[QUOTE="Dr_DudeMan"][QUOTE="CheeChee_Macko"][QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]

truthfully i dont see a difference, and ill also sad that i find it pretty sad that we are fighting and trying to claim ownage over 80 fn pixles, the rockstar devs did what they had to do to make the games even, people need to shut the hell up and JUST ENJOY THE DAMN GAME

E M I N 3 M

It's not "80 fn" pixels. It is a 184,320 pixel difference.

(1280 * 720) - (1152 * 640) = 184,320

Yes, but you are sacrificing advanced post-processing that has had reviewers across the board argue that the ps3 has the slight edge visually for a negligable amount of pixels. I am running the game on a 42" 1080p aquos that support full rgb and I had my buddy bring his 360 copy over that I ran on my elite. And the ps3 version honestly looked better. Colors are more vivid and the light effects look noticeably more realistic. My buddy even said that the 360 version looked kind of 'gray' compared to the ps3 version. So take this bit for what its worth, but I really think that if you want the best visuals, pick up the ps3 version. If you want dlc and achievements, pick up the 360 version.

That's very true if you dont like the way it looks just adjust your TV set... It's not that hard to do and technical people (including me) tune their HDTV's to the way YOU want the game to look... So just because it looks like this on a screenshot doens't mean it'll look like that on your TV set...

You'll never really get your games to look its best if you dont tweak your TV settings, and that's a fact.

Not sure where you get that the ps3's processor is more powerful. Its actually less. Do you know why the ps3 doesn't have in-game xmb yet? Memory and cpu limitations. The system is for some reason already taking up about 80megs of ram for its resources, and the cpu is only a single core 3ghz processor right? Sure, that 3000mhz processor works MUCH more effecient, but the system basically relies on it. Even for sound and the system functionality itself. *Which is why games like stranglehold on the ps3 have major sound problems, because its hard to program on the cell* Only major thing outside of the cell that actually does anything really, is the gpu and ram obviously. Just don't forget, when it says 7 SPE's, its basically dividing the processors resources. NOT 7 cores.

But the 360 has 3 symmetrical cpus with each doing 3ghz. Allows it to take off some of the pressure on the ram that the system takes up for resources *only 20-30megs isn't it?*, and use the cpu mostly for having the in-game blade. Then it has its own sound board, so the cpu doesn't have to calculate all that either. But, by having all those cpus AND a gpu going at once, can easily cause overheating.

So yeah, its kindof obvious why the 360 is more powerful. The ps3 just tries doing too many things with the cell alone, and the 360 can focus most of its cpus on the main game. Not sure about gpu differences though.

hazuki

Well actually the PS3's OS only uses 50mb or less now, with every Firmware update they decrease the amount that's used for the OS... Which means more Memory for Dev. to use!:shock:... I'm hoping they can get it down to the 20mb-30mb range like the 360, i highly doubt it but who knows right? :D

[QUOTE="jimm895"]

[QUOTE="Darthmatt"][QUOTE="EmperorSupreme"]PS3 is more powerful because developers are learning that the Cell and it's SPEs can be used to offload a lot of things like particle effects, lighting calculations, etc.. stuff the GPU normally does letting the GPU do more. phatrawk

If people want to argue the power of the different systems all they need to do is check the stats of the F@H project that can max out any system while it's folding a unit of data. Then they can argue which hardware is the most powerful after seeing the results.

I really hate it when people bring up F @ H as if it's a measure of a processor/console's ability to handle games. For all the armchair computer architects, I can only say this: the Cell is an impressive processor that wasn't designed specifically for gaming. There are many processor architectures that are amazing at crunching certain problems...but you wouldn't want to run your 3D rederer on them. Quoting TFLOPS is often misleading in the grand scheme of things, and can be twisted like a bad marketing campaign.

I've got to agree with this one... I'm a proud PS3 owner and I love my PS3 and what it can do, but you just can't use the F@H project as a valid "PS3 is more powerful then the 360" argument point...

How about we all just wait for the upcoming games to come out and then we can judge to see which console is better. I'm a PS3 owner and fan but you can't deny the 360 has some great games graphicaly.

[QUOTE="damnpapi"]

Yeah i never played the first one, but i always thought it looked pretty good!... I wish i had a 360 so i could compare these damn multiplatform games! haha :roll:

I dont know about you all but the PS3 version just looks washed out and dosn't seem to have a stable framerate. Again you to you fanboys this is just MY opinion, don't get your panties wet playa's:P

Super_Swagger

1.Display settings

2.RGB - full

3.Super white

Problem solved.

Got all that down already playa... I'm not a newb who doesn't know anything about HDTV settings and so on, but thanks for the input.

Yeah i never played the first one, but i always thought it looked pretty good!... I wish i had a 360 so i could compare these damn multiplatform games! haha :roll:

I dont know about you all but the PS3 version just looks washed out and dosn't seem to have a stable framerate. Again you to you fanboys this is just MY opinion, don't get your panties wet playa's:P

Well, I personally ordered the 360 version which I should be getting by tomorrow, but I downloaded the PSN demo last night, and while I absolutely loved the demo, the camera felt a bit wonky on the Sixaxis controller. As for the graphics, I thought that some of it looked good, and some of it looked rather washed out and very muddy. I will have to wait until I get the 360 version before I can make an accurate comparison though.

Aside from all of that, I loved the demo and by the time I reached Vanhorn at the end, I was really starting to dig it. Cannot wait to get my copy.

ironcreed

Yeah please post your thoughts on both version and be detailed if possible... I just dont get why people defend their consoles so much, I love my PS3 but if it the graphics isn't on par with the 360 i'll take the loss... It's not like it's the end of the world god damn it... lol

[QUOTE="damnpapi"]

Post your thoughts on the PS3 version compared to the 360 one, include pictures if possible.

Not trying to start a fanboy war but i think it's safe to say some of us enjoy the comparisons! Also I only own a PS3 and I'm a big PS3 fan, however I dont thinkt he PS3 version looked all that great AT ALL:?

Sully28

Same as you, 1080p on a 40"HDTV... Everything seemed abit slow and not always smooth, plus things got abit too damn blurry at times...

Post your thoughts on the PS3 version compared to the 360 one, include pictures if possible.

Not trying to start a fanboy war but i think it's safe to say some of us enjoy the comparisons! Also I only own a PS3 and I'm a big PS3 fan, however I dont thinkt he PS3 version looked all that great AT ALL:?

These pictures have changed my mind, I will not longer be purchasing this game as it looks absolutely terrible. dipper145

again these are off the screen shots with a digy cam, if you dont buy the game it's your loss :roll: