What is Digg?10 Comments
- Lefty06, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7First of all, did you even consider the fact that most of the developers had more time to develop the same game for the PS3? Look at the ball from the NBA screen shot. That proves that developers had time to add/change parts of many cross platform games. Also if you knew anything about Gears of War you would know that the armor isn't supposed to look like real body armor. The game is set in the future, Resistance is set in WWII, obviously what the players will be wearing is completely different. Both games have a completely different look you can't say one is better just because they look different, they aren't cross platform games! Also, you can't truly compare systems graphics with screenshots, and if you do maybe you should use similar pictures. If you look at NFS: Carbon the setting/cars/view points are all different that doesn't necessarily prove one is better than the other and it isn't a true side by side comparison as your description says. Have you seen any of the video comparisons of any cross platform games? In many of them the Xbox 360 has better overall graphics. Also if you think that the best system out right now is the one with the best graphics you are wrong. Do you know how popular the Wii is? Stupid fanboy.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+51: How about you compare the same area. Moron.
2. The 360 version was out how many freaking months before the PS3 one ?
3. Just which NBA game is this ? We nee details.
4. Please, Resistance is nowhere near as good as GoW, that's just fact.
Oh, and about the 360's advantage of being out longer, where's the advantage from the Cell processor and Blu-Ray drive ? Aren't we suppose to be seeing 4D graphics?
So, for now I will take the other comparisons which show the 360 looking better in most cases. - digitalain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3First,..... When you compared the Need for Speed shots,... You didn't get shots from the same scene, or even THE SAME GAME. Comparing Most wanted vs. Carbon?? Can't use it.
Second,... If the two fighters in the Fight Night image are the same characters, then that means the source code changed, because the character on the left no longer has the tattoos as in the 360 version, and the player on the left has been changed because he has chest hair in the 360 shot and none in the PS3. Can't use it.
Third,... NBA is shots from two different angles. The 360 is looking up toward the lights, and the PS3 is looking straight on. It's very possible that the glow is from the angle. Yes it's possible that it is a fault in the 360, but you'll have to show me the same angle shots from both games to prove your point. Sorry,... can't use it.
And fourth,....You compared screen shots from Gears of War and Resistance:FOM.. If you are trying to convince people that one or the other is better than the other, you need to compare the same games, ...and not state personal opinions. It sounds like you would rather play a WW2 game than a futuristic game, thats cool. But then don't let your opinions on guns and uniforms put down something you just don't like.
I'm sorry but I can't believe any of the evidence that you have put in this article. However,... if you compile a new article with identical screens, I will be more than happy to agree with you that the PS3 is better if the pictures show it. - Lefty06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Where's your argument now? ps3 fanboy.
- punkrockguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1why didn't you use this? because it proves the exact opposite of your claims? http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html?tag=features;title;0
- crcurran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So I can write anything I want on a blog somewhere and then post it as a Digg article myself? OMG that's that's...
so lame I can barely conceive it.
You *must* compare both games on both platforms in person and if you are going to post pics you have to be technically knowledgeable about capturing the images for posting. You are comparing pictures of scenes that don't even match.
I do think the PS3 will eventually look better than the 360 counterpart but not for another year and half (so long due to new architecture). By then the PC Directx10 games will make anything on the consoles look weak and by then the x360 install base is going to match or exceed the PS3 numbers.
The PS2 proved you didnt have to be the most powerful or the best looking to win a nexgen war. Your best bet is to get a Xbox360 now and definitely pick up a PS3 in six months. Too bad Sony didnt work on their online presence for the PS2 because now Sony has to take on a four year mature xbox live which is impressive, most impressive.
Don't be stupid. Right now the xbox360 rocks and the PS3 is a rock. For now at least. - IWriteCode, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here's a better comparison:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?type=mov&id=15368 - ff7jordan23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Excuses excuses excuses...cry me a river xbox fanboys...
- JayD16, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Anyone else find the irony in the fact you could switch 360 and PS3 in lefty's post and read something thats been on digg a million times?
Used to be you would complain that the game was coded for the 360 first and inefficiently ported...
Ah well...Either way, horribly biased article. I'd much rather Microsoft lose as much of a grip as possible but I don't want it to be in an unfair fight. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Bury this *****.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is