Gamespot - Dragon Age Origins PS3 Review

dchalfont - 53 days 12 hours ago

...this game is multiplat

@MichaelJackson

the pc review from gamespot was 9.5...bad cover-up there wacko jacko

Agree(17) | Disagree(5) | Report

MichaelJackson - 53 days 12 hours ago

He/She was talking about the score... O_O

Agree(6) | Disagree(4) | Report

Foxgod - 53 days 12 hours ago

PC version is superior.
I am gonna play that one tonight on max settings :)

Agree(9) | Disagree(22) | Report

beardpapa - 53 days 12 hours ago

lol that's funny.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

thereapersson - 53 days 12 hours ago

I thought it was only a PS3 fanboy tactic to spin things by saying they are buying the PC version?

Agree(21) | Disagree(4) | Report

Foxgod - 53 days 12 hours ago

I play all multi's on pc, that tactic you speak of is only used by angry fanboys who dont have a good pc to begin with.

Agree(7) | Disagree(26) | Report

champ21 - 53 days 11 hours ago

pc >>>>>>>&g t;>>ps3=360

higher fps, mods, free dlcs, better graphics, mouse keyboard support.

all at a cheapr price ;-)

Agree(6) | Disagree(15) | Report

peeps - 53 days 10 hours ago

yep pc is pretty much always better (except it looks like mw2 is being majorly shafted for pc lol and by shafted i mean they're basically limiting it to the consoles features e.g. matmaking no dedi's, no mods, buying dlc etc

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

AKNAA - 53 days 10 hours ago

WoW! a PS3 multiplat better than the 360 version?! now thats a shocker! Hopefully this becomes a trend, MW2, AC2...
PC version does obviously look better, but I don't care for it unless its on a console...

Agree(12) | Disagree(1) | Report

t850 - 53 days 10 hours ago

mw2 shafted = what the console gamers get.

so in console terms pc users didnt get shafted at all, rather the pc version will still be the best looking version.

though i do have reservations at how activision is treating the gamers(pc, 360, ps3), so many copies are sold. is it so difficult for them to give console users dedicated servers as well? specially now that they increased prices even on consoles outside the usa.

i think activision is being greedy and if they are supported it may lead to other AAA developers to treat gamers in the same way.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

raztad - 53 days 7 hours ago

I really dont get it.

3 different reviews of the same game:

1 - DA PS3 56 comments
2 - DA PC 16 comments
3 - DA Xbox 4 comments

Why is the PS3 article the most populated and commented (by far)?

On topic: I'm glad Bioware did a good job with the PS3 version. I'm seriously considering buying this game to support them, but I'm havent played anything like this before so I'm not sure. Game world setting and story are looking extremely engrossing and interesting though.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

gaffyh - 53 days 5 hours ago

I'm VERY surprised that the PS3 version is better than the 360 version, when the game was obviously developed for 360/PC first. Maybe there is hope for Mass Effect 2 on PS3 yet?

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

vhero - 53 days 5 hours ago

Gamespot clearly says the PS3 version is superior to 360 version
http://uk.gamespot.com/ps3/... right near the end of the video he clearly says it looks better.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

darkride66 - 53 days 4 hours ago

I've had it argued before that when comparing games on different consoles, metacritic scores are no good because sites always give games the same score. This couldn't be further from the truth. Professional reviews may not count pixels like LOT does, but when a game is clearly better on one platform compared to the other, it's reflected in these scores. When the differences simply don't matter, the scores reflect that too. Why use just one site's opinion, like LOT, when you can look at 70+ professional reviews averaged into one score?

2009 is almost over. So far the PS3 has the best exclusives and the upper hand with multiconsole releases according to metacritic. I don't know why this is so hard for people to accept.

Agree(4) | Disagree(5) | Report

jjohan35 - 52 days 20 hours ago

I need to know whether this game is repetitive or not like some of the other popular RPG franchises. I thought Oblivion and Fallout were very repetitive, yet got overrated scores.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Delta - 53 days 13 hours ago

They have been on par with some exceptions.

Agree(13) | Disagree(4) | Report

Jamie Foxx - 53 days 13 hours ago

..

Agree(16) | Disagree(1) | Report

Delta - 53 days 13 hours ago

You hit it right on the nose.

Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report

TheIneffableBob - 53 days 13 hours ago

The PS3 version's graphics are better than the 360 version's, though obviously the graphics are worse than the PC version. The PS3's load times are better as well, when compared to the 360 version.

Agree(18) | Disagree(3) | Report

shoeshineguy - 53 days 13 hours ago

"On the flip side, the Xbox 360 version looks positively disappointing. Textures are highly compressed and colors are washed out, though the upside is that this version maintains a smoother frame rate than on the PlayStation 3, where things might get jittery when swiveling the camera around. The PlayStation 3 version features higher-quality textures than those on the Xbox 360, better color saturation, smoother facial animations, and shorter load times. Minor visual hiccups, like corpses that disappear and reappear, are a bit more common on the PS3, however."

Agree(14) | Disagree(2) | Report

McErono - 53 days 11 hours ago

they say: the Xbox 360 version looks positively disappointing. Textures are highly compressed and colors are washed out, though the upside is that this version maintains a smoother frame rate than on the PlayStation 3, where things might get jittery when swiveling the camera around. The PlayStation 3 version features higher-quality textures than those on the Xbox 360, better color saturation, smoother facial animations, and shorter load times. Minor visual hiccups, like corpses that disappear and reappear, are a bit more common on the PS3, however. The PC version is the superior experience, but if you're choosing between the two console releases, the PlayStation 3 has the upper hand.

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

Tony P - 53 days 12 hours ago

That's about what I expected, actually.

Well, tbh I only expected the PC version to score higher than consoles since the game is modeled after the classic PC RPGs. But as I said elsewhere, it looks like visuals are about the *only* real difference and not by much.

If it hurts your enjoyment of the game to know others play a slightly better looking version, reevaluate why you play games. Because besides that, everything else seems to be more or less uniform across platforms.

Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report

colossi16 - 53 days 12 hours ago

Dang, you serious? They really need to go back to their old scoring system, that is so stupid!

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

dchalfont - 53 days 12 hours ago

they gave legitimate justifications for the score differences, ps3 looked better than 360, the pc version looked better than ps3, had a better interface and aditional view options ( isometric)

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

beardpapa - 53 days 12 hours ago

the PC version had isometric when i zoomed out, though I found myself using the behind-character view more. I found no need to individually control each party member like i did in BG, NWN, or IWD since the AI setup for DAO was pretty good. You can customize their AI pretty well, it's kinda like the Gambit stuff in FF12.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

Soda Popinsky - 53 days 12 hours ago

Me too! tihihihi! I buy anything Bioware. Wrpgs rule!

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Feral Gamer - 53 days 9 hours ago

OMG i'll get it from Target! They open at 8am and I'm off work at 8am! GS doesn't open until 10!

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Soda Popinsky - 53 days ago

*head explodes*

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

peeps - 53 days 10 hours ago

well they used to be and i bought all my multiplats for 360 but now ps3's have got their act together and only a few devs have trouble with it + trophies means my 360 has now turned into the 'exclusive only console'

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

mastiffchild - 53 days 6 hours ago

Happened to me a while back to be honest as the last time there were differences in performance bad enough to make me go for the 360 version(rather than with my controller of choice on PS3) was The Orange Box-though now I even play my TF2 on PS3 because, imo, X game chat really killed that game on Live and , really, it performs a lot better than some other parts of TOB.

I might have rented 'Busters for the 360 instead of PS3 but being in the Uk it wasn't out(on 360) and they patched it so it wasn't so bad anyway. Thing is those apart I really can't see a great deal of the things places like DF find as differences and neither can they when they're having to use programs just to find them. It's becoming daft, imo, and as they're ll aiming for parity all it can ever show is that a developer has veen lazy if the PS version doesn't match up as none of the multis have so far even got close to the levels KZ2 or U2 pushed the hardware to, have they?

This said I'm very shocked that B/W managed to do better on the PS3 on their first effort than on 360 with it's PC style dev tools and their experience on the platform. Obviously I coubt that, had GS not pointed out the difference in their scores, that anyone's enjoyment of the 360 version would be lessened in any way because of these, again, little differences.

Personally I'd be a lot happier if devs could have a team dedicated for each console from the start for multi plats and made eash game the very best it could be for all gamers-like last gen. Sadly we're stuck with the parity pursuit and PS3 versions of games being held back by 360's issues as well as it's own and vice versa-and the 99% useless comparisons we get these days pointing out things we can't see for reasons I cannot fathom. If noone can see it why point it out?

Hopefully the quality of exclusives on 360 will start pushing those on PS3(which have been excellent since MGS4 imo)which in turn will make these optimised for noone multi plats look so bad to eberyone that we won't put up with them shortchanging us any longer. It's not my belief that rught now any multi has pushedd either console that hard because of parity issues meaning double the weakness sets and none of the strengths of the consoles really being used. Just make them the best they can be people-it didn't stop PS2 version selling that weren't quite as good as Xbox ones did it? No, and we'd AL get better versions wouldn't we, knowing they were optimised for our consoles and would make DF and LoT's job more meaningful again!

I know it's not likely nut I honestly feel that the way it is now shortchanges all gamers and doesn't allow devs to show all their talent either. So I imagine that Sony only devs are all magically more talented than the best at Capcom or Ubisoft? No way there's talent everywhere but being forced to hobble teir games in the name of not upsetting fanboys or Sony or MS is depriving gaming from developing as fast as it should and some PS3 exclusives are really showing the gap that's widening right now under this false, contrived circumstance.

Maybe it's because this generation the tw competing HD consoles are so close, IDK, but I'd love to see the shackles removed and what devs can REALLY do these days.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Scar 360WA - 53 days 6 hours ago

Same hear, For once the PS3 version is better and I'm waiting for my replacement PS3. So I'm going stick to the 360 version. I cant wait another week to play it.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

thereapersson - 53 days 11 hours ago

You make an ASS out of U and ME

Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report

ps3ftwin - 53 days 9 hours ago

the difference should have been greater then .5

however the game is so good they didnt want to give the console versions a lower score.

i bought the pc version myself.

the pc version has:

better graphics, stable fps, modding support, faster load times etc etc all that while being cheaper.

imo thats worth a whole lot more to me then .5 the pc version should have been a 10.5 considering all the extras its got, though we know we cant just give games a higher rating based on all the extra goodies.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

thereapersson - 53 days 9 hours ago

REPORTED AS SPAM

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

PopEmUp - 53 days 8 hours ago

lol WTF is this?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Apocwhen - 53 days 12 hours ago

...and this has to do with a review of Dragon Age: Orgins how?

Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report

MichaelJackson - 53 days 12 hours ago

Gimped on the Flopbox.

On the flip side, the Xbox 360 version looks positively disappointing. Textures are highly compressed and colors are washed out, though the upside is that this version maintains a smoother frame rate than on the PlayStation 3, where things might get jittery when swiveling the camera around. The PlayStation 3 version features higher-quality textures than those on the Xbox 360, better color saturation, smoother facial animations, and shorter load times. Minor visual hiccups, like corpses that disappear and reappear, are a bit more common on the PS3, however. The PC version is the superior experience, but if you're choosing between the two console releases, the PlayStation 3 has the upper hand. Some minor glitches are shared between the console versions, however, such as rare occasions when the soundtrack or voice-overs disappear.

Shamon!

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

The Killer - 53 days 5 hours ago

multiplatform games looks better on flopboxtea

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Biggunz - 53 days 5 hours ago

Bioware is a very good developer.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report