastic chunks loose inside my controllers AND same design for the "next gen". Too bad ps2 got all my playtime last gen, I had to suffer with cheap controllers. Different story this gen, I get the most comfortable controller ever and the most playtime out of any console I`ve ever owned with my 360.

[Traveler]

Who cares how long the controllers have been around? I am looking at the controllers as they are now and I like the PS3's controller better.

The offset analogue sticks does nothing for me, it makes no difference at all. I play on both consoles and I have never seen any advantage to the offset sticks. Either position works the same once you adjust to it.

The big difference is that the DualShock3's analogue sticks are more precise and have less dead space.

The 360's controller does have better triggers, but the triggers aren't the fire button in most PS3 shooters. You can also buy the RealTriggers for the PS3's controller that make it a moot point.

I don't care what anybody says, I get more cramping with the 360's controller than the PS3's. Part of the reason is that the way you hold the Dualshock3 is that it is kind of resting in your hand and your grip naturally shifts around a bit as you play. The 360's controller, on the other hand, has a design that tends to make you hold it in only one way, which causes more hand fatigue over extended periods of time.

[talltony]

@ traveler
Everything they are saying about the dual shock 3 is lies. You know its like sales, they have to look very hard for things to pick on the ps3 about.

And to all you idiots that just dont like the L2 and R2 buttons on the dual shock 3 please go out and spend 5 dollars at your local gamestop for ps3 "real triggers". PROBLEM SOLVED!

And to all you other idiots calling the dual shock 3 cheaply constructed please ask yourselves how many 360 controllers have you had? How many with loose worne out joysticks? I have had 3 messed up 360 controllers just from playing games. The dual shock 3 is much more durable and can take a normal gaming beating no problem. Which is more than what I can say for the 360 controller.

[Deathmammoth]

Real gamers don't care about resolution, they care about gameplay and overall quality which Modern Warfare 2 looks to have. So I will buy either way.

[ballsofsteel]

i don't really care about resolution but i was hoping for more of an improvement on COD4's graphics. they were decent for 07 but considering how great games like gear, uncharted, and killzone 2 look like i was hoping MW2 would look a little bit better. no that big of a deal to me as MW2 will own gameplay wise

[Yomiro]

I thought we were on the HD gaming generation

[Nihilism]

apparently not, whats that sony and microsoft?, 1080p standard you say....LIARS!

[rsbrage]

That sucks, but its still going to be fun to play. I wonder whats stopping them to just make it 720p? I don't think frame rate issues would be the problem?

[free3sixty]

BEcause of the PS3s bad hardware the game must run on 600p to look equal on both systems:/.

Damn, why des the PSrd always needs 3 years dev time for a game to look good.

[Traveler]

What's Halo 3's excuse for running at a sub-HD resolution then? There is no PS3 version of Halo 3.

Quit using the PS3 as a scapegoat.

[cyborg6971]

@free like you know how to code or programm for either system. . Your a tardtastic excuse for a subhuman.

[edgeofblade]

Same reason COD4 and MW2 did it: Only pixel counters and fanboys looking for an edge care.

PS3 fanboys are the worst offenders, thanks to the "true HD" claims. It's just 1080p. Nothing special about it.

[cyborg6971]

I have no problem with either controller why is this even being discussed? Stupid fanbois on both sides your all idiots. The rez is the same as the last one which is fine with me.

[Hoolock]

Someone with some sense on these forums. Why is everything a fanboy war with you people. Sometimes i really lose faith in the gaming community.

[Ninjamonkey82]

Some people have confused the HD era with Ture HD consoles. The movies that will play on PS3 and Xbox they will be HD but consoles are still along way of having games like COD running at the full 1080p proper resultion. It takes a beast of a PC to do that and thats what console has to push towards.

[slimy the g8ter]

lol 360 idiots have low resolution.the pc kings play the highest,and the cosole fans always say that getting a good pc is hard

[Tr10wn]

is not hard but if you spent 3000$ on a PC well that's you.

[RockmanII7]

Enjoy the price hike

[Pandamobile]

My $700 PC from 3 years ago plays COD4 at 1680 x 1050 at 60 FPS.

Your argument is invalid.

[Tr10wn]

Erm link your rig and some screens? because 3 years ago the only thing i can remember is 7900 or 7600 thats pretty old and my friend got an i7, 8600 gts and 4gb of ram and his game is runny at 45-50fps high of course

[Gamer_Politics]

i dont care about all that just bring us some more of those beautiful gameplay videos

[hesido]

Any time of the day.. The motion feels much more natural at 60fps.

[Ve3tro]

Lol at the tool who Disagree'd with my previous comment, go outside.

[tordavis]

600p is not sub-HD. Anything higher than 525 lines of resolution is considered High Definition.

[Pandamobile]

"High-Definition" is defined as anything higher than 1280 x 720.

[tripewire]

Sorry bud. I think thats technically "Enhanced Definition"

Still, the biggest jump in quality happens between SD and ED. ED to HD isnt that noticable on alot of TV's, hence why alot of people say they cant tell the difference.

[FadeToBlack]

Resolution is important especially for people with larger HDTV's. I know I for one can definatly notice on my 46" TV. For example when i used to play my Wii it looked absolutly horrible even when using the component cables at 480p resolution. I can also notice a substantial difference between a 720p broadcast on Directv and a 1080i or 1080p source. So just beacause you dont have a TV capable of you noticing the differences in resolution, please dont tell everyone else that it doesent matter because its simply not true.

Note: There is no excuse why such a high profile developer and publisher cannot get this game at least running properly at 720p on either console.

[RustInPeace]

Damn straight. For such a "great dev team", they sure are not putting all their effort into every aspect. And don't give me "I'd rather have higher framerate and low res" because you all damn well know if something came out in this time period that looked like anything from the Atari or NES era, but played smooth, you (myself included) would most likely hate its existance.

[Athlon]

I'm surprised they still went this route with 600P, especially considering the uproar about a year ago when it was found out that the first modern warfare was also 600P. They had to come out and defend it then. Did they not think of that when developing this game?

[cmrbe]

this fits well with the bots since their console is a sub par HD console. Now watch them defend MWF2 like its a x360 exclusive because they don't have any games left this year.

[cmrbe]

i thought this was suppose to be a HD gaming era.

[HappyTrigger]

Hmmmmm....... Good times.

[maverick1191]

dont care will still buy

[JonnyBigBoss]

Looks good either way, despite being a yearly game...

[maverick1191]

jeez look at soda and mart going into fanboy overdrive they couldn't be anymore biased on ps3.

The controller is crap and small *cry* it doesn't hurt your hands i've played for a good 6 hours+ and had no pain what so ever maybe you have deformed hands and the triggers are fine better than those cheap 360 ones you can hack and make shooting faster.

Everyone has there preferred controller imo 360's controller felt too big in my hands the ps3 one is abit small but fits right for me but why should you care its at 600p the game will sell and you'll still buy it without knowing its in 600p

and soda stop b1tching about ps3 games we have much more ps3 games this year coming out than 360 and exclusive you seem a bit jealous tbh

yes halo ODST will probably sell more than most ps3 games as the install base is huge they are even doing halo ODST posters now bungie are milking halo, grapics and gameplay wise halo wont beat a good exclusive like U2 halo lives off rep thats it and thats a fact as when up against PS2/3 games it never beats them ps2/3 games win the awards

[Hoolock]

The fanboy flame war above is pathetic from both the PS3 and Xbox side but dont insult a great game like Halo. Graphically it wont beat PS3's lineup this year but it sure as hell can fight back with the gameplay, 2 years on and still going strong, there are very few titles that can say that on console.

Plus dont take awards as a major indicator of a games success, game awards are just as political as film awards. Honestly who felt slumdog should of had the praise it recieved.

[jalen247]

And people where saying that the graphics were going to challenge Killzone 2. This game still isn't 720p...this is crazy. What has Infinitey Ward been doing over these 2 years or treyarch for that matter? They don't want to improve the resolution of the engine or what. The frame rate shouldn't be an issue too because there are plenty of games that run at 720/60fps and look damn good.

[outlawlife]

actually there aren't that many that run at 60fps at 720p

[Ju]

Resistance 2 (R&C if you want - same engine).

[alaris]

I'll be enjoying MW2 at 1200p on my PC! :D

[SixAmpFuze]

MW1 looked and played great on ym hd tv and MW2 will look a lil better and play a lil better . Im happy

[no_more_trolling]

let the cod hate begin

[baraka007]

I have all the COD games on PC and i'll be picking this one up on PC as well... If you want really high res you shouldn't be playing on a console.

[ChickeyCantor]

I thought it said 600FPS, But in the end its still as trivial.

[Hot_tea]

FACT
Game plays better, responds better, is better.
Too many modern gen games have crap frame rate. (30fps) And even with that, they have tearing or slowdown.
I salute IW for going for 100% smooth. Just like Nintendo used to do, that's what made their games great to play.

[cmacdonald]

This blows. IW get your crap together and make a HD game.

[Pandamobile]

Its not their fault the 360 and PS3's GPU's aren't up to modern standards. The game looks great on anything better than a 7800 GTX or whatever GPU the consoles have.

[cmacdonald]

Are you saying the ps3 and 360 can't do 720p games?

[deshon09]

with this mw1 did not disappoint mw2 will not ether

[Saaking]

Graphics do matter a lot. In my opinion it's like 2/3 gameplay 1/3 graphics. If the graphics aren't that good, but the gameplay is then you'll probably play it through. If the graphics are amazing but the gameplay sucks you probably won't. Still, graphics are a very important part of the gaming experience. If all you care about is gameplay buy a wii. HD consoles are SUPPOSED to have great graphics (otherwise why would you upgrade from PS2 to PS3 or Xbox to 360).

[PS360PCROCKS]

so? 2 best selling games this gen are sub HD resolutions. Lol COD-600P and Halo 3-640P= 15 million in sales?

[silverchode]

idc it will still be more fun than other fps games out.

[samfk]

both wud b better ,sumtimes happens 2 wahoo!the fools who said graphics ova gameplay please! ok u go on a crap. game that looks good and is unplayable, gs,ha well cant force common sense on people.;)?

[PS360PCROCKS]

huh? x2 above and below me? English please.

[samfk]

i got next gen consoles cough n funilly enuf i want gud gameplay,graphics r sweet but u just want pretty go the cinema!

[pshizle]

Halo3 640p

[Hudahudahuda]

I won't be getting it.

[tripewire]

Im gonna say it.

KILLZONE 2

If graphics dont matter, why upgrade from a ps2, why buy a HDTV?

Yeah.

Thought so.

MW2 is still gonna be great, no doubt, but come on. Can we stop the "ps3 fails" news articles? Cell is obviously doing something right if, with such an "obsolete" graphics card it can pull off something like KZ2 HALF A YEAR AGO which is so far beyond anything its main competitor can achieve.

PS3. Just buy one and grow the f*** up.

[StankyChicken]

I honestly do not see what the big deal about this is. We never complained about cod4 having bad graphics, so why are we all of a sudden bashing modern warfare 2's graphics, when it looks amazing in the trailers.

[Digitaldude]

Rather disappointing.

If it was exclusive it could have run better on either.

[COMMANDOBLACK]

So your telling me that with all that money they made off of all of those games including CODMW and a few of their other top games. They couldn't have invested in making another game engine just for this game.
That could of ran it at a higher resolutions, including pushing out 60 frames per second or better. Yes the "GAMEPLAY" looks good and I'm going to get it "JUST FOR MP", but I do think that this game was intended for DLC first before it got bigger than expected. I believe it started out as DLC and received a good amount of content in it and then it had gotten switched into a full game.(in my opinion which I think is highly likely) That to me would explain the reason for the same old engine, and the news where they say they found out how to make the maps bigger I don't buy that. The SP boards were set up as linear paths with leg room, to follow the story like GRAW, all so common. But who's to say what justifies a full games price? Only the people who buy it and supports it. To make a long story short. I think the author was trying to point out, we are paying for something less than what was suppose to be a standard. Pushing the game for the best look and gameplay. Why can't you go 1080p? I thought both systems were strong enough to push out hi res with good frame rate? Gameplay is not the only reason we picked up a 360 or a PS3. Some games companies are putting out a lot of games that could as well be put on a regular xbox and ps2. So why are we still paying 64 dollars for a games then if they are not of standard, HI DEF STANDARD! So as long as we keep paying for sub par games the more they will keep re skinning old tech and selling it to us. So when something new comes out that they've had already, they will charge us even more for it. The new generation of console games were all supposed to be in ground breaking CONSOLE visuals, with fast processing power, and better multi player ability. What happened to the push for true HD 1080P in gaming. Was that not one of the BIGGEST reasons and the biggest selling point of each system HYPE? Now look what your saying! It'S going to plays well so I don't care, then why the 300 to 400 dollar up grade from a system and games that played well too? JUST MY OPINION but think about it what your paying for. Then at that I have all the systems and a 3,100 dollar pc I play everything on max on at 1920x1200. But I think it still matters, only because of what they are doing is sub par, if it did't start out DLC and still charging full price.

[PS360PCROCKS]

"High res game pushing out 60FPS or more"

You're kidding me right? Why in gods name would a company take up precious resources to get over 60FPS on a console?

This engine was developed for MW1, you really think within two years they would make another? They tweaked and added (semi) destructible environments and a few other things. It looks better, why complain?

It was most likely NOT DLC, that's completely stupid, this game has been in development for 2 years now.

This game is NOT sub par because the resolution is not 720P/1080P standard. The 360 can upscale to 720p/1080p natively with no issues. The PS3, who knows what it will do, I'm sure it downscales if you're running a 1080i set. Than upscales to 720p/1080p but it's not native like the xbox 360.

Besides the game is graphically beautiful, technically awesome and artistically well done as well. The amount of pixels affects nothing.

two more things, NO ONE would have known or noticed this if this was never a story. Why does it matter now?

Sony was the only company to claim 1080p gaming. Microsoft said countless times "720p is the sweet spot" and only added 1080p to shut Sony up.

[crillyconlig]

sony said 1080p was a target, the cod engine is the same one used for cod2 but updated....

[FadeToBlack]

So by your logic a 480p source thats upscaled to 1080p will somehow look like 1080p? lol please...

[Ju]

"This engine was developed for MW1, you really think within two years they would make another? "

Yes, I would. With that sh!tload of money they made out of CoD4, they could have split the teams for each platform, started to separate code out and optimize a version for each, making it quasi exclusive per platform. Yes, they could have done that within 2 years. They didn't start from scratch, they have experienced developers, they could build on that foundation. But why bother ? Right ? It'll sell anyway. Profit maximization. That's what it is.

[PS360PCROCKS]

Bullsh*t. Don't tell me what I already know to be true. Sony spent an entire year claiming dominance and "TRUE HD 1080P GAMES!!" and Microsoft said "possible not plausible" and Sony went as far as to make a few at launch to show off. Than Microsoft added HDMI and shoved it back in their face.

fade to black - I don't know what the hell your comment is in reference too. I'm pretty sure nobody said anything about 480P being 1080P. The PS3 can only output in 480p, 720p and 1080p. If your TV is only 1080i you play in 480p. If it's 720p all games will play in 720p and 1080P is downscaled. If your TV is 1080p, than all your games are 720P unless its the rare 1080P game. The PS3 CANNOT upscale anything. It will take 600p in the case here and make it 720P but it doesn't add any pixels whatsoever. Hell you can run it in 1080p but it adds no pixels and nothing to the picture.

and the last dude- Right ok, by your logic than we should be seeing new engines from EVERY developer soon. Hell I guess Guerrilla is working on a new one right now? right? I mean I guess the one game and than a new engine is how it's done? You're very stupid if you think your seeing anything new soon. Hell look at Valves games, and your complaining about IW?

[RustInPeace]

@ above
If the PS3 can't upscale anything, then why, on my 1080p TV, does the res change with almost every game? MW is displayed at 1080p on my tv (even if that is not what the actual res is...600p), so is W@W, and MGS4, whereas most other games change to 720p when that's all the game supports. Now, tell me again how/why the PS3 can't upscale...?

[COMMANDOBLACK]

Trust me the first thing I look at is how it looks compared to the old one. Second two years to make the full game yes. Answer this question for me, how many updates did this CODMW get? ONE! Even COD2 received more updates than that. They are big on DLC why the hault of content with one their biggest games then? So thats why I THOUGHT it might have been DLC at first. 3 I do believe the game looks good but not good enough NOW for the home systems. 4 they are doing ok with what I've seen so far GAMEPLAY wise for MP. And like I said again I want it only for MP really. I have the game for PC and the 360 and since I bought the PC version I have only been on the 360 version really once out of a year and a half. Need I must say it looks better on there, plays better, has a lean button, and the games operated a lot smoother on the PC version.

[nice_cuppa]

auto scaled to 1080p !
Nice.
Gotta love 360 !

[mebob]

PC version for me

Gotta love max graphics,free map packs and Free online :D

[ULTIMATE_REVENGE]

This game doesn't even deserve too be run a 480i because the game looks so rubbish just like COD4. I sent it back to store in 1 month because the Online was easy as anything and the campaign sucked so bad.

People were always bashing KZ2's online when in actual fact KZ2's online is much harder then COD4's hence why mostly the bots will bash KZ2 because it's not easy.

Bunch of sissys.

[Digital Commando]

WaW ran a 600p too, that game looked good so why is everyone complaining? Oh yeah because it isn't Killzone 2.........

[crillyconlig]

you should clear a level then go for a walk back through with no enimies distractign you, the game looks terrible, i have a big tv and bad looking games show

[Ju]

WAW is awful. Haven't bought it. For a reason. Got the demo last week, and that's just embarrassing, IMO.

[mebob]

Sucks for console gamers.....i'll be enjoying this in HIGHER HIGH DEFINITION on my "Leet" PC :D

[glennc]

does anyone care if people are going to get the pc version instead??? why why do we have to put up with 50% moron rate on these comments?

[FadeToBlack]

I totally agree with you Glen. And what the hell is the point of high resolutions on a 22" PC monitor lol? Now some people may have the PC running through their TV but not many. And they all come here high and mighty bragging about buying the PC version and running it at max resolutions. At least it gives me a good laugh

[SRT4Chris401]

I'm always willing to sacrifice some graphics for overall smoothness. Only casual gamers that have discovered "HD" think everything is about graphics, and that without graphics they can't comprehend the game....

[Blazian]

I hope they fixed the UPSCALING issue that they had with COD: Modern Warfare. For example, you have your PS3 set to display up to 1080P. And for some stupid reason the game would DOWNSCALE to 720P. You would have to go Display Settings and uncheck 720P and 1080I for it to upscale to 1080P that was just stupid and too much work to play your favorite game. Because not all games give the option to view in 1080P if you have 720P unchecked it they would Downscale to 420P.

[MovieScouse007]

It has been reported in the UK press that the publishers of this game are going to charge £55 ($90) for this game, as an experiment to see if they can get away with charging £55 ($90) for any game.

I WOULD URGE EVERYONE NOT TO BUY THIS GAME UNTIL THEY SEE SENSE AND LOWER THE PRICE!

I am as keen as everyone else to play this game but I refuse to be fleeced by greedy publishers who couldn't give a rats-arse about quality games, but simply care about the £ and $!

Or am I alone on this?

[Guitardr85]

So they can "justify" a 600p game in a 1080p era...they just can't justify a $90 price tag. Oh how many stupid people will buy this game. Seriously everyone...this game needs to be BOYCOTTED!!! Show Activision that they can't fix prices to their whim. Put aside your stupid "need" to buy this game and just hold off a little bit or else we will all be paying $90 for EVERY game!!!

[Gue1]

600p, that's what happens when you develop for an inferior console. aka the X360.

Look at Ninja Gaiden 2, running at sub-par resolution and in 720p on PS3.

[lucifon]

If it looks good (it really does) and plays at 60fps who cares!

[Guitardr85]

Who cares?!?!? Everyone should...especially since they are shipping the game at $90 a pop. With that, the game should not only be 1080p at 60fps, but also come with a popcorn maker and toilet so I can sh!t out all of the extra money they somehow expect me to magically come up with!!!

[mario888]

360 Fanboys just need to admit it! Xbox 360 is the inferior console. If this had been a exclusive PS3 you all know it would be running at 720 native resolution. None of that BS upscalling that the Xbox does.

FYI 360 Fanboys: Unlike the PS3 which can play games in there native resoution. Xbox 360 uspscales and if you don't know the difference just look it up.

[Pandamobile]

Jesus christ. Stop blaming one console for the other's fail. The PS3 is not responsible for the crappy resolution of the 360 and vice versa.

And Mario888:

Both consoles upscale to match what ever resolution they're playing at. So in this case, 1024 x 600 is scaled up to 1280 x 720 which if you have a 1080p TV, gets scaled up to 1920 x 1080. The PC version is the only that that actually plays at an HD resolution.

[mario888]

You are correct, I never said both consoles didn't upscale CODM2 to 720. My statement is about what each console can actually do given the correct native resolution. Xbox 360 has to scale to higher resolutions while PS3 can just send the signal to the TV in it's native resolution.

Just think of it like this: XBOX 360 = DVD Player that can upscale to 720P, 1080i & 1080P.

[COMMANDOBLACK]

The point is a lot of people care if they are giving US half ass materiel! Look at some of the other AAA titles. The developers worked there butts off with innovations to the game and did not over charge or jack up the price just because it's a sequel or was a hot game. Look at METAL GEAR SOLID 4, CRYSIS 1 and 2, GTA, FARCRY 2 these are just a few of the games that stood out. Oh lets not forget FIGHT NIGHT 4. They look very good and play good. To me a 60$ games is a investment. Plus when I see a gaming company cutting corners and skimming off the top, then jacking up the price. Me as a consumer would have problems with the way that company operates when dealing with the product which is a video game. Let me put it to you this way. You eat oatmeal, you love oatmeal. So you go to your favorite restaurant for eating oatmeal all the time and order the their famous oatmeal all the time. You've been going here for years. Now you find out the companies been giving you less oatmeal than before? But they've been just replacing it with more water not milk, butter and sugar. And now they just raised the price of it. Now it taste the same, but then you find out what the owner has been doing. You've been paying more for a lesser quality oatmeal. So you've been loosing out on substance which is the oatmeal, and respect, by them not telling you they were giving you less quantity and quality than the original serving. This from a restaurant you trusted for years who now only wants to see a larger prophet. Now do you say hey it's ok it still taste good, or do you find a better restaurant or ask the owner what's going on?

[COMMANDOBLACK]

I knew what I said was close to the truth! Check the history on this site for CALL OF DUTY you will find all kinds of goodies and you will find out that they were planning on and in the works of some new content around the summer time. And it never came out. So this game was DLC FIRST, then I assume they turned it into a full game with some tweaks. Second you will find if you look for it. About the quality of some game resolutions, they had this conversation before. They said in GERMANY they did not know what was going with it at that point in time. (don't quote me on that one) It points out a earlier CALL OF DUTY GAME and a Tony Hawks game were they were only playing in very low res too. I just want to let it be known that I'm not here to bash on the developers, the game, and their creation, but if they are cutting corner for the side of prophet than so be it. Nobody likes to be bullsh%ted when it comes to their money. They don't like people not paying, so I would say we don't want half done product. So full 1080 please.