my Dead Space impressions so far (Plus PS3 vs 360)

So far the game is great. The best way to describe it is that its Prey with a little bit of Riddick.

My biggest complaint so far is something that bothers me in all games set in dark places: There are several dynamic light effects where there is no actual light fixture. This bothers me because I always like to look at the device producing the flashes of light, or the rotating sentry lights, etc. the shadows and light that get cast inside a room are pretty cool, but if I can't see the source of the light, it drops the immersion factor.

The weapon upgrade system is pretty unique, and the inventory system reminds me of Riddick's. The graphics are good and convey a sense of atmosphere. I am kind of puzzled though because the rooms and corridors that break up each level are fairly small and I would think much more detail and effects could be put into each room. The levels don't have the same level of detail as Bioshock.

I'm finishing up Chapeter 3 though, with 9 more to go so we'll see how things progress.

I did get an opportunity to play this on my friend's PS3 and the framerate dips noticeably when you are fighting more than 2 enemies at once. The 360 version is smoother and also seems to have sharper textures but it might be because I have a better TV. If the PS3 version loads a couple seconds faster like the GS review states, I didn't notice it. The only load times are between chapters and its just enough time to take a swig of Coke and wipe the moisture off my hands.

I do get the feeling that this game's detail was dialed back on account that the PS3 would be too hard to get up to the 360's level. I know Sony has lobbied hard to publishers on making their games look as good as the 360's.

yeah, a unbiased comparation by you :|Giancar

Just what I was thinking, try harder Willie :lol:

Why do i find it hard take this comparison seriously?lusitanogamer

His post history suggests quite a warm attitude toward Sony which in no way elevates Microsoft to a near-Yahweh level, perhaps that is why it's so easy to accept an unbiased opinion from such an unbiased poster.

Also, does anyone else get the feeling that his "friend's PS3" is well, about as existant as his unbiased opinion? Not to mention that his comparison wasn't even done on the same television. Luckily I had a chance to hook my 360 up to my SDTV and it looked horrid compared to the one on the PS3 I hooked up to my HDTV via HDMI, so I guess that goes to show just how downgraded the 360 version actually is.

On a side note, I actually am enjoying the game, and it's surprising to see such a well-done single player experience done by EA. Hopefully we'll see more great single player games this generation; something I feel has been lacking.

IMO the ps3 version is alot better, i find it darker. I also didnt see much difference in the textures.

Also ive had 4 enemies on screen and it did not dip in frame rate whatso ever.

Both versions are exactly the same. Cooldude224

I have the game for PS3, and the game does not slow down when 2 or more enemies are on the screen at once. Plus the game looks fantastic, so I think your comparision is biased.

[QUOTE="Cooldude224"]Both versions are exactly the same. dream431ca

I have the game for PS3, and the game does not slow down when 2 or more enemies are on the screen at once. Plus the game looks fantastic, so I think your comparision is biased.

Then my friend's PS3 must be broken :/

It slowed down on the 2nd chapter when you get attacked by a bunch of monsters in the decontamination room. You probably didn't notice because the lights in that room are flashing. They probably did that intentionally to mask the slowdown but you can definately see it.

Also to the guy who said that the game is darker, and therefore somehow better, on the PS3, what are you comparing it to? Let me guess, you own both systems and bought the same game for both of them? I find it funny how you can make a claim like that without actually playing both versions like I have.

Prey with a little bit of Riddick... what? :|BioShockOwnz

It has the slower pacing of Riddick. Also, some of the architecture like the benches and trash cans remind me of Riddick. The rooms are all made out of metal and pipes, etc.

I've heard they are both the same.SSJ_Nega

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="Cooldude224"]Both versions are exactly the same. WillieBeamish

I have the game for PS3, and the game does not slow down when 2 or more enemies are on the screen at once. Plus the game looks fantastic, so I think your comparision is biased.

Then my friend's PS3 must be broken :/

It slowed down on the 2nd chapter when you get attacked by a bunch of monsters in the decontamination room. You probably didn't notice because the lights in that room are flashing. They probably did that intentionally to mask the slowdown but you can definately see it.

Also to the guy who said that the game is darker, and therefore somehow better, on the PS3, what are you comparing it to? Let me guess, you own both systems and bought the same game for both of them? I find it funny how you can make a claim like that without actually playing both versions like I have.

stopped reading there.

yeah, a unbiased comparation by you :|Giancar

[QUOTE="Giancar"]yeah, a unbiased comparation by you :|cainetao11

sorry, english is not my first language, will take a note on that though

[QUOTE="SSJ_Nega"]I've heard they are both the same.WillieBeamish

His logic has a decent base. He puts stock in what he hears from review sites, where (supposedly) professional journalists are paid to evaluate games, whereas you have become somewhat infamous on these boards for taking Microsoft's side against Sony to an extreme degree. Whether you're telling the truth about this or not, the past points to your opinion teetering on the heavily biased side.

[QUOTE="cainetao11"][QUOTE="Giancar"]yeah, a unbiased comparation by you :|Giancar

sorry, english is not my first language, will take a note on that though

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="SSJ_Nega"]I've heard they are both the same.Nirron

His logic has a decent base. He puts stock in what he hears from review sites, where (supposedly) professional journalists are paid to evaluate games, whereas you have become somewhat infamous on these boards for taking Microsoft's side against Sony to an extreme degree. Whether you're telling the truth about this or not, the past points to your opinion teetering on the heavily biased side.

I'm just giving my impressions, I'm not asking anyone to put their faith in me or to trust me. I've been a big proponent of LBP, even stating that it will most likely get GOTY. I'm not sure how that makes me biased against Sony.

I'm just giving my impressions, I'm not asking anyone to put their faith in me or to trust me. I've been a big proponent of LBP, even stating that it will most likely get GOTY. I'm not sure how that makes me biased against Sony.

WillieBeamish

Nope, supporting LBP is fine and dandy. However, comments such as these where you attempt to completely demean tihngs because they have no appeal to you definitely shows bias.

"Don't waste your money on the PS3. Its garbage, and the games are uninspired. Instead, use that money to purchase the following 10 awesome games that are either exclusives, or simply the best versions:" or claiming multiple times that multiplats are somehow leaps and bounds better (which is where much of the prospect of being unbiased in this thread goes out the window)

Or perhaps comments that are completely untrue toward Sony? Like, oh "Its not just the faster streaming off the optical drive, which has forced PS3 developers to pre-load half the game onto the hard drive"

Or shall I go see how well you are at giving unbiased takes on Sony games? "'bu bu teh Uncharted, MGS4, Resistance 2, etc' we've all been there done that. these games are all generic crap that do nothing especially well with the exception of MGS4's ridiculous cutscenes"

You come off biased against Sony because you do nothing but demean them, and you do nothing but praise Microsoft, when the reality is that Sony is not completely malevolent nor is Microsoft completely infallible.

Yeah, you've already destroyed the chance of having any credibilty, TC. If the PS3 version had a slowdown when there are a bunch of enemies on screen, the reviews would have mentioned it, especially IGN. Not only that but reading fan feedback of the game makes no mention of issues in the PS3 version.

/thread

Prey with a little bit of Riddick... what? :|BioShockOwnz

Exactly. wtf is TC talking about. if anything, this is RE4 (Except actually Scary) with a hint of doom 3 and a generous helping of event horizon.

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

I'm just giving my impressions, I'm not asking anyone to put their faith in me or to trust me. I've been a big proponent of LBP, even stating that it will most likely get GOTY. I'm not sure how that makes me biased against Sony.

Nirron

Nope, supporting LBP is fine and dandy. However, comments such as these where you attempt to completely demean tihngs because they have no appeal to you definitely shows bias.

"Don't waste your money on the PS3. Its garbage, and the games are uninspired. Instead, use that money to purchase the following 10 awesome games that are either exclusives, or simply the best versions:" or claiming multiple times that multiplats are somehow leaps and bounds better (which is where much of the prospect of being unbiased in this thread goes out the window)

Or perhaps comments that are completely untrue toward Sony? Like, oh "Its not just the faster streaming off the optical drive, which has forced PS3 developers to pre-load half the game onto the hard drive"

Or shall I go see how well you are at giving unbiased takes on Sony games? "'bu bu teh Uncharted, MGS4, Resistance 2, etc' we've all been there done that. these games are all generic crap that do nothing especially well with the exception of MGS4's ridiculous cutscenes"

You come off biased against Sony because you do nothing but demean them, and you do nothing but praise Microsoft, when the reality is that Sony is not completely malevolent nor is Microsoft completely infallible.

Again, you are incorrect. I very publicly demeaned Microsoft about the RROD. Convenient that you left those quotes out. Nice way to cherry pick.

:lol: yet reviewers say the game is exactly the same and both have slowdowns and hitches :roll:

creditibility = zero

Well... this was posted on a couple topics earlier. Re-posting...

IGN Insiders just posted a Head-to-Head comparison for both systems:

Not sure. All I kmow is that weapon upgrades do carry over to the next game - except you stay on the same difficulty setting.

Again, you are incorrect. I very publicly demeaned Microsoft about the RROD. Convenient that you left those quotes out. Nice way to cherry pick.

WillieBeamish

Ah yes, it's my fault that in 4 pages of posting history I found 0 positive comments about Sony and 0 derogatory comments. I suppose it would be my fault to not be able to find the one negative comment about Microsoft and the two or so positive comments about a single Sony game in 1100+ posts.

And heck, it's not a bad thing per se to be biased. It's simply a human flaw. I'm the first to admit I'm traditionally harder on Sony and Microsoft than I am on Nintendo. While you may indeed not be biased against Sony, you should be able to see that you give that impression quite easily. Nearly every thread in which our paths have crossed (whether I've posted or not), you praise the 360 and bash the 360 10 times more than you compliment the PS3 or fault the 360.

Either way, enjoy Dead Space - I know I am.

So far the game is great. The best way to describe it is that its Prey with a little bit of Riddick.

My biggest complaint so far is something that bothers me in all games set in dark places: There are several dynamic light effects where there is no actual light fixture. This bothers me because I always like to look at the device producing the flashes of light, or the rotating sentry lights, etc. the shadows and light that get cast inside a room are pretty cool, but if I can't see the source of the light, it drops the immersion factor.

The weapon upgrade system is pretty unique, and the inventory system reminds me of Riddick's. The graphics are good and convey a sense of atmosphere. I am kind of puzzled though because the rooms and corridors that break up each level are fairly small and I would think much more detail and effects could be put into each room. The levels don't have the same level of detail as Bioshock.

I'm finishing up Chapeter 3 though, with 9 more to go so we'll see how things progress.

I did get an opportunity to play this on my friend's 360 and the framerate dips noticeably when you are fighting more than 2 enemies at once. The PS3 version is smoother and also seems to have sharper textures but it might be because I have a better TV. The PS3 version definitely loads a couple seconds faster like the GS review states and I noticed it.

I do get the feeling that this game's detail was dialed back on account that the 360 simply doesn't have the raw power of the PS3 to display such good graphics, thus not being on the same level. Good things happen when developers actually try.

See what i just did? Yea, it's called BS. Plus, it will garner a 10 page thread with people assuming what you're saying is right simply because you said so. I honestly can't believe some of the threads being made here :lol: and especially can't believe that some of the readers here would take your opinion over an experienced one, especially from the #1 gaming website in the world.

So far the game is great. The best way to describe it is that its Prey with a little bit of Riddick.

My biggest complaint so far is something that bothers me in all games set in dark places: There are several dynamic light effects where there is no actual light fixture. This bothers me because I always like to look at the device producing the flashes of light, or the rotating sentry lights, etc. the shadows and light that get cast inside a room are pretty cool, but if I can't see the source of the light, it drops the immersion factor.

The weapon upgrade system is pretty unique, and the inventory system reminds me of Riddick's. The graphics are good and convey a sense of atmosphere. I am kind of puzzled though because the rooms and corridors that break up each level are fairly small and I would think much more detail and effects could be put into each room. The levels don't have the same level of detail as Bioshock.

I'm finishing up Chapeter 3 though, with 9 more to go so we'll see how things progress.

I did get an opportunity to play this on my friend's PS3 and the framerate dips noticeably when you are fighting more than 2 enemies at once. The 360 version is smoother and also seems to have sharper textures but it might be because I have a better TV. If the PS3 version loads a couple seconds faster like the GS review states, I didn't notice it. The only load times are between chapters and its just enough time to take a swig of Coke and wipe the moisture off my hands.

I do get the feeling that this game's detail was dialed back on account that the PS3 would be too hard to get up to the 360's level. I know Sony has lobbied hard to publishers on making their games look as good as the 360's.

WillieBeamish

it doesn't remind me of Prey..it reminds me of Alien

Why do i find it hard take this comparison seriously?lusitanogamer

Because fanboys don't want to hear any negativity about their console, even if it's true. (Not saying it's true)

[QUOTE="Nirron"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

I'm just giving my impressions, I'm not asking anyone to put their faith in me or to trust me. I've been a big proponent of LBP, even stating that it will most likely get GOTY. I'm not sure how that makes me biased against Sony.

WillieBeamish

Nope, supporting LBP is fine and dandy. However, comments such as these where you attempt to completely demean tihngs because they have no appeal to you definitely shows bias.

"Don't waste your money on the PS3. Its garbage, and the games are uninspired. Instead, use that money to purchase the following 10 awesome games that are either exclusives, or simply the best versions:" or claiming multiple times that multiplats are somehow leaps and bounds better (which is where much of the prospect of being unbiased in this thread goes out the window)

Or perhaps comments that are completely untrue toward Sony? Like, oh "Its not just the faster streaming off the optical drive, which has forced PS3 developers to pre-load half the game onto the hard drive"

Or shall I go see how well you are at giving unbiased takes on Sony games? "'bu bu teh Uncharted, MGS4, Resistance 2, etc' we've all been there done that. these games are all generic crap that do nothing especially well with the exception of MGS4's ridiculous cutscenes"

You come off biased against Sony because you do nothing but demean them, and you do nothing but praise Microsoft, when the reality is that Sony is not completely malevolent nor is Microsoft completely infallible.

Again, you are incorrect. I very publicly demeaned Microsoft about the RROD. Convenient that you left those quotes out. Nice way to cherry pick.

You are not fooling anybody. We all know you are a notorious 360 fanboy.

well i won't be surprised. everyone knows (except maybe die hard ps3 fans) X360 has more powerful GPU.

The important thing is devs don't dumb down the X360 version because of the PS3.

[QUOTE="lusitanogamer"]Why do i find it hard take this comparison seriously?Mau-Justice

Because fanboys don't want to hear any negativity about their console, even if it's true. (Not saying it's true)

Don't worry, i can take any negativity towards the PS3. You're assuming i'm a fanboy when i'm not.;) I'm a PS3 fan, which is an entirely different thing.

well i won't be surprised. everyone knows (except maybe die hard ps3 fans) X360 has more powerful GPU.

The important thing is devs don't dumb down the X360 version because of the PS3.

Mystery_Writer

This is what PS3 owners say of multiplats because of development for 360. Seriously, game started with 360 as lead platform, then midway through swtiched to PS3 as lead platform. Turned out great. and usually the ports of 360 to PS3 are crap, because developers haven't taken the time to do a good port. But in terms of graphics and gameplay and features, 360 and PS3 are on same playing field.

If anything can be said of one console holding another back is 360 holding the ps3 back, becuse developers have to keep games on one disc (blueray holds more than hd dvds), but even this is a weak argument. Well we'll see when MGS4 is ported to 360, how many discs were needed. But again a moot point.

I just hope I can get my hands on it via Toy's R Us buy 2 get 1 free deal.