360 vs. PS3 (screenshot comparison)

Duke em' Nuke em'

I very rarely EVER refer to Gamespot, but I am bored and at work,
and thought that their comparisons were quite interesting with the way they
executed it.

They may not be a credible source, but most of the time, they are first with news articles and I thought this would be a read good for the average Kikizoer to reference to.

Enjoy, critisize, plan, spit, cuss, frown, agree, disagree... whatever!

Just ENJOY NOW!!



Where' s Quez?

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

Having been up close and personal with both systems, I would have to say that there isn' t anything at the moment that makes me (Personally) want to shell out the money on a PS3, Assasin' s creed was going to be a game that I was going to get but seeing as this is now no longer a PS3 exclusive, sames as GTA4 then I am really hard pushed to see what the fuss is all about.

Well, now I don' t actually know why I put this up... Both systems are out, and it
IS possible for to get a side-by-side comparison (Live), so I think I' ll let the
flies swarm around this thread.

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

Don' t take this the wrong way Tiz, as I' m all for sticking it to the man. But where do you work that allows you to spend time on sites like Kikizo while on the job? I' m just asking because I have to get myself a job like that...

As for the link we already looked at it. Majik went on about PS3 potentially lacking video ram giving it a bottleneck for textures. Which is most obvious in the background of Fight Night round 3, where the PS3 version looks pathetic by comparison with the 360 version.

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

Don' t take this the wrong way Tiz, as I' m all for sticking it to the man. But where do you work that allows you to spend time on sites like Kikizo while on the job? I' m just asking because I have to get myself a job like that...

Why I oughta!!!



I work in a contact centre, I help people with phone problems all day, and I am
situated in the most quiet department, where every hour, maybe 3 or 4 people
call in (though, lately we have had a few problems, so it' s been about 6 people
per hour.)

i' m on Kikizo a lot today, because there are no managers around, and people that
would be calling have pissed off somewhere to do Christmas Shopping.

It' s an easy job (most of the time) for about 15K-17k per year..

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

Interesting...I have a friend that worked as a call support for an internet provider, he told me it was 98% boredom and 2% fustration. He said it could be fustrating becuase everday he would get at least one caller that was too dumb to follow basic instructions. I' m sure you know the type...

I too am accessing from work, call center it service desk, can get on here a reasonable amount, but im on one of the more busy dept. so there isn' t always time, on a 7-7 today.

NiGHTS into Dreamcast

PS3 COD3 doesn' t use HDR.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

This was posted as a link before ( by another user in Quez' s screenshot comparison thread) and it is interesting to see. Does anyone else think all the PS3 screens on here look like they are washed out? Also, I think these are unfair comparisons as most 3rd party games are made for one console or the other then retooled for another one. Im not sure the effect this gen but last gen it held back the original Xbox as most 3rd party games were built for the PS2 then ported. I would assume with the 360 having a larger installed base most 3rd party games are going to be made with it/PC in mind then ported to PS3 (at least for the time being). To sum it up, Im saying I dont think any of these games take advantage of either console, and there is more to a game than graphics.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

The reason PS3 games look so washed out directly compared to 360 games is because PS3 can' t do AA and HDR at the same time. It also way less memory for textures. That leads to less variety or lower resolution textures and poor lighting in comparison. 360 does 4x AA basically for free. All PS3 games are forced to either be jaggy or have crap lighting.

360 hardware > PS3 hardware

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

i rarely access from home and do it all from work, i always have time, im the System Administrator for a school here in denmark. I have plenty of time to do what ever i please to!

360 hardware > PS3 hardware

Loco, I know this already . Ive been trying to tone down due to X360 fanboy accusations. But yeah, everything you said was true, the 10mb of EDRAM on the 360' s graphics card is a great design choice that frees up the graphics card for other things (like textures)

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

Why would all that produce a washed out image though? More jaggy and blurry maybe, but washed out colours?

(Also the 360 VGA cable produces washed out colours compared to component, maybe the PS3 HDMI cable is just shit..)

The image looks washed out because the textures are either lower resolution or there are less of them. HDR also adds a lot of contrast, lighting makes a huge difference in the way games look.

360 VGA cable does not produce washed out colors... If anything it is just darker than you are used to.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

HDR also adds a lot of contrast, lighting makes a huge difference in the way games look.

Ah yea I guess you' re right there.

360 VGA cable does not produce washed out colors... If anything it is just darker than you are used to.

Nah its pretty bright, but the colours are definitely not as vibrant as they are through component on my setup at least, and it kinda reminded me of that when I looked at the comparisons above.

.....i' d of thought ya' ll would be a lot smarter than judging the capabilities of either x360 or PS3 on multi format titles....

Why would all that produce a washed out image though?

...disregarding multi titles (rightly so), i think its just down to pure unfamiliarity with the hardware.... ...expect proper 1st generation PS3 titles (as opposed to launch titles like Resistance) to look MUCH better:

Currently accepting Article & Review requests

Comparing games that was made for 360 and proted over to PS3 (in most ases their first grps with the hardware).. is silly..

IF Anything.. The PS3 should impress you more on that basis alone.. (that even with a few years of 360 dev time, a port on PS3 with very little dev time can almost look as good, and has not even tapped 30% into the Cell/Ps3 power)..

Seriously, its like when EA announced that they used around 30% of the PS3s potential for FightNight..

I would just hold the comparisons till this time next year.

Then again, even fools can just look at Motorstorm to see the power kicking inside the CEll.. Ive been saying this for ages and will say it again.. Even Motorstorm does things ive not seen in a 360 game, the combination of ultra smooth motions, particle FX and draw distance totally own anything ive seen running on my 360 hands own .. And thats the only real example of things to come at the moment.

Im pretty sure this time next year PS3 will be wiping the floor with 360 in visual terms.. I' ll bet money on that.

I' m not a graphics guy so I don' t care how cool Motorstorm looks. I want good games for a good price. The PS3 has got NOTHING exclusive in the nearest future that I' m interesed in except for Motorstorm.
I' m doing the smart thing and buying a 360 because it already has a couple of games I like and the future looks awesome. I would' ve gotten the Wii but it' s sold out and Meoitrd Prime 3 isn' t out yet anyway so the 360 is looking pretty good to me.
Maybe I' ll get a PS3 in the future if it gets any games I' m interested in and the Cell and RSX actually turns out to be useful. but right now, the PS3 is a rip-off!

stick to the thread, Its about the comparison of screenshots not what sytem is worth buying.

Well I couldn' t really figure out which screenshots looked the best on those. They just looked... different. I guess that' s how the 360 and PS3 are. None of them are really better, they' re just different.
BTW, how about throwing in some Wii screenshots there to make the comparison a little more interesting

Im pretty sure this time next year PS3 will be wiping the floor with 360 in visual terms.. I' ll bet money on that.

...i have to own up and say that I' ve had that feeling for a LONG time now...

....i just try to avoid such suggestions as... ..well... ....you know... ...people here can be " passionate" about their particular brand loyalty, excetra exctra, as such and so forth, yada yada yada, budder bing budder bang budder boom ect.....

Currently accepting Article & Review requests

I' d be cool if the PS3 really is better than the 360.
I' ll probably buy it when they lower the price and all the cool games are out (Twisted Metal PS3 ).
I' m really looking forward to seeing some Killzone screens. Once we get them we can compare them with gears screenshots.

I think why people make these comparisons (360 vs. PS3) is not because they are
ignorant in any way shape or form...no.

It' s more than likely because they think Sony bragged and bragged, lied and lied
about their hardware being the pioneer of HD as soon as it' s released, and now
people are calling them on that statement in terms of comparison shots, I don' t
think we would have seen that if there wasn' t a smog of High Definition hype
revolving around it. Now we have what we call ' damage control' and it' s now a
case of " waiting" until next year to see what the PS3 is truly capable of, where if
they had just originally stated that " developers will have difficulty on day 1 with
the hardware" , then expectation wouldn' t be through the roof, but because of
their willingness to distant it from the 360 as much as possible, they didn' t want
to cave in and show weakness in the form of " development learning curve" .

Of course it' s unfair to judge the screenshots of a newly released console, but
had Sony brought their console off cloud 9 and back in the ' 7th generation' race
people wouldn' t be caling them on the bullsh*t they rattle on about before.

So in those terms, I think it' s fair to make the comparison of screenshots based
on broken promises and disappointing hardware, but unfair to judge it on overall
performance output which in turn PS3 will end up pulling ahead of 360.

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

The biggest reason I see for screenshot comparison is that as a consumer you want to make the best investment possible. A powerful console is to many people a good investment. And by comparing screenshots people hope to find out which one is the most powerful since you can' t really trust what the companies say about their products.
I think that' s why Nintendo has put lots of pictures with people using the Wii-mote along with their in-game screenshots because looking at only the Wii screenshots is quite a turn off.

ORIGINAL: choupolo

HDR also adds a lot of contrast, lighting makes a huge difference in the way games look.

Ah yea I guess you' re right there.

360 VGA cable does not produce washed out colors... If anything it is just darker than you are used to.

Nah its pretty bright, but the colours are definitely not as vibrant as they are through component on my setup at least, and it kinda reminded me of that when I looked at the comparisons above.

Well the monitor/TV you used for it just had crappy VGA support. I' ve used my 360 on 3 differerent monitors and a 1080P DLP TV.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

Yea probably. I' m looking for a good 720p TV at the moment actually, they' re getting cheaper all the time these days. Or I might wait for SED etc heh.

true ginj, people want the best game for there money so screen comparisons are worthwhile to a point. But everyone seems to forget this is not ps2/xbox, the differences are much, and again a new hard to program system vs an old easy to program one, lets give it a year or so... but ultimately there wont be much difference.

These thread of oh the 360 version looks better, or the ps3 runs in 60fps are a lot of crap. nonsense threads. I guarentee i didn' t enjoy superman returns/tomb raider legend etc less on ps2 than on 360 because of prettier visuals... or sit around complaining about how much worse the ps2 version looks. A year or so everything here will be nice, people talking about games and not the my specs are better than yours, my textures are sharper than yours.. i hope.

NiGHTS into Dreamcast

Those games almost look Identical, If I cared about bush' s not being blurred right or some textures lacking,l I wouldn' t be playing console games

Change is inevitable. Except from a vending machine.

Viva La Revolution! erm, I mean Viva La Wii!

Well I care. It adds to the experience, at least for me.

I don' t think PS3 games will ever look as good as Xbox 360 games in a screen shot comparison. 4x AA, HDR and more texture memory are going to lead to much nicer screen shots.

The only places I really see PS3 games possibly being better is physics and animations. The CPU may be better than 360' s but it has yet to prove itself to me. We can have a comparison like this again in 1, 2, or even 3 years and 360 games will still look better in screen shots.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

Textures dont mean shit if a game runs like any other xbox / PS2 game..

I mean, PS3 still can blast out great textures.. people are talking as if they will look rubbish next to 360 ones.

The first thing i notice when i switch on the game is: How it runs.

The CPU may be better than 360' s but it has yet to prove itself to me. We can have a comparison like this again in 1, 2, or even 3 years and 360 games will still look better in screen shots

This is probably true, but dont you feel in the slightest cheated? I brought a 360 more or less after seeing screeenshots of games in forums ETC and i genuinely thought that this machine will own my PC.

NOPE!!! I still to this day have not wittnessed a game that runs as good as i expected.. (dead rising is an exception)..

I know about 4 people who sold their 360s due to being let down by game that runs not much better than your average ps2/xbox game. (Also in gameplay terms ..

When i brought a 360 i was promised to experience " the next level of Immersive Gaming"




Miss-leading.

If the games run like shit it' s due to the developers not the machine, ps3 has the same problem.

IF i see a game that runs as super smooth as most of my PC games or has the motions and particle FX as Motorstorm..

I would be very, very suprized.


Im actually in doubt of its real capabilities, So far all i see it good for is a screenshot maker. After over a year of 360 games who can blame me.

Dead Rising is a way forward tho, im really impresed by that engine (apart from is basic physics ETC)..

Just wait for 2007... then we' ll see.

everyone looks for something different, and im sure threads like these wont change peoples minds

NiGHTS into Dreamcast

Hmmm, Havok and PhysX have been shown to run perfectly on 360 hardware so if a game has lame physics (like most 360 games) then it' s due to the developer. Expect games like The Darkness and Cellfactor to really push things, not games like Gears of War where the most impressive the physics get is when you blow enemies up and their body parts go flying...

The CPU means shit in terms of graphics. CELL won' t make an ounce of difference, ...Sony tried it and failed miserably and ended up running to NVIDIA. RSX is ok but the 7900 in m laptop is technically more " powerful" but obviously RSX has been created purely for gaming so it' s not a fair comparison.

Can PS3 produce nice textures? Yeah. Can it produce textures as nice as 360? Hell no. It' s simply because PS3 has retarded RAM allocation and doesn' t have the 10MB eDRAM that 360 does. 360 also has a separate scaler chip which handles the resolution output so there' s no extra strain on the rest of the hardware. It' s just a shame 360' s 1080p is faked...

PS3 games look nice but those hoping for vast improvements are going to be seriously disappointed. RSX is OLD as it is, it' s only getting older and it' s only capable of so much.

Killzone will obviously look better than Halo 3 though because Halo 3 looks like shit. It' ll be interesting to see how VF5 fares on the 2 consoles, especially seeing as it' ll be a port from PS3 to 360...

But meh, this discussion is lame. Wake me up when PS3 gets a game that looks better than Mass Effect, Lost Planet or Gears of War. Until then PS3 will be lagging behind in terms of visuals.

Like loco already said and like i' ve said myself a thousand times over: 360 hardware > PS3 hardware, and a fruitcake who' s obsessed with physics and 60fps and a homosexual teenager can' t change that fact

I' m still going back to my theory that 360 vs PS3 is going to go on a curve. Comparitavely developing for the 360 is supposed to be much easier, duh. So therefore developers have time to add visual polish to their titles. Once developers have a solid grasp on the PS3 hardware, It' s gonna do amazing things. Untill that time however, we' re stuck with Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire.