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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Another comparison of GTA IV PS3 vs X360

BCNR34 on 27 April 2008
FilaBrasileiro said:
starcraft said:
So the scorecard:

PS3 wins in:
-SIXAXIS support.
-Loading

360 wins in:
-Frame-rate
-Aliasing/paint filter
-No install
-Rumble
-Achievements.

Note that neither future DLC or future online capabilities are recorded as advantages as all are speculative.

 


 win



Around the Network
starcraft on 27 April 2008
DMeisterJ said:
starcraft said:
DMeisterJ said:
NJ5 said:
DMeisterJ said:

Yes, a game that gives you ~100 hours of gameplay, plus Multiplayer, having to wait 440 seconds is a disadvantage... okay.


The list says nothing about the importance of the advantages. That's up to the reader to judge.

 


Starcraft said that sitting for a seven minute install was not an advantage.

A not advantage is a disadvantage. Yes?

I said that having less pop-up is an advantage.

I said that having faster load times is an advantage.

I said that starting the game the moment you get it is an advantage.

By IGN's account, loading is EXTREMELY rare and the 360 will take only a few more seconds. Yet, I haven't nit-picked the importance of that advantage have I?

 



"Don't worry Xbox owners, the load times are rarely more than 30 seconds and don't occur very often."

So it doesn't load often, but when it does, it's 30 seconds.

So after thirteen or fourteen loads, it cancels out the install time. In playing a game 100 hours or so, I'm sure it will load more than 13/14 times.

Er, the PS3 has the load times, they are just slightly shorter.  Like "by a few seconds" according to IGN.

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

DMeisterJ on 27 April 2008



I'm done arguing.



DOATS1 on 27 April 2008

ugly, UGLY, pop-in




PooperScooper on 27 April 2008
ssj12 said:
Kotaku HATES that PlayStation 3 with a passion. Considering IGN, Gamespot, 1up, Rockstar themselves, and many others have givens the PS3 version a nod for graphical AA and better colors in places Kotaku's comparison is quite poor.

and yet some people are still intentionally closing their eyes and plugging their ears. Seriously someones embolism is about to pop.



Around the Network
The_God_of_War on 27 April 2008
DOATS1 said:

ugly, UGLY, pop-in


 Ugh, that's a shame. Which version is it from?



  

DOATS1 on 27 April 2008

have no idea




DMeisterJ on 27 April 2008
The_God_of_War said:
DOATS1 said:

ugly, UGLY, pop-in


 Ugh, that's a shame. Which version is it from?


Oh.

my.

god.

That is FUGLY.  

 



Shameless on 27 April 2008
DOATS1 said:

ugly, UGLY, pop-in


 This is exactly what I mean when I say this game doesn't deserve to score so highly. All reviews so far have rated it 10/10 for graphics, I mean looking at this it couldn't be further from the truth. I haven't seen pop-in this bad in all my time gaming.



PooperScooper on 27 April 2008
Shameless said:

 This is exactly what I mean when I say this game doesn't deserve to score so highly. All reviews so far have rated it 10/10 for graphics, I mean looking at this it couldn't be further from the truth. I haven't seen pop-in this bad in all my time gaming.


Do you know what graphics are?