The very first time I played the PS3 demo I was like WTF is this garbage? The controller doesn't the game either. Best way to play is on 360 or PC with a 360 controller.
@BenTheEpic The thing is, 70-120+ FPS looks like garbage, unless you have a monitor that supports 120 hz refresh rate, and even then, still looks like garbage.
I can easily tell the difference with my eye between 70 and 120 fps and gives me a headache. I just cap my FPS to 30 FPS like it is on the console version.
@b00mYou What you say doesn't make any sense. You're saying 30 fps is better than sixty plus. That's false as hell. Sixty fps is considered real-time and for a reason. Games running at 30 or less create much more eye strain than games running at 60+ fps. Why? Because motion is less smooth at 30 which creates a lot more motion blur as the camera turns around. You get less motion blur with 60+; very little in fact, thus reducing eye strain.
i have both console. and before buying game i always see to it that the game im buying are good in graphics. that why i always watch game comparisson in youtube. and i find out almost all game graphics are good in xbox. i just play ps3 bcz of there exclusive. but lots of my game specially old game are played in my xbox. sorry for my english.
i shouldnt have bought this game for the ps3 ... it has some really bad FPS-problems. should've stick with the pc-version. its just another shitty xbox-port again...
no kidding... RE5 runs flawless on the 360 and the PS3 port has some frame dropping. it's pretty ironic cause you would think Resident Evil games would look better on the PS3 just because it used to be a Sony exclusive at first
i find my ps3 unplayable due to the stupid frame rate drop on most games. My pc cost me 500-600 bucks and i can run Re5 on Mid settings with 60fpsand the same graphics (even slightly better) , so im really pist with how shitty the modern consoles are these days . Im gonna go back to play my ps2 :/
@DragonAge2k Well I can see a clear difference between 30 fps and 60 fps and I've played games at 100-200 fps but at that point I can't see a difference. I think 60 fps is plenty, 30 fps is acceptable but 60 fps is definitely preferable to 30 fps by a long way.
i have played the versus mode on both xbox360 and PS3 (my bro has xbox and i have PS3) I must say that xbox plays a lot smoother both off and online. The controls also feel smoother. And trust me those few frames make a difference if you play online, especially if the internet connection is lagging a bit as well. playstation may be free, but i do tend to play re5 on xbox just because of this...
when you see the difference on a large tv....its as plain as day. It was so noticeable for me - that i actually sold and rebought the game for the 360
Everyone knows that PS3 exclusive games are the best. Games ported badly from other platforms are a result of developer's ignorance. That is why I only buy PS3 exclusives.
@ABN5X You're not goddamn forced to update your computer. My three year old computer can play this game decently (still better than consoles), and my own personal computer I won't need to upgrade for a couple of years and runs RE5 flawlessly.
Disappointed in PS3 version. Those scenes in the vid aren't even graphics-intensive. In heavier areas the frame rate can drop to a crawl. Like in Uroboros Research Facility spinning elevator, most of the Savannah level, and a lot of the boss fights. Trying to get Capcom to admit this problem but so far not getting anywhere.
You cant see the differences in a flash vid but if you play the demo in both consoles you are going to see the differences easily. Anyway in the RE5 Gold Edition you are going to see more framerate issues in the "Desperate Escape" chapter. The PC version is the best it have 60fps and the sharpest textures but Gold Edition is not in PC so the best choise is the 360 version and 360 version have better textures too (see lensoftruth . com comparison)
gold edition is the same RE5 but with extras so it have the same ugly framerate issues and the pal colors in the ps3 too, and if you are going to buy the RE5 Gold Edition you are going to see much more the framerate issues in the chapter "Desperate Escape".
Really are both, the game engine of RE5 cant run correctly in the PS3 system thats why it have framerate issues and some textures are different on both, like the garbage details in the floor or the hairs of the characters.
The majority of multiplatform games have this issues in the PS3, only in exclusive games you can see games with high quality that's why i recommend you the 360 for multiplatform games.
or you can see first the differences in the head 2 Head section of "lensoftruth" or in digitalfoundry (search them in google) before you buy multiplatform games
@fordmike its the same game running on different hardware.this uses 360's 3ppc core things,while ps3's actually needs the 7 other cores.ps3 cant use its core in almost every game because developers didnt code that in
@slaveknight that isnt how computers work, you just cant set it to 60fps, you got to upgrade the cpu, the ram, and the video card( sometimes the motherboard
Guys i need some help, i've been trying to play this game but whenever i enter the game, the frame rates drop like hell, one thing i notice that when the game run smoothly, the game runs like freakin fast( character running around like freakin Sonic) Please help me.
Oh btw boys and girls get ready for DOOM4 in 2010 they say. Is going to only be for PCs(consoles won't handle it) and said nothing out there will even come close, not even Crysis. So next year save up for a new card and direct x 11 and 12,(rumored) we'll need it.
Yeah sure will, i love my rig, even though everything is digital download now mostly. I for one think its great because the downloads you get from gamestop, Direct To Drive, Capcom, etc have NO DRM, ir Secure Rom, unlike when you buy the disc. I downloaded Dead Space and was beyond pleased the DRM that was on the disc version vanished, so yeah its a lot of fun to be able to download PC games right from your home. Plus the up close and personal with PC games is like no other!! KUDOS
Oh, no i dont doubt that the PS3 is a marve, i mean with 8 processors its def the most powerful peace of electronics that you can own in your home. It just uses an older model Nvidia, the RSX=7800gtx. It relies more on the processors with its exclusives which make them awesome(why i own one, besides blu-ray). Its just some ported games suffer badly from low Frame Rates, and lag. But yes even with lower details, the sony exclusives still use a lot of psychics etc. Which is what makes it unique.
sir you are right, because ps3 multiplatfrom games are made from 360 and then ported to ps3, they do lose some of that quality. the ps3 exclusives are the ones that take full advantage of the ps3 cell.
PS3 for a fact has a less powerful GPU and gets its get up and go using the 8 cell processing cores it has.The textures and color are much less on the PS3. Xbox 360 has always been known to have a better GPU since its inception. I have both systems and a gaming PC, and my PC gets 47.9 average frame rate on 1920x1080, and its 169$ ATI Radeon(XFX) 4850 with 1gig of DDR3, and smokes both systems. Also the quad core and 8 gigs of RAM it has helps. So i like all the systems for different reasons.
excuse me the ps3 version is exactly the same watch the game trailers comparison and the gpu is only slightly better on the xbox 360 and the games are set to run at a certain amount of processing power, so u r right; but think about all the exclusives:
God of war 3, uncharted one/two, killzone 2, motorstorm one/two, god of war 3 and gran turismo 5
Look how old are you?? 10?? First theres NO difference in the RE5 textures dumbfuck, second the PS3 is MORE POWERFULL than 360, that's fact, if you werent a dumbass you would know that. 360 is weak, Gow2 used 99% of total 360 power and the game doesnt look as good as Killzone 2, Uncharted 2 or Heavy Rain so shut the fuck up.
FACT, the 360 is more powerful and is PROVEN in the games, retard. No , GoW2 did NOT use 99% you fucking idiot. KZ2 doesn't look good, small confined spaces and SHIT CONTROLS. UC2 SUCKS SO BAD and heavy rain wishes it was Alan Wake.
LOL Dude you're pathetic, you're just a troll who cant have a PS3. Alan Wake?? That shit?? Heavy Rain looks 100 times better. KZ2 does have better graphics than Gears of War 2 and Uncharted 2 beats any game ever made on console so shut the fuck up, do some reasearch you dumbass, ps3 is more powerfull, 360 sux, piece of shit system.
The best game in the world is the Legend of Zelda ocarina of time on the nintendo 64 its the highest rated game ever made so fuck your Heavy Rain, fuck your KZ2, and fuck your Uncharted 2 and most important go fuck yourself cos the playstation 3 sucks balls
Legend Of Zelda?? haha who the fuck cares about ratings, Heavy Rain KZ2, Uncharted 2, all those games are better you dipshit, fuckin nintendo nerd LMFAO
Now i think we all who the winners are yes i rest my case OOPS I ALMOST forgot too mention Your ma chews on cocks in hell poor bitch got jizzed on but she loved every second of it
Again, who cares about sales?? Im not gonna be happy because my console sells alot, im gonna be happy because my console rocks. Oh and overral PS3 is selling very good and 3rd party game developers (EA, Capcom, Ubisoft...) they are all making more money on the ps3...
Omg, im gonna throw myself in here, the ps3 is by a fact more powerfull that the 360 BUT games are coded fore the 360 wich uses 3 PPC cores, the ps3 tho only has one PPC core and 7 more SPEs so most non ps3 exclusive games only run on 1 of the ps3s 8 cores, hence the worse performance.
Also the texures and shit is the same, the difference is the gamma wich is shit on ps3 ports making games look worse.
So yes, 360 original does look better then the ps3 ports but look at the exclusive titles!!
No offense, I've ditched 360 and gone with PS3, and my experience tells me PS3 is definitely not superior. Sorry. Most of the games have poor frame rates.
it looks stunning on PC in DX10 mode, it pretty demanding too although i suspect the drivers need tweaking so whatever performance you get in the bench will improve quite a bit come the next driver releases. really though the controls need the attention, the graphics were always gonna be superb
The benchmark run already quite good for me (45-60fps) even if i have a 2yo computer :P I can't test dx10 though since im still running winXP (boooo!)
most people are gonna good settings on this. its reasonably demanding, but the good thing is that performance at least its appearing to be a good port. vysnc on the game is smooth like other MT framework games even when it falls off the v lock. most are gonna be able to max it, and then the difference will be how much AA you can afford to drop on it.
Yeah, has anyone seen the assassins creed video? the one where the guy clearly shows using full range RGB and super white made it look ten times better? I bet digital foundry havent done that. Sure maybe the frame rate is consistent on 360 but I bet you the colours would like much nicer on PS3 if full range RGB was used. Still u get the game for the system u own. Im waiting for the PC version which will be better than both with higher res.
Both settings are actually set as you describe, even though super white is only used on digital component signals (ie Blu-ray movies to all intents and purposes). Still carry on believing what you want to believe.
"Still carry on believing what you want to believe."
What do u mean? i assumed that u didnt use Full range becos most ppl dont who do these types of videos forget to and results the PS3 version looking washed out. I still "believe" that the PS3 is a better built machine than the 360 and im no fanboy, its just fact. Id rather play this game on the PS3 for the sheer fact that i dont have to worry about the system over heating. BUT, nice vid either way I must admit.
digitalfoundry what i wanna know is how people can deny evidence til they are blue in the face, am i correct in saying that this game also has anti aliasing on 360, none on ps3? most multi platform titles are the same arent they with the difference often being filters noticeably. no AA on ps3, often some anisotropic, no anistropic on 360. when can you do a FEAR 2 comparison? because to me, it runs awful on ps3
i dont think people realise how just enabling anti aliasing on game is a pretty huge leap in performance. when the game is designed to be at the limit of the console abilities, then using AA would incur an enormous performance penalty. IF you could implement AA on ps3 the game would probably be lucky to run above 20FPS at all! whereas the same thing on 360 and the game still runs 30FPS rock solid all the time ps3 is dropping frames with less work to do!
im no fanboy, although ps3 can handle much better material than resi 5 at solid framerates so this actually suprised me lol cant wait for the pc port of it.
its not ps3 fault that it some how runs better on 360. if the developers put more effort into the ports then im sure they coul have both had the same framerate and detail. ps3 can handle more than what resi 5 offers like uncharted at solid framerates. fear 2 is better on pc than both consoles so id like to see a comparison including the pc version.
its never ps3's fault is it. despite the fact that practically every multi plat title runs best on 360, every developer must be lazy. cmon. its been nearly three years and ports still arent up to scratch on ps3. its about time people faced up to the truth and start pointing the finger at the hardware, which is clearly to blame
okay whatever, but you need to know the facts also, PS3 wasnt the lead platform for this game same as DMC4 wasnt lead platform on PS3, it was PC. Thats why this game and DMC4 will run much better on PC becos capcom are using same engine they did with DMC4, hence why every1 was gobsmacked it was such a good port. perhaps the 360 version looks a bit nicer, but I bet you my last penny it looks best on PC.
MT framework is the engine this game and most other capcom titles now run on. the engine is optimised heavily for all next generation platforms, including ps3 and 360. people somehow think that companies dont optimise for ps3, when in reality the underlying engine has already been vastly optimised for each platform, and then the final game dictates further, pretty minor in reality, optimisation. hence for most multi titles, its just boring when someone says its not coded properly for ps3
pc version it already out. assassins creed is pretty close on both platforms. but 360 edges it texture detail. extremely close however and it doesnt help ps3's reputation that the game was supposed to be lead on ps3, and as per usual 360 still manages to pull out a superior version if only slightly...
360 may have the better multi plats, but PS3 has the better exclusives which look better than the multi plats. Its pretty even to me. what ever console you have u get the game for that console and shouldnt be but hurt if theres a spec of dust on one version and not the other.
your opinion ps3 exclusives look better than most multi plats. for a start forget MGS4, it runs 1024 x 768. the model;s are greast but the environments are average, GRAW probably has better looking environments and its a 3 year old game. still least MGS4 is the better offline game. all most ps3 owners claim is uncharted and killzone 2. in my opinion they are no better than 360 games just different. and theres only two of them. not exactly worth extra money for two games versus hundred multi 360
i like both games but there is still no escaping the fact two gears games are rated higher and frankly both better games than uncharted, and halo 3 looks far worse but again it is the better game of killzone 2 especially online. maybe if the developers of both games had concentrated less on graphics they could have made even better gameplay. i have high hopes for uncharted 2. we will have to see
ps3 owners shouldnt feel too hard done by though, the ps3 version isnt as badly behind as some other game slike the recent ghostbusters as one example. if you hadnt seen the 360 version you would be happy with the ps3 version. i am however going to buy and keep the pc version when it appears. no doubt it will run much faster and be overall far superior to console
no ps3 owner is feeling hard because of this, because we have our own advantages, we have better visuals, and this game is selling better on the ps3 than the 360. and u just proved urself that u don't have a ps3. i win once again
ahhh indeed you prove how childish and ignorant you are post after post. i gave enough sites that point to the 360 versions looking and running better, eurogamer portugal is ANOTHER one that backs me up with a whole series of telling shots my lad :o). no question that 360 version is superior, but people who only have a ps3 will be okay i guess. last time i checked selling more doesnt affect graphics, but then they have sold reasonably evenly anyway. not that it matters.....
a seperate eurogamer in depth comparison article in march also confirmed the findings of the horror analysis. with addition to these comprehensive framerate videos that show 360 version runs smoother. i dont think there is anyone that could possibly claim otherwise, i agree with the findings of several seperate sites after playing both versions close after each other. 360 wins although its not enough to spoil the game for ps3 owners. not the best resi game IMO but still very good
vids are locked to a set framerate when encoded for utube you will not tell the difference only in front of the game directly. thus the overlay to show the games speed otherwise you wont know on youtube. a faster framerate does of course require more processing speed and power. so if it looks the same but runs faster indicates better hardware. thats why pc guides talk about 'faster' graphics cards enabling more effects to be turned on before the framerate slips below 25FPS into sluggishness
framerate. well what are movies or games? they are essentially, a series of quickly refreshing, static pictures. one frame is a picture. when you start seeing more than 12-15 frames per second your eyes start to perceive it as motion as your brain blurs the edges between the frames. you never seen a flick book animation or a picture carousel? the principal is the same. because you are seeing slightly changing pictures flicking quickly in front of your eyes, you start to see motion
the more frames you see in a second, the smoother the motion appears to be. for example a game refreshing 60 frames every second will be noticeably smoother and quicker to respond to controller input than one running 20 frames per second. thats 1/60th of a second for a frame and input response, instead of 1/20th. its a smaller timespan so that explains response. typically games running less than 25FPS appear sluggish and 'chuggy'. so frames per second, more and more stable = better
360 has a rock solid framerate as seen above, anti aliasing lacking on ps3, and subtly better textures and effects like smoke/dust. ps3 version is inferior in every way that actually matters. however at least its not a massive gap. 360 version is clearly better, but the ps3 version isnt terrible by a long shot
yes, u r true about the aliasing on ps3, but i have to disagree with u on the textures and other effects. i wouldn't say the ps3 version is inferior because it has its own advantages. 360 version has better frame rate and self shading, and the ps3 version has better textures and other effects such as lightning etc..
well you need to see the comparison shots. the-horror. com website has an extremely good comparison of the versions backing up my comments as usual. ps3 is sorely lacking against 360 with smoke and heat haze effects, textures are here and there slightly lower res on ps3, shadows are lower precision, aliasing more pronounced and finally the killer is that the framerate as seen here, is less stable. 360 better overall all things considered
yes, i already have a prior knowledge about the web site, but that comparison was even before the demo released, capcom changed many things on the ps3 version compared now to those photos. for example, u see the fence, the 360 very has better reflections than the the ps3, and the same goes for the textures on the human guts. but now if u compare the ps3 version to the 360, everything is different, the ps3 version of the game has better visuals. u can check from the latest comparisons.
the article was AFTER the game was released, as stated on the very FIRST sentence. you need to learn to read. they were indeed, retail, FINAL copies comparison that show and confirm the advantages the 360 version has graphically in the departments i highlighted. thats all anyone needs to know. not excuses from you.
well i believe u r mistaken because u didn't read the comparison throughly, this is stated in the article "What you should keep in mind when viewing the pictures below is that, as of the publishing of this article, the game still has three months of development time and any of the things you see below could very well be changed by the time the game is released." so ya, u lose again
i carried on my comment and unfortunately, you didnt appear to read the eurogamer comparison that confirms the findings of the other site 'horror' that i mentioned. indeed, 360 version is superior and the 'changes' you claim were implemented clearly dont exist, as in march eurogamer confirmed, as expected, ps3 version lags behind 360. case closed. thats just the truth
long as its not a godawful port like resi 4 was onto pc. capcom are going majorly multiplatform here. DMC4, dead rising 2, SF4, bionic commando and this, all on pc. no doubt lost planet 2 will follow too. most of these games made for consoles now can be easily run on a relatively cheap pc and they look amazingly better. resi 5 is a good looking game, but im waiting with great anticipation over seeing the extra polish the game should have on pc
it should but the original lost planet did not run very well on pc, at all. its still relatively demanding even today. newer games have managed to improve performance a LOT tho, like DMC4, which i am pleased about
I think its because the GPUs werent as good when Lost Planet released back then, but Ive been playing Lost PLanet on my PC and it runs very smooth at framerates above or around 60fps.
not really. they werent as fast, but that was still 8800GTX time period and yes, it was still demanding. DMC4 maxed for example runs over 100FPS easily on a 8800 series at medium resolutions, lost planet does not, even now. lost planet was just not quite as good a pc port as it should have, i would probably put it down to DX10 more than anything. inefficient use of the new codepath. considering that lost planet was the first ever commercial DX10 release, it kinda makes sense
i initially used an X1950XTX two years ago and i couldnt believe how badly it ran and looked, even at 720p. wasnt even close to the 360 version, despite the fact an XTX would be at least a match or slightly faster than 360's xenos. yes it does run better than 360 on an 8800 series or better these days. but still, it wasnt as good as it could have been
I still don't understand how the ps3 can have games like GT5 and Killzone 2 which run faster and have much higher detail, yet the multi-platform games ALWAYS trail behind the 360 counterpart.
cos the production cost of Killzone 2 was astronomical compared to most multi's. How many years it took to make? How many years is GT5 still in production? Shame KZ2 flopped in sales compared to Halo/Gears/RE5 etc.
well consider this, killzone 2 looked better than RE5 now WAY back in E3 07, same goes for GT5 Prologue, which was revealed also at that show. Now RE5 has been in development since what, 2006 when it was first revealed at e3? Multiplatform or not, they had the time to work on the game. Not to mention its one of capcom's more prominent titles; i'm sure they would put more money in for development.
KZ2's prod. costs were ~20 mil. That's nothing compared to what Gears or Halo cost to develop, btw
360 must be able to run even faster than the 30FPS cap here, it never drops below that lock. chances are without v lock 360 would be doing 40 frames a second most of the time. 360 also has 2 x MSAA to clean up the worst of teh jags. easy win for 360 overall. still the game is very similar on both platforms, no major gap unlike some others
Oh and to all ps3 fanboys... Why do you think we don't have cell processors for pc ? Maybe because it's impossible to code something optimized for this crap ? And don't get me wrong , i'm not fan of the xbox360 either. I challenge you to give me ONE advantage the consoles have over the pc except the price. Good luck on that heh.
I've fulfilled what you asked for. Having a certain game the other platform does not is an advantage in that individual scenario no matter how you cut it.
Consoles have MUCH more exclusives that I like, especially in the form of Japanese-produced games. I don't care the least bit about MMOs and RTS games.
You kind of do. What do you think a quad core is? Almost nobody supports them, but laughing at multi processor CPU's is not even remotely a bullet point in a console vs PC drama.
and here we hav a ps3 fanboy contradicting himself. with blu ray there is actualy less compression needed as it is a bigger disk. yes the Cell requires rediculous amounts of programming etc but still it doesnt need as much compression as the xbox. the reality is that the blurriness is due to the fact that the ps3 is not using Anti aliasing as it is too taxing unlike the xbox which esentialy gets it free. so to cover it, the ps3 blurrs all the images
Frame Rate Issues for the most part is depend on the type of coding used. The 360 is such an easy system to bild code for games that developers have less stress than coding games for the PS3. However, no notable difference have been notcied between the two, as CAPCOM has found a way to use other featuers of the PS3 to provide the same experience and some say, a little better experience than the 360.
But still an older console is surpassing a newer is unacceptable.
xbox 360 is better
matheus357357357 2 months ago
The very first time I played the PS3 demo I was like WTF is this garbage? The controller doesn't the game either. Best way to play is on 360 or PC with a 360 controller.
GLMnumber9 6 months ago
on the NES stable 60fps, NES fucks xbox360\ps3!
frkmybrain 6 months ago
My pc: 70-120+ fps
I still like consoles too though. My current setup is 720p 15 inch LCD TV next to a monitor about the same size with my PC, Xbox 360, and NES.
BenTheEpic 6 months ago
@BenTheEpic The thing is, 70-120+ FPS looks like garbage, unless you have a monitor that supports 120 hz refresh rate, and even then, still looks like garbage.
I can easily tell the difference with my eye between 70 and 120 fps and gives me a headache. I just cap my FPS to 30 FPS like it is on the console version.
b00mYou 4 months ago
@b00mYou What you say doesn't make any sense. You're saying 30 fps is better than sixty plus. That's false as hell. Sixty fps is considered real-time and for a reason. Games running at 30 or less create much more eye strain than games running at 60+ fps. Why? Because motion is less smooth at 30 which creates a lot more motion blur as the camera turns around. You get less motion blur with 60+; very little in fact, thus reducing eye strain.
Programmer
Graphic Artist
Web Developer
palpdaddy 3 months ago
i know m pc was damn expensive but i don't regret the purchase. i think it's great that we have these comparisons available
MrFushnik 6 months ago
i have both console. and before buying game i always see to it that the game im buying are good in graphics. that why i always watch game comparisson in youtube. and i find out almost all game graphics are good in xbox. i just play ps3 bcz of there exclusive. but lots of my game specially old game are played in my xbox. sorry for my english.
jeffbalbon 7 months ago
i shouldnt have bought this game for the ps3 ... it has some really bad FPS-problems. should've stick with the pc-version. its just another shitty xbox-port again...
Terneyah 7 months ago
is it me or does ps3 lag at big explosions just for epic ness?
BOOOOM 24FPS!
XBOX:Boom 60-10fps? unstable.
SafasoTV 7 months ago
a pc is worth investing in anyways, because you get blu-ray capability for $50. PLus the visuals are way better.
smrio 7 months ago
Megadrixfirez, nope. They are about the same.
BenTheEpic 8 months ago
@TheFunnyMonkeyBoy You ever played cyrsis 1? Shit forgot, too much for an xbox too handle.
LostMem0ry14 8 months ago
no kidding... RE5 runs flawless on the 360 and the PS3 port has some frame dropping. it's pretty ironic cause you would think Resident Evil games would look better on the PS3 just because it used to be a Sony exclusive at first
boredstudent 8 months ago
my resident evil 5 on the pc runs so slow, any ideas on how to fix that
xXGoJaMakingXx 9 months ago
i find my ps3 unplayable due to the stupid frame rate drop on most games. My pc cost me 500-600 bucks and i can run Re5 on Mid settings with 60fpsand the same graphics (even slightly better) , so im really pist with how shitty the modern consoles are these days . Im gonna go back to play my ps2 :/
Dirik619 10 months ago
Xbox fucks PS3 any day man :)
fixfluff 10 months ago
@fixfluff Rofl no, te ps3 is much better in hardware, but everything depends on programming.
MegadrixfireZ 8 months ago
@TheFunnyMonkeyBoy (PC better FPS if you have a good computer obviously) Xbox and PS3 always 30 fps so you decide.
NarutoUzumaki 10 months ago
i thinks theyre the same
alexcrangel 1 year ago
@DragonAge2k Well I can see a clear difference between 30 fps and 60 fps and I've played games at 100-200 fps but at that point I can't see a difference. I think 60 fps is plenty, 30 fps is acceptable but 60 fps is definitely preferable to 30 fps by a long way.
e102ewan 1 year ago
Im on like 15 fps lol,no lag,just that the buttons respond like 0.5 secs after pressing it haha.
HIM666dark6light 1 year ago
And that's with everything on high.
nookie077 1 year ago
its the same shit doesnt matters about fraps
TheArcangelpa4 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i have played the versus mode on both xbox360 and PS3 (my bro has xbox and i have PS3) I must say that xbox plays a lot smoother both off and online. The controls also feel smoother. And trust me those few frames make a difference if you play online, especially if the internet connection is lagging a bit as well. playstation may be free, but i do tend to play re5 on xbox just because of this...
unkn0wnrd 1 year ago
Comment removed
unkn0wnrd 1 year ago
Comment removed
unkn0wnrd 1 year ago
when you see the difference on a large tv....its as plain as day. It was so noticeable for me - that i actually sold and rebought the game for the 360
ollyb111 1 year ago
so what if the frame rates a little bit off on the ps3.its still the same game nothing different about...
MrJimkeats 1 year ago
Xbox = constant 30fps
Jaky2008PSN 1 year ago
ps3 version looks better becuase i want it to lol jk. good comparison.
TheFenerli10 1 year ago
damn,the max rate for this game is only 30 fps?
Kashground 1 year ago
Everyone knows that PS3 exclusive games are the best. Games ported badly from other platforms are a result of developer's ignorance. That is why I only buy PS3 exclusives.
Entropy56 1 year ago
PC fucks consoles.
NarutoUzumaki 1 year ago 25
well of course, but I don't want buy each 6 months a new nvidia graphic card with SLI. With consoles you won't have problems with games...
metrospective 1 year ago
@NarutoUzumaki Its BETTER said that PC fucks your Money every year xD
ABN5X 1 year ago
@ABN5X You're not goddamn forced to update your computer. My three year old computer can play this game decently (still better than consoles), and my own personal computer I won't need to upgrade for a couple of years and runs RE5 flawlessly.
FastFlyerJr 1 year ago
its weird the 360 version is a TAD bit better and re5 was supposed to be a ps3 exclusive until Microsoft bribed them..lol rich bastards
CapitanKurosaki 1 year ago
Disappointed in PS3 version. Those scenes in the vid aren't even graphics-intensive. In heavier areas the frame rate can drop to a crawl. Like in Uroboros Research Facility spinning elevator, most of the Savannah level, and a lot of the boss fights. Trying to get Capcom to admit this problem but so far not getting anywhere.
node357 1 year ago
60 frames per second? what the hell is the difference between these version of the game!!!
mandrek485 2 years ago
The game runs pretty ok on both consoles. Still a couple of frames more on 360, but I cant see the difference
UltraGeek2 2 years ago
Next gen consoles lol!..My old dreamcast did 60 FPS no bother!.As does my current PC. 360=RROD. PS3 = YROD.
Naomi0111 2 years ago
@Naomi0111
Devs fault
ramentasteawesome 2 years ago
@Naomi0111 60 frames per second on 10 year old games. Impressive.
Denshuu 2 years ago
@Denshuu i know it is isn't it.
Naomi0111 2 years ago
cant see the difference so it doesnt matter.
switchblade129 2 years ago
@switchblade129
The difference is very easily noticeable imho
Lecrie 2 years ago
@switchblade129
You cant see the differences in a flash vid but if you play the demo in both consoles you are going to see the differences easily. Anyway in the RE5 Gold Edition you are going to see more framerate issues in the "Desperate Escape" chapter. The PC version is the best it have 60fps and the sharpest textures but Gold Edition is not in PC so the best choise is the 360 version and 360 version have better textures too (see lensoftruth . com comparison)
Regards
krismagix 1 year ago
@krismagix so is the ps3 version of gold edition slower then 360 or what...cuz im beginning to think its my ps3 and not the game
fordmike 1 year ago
@fordmike @fordmike
gold edition is the same RE5 but with extras so it have the same ugly framerate issues and the pal colors in the ps3 too, and if you are going to buy the RE5 Gold Edition you are going to see much more the framerate issues in the chapter "Desperate Escape".
Regards
krismagix 1 year ago
@krismagix i already have re5 gold for both systems but the ps3 seems to have bad frame rate while the 360 is smooth as hell.
is it the game or the ps3 system.
fordmike 1 year ago
@fordmike
Really are both, the game engine of RE5 cant run correctly in the PS3 system thats why it have framerate issues and some textures are different on both, like the garbage details in the floor or the hairs of the characters.
The majority of multiplatform games have this issues in the PS3, only in exclusive games you can see games with high quality that's why i recommend you the 360 for multiplatform games.
krismagix 1 year ago
@fordmike
or you can see first the differences in the head 2 Head section of "lensoftruth" or in digitalfoundry (search them in google) before you buy multiplatform games
krismagix 1 year ago
@fordmike its the same game running on different hardware.this uses 360's 3ppc core things,while ps3's actually needs the 7 other cores.ps3 cant use its core in almost every game because developers didnt code that in
OpticalxXxYoroxXx 1 year ago
if u want to play this game on high frame rates, go for pc man, set it to 60fps , and u will be a happy camper
slaveknight 2 years ago 26
@slaveknight
100 hz screen + 100 fps = big win
Lecrie 2 years ago
@slaveknight I scored average of 97 fps on my PC.
nookie077 1 year ago
@slaveknight that isnt how computers work, you just cant set it to 60fps, you got to upgrade the cpu, the ram, and the video card( sometimes the motherboard
B4MVFan409 1 month ago
my frame rate is arond 40 fps but it drops to 2,3 r 5 sometimes with no reason!!! can any ' help me i'm on pc"
oOGremistaOo 2 years ago
Forgot, and it for PC.
hoanson12 2 years ago
Guys i need some help, i've been trying to play this game but whenever i enter the game, the frame rates drop like hell, one thing i notice that when the game run smoothly, the game runs like freakin fast( character running around like freakin Sonic) Please help me.
hoanson12 2 years ago
i play this one n pc, its hell alot more better frame rate with same settings...
slaveknight 2 years ago
i playir on pc too but my framerate at maximum settings 1680x1050 is always around 25
oOGremistaOo 2 years ago
Xuse me? A no life, what the hell is that suppose to mean, do i know u?
jerm26554 2 years ago
Oh btw boys and girls get ready for DOOM4 in 2010 they say. Is going to only be for PCs(consoles won't handle it) and said nothing out there will even come close, not even Crysis. So next year save up for a new card and direct x 11 and 12,(rumored) we'll need it.
jerm26554 2 years ago
omg... what a no life
WeskerFIN 2 years ago
summer or winter?
oOGremistaOo 2 years ago
Yeah sure will, i love my rig, even though everything is digital download now mostly. I for one think its great because the downloads you get from gamestop, Direct To Drive, Capcom, etc have NO DRM, ir Secure Rom, unlike when you buy the disc. I downloaded Dead Space and was beyond pleased the DRM that was on the disc version vanished, so yeah its a lot of fun to be able to download PC games right from your home. Plus the up close and personal with PC games is like no other!! KUDOS
jerm26554 2 years ago
Oh, no i dont doubt that the PS3 is a marve, i mean with 8 processors its def the most powerful peace of electronics that you can own in your home. It just uses an older model Nvidia, the RSX=7800gtx. It relies more on the processors with its exclusives which make them awesome(why i own one, besides blu-ray). Its just some ported games suffer badly from low Frame Rates, and lag. But yes even with lower details, the sony exclusives still use a lot of psychics etc. Which is what makes it unique.
jerm26554 2 years ago
sir you are right, because ps3 multiplatfrom games are made from 360 and then ported to ps3, they do lose some of that quality. the ps3 exclusives are the ones that take full advantage of the ps3 cell.
atomg12 2 years ago
Yeah, my comp with a Sapphire 4650 gets 42.6 on average. It was only 50$
wildhippy 2 years ago
This is why I don't play multiplatform games on consoles.
homelesshobo 2 years ago
PS3 for a fact has a less powerful GPU and gets its get up and go using the 8 cell processing cores it has.The textures and color are much less on the PS3. Xbox 360 has always been known to have a better GPU since its inception. I have both systems and a gaming PC, and my PC gets 47.9 average frame rate on 1920x1080, and its 169$ ATI Radeon(XFX) 4850 with 1gig of DDR3, and smokes both systems. Also the quad core and 8 gigs of RAM it has helps. So i like all the systems for different reasons.
jerm26554 2 years ago
excuse me the ps3 version is exactly the same watch the game trailers comparison and the gpu is only slightly better on the xbox 360 and the games are set to run at a certain amount of processing power, so u r right; but think about all the exclusives:
God of war 3, uncharted one/two, killzone 2, motorstorm one/two, god of war 3 and gran turismo 5
CLIFTYPOPS 2 years ago
Jesus my pc destroys that framerate, and thats with 16xq and fullhd. Pcs are so much stronger today. Atleast highend.
aXque 2 years ago
The xbox 360 version is better than the ps3 version in all aspects
NeRo7356 2 years ago
Another win for 360 and the 360 version has way better textures also.
DominoEffect66 2 years ago
way better textures... fanboy...
its just slight frame rate differences, fuckin lazy developers
GeForce47 2 years ago
fucking faggot, re5 textures on 360 MURDER the ps3 textures yuou can even watch comparison videos of it, you fucking retard.
Lazy developers is just your EXCUSE and it's IRRELEVANT the FACT is 360 is SUPERIOR.
DominoEffect66 2 years ago
Look how old are you?? 10?? First theres NO difference in the RE5 textures dumbfuck, second the PS3 is MORE POWERFULL than 360, that's fact, if you werent a dumbass you would know that. 360 is weak, Gow2 used 99% of total 360 power and the game doesnt look as good as Killzone 2, Uncharted 2 or Heavy Rain so shut the fuck up.
GeForce47 2 years ago
FUCK OFF, the texture difference is FACT.
FACT, the 360 is more powerful and is PROVEN in the games, retard. No , GoW2 did NOT use 99% you fucking idiot. KZ2 doesn't look good, small confined spaces and SHIT CONTROLS. UC2 SUCKS SO BAD and heavy rain wishes it was Alan Wake.
Make me shut up, you fucking powerless queer.
DominoEffect66 2 years ago
LOL Dude you're pathetic, you're just a troll who cant have a PS3. Alan Wake?? That shit?? Heavy Rain looks 100 times better. KZ2 does have better graphics than Gears of War 2 and Uncharted 2 beats any game ever made on console so shut the fuck up, do some reasearch you dumbass, ps3 is more powerfull, 360 sux, piece of shit system.
GeForce47 2 years ago
I have a PC/360/ps3 you stupid fag.
I did the research and OWN BOTH, 360 wins EASILY so go cry some more you broke little faggot.
DominoEffect66 2 years ago
The best game in the world is the Legend of Zelda ocarina of time on the nintendo 64 its the highest rated game ever made so fuck your Heavy Rain, fuck your KZ2, and fuck your Uncharted 2 and most important go fuck yourself cos the playstation 3 sucks balls
U just got whipped BITCH!!!!!
woteva666666 2 years ago
Legend Of Zelda?? haha who the fuck cares about ratings, Heavy Rain KZ2, Uncharted 2, all those games are better you dipshit, fuckin nintendo nerd LMFAO
GeForce47 2 years ago
First place Wii
Second Xbox 360
LAST ps3
Now i think we all who the winners are yes i rest my case OOPS I ALMOST forgot too mention Your ma chews on cocks in hell poor bitch got jizzed on but she loved every second of it
woteva666666 2 years ago
Again, who cares about sales?? Im not gonna be happy because my console sells alot, im gonna be happy because my console rocks. Oh and overral PS3 is selling very good and 3rd party game developers (EA, Capcom, Ubisoft...) they are all making more money on the ps3...
GeForce47 2 years ago
@DominoEffect66
faggot
getOFFmyMILK 1 year ago
Omg, im gonna throw myself in here, the ps3 is by a fact more powerfull that the 360 BUT games are coded fore the 360 wich uses 3 PPC cores, the ps3 tho only has one PPC core and 7 more SPEs so most non ps3 exclusive games only run on 1 of the ps3s 8 cores, hence the worse performance.
Also the texures and shit is the same, the difference is the gamma wich is shit on ps3 ports making games look worse.
So yes, 360 original does look better then the ps3 ports but look at the exclusive titles!!
gfcpettson 2 years ago
nope it aint ps3 is superior
ado908 2 years ago
@ado908
No offense, I've ditched 360 and gone with PS3, and my experience tells me PS3 is definitely not superior. Sorry. Most of the games have poor frame rates.
node357 1 year ago
@DominoEffect66
you're just a faggot
getOFFmyMILK 1 year ago
Both versions suck! PC is best!
RetroGameLover 2 years ago
agree..once you have a high end gaming pc..theres nothing u need
33dgtp 2 years ago
I'm a ps3. But why do they always make an idiot play the ps3 version?
Faulzee 2 years ago
hehe i have everything maxed on the benchmark and i doubled the consoles frame rate
Krisisb0b 2 years ago
Now they should make another video and add the pc version (they released the benchmark) running at 100fps in 1080p with 16xAA.
MrBlackCrow 2 years ago
it looks stunning on PC in DX10 mode, it pretty demanding too although i suspect the drivers need tweaking so whatever performance you get in the bench will improve quite a bit come the next driver releases. really though the controls need the attention, the graphics were always gonna be superb
projectraven1 2 years ago
The benchmark run already quite good for me (45-60fps) even if i have a 2yo computer :P I can't test dx10 though since im still running winXP (boooo!)
MrBlackCrow 2 years ago
most people are gonna good settings on this. its reasonably demanding, but the good thing is that performance at least its appearing to be a good port. vysnc on the game is smooth like other MT framework games even when it falls off the v lock. most are gonna be able to max it, and then the difference will be how much AA you can afford to drop on it.
projectraven1 2 years ago
Draken4426 = LOL xD
MGS4onXbox360LOLwut 2 years ago 2
MGS4onXbox360LOLwut = microsoft and xbox fanboys can only wish that would happen xD.
Draken4426 2 years ago
Yeah, has anyone seen the assassins creed video? the one where the guy clearly shows using full range RGB and super white made it look ten times better? I bet digital foundry havent done that. Sure maybe the frame rate is consistent on 360 but I bet you the colours would like much nicer on PS3 if full range RGB was used. Still u get the game for the system u own. Im waiting for the PC version which will be better than both with higher res.
Draken4426 2 years ago 2
Both settings are actually set as you describe, even though super white is only used on digital component signals (ie Blu-ray movies to all intents and purposes). Still carry on believing what you want to believe.
DigitalFoundry 2 years ago
"Still carry on believing what you want to believe."
What do u mean? i assumed that u didnt use Full range becos most ppl dont who do these types of videos forget to and results the PS3 version looking washed out. I still "believe" that the PS3 is a better built machine than the 360 and im no fanboy, its just fact. Id rather play this game on the PS3 for the sheer fact that i dont have to worry about the system over heating. BUT, nice vid either way I must admit.
Draken4426 2 years ago
digitalfoundry what i wanna know is how people can deny evidence til they are blue in the face, am i correct in saying that this game also has anti aliasing on 360, none on ps3? most multi platform titles are the same arent they with the difference often being filters noticeably. no AA on ps3, often some anisotropic, no anistropic on 360. when can you do a FEAR 2 comparison? because to me, it runs awful on ps3
projectraven1 2 years ago 2
ppl deny evidence because they're fanboys. Keep up the good work digital foundry.
igortube 2 years ago
i dont think people realise how just enabling anti aliasing on game is a pretty huge leap in performance. when the game is designed to be at the limit of the console abilities, then using AA would incur an enormous performance penalty. IF you could implement AA on ps3 the game would probably be lucky to run above 20FPS at all! whereas the same thing on 360 and the game still runs 30FPS rock solid all the time ps3 is dropping frames with less work to do!
projectraven1 2 years ago
im no fanboy, although ps3 can handle much better material than resi 5 at solid framerates so this actually suprised me lol cant wait for the pc port of it.
Draken4426 2 years ago
its not ps3 fault that it some how runs better on 360. if the developers put more effort into the ports then im sure they coul have both had the same framerate and detail. ps3 can handle more than what resi 5 offers like uncharted at solid framerates. fear 2 is better on pc than both consoles so id like to see a comparison including the pc version.
Draken4426 2 years ago
its never ps3's fault is it. despite the fact that practically every multi plat title runs best on 360, every developer must be lazy. cmon. its been nearly three years and ports still arent up to scratch on ps3. its about time people faced up to the truth and start pointing the finger at the hardware, which is clearly to blame
projectraven1 2 years ago
okay whatever, but you need to know the facts also, PS3 wasnt the lead platform for this game same as DMC4 wasnt lead platform on PS3, it was PC. Thats why this game and DMC4 will run much better on PC becos capcom are using same engine they did with DMC4, hence why every1 was gobsmacked it was such a good port. perhaps the 360 version looks a bit nicer, but I bet you my last penny it looks best on PC.
Draken4426 2 years ago
MT framework is the engine this game and most other capcom titles now run on. the engine is optimised heavily for all next generation platforms, including ps3 and 360. people somehow think that companies dont optimise for ps3, when in reality the underlying engine has already been vastly optimised for each platform, and then the final game dictates further, pretty minor in reality, optimisation. hence for most multi titles, its just boring when someone says its not coded properly for ps3
projectraven1 2 years ago
@DigitalFoundry Played both and still dont see a difference in frame rate
RE5King 1 year ago
pc version it already out. assassins creed is pretty close on both platforms. but 360 edges it texture detail. extremely close however and it doesnt help ps3's reputation that the game was supposed to be lead on ps3, and as per usual 360 still manages to pull out a superior version if only slightly...
projectraven1 2 years ago
360 may have the better multi plats, but PS3 has the better exclusives which look better than the multi plats. Its pretty even to me. what ever console you have u get the game for that console and shouldnt be but hurt if theres a spec of dust on one version and not the other.
Draken4426 2 years ago 2
your opinion ps3 exclusives look better than most multi plats. for a start forget MGS4, it runs 1024 x 768. the model;s are greast but the environments are average, GRAW probably has better looking environments and its a 3 year old game. still least MGS4 is the better offline game. all most ps3 owners claim is uncharted and killzone 2. in my opinion they are no better than 360 games just different. and theres only two of them. not exactly worth extra money for two games versus hundred multi 360
projectraven1 2 years ago
i like both games but there is still no escaping the fact two gears games are rated higher and frankly both better games than uncharted, and halo 3 looks far worse but again it is the better game of killzone 2 especially online. maybe if the developers of both games had concentrated less on graphics they could have made even better gameplay. i have high hopes for uncharted 2. we will have to see
projectraven1 2 years ago
they look the same but the xbox 360 has better framerates thats FACTUAL EVIDANCE !
manabog 2 years ago
This is pure rubbish.
Digital Foundry you really should fix it.
Watch the first part on the 360, you can see the slowdown at the beginning, but the fps does not change. Strange. Conspiracy.
xGei8ht 2 years ago
ps3 owners shouldnt feel too hard done by though, the ps3 version isnt as badly behind as some other game slike the recent ghostbusters as one example. if you hadnt seen the 360 version you would be happy with the ps3 version. i am however going to buy and keep the pc version when it appears. no doubt it will run much faster and be overall far superior to console
projectraven1 2 years ago
no ps3 owner is feeling hard because of this, because we have our own advantages, we have better visuals, and this game is selling better on the ps3 than the 360. and u just proved urself that u don't have a ps3. i win once again
nocodenull 2 years ago
ahhh indeed you prove how childish and ignorant you are post after post. i gave enough sites that point to the 360 versions looking and running better, eurogamer portugal is ANOTHER one that backs me up with a whole series of telling shots my lad :o). no question that 360 version is superior, but people who only have a ps3 will be okay i guess. last time i checked selling more doesnt affect graphics, but then they have sold reasonably evenly anyway. not that it matters.....
projectraven1 2 years ago
a seperate eurogamer in depth comparison article in march also confirmed the findings of the horror analysis. with addition to these comprehensive framerate videos that show 360 version runs smoother. i dont think there is anyone that could possibly claim otherwise, i agree with the findings of several seperate sites after playing both versions close after each other. 360 wins although its not enough to spoil the game for ps3 owners. not the best resi game IMO but still very good
projectraven1 2 years ago
vids are locked to a set framerate when encoded for utube you will not tell the difference only in front of the game directly. thus the overlay to show the games speed otherwise you wont know on youtube. a faster framerate does of course require more processing speed and power. so if it looks the same but runs faster indicates better hardware. thats why pc guides talk about 'faster' graphics cards enabling more effects to be turned on before the framerate slips below 25FPS into sluggishness
projectraven1 2 years ago
Can someone please explain what frame rate is? I can't dicern any difference.
CookieKiller473 2 years ago
framerate. well what are movies or games? they are essentially, a series of quickly refreshing, static pictures. one frame is a picture. when you start seeing more than 12-15 frames per second your eyes start to perceive it as motion as your brain blurs the edges between the frames. you never seen a flick book animation or a picture carousel? the principal is the same. because you are seeing slightly changing pictures flicking quickly in front of your eyes, you start to see motion
projectraven1 2 years ago
the more frames you see in a second, the smoother the motion appears to be. for example a game refreshing 60 frames every second will be noticeably smoother and quicker to respond to controller input than one running 20 frames per second. thats 1/60th of a second for a frame and input response, instead of 1/20th. its a smaller timespan so that explains response. typically games running less than 25FPS appear sluggish and 'chuggy'. so frames per second, more and more stable = better
projectraven1 2 years ago
Thank you very much for clearing that up. Good explanation, I tried to find one on the internet, but to no avail.
CookieKiller473 2 years ago
360 version also has better graphics
Koldness99 2 years ago 2
no the ps3 does, i download the demo on both systems and compared them, 360 has better frame rate and the ps3 has better visuals
nocodenull 2 years ago
360 has a rock solid framerate as seen above, anti aliasing lacking on ps3, and subtly better textures and effects like smoke/dust. ps3 version is inferior in every way that actually matters. however at least its not a massive gap. 360 version is clearly better, but the ps3 version isnt terrible by a long shot
projectraven1 2 years ago
yes, u r true about the aliasing on ps3, but i have to disagree with u on the textures and other effects. i wouldn't say the ps3 version is inferior because it has its own advantages. 360 version has better frame rate and self shading, and the ps3 version has better textures and other effects such as lightning etc..
nocodenull 2 years ago
well you need to see the comparison shots. the-horror. com website has an extremely good comparison of the versions backing up my comments as usual. ps3 is sorely lacking against 360 with smoke and heat haze effects, textures are here and there slightly lower res on ps3, shadows are lower precision, aliasing more pronounced and finally the killer is that the framerate as seen here, is less stable. 360 better overall all things considered
projectraven1 2 years ago
yes, i already have a prior knowledge about the web site, but that comparison was even before the demo released, capcom changed many things on the ps3 version compared now to those photos. for example, u see the fence, the 360 very has better reflections than the the ps3, and the same goes for the textures on the human guts. but now if u compare the ps3 version to the 360, everything is different, the ps3 version of the game has better visuals. u can check from the latest comparisons.
nocodenull 2 years ago
the article was AFTER the game was released, as stated on the very FIRST sentence. you need to learn to read. they were indeed, retail, FINAL copies comparison that show and confirm the advantages the 360 version has graphically in the departments i highlighted. thats all anyone needs to know. not excuses from you.
projectraven1 2 years ago
well i believe u r mistaken because u didn't read the comparison throughly, this is stated in the article "What you should keep in mind when viewing the pictures below is that, as of the publishing of this article, the game still has three months of development time and any of the things you see below could very well be changed by the time the game is released." so ya, u lose again
nocodenull 2 years ago
i carried on my comment and unfortunately, you didnt appear to read the eurogamer comparison that confirms the findings of the other site 'horror' that i mentioned. indeed, 360 version is superior and the 'changes' you claim were implemented clearly dont exist, as in march eurogamer confirmed, as expected, ps3 version lags behind 360. case closed. thats just the truth
projectraven1 2 years ago
what is frame rate really?
mandlad2 2 years ago
lol u sonyers fanboys are mad hahahha =P 360 and wii pwn ps3!!
eRickAnt0nio 2 years ago 2
you are a fanboy your self
RapFan275 2 years ago
just one thing, the graphics of the ps3 version of this game are more detailed... just for you to know...
Morvex14 2 years ago
Cant wait for the PC version. The framerates are going to skyrocket!
SolidMGsnake 2 years ago
long as its not a godawful port like resi 4 was onto pc. capcom are going majorly multiplatform here. DMC4, dead rising 2, SF4, bionic commando and this, all on pc. no doubt lost planet 2 will follow too. most of these games made for consoles now can be easily run on a relatively cheap pc and they look amazingly better. resi 5 is a good looking game, but im waiting with great anticipation over seeing the extra polish the game should have on pc
projectraven1 2 years ago
Trust me- its gonna run better. Their proprietary 3Dengine, MT Framework, has games built originally on the PC then its ported to the 360 and ps3.
SolidMGsnake 2 years ago
it should but the original lost planet did not run very well on pc, at all. its still relatively demanding even today. newer games have managed to improve performance a LOT tho, like DMC4, which i am pleased about
projectraven1 2 years ago
I think its because the GPUs werent as good when Lost Planet released back then, but Ive been playing Lost PLanet on my PC and it runs very smooth at framerates above or around 60fps.
SolidMGsnake 2 years ago
not really. they werent as fast, but that was still 8800GTX time period and yes, it was still demanding. DMC4 maxed for example runs over 100FPS easily on a 8800 series at medium resolutions, lost planet does not, even now. lost planet was just not quite as good a pc port as it should have, i would probably put it down to DX10 more than anything. inefficient use of the new codepath. considering that lost planet was the first ever commercial DX10 release, it kinda makes sense
projectraven1 2 years ago
well lost planet runs well on my PC, but it SHOULD run better.
its not as demanding as some games nowdays, but its much more demanding than it should be for how good it looks.
when i ran it on my geforce7600gt it wasnt very good at all. it runs better now, on my 9800gx, but still should be better than that.
also a shame it was a bit boring anyway
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
i initially used an X1950XTX two years ago and i couldnt believe how badly it ran and looked, even at 720p. wasnt even close to the 360 version, despite the fact an XTX would be at least a match or slightly faster than 360's xenos. yes it does run better than 360 on an 8800 series or better these days. but still, it wasnt as good as it could have been
projectraven1 2 years ago
I still don't understand how the ps3 can have games like GT5 and Killzone 2 which run faster and have much higher detail, yet the multi-platform games ALWAYS trail behind the 360 counterpart.
FoxhoundJay 2 years ago
cos the production cost of Killzone 2 was astronomical compared to most multi's. How many years it took to make? How many years is GT5 still in production? Shame KZ2 flopped in sales compared to Halo/Gears/RE5 etc.
igortube 2 years ago
well consider this, killzone 2 looked better than RE5 now WAY back in E3 07, same goes for GT5 Prologue, which was revealed also at that show. Now RE5 has been in development since what, 2006 when it was first revealed at e3? Multiplatform or not, they had the time to work on the game. Not to mention its one of capcom's more prominent titles; i'm sure they would put more money in for development.
KZ2's prod. costs were ~20 mil. That's nothing compared to what Gears or Halo cost to develop, btw
FoxhoundJay 2 years ago
KZ2 cost more to develop. 22mil is the lowest claim, excluding marketing costs.
igortube 2 years ago
360 must be able to run even faster than the 30FPS cap here, it never drops below that lock. chances are without v lock 360 would be doing 40 frames a second most of the time. 360 also has 2 x MSAA to clean up the worst of teh jags. easy win for 360 overall. still the game is very similar on both platforms, no major gap unlike some others
projectraven1 2 years ago 3
I get this feeling that capcom v-locked the ps3 because the screen tear would be far worse on it than on the 360.
TheBf666 2 years ago
Oh and to all ps3 fanboys... Why do you think we don't have cell processors for pc ? Maybe because it's impossible to code something optimized for this crap ? And don't get me wrong , i'm not fan of the xbox360 either. I challenge you to give me ONE advantage the consoles have over the pc except the price. Good luck on that heh.
Sheena8500 2 years ago
Console exclusives
fuzegt 2 years ago 2
And theres tons of pc exclusives aswell
Sheena8500 2 years ago
I've fulfilled what you asked for. Having a certain game the other platform does not is an advantage in that individual scenario no matter how you cut it.
fuzegt 2 years ago
ohhhhh SNAP! BURN-NATED!
hpsprintstar 2 years ago
Consoles have MUCH more exclusives that I like, especially in the form of Japanese-produced games. I don't care the least bit about MMOs and RTS games.
staticks 2 years ago
You kind of do. What do you think a quad core is? Almost nobody supports them, but laughing at multi processor CPU's is not even remotely a bullet point in a console vs PC drama.
joeottoson 2 years ago
i'm talking about ps3 cell processor crap btw and this have nothing to do with pc cpu's.
Sheena8500 2 years ago
You're talking about the PS3's CPU. The Cell's just a variation on a multiprocessor CPU, PC's have also started moving towards multiprocessor CPU's.
You've blundered into the least important non point possible. (What next? Start bragging about how many bits a PC is?) Cling to it if you like.
joeottoson 2 years ago
the 360 has a multiprocessor cpu
zaq147369 2 years ago
but why on earth is the framerate locked at 30?
YeahSure72 2 years ago
It doesnt matter on the ps3 since it can't even keep 30 fps.
Sheena8500 2 years ago
BTW, why the fuck is it lagging on the ps3 side, your ps3 is broken O_O
o0Lelouch0o 2 years ago
How the hell are you even seeing this, it looks so fake.
o0Lelouch0o 2 years ago
im mad they only caped the game at 30fps
asiancreampie25 2 years ago
ports always have frame rate loss,
GamingBlitzDOTcom 2 years ago
probably because Ps3 games are blurays so they have more compression, which means more uncompressing time than xbox
Mansell1994 2 years ago
and here we hav a ps3 fanboy contradicting himself. with blu ray there is actualy less compression needed as it is a bigger disk. yes the Cell requires rediculous amounts of programming etc but still it doesnt need as much compression as the xbox. the reality is that the blurriness is due to the fact that the ps3 is not using Anti aliasing as it is too taxing unlike the xbox which esentialy gets it free. so to cover it, the ps3 blurrs all the images
oxman7 2 years ago
Frame Rate Issues for the most part is depend on the type of coding used. The 360 is such an easy system to bild code for games that developers have less stress than coding games for the PS3. However, no notable difference have been notcied between the two, as CAPCOM has found a way to use other featuers of the PS3 to provide the same experience and some say, a little better experience than the 360.
But still an older console is surpassing a newer is unacceptable.
PSN ID: daniel1908
danielm1908 2 years ago 2
what other features are those?? (seriously i'd like to know)
jjumaa 2 years ago
Xbox solid rock...but there's rly no difference