Submitted by X-Factor 680d ago | video

Tomb Raider Gameplay Xbox vs PS3 Comparison

Side by side gameplay comparisons between the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 have been done to death. What makes this particular comparison is the timing. The latest installment of Tomb Raider represents games making the most use of each console’s power. (PS3, Tomb Raider, Xbox 360)

NastyLeftHook0  +   680d ago
ps3 version looks better(consoles), But its a great game regardless of system.

Anyways, i rented it and i was blown away by how good it really was. im buying it for sure.
#1 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(40) | Disagree(24) | Report | Reply
Divine  +   680d ago
Yea ps3's look a bit better . a lot more shading and. and detail. also ps3 looks a bit more rich in quality
josephayal  +   680d ago
the ps3 version looks slightly better
Pope_Kaz_Hirai_II  +   680d ago
Pc version looked amazing (version I played) ps3 slight edge here.
jc48573  +   680d ago
360 slightly better performance (not that noticeable) vs ps3 better image quality. Your pick. I picked ps3 version for its better image quality.
#4 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(35) | Report | Reply
brodychet  +   680d ago
where are you getting this info? seems like you just made that up to me.
jc48573  +   680d ago
eurogamer's face off. You can read about it their analysis in their website. They recommend ps3, but both are just as good. I settled with the ps3 version after reading it.
#4.1.1 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(10) | Report
Ju  +   680d ago
Eurogamer's face of said when both dip framerate, PS3 dips a little more - those are quire rare though - but overall PS3 actually runs smoother - and has the better image quality. Not a whole lot of a difference, though.
extermin8or  +   680d ago
Ps3 has better image quality/slightly more particle effects etc, but they are both very close... anyway until ps4 is launched im buying multiplat games on my laptop- we've reached the stage where the nvidia card in this that it came with is performing better than consoles on multiplatform games...
Krosis  +   680d ago
This game was a nice reboot in my opinion. I don't understand why it didn't sell well...ditto for Hitman: Absolution :/
Sucitta  +   680d ago
it sold 3 and a half million units in its first month..

it was square enix that projected it's sales to be call of duty like 10 million..

THIS, is what everyone is talking about when they say cod is changing/destroying the industry..

in reality, 3.5 million in a month is very good sales.

Don't let greed infested corporations fog your mind..
aLucidMind  +   679d ago
It's not greed, it is trying to ensure profit over cost. If they're wanting 10 million sales, it's because the game cost them roughly $200M to make and distribute. Developers and producers only see a total of $20 per sale, which would require the 10M sales they're wanting in order to see profit on their investment.

Just marking it down as being greedy is just displaying total ignorance towards the business side of the gaming industry.
avengers1978  +   680d ago
It's because of previous bad games. The next final fantasy might be great, but I will pass because IMO the last one was crap(FFXIII and its sequel)
However tomb raider is a good reboot well worth the attention and money of gamers
Sucitta  +   680d ago
60$ x 3.5 million = 210'000'000

that's two hundred and ten million dollars.

a fifth of a billion dollars..

not including digital sales.

in a MONTH !!
#6.3 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
kneon  +   680d ago
Keep in mind that the developer only gets a fraction of that total. But still with those kind of numbers they must have already turned a profit.
soniqstylz  +   680d ago
Figure that it's about $25 to split between Crystal Dynamics and Squeenix (those numbers come from a Pachter video on the split of money from a $60 game disc).

That's $87.5 million.

For context, Grand Turismo 5 cost $80 million to develop.
GameSpawn  +   680d ago
as kneon said

There is overhead involved in games. Working were I do, I can tell you that most games once they hit distribution warehouses (the places before actual retail stores) the cost they're selling them for is on average around $45 (for a $60 game).

So you figure they are making $10-$15, that's roughly $30 direct from the publisher's distribution companies. Let's take away another $5 per game to cover additional shipping and distribution overhead, we're down to $25 per game.

So at $25 revenue per game that works out to $87.5 million (much like soniqstylz estimate), but this is before breaking the money up between publisher and developer (who probably have prearranged percentages in their contracts).

Still a hefty chunk of change, but to the publisher and developer, they just broke even on their investment. Remember Square was expecting this game to explode and pay off their other failures. Overzealous? Maybe, a bit.

There was a similar case with 38 studios and Kingdoms of Amalur, although in my opinion it was because the incoming Rhode Island governor was a complete d-bag that had some personal hatred for 38 Studios, Curt Schilling, and the previous governor that led to the sutdio's closure. Amalur was a f-ing good game and sold pretty damn well considering.
#6.3.3 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
supraking951  +   680d ago
geez nothing going for MS these days LOL
KidBroSweets2  +   680d ago
Comments like that is why you only have one bubble.
xYLeinen  +   680d ago
I'm asking myself "what's the point" of these comparisons...
_LarZen_  +   680d ago
It's for the people that has both systems and that wants the best version. Either its slightly better performance or visuals.

Easy as that... :)
xYLeinen  +   680d ago
Yea easy thought of a human being I guess.. I want the best.. What people fail to understand is that unless you got two screens side by side you are neither going to feel, see, or "understand" a difference.. Unless there are actually gameplay issues etc.
_LarZen_  +   680d ago
In some games that is true. But there are games where the difference is really noticeable in either visuals or performance issues.

Many examples of this, on that comes to mind is Red Dead Redemtion. The visual difference is hard to miss...


#8.1.2 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report
Why o why  +   680d ago
Thats a fair point but I don't think that matters anymore. How I see it is people with both consoles will still buy it for their primary console. The one where the majority of their achievements/trophies are or where their favoured online community is. Minor differences rarely sway people's choices unless of course the the difference is huge or one version is broken.
trenso1  +   680d ago
we are still doing these? why?
TR was a good game. Definitely deserves a sequel.
HarryMasonHerpderp  +   680d ago
I wasn't really a fan of the reboot, it was a great game but it didn't feel like a Tomb Raider game to me and the Lara Croft I used to know just wasn't there.
Saying all of that though I would welcome a sequel since in the next game she can get back to kicking arse and traveling the world, I just hope they focus more on the puzzles and less on the Uncharted like action sequences.
#10.1 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Krosis  +   680d ago
I never looked at it that way. I just recall the company complaining about lack of sales. They said both games sold just below their minimum projected sales goal...Does anyone else recall that article? I believe it may have been on N4G.
Sanquine90  +   680d ago
No trolling, but since when ps3 games look better than xbox 360 games? ( Multiplatform ) Because xbox fanboys friends of mine always used this argument against me:P
SolidDuck  +   680d ago
To answer your question the majority of multiplats do either run or look better on 360 although in most cases just slightly. But depending on the developer there are a couple dozen or so multiplats that either run or look better on ps3. In most cases it depends on how much time a developer spent optimizing the ps3 version since its much harder to develop for. There are a few extreme cases like beyonneta which was much better performance and graphically on 360. Or final fantasy 13 which had uncompressed cutscenes on ps3 because of the size of the blu ray storage. But all in all most multiplats this gen have only had very slight almost unnoticeable to the average person differences.
Dasteru  +   680d ago
Oblivion pre-GOTY looked and performed much better on the PS3.
THC CELL  +   680d ago
bit late to be honest
DasTier  +   680d ago
NeXXXuS  +   680d ago
The lighting on the 360 version is too bright. You can easily tell that the PS3 version has more contrast to enhance the darkening of the shadows on Laura's body and in the environment itself.

/gets disagrees anyways :\
#15 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
rpd123  +   680d ago
That's the thing about these comparisons. Messing around on the settings for a bit will get you the same results as the other console that is supposedly better. At least when it comes to visuals, not the actual performance of the game.
specialguest  +   680d ago
Normally it's the other way around where the 360 version has better contrast and more vibrant colors. With the coming of the next gen MS & Sony consoles, these comparisons seem to not matter anymore.
leogets  +   680d ago
here we go again with very very little difference, next!!!
Max-Zorin  +   680d ago
Soon, the sun and clouds will be compared if it didn't already happen.
Magnus  +   680d ago
Larua is hot and has a very sexy voice it is a really great game and looks great no matter the console its on. If you own a Xbox360 it looks great on the Xbox360. If you own a PS3 it looks great on the PS3 and if you own a PC she looks great on the PC. Great game I hope other companies learn from Larua on what its like to reboot a franchise best reboot I have played. I still can't believe this game skipped the Wii-U. I was looking forward to trying out the Wii-U version and the challanges that came with the game and the Wii-U tablet.
#19 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
TBONEJF  +   680d ago
here we go again. FIX UR CONTRAST for the last time
rataranian  +   680d ago
Think about this....the next Tomb Raider is going to be on Ps4. Imagine how good thats going to look.
RELIGHT  +   680d ago
LOL why do they still make these stupid ass comparisons? Truly pointless.
Nicolee  +   680d ago
is this 2006?
Th3 Chr0nic  +   680d ago
why does headline say " gameplay comparison" when its really a graphics comparison......
Gondee  +   680d ago
They are still doing this 7 years down the line...
urwifeminder  +   680d ago
I will buying for pc when its 10 bux.
QuickdrawMcgraw  +   680d ago
I am a huge UC fan.And I think this Tomb Raider is everything I want UC3 to be.To me to really rocks and I hope ND rises to the challenge.
#27 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
sir_fortesque  +   680d ago
PS3 is slightly better (it is a slightly more graphically advanced system afterall), but if you have to sit them side by side and compare, the differences aren't big enough to affect gameplay
Adolph Fitler  +   677d ago
Make the games longer, with more replayability & awesome online features that offer both fun & versatility, then 1st & foremost, eliminate ALL dlc, unless it adds both extra online maps, weapons & more, as well as an extra chunk of offline campaign, instead of just ripping us off with the precedence set by H-Activision, when you pay $22Au ($14.95US) for a few crappy extra online maps.....I mean what a joke.
Bring back the industry that I grew up with, & lets BUY our games, thus meaning that they are OUR property, not frigging hired, or on borrowed time.

Add masses of the features I mentioned above, & release the game with more content, as opposed to once again, following Cr-Activisions concept of chopping up already finished games, so you can sell the rest of them in a step release fashion. Give us our full games, as we pay the full price of admission.
I would gladly pay $10-$20 more for a game that offers more for my money.
I mean, everyone complained about GTA4 & slammed it, but guess what???? The game is awesome, & offers far better value for money than mostly every other game around, as it had pretty awesome offline campaign gameplay, as well as limitless online, with a ridiculous amount of online modes, compared with 99.9% of other titles.
Games that are more like Far Cry 3, as opposed to COD12, as FC3 is a massive, living, breathing, 3D jungle-like world, & the game is like a open world, GTA-esque effort, & then there is also the online & the awesome map maker.
Then throw in titles like LBP 1&2 (which, I'm positive Bill Gay-tes & MS hate) that offer the option to make your own levels & gameplay.....& with tools that offer such freedom, so as to allow you make a 1st person shooter on, or racer, or whatever.......I mean, other developers & publishers must despise the Media Molecules, Crytek's, etc, etc, as they are basically offering consumers too much value for money, thus potentially hurting sales for future releases......I mean, the fact is, that we gamers are paying more & more, for less & less.
So, lets scrap all this releasing half games that need patches from the get go, & that have been stripped back, & had 10 or so of the online maps taken from the final release, & lets get full, fluffed out, VALUE FOR MONEY.

Because the fact remains, that us gamers WILL buy pretty much everything that we have, & next gen, that is unlikely to change, as I will see game Unchartered & buy it upon release day, then the next day Tomb Raider will release, & I will buy that as well, the next month GOW:J will release & that gets bought on day 1 as well, & boom there's GOW:A on store shelves & whammo, I've got it.
I guess I am saying that I will continue to buy & support developers of games that immerse me into there world, games I love for the story, as well as for the gameplay, the action & set pieces & all the other little things that make up great games.

I will say, the online is far below UC's standard, & needs some work on both camera & other things, such as the movement, smoothness, controls, etc, etc.
tristanwerbe  +   676d ago
I played both on a 3D tv and they looked the same whoever made this is trying to make PS3 look better

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

The Boss Man: 3 Things that are Frustrating About Nintendo in Early 2015

13m ago - The Boss Man: "Nintendo has done a lot of great things for me as a fan of their games and hardwar... | Wii U

10 Nintendo 64 Platformers You Should Revisit

13m ago - Josh From Controller Crusade discusses 10 great platformers on the N64 that you should go back an... | Retro

Video games can teach you strange things

15m ago - PlayStation Access decided to list six things games taught them that they didn't learn in school. | Culture

“Wait a Minute Mister Postman”: The Problem of Majora's Mask's Termina in a Single Man

16m ago - ZD: "Today on With a Terrible Fate, I offer an analysis of a man who is both doomed and redeemed... | 3DS

Valve Partners With HTC To Create The Vive Virtual Reality Headset

Now - Valve has formed a relationship with Taiwanese smartphone and tablet maker HTC to help create a virtual reality headset called The Vive, which is p... | Promoted post

Dragon Quest Heroes Receives New DLC Gameplay Video

16m ago - Dragon Quest Heroes, the new Dragon Quest series spin-off game now available in Japan on PlayStat... | PS3