COD2 Reviews

[groper]

1upReview

Neither will you be undone by fiddly controls. In fact, the comfortable 360 controller is actually better for this game than the trusty old mouse and keyboard.


Without ever having to worry about what video card you have and whether your drivers are up to date, it puts on a spectacular show. It runs with amazing smoothness, never missing a beat and, at least to many of the eyes that have seen it, better than the beefiest of PCs.

Gamespot Review

Most importantly, though, Call of Duty 2 on the Xbox 360 runs buttery smooth--even smoother than the PC version did for us in a lot of cases. Areas and situations that would cause most PCs to hitch up run perfectly fine on the Xbox 360 version.

 

[London Geezer]

Wanna see some really good smoke effects look at Motorstorm, Killzone, I-8, MGS4 or any other PS3 game showed to date.

Wanna see some really good models and killer lighting, look at The Incredibles and Monsters Inc!!

 

[PC-Engine]

Wanna see some really good models and killer lighting, look at The Incredibles and Monsters Inc!!

 

[newke]

Wanna see some really good smoke effects look at Motorstorm, Killzone, I-8, MGS4 or any other PS3 game showed to date.

Funniest post ever

 

[therealskywolf]

The first two seem to be "8" level games, and dont impress me or reviewers that much graphically.

COD2 is getting raves so far, though. And the fact it runs so well bodes well for X360 power.

I guess we only have two lesser reviews, but both are incredibly positive.

Most likely the game I'm buying..

Hell the gamepro guy says he seriously doubts a better game will come out in X360's entire first year!

http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1059/Call-of-Duty-2/p3/

Teamxbox weighs in.

"8" games? Pgr3 still hasn't been reviewed by the sites that matter (Gamespy->Gamespot) but it got 8.8 on Ign and 10 on 1up. Far from a "8" game.

And Kameo got 8.7 by Greg K himself over at Gamespot. Now this is the same guy that gave Mgs3 8.7 for example (and others), and let me tell you, don't go by the score alone go read the review, it's an awesome game but it has a problem : 10 hour Lenght. As you must know their scores are based on average.

Oh and now...let me tell you something, this is a launch, you hardly ever find "9" games in it (Halo....Mario 64).

 

[seismologist]

lol, what percentage of perspective console buyers do you think have the capabilities to run this game at anywhere near X360 settings? 1%?

I have an A64 3000+ with a Radeon 9600 which isn't THAT bad and I have to run this at 640x480 with 2xAA, and it still chugs like hell, i can run most stuff that comes out half decent but this game just kills my PC.
.

You're specs aren't bad. Turn off AA and upgrade to a $150 6600gt and you could run it just fine.

 

[scooby_dooby]

You're specs aren't bad. Turn off AA and upgrade to a $150 6600gt and you could run it just fine.

I'm gonna wait till next year an hopefully pick up a X1800 or G70 for cheap.

Till then it's 60FPS at maximum settings on the 46" with 5.1 sourround for me! I'll update the first post with the new reviews.

 

[seismologist]

yeah I'm running it on my 50" at 1920x1080. It looks great but the game's more about the immersion than the graphics.

 

[kyleb]

You're specs aren't bad. Turn off AA and upgrade to a $150 6600gt and you could run it just fine.

Acually I have played the game with the same CPU as him but overclocked 540mhz and a x800xt-pe and the game still hits 15fps in a few spots with absolutely everything cranked down, and the 360 runs the demo notably better than that PC even when I havve everything turned down much lower on my PC.

The only big complaint I have on CoD2 is that there are no lean buttons on the 360. I don't use lean in FPS games much at all but with doenes of German's shooting at you from all directions the ablity to lean out and take shots on the PC version really comes in handy.

 

[czekon]

Acually I have played the game with the same CPU as him but overclocked 540mhz and a x800xt-pe and the game still hits 15fps in a few spots with absolutely everything cranked down, and the 360 runs the demo notably better than that PC even when I havve everything turned down much lower on my PC.

The only big complaint I have on CoD2 is that there are no lean buttons on the 360. I don't use lean in FPS games much at all but with doenes of German's shooting at you from all directions the ablity to lean out and take shots on the PC version really comes in handy.

at GAMESPOT they played at P4 2.4 ghz + Gf6800 and the same problem slowndowns to 15 fps or less

 

[kyleb]

The probably had a worse time at it than me then as that CPU is a good deal slower than mine. I only droped that low in two maps and only one section in each but at those points there was so much action going on that even kicking it down to DX7 mode and everything else cranked all the way down didn't do much to help my framerate at all. On the other hand the vast majorty of the game stayed in the 40s or above at much higher settings on the setup I played though it on.

 

[seismologist]

The 360 version is probably optimized more. I'm running a 3200+ and there are slowdowns but the game is too intense to notice. I'm not complaining, it runs fabulous compared to PS2 games which is what I'm used to playing.

by the way I think lean is still available in the 360 version. I read somewhere that you use the d-pad to lean.

 

[pjbliverpool]

1upReview

Neither will you be undone by fiddly controls. In fact, the comfortable 360 controller is actually better for this game than the trusty old mouse and keyboard.


Without ever having to worry about what video card you have and whether your drivers are up to date, it puts on a spectacular show. It runs with amazing smoothness, never missing a beat and, at least to many of the eyes that have seen it, better than the beefiest of PCs.

Gamespot Review

Most importantly, though, Call of Duty 2 on the Xbox 360 runs buttery smooth--even smoother than the PC version did for us in a lot of cases. Areas and situations that would cause most PCs to hitch up run perfectly fine on the Xbox 360 version.

Also from Gamespot:

For the most part, it ran well on our primary test system, a Pentium 4 2.4GHz with 1GB of RAM and a GeForce 6800 OC with 128MB.

the Xbox 360 version of the game, which looks just as good and actually runs smoother than all but the most beastly of gaming PCs

Gamespot ran the PC version on a midrange PC so obviously the X360 version would run better. However they also admit in the X360 review that the most powerful PC's can match or exceed the X360's performance.

And another quote from gamespot:

If you play the game at HD resolutions, you'll find that there's no discernible difference between the Xbox 360 game and the PC one.

So they think the games look identical and you need a top end PC to match or exceed the X360's framerate. Thats a bit of a contradiction to TXB but then who are you going to believe in a comparison between a PC and xbox game?

Incidentally, here is how CoD2 performs on the third most powerful PC setup available (the second if you discount availability of X1800XT in Xfire):

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_2_performance_ati_nvidia/page10.asp

1280x1024/4xFSAA/8xAF = 59fps

Add 10% for going down to 720p and another 20% for going up to GTX 512's and you have an average of around 78fps in this, what Firingsquad have admitted is a more than usually taxing CoD2 benchmark featuring 23 players in a multiplayer scenario.

And does the X360 version run at such high quality settings?

Don't get me wrong, X360 is still by far the most cost effective way to play CoD2 and is the better solution for the vast majority of people but its not the best solution full stop. Well probably not anyway.

 

[kyleb]

I never understood the "too intense to notice" thing. If I am just walking around smelling the flowers or whatever then low framerate is livable, but it it is precisely when 12 guys are all charging in and there are buildings blasting appart and smoke everywhere that I need more than 15fps in order to be able to aim at anyone. I'm really curious to see how those same points in the game play though on final version with the 360.

 

[kyleb]

Don't get me wrong, X360 is still by far the most cost effective way to play CoD2 and is the better solution for the vast majority of people but its not the best solution full stop. Well probably not anyway.

If the full version runs at a rock solid 60fps like they clam it does, I assure you that the 360 beats your guesstimated "average of around 78fps" with a stick. Granted, I don't honestly expect the constant 60fps thing to hold true; but I still think it might run the game just as well if not better than what we see on even the most high end PCs.

 

[seismologist]

Maybe I haven't gotten to the parts your talking about. Like I said I'm mostly used to PS2 games so I'm used to it. Anything above 20fps in a game like this is amazingly fluid and very playable to me.

PC gamers seem to have higher standard in terms of what is an acceptable framerate.
But for me slowdown in hectic situations has always been present even from the days of 2D top scrolling shooters so I guess I'm used to dealing with it.

 

[kyleb]

Yeah, I even recall super Mario chugging in a few points, and PC games like myself tend to turn the options down to aviod stuff like that which is why claims of rock-solid 60fps and the like are so enticing to us and also very dissapointing when such claims turn out to be bunk.

 

[pjbliverpool]

If the full version runs at a rock solid 60fps like they clam it does, I assure you that the 360 beats your guesstimated "average of around 78fps" with a stick. Granted, I don't honestly expect the constant 60fps thing to hold true; but I still think it might run the game just as well if not better than what we see on even the most high end PCs.

If the game literally never, not once falls below 60fps then the average is probably higher than 78 fps. However, quite frankly I find that laughably unrealistic.

A 78fps average would probably spend 80% of its time above 60fps and have a minimum framrate of no less than 35-40fps. That to me is more than enough justification for the claim of a stable 60fps and no slowdown whatsoever.

And if the game really does perform better than a pair of GTX 512MB in SLI (which scale almost perfectly in CoD2) then its down to horrendous optimisation of the PC version. That is unless anyone actually believes that the X360 has more than twice the graphics horsepower of a GTX 512MB.

And of course assuming that the X360 runs at a real 720p/4xFSAA/8xAF.

 

[kyleb]

I suppose we will see shortly, it is all speculation and second hand info until then.

 

[therealskywolf]

If the game literally never, not once falls below 60fps then the average is probably higher than 78 fps. However, quite frankly I find that laughably unrealistic.

A 78fps average would probably spend 80% of its time above 60fps and have a minimum framrate of no less than 35-40fps. That to me is more than enough justification for the claim of a stable 60fps and no slowdown whatsoever.

And if the game really does perform better than a pair of GTX 512MB in SLI (which scale almost perfectly in CoD2) then its down to horrendous optimisation of the PC version. That is unless anyone actually believes that the X360 has more than twice the graphics horsepower of a GTX 512MB.

And of course assuming that the X360 runs at a real 720p/4xFSAA/8xAF.

Ok so know what? I'm sick of seeing these PC elitists, PC is an open platform, of course that if you double the GPUs....

And when GAmespot never says a High End PC may run it better, it only says it may run as fluidly, and take into account, a high end PC isn't a PC paked with 1000$ alone worth of GPU....jesus christ.

Anyway, Uh yeah of course a Dual 7800 512 MB should run the game "Better", but if it's only 10 FPS better, who gives the F? The fact that Xenos can show enough muscle to match those two Pitbulls is amazing.

So what's next? Worstations? Farms? OMG Farms can run COD2 much better than teh Xbox 360. Then as a side note: Cost isn't meant to be taken into account.

Yeah....like someone comes out with this Porshe Like Car that costs under 50.000 Bucks, can Reach 340 Km/h, and the guy is like "My car is faster than most cars outthere" then comes a guy and says "Oh yeah? Well my F1 car is much faster, take that you bitch!!!"

Come on...