Call of Duty 3 confirmed as PS3 launch title
by Blake Snow 
{ Jul 11th 2006 at 11:00AM }
Pro-G confirmed last Friday that Call of Duty 3 will in fact be a PS3 launch title. From the article: "...We're pleased to confirm that Call of Duty 3 has now been confirmed as a PS3 launch title, cementing the game's release date for November 17 2006... we're told that there should be nothing [different between Xbox 360] and the PS3 version in terms of graphics or indeed gameplay."Rumor has it the game won't be in 1080p, thus undercutting Sony's "true hi-def" mojo at the moment. Will this be the trend for most multiplatform titles?
[Thanks, James O.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
JimmyHACK @ Jul 11th 2006 11:04AM
I thought this was common knowledge since 1up kept asking them how it felt doing ps3 launch title and a big followup 360 title...
game will be great, the only minor thing i dont like is infinity ward isnt doing it, but Treyarch will do it justice
Mike @ Jul 11th 2006 11:05AM
Hey guess what. It's also on the 360. It'll probably look the same, smell the same, pwn me the same, and yet I don't have to spend $600. Yay!
baberg @ Jul 11th 2006 11:06AM
Wow, a World War II themed FPS game. I compliment Activision on being so bold and innovative, exploring a genre that hasn't been seen before. They're really taking a risk publishing this game.
/end_gamer_cynic_mode
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 11:09AM
And just how does sony plan to implement their gay tilt mechanism into this game?
darryl @ Jul 11th 2006 11:09AM
@Mike
Still trying to justify your xb360 purchase? Tsk, tsk... the xb360 isn't *that* bad.
Clint @ Jul 11th 2006 11:11AM
It's sad they had to cripple the PS3 graphics just because the Xbox 360 can't handle them.
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 11:13AM
Clint, I'd like you to tell me how they crippled them? I mean come ON!!! You only have a analog tv anyway!!!
JimmyHACK @ Jul 11th 2006 11:14AM
clint, ya will be sad if they just weak port, and dont put extra effort in...
Player1 @ Jul 11th 2006 11:16AM
I say we see what the people who have 1080p TVs and can actually distinguish between interlaced and progressive scan think.
Zach @ Jul 11th 2006 11:18AM
@ Clint.
What part of "... be nothing [different between Xbox 360] and the PS3 version in terms of graphics or indeed gameplay." dont you understand?
So what it doesn't render at 1080P. Woopty Doo.
ill trooper @ Jul 11th 2006 11:22AM
Maybe it will look the same on the 360... But I think the other way to look at this is that you won't be missing out on a quality title like Call of Duty3 if you want to buy a PS3. Here's hoping for cross-platform online...
Cabbage @ Jul 11th 2006 11:23AM
If many of the games are going to look and play the same on either the Xbox 360 or the PS3, this means they may still look better on decent gaming PCs (like Prey does) than on any console. Combining this with very little exclusivity with 3rd parties makes the PS3 a very hard item to sell.
Although I don't plan to get either a PS3 or a 360, I would certainly opt for the Xbox360 since they are getting the bugs worked out of their hardware now, they have a well established online service, and I never intend to purchase a Blu-ray movie. Ever. And this is coming from a Mac lovin' Firefox usin' Microsoft software hater.
ncdign @ Jul 11th 2006 11:26AM
Xboxyde has several pics from the PS3 version and the Xbox 360 version. They both look the same to me.
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 11:26AM
I heard the ps3 copy was already crippled as it doesn't support online multiplayer!
Scott @ Jul 11th 2006 11:27AM
Let's see...number of titles at E3 shown in 1080p by Sony. One and it was a port of a PS2 game.
Draco @ Jul 11th 2006 11:29AM
wouldnt the difference between 1080i and 1080p the same as the difference between 480i and 480p?
cause thats a huge difference, I hate 1080i (but sadly thats all my TV is capable of :()
Armin @ Jul 11th 2006 11:29AM
Their source is from where?
logikil @ Jul 11th 2006 11:30AM
1080p is really just a buzzword that i doubt most companies will implement. Technically speaking, the 360 is just as capable of rendering graphics in 1080p, but the performance hit from using the higher resolution textures doesn't make it an even trade. I would prefer silky smooth 720p rather than stuttering 1080p. And i would wager that you are going to see the vast majority of PS3 games running in 720p. So PS fanboys please don't use this as a bullet point, because you arent likely to see it often if at all. And believe me it will look just as gorgeous in 720p.
Pac Man @ Jul 11th 2006 11:30AM
They look like pretty sweet graphics, even if it looks the same on both consoles. Wouldn't be bad graphics for the first generation of PS3 games, better than some of the rubbish I saw on my 360 anyway.
JimmyHACK @ Jul 11th 2006 11:30AM
its great that they can achive the great game on multiple nextgen systems, if it doesn have 1080p oh well.. my tv will be happy with resistance in 1080p
meddow @ Jul 11th 2006 11:31AM
Wheres the wii love :/
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 11:34AM
Go back to the amazon you tree huggin wii lovers!
Nick @ Jul 11th 2006 11:36AM
Is it really that surprising that they are going to look the same? The graphics cards in both systems are pretty damn close the last time i checked, Ps3 is what 550 mhz clock speed, 360 is 500mhz, ps3 has X amount of dedicated pipelines, 360 has 2x non dedicated.....Im not sure about the memory,
jojo29 @ Jul 11th 2006 11:37AM
actually if you think about it, since they both the same, big props to the sony camp. Why? Well because that would mean that 1st generation titles on sony's console look just the same as second generation games on xbox 360. So if thats the case then Sony's machine would technically be better!?:) just some food for though
joe smith @ Jul 11th 2006 11:39AM
You'll see virtually no games in 1080p. The system doesn't have enough memory or internal bandwidth to support it without making major cuts to game features. The only people doing 1080p will be Sony and developers Sony is paying -- because they will have no choice.
joba @ Jul 11th 2006 11:42AM
@ logikill...I agree with you totally. The PS3 will most likely deliver third party software in 720p. First party Sony software may be a different story. In any event, 1080p is hyper hype.
joe smith @ Jul 11th 2006 11:43AM
#23 - not so much that PS3 is superior as that he developers have had a couple of years to get their tech and art together to enable a multi-platform release. All the major companies will be doing multi-platform and have been building toward it since the systems were announced. Show me a PS3 launch title from a dev who hasn't done a next gen game before and I'll show you a game that looks nowhere near as polished as what a team that has gotten its feet wet on 360 can do. In game development, experience is everything.
Pedro @ Jul 11th 2006 11:43AM
The 360 can't do 1080p, we'll see the difference in call of duty 4 when the PS3 is the norm and the 360 gets a downgraded port. I guess we'll have to deal with lesser 360 graphics from third party non exclusives until they make games for the PS3 and port them to 360.
Todd H. @ Jul 11th 2006 11:43AM
Can't wait for this title, even another reason to buy a 360 instead of the PS3...Why play it on the PS3, when the 360 already has a built-in online community...
Todd
http://www.proxbox360.com
Nick @ Jul 11th 2006 11:46AM
@jojo29
Well the games that were actually playable at e3 this year, were not nearly as impressive as last years cg stuff, also i think alot of 360 games for the 1st generation were really just xbox games that got moved to 360 3/4 way through there development
Bloo @ Jul 11th 2006 11:54AM
"It's sad they had to cripple the PS3 graphics just because the Xbox 360 can't handle them"
They have virtually the same graphics card making you a liar.
"I say we see what the people who have 1080p TVs and can actually distinguish between interlaced and progressive scan think."
I have a 1080i, 720p, and 1080p TV. All these PS3 fanboys are full of it (and I will own PS3 and Wii to compliment my 360).
CuddleFish @ Jul 11th 2006 11:55AM
Don't forget the 360 version will have RUMBLE so it won't be identical to the PS3 version.
logikil @ Jul 11th 2006 12:03PM
@Nick
Agreed. Dev's just wanted to get started on new platform stuff and wanted to at least have games for the system on shelves. Now I think MS shoulders some of the burden that those first launch games created because they also wanted to have games on shelves. So they had to allow half assed ports and scaled down product like Madden onto the system. But if you take Call of Duty and Project Gotham as the bar, thats where first gen titles should have been, and i think thats pretty comparable to what you see from PS3 stuff. So again, to parrot what pretty much every dev and industry professional has indicated, both the PS3 and 360 are on even footing.
So 360 and Sony fanboys put down your virtual venom and acquiesce to that fact so we can all move on.
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 12:04PM
Don't forget the 360 version will cost $59.99 while the PS3 version will cost $69.99...cause it will be on blu-ray disc. ;)
Razer @ Jul 11th 2006 12:04PM
Oh the wake-up call all you people with 1080p are going to get when you find so very little difference and very little support for it. I dunno what I hate more Sony or the confused fanboys who suck up Sony's marketing hype with a spoon. Way to take an awesome 360 launch title(it made the game what it was, not the PC) and put it through the Sony meat grinder.. Maybe I can tilt my rifle with my super special gyro joystick.. pft..
ZildjianKX @ Jul 11th 2006 12:06PM
Won't the PS3 just upconvert 720p games to 1080p, like the Xbox 360 does with 720p to 1080i? The only reason the 360 can't upconvert to 1080p is no HDMI output.
And like someone said, the PS3 version won't have rumble, which does suck for a WWII game with all the explosions.
Justin @ Jul 11th 2006 12:10PM
I can see some parents walking into best buy this holiday season picking up a game system for little tommy....parents to the best buy employee "so what is the difference between the two systems?" Best buy employee responds..."There is no difference...except the PS3 costs half again as much." LOL!!!
Draco @ Jul 11th 2006 12:22PM
@ Justin
Futureshop sais PS3 games will be $5.00 canadian more then X-box 360 games (but 3times the size) now this is hardly proof, but beter then your random amount you listed.
George @ Jul 11th 2006 12:40PM
In this economy it makes ZERO sense to buy a ps3. The 360 is great machine for the money. I make enough money to by the ps3 but it just doesn't have anything over the 360.....blueray and 1080p is not a big enough selling point.......This may be the last playstation. Microsoft will beat them to market again and sonys stategy will fail. Nintendo and 360 will be the only players left.....Sony is bleeding money...Bad investment...
TheEnlightened @ Jul 11th 2006 12:45PM
This game will be really good to actually see how vibration effects a game's mechanics and "feel" aswell as gamers perception/enjoyment of the game as the 360 version will have it and the PS3 one wont.
Scott @ Jul 11th 2006 12:46PM
I thought everyone already figured the PS3 wasn't going to be outputting the majority of their games in 1080p. Here's an article from a while back about Virtua Fighter 5, showing that even their exclusive titles are only going to be running in 720p.
http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=35091
Enough complaining about the 360 causing this "downgrade." Maybe you'll see Lumines in 1080p, but on the more graphically intensive titles, developers will more often opt for the lower resolution. It's easy math, less than half as many pixels to compute.
vidGuy @ Jul 11th 2006 1:17PM
You're wrong, Justin: there is a difference - the name. Sony apparently thinks it's worth $200 to have "PLAYSTATION" on the console in that ridiculous font. ;)
I wonder how the Wii version will play? Wacking baddies in the head and stealing their weapons, disarming bombs, etc with the Wii remote sounds like entertainment to me!
Ed V @ Jul 11th 2006 1:20PM
same...but what about the ps3 load time???
PUKES!!!
Brian @ Jul 11th 2006 1:36PM
@Ed V, since every PS3 has a hard drive it should actually be able to cache enough data to greatly reduce load times. Though I wonder how the read speed and disc size of the BR drive will affect it.
GamerZero @ Jul 11th 2006 1:37PM
@ Draco
So COD3 on PS3 will have three times the content than 360,cool.Did you know PS3 has twice the processing power than a 360 too.Also the PS3 can do dual HDMI output in 1080P widescreen at 120fps.
Well I'm going to order my PS3 now, I'm convinced damn it.
I'll just ask my dad who is Elvis, by the way, to buy me one as soon as he's finished another autopsy at Aera 51.
KawF @ Jul 11th 2006 1:43PM
The retailers here in good ol' Sweden (yes, that place where santa or possibly satan lives and polar bears run rampant in towns), the online stores I've consulted have their prices set at 599 SEK (Swedisk Krona), including taxes, for all new 360-titles and all new PS3 titles. That is, the price-point is EQUAL. Darn shame you all don't live here.
The polar bears are quite nice and only bite every once in a while. They seem to go for people feeding out disinformation though. Somehow they sense the bullcrap in them.
vidGuy @ Jul 11th 2006 1:44PM
Yeah, seriously, the read speed of the BluRay drive is going to be about 2/3 that of the DVD drive in the 360. So, how long are you willing to wait for all that 'extra' content to load up?
I'm sure developers can do some nice tricks with cache and background loading, but it's sure to be a problem as games reach that 40-50GB size all the PS fanboys are saying they'll have. ;)
Canadian Geese @ Jul 11th 2006 1:46PM
We will not see many games running in 1080p. Take a look at this list from after E3 2006...
http://www.ps3land.com/article-344.php
It's a list of the PS3 games and what their resolutions are. Now, this list may have changed, but as it stood I count 2 games listed that will support 1080p. I count 11 that support up to 1080i. Many others are TBD (and most by looking at the developers, most if not all will be 720p).
It's too labor intensive on the console to support both 1080p and smooth gameplay. Developers have been saying this all along. MS realized this a while ago and even stated publically that 720p would be the sweet spot of the next generation.
For the record, 720p looks better than 1080i, so if you still have your 360 set to 1080i, you might want to try changing the settings to 720p. You'll thank me (if you can even tell a difference).
And HDMI is not required to output 1080p. HDMI is required for 1080p with blu-ray, because the way blu-ray is built, it is capable of outputting up to 1080i unless there is an HDMI cable present. This reduces the risk of the BR disc being pirated. This is why so many movie studio's originally sided with BR. It is totally possible to send a 1080p signal over component cables (analog). The problem is with blu-ray and it's limitations. This is why it's so ironic that the tard PS3 doesn't have an HDMI cable. (Sony's response to that, if you'll remember, is that people won't be able to tell the difference anyways).
We will see a few PS3 games that support 1080p, but they will be few and far between. After all, 720p is high def, too.
sputnik @ Jul 11th 2006 2:15PM
Um...Call of Duty 2 on the 360 played and looked a heck of allot better than what I saw on my friends very capable PC with a $200 graphics card.
Gears of War among other upcoming games looks way better graphics wise than Call of Duty 3, so I don't think there was any dumbing down on behalf of the 360.
But if the 360 becomes the defacto development platform...then that's very good for gamers. I suffered through too many games on the Xbox that were held back by PS2 level textures and graphics.
GamerJunk.net @ Jul 11th 2006 2:20PM
Odd, they don't mention the CoD3 Wii version at all. With the rumours that the Wii will launch in October, we could only hope that the Wii version will either be a launch title or come out around the same time as the PS3 and 360 versions.