Face-Off: Call of Juarez: The Cartel
Mexcian stand-off.
| - | Xbox 360 | PlayStation 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Disc Size | 6.2GB | 5.45GB |
| Install | 6.2GB (optional) | - |
| Surround Support | Dolby Digital | Dolby Digital, DTS, 5.1LPCM, 7.1LPCM |
Developer Techland has taken something of a gamble with new offering Call of Juarez: The Cartel. The series has turned its back on the era of the cowboy, relocating the first person shooter action to modern day Los Angeles, opening up a whole new world of high calibre weaponry, vehicles and more densely packed environments.
There's a real sense here that the studio is looking to expand the reach of the franchise, not only with the change of locale but also in the implementation of crowd-pleasing features such as full co-operative online play - up to three players work together through the campaign, adding a more social and tactical approach to the straightforward bursts of FPS action.
Unfortunately, things haven't quite gone to plan: moving away from the Old West has simply made Call of Juarez look like many other middle of the road "urban" shooters, while the solid nature of the visuals in the last two titles seems to have been compromised somewhat as a result of some bland art design choices that don't seem to entirely suit the series' bespoke engine tech.
It's quite a surprise to see a lack of progress on Techland's part with regards to the overall look of the game, especially since The Cartel is running on the new, more technologically advanced Chrome Engine 5. There's a real feeling that the rendering technology doesn't get the opportunity to play up to its strengths in the new locale: in previous Juarez outings, Chrome has consistently delivered detailed landscapes with accompanying long range vistas but the urban setting of the new game doesn't seem to make the most of the engine's capabilities.
The Cartel's less urban areas still show promise though: not only are rural environments more lushly detailed with the use of some pleasing effects (such as light shafts beaming through the trees), but the artwork also does a much better job of standing out from the pack of competing first person shooters.
The most obvious technological changes appear to be how the rendering load is handled on both versions of the game, in combination with a boost in native resolution: it's a noticeable improvement over the last Call of Juarez, as the requisite head-to-head video and comparison gallery reveal.
A direct head-to-head comparison of Call of Juarez: The Cartel on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Use the full-screen button for full 720p resolution, or click the link below for a larger window.
The Cartel's predecessor, Bound in Blood, employs a sub-HD rendering resolution on the PS3: 1152x640 upscaled to 720p, while a cropped 1280x672 is present on the 360, framed by borders. On both versions, a custom anti-aliasing solution provides a decent alternative to the standard use of multi-sample anti-aliasing (MSAA).
In Techland's latest, both consoles now adopt vertical 720p framebuffers - horizontal resolution has been slightly reduced on the 360 (1200x720 on the Microsoft platform compared to native 720p on the PS3), thus allowing the framebuffer and render targets to fit into the system's 10MB eDRAM, without the need to "tile out" mid-frame to main memory, sapping peformance. The difference in image quality between the two is fairly minor: the game isn't quite as sharp on 360 but it's hardly an issue and it's definitely an improvement over The Cartel's predecessor, Bound in Blood, which employed a sub-HD rendering resolution on PS3 (1152x640) and a cropped 1280x672 on 360.
The developer's custom anti-aliasing solution returns, effectively smoothing over the more obvious edges, but not without adding a slight softness to the image. This, along with some of the game's use of post processing elements, give the game's presentation a very mild 'sub-HD' look to it.
Texture streaming and pop-in is a real issue on both versions of the game, but it's more of a problem overall on Xbox 360. The Microsoft platform actually has better texture filtering, but that doesn't count for much when the higher resolution artwork takes longer to stream in.
The basic graphical make-up of the game initially seems quite close between the two versions, and for the most part texture detail and environment modelling is largely identical. There are a few instances of lower resolution textures dotted about on the PS3, along with weaker use of normal mapping, but there's nothing particularly noticeable in this regard that's likely to impact the gameplay experience.
However, the inadequacies of the streaming system utilised by The Cartel is a real problem for both versions of the game. Regularly, we see some obvious and ugly detail transitions occurring close to the player: a good example can be found at 1.27 in the head-to-head video, and in the screens dotted around this page - often you'll see transitions between several detail levels on many environmental objects as higher quality assets pop into view. Both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are affected, but it's clear that texture streaming isn't quite as solid on the Microsoft platform: there are times when higher quality assets simply fail to load, resulting in low resolution artwork being spread across the ground, while object streaming in general appears to be a tad behind on the PS3.
On the other hand, texture filtering on the other hand is better on the 360, with anisotropic filtering providing smoother transitions between mip-map levels leading to clearer art in the distance, compared with a blurrier bilinear implementation on PS3. That said, in terms of the impact on the game's visual quality, the 360 game's texture streaming issues are far more of an issue - detail is lost and a distinct blur is cast over parts of the environment when the art assets don't load, or take their time manifesting on-screen.
The fall-off transistions in fog are more adeptly handled on Xbox 360 (top), while the PS3 has some pixelisation issues with the motion blur effect (bottom).
Elsewhere, other differences are relatively minor, such as the shadow penumbras looking a touch smoother on the 360, or the casting of lower precision shadows in many areas on the PS3. However, other elements are much more apparent during play: motion blur for example, is rendered in a lower resolution on the PS3, resulting in some unpleasant pixelisation artifacts. Additionally, the fall-off transitions between the layers of fog are also much harsher too; the 360 version features a smooth blend between layers as elements of the environment become engulfed in the effect.
You may also like...
-
In Theory: How iPad 3 Breaks the 1080p Barrier
-
Can SSD Upgrades Boost PS3 Performance?
-
Mass Effect 3 Demos Analysed
-
Face-Off: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
-
Asura's Wrath Review
-
The Rise and Fall of Sega Enterprises
-
GAME to close 35 stores
-
AMD in "hush-hush effort" to put graphics chip in PS4
-
The Essential PlayStation Vita
-
Gameplay signs off with £5 Gamestation.co.uk voucher
-
BioWare: we finished Mass Effect 3 before working on DLC
-
Syndicate Review
-
Ridge Racer Vita Review
-
Sony: 3G gives Vita "immediacy"
-
Battlefield: Aftershock pulled from App Store
-
Assassin's Creed: Revelations The Lost Archive DLC details
-
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs announced for PC
-
FIFA 12 gets January transfer window squads update
-
GAME: "we can't stock absolutely everything"
-
Dating site for gamers launches in the UK
-
PlayStation Vita: where's the cheapest price?
-
Guild Wars 2 open beta sign-up begins
-
BioWare unboxes Mass Effect 3 video
-
BioWare blasting Mass Effect 3 copies into space
-
Eurogamer Expo 2012 early bird tickets go on sale















Comments (31) Latest comment 7 months ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
The Cartel's predecessor, Bound in Blood, employs a sub-HD rendering resolution on the PS3: 1152x640 upscaled to 720p, while a cropped 1280x672 is present on the 360...
...an improvement over The Cartel's predecessor, Bound in Blood, which employed a sub-HD rendering resolution on PS3 (1152x640) and a cropped 1280x672 on 360
On the other hand, texture filtering on the other hand is better on the 360
So is this the new guy they wanted alongside Leadbetter? Hi, new guy!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
When did that happen?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
O_O why 360 laughs? O_O I have read a different comparison? to me not seem a stand out victory, every version has it's favours & cont no? Meh...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
anyone played it? is it truly shite? or can you get a laugh with it...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
a game i don't want looks better on a console i don't own. how do i deserve this?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comedy gold.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
And from all the reviews and previews I have read I am glad they did, because more and more this appears to have become a rather uninteresting mediocre game.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Ive read comments of yours now slagging of PC owners and PS3 owners.
Why dont you just put a big neon sign on your head saying "Im a fucking smelly tramp who can only afford to buy a xbox 360. I slag off PC owners and multi platorm owners just to make my trampy smelly self feel better"
That will be slightly less suttle then some of the comments your posting.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
in a sense, PS3 is not really overhyped. SONY say something like PS3 is a super computer. In a sense, yes, PS3 is a super computer. Although by itself, one PS3 is not a super computer. Many PS3 networked together is a supercomputer.
overhyped is game advertisement in those very old year (the NES era and before NES era.)
they already saying High Definition and realistic at that year hahaha.
or maybe on PS2... ugh the overhype about "Emotion Engine"
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
If you are going to correct people, it's a Blu-ray.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
overall definatly worth a punt if you see it below £20
Comment below viewing threshold Show
We're talking about rendering scene once again into reflection map. Cheap artistical texture doesn't work here, but i agree. Why completely remove reflections... But, who knows, maybe rendering scene again just for reflections was too much for ps3. As we can see, they already had to lower quality of some effects (motion blur, fog).
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Do you install 360 games to the HDD for the H2H or not like Lens of Truth? Reason I ask is because you've mentioned texture streaming issues a few times now on the 360 (being worse then PS3) and this is usually resolved at least somewhat with an HDD install.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
An uncharted every 2 years doesn't make up for this.
If i were Sony id hire some of msofts 360 R+D team for the ps4
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Dumbshit