New Graphics comparison?

I'm starting to wonder if it really is down to bad ports as nearly every port suffers from the same thing, brightness.

Maybe a game like UT3 will prove this as I believe that won't be a simple port.
 
Last edited:
I played a couple of those PS3 games with the lightness problem (as they see it) mine didnt look that bright at all, maybe its because i use the new video settings to enable black blacks if that makes sense. If there complaining about it being to light why dont they change the brightness on the TV?
 
People need to go back to just enjoying the games and stop concentrating on which console's games look fractionally better in my opinion.
 
Oblivion proved that there can be a PS3 game port with better textures than the Xbox 360 version
Click to expand...
wtf, are they looking at the same screenshots at me, the textures in those first three shots look way better on the 360 and the ther shots are identical.

Armoured core - Pretty identical
Def Jam - Pretty identical, some differences,but not ones which change the quality
NBA - sharper textures and better anti-aliasing
Virtua Tennis - PS3 version looks blurry, which is weird...
Oblivion - First two shots floor textures look better, everything else looks identical.
Spiderman 3 - Mixed bag, some sharper textures and building detail on the x360, and some different sharper textures and building detail on the PS3, i prefer the PS3 version, but for some reason it has completely different trees etc...
MLB - Crowd and other details not as good on the PS3, shirts seem to look better on PS3 though.

Kojak said:
People need to go back to just enjoying the games and stop concentrating on which console's games look fractionally better in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Dont know what you mean by 'go back' its always been this way and always will... People like to know which version of a game is better etc...

anewbe4u said:
Some times the PS3 just seems too light.
Click to expand...
That seems to be a gamma problem, probably the settings on their PS3... Seems too much gamma to be default.
 
Last edited:
Skyfall said:
Dont know what you mean by 'go back' its always been this way and always will... People like to know which version of a game is better etc...
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on your point of view. Personally I don't care if another version looks 2% better. This knob polishing by fanboys (and game websites such as GameSpot promoting it with articles such as this) reminds me of the arguments that take place between fanboys of PC graphics cards. Kids have always argued over which system is better (Spectrum 48k vs C64 being the one when I was in secondary school).

Games are always going to look or perform better on a certain system as developers usually prefer one over the other or know how to get more out of a specific system. It's the overall quality of the game that should count not which one manages to have better anti-aliasing or fractionally better texture detail etc. Once you get hung up on those things you stop enjoying the game the way it was meant to be enjoyed.
 
I think you're wrong.

People are quite entitled to expect very good graphics, when you've paid £400 for a new console you'd like it to look a bit better. Thats not the only reason but its important.

Graphics are an important part of any game. I would say its 65% playability and 35% graphics. In my opinion anyway.
 
Thats the point though, the defining factor for a game is its gameplay, the defining factor for a console is its games, the ony difference between two version of the same game is;
A) Playing with a different controller.
B) The small graphics differences.

They are informative articles to give the public information they need to see. For example; I can definitley say from those screenshots I see no proof of Sony's claim that the PS3 is "twice as powerful as the Xbox 360". Independent commentary on the systems availible today. And again, part of the point in that article is to show how little the differences are.

And ja for me graphics are important, imagine, if gears of war had average/bad graphics but was twice as long, I would still rather have played the version with better graphics.
 
Skyfall said:
And ja for me graphics are important, imagine, if gears of war had average/bad graphics but was twice as long, I would still rather have played the version with better graphics.
Click to expand...
Me too Gears Of War is an experience and the first taste of "next-gen" graphics on a console, the bar has been set.
 
Kojak said:
People need to go back to just enjoying the games and stop concentrating on which console's games look fractionally better in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Quoted for the truth.
 
Hmm, i have never owned a ps3 and i sold my 360 a while back so i wouldn't call myself a fanboy or anything but the ps3 in those screens look terrible, the textures are far less detailed and does that thing even support AA? doesn't look like it in those pics.
 
chris_87 said:
Some of the pics look really poor quality, I have Virtua Tennis on the PS3 and it looks A LOT sharper than in the pictures they used. :eek:
Click to expand...
Yeah I had Virtua Tennis and Spiderman 3 and they both look better in reality than in those pics! Maybe Gamespot are a tad bias and turn the brightness up on their TV's before taking the PS3 shots??? :confused:
 
That gamespot guy is nuts. Those first few Oblivion screenies look well better on the X360. Much better textures. The PS3 looks washed out and too bright. However the PS3 is much sharper (Imperial City floor tiles and stairs etc.)

Its the same to a lesser extent on the other games. The PS3 looks washed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom