Gamespot declares 360 winning over PS3 on graphics

[s8ist]

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html?tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&click=topslot

The PS3 versions were found to be graphically inferior in most cases. It should be noted that the differences weren't huge, except for Fight Night, where the lighting engine looked like complete ass.

 

[JamesJ]

seems they have a contrast problem.

the problem with this is what tv were they using, what reoloution, I showed something similiar earlier, and thought about editing it out as, right now the Ps3 is just now being developed for, lets do this again next year......the internet is full of fanboys (really starting to ticke me off!) and why not go and play some ps3 and 360 and see which you think is better, not what other people tell you!

 

[JamesJ]

also this is from the article-

"We're going to give the PS3 the benefit of the doubt in this initial round since developers might need more time to figure out how to maximize performance from the Cell and the RSX. If you look at the Xbox 360's first Madden game, Madden 06, you'll notice that it doesn't offer very realistic stadium shadows, either. The trouble with buying a console at launch is that you often have to wait for the second or third generation of games for the system to fulfill its potential. The PS3 didn't beat the 360 in this first comparison, but the games do look fine for first-generation titles. The real graphics battle will likely come next year.
"
Lets be fair and not bash a console just because you dont like it, thank you!

 

[s8ist]

also this is from the article-

"We're going to give the PS3 the benefit of the doubt in this initial round since developers might need more time to figure out how to maximize performance from the Cell and the RSX. If you look at the Xbox 360's first Madden game, Madden 06, you'll notice that it doesn't offer very realistic stadium shadows, either. The trouble with buying a console at launch is that you often have to wait for the second or third generation of games for the system to fulfill its potential. The PS3 didn't beat the 360 in this first comparison, but the games do look fine for first-generation titles. The real graphics battle will likely come next year.
"
Lets be fair and not bash a console just because you dont like it, thank you!

Yeah, I read the article. That's why I posted it.

 

[JoeSp]

I checked out their comparisons and found that the contrast on the PS3 has a higher output then the 360. Differant folks like differant things and basically some folks like their sets brighter than others. I prefer the lighter screens or the PS3 to the darker ones on the XBOX360. Of course I want to see both game systems my PIONEER 58" Elite because those screens did not do just to either the XBOX360 or PS3.

Seeing as how these are XBOX360 games that were ported over to the PS3 I did not expect the PS3 to look better. Contrast of course could be adjusted at the HDTV, the 360 contrast could be adjusted up and the PS3 could be adjusted down. I would guess then that the screens would look basically the same.

I am interested in seeing how games first done on the PS3 will look on the Xbox360. That should be interesting. We won't be seeing any of these games till about April or May.

 

[s8ist]

seems they have a contrast problem.

the problem with this is what tv were they using, what reoloution, I showed something similiar earlier, and thought about editing it out as, right now the Ps3 is just now being developed for, lets do this again next year......the internet is full of fanboys (really starting to ticke me off!) and why not go and play some ps3 and 360 and see which you think is better, not what other people tell you!

Contrast doesn't fix poor frame rates, which were also mentioned in the article. also, if you'll break away from worshipping an electronics company for a second, you'll notice there were places in the article where 360 screens were darker than PS3 AND vice versa! These weren't contrast issues so much as they were programmed into the graphics engines of the games (for instance, Marvel looked better on the PS3 to me just because it was slightly brighter and I could see more detail).

I'm sure PS3 will have some stellar titles that won't fail to impress. This was Gamespot's evaluation of the current line-up. We can cut the blind faith to Sony and let them prove their worth. Then they can have my cash.

 

[JamesJ]

Contrast doesn't fix poor frame rates, which were also mentioned in the article. also, if you'll break away from worshipping an electronics company for a second, you'll notice there were places in the article where 360 screens were darker than PS3 AND vice versa! These weren't contrast issues so much as they were programmed into the graphics engines of the games (for instance, Marvel looked better on the PS3 to me just because it was slightly brighter and I could see more detail).

I'm sure PS3 will have some stellar titles that won't fail to impress. This was Gamespot's evaluation of the current line-up. We can cut the blind faith to Sony and let them prove their worth. Then they can have my cash.

I know you arent talking to me, are you? did you miss the xbox 360 gamertag under my name--I really hate to point that out in front of all these people that you missed that in your rush to be rude and nasty to me, and bash a console again, but anyways back on topic

There were shots were the 360 was dark compared to the ps3, thats why its hard to say for sure, I believe it was a contrast issue....also my point about the whole resoloution thing the Ps3 dosent play nicely with the whole 720/1080i, right now..I am not going to go into detail here, as I think everyone knows what I am talking about, plus I think someone else could do a better job at explaining it...so is it a fair comparison if its lower resoloutions? plus different contrast. again I am at fault for posting the same website, but I also put they look the same, and I really didnt bash one way or the other, as I know the only way to see if you like a game is on your tv at your house, with your system. enjoy!

 

[s8ist]

I know you arent talking to me, are you? did you miss the xbox 360 gamertag under my name--I really hate to point that out in front of all these people that you missed that in your rush to be rude and nasty to me, and bash a console again, but anyways back on topic

No, I didn't miss your gamertag, but thanks for pointing it out to me as some sort of a lame retort. I'm sure you heard the collective "ooooh no he di'int" as you typed it. The type of people who think that is a valid rebuttal are not the sort I would feel obliged to impress. It will be difficult, but I'll live with the 'embarassment'.

 

[peterson40]

I own both... Hands Down the 360 is better... Unfortunate that I waited in line so long...

 

[Paradox-SJ]

I own both... Hands Down the 360 is better... Unfortunate that I waited in line so long...

I now own both (I won the PS3 at work) and as of TODAY...the 360 is far and away the better gaming machine....The questions is will DEV ever be able to take full advantage of the horseies in the PS3? I hope so...but until then (Summer 07 i expect) this fight is lopsided.

 

[JamesJ]

No, I didn't miss your gamertag, but thanks for pointing it out to me as some sort of a lame retort. I'm sure you heard the collective "ooooh no he di'int" as you typed it. The type of people who think that is a valid rebuttal are not the sort I would feel obliged to impress. It will be difficult, but I'll live with the 'embarassment'.

I'm not going to throw insults your way as I dont want my posts deleted. I believe I have a very good view point, and that I am not a fanboy. You had said I am woshipping a console, when in fact you were wrong and just throwing dirt in my face. It wasnt a retort but fact that I have a 360, and I am getting a ps3, what console am I worshiping again? The fact of the matter is you wrote a thread that stated the graphics were behind the 360, especially in one game where the lighting looks like crap, when in fact the article summed everything up by stating the Ps3 is still young and no one has programmed it to take advantage of its power. See what you did there was mis use a article and pull ONLY what you wanted out of it. Do I prefer one console over the other no. Is one console better then the other-maybe, buts thats all in the eye of the owner, as the 360 has GREAT first person shooters out. As I Have stated before it all comes down to what games you like, if you like halo get a 360, if you like metal gear solid, or ratchet and clank get a Ps3, there is no reason to bash a console, or someone just because you dont like it. It seems if someone just sides with sony anymore people automatically assume they "worship" Sony and Ken, but in fact all they did was side with sony maybe on one point....I usually try to take the high road in these arguments, but really the whole me vs you is getting old and worn out, lets just play games and enjoy our systems.

 

[JamesJ]

I now own both (I won the PS3 at work) and as of TODAY...the 360 is far and away the better gaming machine....The questions is will DEV ever be able to take full advantage of the horseies in the PS3? I hope so...but until then (Summer 07 i expect) this fight is lopsided.

I agree, I actually think it will be awhile longer then normal as the cell is very complex to program for, and as far as I have heard Sony hasnt helped by providing lame instructions, and packages for the developers.

 

[hpman247]

Just to Add. The 360 is one Hell of a gaming machine, but so is the PS3. Yes the PS3 is a bitch to program for, but apparently with this new info from IGN "developers are discovering that the PS3 has 'a heap more processing headroom than they initially anticipated and that this was resulting in the development of new gaming capabilities.'" Give it time. No matter what people say, both are great and will be for a long time. The 360 has the advantage coming out early and the PS3 has the brand name loyalty, and I think that will go a long way.

Also, I agree with stuart "the whole me vs you is getting old and worn out" because it certainly is. In the next 2 years the public will decide what it wants and after all is said and done then we can speak some facts other than this rubbish we try to come up with to defend our points. I could go on and on with this issue, b/c I see a lot of MS fanboys and Sony haters here at school and I seriously think they are lacking some type of brain activity that allows them to see 2 points of view and conclusively decide from the FACTS. But anyway, people just enjoy you console. Right now, I'm about 75/25 playing time with the PS3 vs 360, mainly b/c of Tiger and RFoM. You decide. I'm tired of arguing it. peace

 

[JoeSp]

Poor framerates are a result of poor programming -- not poor hardware. That is why I do not particularly like ports of games from other systems. If you are not going to invest in the differance between the systems and play to the strengths of each system then something is going to suffer. Framerates is always the first to suffer.

As far as my contrast statement, it is about how something is shown on your HDTV. Both systems have sweet graphics, in some ways the XBOX360 is very nice, in others the PS3 is very nice. If we wait a year I am sure the PS3 will have some titles out that will amaze and daze you. However, right now, games originally done on the 360 better look better and have better framerates then the ports to the PS3. I think March 2007 will bring alot to the table for the PS3. Lets revisit then shall we?

Oh, and framerates aside (30fps is pretty good and yes 60fps is better) I think that NBA2K7 is better looking on the PS3 then the 360. I know the scoreboard in Madden on the PS3 is better than the 360 and the players muscular definition is better on the PS3 then the 360. Textures upclose look better on the 360 and textures faraway look better on the PS3. These are my impressions but hey, both of these systems are cool. Competition always breeds better product -- lets hope that is true for future gaming on both the Xbox360 and the PS3.

 

[GeorgeLV]

Poor framerates are a result of poor programming -- not poor hardware.

Sure. But it doesn't help that the PS3 is hampered by an outdated off the shelf PC graphics chip that was apparently tacked on when someone at Sony realized the Cell alone didn't make a very good GPU.

 

[ronjohn]

That is why I do not particularly like ports of games from other systems. If you are not going to invest in the differance between the systems and play to the strengths of each system then something is going to suffer.

I am not a computer programmer, or a video game company employee, so I don't know the insides of the business. I do think however that spending extra money to get the games perfect on all systems is not something most business executives would do. They already spend millions to get a game developed, I would think the executives are going to reach a point where they stop spending and put out whatever they have.

 

[mikley28]

Poor framerates are a result of poor programming -- not poor hardware.

Wrong again! It's actually more hardware than software. Try playing BF 2142 on your 128 MB video card with a Celeron CPU and watch your frame rate go down the toilet.

 

[JoeSp]

I am not a computer programmer, or a video game company employee, so I don't know the insides of the business. I do think however that spending extra money to get the games perfect on all systems is not something most business executives would do. They already spend millions to get a game developed, I would think the executives are going to reach a point where they stop spending and put out whatever they have.

And this is the very reason I do not like ports. They don't ever run as well as on the original system. Games made specifically for one system always shine on that system. Those exclusives are the ones I usually like to play. And this is why I will eventually buy a XBOX360 - after the price comes down and the new model comes out.

 

[JoeSp]

While the 360's chip has an architeture that M$ feels is more advanced it should only allow for better textures and HDR features. The chip in the PS3 has been compared to a suped-up 7800gt chip. With its own bandwith port and dedicated memory (256k yes but has access to the other 256 if needed) this chip is well capable of great framerates. If the framerate is not steady at 30fps then it is a programming problem. I have a BFG 6800gt overclocked running at 1600x1200 and I have no framerate problems on anything I run. So while it could be the hardware - I doubt it. Games specifically for the PS3 will tell us what framerates can be sustained. BTW, what is the framerate in Resistance - anyone know?

 

[vurbano]

Looks like the PS3 isnt living up to the hype.