I had some free time...
[quote="Digital Foundry"]Enchanted Arms
Also clearly evident is a lower frame rate on PS3, fewer visual effects and a distinct paring down of detail - both in graphical effects and geometry. An additional grain effect included in the PS3 version can't disguise the graphical shortcomings. In many areas, the game simply doesn't look as though it's running in HD - to the point where Enchanted Arms compares unfavourably with many PS2 games of a similar ilk. Both versions suffer the same flaw, turd vs smelly turd?
Splinter Cell: Double Agent
Things do not improve once you get into the game proper. As soon as Sam Fisher and his doomed newbie comrade hit the water after the first cinematic, you can instantly see that something isn't quite right. Certain lighting effects and even basic anti-aliasing appear to be completely absent from the PlayStation 3 version of the game. Indeed, the more you progress through the initial mission, the more you realise just how much is missing. Splinter Cell: Double Agent on Xbox 360 is a game where the beauty is more than skin-deep - the whole experience is tied to the exceptional graphics, with the use of light and shadow being an essential component of the stealth-based gameplay.
The Darkness
However, the reality of the situation is that while gameplay is virtually identical, it appears that Starbreeze Studios has compromised the PlayStation 3 version in a number of respects. The one thing that is immediately apparent is the omission of motion blur as you pan around - not necessarily a bad thing in my opinion (I disliked it in Perfect Dark Zero) but Starbreeze's implementation of it on The Darkness was pretty good; it certainly makes a difference in the game's opening car chase sequence and makes a good fist of papering over frame-rate inconsistencies. Over and above that, there's a signature lack of anti-aliasing (more on this later) and a definite reduction in texture detail. The occasional lighting effect here and there has also been changed and where they have been, they look less impressive on PlayStation 3. This just reinforces my statement in my first post
Transformers: The Game
Obviously ported across from the already unoptimised 360 codebase, the PS3 version appears to be running with a constant blur badly attempting to mask an apparent drop in resolution. Adding insult to injury is the even poorer frame rate that blights the conversion - v-lock screen tear is a frequently present companion during the PS3 'experience'. Both versions suffer
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Unfortunately, the PlayStation 3 conversion of the game manages to diminish the only decent element of the 360 original - the graphics. The comparison shots do a pretty good job of showing the rougher resolution (what looks like 960x720, poorly resized to proper 720p) and complete lack of anti-aliasing but what you can't see is the horrendously variable frame rate which seems to impact as much on the responsiveness of the controls as it does on the visual feel of the game. Both versions have aliasing problems and bad framerates...
Need for Speed ProStreet
The disadvantages apparent in the PS3 code read almost like a checklist of the worst in cross-platform development. The game's blurrier with an inconsistent frame rate, and if it's not running at a lower resolution than the 360 game it certainly looks like it. On top of that, some of the cool depth of field effects in the Xbox 360 game that add a subtle blur to faraway objects are all but gone too.
Assassin's Creed
While the 360 game drops the odd frame here and there, by and large it's refreshing at a steady 30fps. Not so with PS3 where even the most basic action on-screen sends the refresh rate tumbling dramatically. Both versions suffer framerate dips...bad framerate vs verybad framerate?
Timeshift
Put simply, TimeShift PS3 at its best still drops frames compared to the 360 game, even when barely anything is actually happening. At worst, it's extremely jerky and plagued with v-lock screen tear. Both versions suffer this flaw
Tony Hawk's Proving Ground
The reduction in resolution serves to make the PS3 game far jaggier and less detailed than it does on Xbox 360, the lighting doesn't look so good, and a great many of the special effects employed (especially in the game engine-powered cut-scenes) have been diminished or removed altogether. What is already a pretty unattractive game in its base Xbox 360 incarnation therefore looks even less appealing on the PlayStation 3. Both versions are an identical mess
Guitar Hero III
Whereas the Xbox 360 version runs at full 720p, the PS3 conversion falls some way short - running at something like 1040x585.
Bayonetta
It's fair to say that performance is variable on both platforms, though on average it seems that during the most intense gameplay the PS3 game can only manage anything between 30 per cent to 60 per cent of the 360's frame-rate. Game was patched to match the Xbox 360
MX vs ATV Untamed
Off-puttingly bad screen-tear is your constant companion here and there's zero anti-aliasing or much in the way of special effects to smooth off what is clearly a very 'jaggy' looking game. Indeed, MX vs. ATV Untamed is compromised right off the bat by running with a reduced resolution - 1024x576 to be precise, with very poor scaling used to blow up the image to 720p. All of this conspires to create an excessively rough-looking game.
etc. etc.
McStrongfast
...but that is where I ran out of patience.
Would you kindly go back and reread my first post.....? Also if you would of actually read all of the comparisons and not half of it, the comparison editor was acknowledging that both versions where identical, yet he focused more on the PS3s shortcomings (showing a little bit of fanboyism I might add).
Log in to comment