| Doobie_wop said: The 360 released in 2005, it's also has the most social online network on consoles and multi-platform games performed better on the console from 2006 to 2008. The combination of these things mean that the majority of game reviewers have the 360 as their primary platform and when it comes to reviews, they most likely play and review the 360 version and then copy and past the review into the PS3 section of their site. This may have been fine 2 years ago, but these days it just doesn't cut it. Multi-platform games are more likely equal or even better on the PS3 these days, but it's never noted in any of the reviews on game sites. The reviews have started to come out for Castlevania: Lords of Shadows and I've noticed that few reviewers have mentioned that the game suffers from frame rate drops. After reading around, I've found out that the PS3 version runs flawlessly and the frame rate problems are exclusive to the 360. The same thing happened with Darksiders earlier in the year, the PS3 version was flawless, but the 360 version suffered significant frame drops and had to be patched later on. Split/Second also went through the same thing this year. With more and more games being developed on the PS3 and then later ported to the 360, I'd expect reviewers to be aware of the differences between the two versions instead of only playing their preferred console and then base their score on that experience. Thoughts? |
I'm probably about to repeat what most have already pointed out but multiplat games still to this day tend to took and run better on the 360. So really it's 2005-2010...so far. It's most likely to stay that way (Dead Rising 2 is better looking and running on 360 as is Enslaved). I haven't seen a H2H of Castlevania: LOTS (have you?) so can't comment but the review I read on Eurogamer was of the PS3 version and they mentioned frame rate issues. As for Darksiders, the issue was screen tearing which was resolved with a patch which capped the frame rate and hence reduced screen tear which in turn brought it in line withthe PS3 version. Split Second ran better on 360 with less screen tear, better post processing effects and better overall frame rate but slightly higher res on PS3 (which was 720p) so what's your point?
Perhaps you should try reading your reviews elsewhere. Eurogamer tend to review the better version and most websites point out differences and even deduct scores from inferior versions (see Bayonetta and Orange Box on for example). Also there are dedicated H2H websites such as Digital Foundy and (the inferior imo) Lens of Truth which deal with differences and offer opinions on which is the better version.
Truth of the matter is the mostly small differences won't affect review scores.
