By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - *New BioShock PS3; IGN claims looks considerably better than 360's!

KatinJin on 03 October 2008
Groucho said:
Newsflash!

Developer gets extra year to work on game, because they're bright and can port the engine to the PS3, from the 360, easily. Game improves in both performance and look. Full story @ 11.

Same thing happened with Oblivion, and looks to be happening with Eternal Sonata, etc. If you're willing to wait, you're always going to get a better product, at least in the 360->PS3 direction.

The only 360 "exclusive" PS3 port that had plenty of time, and subsequently failed miserably, was Lost Planet -- kinda says something about the devs, or perhaps the time and budget allowed, for that one.

 

 Haha, may want to read the thread a little better. Take a look at those pics and tell me it looks better now as multiple people having already stated it's clearly not the case now after the fact from IGN. Clearly looks worse now.



Around the Network
Groucho on 03 October 2008
KatinJin said:
Groucho said:
Newsflash!

Developer gets extra year to work on game, because they're bright and can port the engine to the PS3, from the 360, easily. Game improves in both performance and look. Full story @ 11.

Same thing happened with Oblivion, and looks to be happening with Eternal Sonata, etc. If you're willing to wait, you're always going to get a better product, at least in the 360->PS3 direction.

The only 360 "exclusive" PS3 port that had plenty of time, and subsequently failed miserably, was Lost Planet -- kinda says something about the devs, or perhaps the time and budget allowed, for that one.

 

 Haha, may want to read the thread a little better. Take a look at those pics and tell me it looks better now as multiple people having already stated it's clearly not the case now after the fact from IGN. Clearly looks worse now.

The PS3 demo of it that just came out looks better than my X360 version, so... while I guess the readers of this thread aren't necessarily comparing the two side-by-side, like I can do (okay, I have to switch HDMI inputs on my TV, I can't do side-by-side), generally the case is that the year-long ports turn out a lot better -- and Bioshock looks to be no different in this regard.  Like most long-term ports... its better the 2nd time around, for the obvious reasons.

Its a shame I played it through already.

 



selnor on 04 October 2008

I cant believe over a year after I finished it twice we are talking about Bioshock coming out. Feels like 2007. As for the better graphics.....I bloody well hope so. They have had an extra 12 months. Whats a bet a patch comes for the 360 version the same as Oblivion did. Anyways enjoy it. IT's a very good game.



Groucho on 04 October 2008

The port was done by a different set of devs, and the 360 version is probably not going to sell much more due to a patch, so I doubt they will patch it at all. No money to be made from giving 360 owners more than what they've already had for a year, and are now tired of (or so the sales seem to say).



kabhold on 04 October 2008
DMeisterJ said:
outlawauron said:
DMeisterJ said:
This title needs to be budget priced, or it won't sell that well...

They've sweetened the pot, but not enough for a full price tag.

Make it 39.99 and it'll do wonders.

I disagree. Bioshock is $40 everywhere else and it isn't doing too much.

But not on the PS3 :P

I don't think that PS3 owners will hop on this game at full price.

If ps3 owners (who don't own a 360 or a PC capable of playing it) never played it...then why wouldn't they jump to pay full price? I'ts worth it.

 



Around the Network
libellule on 04 October 2008

- according to what I have read on some french forum (comment on demo).
the game is, at best, as good as the xbox360 version.

- overall, people will buy this game because it is one of the only xbox360 title they really wanted to play.



Time to Work !