Face-Off: Dead Rising 2

By Richard Leadbetter Published 27 September, 2010

Undead reckoning.

Page 1 of 2
- Xbox 360 PlayStation 3
Disc Size 6.1GB 5.91GB
Install 6.1GB (optional) 2840MB (mandatory)
Surround Support Dolby Digital Dolby Digital, 5.1LPCM, DTS

And... relax. Following the controversial announcement of a reboot of Devil May Cry with a western developer at the helm, many were concerned that the Dead Rising sequel, developed in Canada, would lack the style and spirit of the Japanese original. Dead Rising 2 manages to honour that spirit while doing just enough to stand apart as a true sequel with its own distinct identity.

In the case of Dead Rising 2, a new studio also means a new engine: only recently, with the development of Marvel vs. Capcom 3, has the publisher allowed the use of its prized Framework MT technology outside of its Japanese HQ, so Blue Castle Games utilised its own technology for this release. The result is pretty impressive: the tech manages to process the requisite multitudes of zombies rather well and the draw distance and LOD transitions are fairly smooth with only minimal amounts of pop-up.

Disadvantages arrive in the form of sometimes-basic environments and lighting, along with some low-poly characters, but the overall effect is impressive. The question is, does the technical accomplishment translate over to the PS3 version of the game?

As is customary for these features, let's begin with the basic comparison assets. First up, there's a nice, meaty 720p comparison gallery to supplement the requisite head-to-head movie. Remember to use the full-screen button to get full 720p resolution.

Dead Rising 2: Xbox 360 vs. PlayStation 3 comparison.

Framebuffer measurements give us our first indication of the quality of this multi-platform project. The Xbox 360 version of Dead Rising 2 runs at native 720p resolution with the bonus addition of 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing. The edge-smoothing is welcome: the engine concentrates on handling huge numbers of zombies with plenty of draw distance, so the actual levels of geometry in the environments are fairly basic. In short, there are plenty of large edges to smooth!

The PS3 version of the game shares the 2x MSAA of its 360 counterpart, but the unfortunate reality is that resolution has been compromised. There's little doubt that Dead Rising 2 on the Sony platform is running sub-HD, with 1024x576 appearing to be the game's native resolution. On the plus side, the quality of the upscaling to 720p isn't that bad, and while the edges still look a bit rough as a result, the overall impression is fine.

However, such a big resolution drop is clear evidence that Blue Castle had issues bringing the game to the PlayStation 3, and this is born out in other elements of the game's look and feel, most notably the overall performance level.

If there was one big issue with the original Dead Rising it was undoubtedly the pretty horrific screen-tear. Utilising the earliest example of Capcom's Framework MT engine, the scope of the game undoubtedly pushed the tech - as it was back then - to its limits. The sequel manages to resolve this unfortunate condition completely or not improve on it at all depending on which version you're playing.

Let's break out the performance analysis to find out more.

Dead Rising 2 performance tests.

First up, there's some good news for Xbox 360 owners. Probably the most immediately apparent upgrade over the first game is that the developer is running with v-sync active, meaning that there is absolutely no screen-tear at all - so all tear graph indicators on the video refer to the PS3 version of the game.

For the most part, Dead Rising 2 on 360 does a fairly decent job of maintaining its capped 30FPS, but there are clearly some "gotchas" that can send performance plummeting. In particular, the outdoor scenes with the huge view distance seem to cause a problem, with consecutive frames running over-budget, resulting in occasional, jarring drops to a sustained, jerky 20FPS.

The usual solution developers employ is to disengage v-sync when running under 30FPS - image coherency will diminish, but response from the controls isn't impacted quite so much. Blue Castle Games appear to have chosen image quality over controller lag in these difficult scenes, and the drop in response is so pronounced that you can't help but wonder if this was the right decision to make.

The PS3 rendition of Dead Rising 2 appears to be using an entirely different approach to the rendering. V-sync is disengaged completely, as is the 30FPS frame-rate cap. What this means is screen-tear is an ever-present element of the image, even when the game is exceeding 30FPS.

Quite why frame-rate has been completely unlocked in the first place is something of a mystery, as it actually introduces more tearing with no appreciable increase in controller response and only very minimal increases in the amount of full frames being output from the console. Just about the only advantages it has over the 360's solution is that those zombie-packed outdoor scenes that occasionally cause the Microsoft console to chug operate with a higher frame-rate on PS3.

Page 1 of 2

Comments (187) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • sonicyoda #1 1 year ago

    Jesus! Old "squinty" should buy some sunglasses.

    Also, as a PS3 owner, I think I'm going to have to skip on Dead Rising 2. I'm sure it's still a riot like the original (which I have had the pleasure of playing) but the missing DLC the 360 owners are getting is a bit of a let-down. Also, the performance issues are typical Capcom. Lost Planet 2 shows almost the exact same problems this is having and it's a real shame the developers don't give PS3 owners the same love. Sad face.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 14:05

  • Bigglesworth #2 1 year ago

    Oh wow, you're still doing these?

  • GamesConnoisseur #3 1 year ago

    Ouch!

    Much far worse than I had expected, as the past year we see PS3 and X360 gets much more closer together compared to the first or second wave of multi platform titles.

    There were some claims in gamesfaq forum that PS3 is the better one!

    Still a fun game even if the damn final boss fight is a pain in the neck (still attempting at moment).

  • telboy007 #4 1 year ago

    Who is the bird with the big jugs? :D They look the same on both consoles, so all good.

  • richarddavies #5 1 year ago

    Is it just me or that's seeing less and less of a difference between versions of games on these now? I find myself squinting at the videos trying to see what differences im supposed to be looking at.

  • muscleblade #6 1 year ago

    Predictable outcome really.

  • onezeonx #7 1 year ago

    THIS IS GONNA GET MESSY....

  • Der_tolle_Emil #8 1 year ago

    Is it just me or that's seeing less and less of a difference between versions of games on these now? I find myself squinting at the videos trying to see what differences im supposed to be looking at.

    With the recent games I would agree with you. However, with DR2 it is really, really obvious where the visual differences are, you don't even have to click on the thumbnails to notice most of them.

    All in all pretty irrelevant though as the DLC is the single most important reason to get this on the 360. A shame because I'm not a big fan of console exclusives and now it turns out the port does not do the game much justice either.

  • Darren #9 1 year ago

    If I remember correctly, the first Dead Rising only had loads of screen tearing if I ran it at a resolution above its native 720p, i.e. 1360x768 or 1080p, otherwise it was perfectly fine with only minimal amounts when the engine got stressed. This same issue cropped up in Resident Evil 5 as well which has significantly less tearing at 720p than 1080p. I always thought it was a bug in the MT Framework engine as other games on the 360 supported upscaling from 720p to 1080p with no loss of image quality.

    Anyway, great news that the 360 is fully v-synced as it means that I'd have been happy with that version had the cheaper PC version not existed. Personally, I'd take a few framerate drops here and there over screen tearing any day but I know others will disagree. Is there any chance of updating this comparison once the PC version is released this Friday?

  • ZizouFC #10 1 year ago

    Surprizzle surprizzle...

  • NimbusTLD #11 1 year ago

    DR2 uses a different engine to DR1? Kudos to Blue Castle Games as I could not tell from Case Zero!

    Clarification: What I meant is that the style is exactly the same, not that the graphics haven't improved...
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 16:19

  • DavidBoring #12 1 year ago

    i never expected dead rising 2 to be cutting edge technology. all i want from the game is hordes of zombies that i can mow down. and from what i read it will still work (almost) fine on my ps3

  • Goodfella #13 1 year ago

    I said the PS3 version was bad in the Dead Rising 2 Review comments but got negged for it.

    Anyway, poor show Capcom, poor show.
    Edited by 2 at 27/09/10 @ 14:23

  • karooo #14 1 year ago

    Why is PS3 version just 5.91 GB? why dont they use blu ray.

  • NimbusTLD #15 1 year ago

    And I'm saddened each time I see or read about sub-standard PS3 versions. Sony first-party studios have consistently proved that it is more than capable of holding its own against the 360, and even surpassing it.

    Sony should seriously consider offering free lectures or sending code ninjas to 3rd party studios to unlock their machine's full potential.

  • Moonprince #16 1 year ago

    "and we also see evidence of lower-resolution textures too on Chuck's jacket (top)"

    You say its missing 'allot' of detail but fk me I'm looking and can't see a difference.

    Are you just bs'ing?

  • M_of_the_sys #17 1 year ago

    @Moonprince

    I was thinking the same thing. Spent ages looking at that one. I did notice a difference in the writing on the jacket.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 14:27

  • TopKatt #18 1 year ago

    This is all well and good but what does Bobby Kotick think?

  • StooMonster #19 1 year ago

    Darren: This same issue cropped up in Resident Evil 5 as well which has significantly less tearing at 720p than 1080p. I always thought it was a bug in the MT Framework engine as other games on the 360 supported upscaling from 720p to 1080p with no loss of image quality.

    Can only agree, the RE5 experience on Xbox 360 has made me wonder whether one should run all games at 720p for less tearing, or if this problem was game specific.

    I've asked before, and I'll ask again, can DF please do an article about comparing output resolutions and performance? (i.e. should ones set one's 360 or PS3 to 720p or 1080p for optimal performance).

  • Dogs-not-Gods #20 1 year ago

    Not to be too journalistically nerdy or anything but Blue Castle are a Vancouver dev and, as such Canadians. So the game wasn't developed in the USA as the opening paragraph states. Not be be nerdy, like I said...
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 14:30

  • karooo #21 1 year ago

    "another shitty port,suck it up sony nazis hahaha.whats that sony 'the next gen doesnt start till you say it does' hahaha what a joke"

    Key word = port.

    Multiplatform = optimized for both consoles.

  • Zerobob #22 1 year ago

    Even though I only own a 360, I still can't quite believe developers still haven't got to grips with getting better performance out of the PS3 on cross-platform games. I know there are exceptions such as Final Fantasy XIII, although its no secret Square Enix developed this primarily with the PS3 in mind and also kindly made a 360 version.

    But then but when a game is produced by a middle of the road developer favouring neither console in particular, I would bet every time the 360 gets the slightly more optimised game, or rather the PS3 gets a slightly scaled down game in terms of resolution and graphical effects & processing. I thought these days would be behind us by now being nearly 2011 and most games would be running at a native 720p regardless of the game or console.

  • TopKatt #23 1 year ago

    Keep an eye out for tigerstyles new account. If he's back, this is where we'll spot him.

  • Dave52 #24 1 year ago

    "In this scene, depth of field filtering on PS3 is nowhere near as strong"

    Can someone tell me what I'm looking at in this image (the one where he's talking to the reporter)...? The background on the Xbox version looks blury, the PS3 one doesn't. Is that depth of field...? I'm confused.

    Gameplay looks the same on both consoles. Buy whichever one you fancy (although, obvously the PS3 one if you want superior sound).

  • layleeloo #25 1 year ago

    TVR is right. I love my PS3, but even without reading these I just automatically buy any cross platform game on 360. Not just for the infinately better online gaming and of course, cross game party chat but becasue the 360 cross platform games always seem to be a bit better. I will get negatived for saying that to the PS3 fanboys but its true. I buy all my exclusives on my PS3 like LBP and the likes, but most cross platform with the exception of Burnout I have bought on 360 due to the amount of these tech comparisons they keep winning. Doesnt seem to be much excuse 3-4 years after PS3's release.

    I did love the DF tech comparion of LBP versus LBP2 so nice to see thats even better this time so I look forward to that, but hardly the same as these platform comparisons haha.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 14:54

  • captainrentboy #26 1 year ago

    ''But, but, Uncharted 2.... UNCHARTED 2. Everyone please remember that game, ignore the hundreds of titles which look better on the 360, Uncharted TWO!!''

    Surely the above is due any second now :)

  • GreyBeard #27 1 year ago

    Surely the big clue going forward regarding the optimization of PS3 builds is going to be the anti-aliasing method employed. As Richard has pointed out Sony are offering their MLAA implementation as part of the EDGE tools package, which has higher IQ and lower GPU cost.

  • NimbusTLD #28 1 year ago

    @Dave52

    "Can someone tell me what I'm looking at in this image (the one where he's talking to the reporter)...? The background on the Xbox version looks blury, the PS3 one doesn't. Is that depth of field...? I'm confused. "

    Yes that indeed is the depth of field effect, which makes your eyes focus on the objects in a scene which are... well, in focus :)

  • ThemisB #29 1 year ago

    Why are these face-off comments threads always full of cunts? Most (not all) of the comments above mine are fucking retarded. I bet half you windowlickers always skip to the last paragraph to see who 'won', as if somehow this is going to make you feel better about your console choice.

    If you have ever said anything along the lines of '360 always has better multiplat versions' or 'yeah but PS3 has better looking exclusives', you are fucking pathetic.

  • Goodfella #30 1 year ago

    Has anyone mentioned Uncharted 2 yet?

    Seriously, we all know the 360 and PS3 are virtually identical when it comes to power, with slightly different advantages and disadvantages for each machine.

    Clearly Sony just made it harder/more expensive to develop for the PS3 so most devs don't bother so they just port them over, which ALWAYS results in it being inferior.

    Anyway, I just wish the fanboy bollocks would end on both sides.

  • M_of_the_sys #31 1 year ago

    What Themis said.

  • Goodfella #32 1 year ago

    Why are these face-off comments threads always full of cunts?

    I'm sorry but could you take your C word out of here, it's only allowed in Bobby Kotick related articles. ;-)

  • Caimbeul #33 1 year ago

    What about the PC version?

  • M_of_the_sys #34 1 year ago

    @Caimbeul

    From the article:

    "the PC version of Dead Rising 2 launches on 1st October."

  • DoctorFouad #35 1 year ago

    "The PS3 version of the game shares the 2x MSAA of its 360 counterpart, but the unfortunate reality is that resolution has been compromised. There's little doubt that Dead Rising 2 on the Sony platform is running sub-HD, with 1024x576 appearing to be the game's native resolution"

    "Shadows are computationally expensive and we can see them pared back a little on the PS3 version of Dead Rising 2"

    "The PS3 rendition of Dead Rising 2 appears to be using an entirely different approach to the rendering. V-sync is disengaged completely"

    Ok I am really sick of those developers and multiplatform engines...after more than 4 years of PS3 development we still get this crap....

    use properly the CELL SPEs please....is it too much demanding ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 15:46

  • jtodroc #36 1 year ago

    I take it tigerstyle has now entered the thread!

  • Dizzy #37 1 year ago

    Let me guess? Lazy devs?

  • Goodfella #38 1 year ago

    I take it tigerstyle has now entered the thread!

    Not sure but TVR is doing a rather convincing impression.

  • FogHeart #39 1 year ago

    Me, I'm more interested in a staring competition face off between Rooney and Chuck.

  • el_pollo_diablo #40 1 year ago

    I'm so glad I only own one system. It's nice just to play a game rather than have to to worry about how much better it would be on the other system and what a terrible, terrible choice I've made.

    And then go and make a list about it.

  • VandelayIndustries #41 1 year ago

    Fascinating stuff:
    So third parties generally do better on 360. Sony first party are generally a class apart, and Microsoft first party have been struggling with technical limits this year.

    *head pops*

  • el_pollo_diablo #42 1 year ago

    You're welcome.

  • jtodroc #43 1 year ago

    Well considering TVR's account seems to be fairly new, it could well be the resurrection of Tigerstyle.

    Anyway, like el_pollo_diablo, I only own 1 system, and I don't cry myself asleep at night worrying that the 360 has won 127 of these. Most of the time there's not much difference, its rare to get a botch job like Bayonetta or Ghostbusters.

    There was a big deal made about the PS3 version of Red Dead being much worse, but you know what? It didn't stop me loving the game.

  • Raznilof #44 1 year ago

    @VandelayIndustries - Although I agree with that statement, Reach certainly raised the bar for first party titles on the xbox. And I really like Alan Wake too. But it's hard to find a prettier game than uncharted 2 (even if I loved the first one far more as a game).

  • kangarootoo #45 1 year ago

    This thread is rubbish.

  • drumbaby #46 1 year ago

    To be fair I think PS3 owners should count themselves lucky that Capcom were gracious enough to include an actual game disc in the box. Maybe Microsoft didn't pay them enough money to pull that particular stunt?
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 18:11

  • Dave52 #47 1 year ago

    TVR: "I'd rather have the better version every time"

    So, did you buy all 128 titles...?

    I don't own an XBox. I don't sweat over these face-offs because the multi-platform games I'm interested in all look pretty much identicle (including this one). Personally (and I will get negged for it I'm sure), I prefer the list of PS3 exclusives over the Xbox ones, so I'm pretty happy with my console choice.

  • Goodfella #48 1 year ago

    and looking at the frame rate analysis for Castlevania on PS3, that could well be 129 as it chugs along at less than 15 FPS in places.

    Oh how I loathe to get involved in these petty arguments but when someone clearly spouts complete bollocks it has to be challenged.

    I assume you are referring to this analysis where the framerate doesn't dip below 23 fps? Edit, sorry, very briefly dips to 17 fps, and it must be very briefly as I didn't notice it in the demo.

    I've played the demo and it's smooth, with zero screen tear and looks great, that'll do for me.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 15:53

  • Bagpuss #49 1 year ago

    Lol....smugly looks at Pc.

    Running at 1080p,4xAA,rock solid 60fps+, with textures far nicer than any console can manage......

    And my Pc only cost Ł400 to build 12mths ago.......

  • VandelayIndustries #50 1 year ago

    @Raznilof
    I agree, Reach is a fantastic game, I was less enamored with Alan Wake though. I was just commenting on technical matters such frame rates & screen tear etc.

  • telboy007 #51 1 year ago

    What are we discussing here again? I'm not sure any more. Has a console won the war yet? Can we get on with some playing of the games yet? I have found a renewed love for gaming in "games room" - that rip off merchant extraordinaire. Although it is a rip off I have been muchly enjoying playing games from yesteryear. Didn't matter which one was 720p, or had AA as they all looked shit. Yar's revenge has about 5 colours for fucks sake. Didn't matter then did it! Not like it was in my day, when I were a lad, blah blah blah.

  • FogHeart #52 1 year ago

    Tell you what, why don't we mention the Playstation Move, first reply to include the word 'dildo', we have found our man. He won't be able to resist.

  • DoctorFraud #53 1 year ago

    Always get 360 version of multiplats. Always.

  • Dave52 #54 1 year ago

    @TVR

    I've just gone through your list, of the "Better on Xbox" ones, these are the only ones that I own, or interest me:

    Army of Two: The 40th Day
    Batman: Arkham Asylum
    Bioshock
    Bioshock 2
    Borderlands
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
    Call of Duty: World at War
    Colin McRae: Dirt 2
    Dead Space
    Fallout 3

    Of those, I disagreed with these face offs at the time:

    Borderlands
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
    Call of Duty: World at War
    Dead Space
    Fallout 3

    These are the "Better on PS3" ones that I care about:

    Colin McRae: Dirt
    Final Fantasy XIII
    Oblivion: The Elder Scrolls IV

    So, as you can see - no sweat...

  • jtodroc #55 1 year ago

    @ TVR

    The reason I haven't bought a 360 is because I don't need to, I can play all the games I want on PS3. If I wanted a 360 I'd go out and get one but what's the point in wasting money having 2 consoles. Just cos the 360 has slightly better ports on multi-format games doesn't make me want to get one. As I said before, its rare nowadays for ports to be as bad as Bayonetta.

    As noface pointed out, MW2 maybe on the 360's list of wins, but you know what, unless you're some sort of cyborg you're not going to notice the difference.

    And if you're ignoring the "PS3 fanboys", why are you replying to everyone spouting your bollox.

  • TopKatt #56 1 year ago

    Yep, thats definitely him. :)

  • orangpelupa #57 1 year ago

    wait wait.. Digital Foundry is a technical analysis right?

    Why discussing "DLC" as an advantage on xbox 360....

    i agree the other points are valid though. There are many things/elements looks better on xbox 360 than PS3. But its not noticable in normal play.

    looks like a good port for me.
    yes its sub-HD on ps3. But the upsampling looks decent.

    here hoping the PC version will be lightweight. My xbox dead, and i can't have PS3 (my monitor not supported). So my only choice is the PC version. (im with radeon 4770)

  • Dizzy #58 1 year ago

    Lol... look at the SDF marking down like mad. These treads are filled with insecurity.

  • TopKatt #59 1 year ago

    Insecure treads is the last thing you want. ;)

  • M_of_the_sys #60 1 year ago

    Can't the police pull you over for that?

  • Lunastra78 #61 1 year ago

    I'm getting tired of Zombies in general so I think I'll pass on this.

  • bluetoothion #62 1 year ago

    Multiplat means splitting their resourses and they would; opt for the one with most installed base....and unfortunatelly for single platform gamers that went for PS3 only ( such as myself) we get the short end stuff....kinda used to it by now. if you have both you get whichever feels better for you....

    and if you re a PC user you brag that your 1000$ machine that you bought a year ago can do more than 400$ one that was released 4 years ago .... Yipeeeee .....

  • sfp_noodle #63 1 year ago

    Considering TVR's post count is 11 ( as of now), I think it's safe to say he's tigerstyle. Welcome back. I actually missed your amusing rants. Nice to see you haven't lost your touch.

  • Goodfella #64 1 year ago

    Apparently the PC version isn't much cop, a typically poor console to PC port.

  • SG79 #65 1 year ago

    Technically inferior, less content, no demo. The real question is, why did Capcom even bother with a PS3 version? They even bought Blue Castle because of the work.

  • NimbusTLD #66 1 year ago

    To be fair I think PS3 owners should count themselves lucky that Capcom were gracious enought to include an actual game disc in the box.

    Is there some news I missed???

  • Machiavellian #67 1 year ago

    And I'm saddened each time I see or read about sub-standard PS3 versions. Sony first-party studios have consistently proved that it is more than capable of holding its own against the 360, and even surpassing it.

    The difference is time and money. Sony First party can concentrate on one machine, probably share technology and have taken longer to get their games done. Multiplate do not have the luxury. They work within the time they have and if a particular system takes a lot of time to get little issues resolved the budget might not support it. We all know that the PS3 can shine, the problem is the time that it takes to make it shine.

    As seen with mature engines, they have closed the gap between the PS3 and 360 but when a developer creates their own engine, you see the same pattern again. It's really not that surprising since this is a pattern that has happen since the PS3 first showed up on the market. Unless a developer use the PS3 as the lead system and have a good background coding for the PS3 things even out between both systems. In a multiplate game, developers usually struggle to get up to speed with the PS3. Coding to all the SPUs instead of using the GPU takes time, which cost money and if your time line is 24 months then something has to get left behind.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:04

  • SG79 #68 1 year ago

    Oh geez, Richard, Blue Castle is in Vacouver, BC... in Canada, not the US.

  • Machiavellian #69 1 year ago

    I think a lot of people keep forgetting that ND spent 3 years on their game engine for the PS3 before they came out with Uncharted 1. 3 years on the engine alone is not something every developer has time to do. This is the reason developers purchase engines like Unreal because they want to create the content, not create the graphics engine before they can do anything.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:04

  • CernaML #70 1 year ago

    I find it funny how I only own 360 exclusives for my 360 and PS3 exclusives/multiplats for my PS3 (oops, did I just upset some of you 360 fantards out there?). Still buying multiplats for my PS3 because, guess what, these differences are so goddamn minuscule that only a pathetic human being would desperately downplay the PS3 for this so-called flaw. MW2, BC2, Rock Band, Blur, Split/Second, SSF4 and all these other so-called "better on 360" multiplatform games play identically on the PS3 and look just fine on the PS3. Don't try to prove me wrong. Taking a microscope or magnifying glass to the screen is bad for your eyes.

    Why were all your mouths shut last gen? Why didn't you boast about superior multiplats/online on the Xbox? Was it because it was being dominated by the PS2 in both hardware and software sales? You're not gamers. You're pretend shareholders who only care which console sells more.

    Hey TVR, here's a fact that I'd like for you to spin. TechnoBuffalo declared the PS3 as the winner of this generation's console war.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 16:32

  • orangpelupa #71 1 year ago

    <strong>"and if you re a PC user you brag that your 1000$ machine that you bought a year ago can do more than 400$ one that was released 4 years ago .... Yipeeeee ..... "</strong>

    i dont understand. Why people still have a stigma that PC = expensive 1000$ thing.

    dont use PC from alienware (ir any other branded PC) as PRICE point please. It is overpriced.
    Just tell the local PC store what you need a PC to do. And they will happily think what the spec for you, with good prices.
    and <strong>dont</strong> INCLUDE the LCD Monitor price with the PC price....

    if i remember correctly, my 300USD PC is bought a year ago. And today, still can play multiplat games in all HIGH @ 1440x900.
    so if you only want to play multiplat games on PC with Console-quality (1280x720, mixed medium-high setting). It should be cheaper than 300USD.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 16:32

  • EugenesLair #72 1 year ago

    I'm also getting tired of Zombies. Talking about this thread, not the game.

  • NimbusTLD #73 1 year ago

    I don't see why everyone is getting so up in arms against TVR. I agree with his original point that if you can, own both consoles. That way you take advantage of getting the exclusives for each platform and the best multi-platform version. And as he has said probably close to 127 times now, the better version graphically is on 360 for the majority of the games.

    I can agree that his etiquette could be improved though ;)

  • Goodfella #74 1 year ago

    It's not what tigerst...sorry TVR says, it's how he says it.

  • richarddavies #75 1 year ago

    @Nimbus I agree with you. He's made some fair enough points and I don't even think he's said anything out of hand either. To be honest I think it's just funny when you get someone that takes this shit well more seriously than they should and even when there getting negged for being a spoon rather than taking it on the chin they just keep posting and posting till you turn to there way of thinking when it just pisses everyone off more.

  • NimbusTLD #76 1 year ago

    @Dizzy

    Commenting about getting negs... that's soooo not insecure ^_^

  • NimbusTLD #77 1 year ago

    @retrend

    That's psytrance :)

  • riceNpea #78 1 year ago

    i couldn't give a fig if the PS3 version isn't as pretty as the XBox version if it's not really discernable...

    this for me was the most important piece of information that would impact the game for me...

    ' On the other hand, the technical compromises do at least mean that the PS3 version is in the same ballpark in terms of playability, and as mentioned earlier, there are occasional areas in-game where the 360's v-sync implementation can impact controller response '


    that's it. 2 pages of graphical comparison of details that won't really spoil the game for me, and this which potentially could gets barely 3 lines.

  • Negotiator #79 1 year ago

    The PS3 owners saying they haven't noticed any of the problems the article brings up, that makes me laugh. They said the same thing yesterday about the Enslaved demo, which was clearly better on 360. Come on guys wake up, the PS3 is just not the powerhouse machine Sony want you to think it is. I like both consoles, but it is clear now that the PS3 is starting to struggle with the more demanding modern games. Big open environments, populated with lots of characters is something the PS3 has trouble with, live with it.

  • NimbusTLD #80 1 year ago

    @retrend

    Ooooooooo I was so so close to starting a flame war about music tastes with you! Then I remembered we get enough of those here already :)

  • PrivateJoker #81 1 year ago

    Negotiator...I take it you're wearing the exclusive fanboy dickhead dlc today???

  • Negotiator #82 1 year ago

    The truth hurts, but the evidence is right there. Also I own a PS3 and I own both KZ2 and Uncharted 2, but they clearly play to the PS3's strengths, smaller enclosed environments, smaller number of characters etc. Sony did a number on most of you, and no one wants to admit it, why?

  • Negotiator #83 1 year ago

    Look at the first Infamous, open world, lots of characters = average graphics, and that was an exclusive.

  • PrivateJoker #84 1 year ago

    @Negotiator...because you're a troll and not an expert.

  • klem578 #85 1 year ago

    noface = angry internet person

    CernaML = angry internet person with a God complex

    Astro-creature = angry internet person

    To all of the above : Gentleboys (putting"men" in the same word would do it injustice), there are always places like N4G to preach your Gospel and spread so much hate and bile over a fucking videogame/plastic piece of machinery that is a console...

    For all the other gentlemen : Enjoy your games whichever platform you buy them for , after all , it's your money at the end of the day :)

    Cheerio


  • Negotiator #86 1 year ago

    noface WTF are you talking about, GTA is better on the 360 and thats a fact.

  • jtodroc #87 1 year ago

    @Negotiator

    I don't think anyone's saying there aren't differences between the 360 & PS3 versions of this game. But the point people like myself & noface are trying to make is that most of the times the differences are barely noticeable & don't warrant people splashing out hundreds on 2 consoles.

    eg, Modern Warfare 2 was on the list of 360 wins. If anyone can notice the difference between the 360 & PS3 versions with the naked eye, then they must be some sort of futuristic cyborg.

    There are obviously some examples where the differences are clearly noticeable & where the PS3 version is much worse (like Bayonetta), but this hardly happens anymore & most of the time the 360's advantages are so minor it doesn't warrant someone going out and spending more money on a second console.

  • des #88 1 year ago

    Just like I have said,SDF is running out of excuses...denial about everything,lol
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:20

  • klem578 #89 1 year ago

    ATTENTION, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT !!! : [link url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RTc32qBpAk&feature=rel ated
    ]http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=0RTc32qBp...[/link]

    noface today : [link url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOC-hDULX1c&feature=rel ated
    ]http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=IOC-hDULX...[/link]

    Seriously now , you're going to have a stroke mate and judging by the tone of your posts, well , let me just say that having a stroke at the age of 15-16 is not something that you'd like to experience...

    ...unless of course you're above that age - in that case , i'll have lost faith in humankind once more by reading the usual bile-infested comments sections over "the internets"..

    It really is a shame and i'm not even being sarcastic , so much hate and for what ?
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:26

  • Goodfella #90 1 year ago

    I love the irony of the use of (the pathetic) term SDF, clearly being used by people who you could probably label the MAF (Microsoft Attack Force)

  • klem578 #91 1 year ago

    What kind of work friend do you actually do ? Does Elementary school provide you with a good wage or... ?

    I'm genuinely curious, that's all.

    PS : You really sound like a fantastic individual , i actually like people like you :)

  • rotmm #92 1 year ago

    @noface, "Do a faceoff: GeOW 2 vs. Killzone 2 and come back."

    GeOW2 : Smallish, contained enviroments with limited numbers of enemies, well designed environments with highly detailed textures.

    KZ2: Smallish, contained enviroments with limited numbers of enemies, well designed environments with highly blurred textures.

    There you go.

  • captainrentboy #93 1 year ago

    I really want to see Noface at work, with his shoes off, laughing hysterically at his PC monitor. In my head it's a glorious sight.
    Edit- All whilst earning 50 grands a year. Fantastic.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:46

  • klem578 #94 1 year ago

    So , 50 grand a year and you're a 1-system only owner ? ;P

    You must be a very selective individual then...

    A for me , i make 10 drachmas a day (i can buy a whole pack of chewing gum).
    Also , i just bought my first donkey+ cart to get me to work everyday, so...

    /is also bored to death at work (plus, i'm better than you , not only i have taken my shoes off but my socks too)
    /stares at flip-flops


  • bladdard #95 1 year ago

    PS3 versions of capcom games should be branded crapcom ;o)

    @Negotiator

    The final few levels of KZ2 have some massive environments fully populated with dozens of Helghast. Your comment about PS3 limtations doesn't hold water.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 17:57

  • bladdard #96 1 year ago

    TVR can you stop posting interesting titbits and tell us how many cross platform games are better on the 360, I've forgotten. A list could help.

  • Goodfella #97 1 year ago

    Yep, definitely tigerstyle, the abuse is gradually appearing..."fuckwits", etc.

    Retroid, get your hammer ready. ;-D.

  • darkmorgado #98 1 year ago

    Without even reading the comments, I am confident in saying that a truckload will be 360 owners gloating, a truckload will be PS3 owners bitching, and a truckload will be people saying that they don't care but still obviously cared enough to tell us they don't care. Someone's also bound to get pedantic and try and say Leadbetter is wrong.

    Am I right?

  • el_pollo_diablo #99 1 year ago

    More or less.

  • Goodfella #100 1 year ago

    Almost, you didn't mention that there's always someone who posts that they know exactly what others have posted without even reading the comments. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 18:32

  • anamenos #101 1 year ago

    360 wins again. What a suprise??????

  • Dave52 #102 1 year ago

    Negotiator: "smaller enclosed environments"

    The draw distance in U2 is immense. Really mate, what are you talking about.

  • darkmorgado #103 1 year ago

    @Goodfella

    lol. +1 sir, +1.

  • rotmm #104 1 year ago

    @Dave52, "The draw distance in U2 is immense. Really mate, what are you talking about."

    In U2 it's not "draw distance" like in, for example, GTA4 where it's actually scenery the player can visit. Some of the Gears 2 levels appear to be huge, but like U2 most of it is just "window dressing" and you as a player are still forced down a fairly narrow corridor.

    So he's right to say U2 has smaller, enclosed environments because the actual play area is relatively small. It's just that the pretty scenery gives the appearance of a larger world.

  • rotmm #105 1 year ago

    Fantard Face-Off: TVR vs noface

    TVR has the number 127 on his side, but noface has 50 grands in his back pocket.

    I'm not sure who to give this round to.

  • darkmorgado #106 1 year ago

    So he's right to say U2 has smaller, enclosed environments because the actual play area is relatively small. It's just that the pretty scenery gives the appearance of a larger world.

    Precisely. Uncharted 2 is an amazing game, no doubt about it, but to suggest it's open-world is complete fallacy. Half the stuff you see won't even be fully rendered, as you never visit it.

  • SG79 #107 1 year ago

    Amusing. I make a correction that the developer isn't based in the US but Canada, and two people rate my comment as a positive and a negative respectively.

    We're disputing facts now? http://www. bluecastlegames.com/#pageId,29

    EDIT: I got my answer. Enough negative ratings will move them to California I'm sure.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 19:29

  • MeBrains #108 1 year ago

    but is it a good game?

  • jellyBelly #109 1 year ago

    The tearing on PS3 is pretty bad on this. Ive even observed it whith chuck being the only character onscreen. Shame really.

    I wonder if and when development practices and libraries on PS3 will be mature enought to permit developers to produce in a cost-effective way competent software

  • MeBrains #110 1 year ago

    TVR: let's attack again (and again) ... (and again) ... (and encore) about Microsoft's inability to have provided a stable platform. Let's discuss about the fact that it only does shooters. Or about the fact that kinetic (pun indeed intended) got so paired back that it's not that different to the eyetoy anymore... in my eye.

  • lockload #111 1 year ago

    "On the one hand it is very difficult to avoid criticising the developer for not giving the PS3 version of Dead Rising 2 the same sort of love that the 360 game clearly received."

    I totally disagree each game has the same budget why should they soend more t on the ps3 version its sonys fault its hard to program for

  • Retroid #112 1 year ago

    Whoops, my finger slipped again.

  • darkmorgado #113 1 year ago

    Ooooh the comment count has just drastically dropped.

    I take it TVR has been banned again then?

  • Retroid #114 1 year ago

    Yup.

  • darkmorgado #115 1 year ago

    @Retroid

    Can you just confirm something to me - if people are banned from posting comments, can they still post them and the just don't appear? I've noticed this with someone banned who has "posted" a comment in another article, but it hasn't actually shown up.

  • jackdoe #116 1 year ago

    @lockload

    What makes you think they even spent the same amount of manpower on both versions of the game? It is painfully obvious that the PS3 version is a port and likely consisted of a skeleton crew. The fact that the "Prologue" and "Epilogue" DLC is 360 exclusive as well should tell you how the general make up of the development team is like.

  • Goodfella #117 1 year ago

    @ Retroid

    Well done that man.

  • darkmorgado #118 1 year ago

    im a 360 fanboy

    Why the hell would anyone actually admit to being a fanboy? Not just admit, but be openly proud of the fact? Is it like Chavs who are proud to be called yobs or something?

  • Goodfella #119 1 year ago

    Lol, good call dm.

  • Machiavellian #120 1 year ago

    to get the best out of the platform and therefore to sell more copies of your game? so, why not?

    I am sure if a developer had all the time in the world, then yes, they could spend that time getting the PS3 closer to the 360. The problem is that developers do not have infinite time. They are on a budget and they have millstones where they need to meet. Development cost money and time is a very precious resource. I am a developer and we have to estimate our time to the last dollar for projects we do. There is only so much time in a day where you can be productive and anything that delays you put you behind from meeting your millstones. 24 months sound a lot but in development time that can be very minimum if you have to create the game engine and the content.

    Some blame has to be passed back to Sony instead of it always being shifted to the developer. If you are a developer you understand you live and die by the tools, resources and libraries. If those are not up to par, then you must create them yourself which delay projects and cost more money. One of the primary issues that I heard concerning Sony is that their tools, libraries and resources they provide isn't even close to the support that MS provide.

    For most of the PS3 generation, Sony had the same attitude as they had with the PS2. Build it and they will come. Providing the resources, tools and libraries were up to the developers. That worked for Sony for the PS2 because of the PS1 and the year head start on their competitors. As we see with the PS3, you ratchet up the complexity and forget you have competitors not to mention come out a year later and the table get reverse.

    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 20:18

  • Oceans1999 #121 1 year ago

    That second video was so different on each side. I was shouting, "move the f**ing camera on the 360 side" while he proceeded to leave the controll well alone and bash at an empty, zombieless scene. I can see that the 360 version is better (anyone can) but why does the article seem to seem like a fanboyish child explaining it to me?

    What a weird world!

  • darkmorgado #122 1 year ago

    brainwashed nazi followers

    So this is how low it goes, is it? Accusing anyone who owns a PS3 of being a "brainwashed Nazi"?

    Idiocy aside, I think you will find that the Nazi party ceased to exist in 1945. A whole 65 years ago. They teach it in school, though perhaps you haven't got to that stage of the curriculum yet.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 21:03

  • Goodfella #123 1 year ago

    Gaystation? mum jokes?

    Someone want to tell this guy it's 2010, not 2006?

  • darkmorgado #124 1 year ago

    the games didnt last long,like me with yo mum hahaha

    You can get medication for that you know. You might want to look into it, premature ejaculation ruins relationships.

    EDIT: Although clearly you are just some spotty teenage virgin posting on EG when you should be doing your homework.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 20:29

  • bladdard #125 1 year ago

    Scottydogg is the greatest forumite ever.

  • jackdoe #126 1 year ago

    I find it odd that there is no mention of load times. Are they a problem as in Case Zero?

  • IneptPercy #127 1 year ago

    Still waiting for my PC version (costing Ł16.69), but the difference between consoles is more than I thought it would be.

    It would seem if a game is made from the ground up for either console the other will suffer.

    Still waiting to see how this looks in 1080p at 60fps :-)

  • makeamazing #128 1 year ago

    Having played the game on PS3 and not on the 360 (cause i dont have one at the moment), it didint make any difference to my viewing/playing pleasure as i dont have two machines connected up to each other to play and view at the same time. So yes i am sure this is helpful if you own both machines and want to make sure you get the better (if sometimes tiny differences)... for the rest of us... makes no difference :D

    But all in all, considering they made it from scratch, not a bad attempt on the PS3, i have seen alot worse to be honest. To be honest, putting a halloween mask on a zombie doesnt get boring on any platform :)

  • bladdard #129 1 year ago

    Scottydogg do some more please, I've only stuck around for some more wisdom. Tell me what your daddy does to those gaystation Nazis.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 20:41

  • IneptPercy #130 1 year ago

    I will say actually to me v-sync is more than a tiny difference, any games with tearing completely ruin it for me, hence I do most of my gaming on PC these days.

  • Goodfella #131 1 year ago

    @ Ineptpercy

    I don't play as much PC games as I used to, only Starcraft II and Left 4 Dead 2 at the moment, but my ageing 3 year old PC which I built myself does a grand job of displaying both games at max settings with v-sync enabled.

    There's nothing I dislike more than screen tear in games. You'd think the consoles, as a consistant platform, would have completely eradicated it by now, how hard can it be? but clearly they can't.

    Still, at least the forthcoming Castlevania: Lords of Shadow has zero screen tear, from the PS3 demo I played. Good stuff.
    Edited by 2 at 27/09/10 @ 20:53

  • darkmorgado #132 1 year ago

    @Goodfella

    I can't bloody wait for Castlevania. Had it on preorder for ages, and the GamesTM review has just made me want it more (Especially when it said 20 hours for a playthrough, double for all the secrets).

  • darkmorgado #133 1 year ago

    I don't play as much PC games as I used to, only Starcraft II and Left 4 Dead 2

    Wot? No Civilisation? Sacrilege!

  • Loghorn #134 1 year ago

    Wow. Like I said plenty of times, the 360 is the better system for multiplats! That's why I don't play them on PS3 at all!

    Also, for those that bring up games like Uncharted 2, let's keep in mind that both the 360 & PS3 are running off of 2004-2005 hardware & that they have pretty much equal specs. The 360 also has the power to make games look better as well; it's just that Microsoft & their developers don't put forth the effort into making graphics look very superior on exclusives like Sony does it within their developers. Also, most people like myself plays more multiplats than exclusives, anyway (even though that there's great exclusives like Halo: Reach that gets plenty of more playtime than most PS3 exclusives out there).

    I know that there are some of these PS3 fanboys out here that are marking me down, because they can't handle the truth. If the PS3 was much more easier to develop, then we've would've seen most multiplats being the same between each console.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 21:12

  • purerandomness #135 1 year ago

    Hey DF.
    I love your stuff usually, but for guys that get serious over the details you overlooked a serious one. Dead Rising 2 was made by Blue Castle Games which is a Canadian company. Not from USA like you wrote at the beginning of the article. Canada is pretty proud of the select developers it has so give credit where it's due, don't roll north america into a USA ball. It's like calling britain and ireland the same place. Or Worse, the UK and France.

  • Lord_Gremlin #136 1 year ago

    What I understood so far: this game is far from perfect on both platforms. What's worse - 20 FPS in most tough moments on 360 or better framerate at cost of screen tearing and lower resolution on PS3? It's like what's better - a kick in your arse or a punch in your butt?
    On the one hand, I'd rather put up with tearing on PS3 than with slowdowns on 360. On the other hand, prologue and epilogue are 360 exclusive. Verdict: I won't buy this game at all.

    Capcom is just so... Capcom.

  • Goodfella #137 1 year ago

    @ darkmorgado

    Oh yeah, I've had Castlevania pre-ordered for ages now too and counting the days now. Reviews so far (magazines only) are really positive, all of them 90% plus, with the exception of Edge who gave it an 8/10, apparently.

    20 hours play time too, that's more than I could have hoped for, awesome, can't wait.



  • bladdard #138 1 year ago

    Loghorn you're a poor excuse for a fanboy and you really must try harder, use scottydog as your muse.

  • darkmorgado #139 1 year ago

    @Goodfella

    GamesTM gave it an 8 as well. Not picked up the new EDGE, will do so later on in the week.

  • darkmorgado #140 1 year ago

    @Lord_Gremlin

    While there are some framerate problems on the 360 version, they're not gamebreaking by any means. Considering how many zombies are on screen, animated, in most scenes to be honest it's pretty damn impressive it runs at all.

  • Loghorn #141 1 year ago

    @bladdard: Blah, blah, blah. You're just mad because you can't handle the truth. I speak about how I feel about the situation, & many other people here feel the same. Plus I'm no fanboy. I gave the PS3 plenty of chances to shine in the multiplatform category, & it's just not cutting it. Now, I use my PS3 most of the time for exclusives & for Blu-Ray.

  • jtodroc #142 1 year ago

    I must have missed some crazy comments from TVR while I was on the way home from work! It couldn't have been much worse than Scotty's "gaystation" & "nazi" crap.

  • darkmorgado #143 1 year ago

    Now, I use my PS3 most of the time for exclusives & for Blu-Ray.

    I have to admit, I love my PS3 but I'm the same. 99% of my multiplatform games are 360. It doesn't help that I like achievements (but am meh about trophies).

  • Lord_Gremlin #144 1 year ago

    @darkmorgado: Well, for you this may not be a big deal, but for me 20 FPS in action game = unplayable.
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 21:19

  • Pikol #145 1 year ago

    I've got the PC version, 1080p AAx4, 40-60fps, on a 2 years old pc.

    Whenever I got the choice, I chose the PC version. for fairly obvious reasons.


    Also, I hate that Blurr effect, I turned it off, game looks far better.

  • jtodroc #146 1 year ago

    Has anyone looked at scottydog's profile? His profile picture is priceless!

  • bladdard #147 1 year ago

    @Loghorn

    I'm not mad I'm happy you silly sausage, I just wish you were funnier.

  • darkmorgado #148 1 year ago

    @Lord_Gremlin

    What I mean though is that it really isn't that frequent. I've only noticed it when I've had multiple survivors with me in open, outdoor areas with loads of zombies.

  • Diomedes #149 1 year ago

    Its a shame Blue Castle couldnt use the MT Framework engine on the PS3 ...they would have least have kept the 720p or resolution.

  • bladdard #150 1 year ago

    @jtodroc

    Yes it's brilliant, he's wearing his dads darth vader suit.

  • Retroid #151 1 year ago

    Argh, get rid of one and another pops up!

    Ah, that makes sense - they're Sith! :D
    Edited by 1 at 27/09/10 @ 21:54

  • darkmorgado #152 1 year ago

    I love how the fanboys are now negging me for ridiculing them, as if it somehow makes their attitude any more valid.

  • makeamazing #153 1 year ago

    This topic is too full of the usual suspects to be honest... i am just happy that the game has finally come over to the PS3. I actually purchased a Xbox to just play the original, but then proceeded to only play the first game for about 10 minutes (I put the Xbox around the corner in the living room and so it never got used (thats one of the reasons i sold it)... so regardless of this console willy waving (you know who you are), i am pleased its on the PS3 now, rather than not. At least ive played the second one a lot more than the first.. :D

    Question, do the zombies continually spawn, or can you actually clear out an area?

  • darkmorgado #154 1 year ago

    Question, do the zombies continually spawn, or can you actually clear out an area?

    They continually spawn, but not right in front of you. I think the game spawns them off-camera.

  • makeamazing #155 1 year ago

    Ah, thats a shame, it would be cool to clear out the actual areas..... and then zoom around the shopping center without a care in the world :)

  • darkmorgado #156 1 year ago

    @makeamazing

    Possibly, but then it would sort of spoil the experience. After all, everything in the game is there specifically for the purpose of killing zombies. Half the fun comes from seeing what effect everything has in the zombies - like making them slip on shampoo, toppling them like skittles with a bowling ball, etc. Take that away and I'm not sure the game would have any sense of fun or what-if-I-try-this appeal.

    Maybe a God mode though, with time limits turned off. If they released a keys-to-the-city mode like Crackdown then I dont think the game would ever leave my disc tray!

  • darkmorgado #157 1 year ago

    @retrend

    Yeah, what I said :-)

  • JBlokeUK #158 1 year ago

    So the honours go to the 360 for this particular release

    And every other release, which makes these comparisons so boring and predictable.

  • RKOwned #159 1 year ago

    Sounds like a 360 led game trying to be jerry rigged on PS3. Add that never works out well. No doubt well get teh usualy crowd saying :Another win for 360, why even buy a PS3" and stupidity like that. PS3 has fantastic exclusives and if you only own a PS3, you arent going to care about the differences. And honestly, I dont think most games are this bad. This seems like a inexperinced dev trying to put a 360 lead game on a PS3 without any optimization.

  • RKOwned #160 1 year ago

    @ android123: you really are a piece of work. Did you ever think that PS3 owners are perfectly happy with their purcahse because: 1. the arguably better Exclusvies 2. the fact that they dont give two shits about the differences because they rarely are game breaking. Sounds like all your trying to do is feed your own insecuritys you have. Yes, on average PS3 doesnt get the quite as good version, but really, why does that make PS3 a bad consoles or even worse overal? 360 has slightly better multiplats, but amny argue that its exclusvies are suffering. Ps3 struggles with multiplats some times, but amny argue it has the stronger exclusive libararey.

    Saying that PS3 fans are bought the wrong console and shit like that (yes, you said this at one point) is idiotic because how do you know how they feel about the console and whoa re you to say they bought the wrong console. I know many people who only own a PS3 and they are quite happy with it. You need to wake and see the reality that people outside here dont give a crap about the usual small differences.

    So please, dont feel sorry for them because theres nothing to feel sorry for. Truth hurts.

  • RKOwned #161 1 year ago

    Im very curious to see how Castlenvania turns out. They are using PS3 as lead platform, so they should be the same or even possibly better on PS3 in some ways. I think devs need to realize that they need to start using PS3 as lead SKU for their games.

  • JBlokeUK #162 1 year ago

    @ android123: you really are a piece of work. Did you ever think that PS3 owners are perfectly happy with their purcahse because: 1. the arguably better Exclusvies 2. the fact that they dont give two shits about the differences because they rarely are game breaking.


    Couldn't have put it better myself RKOwned, also the rest of your post is spot on.
    Edited by 2 at 28/09/10 @ 02:32

  • darkmorgado #163 1 year ago

    Im very curious to see how Castlenvania turns out
    The GamesTM review stated 360 as the platform reviewed, and didn't highlight any technical issues and slapped it with a solid 8/10 (only complaints being some QTE-reliant boss battles) so I am pretty confident.

  • darkmorgado #164 1 year ago

    @scottydogg

    I think it's past your bedtime, lad.

  • CernaML #165 1 year ago

    Don't be late for school, scotty. And for the record, you have very bad taste in games if you think Mass Effect 2 is worth a 5/10 only.

  • RKOwned #166 1 year ago

    @darkmorgado: Yeah, but since they only reviewed the 360 version, I dont think they would be able to give any opinons on the PS3 version and wether or not its as good because they didnt even play it for review.

  • bladdard #167 1 year ago

    Scottydog thanks for returning you've made my day, you're like an ever reliable performing monkey. 1 more thing ... I think I love you!

  • bladdard #168 1 year ago

    As long as you do me in that darth vader suit I'll be more than happy xxx

  • Goodfella #169 1 year ago

    LOL.

  • Widge #170 1 year ago

    Can they not put a V-sync option in the menu? I remember Bioshock had one on the PS3 and disabling that lead to better framerates with no discernable tearing. At least the option would be there for those driven MAD by tearing. I'd rather have a chug than tear.

  • Dave52 #171 1 year ago

    scottydog: " i dont like to waste my days in bed"

    No, perish the thought. You need to be up and at 'em, there's only so many hours in a day. Quick, jump around your favourite Forums and Comments pages and act like a twat...

  • jtodroc #172 1 year ago

    I have to say, reading the comments from childish fanboy idiots like scottydog actually make me laugh. You can't have a mature debate with these guys, you just laugh at them.

  • TRUTH #173 1 year ago

    Might buy this once the price dropped. Just bought F12010, Halo Reach and now reading very positive reviews for Castlevania: LOTS, scored 9/10 in Gameradar.

  • des #174 1 year ago

    Ahh poor sony fans,going in circles again...keep defending your shitty designed weak piece of plastic and metal instead of playing games...and DR3 will be 360 exclusive...nice plan
    Edited by 1 at 28/09/10 @ 11:55

  • Widge #175 1 year ago

    shit me, the 360 gets an exclusive?!

  • carlitoswagon #176 1 year ago

    Interesting thread. Comments from well informed articulate young men venting their anger at console diversity??!! There's a sitcom sketch in here somewhere. Enough to brighten up my boring day at work. Thank you.

  • Badassbab #177 1 year ago

    Awful port. Shame of the devs. Should've just kept it a 360 exclusive or timed exclusive.

  • Loghorn #178 1 year ago

    @RKOwned: Even IF 3rd party developers start developing games for PS3 first, it won't do jack; the PS3's GPU simply doesn't have enough pipelines. If anything, it's the reverse of what people think; development on the PS3 is actually holding the 360 back, since it's more effort for more or less the same result. Just look at games like Virtua Fighter 5 (Virtua Fighter 5 first came out on PS3, then ported over to 360), & Assassin's Creed 1 & 2; they were developed for PS3 first, & yet, the 360 versions came out to be much better.

    Plus I love how people think SPU's can magically solve every problem the devs may come across when developing a game for the PS3. SPU's do nothing for RAM, and while they can help out the GPU, they still can't do certain GPU specific tasks, especially when the GPU itself is too outdated to support certain things.
    Edited by 1 at 28/09/10 @ 22:27

  • RKOwned #179 1 year ago

    @loghorn: No one can prove that Any console is holding another back. Saying so is just tin foil hat conspiracey theory bullshit.

  • womble #180 1 year ago

    The fanboy arguments are predictable.

    Look, it's simple: buy both consoles. If you can afford a PS3 and games, frankly, you can afford a freaking 360.

    Get a 360 for the range of games and performance. Get a PS3 for its exclusives. SIMPLE.

    Oh, and those people who say they're not going to buy the game because it doesn't perform well enough on their pet platform? YOUR LOSS.

  • womble #181 1 year ago

    Can't wait for LensOfTruth to give this one to the PS3 because of the "load times" (when you forget to install to the 360's HDD of course...)

    Visually, I think this game is a huge disappointment on both machines. The first was OK for its time, but this is barely better. Far from cutting edge. And the polys, oh, man. Some of the models are PS2 level.

  • Retroid #182 1 year ago

    /Waves goodbye to another bloody troll

  • Warden80 #183 1 year ago

    So this confirms 360 is superior once again. As they say, a car with 800hp engine is not worth anything if the rest of the car cant keep it up. Elegant design and efficiency wins by a landlside, SDF take note.
    Edited by 1 at 29/09/10 @ 20:14

  • Montag #184 1 year ago

    I do like how the fanbois always like to bitch about multiplatform somehow isn't a fair comparision because it isn't looking at a Sony exclusive, twisted logic.

    Just accept that the Xbox exclusives look better on the Xbox, PS3 exclusives look better on the PS3 and multis generally look a tiny bit better on the Xbox.

    Whether you like it or not that is how it is. Endless bitching how evil corporations like to downgrade the PS3 visual because THEY ARE THE MAN and THEY ARE DOING IT ON PURPOSE and THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROGRAM THE CELL BETTER. Can you really imagine the meeting.....

    'So boys we're designing Left for Duty Modern Farts Part 16, who wants what job?'

    'Hey can I have the slightly muddier textures on the PS3 o npurpose because I like my work looking a bit crapper! Also as I went to University to do a course on Deliberately Programming Cell a Bit Worse Than I Know How To Annoy Fanbois'

    'Ok Who wants crisper Xbox graphics?'

    Do you really think if they could get absolute parity they wouldn't?

    Apart from a couple of games looking horrific on the PS3 it doesn't effect the game at all so play your box of choice and remember, without this site you'd never know!!

    I want a Head to Head... I know lets do Uncharted 2 against Pacman on the 2600, that'll give a result I like, Ooooh my PCs better anyway

  • Jlmadyson #185 1 year ago

    360 wins again not surprising.

  • Mungrul #186 1 year ago

    Why don't these articles ever mention the one killer fact about PS3 versions? IE, that multiplayer is FREE?

  • RKOwned #187 1 year ago

    This isnt really surpirsing since this is a unproven dev and this is probaly their first time with PS3 hardware. Also, this is Capcom which is pretty dodgy this gen on multipaltform.