|
Why do 360 games look better in online comparisons?
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
10. September 2008 @ 20:44 |
Link to this message
|
A simple question. When you go to see the PS3 vs 360 videos for games at http://gametrailers.com, why do the 360 versions look brigher and more vibrant?
I AM NOT TRYING TO START A FANBOY FIGHT! I AM LOOKING FOR PURE FACTS. IF YOU ARE GOING TO TALK NEGATIVLY ABOUT ANY CONSOLE, I WILL REPORT YOU TO THE MODS.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Member
|
10. September 2008 @ 23:08 |
Link to this message
|
sometimes its a case of the game is made for 360 and then has a crappy port job made for PS3, which can happen the other way around too.
|
|
sloth92
Junior Member
|
10. September 2008 @ 23:37 |
Link to this message
|
Much agreed, also some ps3 games were made to work on a computer and not the ps3 then tested on the pc and ported to the ps3, but this was mainly the release games. Most definately the port jobs are bad from xbox to ps3, also the 360 doesnt have the power like the ps3 and the games end up being like a Pinto with a huge v-8, without the correct mods to the suspension it will spin all over the place. As you can see games like Mgs4 Look awesome. I use this rule because I have both the 360 and the ps3 if the game is out for both and has online play I buy for the 360 if it does not have online play I choose whichever one I can get used first. Otherwise the ps3 is a great system I hope these help you answer your questions.
Tha Sloth zapped ya with his pimp cane
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 00:44 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by JorDogg:
sometimes its a case of the game is made for 360 and then has a crappy port job made for PS3, which can happen the other way around too.
Exactly, its because the lazy devs orignally code games for the 360 because its simpler and then just slap together a port for the ps3.
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 08:35 |
Link to this message
|
I'm asking because I'm looking at games like Assassins Creed and Bioshock and seeing that they look like crap on the more powerful PS3. The PS3 always shows everything darker.
So the simple answer, Dev's are lazy.
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 09:09 |
Link to this message
|
Hold on a sec, I thought bioshock was being developed for the ps3 and not ported?
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 09:12 |
Link to this message
|
It has been proven that Gametrailers has done multiple things to make it "seem" that way.
1) They do not enable Full Color option in the PS3 settings. Explaining that "it does not come shipped enabled so we don't do comparisons that way and leave it at Limited not Full"
Which is 100% obviously BS plain and simple. The fact is they use the PS3 on computer monitors for their reports which support these options yet for some reason they do not enable them to get a PROPER comparison...bias much?
2) They have been caught using PS3 footage for a comparison for Grid. sources 1, 2, 3
Basically they said the PS3 version was worse, it wasn't as colorful, bright etc. but they used PS3 footage for the 360 version in the comparison! Then said it was an editing error...again this is utter BS. The video obviously had the X,O,/\,[] of the PS controller but the best part that proves their bias is that the videos reflected their "findings" so that means they knew exactly what they where doing as the colors and brightness where adjusted to make it seem as the "360" version was better!?!? How would that be possible if the recording was of the same exact game!?! Easy. Enable Full color (which they say they just couldn't do already) or use video editing tools on the PC post recording.
I still go to Gametrailers but just to see some HD videos and always keep in mind that their footage is only a guideline to what the game will look like. And I NEVER fall for their "comparisons". But I mainly go to a site like Gamersyde.com for MUCH better (& proper) captures for PS3 footage of games.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 09:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by canuckerz:
Hold on a sec, I thought bioshock was being developed for the ps3 and not ported?
No, it's still a port, but some additional things like the textures, water and AA have been tweaked for the PS3.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2008 @ 09:14
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 09:26 |
Link to this message
|
Is there a reason behind thier bias? Getting paid off etc. Or are they just fanboys?
That sucks about bioshock, I thought we were getting a proper one made.
And thanks for the tip about the hdmi full color range, I didn't realize that worked with computer monitors. Much more vibrant now and I see what you mean.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2008 @ 09:34
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 09:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by canuckerz:
Is there a reason behind thier bias? Getting paid off etc. Or are they just fanboys?
That sucks about bioshock, I thought we were getting a proper one made.
And thanks for the tip about the hdmi full color range, I didn't realize that worked with computer monitors. Much more vibrant now and I see what you mean.
I really don't know why. If I had to guess I would say a combination of the 2. Don't fret about Bioshock from my understanding it is the superior version as it has ALL the content that the 360 had to download additionally and some new gameplay as well as support for trophies and possibly alternate endings. If you are able to check out this months episode of Qore it has some really good info about it.
As for the Full color range & PC monitors compatibility...that's what it was intended for, and for TV's that also support it. But either way NP, you're welcome ;)
In addition here is a video that just further proves GT's bias. It was an HD video on Stage6 made by the user bobothemonkey but since they are not around someone posted a SD version on GT's servers!
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/160513.html
PS3 - 720p RGB Full/Super White On
360 - 720p Black Level Extended
Edit: I actually pay for Qore but here is a Youtube of it
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2008 @ 09:52
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 10:46 |
Link to this message
|
I guess it's the 360's turn to shine, just like how the PS2 shined over all last generation.
Thanks Oner for posting that video, that's what I like to see. Show all those fanboys that the PS3 looks the exact same as the 360.
Another question. I saw somewhere that LBP could not be released for the 360 due to large levels and physics involved. Isn't it true that the 360 has superior RAM and Graphics capabilities but the PS3 has the better physics capabilities with its Cell Processor?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2008 @ 10:54
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. September 2008 @ 13:18 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by core2kid:
Another question. I saw somewhere that LBP could not be released for the 360 due to large levels and physics involved. Isn't it true that the 360 has superior RAM and Graphics capabilities but the PS3 has the better physics capabilities with its Cell Processor?
LBP could be made for the 360 (graphics wise) if they had incorporated a hard drive into EVERY system and had implemented a larger capacity disc drive medium. But then again MS doesn't allow user made content on their system for full game releases (look at UT3 and why there are no map editors, mods etc. while the PS3 version does).
As for the 360 having superior ram that is an outright fallacy. Read up on this link, watch the video as well as here. But in short ~
Quote:
PS3 as we all know is powered by 256mb of GDDR3 RAM and 256mb of XDR at ultra fast speed of 3.2 ghz.The XDR RAM has a very low latency and is more efficient than contemporary PC RAMs
This in comparison to the 360 which has 512mb GDDR3 + 10mb EDRAM (10mb more ram) yet it is unable to compete with the speed of the XDR ram. Now some will say "but but but the PS3 has only 256 available to the Cell" that is also incorrect the cell has access to all the ram directly at any time and also in a different way.
See while 256 is "small" that does not matter, think of it this way a 8' diameter pipe @ 2' long can flow more quicker and more efficiently than a 2' diameter pipe @ 2' long = this analogy represents bandwidth & speed (the 3.2 ghz speed in vs. the 360's 700 mhz speed ram). So even if we imagine the PS3's architecture ONLY had access to 256 megs of it's available 512 it can still handle just as much (if not even more) than it's counterpart.
But it is all subjective/relative anyway as it all depends on the dev and how they go about or handle the way data is streamed/pooled. Remember, Data is just 1's & 0's and when you couple the Cell processor and the XDR + GDDR3 ram together correctly you can attain great results....just look at what the PS3 has done for Folding @ Home! Or just go by your own eyes and look at other titles that are unequaled like GT5P, Uncharted, Killzone 2, Heavy Rain, MGS4 and more.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2008 @ 13:35
|
