Advertising
| X360, PS3 Friday, September 8, 2006 | 9:01 AM

Call of Duty 3 images and video

Call of Duty 3 images and video

Activision released this two batches of images of Call of Duty 3, one from the Xbox 360 version, the other from the PS3 one.
Update: Added an excellent gameplay video. This a 60 fps movie, so you'll need a powerful computer to play the HD version.


Gameplay

All comments

Page << 1 2 3 >>
Commented on 2006-09-08 12:02:25
Posted by Sheps
They both equally look dodgey.

The characters look like they have been dodgely cut out of a gif animation :S. Eitherway i've played enough WW2 the past 5 years to last me a lifetime, they should get a new gimmick.
Yeah i feel the same, if i have to play a game that involves warfare i rather not that it's in WW2 era... Why not just make a good game that involves like the Gulfwar or Vietnam.
Commented on 2006-09-08 12:51:02
This looks sweet.
Commented on 2006-09-08 13:18:04
I say no way to ww1 games. If you no your history in was all shotguns and trenches so no fun at all for a game
Commented on 2006-09-08 14:09:42
WOW 60FPS is very good,
But i prefer 30FPS with much detailed graphics :D
Commented on 2006-09-08 15:34:36
Posted by 007ybse04
WOW 60FPS is very good,
But i prefer 30FPS with much detailed graphics :D
That is a huge statement to make about a fps, most people would prefer a smooth 60fps...
Commented on 2006-09-08 15:37:21
Yeah personally I'll take the 60fps. Maybe I'm crazy but those screens for COD3 look pretty good to me. Downloading the video now...
Commented on 2006-09-08 15:47:30
In the video COD3 is NOT exactly as COD2 as some of you say. Not much better, but better indeed.
Commented on 2006-09-08 15:51:20
Video actually looks pretty damn good. But the gameplay and environments look 100% identical to COD2. The particles on this look pretty impressive though.

But again, this is the same game w/graphical upgrades (from what the video shows).
Commented on 2006-09-08 15:57:16
they look good ... but i must agree with rupbert... i'd take higher res textures and more shaders at 30fps locked than a 60fps game.... but thats me :)
Commented on 2006-09-08 16:00:20
you know... i watched the video again and it does look good... but i have to say something upsets me with games lately... can't they come up with a destructed edge system? i mean why is it when buildings break they're these big square cut outs... in real life if an rpg hits a wall it isnt neatly broken down squares theirs damage im sad that i havent seen any developers design a system to add "ruble" to the top of the walls so that it doesnt look so fake when a wall has been exploded out or a whole punched thru
Commented on 2006-09-08 16:01:09
Posted by davidnay
How about a game focusing around the American Revolutionary War. That would kick ass. I would love to put a slug into a lobster back wanker ;)
what about the line battles? BORING
Commented on 2006-09-08 16:43:40
Posted by Trup1aya4rea1
what about the line battles? BORING
Could be a really cool minigame actually. That's a tough design for a game though, and that's probably why someone hasn't done it yet. I'd like to see a BiA style game but with more people in that era and it would be sweet as hell.
Commented on 2006-09-08 17:15:38
This looks like CoD2 with some nicer effects (like depth of field etc).. More of the same bassicly..

Also explains to me why this is not on PC.. CoD PC gamers will probably not buy this in big numbers that soon after CoD2..
Commented on 2006-09-08 17:35:15
It finally has some physics, but they need to improve it. In the vid there is a piece of wood shaking around on the ground!

For those who like to play an American Revolutionary War-game, why don't you play North against South for the NES!? ;o)
Commented on 2006-09-08 17:47:11
The video looks pretty cool although I hope they don't go and make every level dark. I want some sunlight in my blood bath!
Commented on 2006-09-08 18:05:05
don't like the music. sounds cheap.
Commented on 2006-09-08 18:06:08
This game looks really good. I have to agree with everyone about the WW2 thing, but as long as the game is enjoyable who cares. I found COD2 to be one of the best single player experiences (for a war game) ever. With 7.1 suround sound and an HDTV the intensity was unbelievable.

At first look I though COD3 looked pretty much the same as COD2, so i looked up this video to do a "pepsi challenge". Have a look: http://www.xboxyde.com/leech_1687_1_en.html

I think COD3 is a definate standout; with more than just adding a few "little effects" to an already good engine.
Commented on 2006-09-08 23:30:01
I must admit that this game is shaping up pretty nicely graphically (atleast the 'city part' is).
Though 'technically' it might not be all that impressive, but it's not bad at all.
Only thing that bothers me is the priorities some game developers have, like with this game they go for stuff like 'grass and smoke movement according to the wind direction'.
It's pretty neat, but I'd rather se some destructable enviroments instead...

And seeing it running at 60 FPS just makes it that much more realistic and immersive, I like it.
Hopefully it will be locked at 60FPS in the final build, but it's nice to see a game running at some decent framerate for the 360 anyway, which is pretty rare unfortunately...
Commented on 2006-09-08 23:44:42
anyone with half a brain can tell u that the ps3 is better than the 360. but i hate sony. so whatever. i mean just look at any ps3 vid. rock solid 60 frames a second. v sync, insanely high rez materials. the same games can be done on 360 yes, but watch them struggle to reach 30 frames and still not use v sync. the truth sucks yes but 360 is better for other reasons.

but if this game runs 60 on both systems, well its clearly not using the ps3 to the max.

i will say that the normals maps look awesome though.
Commented on 2006-09-08 23:46:49
I'm pretty tired of WW2 games but BIA HH is looking pretty good. I can't say I'll be looking at this game as there are more interesting shooters comming sooner and later.

While I doubt this is the game to test screen shots between PS3 and 360, I really couldn't see any differences.
Commented on 2006-09-09 01:27:57
What the hell is with the FUGLY hand model? Other than that it's shaping up not to badly.
Commented on 2006-09-09 01:37:36
I understand you guys want originality but it would be very tedius fighting in the Revolutionary War or Civil War, don't get me wrong, the action would be intense. Ducking down in the grass trying to reload your weapon while bullets and cannon fire are passing by your head blowing the hell out of your comrades...never mind, a Revolutionary War or Civil War FPS would kick ass.
Commented on 2006-09-09 02:04:38
Posted by DirtPipeMilkShake
anyone with half a brain can tell u that the ps3 is better than the 360. but i hate sony. so whatever. i mean just look at any ps3 vid. rock solid 60 frames a second. v sync, insanely high rez materials. the same games can be done on 360 yes, but watch them struggle to reach 30 frames and still not use v sync. the truth sucks yes but 360 is better for other reasons.

but if this game runs 60 on both systems, well its clearly not using the ps3 to the max.

i will say that the normals maps look awesome though.
oh really? is that why their flagship title, Resistence, is only running at 30 fps, and looks no better than 360 games? Is that why Warhawk and Motorstorm are decidedly sparce with objects, and completely in contrast to the thousands of enemies shown in the Warhawk vids from 2005? Is that why a dev just reported that the 360 has more memory for textures, and their multiplatform game may end up with better looking textures in the 360 version of their game? i haven't been overly impressed by any PS3 vid so far, and certainly not any more impressed than the 360 games i see. usually the opposite in fact, because i expect more out of a 600 dollar system.
Commented on 2006-09-09 06:18:26
canr wit for the online play
Commented on 2006-09-09 12:13:21
Posted by spacemanjupiter
oh really? is that why their flagship title, Resistence, is only running at 30 fps, and looks no better than 360 games? Is that why Warhawk and Motorstorm are decidedly sparce with objects, and completely in contrast to the thousands of enemies shown in the Warhawk vids from 2005? Is that why a dev just reported that the 360 has more memory for textures, and their multiplatform game may end up with better looking textures in the 360 version of their game? i haven't been overly impressed by any PS3 vid so far, and certainly not any more impressed than the 360 games i see. usually the opposite in fact, because i expect more out of a 600 dollar system.
if what you say is true, then i stand corrected. i find it hard to believe however. the fact remains, most 360 games struggle to reach 30 frames a second and ususally without v sync to top it off. its a sad fact, but a fact nonetheless. perhaps the ps3 does suck (hardware-wise. we already know it sucks for many other reasons).

i did notice the 15 minute HD MGS4 trailer had some slowdown, but it was very rare and it sure as hell looked awesome. but then again its all scripted...
Page << 1 2 3 >>

About the game


Advertising
What's up?
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb speaking of going to bed (did someone mentiong going to bed?) I think I need to go to bed. (29 minutes ago)
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb I think the point is that we are used to your postings, and an extra "though" here and there isn't going to make us hate it :D (30 minutes ago)
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb um Simon? In English that means "Just get it across". see I made a funny, but also a point. (35 minutes ago)
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb hahaha, jest gut it across. (1 Hour ago)
  • SimonM7
    SimonM7 Yeah, "well" is a nice go-to way to start a sentence. If used sparingly I like things that evoke a sense of spoken language, though. (1 Hour ago)
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb oh my it's the English Language! run away! (1 Hour ago)
  • PlumbDrumb
    PlumbDrumb I also do "well" and "like", like "well, don't forgo it completely", or something like that. Oh yeah, I also do "or something" and "Oh, yeah". bah.... and that one too! (1 Hour ago)
PreviousNext
Top stories