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

Forums - Sony - BIOSHOCK ps3 review by psm3 (93)? a slight anomaly! read on..............

Perhaps in the conversion they took almost full advantage from PS3 HW for some things, hence the stunning bits noted in some reviews, while they didn't take enough care of some other detials, like that now notorious pixellated texture. This could explain the non-uniform reviews about visuals.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


Around the Network

The games are exactly the same except for AA on the 360 version, and unfinished big daddy textures that were somehow missed. All the colours and the lighting are exactly the same.



well at least its an overall better game because of the extra exclusive built in content



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

This game was alot of fun. If you have a PS3 and haven't played it yet. I would recommend this title over and over.



I played through the game once on PC and once on the 360. For the first time ever, I felt that a first person shooter was better on the console than on the PC. Playing Bioshock on an HDTV in surround sound is much better than playing in front of a computer monitor, hands down. Neither version had anti-aliasing, so the choice was simple. If the PC version had anti aliasing, I would have called it a draw.

If you have a PS3 and haven't played this game, you need to buy it or rent it. It's a game you'll want to play through at least twice if not more than that.




Around the Network
Skeeuk said:
well at least its an overall better game because of the extra exclusive built in content

With an overall higher price of $20....

Anyhow your problem is due to comparing reviews to previews. Previews are a bunch of BS to get you excated about a game and often include features/graphically expectations that never make it into the final release. If Fable was anything like the previews indicated it would have been game of the century.

 



Isn't PSM3 some sort of playstation magazine? If they, as playstation fanboys, say that 360 bioshock has better visual, then I guess we can trust them.



Good, this game deserves good scores. Actually, 93 is a bit low.



joshin69 said:
I would say the difference being the humans involved in the (p)review

 

 Agreed.



flagship said:
Skeeuk said:
well at least its an overall better game because of the extra exclusive built in content

With an overall higher price of $20....

Anyhow your problem is due to comparing reviews to previews. Previews are a bunch of BS to get you excated about a game and often include features/graphically expectations that never make it into the final release. If Fable was anything like the previews indicated it would have been game of the century.

 

final builds look better than preview/beta builds.

i was refering to ign claim that the textures and water effects are taken up a notch, then a week later 2k issued a statement claiming they are just aiming for parity on both systems and not 1 better than other.

for a ps3 owner who has not played this before it could be a good game for them this holiday, its an overall better game because of the exclusive content that isnt dl content its on the disc.

 



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...