DigitalFoundry- Mass Effect 2 Xbox 360 vs. PC Comparison

Published 13 February, 2010 Duration 2:15

Comparison video showing that the Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 2 bears an uncanny resemblance to the game on PC at maximum settings.

Comments (7) Latest comment 1 year ago

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

  • lockload #1 2 years ago

    Its amazing what a console for £120 can do, huge improvements over the first game makes sense though as its running on unreal 3 engine and its very well tuned for 360 now

    Great game

  • AttroPheed #2 2 years ago

    Looks nigh on identical. Frame-rate comparisons would be a joke though.

  • Caimbeul #3 2 years ago

    I have both versions and would conclude that the PC version running in 1680x105, everything maxed and forced AA running at 60fps is by far the superior expeience. To be honest the improved frame rate is the biggest advantage as it makes the games animation even better giving a much more cinematic experience. The 260 version is a little jerky in places although still a big improvement on the first one.

  • Psihomodo #4 2 years ago

    Who is the joker that thought including "film grain" option in the comparison was funny?

  • vapourmile #5 1 year ago

    It's interesting to watch these 'versus' videos of the three main platforms. The truth about them is they tell us a lot more about game development strategies than the actual power of the three machines. To maximise the potential of each platform the developer would probably have to develop the title for each platform independently: We already know, from a technical standpoint, a top-spec PC has far more horsepower than either console. We even know which PC graphics cards the console hardware is closely based upon and a lot has happened on the PC since then. The fact is though it must be far more cost-effective from a developer perspective to make one 'reference' model of the game and then port this version across all three bases, than it would to develop three independent versions of one game to maximise the specifics of each platform.

    It also makes sense for developers to target the hardware people have at home, even most PC owners don't have a top-spec PC.

    The other problem that hits you as a PC owner is the consoles get priority treatment for games development. In most people's minds the PC is still an applications - not games - oriented machine.

    Of course, IF top-end PCs had priority and games were first developed specifically to use all the advantages of a fully maxxed out PC, and Then they were ported, we'd probably see a marked difference. As they say though 'IF' is a big word, they don't do it that way, and it's likely the games on the big three won't show a significant grand-slam difference for a long time.
    Edited by 1 at 29/09/10 @ 19:07