Graphics Face-Off: X360 vs. PS3

hmkpoker · #1 01-21-2007, 10:54 PM

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html

Side by side comparison of Need for Speed, CoD, Madden, Marvel: UA, NBA 2K7, Fight Night, Tony Hawk, and Tiger Woods.

PS3 looks almost indistinguishable from the X360 in these shots, which is kind of sad given the price tag.

Duke · #2 01-21-2007, 10:58 PM

It looks brighter and a little blurrier. The X360 looks far crisper, though dark helps out with the contrast.

Xhad · #3 01-21-2007, 11:22 PM

Stuff like this is exactly why I don't care about the graphical capabilities of this gen's systems.

[ QUOTE ]
Without direct screenshot comparisons, we wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two versions, aside from a slight variation in crowd size and placement. However, with a direct screenshot comparison, we notice that Tiger's belt buckle stands out and his shirt texture has better visibility in comparison to his attire on the PlayStation 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

OH NO! NOT TIGER WOODS' BELT!

Kumubou · #4 01-21-2007, 11:47 PM

As much as I enjoy hating on Sony, that comparison is bunk. All of those games were ported from the X360 to the PS3; of course they are going to look the same. It's like comparing PS2 games that get ported to the Xbox -- they look the same because the assets never get updated.

It's only an issue when you step down in graphical horsepower (take a look at Call of Duty 3 on the X360/PS3 versus the Wii revision -- aiya).

blackize · #5 01-22-2007, 03:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
All of those games were ported from the X360 to the PS3; of course they are going to look the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

But they don't look the same. They look darker and less clear on the PS3.

Games designed from the ground up on the PS3 can have superior graphics, but they can't compare those because games made from the ground up for the PS3 and PS3 exclusives.

hmkpoker · #6 01-22-2007, 02:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Stuff like this is exactly why I don't care about the graphical capabilities of this gen's systems.

[ QUOTE ]
Without direct screenshot comparisons, we wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two versions, aside from a slight variation in crowd size and placement. However, with a direct screenshot comparison, we notice that Tiger's belt buckle stands out and his shirt texture has better visibility in comparison to his attire on the PlayStation 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

OH NO! NOT TIGER WOODS' BELT!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. This is the first generation of consoles where graphical improvements make literally no change in game playability. The first five generations introduced entirely new genres with each graphical upgrade (I think the fifth was the most significant, since it plunged games into a whole 'nother dimension), and the sixth generation allowed us to play the 3D games seamlessly, the way they were meant to be played. Any graphical improvement now is just gravy; being able to see Shaq's eyelashes if you look real close on your 1080p television does not change the game. The Wii's graphics are no less playable than anything on the PS3/360.

Heck, who even wants to play games with a conventional controller after the Wii [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

ilya · #7 01-22-2007, 03:50 AM

It's definitely not an order-of-magnitude difference (like 360 vs. Wii), so who really cares. When the graphical quality is this close to being equal, it's really all about which system has the better games.

Dire · #8 01-22-2007, 04:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It's definitely not an order-of-magnitude difference (like 360 vs. Wii), so who really cares.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any consumer with half a brain should care. It's not just the graphics. The PS3 is 50% more expensive than the 360, has inferior online capability to the 360, has no rumble, has graphical quality ranging from inferior to almost equal with the 360, has worse performance in 'cross platform' games (COD 3 in particular), is currently experiencing a slew of game cancellations, etc.. The PS3 has absolutely nothing going for it.

I'd expect most of the fanboys have already purchased their PS3s. That would now mean that anybody considering purchasing a PS3 is a [presumably] rational consumer. These people need to realize what's going on. Purchasing a PS3 right now is abhorrently rewarding for Sony who has just entirely missed the mark with this console. The more these 'little' failures get out there in the public eye, the better.

Xhad · #9 01-22-2007, 04:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Any consumer with half a brain should care. It's not just the graphics. The PS3 is 50% more expensive than the 360, has inferior online capability to the 360, has no rumble, has graphical quality ranging from inferior to almost equal with the 360, has worse performance in 'cross platform' games (COD 3 in particular), is currently experiencing a slew of game cancellations, etc.. The PS3 has absolutely nothing going for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

His point wasn't, "They're (nearly) graphically equivalent, so the systems are equal," it was, "They're (nearly) graphically equivalent, so graphics is not going to be the deciding factor in comparing the two." Which you seem to agree with since everything you mentioned has nothing to do with graphics.

MrWookie · #10 01-22-2007, 10:01 AM

Wow. The amount of PS3 fanboi-ism on that site is pretty disgusting. They make the Wii and PS3 fanbois on this one look pretty tame. I was looking at those pics, and really, the darker/lighter is the biggest difference, and that might just be TV or other internal settings. The Xbox seems to have just a few more textures that look sharper, though, so I might give it a nod. When it comes to lighting, I like the PS3's headlights better in NFSC, but I like the XBox's stadium shadowing in Madden. You guys know if the shadows change as the day goes on? That'd be pretty sweet. If it's just a static shadow, then I can't really give the XBox any credit for rendering it.