John | 
January 22, 2010 | 
“…these objects look like green blobs…”
 |
 |
|
 |
|||||||||
| EA |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
EA | |||
| EA |
1 | 1 |
EA | |||||||||
| Action, TPS |
n/a | n/a |
Action, TPS |
|||||||||
| Release: 01/12/10 | 33 sec | 20 sec | Release: 01/12/10 | |||||||||
| ESRB: Mature |
3.01 % | 0.92 % | ESRB: Mature | |||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||
 |
||||
 |
 |
|
Head2Head – Army of Two: The 40th Day Length: 00:07:17 We go Head2Head with Army of Two: The 40th Day for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. |
|
 |
 |
|||
 |
||||
In this Head2Head, the Lens of Truth takes a look at the retail versions of Army of Two: The 40th Day. Supplied by Play N Trade (Oviedo), this sequel throws you right into action and lets you know there is no time to waste. Watch the video and read on for an in-depth analysis.
Graphics: Overall, the graphics for this game are solid. The character models are well done and the environments are impressive. Oddly enough, almost all of the characters have some sort of a scar across their face, as evident in the lead character we played. While close visually, we see some differences between the two versions when it comes to texture resolutions and shadow quality. In some shots, the lower resolution textures on the PlayStation 3 actually change the look of the characters. When the normal and specular maps are lower resolution, we lose a lot of detail in the character’s faces which can make for shiny-looking skin, reminiscent of the claymation characters from Robot Chicken. These shaders look more matte on the Xbox 360 and have subtle details, giving the characters more realistic qualities. One of the rollovers shows higher resolution texturing and normal maps on the shoulder armor, and in the first mini boss fight, you can see the overall normal maps are cleaner on the Xbox 360. Some of the texture issues also made their way into the environments. As evident in another one of the rollovers, random textures in the environments, such as the green leaves, were of a lower quality. On the PlayStation 3, these objects look like green blobs, but in the Xbox 360 version, you can clearly see that these are leaves. Some signage, props and walls fall victim to smaller textures as well. Lastly, there were some rather unsightly shadow artifacts on the PlayStation 3 version.
Performance: Army of Two: The 40th Day performs pretty well on both consoles, but there is a winner. The Xbox 360 version maintains a slightly higher frame rate and less tearing than the Playstation 3 when there is a lot happening on the screen. Globally, the Xbox 360 averaged 29.95 FPS with 0.92% torn frames, whereas the Playstation 3 averaged 28.36 FPS with 3.01% torn frames. It was close, but during a few of the clips the averages were around 26 FPS on the PlayStation 3 where the Xbox 360 only dropped to 28 FPS.
During our capture, we did encounter an odd glitch on the Playstation 3 version. In the hostage clip, the game pauses in the stairwell to remind you not to kill civilians. After the pause, you come down the stairs and encounter 3 hostages. Everything ran fine on the Xbox 360 even though we accidentally killed the third hostage. When we tried it on the Playstation 3, we hit our glitch. While taking aim at the third hostage, the game froze for a few seconds. We thought the game crashed but then the game picked back up. The gun went into auto fire and we killed the hostage instantly. The game continued by itself: reloading the gun and firing repeatedly until the gun was out of ammo. We originally showed the glitch in our video but were concerned that it would skew the data. We could not verify the Playstation 3 as being a glitchy version, and since the game did not hang anywhere else, the decision was made to remove this footage.
| PlayStation 3 Frame Analysis | Xbox 360 Frame Analysis |
| Clip 1: Length of clip: 2633 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.98 Percent of torn frames: 0.25 |
Clip 1: Length of clip: 2633 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.95 Percent of torn frames: 0.07 |
| Clip 2: Length of clip: 1410 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.98 Percent of torn frames: 0.14 |
Clip 2: Length of clip: 1410 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.94 Percent of torn frames: 0.23 |
| Clip 3: Length of clip: 1722 frames Average FPS of clip: 26.24 Percent of torn frames: 2.30 |
Clip 3: Length of clip: 1722 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.31 Percent of torn frames: 0.82 |
| Clip 4: Length of clip: 1929 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.98 Percent of torn frames: 0.01 |
Clip 4: Length of clip: 1929 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.79 Percent of torn frames: 0.01 |
| Clip 5: Length of clip: 4047 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.71 Percent of torn frames: 0.45 |
Clip 5: Length of clip: 4047 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.83 Percent of torn frames: 0.12 |
| Clip 6: Length of clip: 2511 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.83 Percent of torn frames: 0.43 |
Clip 6: Length of clip: 2511 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.54 Percent of torn frames: 0.11 |
| Clip 7: Length of clip: 2079 frames Average FPS of clip: 27.56 Percent of torn frames: 0.46 |
Clip 7: Length of clip: 2079 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.17 Percent of torn frames: 0.35 |
| Clip 8: Length of clip: 2561 frames Average FPS of clip: 26.15 Percent of torn frames: 0.47 |
Clip 8: Length of clip: 2561 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.12 Percent of torn frames: 0.23 |
| Clip 9: Length of clip: 3531 frames Average FPS of clip: 27.95 Percent of torn frames: 1.03 |
Clip 9: Length of clip: 3531 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.64 Percent of torn frames: 0.07 |
| Global percent of torn frames: 3.02 Global average FPS: 28.36 |
Global percent of torn frames: 0.92 Global average FPS: 29.35 |
Loading: Both versions of Army of Two: The 40th Day had updates available, with both versions weighing in at 21mb. Both installed fairly quickly and there wasn’t a mandatory installation on the Playstation 3 afterwards. However, the load times were almost doubled on the Playstation 3. We can assume that if the Playstation 3 had a mandatory install, the load times would probably drop significantly.
Load Time 1: PlayStation 3 – 40 sec / Xbox 360 – 20 sec
Load Time 2: PlayStation 3 – 47 sec / Xbox 360 – 21 sec
Load Time 3: PlayStation 3 – 22 sec / Xbox 360 – 15 sec
Load Time 4: PlayStation 3 – 25 sec / Xbox 360 – 24 sec
Roll over to see the differences. Here we compare the different HDMI settings between the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice the Xbox 360 versions softer shadows.
Roll over to see the differences. Notice the lower resolution texture.
Roll over to see the differences.
Roll over to see the differences.
Roll over to see the differences.
Conclusion, Technical Score and Staff Choice on Page 2.
Pages: 1 2
Im more of a sony fan, but 360 wins by a mile.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
Considering how most games from EA have had a solid reputation for performing and looking good on both platforms, I’m a bit surprised.
I won’t be getting this. I heard the the game was much better but the replay value is pretty thin.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
No where near as bad as Bayonetta but definite 360 win, but at least it shows that even if it doesn’t look as good on PS3 the performance doesn’t have to suffer like Bayonetta.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Got it for 360. My ps3 for exclusives only. Sony need to have words with their developers.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Yeah…really seem to be the case. Seems like Sony is turning in to this generations Nintendo. A system just for exclusives.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Just when it looked like EA was getting close to console parity….
This is a blowout victory for 360. The data makes it seem close but your eyes tell you different.
Seems like PS3 version has no aliasing or QAA. Not impressed. First one on PS3 didn’t have AA.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Seems like developers are avoiding installs on PS3 and in turn the games are worse off.
This game should have gotten an install to improve texture quality and loading. 1 or 2 gb install and problem solved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Or they could do an Unreal Tournament 3 and put it an optional install
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ive played this game on both systems and couldnt really tell the difference until I saw the comparison shots. Xbox clearly takes this one with the higher resolution textures, softer shadows and slightly better frame rate.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Is clearly noted the difference in shade and texture, the XBOX360 version is superior as is usual in multi-platform games, they could have done better with the PS3 hardware. No doubt the Xbox 360 version is the winner
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
There is no excuse anymore why graphics on the PS3 should look like ass. Evidently EA has yet to look at what is possible on that system, eg…Uncharted 2. I am no programmer, but I can understand that Sony has hardware that is difficult to program for, EA has had more than 3 years to learn by now how to take advantage of the PS3 platform.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
This is why I have wayyy more games on 360 vs my ps3.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
they say the quality of the game comes off better on the lead console, I really wonder if that’s true. I guess we’ll definitely see when FFXIII hits the shelves. You’d figure that even though the devs have a great name in the industry they’d still have that same perfectionist zeal they had when they were up and coming. anywho I guess i’ll be getting this for my 360
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Typical outcome. As usual, the 360 beats the ps3 in multi-plats. Nothing new.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I saw 360 wins, but I bought it for ps3 because no1 is ever online on 360 for some reason:S
Good head to head, Been waiting for this 1:D
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
lol who would buy this game?
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
ppl that don’t just want to keep playing mw2 or Gears of war 2 all the time?
There are other games out there:) Be a little open minded.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
The difference isnt large enough to make me want the 360 version. PS3 version again for me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
and also i dont play my games with a magnifying glass so the differences mean nothing 6 feet away.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Then you must have bad eyesight, because from both my 23″ and 52″ from any logical distance, the difference is clearly noticeable. I’m sure graphics aren’t everything, but to say you’d need a magnifying glass to see the difference is completely untrue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Only noticeable if you are up close or a complete 360 fanboy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
I’m such a fanboy that I own 2 ps3’s to my one 360. Riiiight. Please cease your blatantly typical ps3 fanboy bullshit.
It’s unwarranted, as the evidence is clear: the 360 version is superior. End of story. You might keep trying downplay the ps3’s shortcomings, but you don’t need to be a rocket scientist or have 20/20 vision to see that the 360’s version wins.
It saddens me to see this bullshit in every head2head. I love both systems, but ps3 fanboys are constantly in denial.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
the differences arent as big as xbots try and make you believe. especially when you are actually playing the game.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Well then you should have played both demos and you would have noticed a considerable difference, 360 version ran far smoother with less screen tearing and did look nicer. But it sounds as if you wouldnt even listen to the developers themselves if they told you that
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I only have a PS3, and this game doesn’t warrant re-purchasing a 360. I traded it off because of too many RROD’s. So I’ll be getting it on the PS3.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
ps3 hardware = overhyped.
People made uncharted 2 look like nothing people ever saw. All I saw was mediocore graphics with very low resolution and no AA.
The 360 also got some shitty graphics but better than the ps3 with no AA and lag.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
complete 360 fanboy.So sad
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
But the PS3 is over hyped… The RSX is a weaker graphics card than the Xenos. That being said, Uncharted 2 and The Saboteur both show that the PS3 can offer better graphics by transferring graphic work to the Cell.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Have you played Uncharted 2? Im pretty sure that it doesn’t have “Very Low Resolution Textures”
If you believe that the PS3 Hardware was “OverHyped” then I can safely say that the Xbox 360 was “OverHyped”
Anyway this is clearly an Xbox win, but not enough to be worth purchasing on Xbox.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Anyway this is clearly an Xbox win, but not enough to be worth purchasing on Xbox.”
There’s no reason not to own an Xbox 360. It wins multi-platform comparisons time and time again, has a better online service, more downloadable games that all have demos, has exclusives that can’t be played anywhere else etc.
Hardcore fanboys who refuse to entertain the other platform are the idiots that are missing out in the end.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@friedchicken
He said it’s not worth purchasing ON the Xbox 360. He didn’t say that it’s not worth purchasing AN Xbox 360. Is this game any good anyway? It only has a 75 on Metacritic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
wow, coming from a 360 fanboy(really do not like using that term but its true)whos never played uncharted. dont go hating the world because you couldnt afford a ps3, so you went for the cheapest thing, dont try to justify it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
LOL. You’re not replying to my comment are you? I own all of the current gen consoles and a high end gaming PC. I’ve completed Uncharted 1 and 2. I don’t let pathetic kindergarten biases put me off buying a console.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Ashdude
Try to go to the ophthalmologist, because you need it.
Uncharted 2 has the best graphics seen on a game console by MILES (and it has AA).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lol why do Lense of Truth always write their comparrisons to make the PS3 sound really bad. They say the PS3 version has 3 times as much tearing. Why not say it only has a tiny amount of tearing with 3%. They always overdo it to make the PS3 sound terrible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
So they should sugar coat the truth? Last time I checked 3% compared to 0.9% is a little more than 3 times. Also needless to say the game has inferior textures and longer loading on the PlayStation 3.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
they need to sugar the truth for ass hurt sony ps3 fanboys like monkey idiot. come on junked, you should know by now man, ps3 fanboys like him been crying since nov 2006!
ps3 fanboys- cry b3yond!
psn- dementedspirit
xbl demented spirit
peace, and good head to head a s usual.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Not really, I believe they give Head2Head’s fair trial. I mean, what do they get out of favoring the 360? That would make Head2Head pointless.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Head 2 Heads are created to be controversial so people visit the site which creates hits that means they can charge more for advetising. NEVER think that these sites are unbiased. Why would they do these things out of kindness. Its all for money.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Having actually met and known one of the people who runs this site I can tell you that these people do this because they like to, and not because they want to make money.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
hello all! first comment :p
well…I’m an 360 player and recently brought a ps3 home cause I don’t want to miss the exclusives from the ps3 and apart of the multi-platform war I guess its still worth cause the exclusives are top notch
its really a shame that most of the multi-platform games are poorly ported between consoles
sorry my english
cheers
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great game, great Head2Head and both consoles are great in their own way, can’t we all get along?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Deffinitiky a win for the 360.
But who cares, this Game isnt good at all on both Platforms this game is a Fail for over 30 bucks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I do notice the differences between the 2 graphics, but mostly on from the screen shots. I doubt you will notice that much of a difference while playing a game, or if you do not enough to actually effect your enjoyment.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Usually with HD games, you need to see both console versions side by side before you’ll notice any differences. It usually won’t be “day & night” differences either, as in this case.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
yeah the 360 fanboys go and say that you must be blind not to see the difference and the PS3 version sucks, but i bet if they were shown a random version with no idea what controler is being used they would not be able to tell which version is being played.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Heh, unlike most people I DO have enough TVs in the house to do my own head2heads. I HAVE done such comparisons in the past PLENTY of times, and believe me when I say that I DON’T need 2 sets to prove to me how inferior the ps3 version is.
LoT is a site trying to show gamers the differences in each version graphically. For people like me who owns both consoles, it’s a legitimate website that helps out in picking which version of a game I’d want to purchase. The 360’s games almost always win, and I have agreed with LoT 99% of the time, because like me, they AREN’T blind.
They may seem like 360 fanboys to you, but so would the majority of the world, since the 360 IS superior in multi-plats. Go join some ps3 fansite so you can hang out with others just as delusional as you are. As for everyone else, the evidence is clear, and LoT has proven it time and time again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Red Lust Envy: That entire comment sounds like a fanboyish rant. =\
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, I’m a fanboy who owns and loves both systems. Jesus. <__<
It's the typical anti-360 comments on this site that prove who the fanboys really are. There's being a fanboy, and then there's the truth.
Anyone who swears the game looks identical is in denial.
I will continue to play games on WHATEVER system they look and run better on. As it stands, the ps3 version are almost always inferior. No need to be a fanboy to see that.
LoT is a site showing the differences. If you can't stand how LoT PROVES that the ps3 versions are inferior, go back to your playstation forums. You'd be a lot happier there, where you can talk about how the ps3 versions are better because… oh wait, there's like almost no games that are better on the PS3. Whoops.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Red Lust Envy is def a xbot fanboy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Of course, that’s all you have to say. No logic, just baseless accusations. How about you defend the ps3 with actual facts and proof? Oh that’s right, you can’t. Who’s the fanboy?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Although the PS3 version has lower texture resolution I am glad that EA decided that having a decent FPS is the most important part of a game and treated it as such. Even though I am sad to see another PS3 game lose to the 360 in terms of graphics, I would say that the port was actually fairly well done and gamers should be happy with whichever version they can get.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
360 wins but i’l buy it for the ps3 beacouse the RROD hit me for the 3rd time:(
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I prefer PS3 hands down, but 360 wind this battle, It’s getting a little bit tiresome with all these bad ports it’s about time they knew what they were doing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
hmmmmmm still ps3 is my choice hehehe
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m surprised of people saying that they will buy this shit for ps3. Let’s see: 1)they dont use mandatory install when any ps3 have hd (its obvious it was made for xbox), 2)they didnt try to think in any kind of AA (a lot of work seems),3) It doesnt use the advantage of blue-ray for cinematics, textures or sound (almost all multi fail in this). Red Lust Envy and LOT have reason (and im a ps3 owner). Buy this and u will get more ports like this as reward. Of 8 games i have, 6 are exclusive (since sept. i bought the ps3 slim). I love the effort Sony put in the ps3 exclusives (sometimes i wonder if they can make money with so much quality, time and work). So Friedchicken if i want a multi, i buy it for pc (best multi always), so i dont find any point in buy a xbox, its money wasted in my opinion (their exclusives dont attract me and many of them go in pc too, like mass effect, microsoft cant abandon windows seems). Forgive this foreigner for the poor english by the way.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“So Friedchicken if i want a multi, i buy it for pc (best multi always)”
You’re in a thread that’s about a game that isn’t even released on the PC though mate. Look at some of the recent wins for the 360 on here – this game, Bayonetta, MX Vs. ATV Reflex, Assassin’s Creed 2, WWE Smackdown Vs. Raw, Tekken 6 – none of those games are out on PC and out of all of them Assassin’s Creed 2 is the only one that will get a PC version.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dragon Age Origins, Modern Warfare or your Assasins Creed 2 (soon) are in pc (all of them with great critics this year). Tekken is better in xbox yes but ps3 is very close in that one, as LOT said. The only game i would miss in your list is Bayonetta, seems a nice one(no pc version, and crappy in ps3, grats about console!, ill wait for GOW3) MX. ATV Reflex, WWE Smackdown Vs. Raw as well as Army of Two are games that i wouldnt buy not even at 20€, i cant spent my little time or money in those kind of games (and i talk about my opinion, if you think they are good games, nice, no problem, enjoy). And about multiplatforms… exclusives always will be much better (for example Sony with killzone, Uncharted.. or Microsoft with Halo, Gears..) put much effort and time to make great games for their consoles (win money with those games is secundary compared with the prestige). I personally prefer killzone2 graphics over farcry2 being my pc much more powerful. When you buy those games you dont waste your money for sure. Buy a console for their exclusives(and Microsoft have nice ones btw), no for the multis . Many ppl seem to have both consoles, if people can afford it.. “eh!why not?” (i cant :S ), but i think that with 1 and 1 pc its more than enough! PD: an advice Friedchiken keep your money, dont buy Army of two and buy Mass Effect, Halo reach or Alan Wake!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The problem is that in order to get these games to look and run better than on consoles you need a pretty beefy pc. I’m not a pc gamer (I would be if it wasn’t so prohibitively expensive to stay up to date with current tech). The ps3 and 360 communities are larger, and more involved with each other than pc gamers. I only read about this so I can’t say this from experience.
My girl just bought a $1600 computer with a Core i7, 8gb DDR3, and a 1gig NVidia GFX card, and it’s already outdated. This is what turns me off from PC gaming.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A new game like Asesins creed 2 recommend Intel Core2 2.6 GHz GeForce 8800 GT for example, the pc of your girl is a beast! (it can eat a ps3 and a xbox together for breakfast and till it would have 3 cores bored) It will be great for many time, believe me (maybe you must marry her
) Any 80€ graphic card of today is 4Xtimes more powerful than a RSX or a Xenos. Pcs live a lot time, as a tip World of Warcraft (the best pc game for my taste till) is playable in an old crappy p4-2.2 Ghz (like 7 years old). Even i saw a friend play Muramasa the demon blade emulated with a core2duo 1.8 Ghz-ati hd4650 and it run smooth with a res that Wii can only dream. You dont need the last cpu of gfx card, with 600€ you can buy a very nice pc. The problem for pcs, as far i see, is that few companies release the real pc power, (crysis for example and because it wasnt multiplatform). Excuse me for talking about pc so much in a console page!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
PCs last a long time if you don’t mind living of minimum requirements.
If not, you’d be spending enough money to buy a new PS3 every couple of years to upgrade your GPU and then complain to your friends about how you need a new CPU and MB
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
PC nuthuggers starts to invade.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
X360 version looks much more refined . it looks to me like most game studios have problems getting detailed textures from ps3 . Its not the ps3 at fault tho as some ( very few though ) games are better textured on ps3 .
I think only teams with HUGE financial resources and skilled people can get ps3 to work properly , programmers without deep knowledge of cell chip programming are kinda pissing against the wind . It may end up only sony who can take advantage of the cell fully , they have the time money and knowledge of cell workings .
To be honest , the ps3 textures here look crap against 360 ones … very sad . Look into cell chip and its clear that its FAR more powerful than x360 cpu … but sony shouldve just used a more straight forward chip to work with graphics setup … they didnt do anyone favours here .
Cell shouldve been saved for ps4 i think .
Nice textures here on x360 .. clear winner .
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Cell is not FAR more powerful than 360. Do some tech search and you’ll see that the 360 is based on PS3 cpu concept (both from IBM).
360 is not a common powerPC cpu like most ppl think.
And yes, PS3 hardware is overhyped.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
PS3 version is soooooo!!! much sharper bros!!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
1