Our Xbox One X videos of Modern Warfare 2

Driftwood
Sunday, May 3, 2020 | 1:20 PM
7 comments

GSY Video PC PS4 Xbox One

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Remastered came out exclusively for PlayStation 4 about a month ago but it's now finally available on Xbox One and PC. For once, the port was not a lazy one in that it did not only rely on a boost in resolution. Thus, textures and lighting were completely revamped for the occasion, allowing players to rediscover the last episode developed by Infinity Ward in the best possible conditions. The PS4 Pro version also featured a 1620p resolution so we can only assume it's at least the same on Xbox One X. As pixel count is not really our thing, we'll wait for Digital Foundry to release their analysis, but we were surprised to see how visible aliasing is on Microsoft most powerful console. Check out the first 2 missions and let us know what you think. In the comments.

High quality stream and download

Commented on 2020-05-03 14:43:53

Finally, release the Kraken...best version.

(after the master race)

In reply to

Sdarts

Commented on 2020-05-04 17:10:52

Dridt, you were right on the money, Xbox One X uses the same resolution: 2880x1620. Digital Foundry just confirmed:

"The numbers speak for themselves. On the X model you get a native 2880x1620 resolution - or 75 per cent on each axis. As far as I've tested, it's completely fixed to that figure too, with no drops under during load. Curiously though, PlayStation 4 Pro delivers the exact same pixel count so it's not beyond reason to suggest that the Xbox One X may be somewhat under-utilised here. Make no mistake, the game still looks impressive - especially when played with HDR - but the numbers and the comparison points up against PS4 Pro suggest that the Microsoft machine could have delivered more."

Digital Foundry - Modern Warfare 2 Remastered on Xbox is smooth, slick and polished:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-...

This highlights - again - why having 2 different versions of a console and that console parity are very bad. A lot of developers are very lazy, don't care or too incompetent. They either only focus on one version, one version of each console, or go for the lowest common denominator.

This may seem harsh, but in this case the PC version on Battle.net says it supports 4K, so the work is already done:

"PC Optimized
Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® 2 Campaign remastered has been optimized to take advantage of PC capabilities. 4K, uncapped framerate, ultrawide monitor support - experience this iconic campaign in a brand new way."

Battle.net - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Campaign Remastered:
https://us.shop.battle.net/en-gb/product/call-of-d...

So clearly it wasn't a matter that working on 4K textures would eat up resources, time and money. Why the hell didn't they just make the XBX version better. Even Digital Foundry raised many questions as to why the XBX version isn't better.

It makes no sense from a technological standpoint. However, if Sony paid a lot of money to have 1 month of exclusivity, maybe they also asked for console parity on the better console versions?!

In the Digital Foundry article, there are comments talking how Activision has favoured the PlayStation version in most Call of Duty games, which is true. Which begs so many questions, but most importantly "Why?!".

Maybe Sony didn't, but companies - specially in the games industry - do shady deals all the time, so this wouldn't surprise me in the least. Since it's just the single player campaign and there's no plans for multiplayer afaik, there's no need to be concerned with cheaters online, so for those who can, I recommend the PC version as it will both run better and look better. Though I will wait for a price drop during a Black Friday or Summer/Winter event sale.

Dridt, you were right on the money, Xbox One X uses the same resolution: 2880x1620. Digital Foundry just confirmed:

"The numbers speak for themselves. On the X model you get a native 2880x1620 resolution - or 75 per cent on each axis. As far as I've tested, it's completely fixed to that figure too, with no drops under during load. Curiously though, PlayStation 4 Pro delivers the exact same pixel count so it's not beyond reason to suggest that the Xbox One X may be somewhat under-utilised here. Make no mistake, the game still looks impressive - especially when played with HDR - but the numbers and the comparison points up against PS4 Pro suggest that the Microsoft machine could have delivered more."

Digital Foundry - Modern Warfare 2 Remastered on Xbox is smooth, slick and polished:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-modern-warfare-2-remastered-xbox-analysis

This highlights - again - why having 2 different versions of a console and that console parity are very bad. A lot of developers are very lazy, don't care or too incompetent. They either only focus on one version, one version of each console, or go for the lowest common denominator.

This may seem harsh, but in this case the PC version on Battle.net says it supports 4K, so the work is already done:

"[b]PC Optimized[/b]
Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® 2 Campaign remastered has been optimized to take advantage of PC capabilities. 4K, uncapped framerate, ultrawide monitor support - experience this iconic campaign in a brand new way."

Battle.net - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Campaign Remastered:
https://us.shop.battle.net/en-gb/product/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-campaign-remastered

So clearly it wasn't a matter that working on 4K textures would eat up resources, time and money. Why the hell didn't they just make the XBX version better. Even Digital Foundry raised many questions as to why the XBX version isn't better.

It makes no sense from a technological standpoint. However, if Sony paid a lot of money to have 1 month of exclusivity, maybe they also asked for console parity on the better console versions?!

In the Digital Foundry article, there are comments talking how Activision has favoured the PlayStation version in most Call of Duty games, which is true. Which begs so many questions, but most importantly "Why?!".

Maybe Sony didn't, but companies - specially in the games industry - do shady deals all the time, so this wouldn't surprise me in the least. Since it's just the single player campaign and there's no plans for multiplayer afaik, there's no need to be concerned with cheaters online, so for those who can, I recommend the PC version as it will both run better and look better. Though I will wait for a price drop during a Black Friday or Summer/Winter event sale.

Commented on 2020-05-04 20:31:03 In reply to Sdarts

Posted by Sdarts

Dridt, you were right on the money, Xbox One X uses the same resolution: 2880x1620. Digital Foundry just confirmed:

So clearly it wasn't a matter that working on 4K textures would eat up resources, time and money. Why the hell didn't they just make the XBX version better. Even Digital Foundry raised many questions as to why the XBX version isn't better.

it's caca of doody, no one gives a damn nowdays, everyone just wants caca of royale or fortnite. Why bother?

phillipstuerzl

Commented on 2020-05-06 17:55:28

I don't know if you guys know this, but when you encode in HEVC, those videos aren't properly seekable/able to be fast-forwarded/navigated through. I don't have this issue with HEVC videos from other sources. Might be something off in your encoding settings or something? It's not a huge issue, but can be a bit frustrating if it's a longer video, and/or if it gets interrupted and you want to go back to where you were, but instead have to watch through the whole video up to where you were. Might be worth looking into? It can be a bit frustrating.

Driftwood

Commented on 2020-05-08 12:33:17 In reply to phillipstuerzl

We don't seem to have the same problem as you and no one else has reported the issue but you so far. :(

Commented on 2020-05-11 15:33:07 In reply to Driftwood

Huh. Strange. It occurs for me both on Windows and on my LG TV.

Commented on 2020-05-11 15:37:56 In reply to phillipstuerzl

Haven't tried on the TV, so it's possible it does not work as it should this way, but we've really encountered no problems when playing the file with Media Player Classic or even VLC. :(