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

Forums - Gaming - DigitalFoundry - Face-Off: L.A. Noire

Nsanity on 23 May 2011

DigitalFoundry

In the final analysis, L.A. Noire on PlayStation 3 is the one to get. It's smoother, it seems to have fewer streaming bugs, and of course there's no disc swapping. However, factoring in the enormity of the game, it's a credit to Team Bondi that the Xbox 360 version is as close as it is, and so long as you're aware of the gameplay issues and annoyances that Oli covered off in the L.A. Noire Eurogamer review, it's a great buy regardless of the console you own.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-la-noire-face-off?page=3



Around the Network
Rainbird on 23 May 2011

I'm glad I already bought the PS3 version then.



D-Joe on 23 May 2011

disagree

developing on 360 or PS3 is not matter

time and heart is matter



http://zh-tw.justin.tv/johndoe1899

slowmo on 23 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:

Developing on PS3 first is the best move, because both consoles benefit from it.


Then the 360 gets the lazy port and everyones happy on this site jk

The only way you get both versions having the same effort applied is two dev teams, as Cyrtek showed.  LA Noire could have been better on the 360 if lead on the 360.  That's just a fact.  At least the differences aren't as bad as some of the comparisons we've seen in the past (naming no names as it's unimportant).  I'm not buying that leading on PS3 makes the 360 version better, it only makes the PS3 version better (which was perhaps needed once upon a time).



Mad55 on 23 May 2011
D-Joe said:

 

disagree

developing on 360 or PS3 is not matter

time and heart is matter

 


This pretty much.



Around the Network
d21lewis on 23 May 2011

Damn.  I already got the shitty 360 version.  It's almost unplayable......



slowmo on 23 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:
slowmo said:
CGI-Quality said:

Developing on PS3 first is the best move, because both consoles benefit from it.


Then the 360 gets the lazy port and everyones happy on this site jk

The only way you get both versions having the same effort applied is two dev teams, as Cyrtek showed.  LA Noire could have been better on the 360 if lead on the 360.  That's just a fact.  At least the differences aren't as bad as some of the comparisons we've seen in the past (naming no names as it's unimportant).  I'm not buying that leading on PS3 makes the 360 version better, it only makes the PS3 version better (which was perhaps needed once upon a time).

I wouldn't say the same effort was applied in Crysis 2's case, as the PS3 version not only ran at a lower resolution, but had more texture pop-in as well. If anything, Crytek blew a lot of smoke; claiming the PS3 version would be the superior version with physics "closer to that of the PC".

Generally leading on PS3 usually helps both games in the long run (enough developers seem to think so anyway). There are always exceptions to the rule, of course, but the amount of titles lead on PS3 has mostly helped both versions fare better than they would have if lead on 360.

That is impossible to quantify as you cannot go back in time and switch development around, the only thing you can say in good faith is that when the PS3 is lead they usually end up with better results for the PS3, we have no evidence that the port afterwards makes the 360 version better than it would otherwise have been.  Put simply games are being coded to the strengths of the PS3 at the moment not the 360, the 360 can do a lot of graphical tricks that the PS3 comparatively struggles with, such as Alpha Blending and transparency effects for example.

 

On the Crysis front they had seperate development teams dedicated to each version.  The engine obviously couldn't extract quite as much performance from the PS3 hadrware as the 360 for whatever reason.  I have no doubt though that had they lead on the PS3 version then ported to the 360 the PS3 version wouldn't have improved at all and the 360 version would be the worst of the two.

 

I'm not syaing there hasn't been some advantages in terms of improvements to maximising the use of multiple cores with the 360 games but I doubt developers are pushing the boundaries on the GPU side that they could be doing.  I'd say it's great for PS3 owners it's done this way as it's easier for devs to get similar performance from an engine afterwards on the 360 architecture than the PS3's, but that doesn't equal getting the most of the 360 in my books.



slowmo on 23 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:

It can be argued that neither console is truly being taken advantage of (especially the PS3). For instance, most multiplatform titles have much trouble reaching the quality of titles like Uncharted 2 or God of War III. This is thanks (in part) to the strong 1st party arsenal that Sony has lined up who coach each other on the strengths and weaknesses of the platform. Now it's not that multiplatform devs are "untalented/lazy", it's that they aren't going to fully take advantage of the PS3 (which often times leave it on the shorter end of the stick). Yes, they are things the 360 can do the PS3 struggles with, but there are also things the PS3 can do the 360 would struggle with.

Since the majority of the dev time this gen was spent optimizing titles for the 360, it's nice to see the PS3 get a lift in this area. I honestly believe had LA NOIRE been 360-lead, the result would have been equal on the 360 to what it is now (perhaps a tad better), but significantly worse on PS3. Doesn't mean the hardware is bad, but porting from PS3 to 360 has been considered much better than the other way around.

All you have to do is look at how the vast majority of titles (vast majority with the 360 as the lead) have turned out this gen to make any kind of reasonable assumption on the matter.

I agree by and large with your points but the bolded is why I disagreed with your original statement.  I personally feel the 360 version would have been better if it was lead so as such I felt it hasn't benefitted from the situation. 

We both agree on the fact that we prefer exclusives because they really can extract the most out of the hardware.  Multiplatform titles end up making sacrifices to cope for the weaknesses in both pieces of hardware but the lead platform is always going to get the better deal (unless the developer is really crap and hands the port over to someone competent).

Call me picky but I just disagreed that the 360 games benefitted from this arrangement.  I'll conceed that gamers as a whole benefit though as we all get very similar experiences now which wasn't always the case with some developers real poor efforts of porting in the past (although the games weren't necessarily any less playable of course).

 

*Edit* I didn't really specify in my previous post but I agree the PS3 has different strengths so there is things it can do better than the 360 also.



ethomaz on 24 May 2011

I'm laughing with the threads created with fake images showing the PS3 version infinitely inferior like that: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=128642.

LOL



Squilliam on 24 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:

I'm only going by the results. Most PS3 ports are by and large worse than 360 ports have been (even though, yes, there are exceptions to the rule with some 360 ports). There's plenty to speculate, but that's just how it's been this gen. Now either the devs are taking better care of 360 ports, or porting to PS3 is harder (and judging from common chatter throughout the industry, I'm inclined to go with the latter).

If the 360 had been the only console in question (as in it was the only hardware to worry about) then yes, obviously, the results should be better than the ported version of LA NOIRE. However, if this game had been 360 lead, I'm willing to bet the situation would have mirrored (or at least have been very similar to) GTA IV/ Red Dead Redemption (in where the differences were not minor and heavily favored the 360).

Since we can't prove anything for certain, it's a stalemate, but if 360-to-PS3 ports continue to favor the 360, that would add some serious validity to what I'm saying.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're making assumptions out of ignorance. Do you actually know that GTA IV was developed by two different teams and therefore wasn't lead on anything? Do you know for a fact that Red Dead Redemption was lead on the Xbox 360 or does your logic sum up to this?:

If 360 > PS3 = lead on 360 = bad port.

if PS3 > 360 = may the best platform win = oh how surprising nice to see the PS3 in it's place...



Tease.