Posted Jul 11, 2006 at 11:35AM by Christopher C. Listed in: News, Videos, Call of Duty 3, Games Tags: World War II, Treyarch
Ó

Call of Duty 3


It seems like only yesterday we were knocking on the digital doors of the virtual Reichstag, or trudging through the snowy fields of Moscow, but it's once again time to suit up, sound off and fall in line, were only a short while away from our return to World War II.

The sequel to the best-selling Call of Duty 2, Call of Duty 3 offers some significant changes over the last entry in the series, including a new close quarters combat battle system that allows you to get in close (I mean real close) and fight hand-to-hand. You'll also have the ability to improvise explosive devices, disarm traps and execute a great number of other battlefield situations that demand quick thinking and quicker reflexes to survive. In addition, you'll be have the ability to chip away enemy soft cover, flushing them out into the open, but you'll have to be careful as they can do the same to you.

Multiplayer promises to be an absolute hoot as well with support for up to 24 players (a huge boost over the previous game's 8) and the ability to commandeer vehicles with a buddy, such as tanks, jeeps, and even those nifty motorcycles with side-cars as well.

Now here's a chance for you to compare the current visual state of the game across three platforms (we know you're going to do that). From the screenshots it's pretty obvious that the Wii will be getting the short end of the graphical stick, a development that must have been expected really, but look at how much fun those "kewl" looking models seem to be having with the Wii controller! Ok, so they look like idiots, but many have pointed out that the Wii controller could lend itself quite nicely to First Person Shooter control, and knowing Treyarch, they'll be planning to make full use of it's singular design.

From the looks of things shadowing has yet to be implemented in the PS3 build of the game, but rumor has it this version will feature a few more light sources and other graphical flourishes over the Xbox 360 iteration. Rumor also has it however, that both versions of the game will be just about indistinguishable to the naked eye... that would indeed seem to be the case judging by these screens.

Xbox 360

Call of Duty 3 - Image 1    Call of Duty 3 - Image 2    Call of Duty 3 - Image 3 

PS3

Call of Duty 3 - Image 1    Call of Duty 3 - Image 2    Call of Duty 3 - Image 3 


Wii

Call of Duty 3 - Image 1    Call of Duty 3 - Image 2 

So there you have it folks, one of the first honest to goodness comparisons of what a next-gen multi-platform game will look like, it would appear that at least for now, the 360 and PS3 versions are just about on par with one another, it remains to be seen whether one console will gain a significant graphical lead over the other in the future. As for the Wii version, it seems to be moving along, minding it's own business, with an understandably less impressive graphical demonstration, it nonetheless hopes to make up for this shortcoming with unique control that offers a physical experience you won't be getting from the other two... I wonder if we'll see tilt sensor implementation in the PS3 version though.

Download: [Call of Duty - Gameplay Video - The Church Tower] - WMV - 50MB

Download: [Call of Duty - Gameplay Video - Close Quarters] - WMV - 63MB

Download: [Call of Duty - Gameplay Video - Tank Ride] - WMV - 60MB




Permalink  |   Email this  |   Linking Blogs   |   Digg It!

Bookmark / Find this article on:


48 Comments


Sort by:
   by NEO FOLLOWER2 (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ps3 vs 360 versions of cod3...

the wii version is obviously going to be graphically worst
but the wii controller is really good for fps games

the 360 version will have online(so will the wii and ps3 versions) and will be like a standard cod on the 360

the ps3 version will be the same as the 360 but 1 thing they might use the tilt controller somehow in the game.

   by matt (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ..

thanks #1 i dont think any of us could have thought of that on our own..

   by the fizz (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » LOL!

Neo Follower2, you are a *****ing dumb ass. Thx for stating the obvious.

   by Dude (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » The developers mention that they were going to add more graphical details on the PS3

This is not a rumor it's a fact. See IGNs interview for details.

Wii controller better for FPS? thats not what red steel showed. Most people complained that it was hard to aim with in all three games: Zelda, Metroid, Red Steel.

   by ding a ling (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ps3 pics

are really the 360 pics

   by Dexyn (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » Perhaps...

They've probably fixed the Wii's problem at this point since, undoubtabley, Nintendo simply put out their control and games for E3 as a test run. As for the PS3 and XBOX360 versions being only slightly different, I'm getting the game either way. >.>

   by Waters (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » Wtf

Why does the guy driving the tank on the Wii look so........ GAY!??

   by joel (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ...not impressed

i'm not impressed with the graphics, looks the *****in same as cod 1 and 2.

   by Advertising -
   by soapinmouth (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ifyour not vey impressed

than your ganna be disapointed in the next gen. And btw look and see how similar the graphics on ps3 and 360 are.

   by chief (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » i think

brothers in arms: HH will be a better game from what i've seen.

   by AhReally? (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » to no. 9

If COD 2 for xbox360 was supposed to be "next-gen", then I truly truly am disappointed. Both COD2, and apparently (judging from the photos) COD3 have outdated, and very un-"next-gen"-like graphics if you ask me.
I mean goddamnit look at the wii's version - it looks like a ps2 game. say what you will about the wii's graphical prowess it ain't no ps2.
In Conclusion - Developer sucks graphicwise, whether it the wii's version or even the 360's and ps3's.

   by mesa (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » .

the more of them weird/stupid poses i see those people are making with the wii controller the more i crap my pants from laughing! lol really a dumb thing that controller is.

   by tom (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » #11

have you played COD 2 on high def?????

   by Yaz - 2006-07-11
 » #4

"This is not a rumor it's a fact. See IGNs interview for details."

There's no mention of this on IGN's website (do you have a link?).

So right now, it is just a rumour. :|

I doubt there's any noticeable differences between the 360 and PS3 versions.


   by PimpnPaul99 - 2006-07-11
 » cod graphics

cod graphics are really clear and sharp... but they do lack lots of the newer pixel shaders and all that other high tech crap that newer Next Gen games will have. The graphics in Brothers in Arms look much more smooth and lifelike.

CoD is more like a PC game.. and you can tell they didnt spend alot of time making it..if COD 2 just came out a year before this is planned to be released. Fun games... lots of action

   by XDAdmin (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » Very Nice!

I think it looks like it has a lot of potential!

http://www.xboxdomain.com

   by im bad (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » ps3

this game is going to be a luanch title im getting it for ps3 this game is nice

   by Advertising -
   by MGSROCKS1 - 2006-07-11
 » #4

In the July issue of Electronic gaming Monthly, it was written the PS3 version will have more light sources, and a so small graphical diffrence, no one would know which is better with their own eyes.

   by ssj3fox - 2006-07-11
 » Wii version most developed

http://www.thewiire.com/news/356/1/Call_of_Duty_3_Most_Developed_on_Wii

   by kura (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » about COD2

I played COD 2 on High quality settings.

IT DIDN'T LOOK REALISTIC

I don't get tricked by plastic dolls people...
the quality sucks man.
Don't tell me it looks awesome just because there's more polygons in there.

Do something like what Valve did.

STUDY the textures.
DO WHATEVER'S NECESSARY.

I am sick of people claiming it's next get when it looks worse than Half-Life 2

   by lansingone - 2006-07-11
 » it would take to much time

if thay made the PS3 one look better.if you look at the game it would look alot better if thay made it really use blu ray by making use of high res textures for everything, that would make all things from the rust on the back of the tank to the random stone such as the stone in the lower left corner of the second 360 screen look unmistakably better
. but to add high res textures it would cost more time and money

   by Yaz - 2006-07-11
 » #21

Even if they had the time, Blu-ray will not add the detail you're suggesting lansingone. :|

If you look at ANY screenshot from any game, everything you see in that screenshot was in RAM at that particular time.

BOTH consoles have just 512MB of RAM, therefore for every frame, everything has to be in RAM as it's being rendered. So even if the developers wanted to, the PS3 version will not have higher resolution textures than the 360 version. If either console had more RAM however, say 1 GB, then that console could have higher resolution textures compared to the other.

Blu-ray will allow for more textures overall in a game (i.e. less repeated textures) or for larger game worlds in total, but you're right in saying that will cost in terms of time and money.

   by horny (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » lol

I wanna have sex with a hot girl!!!:)

   by horny (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » lol

I wanna have sex with a hot girl!!!:)

   by hush404 - 2006-07-11
 » hmm

wow... I knew the wii was less powerful then ps3/360 graphically... but wow. COD3 on the wii looks worst then COD big red one did on teh PS2.

   by ssj3fox - 2006-07-11
 » Messed up

Wii is twice as powerful as the cube. COD: BR1 looks better on cube... Are these not final?

   by Figboy (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » eh

i used to work at Activision, so i'm kind of a bitter employee, but the game doesn't really look that impressive to me, on any system. i'm also pretty sick of WWII shooters, so i think Brothers in Arms: HH (which sounds like a real next gen game from the features they're implementing) will probably be my last foray into the traditional WWII genre (Resistance has my interest, primarily because i love alternate histories). Activision suffers from a "me too" complex, and their games never seem to rise above mediocre. mainly because they refuse to spend the necessary money to make a game truly above the norm. if the budget of the game is $12 million, you better bet your ass they won't spend a penny over $12 million. and if they can spend *less*, all the better.

they're a huge company, and can afford to make some truly exceptional game (especially with the strong stable of licenses they have from X Men to Spider-Man), they just care more about their bottom line. of course, i'm just a bitter ex-employee, so i may have a bit of a bias.

   by Advertising -
   by Christopher C. (QJ. NET Staff) - 2006-07-11
 » Hi Figboy.

Haven't seen you around in a while, I'm curious as to what sort of work you had at Activision. Do tell :)

   by GamerX (Unregistered) - 2006-07-11
 » No Difference

CoD 3 doesn't look very much differenent from CoD2, I hope since its an "early" build they might be able to make some improvments.

Also ppl DON'T EXPECT AND DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PS3 AND X360 versions of ANY GAME jus yet. Its too early for devs to know the true limits of any system and further more today devs think more about costs and profits since the industry is so competitive.
They have no real reason to spend more time and money to IMPROVE one version over the other. Its just too expensive.

   by Annony - 2006-07-11
 » PS3 vs X360

We'll never truely see 'which console is better' on a game that's ported to all 3 systems. I don't picture EA, Ubisoft, of whoever spending extra time and money making 3 different versions of the same game (even though you technically have to program 3 different games...)

The most we'll see will be similar to comparing Soul Calibur 2 on the PS2, Gamecube, and XBox: Maybe one console will have slightly better antialiasing, but you won't likely be able to tell with your bare eye.

We'll see differences in hardware with exclusive titles that are customized to the system.



Add QJ.NET
Add to My Yahoo!
Google Reader Subscribe with Bloglines
Add  to your Kinja digest Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader Add 'www.qj.net' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
Subscribe with SearchFox RSS del.icio.us www.qj.net
Add to Technorati Favorite! Add to My AOL
furl! it Stumble for Treehugger!