Lens of Truth writes "Welcome back for another exciting Head2Head! This week we take a look at Bethesda’s Dishonored for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Jump inside to see if you can spot any differences."
(Dishonored, PS3, Xbox 360)
ill tell you what,the difference is very small here even between cons/pc so it shouldnt really matter to you.
but what really should make you giggle is the way the movement in this game works. maybe im the only one but while playing this ive notice that theyve SOLVED EVERY PROBLEM ive ever had with movement in games.
say theres a canister tucked underneath a walkway if you were to try to get on this canister in other games you may as well have given up yet in this game you just simply go up to the canister and jump it brings you up and crouches you at the same time squeezing you underneath the walkway so you are now prone.
or when you jump off chains, most every other game ive played you had to manuver your body around so your back faces the way you want to jump off and you had to look back at it and jump sometimes at the expense of extreme frustration. in this game you just climb the chain and jump it gives you plenty of momentum and it ALL just feels right.
to the way the character doesnt die when you jump off of things it feels like he shouldnt. and the shock absorber like animation when landing. or the fact that when you carry bodies you can actually throw them over railing or far enough to feel like you accomplished something, unlike batman ak aslyum where there was an invisible barrier keeping you from bataranging thugs off roofs.
this game is SO smooth.
i think it revolutionizes the movement in modern gameplay. it all just works and works brilliantly.
GO play the Fkn Game it might not seem like it at first but it just sucks you in with how well it offers you the freedom to do what you want and not get frustrated in the process.
In tests the PS3 version looked slightly better than 360, the 360 version performed slightly better than PS3, and the PC version looked and performed better then both console versions.
as i am playing on PC i can tell you that the assets are the same.
meaning that any difference is mereley resolution and draw distance.
what i was trying to say is that navigation is tits, all the little quirks ive had in the past with games like deus ex etc is that they kept me in a box and i couldnt get to the most obviously accessible places, this game makes it easy to get anywhere.
the mechanics in place for ledge grabbing and jumping are the best ive ever played with.
Can I point out that you guys are basically bickering over which version of game looks better graphically when really its nothing spectacular in that department....
I am more interested in which version runs better.
Very competent releases on all 3 platforms. However it's not the raw graphical grunt that makes Dishonored stand shine, rather it is it's amazing art design aided by some great lighting effects.
Regardless of your platform of choice; you are depriving yourself of one of this gen's best gaming experience by not buying this game.
In general, not that impressive of a game as far as graphics. Even on the PC I'm underwhelmed by how it looks with everything maxed out. Even the textures are still low-res with many of the writings you find on paper/posters throughout the game too blurry to read. Not all, but many of them.
I dont care which looks better as long as the ps3 version doesnt suffer from bethesda and its memory issues. Sinve its a game that doesnt allow u to pick up 200 million worthless objects, it should be fine. I cant wait to finish borderlands and play it. It was my most anticipated game this year now that bioshock is pushed back.
Yeah, what sazzrah said. Dishonored was made by Arkane Studios. They also worked on Bioshock 2, which was also almost identical between the PS3 and XBOX visually. With the Dishonored head to head, they are very close IMO, shouldn't be any noticeable difference. In some of the screens, the PS3 version has slightly better resolution. It may be the case throughout the game, or it may be the screen captures were taken at a more precise point in action. Either way, they are very similar. I don't think wither console owner will be upset with this game... keep hearing great things... can't wait to play it.
No offense but who cares.Just play the dam game its absolutley sick.This game should be praised for how good it is not its stupid screen shot comparisons.Get it together guys GOTY right here.
PC blows them both away so who cares? Consoles have been lacking for years now. I turned my ps3 on the other day to play tekken tag 2 and thought wow these graphics are horrible. PC in 1080p is the way to go and you can do it for the same price as a console.
Sorry man but they are both exactly the same. The difference between the two is dark and light. You either like the 360 version better because its darker or you like the ps3 version because its lighter. But as far as what matters they both look exactly the same
Not only they don't care about "who wins" or "who loses", they are perfectly objective, but they also compare games and platforms based on RAW datas and provide a real technical analysis.
I really enjoy reading their articles, even for games I don't care.
From the pics it looks like the Xbox looks better. Which is to be expected because Bethesda published this and make all there games on Xbox and ported to the PS3. And even in a few screenshots the PS3 shines a bit.
Resident Evil and Borderlands look visual better on PS3. People need to take off there fanboy goggles and look with there eyes and quit the denial its not healthy for you.
360 version looks better to me. But what are you smoking? Have you played Borderlands 2 and Resident Evil 6 on both platforms? Have you seen comparisons? PS3 looks miles better on Resident evil 6 and a tad bit better on Borderlands.
Bethesda PUBLISHED, they didn't make it. It's runs on UE3, not Bethesda's engines. Mostly typical results for UE3, PS3 looks a little brighter with the 360 being darker, but I think the PS3 managed to look ever so slightly better in this one somehow, real close.
Or the 20 minute mandatory install and 4 GIGs more space used on the ps3 to make it even keep up with the 360 which has no mandatory install and plays right away from the disc at 3.8gigs. Its always safer to pick up the 360 version as the ps3 has to go to great lengths just to try to match it. The 360 runs at 30fps only dipping to 20 during a boat scene back to the hide out. The ps3 on the boat scene goes to 26 but is full of screen tearing with none on the scene for the 360.
The 360 version is locked at 20fps and has as much screen tearing as the PS3 in the action scenes! Can u not read? I really don't see installing as an issue, I'd fully install every game if I could!
And not to mention the 360 doesn't "play right away at 3.9gb". (Though optional) It should be installed at 3.9gb to make it run better. Not much of a difference from the mandatory 4.6gb buddy.
The PS3 version looks better and is at 30fps with slight screen tearing.
The 360 version looks worse and is capped at 20fps with no screen tearing. (Just as much screen tearing in actions scenes however).
Don't even bother with these anymore. I just pick up the 360 version. Unless their is some exclusive content like Mortal Kombat, it's safe just to get the 360 version.
Really doesn't matter which version you pick up anymore.. These hairsplitting comparissons only prove to divide the fanbases more.. The differences are so minor anymore that these comparisons are just asinine.
I think you meant "more like the PC version = better than the Xbox 360 version" right? You can't be suggesting that it's actually looking better than the PC version, right?... Right??? :)
There's no difference as far as I can tell, relax people, seems like they did a good job this time. Buy it for your favorite console or play it on PC. Case closed.
360 version runs at 20fps, PS3 version runs at 30fps dipping to 26 in parts! That's just lazy imo, 60fps is possible on console with a bit of hard work!!
I agree with you that they could make it 60fps for this game on these consoles... They would just have to take out most of the animations, lower the textures, reduce map sizes, draw distance and have almost non existent HDR in most scenes. That way it will run 60fps. Take a look at ALL console games that run 60fps... The graphics and physics are at a minimal or the game is static like a racing game with static backgrounds. These consoles are 5+ years old with aging hardware. There is no way they will run this game or any graphics demanding game at 60fps without major sacrifices. There is only so much you can do with fixed hardware. You cannot add in more textures, HDR, Polygons, ADOF, physics to a system that MATHEMATICALLY only allows so much. If this were not the case then Gears of War and Uncharted and the rest of the console graphic heavy hitters would be running 60fps using all real time lighting and effects. None of them use this at all...
There's no difference for Christ's sake. It's light on one and darker on the other. If you honestly think that makes a difference, then the brightness on the console you claim looks worse can be changed to look exactly the same as the one that is supposedly better.
That's exactly what i say to them since 2010 , no one hear me , just fight for this stupid BS , gaming websites buy 3 versions to make these articles , just to get hits , people sometimes are too blind , the only thing that is different between the versions are bugs , each have it's own collection of bugs so why the hell people care about these things?!. >.< . it really amaze me xD ...
I've been saying it too my friend. Everyone else bickers when they look the same. Like you said, the problems aren't even in the graphics. Each version has different bugs or glitches, yet nobody says a thing about those.
The 360 version seems to be a bit darker but other then that they look the same to me. This game isn't about showing off the latest and greatest in graphics anyway
I can't wait for next gen when websites like this one will become obsolete since both the next Xbox 720 and the PS4 will use an almost the same GPU/CPU combo.
On any case the versions have slight variations but nothing to tip the scale in one direction. This game is about art style and atmosphere and not about fidelity.
the only thing i really wish they'd do is actually use properly colour corrected screenshots/videos... the PS3 really doesn't look that washed out when you have done all of the necessary adjustments.
apart from that, it's a virtual tie, and i think it all boils down to which game has the better performance statistics.
The game is going to be the sleeperhit of this year.Its a great game and worth picking up.I guess it comes down to what style of games you play or enjoy, not everyone is the same in this category.
Really? The console versions look almost the same. The power difference between these consoles are not that great to have HUGE differences between the two like a Wii game despite some rantings of many on this site. If you want a version that is very different in looks and play, buy the PC version because the console versions of multi-platform games are practically identical unless they screw it up
Both versions look pretty much the same. The only difference that i can see in those images is that the 360 version is a little bit blurry in comparison to the PS3 one. This could be due to some sort of filter but i personally dont like the effect that it has on the game.
EDIT: I just read the Eurogamer article and it appears that both versions use some sort of post processing AA effect. The 360 is using FXAA while the PS3 version is using MLAA which would explain the blurriness in the 360 version.
Both versions look decent however I don't believe the PS3 version is the superior version as some of you are claiming, but I'll wait for the final analysis before I cast judgement. Based on these pics though, the PS3 version is missing some textures, has some rough AA, lighting looks washed out, the 360 has some nice contrast, softer edges better textures and draw distance.
Like I said I'll wait til the final analysis to make my final judgement but, clearly people are letting their biased opinion effect their vision. Those people saying that they both look the same and that the only difference is blurriness need to get their eyes checked Based on these pics you can see a lot of differences...
20°
180°
150°
20°
Ad 
30°
10°
20°
20°
30°
20°
Why is that?
but what really should make you giggle is the way the movement in this game works.
maybe im the only one but while playing this ive notice that theyve SOLVED EVERY PROBLEM ive ever had with movement in games.
say theres a canister tucked underneath a walkway if you were to try to get on this canister in other games you may as well have given up yet in this game you just simply go up to the canister and jump it brings you up and crouches you at the same time squeezing you underneath the walkway so you are now prone.
or when you jump off chains, most every other game ive played you had to manuver your body around so your back faces the way you want to jump off and you had to look back at it and jump sometimes at the expense of extreme frustration. in this game you just climb the chain and jump it gives you plenty of momentum and it ALL just feels right.
to the way the character doesnt die when you jump off of things it feels like he shouldnt. and the shock absorber like animation when landing. or the fact that when you carry bodies you can actually throw them over railing or far enough to feel like you accomplished something, unlike batman ak aslyum where there was an invisible barrier keeping you from bataranging thugs off roofs.
this game is SO smooth.
i think it revolutionizes the movement in modern gameplay. it all just works and works brilliantly.
GO play the Fkn Game it might not seem like it at first but it just sucks you in with how well it offers you the freedom to do what you want and not get frustrated in the process.
I haven't got a fluffin clue what it is you're trying to say.
Stopped reading after that part.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
meaning that any difference is mereley resolution and draw distance.
what i was trying to say is that navigation is tits, all the little quirks ive had in the past with games like deus ex etc is that they kept me in a box and i couldnt get to the most obviously accessible places, this game makes it easy to get anywhere.
the mechanics in place for ledge grabbing and jumping are the best ive ever played with.
so hard to understand?
I am more interested in which version runs better.
Regardless of your platform of choice; you are depriving yourself of one of this gen's best gaming experience by not buying this game.
Check out Gamespot's graphics comparison video:
http://www.gamespot.com/dis...
And here is Digital Foundry comparison (much better than just a bunch of screens) http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
Not only they don't care about "who wins" or "who loses", they are perfectly objective, but they also compare games and platforms based on RAW datas and provide a real technical analysis.
I really enjoy reading their articles, even for games I don't care.
Resident Evil and Borderlands look visual better on PS3.
People need to take off there fanboy goggles and look with there eyes and quit the denial its not healthy for you.
And not to mention the 360 doesn't "play right away at 3.9gb". (Though optional) It should be installed at 3.9gb to make it run better. Not much of a difference from the mandatory 4.6gb buddy.
The PS3 version looks better
and is at 30fps with slight screen tearing.
The 360 version looks worse
and is capped at 20fps with no screen tearing. (Just as much screen tearing in actions scenes however).
There's no difference as far as I can tell, relax people, seems like they did a good job this time. Buy it for your favorite console or play it on PC. Case closed.
I agree with you that they could make it 60fps for this game on these consoles...
They would just have to take out most of the animations, lower the textures, reduce map sizes, draw distance and have almost non existent HDR in most scenes.
That way it will run 60fps.
Take a look at ALL console games that run 60fps...
The graphics and physics are at a minimal or the game is static like a racing game with static backgrounds.
These consoles are 5+ years old with aging hardware.
There is no way they will run this game or any graphics demanding game at 60fps without major sacrifices.
There is only so much you can do with fixed hardware. You cannot add in more textures, HDR, Polygons, ADOF, physics to a system that MATHEMATICALLY only allows so much.
If this were not the case then Gears of War and Uncharted and the rest of the console graphic heavy hitters would be running 60fps using all real time lighting and effects. None of them use this at all...
On any case the versions have slight variations but nothing to tip the scale in one direction. This game is about art style and atmosphere and not about fidelity.
PS: Went with the PC version myself.
apart from that, it's a virtual tie, and i think it all boils down to which game has the better performance statistics.
They told me the hype was a little much for what the final product turned out to be!
the contrast for the 360 version makes it feel more plain though...
Gamespot's graphics comparison video:
http://www.gamespot.com/dis...
The PS3 and Xbox360 versions are practically the same.
The power difference between these consoles are not that great to have HUGE differences between the two like a Wii game despite some rantings of many on this site.
If you want a version that is very different in looks and play, buy the PC version because the console versions of multi-platform games are practically identical unless they screw it up
EDIT: I just read the Eurogamer article and it appears that both versions use some sort of post processing AA effect. The 360 is using FXAA while the PS3 version is using MLAA which would explain the blurriness in the 360 version.
Like I said I'll wait til the final analysis to make my final judgement but, clearly people are letting their biased opinion effect their vision. Those people saying that they both look the same and that the only difference is blurriness need to get their eyes checked Based on these pics you can see a lot of differences...