DigitalFoundry- Resident Evil 5 Face-Off

Published 3 June, 2009 Duration 2:27

Comments (36) Latest comment 3 years ago

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

  • kangarootoo #1 3 years ago

    Looks identical to my eyes.

  • PrivateJoker #2 3 years ago

    Pointless now I've seen The Last Guardian and God of War 3 etc. The 360 has been out longer and hasn't produced visuals that compare.

    It's up to the dev's to create polarity on multi platform games but are they contractually obliged to?

  • Darren #3 3 years ago

    The PS3 version has weaker AA and a slightly lower framerate (especially noticeable when turning quickly), the Xbox 360 version has better AA and a smoother framerate, negated somewhat by intermittent screen tearing. Overall, they're on a par with each other and otherwise identical, although I prefer the PS3 version for the tear-free framerate.

  • teabagger #4 3 years ago

    Identical apart from the perennial anti aliasing issue, which is hardly a biggy.

  • Widge #5 3 years ago

    And to big up DF, check out the 360's streaming tech article:
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/check-ou t-1080p-smooth-streaming-now
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/articles/check-...[/link]

    sounds interesting.

  • muscleblade #6 3 years ago

    Capcom is one of the few that can make the PS3 version on par with the 360 one.

  • miiiguel #7 3 years ago

    "The 360 has been out longer and hasn't produced visuals that compare."
    Wii is newer than 360.

    And besides the reasons "I've seen LG and GOW3" you should add "I own a PS3 and I am a fan, therefor I must say it's the bestest".

  • Triggerhappytel #8 3 years ago

    Aah, good old Darren and his screen tearing ;)

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #9 3 years ago

    Fact ps3 is only `on par` with 360 is surely the point, the ps3 is technically on paper the superior machine so shouldnt be on par but blowing out the water, but it doesn't.

  • miiiguel #10 3 years ago

    What about Crysis Darren? :)

  • Wastelander #11 3 years ago

    Check out the Neogaf thread. PS3 is all a bit vasaliney.

  • Darren #12 3 years ago

    What about Crysis? :?

  • Darren #13 3 years ago

    @Wastelander - The 2X Quincunx AA of the PS3 version is the reason for its softer look as it blurs the texture detail.

    That said, you really don't notice it while you playing it. Trust me, as I've got both the 360 and PS3 versions of RE5 and alternated between both games when I played it. It's only something you can see in static screenshot comparisons.

  • Eraysor #14 3 years ago

    Do you really have to preview these as well, EG? You're like Activision for milking now...

  • kangarootoo #15 3 years ago

    @Wastelander

    "Check out the Neogaf thread. PS3 is all a bit vasaliney."

    I could only tell because I was scrutinising stills. If I was simply playing the game I really doubt I would notice the difference at all.

  • mrpon #16 3 years ago

    Cheers Widge, excellent link.

  • andijames #17 3 years ago

    @Darren

    Not having a go fella but just curious why do you get the same game on both platforms?

  • PrivateJoker #18 3 years ago

    @miiguell...I also own a high end PC, a Wii, a PSP, an iphone and sold my Xbox last year. I stated what I saw and what I felt in my opinion. The console I own in this case is irrelevant.

  • Feanor #19 3 years ago

    /waits for PC version

  • Buztafen #20 3 years ago

    I'd happily buy either as when your playing your not going to see much if any difference....but youve got to be blind if you cant see the extra detail and effects which are left out of the PS3 version , no matter how insignificant they are. Check out the sparks coming from the truck as its sliding on its side aswell as the windscreen smashing. Also check out the particle and stone effects at the gigantors (whatever theyre callled) feet as he's walking towards the camera.

  • Buztafen #21 3 years ago

    Someone should of gone to specsavers....

  • Collymilad #22 3 years ago

    The 360 version is better.

    As for GoW III, it's a hack and slash, get over it. Also, it STILL doesn't prove Sony's boast about the power of PS3.
    Edited by 1 at 03/06/09 @ 16:32

  • Xerx3s #23 3 years ago

    "Fact ps3 is only `on par` with 360 is surely the point, the ps3 is technically on paper the superior machine so shouldnt be on par but blowing out the water, but it doesn't."

    On paper it's only superior to people who hardly have a clue what they are talking about. You can't compare the hardware. Each has it's own strengths and weaknesses. Thinking that bute force cpu cycles will make a more powerfull games machine is an illusion.

    It's not without reason that PC CPU's have been stuck around the 2 to 4 ghz area for a very long time now. They are radically improving in other area's.

  • Darren #24 3 years ago

    @andijames - I bought both versions because I wasn't sure which would annoy me more... weaker AA (PS3) or screen tearing (360). As it turned out it was the latter but, you know, I'm one of those people that has more money than sense. I have the PC version pre-ordered as well if you want more proof! ;)

  • Darren #25 3 years ago

    @Xerx3s - Another point is that RE5 is a multiformat game which rarely makes the best use of all platforms anyway, certainly not to the same extent as an exclusive game.

    You only have to take a look at games like God of War 3, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 to realise that the PS3 can produce stunningly good graphics in the hands of talented developers. There is no way you can directly compare those with 360 games. Sure they might run just as well on the 360 with time and patience, which I'm sure they would, but the same could be said of Halo 3, Forza 3 and Gears of War on the PS3!

  • JamieR #26 3 years ago

    the 360 one looks to have very slightly more detailed

  • consignia #27 3 years ago

    It's not without reason that PC CPU's have been stuck around the 2 to 4 ghz area for a very long time now.

    Not least since you couldn't run them without them being supercooled.
    Edited by 1 at 03/06/09 @ 17:34

  • Calgon #28 3 years ago

    Darren the thing I dont like about your stance on tearing is the fact that when someone says its not really not so noticable when your playing the game(which it isnt in the case of RE5) you cant seem to accept that answer.

    Yet when for instance someone who does tell you they notice the framerate drops and jaggies and blur in the PS3 version and its a turn off you tell them "its not so noticable when you are playing it". :/ I for one genuinely would pick the 360 version as the best it has less flaws and it has a smooth steady framerate, 30fps to be precise which is what all devs should aim for at the least.(the fact that they didnt do the same for the PS3 instead chosing V-lock tells me if you thought the 360 tearing was bad then to get to the same level then these same devs thought it was unnacceptable... you'd probably have thrown up in disgust)
    Edited by 1 at 03/06/09 @ 17:38

  • GamesConnoisseur #29 3 years ago

    I second Calgon comments above.

    I too have more money than sense had had played and got 100 percent achievement on both X360 and PS3 RE5 version.

    I decided to sell PS3 version, very 'slight' inferior graphic quality but not really noticeable, yes some added details missed out but you have to be anal to spot those!

    The real reason is I have more mates to play co op with on X360 and that decided it for me... as for screen tearings.. Gods I hated those as much as Darren and others but if you set resolution to 720p.... that answers the problem.

    I HARDLY noticed any tearings for majority of gaming... although you will see the blurrings throughout the game but not a deal breaker though.

    At end of day its individual preferences and respects to all for what they choose, but telling others to say one is better than other is just subjective!

    Both are equally good to play and X360 wins it for me ...one mere individual on this crowded planet!
    Edited by 1 at 03/06/09 @ 18:15

  • MORZTAN #30 3 years ago

    I have never noticed screen tearing :) Hopefully I will never know what it means, cause then IŽll probably start noticing it :)

  • septimus #31 3 years ago

    Nothing between them. No one is missing out.

    And as mentioned, we know both can do a lot better. I still believe PS3 will end up with the superior graphics through exclusive titles. Not that it matters much.

  • makeamazing #32 3 years ago

    Yeah i think people have preferences, some will go for PS3 some will go for Xbox, glad these posts are more about personal preference of which people feel is less irratating to them, rather than fanboyism. I dont buy many games on the Xbox, so for me PS3 is my main platform (though upto 12-14 months ago it used to be PC, but as all the good games are coming out on consoles primarily, that is now the platform i choose/buy more of).

    The problem with these face offs is that if you buy for one platform (either one), you will never know there was an issue, unless they make a hash of that particular format.

  • IneptPercy #33 3 years ago

    It does seem the 360 has the slight edge due to AA from that video, I am still waiting for the PC version.

  • lavalant #34 3 years ago

    @PrivateJoker you've seen GOW3 and Last Guardian??? really?? I didn't know they were out yet, what like Killzone 2 was meant to look like?

  • bad09 #35 3 years ago

    Looks identical to me. Did remind me how awful 5 is though.

  • coldheart #36 3 years ago

    I cant tell the difference, if there is one, its too small for me to notice.