Xbox 360 Vs. PS3 Graphics Comparison Round 4

jaysquared - 399 days 6 hours ago

Wait Wait! No way the 360 is superior to the PS3! Your telling me I bought a $600 console at launch on the promise that it will be superior to its competition.. I mean Sony themselves said that next gen won't start until the PS3 is released and ate that up! They also said that the cell is the most powerful processor out there and that's why everything will look better on my PS3 than the 360... If that's not true then i'm ready to leave this world behind!

Agree(14) | Disagree(29) | Report

Hellangelzx - 399 days 6 hours ago

And I'll say it again.

Multiplatform games aren't supposed to be superior in any way shape or form to the opposite console.

They're supposed to be exactly equal, based on what the developer can do with the system.

From what I saw, all these were basically equal.

Agree(16) | Disagree(6) | Report

baseballkid721 - 399 days 6 hours ago

I think Dead Space looks better on PS3... Dead Space on PS3 has darker color than 360 version. I played and beat Dead Space on PS3 and I didn't even see that strange shadow effect on Issac as it shows in 3rd and 4th picture... Since it only happens with that part, the PS3 version is, no doubt, better than 360. According to 360 fanboys, the brighter version is inferior. Funny how they always eventually contradict themselves(old PS3 games usually were brighter compared to 360 version and was the reason why 360 games looked better)

here are the corrections:
PS3- 3
360- 3
tie- 1

Agree(14) | Disagree(7) | Report

SaberEdge - 399 days 4 hours ago

The only thing is, I just played both versions of the demo and the 360 version doesn't look as bright as it does in those screenshots. I don't know what they did to get the 360 version to look brighter like that. It might be because they are outputting through HDMI and I am outputting through component. In any case, you can adjust the brightness level within the game itself so any difference there is pretty null. On the other hand, I did confirm the banding in the shadows and I also noticed that the framerate was more solid in the 360 version. Eurogamer's analysis also found that the 360 had a more stable framerate.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Algonath - 399 days 4 hours ago

If you look closely, the PS3 version is more jaggy-edged than the 360 versions. This is the same thing with OBLIVION. Its more bright....yea more bright and jagged-edged! aND if you think thats incorrect then you should punch your face you denial *****. lol

Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report

MNicholas - 399 days 3 hours ago

comparing multiplatform titles is pointless because such titles are not designed to take full advantage of the unique capabilities of each machine.

Only the best console exclusives are designed to really push their respective hardware platform to the max. Here are some examples:

3rd person shooters running at 30fps: Gears 2 vs Uncharted
1st person shooters running at 30fps: Halo 3 vs Kill Zone 2
Racing simulation running at 60fps: Forza 2 vs GT5 Prologue

etc...

Agree(4) | Disagree(6) | Report

PS3 FTW - 399 days 3 hours ago

These were pretty much the differences:

On all of them except FallOut 3, PS3 had higher/better contrast. FallOut 3 was the only one where the 360 version had higher contrast.

I've never seen anything like that weird pixely stuff in PS3 Dead Space. The PS3 version obviously looked better so they went and threw in a glitch - nice GameSpot.

Some of the articles screens had the 360 version looking a little smoother but the PS3 with higher contrast.

I've got an idea! Why don't they compare MGS4 to Gears 2?! Oh, wait... that would show how PS3 has far superior graphics! Something GameSpot won't show. Like how they said KZ2 had NO destructibility what-so-ever but then videos from the beta showed literally ground-breaking destructibility. I'v been in the KZ2 beta since day 1 and the destructibility has always been there.

Sony never said multi-platform games would look better. Any smart person knows it's the exclusives, like how KZ2 looks at least 2x better than anything on 360 and yet it only uses 75% of the PS3s power.

Like the Fantastic 4 dude says - "FLAME ON!"

Agree(2) | Disagree(6) | Report

SaberEdge - 399 days 1 hour ago

I don't agree. Killzone 2 looks good, but you are totally exaggerating how good it looks. Have you even played through Gears 2? That game looks better than anything I have played on my PS3 and that includes GT5p, Uncharted and MGS4. Gears 2 is the best looking game right now on consoles.

Agree(6) | Disagree(9) | Report

StephanieBBB - 398 days 21 hours ago

Notice the gray layer of the xbox360 pictures: http://www.gamespot.com/fea...

And then look at this video: http://www.gametrailers.com...

The PS3 is the only console which has a slightly gray layer as the 360 has richer color. When you turn on full RGB and super white on the PS3 some of that goes away but It still can't compete with the 360's richer colors.

Which of the pictures are the ones with the richer color on gamespot? Yeah the so called "PS3" picutres. No way in hell that the PS3 can have richer color than the 360.

I call BS on gamespots pictures.

Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report

baseballkid721 - 398 days 14 hours ago

are you seriously comparing BAJA??? lmaoo that game isnt even good in the graphic department.

PS3 is capable of having rich colors like 360 but its the developers that are not doing the job right. as of now, they are starting to make PS3 identical, if not better than 360 version. the version with richer colors are usually the lead platform version.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Willio - 398 days 9 hours ago

Sony is next gen if you think about it. Was Microsoft pro-HD when it was released? Sony is pushing the HD market and a new media medium Blu-Ray. if you can change the market, i say thats next gen.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

cherrypie - 398 days 9 hours ago

Xbox 360 on Fallout is better. By far.

PS3 has aliasing problems.
PS3 has big black blobs in place of "things" in the distance.
PS3 has inferior trees & shrubs.
PS3 has inferior lighting.

Xbox 360 on Call of Duty 4 is better. By far.

Everything on the PS3 looks like it is covered in 1" x 1" -- its all the poor aliasing on the PS3 making things look terrible.

Look at the last shot, of the men looking over the bunker. The PS3 version looks HORRIBLE. They seem to be dressed in plastic-sheet clothing, all blocky and square. Horrible.

Xbox 360 on MK vs. DC is better.

On the last shot, PS3 green lantern looks plastic and flat. The light and nuance of colour in the Xbox 360 is better again, by far.

And yet again, the PS3 owners lear what they are missing. The COD4: World at War was the most suprising for me. I cant belive how *bad* it looked on the PS3. Just terrible.

@above
"I've never seen anything like that weird pixely stuff in PS3 Dead Space. The PS3 version obviously looked better so they went and threw in a glitch - nice GameSpot."

What? Are you SERIOUS? Are you saying Gamespot has access to code? That they intentionally screwed with the screenshots to *add* that?

Your paranoid and delusional pal.

Take a look at CoD:WaW - all that "weird pixely stuff" is even *WORSE* in CoD.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

DaTruth - 398 days 7 hours ago

How come none of the PS3 exclusives have any aliasing problems? Yes, that's right.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Software_Lover - 399 days 7 hours ago

Not even going there, LOL. Have a good day sir and a happy thanksgiving.

Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report

littletad - 399 days 6 hours ago

You can almost hear the open zone clamoring for your fanboyism. Btw Happy Thanksgiving.

Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report

Qdog - 399 days 6 hours ago

It is my opinion, and distinct observation, that the 360 version of Fallout 3 has anti-aliasing(or a very advance edge-blur) and a heavier contrast, otherwise, there arent any notable differences. I think most multi-platform games are getting closer and closer to cross-platform equality. I think that Dead Space looked way more defined on the PS3, just my opinion. Burnout Paradise looked very equal at a glance, until you get closer to some textures, in which case the PS3 version is sharper. GTA4 did look more refined, and contrasted on the 360, but softer and more realistic on the PS3. Mirror's Edge looks very close on both platforms, due to it's use of a controlled(selective, reduced) color palette, with the exception of anti-aliasing in the 360 version. With Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, it came down more to controller preference, well except for a visible lower number of particles, compared to the 360. Overall, I am impressed, at how far this has gone. Please remember that first and second Party exclusives are meant to push the platform's capabilities, while multi console games are meant to push the franchise, in an equal(if possible) and acceptable presentation( except for games based on an upcoming movie, or even worse a game made by the Devil himself, Uwe Boll). Thank you for reading. IIIII<Only pedophiles and puppy killers will disagree with me without the courtesy of a response.>IIIII

Agree(8) | Disagree(3) | Report

GIJeff - 399 days 6 hours ago

its not even worth arguing. The ps3 is technologically superior in every way, be it graphic power or processing. It's fact, not opinion. This fact doesn't mean you can't like your 360...just like children used to like the Sega Pico.

Oh, and all UT3 games are ONE GAME. And UT3 on PS3 EASILY looks as good as ANY OTHER UT3 engine game on any console. If you cant see that, fine. But that's the TRUTH.

Agree(8) | Disagree(6) | Report

Heywood Jablomee - 399 days 4 hours ago

Software lover your such a fvcking pole riding fa9!

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

Rob0g0rilla - 399 days 4 hours ago

and it looks like crap. What about alan wake? What about Splinter Cell? Good games take time. Gears 2 follows the same formula as Gears 1 just like Resistance 1 & 2 and UT series. They all follow the same formula and the same engine. Don't forget the PC and 360 have a similar architecture as well so I'm sure putting it on PC wasn't that bad. Games like MGS4 and Killzone 2 run on a completely new engine. MGS4 could of came out last year but it was the most polished I ever played and it runs amazingly smooth. Killzone 2 could of came out this year but they decided to release it next year because of Resistance 2 and LBP. I don't blame Killzone 2 taking forever. It has to be right, it has to be this and it has to be that. Seriously, can you really blame them for it taking so long when people are expecting so much and games are too expensive for them not to meet the consumer's demand?

Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report

Heywood Jablomee - 399 days 4 hours ago

BLadestar how would 3rd party games show superiority when they hame the same coding? the only way to compare horsepower is to look at 1st party, dumbass.

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

0verdrive - 399 days 3 hours ago

i completely disagree with you.

you claim that 3rd party multiplatform games are the only/best way to judge the power of hardware, and i completely disagree with you. you say in your post at first that software is not the issue, and that the minor differences in 3rd party games show which console has graphical prowess. but at the end of your post, when addressing 1st party games like mgs, you say that hardware is not important, its the software coding that makes a game look good.

how can you say that one machine is more powerful than the other, judging by how it renders software? what you are judging when you nitpick between versions is just the amount of work that the development team put into the title in order to optimize the code to run on the specified hardware. its already been mentioned that 360 is easier to program for, and that is showing in the discrepancy between the two version of multiplatform titles. on top of that, most multiplatform games so far this generation are coded for the 360, and ported over to the ps3. development teams have to take the code, optimized for 360, and make it work on the ps3, which is harder to code for- resulting in shabby ports, as seen with fallout3. so no, multiplatform games are not equal, because both systems have different hardware, and the way they render graphics is different. it is up to developers to integrate their software to use the respective hardware, something that they have had more trouble doing on the ps3, so far.

it should be noted that none of these multiplatform games are pushing the hardware of either of these machines. to say that one machine is more powerful than the other based on how it is rendering a game that does not push the limits of the system is stupid.

that is why everyone keeps on going back to first party games. that is why everyone keeps on bringing up killzone2. these titles are built from scratch with in house engines that are optimized for the hardware of the console, in killzone's case, the ps3. first party games are made to push the limits of each console farther than multiplatform titles could, thus actually showing the power of each console. yes, it does have a lot to do with the amount of work that the development team is putting into it, but at the same time it gives us gamers some way to judge the potential of hardware, were all developers to put as much time, effort, and money into all of each console's titles.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

hate_me - 399 days 1 hour ago

how can the ps3 being held back by the 360 when the 360 multi plat games 90% of the time looks better on the 360? there are alot of kids on here and in a previous statement I said that this site is going downhill just because of ignorant idiots from both sides

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

cherrypie - 398 days 8 hours ago

"None of them push the Xbox 360 with multiplat games because the PS3 is holding them back"

There. I fixed it for you.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Tiberium - 398 days 4 hours ago

it matters because some people buy systems for better multiplatform games. They want the best bang for their buck.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Software_Lover - 399 days 6 hours ago

to the 360 version. And does it really matter.

Unless you're playing them both side by side, at the same time, on the same television, at night, during a full moon, with binoculars, and a 45 degree glare, in bunny slippers

Will you actually be able to tell the difference?

If you own a ps3, why worry about what the 360 version looks like, unless it is just ps2 quality vs 360 quality. And vice versa. Why care, as a 360 owner, unless its xbox quality vs ps3 quality?

Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report

LinuxGuru - 399 days 6 hours ago

Um, they have the extra year of PS3 dev time under their belts NOW (before making Fallout 3), and the experience they gained from Oblivion...you'd think that would have applied to the PS3 version of Fallout, but no.

I did own a 360 (not any more due to repeat hardware issues), and I have a PC as well.

It's just a shame that even with the extra YEAR of experience, they couldn't even keep the PS3 version on par this time around.

Very disappointing.

Oh and about your little overblown statement there - it's actually quite easy to notice missing reflections, bad shadowing and pop-in.

You don't need bunny slippers under a full moon with a 45 degree angle and binoculars.

I know the PS3 is a capable machine. Moreso than the 360. Killzone 2 is absolute proof of that. It just disappoints me when I see a dev backslide from producing a more superior product when they were shown to be capable of it before.

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

thebudgetgamer - 399 days 6 hours ago

a few graphical hic-ups will not stop me from buying a game i can see if the actual gameplay was broken but a couple of screen tears is nothing to me

:)

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

pain777pas - 399 days 6 hours ago

The games look pretty much the same on both systems except for Star Wars. Dead space I'm not sure I buy that it looks better on the 360.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

cherrypie - 398 days 8 hours ago

"wait wait wait for X!"

For extra LOLz, I invite everyone to inspect this poster's icon. Apparently the EPIC IRONY escapes him.

My prediction: KZ2 is the Lair of early 2009.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Software_Lover - 399 days 6 hours ago

After years of reading people's responses, and them being so vibrant and vocal, I have to come to realize how easy it is to recruit terrorists. I always wandered how in the world do these people get others to go blow themselves up. Well look no further than blind fanboys who will defend and attack blindly, LOL.

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

SketchCA - 399 days 6 hours ago

Yeah I have to agree. I want to believe that people aren't that stupid but god d@mn, it seems like it gets harder everyday. People! They are f-ing video games!!

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

LinuxGuru - 399 days 6 hours ago

People have to learn, you know. The PS3 has a learning curve, and those who conquer it are showing what the PS3 is capable of.

*cough* GUERRILLA *cough*

Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report

Dr_Nefarious - 399 days 4 hours ago

gnothe1 is right.I was one of those idiots who believed the ps3 was going to blow away the 360. After 2 years of booty whoopins, I realize the ps3 is nothing more but a dying pipe dream. I love my ps3, but these comparisons are starting to set a pattern that I don't like.

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

Sayai jin - 399 days 1 hour ago

LinuxGuru- True, but how long do you think the masses want to wait? Devs are spending a lot of time and man hours dev'ing for the PS3. When they can spend less time dev'ing and make more money going multi-plat. I am not saying it's right, but they are companies after all and they are in business for one thing, money!
Remember what one of the reason the PS1 and PS2 a huge success? Ease of developing and cost effective. I do not know why Sony strayed away from this.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Jenzo - 399 days ago

Is that the truth? Quickly! Hide it!!

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

ApocalyPS3 - 398 days 15 hours ago

it took ATi's universal shader architecture to smack nVidia into new thinking, which led them to developing CUDA so you can put that old GeForce (no older than 8 series however) to work as a GPGPU. and they still fall behind ATi's best efforts at the high to midrange market.

Nothing beats a pair of Radeon HD4870x2 1GB. And if you want affordable just drop down to a HD4850 and pay less than $200 per card and still get 800 stream processors and 512MB GDDR3 each! Or get all insane and go quad Crossfire on a 790fx!

If not for ATi's constant rivalry we would've seen another GeForce series go by without any major innovations.

in other words another FX series down the tubes;)

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Heywood Jablomee - 399 days 4 hours ago

It does make some good toast while it keeps your room warm.

Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report

BLuKhaos - 398 days 13 hours ago

Funny thing is that it fails at even being a good heater because The PS3 pumps out more heat and still runs flawlessly while the RRODbox holds the heat in and Dies.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

HateBoy - 398 days 18 hours ago

look at the pictures dumbass. Man you wouldn't believe water was wet even if I splashed it on your face.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

LinuxGuru - 399 days 6 hours ago

The only thing the 360 can handle excellently is textures.

Everything else....not so much.

Agree(3) | Disagree(8) | Report

SaberEdge - 399 days 4 hours ago

Killzone 2 looks awesome and I am definitely getting it. My best friend is in the beta and I know first hand how good it looks. However, my honest opinion is that many people are overhyping it. The graphics look very good in many ways, but there are definitely areas where it is deficient. I personally think Gears 2 stands up quite well to it. They both look awesome, they just have very different approaches.

What you have to consider, too, is that Killzone 2 has had a much longer development cycle than Gears 2 did and also has a huge budget behind it. We can also see that a lot of the reason KZ2 looks good is because of the technical talent of the developers. If we look at how good Guerrilla were able to make Killzone look on the PS2, it should be no surprise that they have managed to make Killzone 2 look as good as it does. But it still doesn't prove the alleged superiority of the PS3.

Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report

Bangladesh - 398 days 23 hours ago

Gears of War 2 wipes it's ass with the PS3's entire game library. Lol, you don't even need a color tv for Killzone 2, it looks exactly the same on an old black/white.

Agree(2) | Disagree(6) | Report

Ilikegames76 - 398 days 9 hours ago

You sound just like GameTrailer's video editor.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

lokiroo420 - 399 days 5 hours ago

Enjoy buying your external bluray drive next year, and the enjoy buying your xbox720 the next, pay beyond gayboy.

Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report

Danja - 399 days 5 hours ago

ur comment never ceases to amaze me.....ur 3 year warranty is up now..sooo..good luck...^_^

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

Magic_The_Celt - 399 days 2 hours ago

dude, OMFG its a game consoles, you speak about it like its some amazing leap for human kind thats gonna do a damn thing for us

you need to wake up and realise, ITS-A-GAMING-CONSOLE

do you have no life at all? your a good speaker you should put that to good use

why arent you on your awesome 360 right now? im on my PS3 dude.. with its IE, writing this, telling you that you need some form of life if you believe the dribble you spin

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Heywood Jablomee - 399 days 4 hours ago

You could compare exclusives but the box only has an exclusive, 360 blows more than pp jonesing for some c0ck.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

SaberEdge - 399 days 4 hours ago

I have Uncharted and MGS4 and Gears 2 looks better than both of them, so I don't understand what you are talking about. I will judge KZ2 when I can play it in its entirety on my HDTV. As of right now, though, Gears 2 is the best looking game I have played on any console.

Agree(1) | Disagree(6) | Report

morganfell - 399 days 3 hours ago

Gears 2 muddy textures can't touch MGS4. When you can see individual strands of hair, movements that look like a human being instead of a overblown episode of RAW, and a lighting engine way past what Gears 2 provides then this conversation is over. Sorry fanboy, bark up another tree. No sense in even talking further.

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

Bangladesh - 398 days 22 hours ago

Morganfell

What kind of ignorant comments are you going to make when Gears of War 2 wins Best Graphics at the VGA's?

lol I'm sure you will pull something completely ludicrous out of your dumb ass.

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

HateBoy - 398 days 17 hours ago

Then he'll claim they (who decide who wins) were paid of, as always. Morganfail lives in constant state of denial. It's sad really.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

morganfell - 398 days 15 hours ago

No Hateboy. But you are the one that thinks a bunch of rabid fanboys are right. Who do you think picks the winners at the VGA awards? Serious, impartial individuals that are technical and artistic experts that understand the degree of achievement in titles like MGS4? No fanboys. I don't have to say they were paid off. I need merely tell the truth that the entire show is a joke and lacks any degree of validity.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

testerg35 - 399 days 3 hours ago

I believe it was suppose to be this year that the PS3 is suppose to do all that. But I guess we'll have to wait again.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Shane Kim - 398 days 14 hours ago

Disagree with CoD5, it looks better on the PS3, much more detailed. And most of the pics shows that the PS3 version is more rich in colours.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report