List Of Justifications For Why Most Multiplats Look Better On X360

to name few

- FEAR (lazy devs)

- Virtua Tennis (same as FEAR)

- Splinter Cell : Double Agent (1-lazy devs, 2-it's a port, and ports always look better on the original console, 3-ubisoft loves x360 and hates ps3, 4-Ubisoft paid by Microsoft)

- Rainbow Six Vegas (same as splinter cell)

- Call of Duty 3 (1-near launch title, devs didn't learn the console yet, 2-final dev kits reached couple of days before the launch).

- Marvel Ultimate Alliance (same as call of duty 3)

- Virtua Fighter 5 (1-X360 has extra dev time, 2-X360 version is based on the arcade version C, 3- it's a port, and ports always look better on the ported version)

- The Darkness (dev still didn't learn the PS3 yet)

- All pro football 2k8 (1- the ps3 proved itself capable of running other games like tetris at 60fps, so obviously it's the dev's fault. 2- who cares, you won't notice a difference betweeen a constant 30 fps and a constant 60fps using a controller).

- Madden NCAAA (same as all pro football 2k8 ).

- Madden 08 (Microsoft paid EA to handicap the PS3 version)

- Fight Night Round 3 (lazy dev)

- others (let me know if I missed any)

The thread is not about the list of games that look better on X360. It's about the excuses that were made to justify the list.

P.S. Also, for PS3 fans, feel free to post a list of multiplats that looks better on PS3 and the execuses that were made by X360 fans to justify them.

5- Call of Duty 3 (1-near launch title, devs didn't learn the console yet, 2-final dev kits reached couple of days before the launch).

Call of Duty 3 (both in 720p)

.

Mystery_Writer

Taken from the other thread.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

5- Call of Duty 3 (1-near launch title, devs didn't learn the console yet, 2-final dev kits reached couple of days before the launch).

Call of Duty 3 (both in 720p)

.

Overthrow

Taken from the other thread.

[QUOTE="Overthrow"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

5- Call of Duty 3 (1-near launch title, devs didn't learn the console yet, 2-final dev kits reached couple of days before the launch).

Call of Duty 3 (both in 720p)

.

redandblack23

Taken from the other thread.

I could easily sabatage a multiplat on consoles if someone wanted to. They could buy the PC version and adjust the settings accordingly.

the ps3 ones are better...the buildings look better..the soldiers have more detail..
redandblack23

"Call of Duty 3 has made its way onto just about every major console, but it definitely looks best on the Xbox 360. The PlayStation 3 comes in a close second, but the 360 is the clear winner.

The textures have less detail on the PS3, and the game looks a little washed out. Between the overly bright visuals and muddy textures, the PlayStation 3 can't match the 360 version's gritty look. " - gamespot.com

Now, let me know the reason why GS said that, so that I can add it to my list :)

[QUOTE="redandblack23"]

the ps3 ones are better...the buildings look better..the soldiers have more detail..
Mystery_Writer

"Call of Duty 3 has made its way onto just about every major console, but it definitely looks best on the Xbox 360. The PlayStation 3 comes in a close second, but the 360 is the clear winner.

The textures have less detail on the PS3, and the game looks a little washed out. Between the overly bright visuals and muddy textures, the PlayStation 3 can't match the 360 version's gritty look. " - gamespot.com

[QUOTE="redandblack23"]

the ps3 ones are better...the buildings look better..the soldiers have more detail..
Mystery_Writer

"Call of Duty 3 has made its way onto just about every major console, but it definitely looks best on the Xbox 360. The PlayStation 3 comes in a close second, but the 360 is the clear winner.

The textures have less detail on the PS3, and the game looks a little washed out. Between the overly bright visuals and muddy textures, the PlayStation 3 can't match the 360 version's gritty look. " - gamespot.com

Ouch, face...

The differences are so miniscule it borders on absurd to actually pay attention to it, let alone use it as a way to claim system superiority.SpruceCaboose

Agreed, but as you can see from a few posts ago some people have their fanboy goggles on...

The differences are so miniscule it borders on absurd to actually pay attention to it, let alone use it as a way to claim system superiority.SpruceCaboose

well put. I should add this justification to the list :P

The problem is there is one game that owns them all and that would be oblivion, having just played oblivion on the ps3 couple of days ago there is no doubt in my mind it's just lazyness, Oblvion on the ps3 amazed me and I could notice improved graphics on the ps3 having played both versions, so if oblivion probably the best game out right now next to gears of war can look just as good on the ps3 and somewat improve, then fear and all the other games can easily look just as good on the ps3 if not sligtly better and this isnt because the ps3 is more powerful im not saying that, it's just the game studio obviously took the time to work on the ps3 and actually made an amazing port which just goes to show the other devs that made fear and splinter cell and so on either had no idea how to work on the ps3, were lazy or just didnt think it was worth putting the effort in because as ifit couldnt handle the games just as good on ps3 if oblivion can because oblivion is totally on another level to those games

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] The differences are so miniscule it borders on absurd to actually pay attention to it, let alone use it as a way to claim system superiority.Mystery_Writer

well put. I should add this justification to the list :P

Let's compare framerate now...

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] The differences are so miniscule it borders on absurd to actually pay attention to it, let alone use it as a way to claim system superiority.Mystery_Writer

well put. I should add this justification to the list :P

That was not a justification. That was me saying that they look, to any normal gamer who does not freeze frame games to look at trees in the distance, they look the same.

Sure there will be differences. But they are ridiculously tiny, and really insignificant.

The problem is there is one game that owns them all and that would be oblivion, having just played oblivion on the ps3 couple of days ago there is no doubt in my mind it's just lazyness, Oblvion on the ps3 amazed me and I could notice improved graphics on the ps3 having played both versions, so if oblivion probably the best game out right now next to gears of war can look just as good on the ps3 and somewat improve, then fear and all the other games can easily look just as good on the ps3 if not sligtly better and this isnt because the ps3 is more powerful im not saying that, it's just the game studio obviously took the time to work on the ps3 and actually made an amazing port which just goes to show the other devs that made fear and splinter cell and so on either had no idea how to work on the ps3, were lazy or just didnt think it was worth putting the effort in because as ifit couldnt handle the games just as good on ps3 if oblivion can because oblivion is totally on another level to those games

bigLLL

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]

The problem is there is one game that owns them all and that would be oblivion, having just played oblivion on the ps3 couple of days ago there is no doubt in my mind it's just lazyness, Oblvion on the ps3 amazed me and I could notice improved graphics on the ps3 having played both versions, so if oblivion probably the best game out right now next to gears of war can look just as good on the ps3 and somewat improve, then fear and all the other games can easily look just as good on the ps3 if not sligtly better and this isnt because the ps3 is more powerful im not saying that, it's just the game studio obviously took the time to work on the ps3 and actually made an amazing port which just goes to show the other devs that made fear and splinter cell and so on either had no idea how to work on the ps3, were lazy or just didnt think it was worth putting the effort in because as ifit couldnt handle the games just as good on ps3 if oblivion can because oblivion is totally on another level to those games

HuhJustaBox

So you are saying you would rather have a 1 year wait and 4 gigs taken up for on your hard drive for every multiplat released?

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] The differences are so miniscule it borders on absurd to actually pay attention to it, let alone use it as a way to claim system superiority.SpruceCaboose

well put. I should add this justification to the list :P

That was not a justification. That was me saying that they look, to any normal gamer who does not freeze frame games to look at trees in the distance, they look the same.

Sure there will be differences. But they are ridiculously tiny, and really insignificant.

is that for Call of Duty, or for everything?

is that for Call of Duty, or for everything?

Mystery_Writer

Everyone I have seen IRL yet. There are differences, yes. They are small, and they don't make much of a difference, if any.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

is that for Call of Duty, or for everything?

SpruceCaboose

Everyone I have seen IRL yet. There are differences, yes. They are small, and they don't make much of a difference, if any.

does this needs justification, or the differences also miniscule

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

is that for Call of Duty, or for everything?

Mystery_Writer

Everyone I have seen IRL yet. There are differences, yes. They are small, and they don't make much of a difference, if any.

does this needs justification, or the differences also miniscule

*Purdy pictures*

Congrats. You can find the worst possible example and then use it as the norm. Would you like me to find pre-patched Oblivion and compare it to the PS3 version?

I am saying, in the vast majority of cases, the difference is insignificant. Simple as that. Not every case is going to adhere to that. Most will. Some will look noticeably better on PS3, some will look noticeably better on 360. They are games, which are code, and not all code is created equal. Its a fact of life.

[QUOTE="HuhJustaBox"][QUOTE="bigLLL"]

The problem is there is one game that owns them all and that would be oblivion, having just played oblivion on the ps3 couple of days ago there is no doubt in my mind it's just lazyness, Oblvion on the ps3 amazed me and I could notice improved graphics on the ps3 having played both versions, so if oblivion probably the best game out right now next to gears of war can look just as good on the ps3 and somewat improve, then fear and all the other games can easily look just as good on the ps3 if not sligtly better and this isnt because the ps3 is more powerful im not saying that, it's just the game studio obviously took the time to work on the ps3 and actually made an amazing port which just goes to show the other devs that made fear and splinter cell and so on either had no idea how to work on the ps3, were lazy or just didnt think it was worth putting the effort in because as ifit couldnt handle the games just as good on ps3 if oblivion can because oblivion is totally on another level to those games

DoctorBunny

So you are saying you would rather have a 1 year wait and 4 gigs taken up for on your hard drive for every multiplat released?

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

is that for Call of Duty, or for everything?

SpruceCaboose

Everyone I have seen IRL yet. There are differences, yes. They are small, and they don't make much of a difference, if any.

does this needs justification, or the differences also miniscule

*Purdy pictures*

Congrats. You can find the worst possible example and then use it as the norm. Would you like me to find pre-patched Oblivion and compare it to the PS3 version?

I am saying, in the vast majority of cases, the difference is insignificant. Simple as that. Not every case is going to adhere to that. Most will. Some will look noticeably better on PS3, some will look noticeably better on 360. They are games, which are code, and not all code is created equal. Its a fact of life.

I asked if it was for only CoD3 or for everything, u said; everything. I posted the pictures.

Now, as for the excuse you gave, is it ok if I consider this line as your justification?

"They are games, which are code, and not all code is created equal. It's a fact of life" - SpruceCaboose

The only reason is because devs are still getting used to the PS3, while the 360 had a year head start so devs already have a solid foundation.

Next year, or probably later this year, we'll see PS3/360 games looking pretty much exactly the same. My prediction is that PS3 multiplats look and play better in 2008 but we won't really know for a while.

Virtua Tennis looks better on PS3.SergeantSnitch

"One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." - gamespot.com

now, let me know why GS said that so that I can add it to the list. ;)

Virtua Tennis looks better on PS3.SergeantSnitch

[QUOTE="SergeantSnitch"]Virtua Tennis looks better on PS3.Mystery_Writer

"One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." - gamespot.com

now, let me know why GS said that so that I can add it to the list. ;)

*pictures*

What's the competitors excuse for this one?Dualshockin

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay." - gamespot.com

don't remember PS3 fans excuse for this one. But please let me know what it was if you remember ;)

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="SergeantSnitch"]Virtua Tennis looks better on PS3.Mystery_Writer

"One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." - gamespot.com

now, let me know why GS said that so that I can add it to the list. ;)

fair justification? so your justification for VF5 is "GS is unfair"?

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"] *pictures*

What's the competitors excuse for this one?Mystery_Writer

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay." - gamespot.com

don't remember PS3 fans excuse for this one. But please let me know what it was if you remember ;)

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"] *pictures*

What's the competitors excuse for this one?Dualshockin

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay." - gamespot.com

don't remember PS3 fans excuse for this one. But please let me know what it was if you remember ;)

* more pictures *

Tell me again how the Ps3 has inferior lighting.

Here are simple steps on how to find out:

1- click link

2- read english text

3- look at pictures.

4- come back with an excuse

COD3 looks better on 360:


Pro_wrestler

I see what you did there... :|

With the Gamespot pictures posted in the Graphical Comparison 1, it did show the 360 version with better lighting. But the PS3's character models are much more detailed and sharper. SergeantSnitch

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models.The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior" - gamespot.com

I have the feeling we'll get to the excuse in your next post.

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"] *pictures*

What's the competitors excuse for this one?Mystery_Writer

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay." - gamespot.com

don't remember PS3 fans excuse for this one. But please let me know what it was if you remember ;)

* more pictures *

Tell me again how the Ps3 has inferior lighting.

Here are simple steps on how to find out:

1- click link

2- read english text

3- look at pictures.

4- come back with an excuse

Graphics aside, 360 versions plays better for some reason and they get higher ratings regardless, but I know you'll still blame these "lazy devs". If only these devs hear these Sony fanboys calling them lazy, I bet they'll stop making games for Sony. Give them some credit.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="Dualshockin"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"] *pictures*

What's the competitors excuse for this one?Dualshockin

"Fight Night Round 3 was one of the first games to really show off the Xbox 360's graphics power with fantastic lighting and incredibly detailed player models. The PS3 still has great looking player models but the crowds are less detailed and the lighting effects are definitely inferior. If the graphical losses weren't enough, the PlayStation 3 version takes almost twice as long as its 360 counterpart to load into the menu screen, and a third longer to load a quickplay." - gamespot.com

don't remember PS3 fans excuse for this one. But please let me know what it was if you remember ;)

* more pictures *

Tell me again how the Ps3 has inferior lighting.

Here are simple steps on how to find out:

1- click link

2- read english text

3- look at pictures.

4- come back with an excuse

* pictures of Virtua Tennis *

Now tell me how all multiplats look better on the 360.

lol, what is this, Abbot and Costello routine?

here it is again (read it more than once if you have to):

"One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." - gamespot.com

Also, as for your "Ironically,this post ^ looks like an excuse.". I'm not giving any excuses for the PS3. I believe what GS is saying. You're the one having hard time believing what GS is claiming, and I'm yet to hear why.

P.S. please do continue your Abbot and Costello routine, I'll hopefully come back later on in few hours to see how deep the hole you're digging for yourself has become.

OKay, the graphics are the same. The Gamespot comparisons use xbox-optimized settings (which aren't at all PS3 optimized settings), and don't use all the PS3's graphical oomph (namely HDMI, and 1080p in some cases), which is crippling one runner so they can both compete.

As far as I can tell, PS3 textures are sharper, xbox has smoother lines, and the difference is tiny.

lol, what is this, Abbot and Costello routine?here it is again (read it more than once if you have to): "One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." -"http://www.gamespot.com/features/6171831/p-4.html"Also, as for your "Ironically,this post ^ looks like an excuse.". I'm not giving any excuses for the PS3. I believe what GS is saying. You're the one having hard time believing what GS is claiming, and I'm yet to hear why.P.S. please do continue your Abbot and Costello routine, I'll hopefully come back later on in few hours to see how deep the hole you're digging for yourself has become.Mystery_Writer

Fight Night on PS3 has NO MOTION BLUR!!!! It sacrifices every other graphical detail, effects and framerates in order to achieve those higher detail player models that just happened to take an extra year of development time to create.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="Dualshockin"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="SergeantSnitch"]Virtua Tennis looks better on PS3.Dualshockin

"One judgment we can make is that the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures. You can see it in the netting and in the Dunlop logo on the box to the right of the net in the third image set. The Xbox 360 players also seem to cast softer shadows on the court, while the PlayStation 3 has hard shadows." - gamespot.com

now, let me know why GS said that so that I can add it to the list. ;)

fair justification? so your justification for VF5 is "GS is unfair"?

So to put it in perspective (without going into tangents), assume nobody provided you with 1080p pictures. What would be your answer then to GS's claim (i.e. GS pictures and paragraphs)?

Hope the question is clear to you now :)