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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Developers getting the hang of ps3: PS3 vs 360 multiplat comparison 08

stephen700 on 29 November 2008

The Ps3 version has seriously bad alias problems - not that that affects gameplay anyway the frame rate is steady 30fps which is ok.
The camera veiw is useless if you go near a wall you cant see a thing.
The controls they suck - it's crap trying to aim with a thumbstick.
The Press x to shake off close in attacks is pathetic and should have been done with a motion control.
The movement control is crap too it's not even analogue and seems to be laborously slow whatever you try to do.
The player can't even jump down from a platform or jump upwards talk about a rigid set of constraints to movement - overall i think this game is crap.
The PC version by virtue of it having a mouse interface would be the best for sure.
This is why i dont but games like this for the PS3 - they have such poorly implemented controls.



PS3 number 1 fan

Around the Network
DMeisterJ on 29 November 2008

Who cares?

Sigh.



rubido on 30 November 2008
ChronotriggerJM said:

I love how blind some of us can be on this website :P I think a good majority of you missed the entire point to begin with ^^

The obvious die-hard fanboy's on both side ravenously support they're console in which is OBVIOUSLY TEH BETTARS, I mean hell, were hearing talks of some missing vines here... a little bit of blur there, a shadow being silly looking on one console, while not even being there on the other :P

This was the point guys!

At the start of this "console war", you'd be lucky if you could even make a PS3 version of the game run at 30 frames a second! Developers have come a million miles from they're first efforts on the PS3, and some of these actually look better than they're 360 counterparts! It's fantastic! Not because it looks better (personally, the exclusives always have, and probably always will ^_~ ), but because you don't have to dread picking up a multi-plat, which I'll admit, I've been pretty wary of :P A common expression of ours around the house for a while has been "Meh, it looks so... multi-plat..." And well now, that's not as much of a bad thing :P

I tip my hat to some of these developers for not being fully incompetent, you've learned the PS3 quite well ^^ Now please for the sake of gaming, figure out the Wii xD It's suffering the worst from 3rd party developers :(

Good post. :)

 



whacker41 on 30 November 2008

If there's a difference in graphics of all those screenshots, then the difference is so miniscule that i don't think it's worth making a thread about it.



PSN- williwod

Remember, there are no stupid questions. Just stupid people- Mr Garrison

Deneidez on 30 November 2008

Slight edge goes for X360. Devs are however getting better with PS3. Anyway, crappy comparison is crappy. When comparising graphics you shouldn't make screen shots smaller than the actual game play resolution is. Make those pics 200p stamps and try to compare those. Urgh... At least eurogamer does it right.



New crap available on mi pages!

Around the Network
mibuokami on 30 November 2008

leo-j said:
NNN2004 said:

the ps3 is the lead platform for the game and the game looks worst on it .. man i said that to sony fans before .. the games are great in the ps3 but not the graphics .. i didnt bought my ps3 becaus its have a great graphics no i bought it because its have some great games.

 

If the ps3 were lead platform, the game cant look worse on the ps3.seeing as its a ps3 to 360 port, its either identicle or there is something wrong

Also the PS3 has the best looking games on consoles this gen, what are you trying to create with your "NOT GOOD GRAPHICS" argument?

Im not trying to start a flamewar, also its not brightness/gamma settings, its called FULL RGB super white, PS3 games look miles better when put to those settings(I still dont think gamespot used it, seeing as not all 360's use HDMI, and they cant compare an HDMI ps3 with a component cable 360).

 

Lead development on PS3 does not always equal superior on on par graphic for the PS3, there a clear cases such as Mirror's Edge which has more screen tearing on the PS3 version.

That said, I cannot notice the difference when I actually play the game, maybe my eyes just aren't that sharp...




NJ5 on 30 November 2008
Kantor said:
I honestly cannot make out any difference just looking at the pictures.

Let Gamespot preach about "pop-in" and "screen tearing" and "lower resolution" while tweaking the brightness and contrast settings so they are optimised on the 360 and make the PS3 version as ugly as possible.

Come on, it's obvious. Gamespot are not exactly the least biased site on the internet. Almost as bad as EuroGamer, when they made that PS3 version of BioShock being clearly inferior to the 360 version and an insult to a great game comment.

There are some differences which are pretty obvious (whether they're important or not is a matter of personal opinion of course).

In the Star Wars: The Force unleashed first screenshot, look at the shadows on the floor. The 360's shadows are quite detailed, you can see the shape of the leaves projected on the floor. The PS3's shadows are more indistinct, as if they have a lower resolution.

360:

PS3:

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Kantor on 30 November 2008
NJ5 said:
Kantor said:
I honestly cannot make out any difference just looking at the pictures.

Let Gamespot preach about "pop-in" and "screen tearing" and "lower resolution" while tweaking the brightness and contrast settings so they are optimised on the 360 and make the PS3 version as ugly as possible.

Come on, it's obvious. Gamespot are not exactly the least biased site on the internet. Almost as bad as EuroGamer, when they made that PS3 version of BioShock being clearly inferior to the 360 version and an insult to a great game comment.

There are some differences which are pretty obvious (whether they're important or not is a matter of personal opinion of course).

In the Star Wars: The Force unleashed first screenshot, look at the shadows on the floor. The 360's shadows are quite detailed, you can see the shape of the leaves projected on the floor. The PS3's shadows are more indistinct, as if they have a lower resolution.

360:

PS3:

 

I played that level twice on PS3, looked at the comparison shot, and it took a pointing out for me to notice that there was actually any difference.

Higher resolution shadows = superior graphics? It's seriously not noticeable. The only games I admit look NOTICEABLY better on 360 are The Orange Box and Fallout 3.

For some reason, Big Daddies in the PS3 version of BioShock go all black and burned when they die, but I just dismissed this. Really, it doesn't affect the experience in any way.

 



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

NJ5 on 30 November 2008

@Kantor: That's why I said that the importance of these observations is a matter of personal opinion. Personally I don't think it's a big deal either. My point with that post was simply to show that when you know what to look for, the differences aren't that complicated to see.



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

MrBubbles on 30 November 2008
Kantor said:

For some reason, Big Daddies in the PS3 version of BioShock go all black and burned when they die, but I just dismissed this. Really, it doesn't affect the experience in any way.

 

to cover up the bad textures, id assume.

 



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur