I don't get this logic from gamespot

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"] It's not noticeable (besides the CGI quality). He probably went to Digital Foundry :P and the overall game experience is the same.Snugenz

It is true that the only differences are graphical, if you have any evidence to the contrary please feel free to share it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="Chutebox"] People keep saying this, but it's just not true.sayonara89

It is true that the only differences are graphical, if you have any evidence to the contrary please feel free to share it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

The overall game experience is still the same, i never denied there's differences in quality. And i dunno about you but i'd include framerate under graphical.

[QUOTE="sayonara89"]

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

It is true that the only differences are graphical, if you have any evidence to the contrary please feel free to share it.

Snugenz

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

The overall game experience is still the same, i never denied there's differences in quality. And i dunno about you but i'd include framerate under graphical.

I think most people would list framerate under performance, rather than graphics.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="sayonara89"]

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

Greyfeld

The overall game experience is still the same, i never denied there's differences in quality. And i dunno about you but i'd include framerate under graphical.

I think most people would list framerate under performance, rather than graphics.

Why did they go out of their way to give the xbox 360 version of dragon age a lower score than the ps3 version. The ps3 version looks slightly better but the ps3 version on average runs at 15 fps lower which is much more noticeable (and has a larger impact on a person gaming experience). It really feels like gamespot is being very unprofessional with their comparison.

There are many instances of games where the 360 looked better and performed better and yet recieved the same score (i.e. MW2) which is totaly fine. It really makes me distrust gamespots reviews because this logicalinconsistency is NOT opinionated.

EDIT:You guys aren't getting it. Every single game the xbox 360 scored higher in had better frame rates and better graphics (i.e bayonette and fallout 3). Even if they had the same frame rate and better graphics there could be an arguement for a better score but not when you have lower framerates.

Btw I have a ps3 but not a 360 so I am not a fanboy, I just hate logical inconsistancies from these so-called paid professionals.

hysam20241

I never noticed any bad framerates in Dragon Age on my PS3. Also, the graphical difference has to be noticeable better for it to affect the rating. Most games you have to go looking for problems to notice differences. Dragon Age is more significant in the difference between the two versions.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="sayonara89"]

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

Greyfeld

The overall game experience is still the same, i never denied there's differences in quality. And i dunno about you but i'd include framerate under graphical.

I think most people would list framerate under performance, rather than graphics.

Sure, but framerate is only noticeable through graphical inconsistancies, like Sazh walking in slow motion in the above vid and the world getting choppy. I mean performance will always fluctuate but it isnt always noticeable.

Bah i'm too tired to try and explain what i mean now. :P

Its cause gamespot is finally realizing that the ps3 has game?

Well the xbox 360 has no AAAAE game anyways.

Megaman5364

And this is relevant to this thread how?

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

The overall game experience is still the same, i never denied there's differences in quality. And i dunno about you but i'd include framerate under graphical.

Snugenz

I think most people would list framerate under performance, rather than graphics.

Sure, but framerate is only noticeable through graphical inconsistancies, like Sazh walking in slow motion in the above vid and the world getting choppy. I mean performance will always fluctuate but it isnt always noticeable.

Bah i'm too tired to try and explain what i mean now. :P

I know what you mean, but it's still referred to as a performance issue, because it's about how well the game can perform with the hardware, rather than an actual issue with the graphical fidelity.

Why did they go out of their way to give the xbox 360 version of dragon age a lower score than the ps3 version. The ps3 version looks slightly better but the ps3 version on average runs at 15 fps lower which is much more noticeable (and has a larger impact on a person gaming experience). It really feels like gamespot is being very unprofessional with their comparison.

There are many instances of games where the 360 looked better and performed better and yet recieved the same score (i.e. MW2) which is totaly fine. It really makes me distrust gamespots reviews because this logicalinconsistency is NOT opinionated.

EDIT:You guys aren't getting it. Every single game the xbox 360 scored higher in had better frame rates and better graphics (i.e bayonette and fallout 3). Even if they had the same frame rate and better graphics there could be an arguement for a better score but not when you have lower framerates.

Btw I have a ps3 but not a 360 so I am not a fanboy, I just hate logical inconsistancies from these so-called paid professionals.

hysam20241

[QUOTE="hysam20241"]

Why did they go out of their way to give the xbox 360 version of dragon age a lower score than the ps3 version. The ps3 version looks slightly better but the ps3 version on average runs at 15 fps lower which is much more noticeable (and has a larger impact on a person gaming experience). It really feels like gamespot is being very unprofessional with their comparison.

There are many instances of games where the 360 looked better and performed better and yet recieved the same score (i.e. MW2) which is totaly fine. It really makes me distrust gamespots reviews because this logicalinconsistency is NOT opinionated.

EDIT:You guys aren't getting it. Every single game the xbox 360 scored higher in had better frame rates and better graphics (i.e bayonette and fallout 3). Even if they had the same frame rate and better graphics there could be an arguement for a better score but not when you have lower framerates.

Btw I have a ps3 but not a 360 so I am not a fanboy, I just hate logical inconsistancies from these so-called paid professionals.

SAGE_OF_FIRE

[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"][QUOTE="hysam20241"]

Why did they go out of their way to give the xbox 360 version of dragon age a lower score than the ps3 version. The ps3 version looks slightly better but the ps3 version on average runs at 15 fps lower which is much more noticeable (and has a larger impact on a person gaming experience). It really feels like gamespot is being very unprofessional with their comparison.

There are many instances of games where the 360 looked better and performed better and yet recieved the same score (i.e. MW2) which is totaly fine. It really makes me distrust gamespots reviews because this logicalinconsistency is NOT opinionated.

EDIT:You guys aren't getting it. Every single game the xbox 360 scored higher in had better frame rates and better graphics (i.e bayonette and fallout 3). Even if they had the same frame rate and better graphics there could be an arguement for a better score but not when you have lower framerates.

Btw I have a ps3 but not a 360 so I am not a fanboy, I just hate logical inconsistancies from these so-called paid professionals.

Arach666

Trophies? Achievements? Old PC? Preferred gaming system? For the poops and giggles?

[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"] Why would you play dragon age on a console :| Greyfeld

Trophies? Achievements? Old PC? Preferred gaming system? For the poops and giggles?

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]

They utilize the same logic to give Bayonetta a 9.0 on 360 and an 8.0 on PS3, to give Fallout 3 a 9.0 on PS3 and 8.5 on 360, Orange Box 9.5 on 360, 9.0 on PS3. When games get higher on 360, it's logical, but if one game gets a higher score on PS3 (and an even higher score on PC), it becomes illogical? Please explain your logic.

mztazmz

And the latest 360 fan response to Final Fantasy XIII looking better on PS3 is that graphics don't matter, only the framerate matters:roll:

And as time goes by and PS3 games keep looking better, the situation on system wars is only gonna get worse:?

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="Chutebox"] People keep saying this, but it's just not true.sayonara89

It is true that the only differences are graphical, if you have any evidence to the contrary please feel free to share it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-chapter-8-analysis-1?size=large (framerate)

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

[QUOTE="Arach666"] That is the question indeed.Arach666

Trophies? Achievements? Old PC? Preferred gaming system? For the poops and giggles?

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

[QUOTE="Arach666"] That is the question indeed.Arach666

Trophies? Achievements? Old PC? Preferred gaming system? For the poops and giggles?

Maybe, but for people who are into collecting trophies/acheivements for their PS360, it's preferable to buy the game for that system, even if it does play better on the PC.

For the record, I played it on the PC, myself. But I understand that people have their preferences.

[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

Trophies? Achievements? Old PC? Preferred gaming system? For the poops and giggles?

mitu123

I´ve seen a long portion of the PS3 version of the game and I was quite unimpressed,to be honest.

The dificulty was way easier(that bridge puzzle was almost insultingly easy),the frame rate and overall visuals wer not good at all imo,but most importantly,the gameplay was horrid.

I can understand that the radial menu works well on the console version of ME but with DA,just no.

Action bar is what that game needs,along with a zoom capable camera for tactical view.

To be fair though,DA was being developed as a PC exclusive,and the consoles got in development very late,maybe that´s why they aren´t very good,but for all intents and purposes,those version shouldn´t really exist,imo.

They utilize the same logic to give Bayonetta a 9.0 on 360 and an 8.0 on PS3, to give Fallout 3 a 9.0 on360 and 8.5 on PS3, Orange Box 9.5 on 360, 9.0 on PS3. When games get higher on 360, it's logical, but if one game gets a higher score on PS3 (and an even higher score on PC), it becomes illogical? Please explain your logic.

calvinsora

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="Arach666"] To be fair,the PC version has achievements as well. But the last option seems correct :PArach666

I´ve seen a long portion of the PS3 version of the game and I was quite unimpressed,to be honest.

The dificulty was way easier(that bridge puzzle was almost insultingly easy),the frame rate and overall visuals wer not good at all imo,but most importantly,the gameplay was horrid.

I can understand that the radial menu works well on the console version of ME but with DA,just no.

Action bar is what that game needs,along with a zoom capable camera for tactical view.

To be fair though,DA was being developed as a PC exclusive,and the consoles got in development very late,maybe that´s why they aren´t very good,but for all intents and purposes,those version shouldn´t really exist,imo.

[QUOTE="Arach666"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] I know I'm going to sound like a hermit, but honestly, after playing Dragon Age on PC, there shouldn't even be console versions, both have problems that the PC version doesn't have, and it's a Bioware game too, which I mainly play on PC as well for their games.

mitu123

I´ve seen a long portion of the PS3 version of the game and I was quite unimpressed,to be honest.

The dificulty was way easier(that bridge puzzle was almost insultingly easy),the frame rate and overall visuals wer not good at all imo,but most importantly,the gameplay was horrid.

I can understand that the radial menu works well on the console version of ME but with DA,just no.

Action bar is what that game needs,along with a zoom capable camera for tactical view.

To be fair though,DA was being developed as a PC exclusive,and the consoles got in development very late,maybe that´s why they aren´t very good,but for all intents and purposes,those version shouldn´t really exist,imo.

DAO looks a ton better on the PS3 when put side by side. The 360 may have a more steady frame rate but blurry graphics and washed out textures justify the .5 difference. Go check out the comparison on Lens of Truth and come back and tell me the score was not fair.djsifer01

It is not justified because red dead redemption as a package (resolution, framerates, objects displayed on screen, pop in textures, bugs) was better than the ps3 version in all of these catagories and the ps3 version still recieved the same score. Here is some articles to back up my statement.

Now look at the facts I presented and tell me that the "score was fair" (or justified).

[QUOTE="djsifer01"] DAO looks a ton better on the PS3 when put side by side. The 360 may have a more steady frame rate but blurry graphics and washed out textures justify the .5 difference. Go check out the comparison on Lens of Truth and come back and tell me the score was not fair.hysam20241

It is not justified because red dead redemption as a package (resolution, framerates, objects displayed on screen, pop in textures, bugs) was better than the ps3 version in all of these catagories and the ps3 version still recieved the same score. Here is some articles to back up my statement.

Now look at the facts I presented and tell me that the "score was fair" (or justified).

[QUOTE="djsifer01"] DAO looks a ton better on the PS3 when put side by side. The 360 may have a more steady frame rate but blurry graphics and washed out textures justify the .5 difference. Go check out the comparison on Lens of Truth and come back and tell me the score was not fair.hysam20241

It is not justified because red dead redemption as a package (resolution, framerates, objects displayed on screen, pop in textures, bugs) was better than the ps3 version in all of these catagories and the ps3 version still recieved the same score. Here is some articles to back up my statement.

Now look at the facts I presented and tell me that the "score was fair" (or justified).

[QUOTE="hysam20241"]

[QUOTE="djsifer01"] DAO looks a ton better on the PS3 when put side by side. The 360 may have a more steady frame rate but blurry graphics and washed out textures justify the .5 difference. Go check out the comparison on Lens of Truth and come back and tell me the score was not fair.LookAnDrolL

It is not justified because red dead redemption as a package (resolution, framerates, objects displayed on screen, pop in textures, bugs) was better than the ps3 version in all of these catagories and the ps3 version still recieved the same score. Here is some articles to back up my statement.

Now look at the facts I presented and tell me that the "score was fair" (or justified).

[QUOTE="hysam20241"]

[QUOTE="djsifer01"] DAO looks a ton better on the PS3 when put side by side. The 360 may have a more steady frame rate but blurry graphics and washed out textures justify the .5 difference. Go check out the comparison on Lens of Truth and come back and tell me the score was not fair.LookAnDrolL

It is not justified because red dead redemption as a package (resolution, framerates, objects displayed on screen, pop in textures, bugs) was better than the ps3 version in all of these catagories and the ps3 version still recieved the same score. Here is some articles to back up my statement.

Now look at the facts I presented and tell me that the "score was fair" (or justified).

How could you ask such a question in system wars? Isn't this the point of these entire forums?

Why did Gamespot give ODST a 9? The answer is we'll never know. Reviews are still opinions.Zoso-8

Sigh, I give up with you guys. Btw, the ps3 version of bayonette is better than the 360 version IMO...

why does it bother people so much when it comes to scores?

Its always funny seeing people make a big deal if a multiplat suffers occasionaly some framerate drops or else is slightly superior in terms of visuals.. I've seen and played version of the same games on both PS3 & 360 and either way the differences where so rare or else not much noticeable that it didnt effect the gaming experience..

The way I see it is that PS3 fans want desperately to somehow prove that multiplats are all on par with the 360 version, which is not actually true (though the PS3 versions are fine)... on the other hand since 360 fans see a lack of frequently released great exclusives and they rely heavily on multiplats its like they need to nitpick on everything in order to make is seem like game X is 100x better than the PS3 version, while making sure to completely DISAGREE when occasionally a multiplat is said to look/perform slightly better on PS3..

I guess this is sytem wars :P

To avoid confusion in the future don't use "logic" and "Gamespot" in the same sentence. In fact try to avoid Gamespot reviews entirely.