Now the follow up is finally here and I'm happy to say, it's a fantastic game, living up to and exceeding all of these lofty expectations.Īs one might expect, the story of Modern Warfare 2's (MW2) single-player campaign picks up after the events of the original Modern Warfare. While the first Modern Warfare had the luxury of being a relatively unknown quantity before its release, its success has set the expectation bar very high for its inevitable sequel. Then Modern Warfare came seemingly out of nowhere and offered us a third option, a well crafted modern-day shooter whose story dealt with issues that were currently relevant to the world and also happened to include an amazing online multiplayer component.
#MODERN WARFARE 2 FOR PS3 SERIES#
There was either the Halo series or one of the plethora of shooters that took place during World War II. Incidentally, other users in this thread have noticed the additional fog on the 360 too.Before Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was released there were basically only two major options for the majority of FPS gamers. With regard to MW2, all I am saying is there is ample evidence of historical precedent in favour of my argument. I am not sure how you can justify calling me a liar, as the facts and evidence are clearly in my favour, dude.
#MODERN WARFARE 2 FOR PS3 PS3#
You will find I am right.Įven Tekken6, lauded to have been designed and developed for arcade on ps3 hardware, was forced to run a 576p on ps3, while the 360 managed 768p.Īgain, this is a fact. A lot of the time, the ps3 is lagging - and that's not even counting framerate problems, frametear and reduced textures evident on the ps3.Ĭheck through it yourself. The above link shows the resolutions and AA levels of nearly ALL the multiplats. Here's the evidence, which shows ps3 multiplats are inferior in some ways 80-90% of the time:Ĭertainly with regard to Bayonetta, the difference was so obvious that Famitsu deducted 2 points - even without a direct comparison! The argument is moot.Ĭommodore64 4430d ago (Edited 4430d ago ) And seeing as how a majority of 360 players only own a 360 will obviously prefer the 360 controller, and vice versa for PS3 owners. So some might prefer the GT car, and others might want the EVO. While the PS controller is more like an EVO FQ-520 where it has an incredible steering ratio (dead zone), Super AYC (contact sensitive face buttons), a precise gearbox (D-pad), but the ride is a little rougher (size), the pedals are mushy (triggers), and the seats aren't as fitting (analog sticks). To me the 360 controller is like a big GT car where it has great pedal feel (triggers), comfortable bucket seats (concaved analogs), and rides extremely comfortable (Size), but is a bit sluggish with the steering inputs (dead zone) and the gearbox isn't snappy or accurate (D-Pad). So the PS controller fits the bill there FOR ME.Īnd to Bubbles_kitty_cat please provide some factual evidence besides that people prefer the 360 controller to the PS3 most of the times. But at the end of the day, my control style is very sensitive and I need the dead zones to be as small as possible so I can be as accurate as possible. There are things I like about the 360 controller and things I don't like about the PS controller. "I simply feel the level of precision afforded by the PS3's analog sticks make it my preferred controller for shooters, although I do agree that the 360's analog stick LAYOUT, as well as the feel of the triggers, is better."īubbles to Statix! That's exactly how I feel.
0 kommentar(er)
