| DOATS1 said: what i'm concerned about is how the ps3 version has a 'visual edge' over the 360 version, when it's at a lower resolution. shouldn't the reviewers be at least saying that the 360 version has the edge or they both look too good to tell apart? i mean the ps3 version looks good enough for reviewers to point out that it looks better than it's rival. i'm not saying this is defo false, but it seems pretty weird to me according to what the reviewers are saying. |
Its because resolution doesn't soley determine how good a game looks. I could play a game on my PC at very high resolution but with a lot of additional effects turned off... or play it at a lower resolution with all those effects on - guess which one looks better?
The reviews seem to be pretty much in agreement that the PS3 'looks' better due to 'slightly' better lighting, pos-processing effects, and so on - the resolution difference is not enough to make much difference and it would appear the 360 does not have quite as nice lighting, etc. Also the HDD load on the PS3 is reducing pop-in and texture load times it would appear, which also contributes to the game looking better.
I've seen the game on both systems now and really the difference is not much. The PS3 is def the overall better looking version to the eye - but we're not compaing the Mona Lisa to a sketch by a two year old, we're comparing two almost identical paintings with one being slightly better lit for viewing.
If you have 360 you've still got a good game (and the DLC if you buy it). If you have a PS3 you have the same good game with a little extra sprinkle of chocolate on top (and maybe different DLC at some point, maybe not).
I say call it a draw and be happy. I am.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
