PS3/360 visual differences

Umm, regarding the GTA4 video, I think they are all running off one system. I don't think Rockstar made one video with the 360 version and then the exact same video with the PS3 version. So I don't know what you are talking about with that.

The fact of the matter, though, is that the PS3 ports are almost universally inferior to the originals. Eurogamer has run 6 comparisons, where they take a batch of games and compare the two, and the amount of games superior on PS3 could be counted on one hand. Out of like 45 games.

Ports tend to inferior as a matter of course. Put Uncharted or Motorstorm on the 360 and they will not run as well, even if the 360 could in theory handle them. A lot of these games and their engines were designed for 360. So the ports might be inferior even if the systems were similar. However, the 360 and PS3 architectures are very different - 360 has one 512 meg RAM bank while the PS3 has 256 and 256 video, 360's CPU is triple-core while the PS3's is one core with six subprocessor units running, etc.

I have a feeling a lot of these games are not taking the PS3's SPEs into account. They are running off a the Cell's single core main processor. This is not the way the system was designed to run, though, and it can't keep up with the 360's CPU.

Insomniac has said the new version of their engine (R&C) can display more detail on screen at 60fps than the old version (Resistance) could at 30fps. And it certainly shows. They did this by moving systems from the main processor to the SPE.

If publishers are not willing to do that, and several including EA have not shown they care to, the ports will continue to be inferior. Always. There's no reason for these ports to be so weak and games like DiRT have proven they don't have to be but they are.

Regarding the shininess, it is probably a difference in the way the PS3's GPU handles shaders or lightng or something. And one again publishers have shown little concern about optimizing these games properly for the PS3.

Hopefully as PS3's installed base grows they will care more. For now, all my PS3 games are exclusives.

My .02 (and factor in I don't own a 360)..........I think it's a combination of several "issues".

a) Single vs divided RAM
b) 3 procs vs a single proc w/ specialized sub-procs
c) GPU

The 360 is easier to manage from a development standpoint & from what I've seen the biggest difference appears to be the GPU. I simply don't think the PS3 can handle the textures or the lighting that the 360 can do. Every single multi-platform game I've seen the PS3 version always looks a bit "texture light". I suspect, though there's no proof, that the GPU limits the PS3 in final graphics. You can use the cell's to offload some work but for things like textures you'll need bigger chunks of RAM....divided RAM bites the PS3 in the butt here.

On the other side I don't think the 360 can match the PS3's physics capabilities - I don't think it could handle the "motorstorm" style wrecks.

Each one has it's strengths & weaknesses........overall I'd say both work very well & provide an excellent gaming experience.

I disagree. The PS3 can do anything the 360 can do just fine, it all depends on how well the developers choose to optimize their game for the PS3. Look at Oblivion on the PS3 versus the 360, the textures were better and the lighting was just as good (in fact they brightened it up a bit so it was easier to see what the hell was in some of the really dark environments). Dunno about the 360 and physics but I'm sure the 360 can handle it.

From what I've seen though so far games that being developed exclusively for the PS3 (Uncharted and Ratchet come to mind recently) look better than games being developed exclusively for the 360 or being developed for the 360 and PS3.

I think Uncharted's look is just an artistic decision, and honestly if you feel the need to tweak it probably just comes down to personal taste. Not quite sure what to tell you, Uncharted's look is fine for me. Though a lot of games really do go overboard with the lighting on all systems, I remember STALKER sometimes the light on the walls look like someone smeared grease all over it. Most games have built-in brightness settings, that might work for you. I think Uncharted does.

Well if that were the case then they'd use the same approach. They are different, whether or not it matter is the key.

The 360 GPU is more powerful, no real way to argue it. It can so things the PS3 can not - just the way it is. You can offload some processing but in the end the GPU has to push the image. Shared memory is easier to work with - who needs it gets it.....and it has a larger area to buffer textures. The 360 can in no way match the pure number crunching of the PS3 - power that would be very nice for a physics engine.

It's not a case of one being "better" they just have strengths & weaknesses. I don't think either unit has been "maxed" out yet...............we'll see.

Besides it's not like I'm watching every pixel down the stretch in the last lap of motorstorm anyway


And neither was my post. They're just different. They have different approaches. As I said both provide an excellent gaming experience = it's all good.

Sorry, of no help in the settings - sounds like a PITA.

I hav'nt seen a game look waxy..

lol

Someone correct me if I'm wrong here but I think its been unanimously decided that the 360 gpu is better and the ps3 cpu is better, right? The gpu does most of the work when it comes to graphics right...I mean thats what they're there for. So as far as I'm concerned
360=better gpu=better graphics
ps3=better cpu=better physics/AI and stuff

Tell me if I'm wrong cuz I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this.

To answer the original question, the shiney/waxy look is an artistic choice and not specific to either system. Both system have games where models are overly shiney. These new systems offer developers choices in shaders that weren't available previously and a lot of them seem to be going overboard with them to try to give their games that "next-gen" look. It's sort of like in the 80's when every 3D flying logo had a gawdy lens flair effect. It's the new tool in the artist's bag of tricks and once the newness wears off, you'll see it being used more tastefully.

Are you sure that your VGA and HDMI inputs are calibrated correctly? Since your two systems are going through different inputs, it is difficult to make a scientific comparison between the two, as the conditions are not identical.
Also, I can almost guarantee that the 360 and PS3 GTA IV videos were recorded off one system, although no one can say whether it was the 360 or the PS3. This suggests that the perceived difference in video output between the two is either a product of your imagination, which is unlikely, or is related to the difference between the VGA and HDMI inputs on your TV.

Well with VGA you can't change as many settings and make it over saturated etc as you can with HDMI. VGA is a cleaner more pure output like a PC, while HDMI is more like a standard TV signal. I prefer the VGA signal on my 360 over the PS3 HDMI output to the same TV. For one thing VGA allows 1:1 pixel mapping and is sharper. The HDMI doesn't allow this and has more edge ringing and just isn't as sharp. You can though adjust the color more with HDMI so just try tweaking it more.

I personally thought that the stranglehold demo looked like crap on the ps3, I think that there was a lot of unfinished (graphical) business going on in the demo. I have a 60" panasonic 1080p plasma so all of my games put a welders burn on my retna's.

It's not just PS3 games that have the "Wax" effect. Look at Mass Effect for an example, or more specifically, the faces in mass effect (They are so glossy, it's ridiculous). Luckily, some game devs are starting to realize that everyone has different tastes, and they are putting in options to change the look (Mass Effect for example lets you add/remove a "Cinema" effect, which is basically noise overlaid on the picture. It also lets you add/remove motion blur, and change around the color settings). By next gen, we should have as many options to change around as PC gamers (like enabling/disabling anti-aliasing, and changing the texture detail etc) or atleast, that it what I am hoping for.

This is about the best screenshot that I could find on google of what I am talking about

It's not only that though, there are other graphical bugs on their faces aswell. It's too hard to explain, but it's a bit like fuzz in clumps on their faces. The game is pretty good overall, but there are alot of small problems that keep it from being as good as Kotor. If the face glitches are just my disc or my 360, I'd love for anyone else that has Mass Effect to say so, but all other games are fine on my 360.

Oh and for what it's worth, I can't tell the difference between RGB and the other one. (Ygb whatever)

That sweaty sheen is there the entire time. Really it's hard to show in screenshots, but I know what you are talking about. It's as if they have a layer of plastic wrap over their faces/bodies in some games. Luckily most games aren't like that.

Sounds to me like you're just talking about some of the "next-gen" lighting effects for facial textures. Some games have it worse than others. PS3 games tend to look brighter at default/native display settings than 360 games, so the PS3 probably brings out that effect more starkly than the other.

Games like Stranglehold have it really bad. The latest Tony Hawk game also looks pretty shiny-faced. The "plastic wrap" analogy is a good one. I've always thought of it as characters being coated in oil. Regardless, it's the fault of individual developers not the consoles.