PS3 vs 360 graphics

Steedie · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:00

wannabedamned said:
360's version of fightnight is nicer than the 360 for 1 reason, The lights. Other than that, No difference.

Rofl, you have to be kidding

360 Scene:

PS3 Version (I've highlighted the most obvious differences)

Just look at the textures of pretty much everything, they're naff, the crowd, the flags, wtf is up with that. Not that its particularly important, I dont buy a game to look at the flags and background scenery. But when you go on about how much better PS3 is gonna be, its embarrasing to churn out something like that

Again 360:

Now PS3:

Muscle definition is a lot better than the 360, and thats good, but you cant just add that and drop everything else. They just look bland with no really life to them. The 360 makes them look like they've been in a ring punching for ages, they look sweaty, PS3, well no offence but Ali just looks like brown clay

You really must have your Sony goggles on to not notice that, I'm getting a PS3, cant wait for it, yet I'm not gonna pretend that right now, 360 is spanking it all over the place. But in the PS3's defence, developers have had a massive lead in terms of getting to grips with the 360 architecture

dirtydog · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:03

Steedie said:
You really must have your Sony goggles on to not notice that, I'm getting a PS3, cant wait for it, yet I'm not gonna pretend that right now, 360 is spanking it all over the place. But in the PS3's defence, developers have had a massive lead in terms of getting to grips with the 360 architecture

Hang on

When 360 games came out with rubbish graphics, glitches, framerate problems, whatever - everyone here said "oh no no it isn't the 360's fault! Blame the developers, not the mighty 360!"

Now PS3 games come out and those same people are saying "ha, look how crap the PS3 is!"

The stench of double standards in this forum is overpowering...

Steedie · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:08

dirtydog said:
Hang on

When 360 games came out with rubbish graphics, glitches, framerate problems, whatever - everyone here said "oh no no it isn't the 360's fault! Blame the developers, not the mighty 360!"

Now PS3 games come out and those same people are saying "ha, look how crap the PS3 is!"

The stench of double standards in this forum is overpowering...

How did I know you were going to mention that? :rolleyes:

Sorry but I really dont value your opinion what so ever with some of the crap you come out with

And also, whenever a 360 game comes out with sub standard graphics, I'm the first to complain, you make a next gen console and go on about the graphics, you dont go releasing games that dont live upto it.

wannabedamned · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:11

You really must have your Sony goggles on to not notice that,

hehe, I think goggles would have helped. If you notice, I'd not noticed anything behind those lights.

Thats not a bad thing, It's just once i'd see the lighting difference, I figured unfortunately that the PS3 version was a bit pants in comparison lol.

--

Dirtydog does make a good point tho, It is down to developers isnt it, Rather than the companies who make the consoles.

dirtydog · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:12

Steedie said:
How did I know you were going to mention that?

Because I'm one of the few posters in here who tries to take a balanced view probably

Sorry but I really dont value your opinion what so ever with some of the crap you come out with.

Please explain why what I said was wrong then...

Andy298 · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:15

metachi said:
the graphic looks the same, but the xbox360 has better lighting.

They don't look the same at all. 360 has far better textures on some of those games. They just look clear and crisper!

Steedie · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:16

dirtydog said:
Please explain why what I said was wrong then...

This is another thread in itself, but you know I'm not the only one who finds your views about frame rates a bit repetitive. You just try and get peoples back's up...

You're posts in other parts of the forum are good and helpful, but I just feel in this part of the forum you try and pee people off

wannabedamned · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:17

Andy298 said:
They don't look the same at all. 360 has far better textures on some of those games. They just look clear and crisper!

eugh, This is just going to go round in circles alll day long

dirtydog · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:18

Steedie said:
This is another thread in itself, but you know I'm not the only one who finds your views about frame rates a bit repetitive. You just try and get peoples back's up...

You're posts in other parts of the forum are good and helpful, but I just feel in this part of the forum you try and pee people off

Did you not take my point? Did the fact that I included the word 'framerate' (which was NOT the point) blind you to the point itself? :confused:

Do you want me to draw you a picture mate?

Steedie · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:20

dirtydog said:
Did you not take my point? Did the fact that I included the word 'framerate' (which was NOT the point) blind you to the point itself? Do you want me to draw you a picture mate?

No, I understand quite clearly what you are saying.

I said that when games come out for the 360 with sub standard graphics and glitches that I'm the first to moan about it, as I think its just lazy not to make your game look next gen on a next gen console.

But first and main argument always is the Frame rate, which like I said becomes quite repetitive

Andy298 · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:29

wannabedamned said:
eugh, This is just going to go round in circles alll day long

Don't get me wrong I'm not slating the PS3, I'm just pointing out that the comment he made was totally false!
Of course the 360 is going to look better, it's been out for a year now. I'm pretty damn sure we'll not see the real power of PS3 for about a year also

Raikiri · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:35

dirtydog said:
Hang on

When 360 games came out with rubbish graphics, glitches, framerate problems, whatever - everyone here said "oh no no it isn't the 360's fault! Blame the developers, not the mighty 360!"

Now PS3 games come out and those same people are saying "ha, look how crap the PS3 is!"

The stench of double standards in this forum is overpowering...

But there were some bad games released on the 360 and they are slated by 360 owners, this is comparing THE SAME GAMES so the developer issues really go out the window. If it was comparing GoW with resistence then the developers would play a part but as this is comparing the same games made by the same people with the only variation being the console that they are running on.

As for framerate, doesn't the PS3 have more issues on games such as TH8 than the 360 version?

Also, both consoles have been in development for about the same time, the games are directly comparable because they are from the same gen.

dirtydog · 7 Dec 2006 at 11:40

Raikiri said:
But there were some bad games released on the 360 and they are slated by 360 owners, this is comparing THE SAME GAMES so the developer issues really go out the window.

Up to a point they do, but not totally. For a start there are probably different programmers working on each version even within the same company. But the main point is that the PS3 is newer territory than the 360.

Personally I am happy to admit that some of those PS3 screens look worse, particularly the flag in the boxing game. Overall though there is little in it.

Raikiri said:
Also, both consoles have been in development for about the same time, the games are directly comparable because they are from the same gen.

No. This is where the double standards and hypocrisy starts to creep in

Compare them on a level playing field please. The 360 has been out a YEAR. The PS3 has been out a MONTH. See the difference?

Raikiri · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:03

I don't carehow long they have been out, they are the same gen and therefor directly comparable. Same as I compared the PS2 and xbox games directly even though the advantage was to the PS2 release wise.

Next year it will be 'the 360 has had 2 years and the PS3 has only had 1' etc. until the next xbox comes out before the next PS and then it will be 'but it is next gen the PS3 isn't'.

dirtydog · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:08

Raikiri said:
I don't carehow long they have been out, they are the same gen and therefor directly comparable. Same as I compared the PS2 and xbox games directly even though the advantage was to the PS2 release wise.

Next year it will be 'the 360 has had 2 years and the PS3 has only had 1' etc. until the next xbox comes out before the next PS and then it will be 'but it is next gen the PS3 isn't'.

Well why when I compared the 360 to the Xbox and PS2 and pointed out that some 360 games were performing poorly compared to those in some respects, people said 'but the 360 has only just come out' ? You can't have it both ways?

lordrobs · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:14

Next to naff all in it imo. I prefered the PS3 NFS:C shots and at first glance I prefered the PS3 Fight Night ones, probably because I instantly looked at the foreground (as you do when playing a game).

Looks like they are pretty much on par which for us gamers as a whole is the best possible outcome :cool:

roboffer · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:15

Have to go along with dirtydog on this, there really do seem to be a lot of people with double standards. I for one will never buy a PS3, but that does not mean I have to pretend the 360 is better than it if it isnt.

McManicMan · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:21

dirtydog said:
People don't buy the PS3 because they think its cross-platform games are going to look any better than the 360. They buy it for PS3 exclusive games (and/or the blu-ray player).

true but a lot won't be will they, most just presume becasue its called Playstation then its automatically better, but if they wanna waste £200 or more extra than a 360 then thats down to them, but its a shame

Andy298 · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:27

Raikiri said:
I don't carehow long they have been out, they are the same gen and therefor directly comparable. Same as I compared the PS2 and xbox games directly even though the advantage was to the PS2 release wise.

Next year it will be 'the 360 has had 2 years and the PS3 has only had 1' etc. until the next xbox comes out before the next PS and then it will be 'but it is next gen the PS3 isn't'.

Hmm I dunno? I do agree with Dirtydog on this. I mean it's going to take time for developers to get use to the PS3. I don't believe for one minute that developers have had PS3 dev kits for just as long as 360 kits. Ok in the comparison article they are the same games, but if devs are still not use to PS3 kits then of course the games are going to look worse.
All I'm saying is that it's too early to compare these machines. I'd wait till next Xmas at least before we see the true power of the PS3, 360 also! I mean the developers at Epic said they only scratched the surface with Gears, and that's an amazing looking game!

duncan888 · 7 Dec 2006 at 12:32

The Fight night screen shots clearly shows Xbox360 to be better imo, the lighting effects are non exsistant on the PS3. On the xbox u can see they are using HDR lightingh effects.

If you go to gametrailers and download the High Definition; Marvel: Ultimate Alliance comparison video against 360, PS3 and Wii. Although the 360 and PS3 look identical you can clearly see that the 360 outperforms the PS3 because it runs smooth as silk, apposed to the PS3 which looks like its running at 15fps, not fluid at all.
The Wii looks a bit naff, but its not in the same league.

Surely PS3 developers have had the development kits for years, as the PS3 was scheduled to come out a year ago. So they've had an extra year to polish things up which would have been finished if not for the delay