Posted Jun 23, 2009 1:06 pm PT (hide)

nathace , I don't think you have a ps3 because no , you don't have to install any game , its upto you if you want to install it to decrease loading times but when you start a game the first it does install some files but that also happens in xbox , right?

• agree 0
• disagree 11
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Jun 22, 2009 9:13 am PT (hide)

half of these look exactly the same

• agree 1
• disagree 10
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 28, 2009 7:11 am PT (hide)

X360 RULES !!!! XD

• agree 4
• disagree 15
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 24, 2009 2:10 pm PT (hide)

if im honest in the ranibow vegas bit ps3 seemed abit better than 360 ive got both consle's and i prefer 2 play the 360. it annoys me that u HAVE to install all games you play on ps3 to hard drive i meen its gonna get 2 a point where iv ran out of space..

• agree 2
• disagree 13
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 20, 2009 11:46 pm PT (hide)

filmboy85, have you played the game, or are you only going by what you read? (im guessing you must have played mgs4 btw). few gamers today rave about the *gameplay* graphics of mgs4 as being better than anything else out there, good as they are.

cinematics and gameplay graphics are not the same, but im repeating myself now so maybe this dont help, but still, the quality of the character textures and polygons, the animations, subtle details, are higher in the cutscenes than they are ingame, which is often the case for realtime cutscenes, together with dramatic camera angles and close-ups. it doesnt matter how well the cinematics are done, or how smoothly they move from cinematics into gameplay, they are still two seperate types of the graphics and should be compared to the same type of graphics in other games. when youre *playing* mgs4, its impressive, but to me it doesn't have the same wow factor as the cinematics, and so to me its not better looking than *every* other game out there during gameplay.

if you want to say mgs4s ingame graphics are the best ever, then ok thats your opinion, but graphics during gameplay are not the same as graphics for the cinematics just because they are running in realtime. dam, i repeating myself yet again.

so maybe we just have to agree to disagree. cause i dont think im going to change your mind, and you not going to change mine. :-)

• agree 4
• disagree 12
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 15, 2009 9:14 pm PT (hide)

naw but seriously....

i own both systems and its sad to see even now they can't seem to use the ps3's potential correctly. maybe its because its so darn hard to program for like i read everywhere compared to the 360.

anyways can't wait for a final fantasy 13 comparison between both systems.

so for now, i just keep buying games for my 360 whenever i have a choice between both systems..

• agree 2
• disagree 11
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 15, 2009 9:09 pm PT (hide)

THE XBOX 360 HAS SUPERIOR FLOWERS!

hehe what have we come to......

• agree 1
• disagree 12
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 12, 2009 2:17 am PT (hide)

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 11, 2009 4:07 pm PT (hide)

I'd also like to note that the MGS series has always (with the exception of the PSP version and possibly 3) been about in-engine cinematics. The first changed the way story was thought of in gaming by using this technique throughout the entirety of the game.

• agree 1
• disagree 10
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 11, 2009 4:00 pm PT (hide)

mtmind2, real time, in-engine cinematics look the same as gameplay. They use the same technology to render the cinematics as they do the gameplay. If you don't believe me, then here's a quote from gamespot's MGS4 review:
"Rather, these two elements are tightly intertwined, and this tapestry is held together by an important technical thread: Cutscenes that are rendered fully in real time within the game engine. It's impressive enough that these scenes look as good as any prerendered cinematic you've ever watched. It's even more amazing when those same scenes transition without pause into gameplay, and the same hulking mech you watched lumber about in the cinematic is looming above you. The subtle animations, the lush environments, and the rich textures are the same in and out of story sequences, and the effect is so seamless it may take your breath away."

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 10, 2009 11:33 pm PT (hide)

@filmboy85

er where did i say mgs4s cinematics were not real time?

i know they were real time (except for 2 of them i believe), that's why i said to GM-XP-L9 that maybe you could say mgs4 had the best cinematics, but i dont think you can say the same about the gameplay graphics, which were very good but not mind blowing.

also, real time cinematic graphics are not the same as gameplay graphics filmboy85, for lots of reasons. the real time cinematics in mgs4 has to be compared to the real time cinematics of other games, for which i still consider mgs4 as one of the best, if not the best for cinematics. the gameplay graphics in mgs4 has to be compared to the gameplay graphics of other games, for which i dont consider mgs4 to be the best, just very good.

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 10, 2009 5:50 pm PT (hide)

@MTMind2
MGS4's cinematics were in-game, meaning that they were rendered in real time and therefore are the same as the gameplay graphics. It even says so in the Gamespot review. They made a point of mentioning it.

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted May 7, 2009 10:47 am PT (hide)

there nearly both the same but even having a ps3 i do believe that the ps3 gives out a haze of light so yea the 360 takes this round

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 21, 2009 2:19 am PT (hide)

Batsu12 is right, X360 wins this round.

• agree 3
• disagree 10
• = -7
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 18, 2009 5:20 pm PT (hide)

Xbox 360 wins,Still ps3 exclusives look better than xbox 360 exclusive titles.I can see that 3rd party games look much better on xbox 360 they have better textures and lightning effects.I always thought ps3 would look better but this comparison really shows that xbox 360 look damn good when it comes to 3rd party games.

• agree 3
• disagree 13
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 18, 2009 3:13 pm PT (hide)

@GM-XP-L9

as i was saying before being 'rudely interupted' :-), what is "pre-normal"? there is no such thing.

"i don't think we can have a multi DvD9 Xbox 360 game"

blue dragon, lost odyssey, star ocean 4 are all multi DVD9 360 games, and ffxiii will also be mult-disc according to square-enix.

"I hope you didn't forget MGS4 which Was Using the full BD size and it was the best game, best graphics, best story.."

mgs4 was 30gb, not 50gb, so it didn't use the full BD size. best cinematic graphics? maybe. best gameplay graphics? no, but still very good.

• agree 1
• disagree 10
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 18, 2009 3:57 am PT (hide)

btw im gunna add this insightful comment

graphics arent everything like some say. so when graphics dont matter what does? exclusives, online play, and extra features!

i believe both have their nice exclusives halo3,gearsofwar,masseffect,mgs4,killzone2

online is generally perceived to be better on the 360.. not my opinion i own both but in general most websites say xbox360 online is smoother with better features and the chat function worked well from the day it came out. ps3 needed tons of patches to get it on and working right. ps3 has blu-ray on its side and home, which some might argue isnt really a plus.

• agree 2
• disagree 10
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 18, 2009 3:34 am PT (hide)

i meant killzone 2 in the last part lawl

• agree 2
• disagree 10
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 18, 2009 3:32 am PT (hide)

ps3 will look better than the 360 when developers pour 3 times more money and time into developing the game because of how difficult the SPUs on the PS3 are to efficiently use. take this for example.. resistance 2 only used 20% of the ps3's SPU's power. why? because otherwise it would take another year to get it to use it at 80%

meanwhile the xbox 360 uses net framework and 3 easy to program CPUs so it takes less time which is less money to make games look nice. thats why fallout 3 looks better when in theory the ps3 version should blow it away. they wont halt distribution of the game for another year just so they can make fallout 3 look as good as the ps3 can make it look. so they release games as soon as it finishes for either console, which usually the 360 will finish first.

take the games oblivion and bioshock. both were released much later (a year later) than the xbox 360 version and looks just a little better (not much). it took them longer just to get the ps3 to look similar to the 360.

when a company finally releases a game engine that utilizes the full ps3 power, then games will roll out looking way better. like killzone 3. which really still doesnt use 100% of ps3's power either.

• agree 3
• disagree 11
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 14, 2009 7:54 am PT (hide)

imo the games today are so good looking that graphics becomes not as important as factors such as longevity, multiplayer, gameplay, design, etc etc. u can have the best looking game using the unreal engine but if the gameplay is broken, its broken.

i often find that exclusives tend to look best on the respective systems. gears of war, halo, project gotham racing, forza look brilliant on the xbox while metal gear, resistance, killzone, gran turismo are stunningly good looking too. i guess its cos the developers are putting in all the effort to bring the best out of one particular system. however, developers have to spend a lot more time porting games to different console for multiplatform releases. the xbox platform is probably easier to work with. that probably explains why fallout 3 looked so different from the xbox version.

i feel its rather unfair to say that playstation visuals are slightly behind because looking at mgs4, killzone2 and gt5, i dun understand how fallout and vegas can look so bad. the problem now is developers not pushing systems to the max. rmb how good god of war 2 looked on the ps2? who knew a system that old can display such crazy graphics. its an example of developers pushing the systems to the max.

• agree 1
• disagree 9
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 13, 2009 2:27 am PT (hide)

@MTMind2

"the game worlds of ps3 exclusives are no bigger and the hours of gameplay no longer than multi-format games or 360 exclusives"

That's right, but why to have a big Resistance or a big Gears when every year they're going to release a new game? Anyway I just meant games like GTA 4, Midnight club, Final fantasy XIII that takes long years of development, therefore to deliver everything they want and make games wider they need space and because i don't think we can have a multi DvD9 Xbox 360 game, games will be long enough but using ~25% of what a Ps3 game can be.
I hope you didn't forget MGS4 which Was Using the full BD size and it was the best game, best graphics, best story..

"no such thing as a pre-normal cpu, and the 360 is not limiting games spaces "

A Custom 3 cores CPU --VS-- a 1 PPE and 7 SPEs Cell broadband Engine ...isn't that normal?

And what are the PS3 Limitations??

• agree 0
• disagree 11
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 9, 2009 12:46 pm PT (hide)

Anyway I agree With "XDragoonXx".

• agree 2
• disagree 12
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 9, 2009 12:43 pm PT (hide)

The Xbox 360 caused Crisis to the Playstation 3.

If games like Fallout 3 were exclusively on Ps3 we might had bigger world and better graphics.
Xbox 360 is just like a......microbe, I mean it uses a "Pre-normal" CPU that renders development quite easy and then Limits games spaces, therefore we end up having Limited Games with great graphics and lower-rate graphics on other systems, then Xbox 360 gets Exclusive DLCs !

Anyway I don't trust those graphics comparison things, everything depends on your TV settings And I still Believe that the Ps3 Can do much better than the xbox 360.

I have a 360, I wish I had a Ps3 cause the 360 got lots of problems and I'm ready to talk about them.

Hope this Gen ends up soon.

• agree 2
• disagree 15
• = -13
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 8, 2009 2:19 pm PT (hide)

both great systems!

• agree 1
• disagree 10
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Apr 5, 2009 9:45 pm PT (hide)

They are basically the same, powerful, with each their own core-base games, but I'm not biased in anyway, I just prefer the Xbox 360 for online gaming rather than the PS3 (which I usually play offline ~ except for some games like Killzone 2)

• agree 4
• disagree 10
• = -6
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Mar 27, 2009 1:44 pm PT (hide)

yes i agree with xdragonxx both systems are powerful and they r good

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Mar 18, 2009 5:48 pm PT (hide)

You really can't compare mutli-playtform games

You have to compare exclusives of each console, because only exclusives use most of the power a console. This is because one system may be more powerful, and multi platforms hold back their true potential.

• agree 3
• disagree 11
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Mar 18, 2009 2:59 pm PT (hide)

both systems look really good, but if u buy a gaming PC you'll always have the upper edge graphically, and after the initial purchase, financially. as long as the hardware you bought can handle it, 99% of the time, they look better on a PC. 400$ for a new console in 5-8 years or a 120$ graphics card expansion? plus every game comes out for about 10$ less. the only problem is exclusives, but more and more games are being created for the PC too, so things always look bright for PC users

• agree 3
• disagree 12
• = -9
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Mar 9, 2009 12:20 pm PT (hide)

rats! xbox won again! But the ps3 has better graphics in thier exclusive games.

• agree 0
• disagree 24
• = -24
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Mar 6, 2009 3:10 pm PT (hide)

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

• agree 2
• disagree 13
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 24, 2009 8:17 pm PT (hide)

both systems look fine and as for which console is better both of them are but the one that currently winning is xbox 360 and for what reasons i think its the online play and its a good thing the ps3 has bluray or else it would be losing and its not because of the graphics. its just the buisness between them thats all.

• agree 3
• disagree 22
• = -19
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 23, 2009 10:45 pm PT (hide)

JackHoleFace00 you are such a lonely gamer... lol

• agree 0
• disagree 22
• = -22
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 23, 2009 1:46 pm PT (hide)

Looks like nothing new here... 360 has some better textures and certainly anti-aliasing, while PS3 (sometimes) has better color-fill and lighting. 360 certainly seems to (barely) win out the majority of the time. Makes sense since we're not talking about the Wii here
I have to admit these are a guilty pleasure for me... because on one hand I'm curious, and yet on the other hand I don't care. I bought the PS3 and am sticking to it primarily for 2 reasons: MGS4 and Blu-Ray. Plus KZ 2 coming out. Really, who is going to be irked if COD looks just barely better on one system or another? C'mon. The exclusive games/system features should be the real reason to pick your system. I like both.

• agree 7
• disagree 24
• = -17
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 16, 2009 1:22 am PT (hide)

gamespot set the PS3 up wrong, see post on hip hop gamer shows forum: http://www.hiphopgamershow.com/realtalk/SMF/index.php?topic=1375.0

• agree 4
• disagree 14
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 15, 2009 11:30 pm PT (hide)

lol.. minor difference.. actually i wouldnt care so much bec i have them both.. but honestly, my pc owns them both in terms of graphics..

• agree 0
• disagree 10
• = -10
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 15, 2009 5:46 am PT (hide)

Ps3's graphic is way better than xboox360 when in 1080hd.

• agree 9
• disagree 20
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 12, 2009 11:42 pm PT (hide)

That's why I love my PS3...The box is just so cheap.

• agree 5
• disagree 19
• = -14
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 12, 2009 3:23 pm PT (hide)

dude i have dead space for both consoles xbox looks the same but PS3s way different and PS3 looks better in real life but in this its for xbox360

• agree 4
• disagree 12
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 11, 2009 10:19 am PT (hide)

@syn79
What an insightfull comment *cough cough*, sarcasm.

• agree 0
• disagree 11
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 10, 2009 11:39 pm PT (hide)

cyberguy0123 is sooo right, only when we shut off the game do we actually try to think and see these minor differences that we really dont mind when we are just PLAYING the game

• agree 3
• disagree 11
• = -8
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 10, 2009 1:54 am PT (hide)

PS3 sucks and Xbox 360 is weak. Im still rockin my NES. You all can just keep playing those ugly games while I play Zelda all day. Oh yeah and PC sucks too.

• agree 2
• disagree 26
• = -24
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 9, 2009 1:45 pm PT (hide)

Call me when they're differences people actually care about.

• agree 6
• disagree 13
• = -7
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 8, 2009 1:03 pm PT (hide)

Fallout3 - Xbox360 (missing boulders and bench on PS3)
SC - Xbox 360 (higher flower details and it's up to TV contrast setting)
Dead space - Xbox360 (you can see weird lines on that guy body on PS3 in last image)
Star Wars - Xbox360 (higher resolution and better reflections)
Call of Duty - Same
Madden - Same
MK vs DC - Xbox360 (suggested higher resolution on certain details)

Change your TV's contrast setting they will look same in most games.

• agree 7
• disagree 27
• = -20
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 6, 2009 4:23 pm PT (hide)

I think the 360 wins but they booth look really really good and it is also just opinyoun

• agree 6
• disagree 22
• = -16
• Login to rate this comment

Posted Feb 5, 2009 2:21 pm PT (hide)

Anyone who can actually see a noticeable difference is a loser. And looking at these pictures on a PC isn't really going to be an accurate way to compare.

• agree 8
• disagree 19
• = -11
• Login to rate this comment