Rainbow 6 Ps3 Review Inside - Beats 360 version graphically :-)

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

its not a gamespot it doesnt count.oback

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

RazMaTaz-1

Another excerpt from the same link:

"Vegas takes a swing at using the motion sensing capability of the Sixaxis controller to operate the game's snake camera, which lets you peer under doors to spot waiting foes. Does it work? No, not really."

Its easy to edit things to portray the picture that you want. Anyways, congrats to PS3 owners on getting a good shooter.

ah the xbox360 version scored higher on that same site. five stars

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274557&tab=reviews&page=0&eid=-1

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.Kestastrophe

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

[QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.RazMaTaz-1

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

Then there is no reason to make this thread as a good looking game, does not mean a good game.

AmIright or AmIright

Although this is a case of a good looking game and a good game to play... It still doesnt look better.

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.Kestastrophe

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

Do you see the stars?! The PS3 version does have more than the X360 version. So how come that the X360 version score full 5 stars and PS3 vers not???!!!

[QUOTE="RazMaTaz-1"][QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.Guor_ok_Gondul

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

Then there is no reason to make this thread as a good looking game, does not mean a good game.

AmIright or AmIright

Although this is a case of a good looking game and a good game to play... It still doesnt look better.

Well its the first R6 review for Ps3, so yeah, it does deserve a thread,

Are you trying to contradict yourself or something? The review states it looks a tad better on PS3 than 360, so how can you say it doenst look better. :|

4.5 stars is a high score, put that into perspective, that 9/10, AAA standard.

*waits for "but but teh gamespot reviews onli deh countzor :cry: " again, it leads to the first thing i said, its the FIRST ps3 R6 review.

[QUOTE="Guor_ok_Gondul"][QUOTE="RazMaTaz-1"][QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.RazMaTaz-1

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

Then there is no reason to make this thread as a good looking game, does not mean a good game.

AmIright or AmIright

Although this is a case of a good looking game and a good game to play... It still doesnt look better.

Well its the first R6 review for Ps3, so yeah, it does deserve a thread,

Are you trying to contradict yourself or something? The review states it looks a tad better on PS3 than 360, so how can you say it doenst look better. :|

4.5 stars is a high score, put that into perspective, that 9/10, AAA standard.

*waits for "but but teh gamespot reviews onli deh countzor :cry: " again, it leads to the first thing i said, its the FIRST ps3 R6 review.

I actually could careless if its a GS review or not the fact is, they probably look the same if not th 360 version will still look better. I however am a firm believer in the 1 extra year of dev time..

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

[QUOTE="RazMaTaz-1"][QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.Guor_ok_Gondul

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

Then there is no reason to make this thread as a good looking game, does not mean a good game.

AmIright or AmIright

Although this is a case of a good looking game and a good game to play... It still doesnt look better.

Well its the first R6 review for Ps3, so yeah, it does deserve a thread,

Are you trying to contradict yourself or something? The review states it looks a tad better on PS3 than 360, so how can you say it doenst look better. :|

4.5 stars is a high score, put that into perspective, that 9/10, AAA standard.

*waits for "but but teh gamespot reviews onli deh countzor :cry: " again, it leads to the first thing i said, its the FIRST ps3 R6 review.

[QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.RazMaTaz-1

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

self owned? i didnt even say it was overall better than the 360 version :|

If you clicked on the link I provided, you would know that the site you provided gave the 360's graphics 5 stars, which is the same as the PS3 version.

its not a gamespot it doesnt count.oback

Moreover it's not even from a real games site.

So you waited 4 months or so for better graphics?Shazenab

More than four months. We were supposed to have this game at launch. Shows how game starved some of my cow brethern are. Does 6 months of delays justify slightly better visuals (according to yahoo only) and a few extra maps? I don't think so.

[QUOTE="Shazenab"]So you waited 4 months or so for better graphics?CyanX73

More than four months. We were supposed to have this game at launch. Shows how game starved some of my cow brethern are. Does 6 months of delays justify slightly better visuals (according to yahoo only) and a few extra maps? I don't think so.

I think its partly trying to justify the ps3 as the most powerful machine.. Well, to be honest (like oblivion), if the developers released the game at the same time than the 360 version would, most likely, be up to par with the playstation 3. Not like it matters.. Raindow Six Graphics arepoor for the majority of your game time(online).

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

RazMaTaz-1

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

Guor_ok_Gondul

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

[QUOTE="Guor_ok_Gondul"]

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

darthogre

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

Ownage approved. You just made every cow proud.

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

darthogre

The question is would the Lems be braging about Haze. They will a good amount of games to pass the time.

EDIT: I am a 360 fan, but not looking forwards to Haze (it looks good but there are other FPS I want, Crysis, BioShock, and Half Life 2:EP2; for the PC;come to mind)

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.Kestastrophe

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

[QUOTE="RazMaTaz-1"]

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

Kestastrophe

Another excerpt from the same link:

"Vegas takes a swing at using the motion sensing capability of the Sixaxis controller to operate the game's snake camera, which lets you peer under doors to spot waiting foes. Does it work? No, not really."

Its easy to edit things to portray the picture that you want. Anyways, congrats to PS3 owners on getting a good shooter.

it came out 6 months later what do u expect?!?

great game though no doubt

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

RazMaTaz-1

All I have to say is where are the pics for proof? Until then I don't care what this article has to say.

[QUOTE="Kestastrophe"]

[QUOTE="oback"]its not a gamespot it doesnt count.mavven

Anyways, self-owned because the 360 version scored higher on this site.

Do you see the stars?! The PS3 version does have more than the X360 version. So how come that the X360 version score full 5 stars and PS3 vers not???!!!

The game came out on PS3 a full 7-8 months later.

What the **** do u expect a higher score?

[QUOTE="darthogre"]

[QUOTE="Guor_ok_Gondul"]

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

CyanX73

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

Ownage approved. You just made every cow proud.

Ownage denied - the only reason Haze is delayed for the 360 is because the devs are afraid of coming up against Halo 3. The games are technically releasable at the same time, but the devs are holding one back to make way for another game. Rainbow Six Vegas took so long because the devs couldn't grip the PS3, and was delayed to allow more development time. Therefore the release of Haze on the 360 is directly comparable to that of the PS3 - the time delay was the devs CHOICE, they weren't forced to delay it unlike Ubisoft.

Think about it - Rainbow Six Vegas for the PS3 has had over 6 months of extra development time yet doesn't do anything different. Haze will be finished at the same on both PS3 and 360, so they are comparable. Saying 'we are already bored of Haze' at the time will only be met with 'thats fine, we were playing Halo 3 when you had Haze, then we get Haze too'. Whereas 360 fanboys can say 'we are already bored of Vegas' and the PS3 fanboys can reply with 'thats fine, we had... um... we had.... Motorstorm?'

4.5/5.0

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274558&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=517506

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

Seems like Ubisoft are turning over a new leaf. Takes time to make a good port for a Ps3, unlike these lazy devs like FEAR.

RazMaTaz-1

if it's not gamespot, or ign, And maybe 1up is doesn't matter.

[QUOTE="CyanX73"][QUOTE="darthogre"]

[QUOTE="Guor_ok_Gondul"]

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

RDS_Phoenix

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

Ownage approved. You just made every cow proud.

Ownage denied - the only reason Haze is delayed for the 360 is because the devs are afraid of coming up against Halo 3. The games are technically releasable at the same time, but the devs are holding one back to make way for another game. Rainbow Six Vegas took so long because the devs couldn't grip the PS3, and was delayed to allow more development time. Therefore the release of Haze on the 360 is directly comparable to that of the PS3 - the time delay was the devs CHOICE, they weren't forced to delay it unlike Ubisoft.

Think about it - Rainbow Six Vegas for the PS3 has had over 6 months of extra development time yet doesn't do anything different. Haze will be finished at the same on both PS3 and 360, so they are comparable. Saying 'we are already bored of Haze' at the time will only be met with 'thats fine, we were playing Halo 3 when you had Haze, then we get Haze too'. Whereas 360 fanboys can say 'we are already bored of Vegas' and the PS3 fanboys can reply with 'thats fine, we had... um... we had.... Motorstorm?'

ah the xbox360 version scored higher on that same site. five stars

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951274557&tab=reviews&page=0&eid=-1

v-vega75

Strange. The PS3 version has one star higher in multiplayer over the 360 version and the 360 version has half a star higher in interface, yet the 360 version gets 5 stars and PS3 4 1/2.

So the next time Ubisoft comes out with a game are we still going to here exuses on why one version is better and why one version is inferior? I mean after this and after Ubisoft said they won't rush anymore Wii games I hope that will be the new norm. But one thing concerns me. Will we always have to wait this long for 360 ports going to PS3? Sure dev will get easier but its only going to get that much easier for 360 as well. If not waiting gives 360 superior multiplats and waiting for an extended period of time just to get a decent port is the norm then I have to say something must change.

Maybe Sony should release some new dev tools or something I don't I'm no dev, but I'm sure they'll figure out something.

I am not going to get into the graphical comparison of a game that is a 6 month old port. The graphical comparison does not work on either side and anytime a game gets ported after the original release you can't really do a side by side because the assumption will always be that the developer has had more time to clean it up therefor that is the reason it looks better. But what i will say it that the ps3 fans will get a heck of a game and in reality one the best multi player experiences I have ever had in a game. Have fun.jbeen

Agreed. Fun game. Enjoy it and let everyone else argue out the minute differances.

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

darthogre

Sure.

The review might be inaccurate, as other sources such as IGN has stated the opposite.

From IGN preview "The first difference that we noticed is that textures aren't quite as sharp as what we remember seeing on the Xbox 360 game. While some stuff is fine, another texture close by will be of a much lower resolution, resulting in a disjointed look to some of the environments."

The 360 version is no graphical master piece, but I would wait for a better comparison before concluding that the ps3 version indeed have improved graphics.

[QUOTE="RDS_Phoenix"][QUOTE="CyanX73"][QUOTE="darthogre"]

[QUOTE="Guor_ok_Gondul"]

This isnt something to brag about most 360 fans have played and moved on from this game. I think you should play it and move on from it also. Your just making your self into a fanboy if you dont.

alfy13

Intresting. I wonder if PS3 fans could say the same to 360 fans about Haze. IF Haze ends up being a great game (Keeping in mind it comes out for 360 the next year).....does that mean it really doesn't mean anything when it's released on X360 because "PS3 fans have moved on".

Ownage approved. You just made every cow proud.

Ownage denied - the only reason Haze is delayed for the 360 is because the devs are afraid of coming up against Halo 3. The games are technically releasable at the same time, but the devs are holding one back to make way for another game. Rainbow Six Vegas took so long because the devs couldn't grip the PS3, and was delayed to allow more development time. Therefore the release of Haze on the 360 is directly comparable to that of the PS3 - the time delay was the devs CHOICE, they weren't forced to delay it unlike Ubisoft.

Think about it - Rainbow Six Vegas for the PS3 has had over 6 months of extra development time yet doesn't do anything different. Haze will be finished at the same on both PS3 and 360, so they are comparable. Saying 'we are already bored of Haze' at the time will only be met with 'thats fine, we were playing Halo 3 when you had Haze, then we get Haze too'. Whereas 360 fanboys can say 'we are already bored of Vegas' and the PS3 fanboys can reply with 'thats fine, we had... um... we had.... Motorstorm?'

But the point remains...while you play Haze, we'll be playing freaking Halo 3. Once we've slowed down on playing that, we'll get around to Haze. :P

"On the PS3, Vegas exhibits few graphical improvements over the 360 version"

RazMaTaz-1

That means there wasn't much of an improvement at all. It doesn't "beat" the 360 version, according to that quote. The quote says the PS3 exhibited few graphical improvements over the 360. It doesn't say a few, or a few more, it says simply, few graphical improvements. Therefore, if there were any, they were minor and unnoticable. Good Try.

What there's a new Rainbow Six? Oh you mean Vegas, the game I had before Christmas? Well, glad you finally got to play the game, it's a good one...TheCrazed420

owned

i actually feel bad for cows cuz they have to wait 9 months for a same game with bettergraphicsgamergeekgeek

It was great game for 360 but most of u lemmings were busy playing gears so dont act like u guys care.

Well, the cows can believe whatever they want to believe, but the lemmings pull the same card out on the hermits everytime.

Bu, bu, you had to wait!

It's all good, us PC gamers are enjoying the most number of AAAs, AAs, and other things like, oh, the best graphics, free online, etc while waiting on YOUR games. :lol:

As for the whole wait excuse is concerned. Good games are still good games, regardless of the timeframe. I swear, the way people talk about 'But, I played it long ago...' makes me feel like someone is dying of an incurable disease because they have to rush and play everything as soon as it releases.