Bioshock, Ps3 vs 360 screens.

[QUOTE="loco145"][QUOTE="MasteRich"][QUOTE="loco145"][QUOTE="MightyMuna"]

All I have to say is that, do not, I repeat do not believe what you see and read on the internet, more so, from a disgusting forum like SW, some people here are really sad, and will say and do anything.

you would have to be ignorant or a Sony/PS3 hater to believe that pic is real. most people bashing the PS3 version dont even own a PS3. and people who do own one are known to favour 360.

MightyMuna

If you owned a PS3, why would you photoshop the "ps3 screen" to make it look bad? Plus, you have no sources from where the pics came from, so you could have easily found the pics and just PS'ed them.

Anyway, from this thread:

http://i38.tinypic.com/1t6mo6.jpg

there is no proof whatsoever that it has not been shopped.

just like this

That doens't look like the first Pic. Plus the filter doens't follow the geometry of the object at all... ANyway, I won't reply to you anymore.

see, I can do it too.

MightyMuna

...and yet it still looks better than the real ps3 shot! :roll:

[QUOTE="MightyMuna"]

see, I can do it too.

tok1879

...and yet it still looks better than the real ps3 shot! :roll:

what's the proof that it is real or not? also do you own a PS3?

[QUOTE="MightyMuna"]

see, I can do it too.

tok1879

...and yet it still looks better than the real ps3 shot! :roll:

cows are so upset these days they are down to debating this lol...

[QUOTE="Gamer4Iife"]By the way, where did you find those pics, TC ?loco145

Beyond3d forums.

On a forum? That explains it then. :lol:

Wait, fanboys are still denying this? *sigh* This is real. Go turn on your PS3, then look at the Big Daddy that is dead by the waterfall. It's real. Let's be honest for once.

http://i38.tinypic.com/1t6mo6.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/alhlwn.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/2yn44yp.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/1475ns.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/24q6dcz.jpg

Stop sticking up for a piece of hardware and hold devs accountable.

[QUOTE="tok1879"][QUOTE="MightyMuna"]

see, I can do it too.

MightyMuna

...and yet it still looks better than the real ps3 shot! :roll:

what's the proof that it is real or not? also do you own a PS3?

the proof is everywhere, all you gotta do is open your eyes, and yes i own ONLY a ps3(out of the next-gen consoles). My ID's tok1879, you can add me if you want!

[QUOTE="tok1879"][QUOTE="MightyMuna"]

see, I can do it too.

Metsvideogame

...and yet it still looks better than the real ps3 shot! :roll:

cows are so upset these days they are down to debating this lol...

what? I don't get ur point?

Regardeless if the picture is real, If Bioshock looks worse on the PS3, then its due to the fact that it was a quickly made port to cash in on PS3 users. Its a FREEKING port!

If anyone thinks this is a proper system comparison,they are kidding themselves, please compare Bioshock and Uncharted. Jeezus!

ThisCurse

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

angry_fork

And whoever says it's not real is being 100% dishonest.

[QUOTE="angry_fork"]

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

BioShockOwnz

And whoever says it's not real is being 100% dishonest.

No.

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

angry_fork

wow, and i thought the wii fanboys were bad...

[QUOTE="angry_fork"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="angry_fork"]

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

BioShockOwnz

And whoever says it's not real is being 100% dishonest.

No.

Yes, that's dishonest. It truly is. I know the quality of a posters character after going through this thread. It's dishonesty and it's not cool at all.

I agree 100 percent, I think it might be a bug in the source code but dont start saying the guy is doctoring pics. Oh I guess thats what you do when you are in major and I mean major damage control.

[QUOTE="angry_fork"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="angry_fork"]

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

BioShockOwnz

And whoever says it's not real is being 100% dishonest.

No.

Yes, that's dishonest. It truly is. I know the quality of a posters character after going through this thread. It's dishonesty and it's not cool at all.

Okay Matlock.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="angry_fork"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="angry_fork"]

Anybody who thinks this is real is lost.

Metsvideogame

And whoever says it's not real is being 100% dishonest.

No.

Yes, that's dishonest. It truly is. I know the quality of a posters character after going through this thread. It's dishonesty and it's not cool at all.

I agree 100 percent, I think it might be a bug in the source code but dont start saying the guy is doctoring pics. Oh I guess thats what you do when you are in major and I mean major damage control.

No.

Ok, thats it, i'm gonna have to download the demo to see it for myself, i honestly dont believe in that pic, is way to bad, but there are to many people here saying that its true, i guess that the only way is to check it myself.madsnakehhh

Remember, it's the Big Daddy under the waterfall. You pass a security camera and there are 2 splicers in the water. Also, notice the white borders to the bottom and right during the opening. Very odd.

wow ...cows are paying 60 bucks for that ?

first they get the inferior version of Baja and now this ? It's 2006 all over again !

wow ...cows are paying 60 bucks for that ?

first they get the inferior version of Baja and now this ? It's 2006 all over again !

AtrumRegina

dude, of all the games to make this point with, why the POS Baja?

[QUOTE="AtrumRegina"]

wow ...cows are paying 60 bucks for that ?

first they get the inferior version of Baja and now this ? It's 2006 all over again !

tok1879

dude, of all the games to make this point with, why the POS Baja?

LOL..

that game sucked to begin with hahah.

I just downloaded the PS3 demo I'm going to check it out now. Also, why is it the people that only own one console always lie about it to make themselves feel better? It's totally creepy and weird... guys just thought you should know.Gesyma

they have been doing it sense..well...forever...every fanboy needs a purpose..my problem is when people take it to the heart, like somebody just killed there internal child or somthing..some people just take it a tad too far..

but at the end of the day most people know that its all one big joke..and that none of the industry takes this seriously..that..and some of the debates here are hilarious..

[QUOTE="tman93"][QUOTE="legol1"][QUOTE="Pinkyimp"]

[QUOTE="legol1"]i just made my own comparaison with the demo both at 720p looking at the same thing at the same distance at the same angle and the 360 version look better the ps3 version have blury texture and the sound is richer in the 360 version so with all the dev working onthat version and all the time they take its must be obvious now the 360 is more powerful end of story.legol1

Or...it could just be a lazy port...

these things do happen you know.. and it has happend before..(gears of war PC)

Ok, thats it, i'm gonna have to download the demo to see it for myself, i honestly dont believe in that pic, is way to bad, but there are to many people here saying that its true, i guess that the only way is to check it myself.madsnakehhh

I just did it and it is a real picture The Big Daddy does look like that in game

[QUOTE="madsnakehhh"]Ok, thats it, i'm gonna have to download the demo to see it for myself, i honestly dont believe in that pic, is way to bad, but there are to many people here saying that its true, i guess that the only way is to check it myself.Chaos_HL21

I just did it and it is a real picture The Big Daddy does look like that in game

wow some people are getting owned.

You guys are aware the devs already acknowledged this, it is merely an overlooked misplaced texture in the demo. There is even a link in this thread a few pages back mentioning this; lets see pics of things other than the big daddy (that again the devs said they are ware of) for a better comparison (well about as good as a comparison a demo vs a retail product can produce). Cows are throwing accusations of the pic being a fake without even reading and lemmings are proffesing and praying that this pic is an absolute indication of the final product both of which are WRONG!!!! In summary BIG DADDY UGLY PIXELY PLACEHOLDER TEXTURE THAT MANAGED TO SLIP BY INTO DEMO, DEVS KNOW AND WILL ADDRESS... not too complicated right?eNT1TY

I agree with you, I think they will fix that issue. Besides that the rest of the game looks worse as well. Everything is dull and the color is sucked out of everything, all in all the game just looks worse. People cant keep blaming devs at some point you have to blame the hardware. If the ps3 was superior we would have seen it in the multiplaits. As it is it seems the only way the ps3 can have a great graphical game is to be in development for 4 or 5 years.

[QUOTE="eNT1TY"]You guys are aware the devs already acknowledged this, it is merely an overlooked misplaced texture in the demo. There is even a link in this thread a few pages back mentioning this; lets see pics of things other than the big daddy (that again the devs said they are ware of) for a better comparison (well about as good as a comparison a demo vs a retail product can produce). Cows are throwing accusations of the pic being a fake without even reading and lemmings are proffesing and praying that this pic is an absolute indication of the final product both of which are WRONG!!!! In summary BIG DADDY UGLY PIXELY PLACEHOLDER TEXTURE THAT MANAGED TO SLIP BY INTO DEMO, DEVS KNOW AND WILL ADDRESS... not too complicated right?lolkie_81

I agree with you, I think they will fix that issue. Besides that the rest of the game looks worse as well. Everything is dull and the color is sucked out of everything, all in all the game just looks worse. People cant keep blaming devs at some point you have to blame the hardware. If the ps3 was superior we would have seen it in the multiplaits. As it is it seems the only way the ps3 can have a great graphical game is to be in development for 4 or 5 years.

the PS3 is a joke

[QUOTE="eNT1TY"]You guys are aware the devs already acknowledged this, it is merely an overlooked misplaced texture in the demo. There is even a link in this thread a few pages back mentioning this; lets see pics of things other than the big daddy (that again the devs said they are ware of) for a better comparison (well about as good as a comparison a demo vs a retail product can produce). Cows are throwing accusations of the pic being a fake without even reading and lemmings are proffesing and praying that this pic is an absolute indication of the final product both of which are WRONG!!!! In summary BIG DADDY UGLY PIXELY PLACEHOLDER TEXTURE THAT MANAGED TO SLIP BY INTO DEMO, DEVS KNOW AND WILL ADDRESS... not too complicated right?lolkie_81

I agree with you, I think they will fix that issue. Besides that the rest of the game looks worse as well. Everything is dull and the color is sucked out of everything, all in all the game just looks worse. People cant keep blaming devs at some point you have to blame the hardware. If the ps3 was superior we would have seen it in the multiplaits. As it is it seems the only way the ps3 can have a great graphical game is to be in development for 4 or 5 years.

so true, the PS3 was a fallen promise, thats all.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

nVidiaGaMer

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

EXLINK

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

Its the developers fault ... PS3 exclusives look better then 360 exclusives because those are the real developers who know what they are doing.

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

EXLINK

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

Would you please people stop saying that the developers had an extra year with the PS3 version? The PS3 version wasn't developing in parallel with the Xbox 360 version, so IT DOESN'T HAVE AN EXTRA YEAR, IT HAS RELEASED 1 YEAR LATER and they used this time to CONVERT the game into a PS3 game.

[QUOTE="eNT1TY"]You guys are aware the devs already acknowledged this, it is merely an overlooked misplaced texture in the demo. There is even a link in this thread a few pages back mentioning this; lets see pics of things other than the big daddy (that again the devs said they are ware of) for a better comparison (well about as good as a comparison a demo vs a retail product can produce). Cows are throwing accusations of the pic being a fake without even reading and lemmings are proffesing and praying that this pic is an absolute indication of the final product both of which are WRONG!!!! In summary BIG DADDY UGLY PIXELY PLACEHOLDER TEXTURE THAT MANAGED TO SLIP BY INTO DEMO, DEVS KNOW AND WILL ADDRESS... not too complicated right?lolkie_81

I agree with you, I think they will fix that issue. Besides that the rest of the game looks worse as well. Everything is dull and the color is sucked out of everything, all in all the game just looks worse. People cant keep blaming devs at some point you have to blame the hardware. If the ps3 was superior we would have seen it in the multiplaits. As it is it seems the only way the ps3 can have a great graphical game is to be in development for 4 or 5 years.

Maybe, 4-5 years is a bit on the extreme side but i do agree that more dev time is needed to produce similar visuals and ALOT more to produce better. About the game looking worse i would have to play the retail version to compare but i will not considering i have the PC version unless i rent. BTW, only 360 version i played prior to the full pc one was the demo. And muliplats only look worse because its much cheaper than making them look the same let alone better when they are porting over. Profit margin over quality will always be the norm unless there is some contractual obligation for the latter. So in a sense i disagree on the hardware being the limitimg factor but rather the architecture.

Are these comparisons between the 360 retail and PS3 demo versions?

That looks like a very significant difference in both colour palette, contrast and texture resolution.

I still think we need to wait for a proper comparison between the two retail releases. Demos tend to be innaccurate nowadays.

And besides, most website previews indicate that the PS3 version either looks as good or better than the 360 version, and that the colour palette looks more vibrant. These pictures say otherwise.

Brainhunter

Links? All I've seen is ones saying it shows a significant downgrade.

[QUOTE="EXLINK"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

eloyc

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

Would you please people stop saying that the developers had an extra year with the PS3 version? The PS3 version wasn't developing in parallel with the Xbox 360 version, so IT DOESN'T HAVE AN EXTRA YEAR, IT HAS RELEASED 1 YEAR LATER and they used this time to CONVERT the game into a PS3 game.

Still gave the developers more time to optimize their engine codes so it would play better. Regardless if it was parallel or not, the developers had more time with their engine code thus they had more time to go through it and optimize it better. Its more than obvious that the 360 would look the same if not better if it had the same development time and same release date.

[QUOTE="eloyc"][QUOTE="EXLINK"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

EXLINK

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

Would you please people stop saying that the developers had an extra year with the PS3 version? The PS3 version wasn't developing in parallel with the Xbox 360 version, so IT DOESN'T HAVE AN EXTRA YEAR, IT HAS RELEASED 1 YEAR LATER and they used this time to CONVERT the game into a PS3 game.

Still gave the developers more time to optimize their engine codes so it would play better. Regardless if it was parallel or not, the developers had more time with their engine code thus they had more time to go through it and optimize it better. Its more than obvious that the 360 would look the same if not better if it had the same development time and same release date.

I'm not arguing about how it would be in the Xbox 360 with more developing time nor if it looks better or worse on the PS3, I'm just saying that the PS3 PORT (we should remark that is a PORT) has't had an extra developing year. Converting games from XBox 360 to PS3 is not a shallow job, it's a pain.

LMAO,DOWNGRADE CONFIRMED :lol:

The mighty cell and RSX struggling to run a year old game? What happened?

GabeNewellsPie

[QUOTE="EXLINK"][QUOTE="eloyc"][QUOTE="EXLINK"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

:lol:

Wow. One year later and the PS3 version still can't outdo the 360 version. Sad.

eloyc

PS3 is better. Fight Night Round 3 looks better on PS3. Oblivion looks better on PS3. Its up to the developers if they really want to work around the programming difficulties of the PS3 and not be lazy.

And the fact that developers for those games also had almost a year of extra development time. If you gave that extra year to the 360 it would look probably even better than the PS3 version.

EDIT: But then again, Bioshock was more than a year later and it still looks worse! LOL!:lol:

Would you please people stop saying that the developers had an extra year with the PS3 version? The PS3 version wasn't developing in parallel with the Xbox 360 version, so IT DOESN'T HAVE AN EXTRA YEAR, IT HAS RELEASED 1 YEAR LATER and they used this time to CONVERT the game into a PS3 game.

Still gave the developers more time to optimize their engine codes so it would play better. Regardless if it was parallel or not, the developers had more time with their engine code thus they had more time to go through it and optimize it better. Its more than obvious that the 360 would look the same if not better if it had the same development time and same release date.

I'm not arguing about how it would be in the Xbox 360 with more developing time nor if it looks better or worse on the PS3, I'm just saying that the PS3 PORT (we should remark that is a PORT) has't had an extra developing year. Converting games from XBox 360 to PS3 is not a shallow job, it's a pain.

And expect that to continue because developers know the size of the fan base for each system and the ease of developing for each system. Coincidentally both are on the 360.