Street Fighter IV PS3 is sub-HD in close-up

Gamezine: "Street Fighter IV has been getting much praise for its combination of classic gameplay and updated graphics technology, but there are differences between the console versions.

Firstly, you're going to notice more jagged edges in the PlayStation 3 game, since it doesn't feature any anti-aliasing. This is in contrast to the Xbox 360's 2xAA.

This isn't that much of a negative, since the 'jaggies' are barely noticeable when playing in the traditional gameplay view.

However, you might notice the edges in the character close-ups, a view where the PlayStation 3 suffers slightly in another area. During the close-up sequences, generally used with special moves, the PS3 game's rendering resolution drops from 720p to nearer 630p, which is then up-scaled for output."

Comparison pictures and videos can be found at the source.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Omega43559d ago

Not surprising really, it is a multiplatform game

Even at this late stage in this console generation the PS3 has yet to pull ahead in multiplatform games, lucky it has so many 1st party games to demonstrate its power

CaseyRyback_CPO3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

After KZ2, does it matter? Or will the people who have no intention on buying the PS3 version still pretend that Halo3 ran in HD, and that resolution means more than something you cant see when you're sitting down on a couch.

Just asking.

Lucreto3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

The PS3 can't pull ahead as they need to build games that will also work for the 360.

Killzone 2 shows the PS3 power.

Omega43559d ago

Yeah it does matter, unless of course you only care about 1st party games and plan on forgetting about all the 3rd party multiplatform ones

solidjun53559d ago

Does it really matter? I mean no one cared about this until this came out. It doesn't matter. I mean if you had to choose between both of them and it came down to controller preference, then that's fine. However if it came down to the fact that "where in this screenshot RYU is at sub 645", would that really concern you? I've played both versions (i own the PS3 copy) and they were side by side at the gamestop I bought the game in and they were exactly the same. Played exactly the same with no framerate (the most important thing to me) issues. So it doesn't matter.

CaseyRyback_CPO3559d ago

Again, who does this matter to outside of the people that aren't buying the PS3 version. The 360 owners.

Its not a tell of the PS3's hardware, because all of its 1st party exclusives show off hardware power, which is how it always works in gaming. Not sure if this is your first generation of gaming, but multiplatforms are always mildly different from one another since they have to program the code to work for the lowest common denominator, which is the Xbox360's Arcade Sku without a HDD. There will never be an equal port between the two, because there has never been an equal code on any multiplatform game that is 100% exactly the same in and out.

For the same reasons Burnout wont work on the Arcade units without a HDD to go online, Ps3 versions of games suffer from tiny details that ultimately dont matter unless you have a degree in computer science, capture equipment, both consoles running side by side split screen.

So Again, outside of Video Editors and the 360 community, why does it matter that SF4, a game arguably played better on the DS3 due to the dpad, which is at equal scoring right now, has been reviewed and praised equally, who does this affect?

Mr_Bun3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

I agree....There are always mild differences...take NHL 3 on 3...There is an extra trophy for the PSN version ("Jack of all trades" trophy). No big deal, but it just shows that multiplat games are not clones.

JokesOnYou3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

Only problem with your "lowest common denominator theory" is that last gen, xbox was more powerful than ps2 and it showed that in multiplats from day one....but yes you are right this isn't a big deal unless you like pausing the game to count pixels.


edit: Wow, disagrees for what? it pretty much common knowledge that xbox multiplatform games looked slightly better than their ps2 counterparts...lolz, I guess you some of you just started gaming when the ps3 launched. Oh, I see maybe its from the people who do actually pause the game to count pixels, lmfao.

OGharryjoysticks3559d ago

There always seems to be somebody out there defending their console of choice regardless of how obvious the differences are. In the case of Street Fighter IV, the entire game's style is so jagged so it appears somewhat like it was painted in strokes that complaining about the PS3 version's difference at times of having a fraction of more jag is dumb as hell. In this case honestly comparing the two builds is pointless unless you have 2 TVs in your house set up beside each other in your room with each version playing at the same and even then it's subjective. But that's what the forces are out to do - to try and make you believe something's wrong with the PS3. Heck if you want a better example of how lame these comparisons are now check out this link and tell me the PS3 version doesn't obviously look better but since it's a 3rd party game you'll never read the truth.

Omega43559d ago

It doesnt affect anyone really except the people with two consoles that is and i know i'd rather go with the version where i didnt have to fear cutting my eyes from all the jagged edges

PS3 may have some better looking 1st party games but the 360 will also have better looking multiplatform games

gamesmaster3559d ago

does anyone actually give a, sh!t? i mean, apart from fanboys.

thewhoopimen3559d ago

Ok Omega4, I've had enough of your insipid bashing. If you want to make a strong case of the 360 being a more powerful system SF4 is NOT the place to be choosing your fight.

SF4 IS NOT A Technically demanding game. It features TWO characters fighting each other on a 2D/3D background. There is no "real" muscles being flexed on either console. It's not even technically more demanding then Tekken5 or SoulCalibur4 which at least feature a 360 view of the background environment.

What we see here in this scenario is a true poor conversion.

ThanatosDMC3559d ago

It's multiplat, what can we say? PS3 is highly capable of Anti Aliasing that is way better than 360 but they dont know how to do it, i guess.

Omega43559d ago

"SF4 IS NOT A Technically demanding game."

And yet the PS3 cant even render it in true HD, not looking good for future more demanding multiplatform games is it

StayHigh3559d ago

wow there no difference at all..when i look at the 360 and ps3 version it looks the same to me..all mulitplatform will look the same its a given..

pwnsause3559d ago

stop acting like we give a damn of how the game looks. you put it side by side right now, it will look the same.

sonarus3559d ago

Well capcom still has more experience on the 360 than the PS3. Not all developers have the same level of talent. Capcom is just showing where they lie.

StayHigh3559d ago

if you talking about true hd the ps3 is the system to own right now.there is no hardly any difference in street fighter iv and im sure third developers will get even better programing the ps3..there so many huge first party exclusive games on the ps3 that shows the hardware power..all 360 fanboys have is gears of war and thats

Lifendz3559d ago

when you're playing without the Xbox360 version right next to the PS3 version? I don't recall any article other than this one saying the PS3 version suffers visually. Some articles will go to great lengths to try to make something out of nothing. Yet another article catering to fanboys in order to get hits. Sad.

nix3559d ago

forget close-up, i can notice that from up here.

UnwanteDreamz3559d ago

At all you fan people pausing the game and counting pixles. What a bunch of fu8king loosers you must be. I play multiplats on PS3 and I can say haven't been dissapointed yet. I mean other than being able to use this crap in your childish arguements, how does it benifit you?

Spend your money however makes you happy but understand anyone using this as an argument for which console is more powerful is a giant douche. Same goes to PS3 gamers. Comparisons on a game like this are for socialy inept fuc*tards to debate.

JOLLY13559d ago

You can get more points in the 360 version of SFIV. Yes, I was kidding. Now quit arguing and start playing.

Aquanox3559d ago

This shows how in real life, efficiency is better than raw horse power. While you might see some isolated jewels in a complicated architechture, games that also excel in technology - and gameplay - perform better in a more efficient architecture like the Xbox 360's.

Said this, I wouldn't consider the sub-HD resolution a big deal, however, the lack of AA is, considering the Xbox 360 counterpart does have it.

Gun_Senshi3559d ago

ALL Multiplatforms are best on PC. END. NO CONTEST.

IdleLeeSiuLung3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

With the superiority of PS3 "power", how come we still after 2 years see multiplatform games either equal or better on the 360?

One can argue, that Sf4 isn't the most technical demanding game then one should also ask themselves if it isn't demanding why does it still look better on the 360?

I'm no fanboy and pre-ordered on PS3 (which is now on backorder), but like to say it as it is. Yet again we get another game that is better on the 360, granted this is minor if anything, but it continually re-inforces that games on the 360 is better. Just look at the US IGN review of SF IV, the PS3 version had technical issues (outside of gameplay)

"We ran into a few bugs with bringing up the XMB on the PS3 version, as the game would occasionally crash in the process and there was a strange Trophy bug that reared up when foreign unlock data was transferred to our PS3."

Instead of fanboys dismissing this, I really think that this analysis reinforces quality assurance from consumers.

Real Gambler3559d ago

"And yet the PS3 cant even render it in true HD, not looking good for future more demanding multiplatform games is it "

Fitting everything on a 9 gig disk will be demanding in the future... Still making games for consoles without hard drives will be demanding in the future. Finally finding a programmer who knows how to program a PS3 in the future? Well, more and more are learning about the console. Finding a magician who can fit more and more stuff on a 9 gig disk for a console with no hard drive, in the future? Priceless. Maybe you're future is only 1 year from now, but mine isn't.

thewhoopimen3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

Why is there Sub-HD and no AA?

It's called a quick and dirty port. Its what happens when developers on a limited budget say, "this is good enough"

PS3 should has quicunix. There is no excuse for having sub-hd resolution on textures for a game of this size or limited technical showcase. It's called lazy. Like your arguments.

@Sevir4 This isn't even about how the game plays in motion or not.
This is how they originally designed the game (on a PC) and how "little" thought they went to porting it. This game follows a traditional CPU processes while "GPU renders everything onscreen" mentality. Well the 360 works that way b/c it was designed for that in mind (thus why developers say it is easy to develop for yada yada).

The PS3 with split memory architectures and SPUs designed to render (as well) doesn't work that way. If they do a quick and dirty port, then the PS3 is essentially a gimped single core processor rendering to a Nvidia GPU with only 256 mb of memory. No multi-threading, non-efficient use of the remaining 256 XDRAM dedicated to the processor. No Quicunix b/c it is 'extra' work. No SPU usage b/c it is 'extra' programming and thus 'extra' work. Thus why I say all the xboy fanbots need to really educate themselves on where and when to bash.

Sevir043559d ago

because thats the only way you'll notice these so called jaggies. This gen people are just looking for all sorts of things to slander a console. in motion while playing, you cant see jaggies, or sub HD graphics, It looks good, runs smooth. you arent playing a still veiw picture. If thats all you wanted then you should perhaps take pictures and and and play thjose in a slide show. if seeing sub HD stills is all you want then maybe you should skip playing games to gether. i'm sure it didn't bug yuo when you were okay halo in 640p did it omega. please quit spaming, the game looks good and plays well. get over it.

it's 3 years now, The console wars need to end. play games not fanboys

eagle213559d ago

1.) Controls, PS3 wins. Most important!
2.) Special Edition, PS3 wins. Blu-ray and Ryu FTW! I also think 360's lime green is totally ugly for most box arts.
3.) Sound, no need to crank it loud cause PS3 is quiet and 360 is noisey.
4.) Play as long as you wish on PS3. :)

If you think 360 is flawless in rendering any multiplat, you are mentally delusional. Even most 360 exclusives are not impressive.

ukilnme3559d ago

@ CaseyRyback_CPO

"Omega, SF4 is rated on the PS3 just as high as the 360 version.
Again, who does this matter to outside of the people that aren't buying the PS3 version. The 360 owners."

Don't kid yourself. We all know if it was the other way around it would matter to the PS3 owners, the special ones anyway which happen to be the majority on N4G. They manage to find their way in to 99% of the 360 articles good or bad. Don't worry though, I know that works both ways too.

ActionBastard3559d ago

I was too busy whoppin ass with my boy Ken to notice anything that insignificant. Why not compare the load times? It's installed on my PS3 and I have yet to see "loading". I feel like I'm in an arcade.

IdleLeeSiuLung3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

Thanks for the PM.

I agree with you that it might be developer laziness to some degree, but you also have to ask Sony why they made this decision to design a console with so much theoretical power at the cost of developers time. As a programmer myself, I can appreciate a design that allows me to be more efficient instead of re-educating myself on a new and arguably untested architecture.

Lazy or not, resources are limited and budgeted. They either put it into making the port run or in adding new features. In addition, both ports (360/ps3) are made in tandem, why does one suffer more than the other?

Nobody is arguing the PS3 power as we all know the cell processor is a monster calculator, but it doesn't matter if we consistently get crappier ports than the competition.

edit: @Action Bastard below
I'm not sure if your comment was directed at me, but when I say port, I mean a port from the Arcade version, that is why I say "both ports are made in tandem"... you can't make a port of each other in tandem...

Also, this just came in. It appears there are more details and it appears the PS3 version is getting shafted again: (via another n4g news posting here)

I'm starting to wonder if I should have ordered the 360 version now. Small differences yes, but still. The d-pad on the 360 is so crappy though, I was pissed of playing MK vs. DC on it. Furthermore, even on shooters like gears changing weapons frequently changes into the wrong weapon with the d-pad. That d-pad has a 50% chance you get the action you intended it to do.

ActionBastard3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

I love the ingorance in this thread. The PS3 version is not a port of the 360 version. It was built off the same engine Capcom built SPECIFICALLY for MULTIPLATFORM game development. You know, to reduce production costs by not having separate engines for separate hardware (360, PS3, PC). It's called MT Framework. Look it up.

No, my comments were not directed at you. Just the general assumption. Capcom themselves stated if there were ANY differences in the two versions, they would have placed them side by side at CES. This is just a flamebait article from a "gamer" without a PS3.


27 - PS3 - 360
1.) Controls, PS3 wins for games that are focused on use of the Dpad. otherwise 360 wins by a long shot (also, if you're any good at all at SF you'd buy a joystick so this is a useless argument. Most important!
2.) Special Edition, PS3 wins. Blu-ray and Ryu FTW! I also think 360's lime green is totally ugly for most box arts. (useless argument as well..don't you already own a PS3? I do.
3.) Sound, no need to crank it loud cause PS3 is quiet and 360 is noisey. (true gamers, like myself have high end headphones for gaming or a little thing called surround sound)
4.) Play as long as you wish on PS3 or 360.

If you think 360 is flawless in rendering any multiplat, you are mentally delusional. Even most 360 exclusives are not impressive because I am HEAVILY biased and not a true fan of gaming or art.

ukilnme3559d ago


LOL. That was a good fix.

SWORDF1SH3559d ago

Enough of the fanboy news and fanboys on N4G.
Gaming journalist have got out of hand and its spreading to the gamers.
Be a real gamer and stop with the hate for rival console.
Both consoles are here to stay so get over it.
Make N4G a gaming site once again and MESSAGE ME to add you to the list to show that you support this message and spread this message.
Go on. Say something nice about your rival console.
People that support it:

Consoldtobots3559d ago

I've done my own graphics comparison and found some GLARING flaws in the 360's graphical output. I even got a magnifying glass to see it in more detail. To my surprise those jaggies turned into letters which formed words like

"I can't run KZ2,UC2,GT:5,MGS:4,GOW3,HR,MS: PR,basically any PS3 exclusive"

NOW those are graphical flaws that would make me think twice about a console. What point am I trying to make here?

hardly noticeable jaggies vs. MONSTER PS3 exclusives = NO CONTEST

If thats the only selling point you guys have for the 360 over the PS3 I can see why many are already proclaiming it dead.

eagle213559d ago

trust me, I know gaming and art extremely well. :)

Joey Greco RULES3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

Whiny b*tches in this place, for reals.

I like the "jagged" look. Gives it a rough, and hand-drawn characteristic.

You wont notice this while playing the game, and if you are, then your prolly getting your @$$ beat by the opponent.

@eagle21: eagle eye smith?

callahan093559d ago

Who cares about this crap. Some people just have too much time on their hands investigating these minute differences in graphical clarity between the PS3 and 360. It doesn't matter about the graphics, the things you should consider when choosing to buy this game are, in this order:

1) If I intend to play online with my friends, what system will they be buying the game for?

2) Which controller do I like better for this kind of game? (you can always just buy the third-party SFIV controller if criteria number 1 has you purchasing the game for the system who's controller you don't prefer)

3) Do I prefer increasing my trophy rank or gamerscore?

DaTruth3559d ago

Yeah, but most of these people probably aren't buying this game, they just like to whine about it on N4G.

But seriously, If you have a 360 and no PS3, you shouldn't be in this thread, you should just see the heading and be happy. If you only own a PS3 you can discuss how Capcom screwed you or you can say, I can hardly tell the difference, and go on with life. If you have both, then you would get the PS3 version for the controller and graphical analysis is a moot point.

DelbertGrady3559d ago

In conclusion, the PS3 is not the best choice if you are interested in playing multiplat games.

Don_Frappucino3559d ago

"With the superiority of PS3 "power", how come we still after 2 years see multiplatform games either equal or better on the 360?"
Mirrors edge was better on the PS3 than the 360, even IGN said so. Do you homework before posting boy.

pixelsword3559d ago

...until then, who cares.


Try harder at what? I saw some fanboyish statements made so I highlighted or fixed them for you.

go that way >>>>>> if you feel like posting with the kiddies. I like to once in a while ;)

there are visiually stunning games for both consoles and games that are fun to play for both..whats your damage dude?

snyper8313559d ago

Ps3 fanboys quit making excuses, if the ps3 was really so much more powerfull it would show in every game specially in multiplatform games i just bought a ps3 and played killzone2 and yes the game looks awesome but so many 360 games. Remember the original xbox?? ok that system was clearly more powerfull than ps2 and it showed specially in multiplatform games where you can fairly compare both systems... And at the end of the day what matters is for you to enjoy the games thats why i bought a ps3 to play some games i been missing out even though my system of choice is 360..

eagle213559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

You're pretty biased, calling me out instead of comment 1.0. Seriously, check the media about how visually impressive PS3 games are. :)

medziarz3559d ago

has anyone even look at them and compare?!
the're basicaly in the same shape

WIIIS13559d ago

I just wish to say this proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the PS3 is the inferior console for graphics.

There is absolutely no justification why multiplatforms continue to be vastly superior on the 360 even after such a long time. If the PS3 is the more capable machine, multiplatforms would at least be equal if not better on the PS3. Case on point, Xbox v. PS2. That is the plain, simple and true logic. Any argument to the contrary is unadulterated nonsense and just a deliberate attempt to blind yourself to facts in order to soothe your bruised and battered fanboy ego.

What do we make of PS3 exclusives you ask? Well firstly, while I'd admit some PS3 exclusives have high production values, I do not agree that they are graphically superior to what we've seen on 360. Secondly, even if you insist they are graphically superior, the obvious answer is that a LOT more time and money have been pumped into the development of the graphics of these games. There has not been a single 360 exclusive game with that kind of budget and emphasis on graphics. Too Human, by the way, was a game trying to revolutionize gameplay rather than graphics and in any case ran into severe problems Unreal Engine and had to restart their graphics engine from scratch.

360 > PS3 graphically. That's the bottom line, like it or not. No shame in that since Xbox > PS2 graphically too.

pain777pas3559d ago

Ported games are a problem for the PS3 hands down we all must accept this few developers can get around this due to the specialized coding of the PS3. The PS3 will only accel in PS3 exclusives I can now rest easy though because the games are so close that it does not matter and the exclusive PS3 content is very good from Sony. RPG please from a SONY studio and then I'll just relax and play games not fight over resolutions for multiplats. The PS3 and Xbox 360 work differently and the PC is where most games are made then ported. So the 360 is more suited for porting PC games to based on develpers like John Carmack who have stated that with time the PS3 can output better graphics and of course physics etc but if your in a time crunch the 360 is the way to go for multiplats. All PS3 owners live with it. I'm happy about it because I think as far as games and content go with flower and Killzone in the same month show AAA titles that are diverse in style and both very high quality. The PS3 is for me.

JHUX3559d ago

I hate to tell you, but if it was possible then I think we would be seeing it by now. The fact is the 360 has been out a whole year ahead of the ps3, so it should be graphically ahead at a much more noticeable level. Instead though, we see that ps3 exclusives have always out shined the 360 games. Multiplatform started off with a different story. Now though most multiplat games look about the same, which is what the developers plans are. Now a days people are trying to nitpick things that are non existent, or so small that they would find problems with something even if they were looking at the same screen shots, but they were labeled differently (thats when being a fanboy takes over your eyes). It started with resistance fall of man being a pretty impressive launch title for what it was, but then uncharted and RTOD came out(Which were best out at the time graphically). That has continued till this day, exclusives still remain better, Microsoft has the budget and they have definitely had the time to do so, yet they still haven't broken out ahead when it comes to exclusive games.

I could say "Hey, look at how much money was put into halo 3", and then that would show what came out of a big budget game. I know a lot was spent on advertising, but it had a pretty hefty development budget as well, and it definitely wasn't state of the art by any means.

Multiplatform games are going to basically be the same. The developers are going to do there best to try to make them equal. There will be minor differences that only fanboys are going to make a big deal about, I highly doubt we are going to see any Madden 07 type deals happen anymore.

I am not trying to come off as a fanboy in anyway, but I have to step in when I see excuses being pumped out that really don't make any sense. The bottom line is you are wrong, I mean if this whole generation passes, and the 360 never takes the lead when it comes to exclusives, are you going to still use that excuse that Microsoft didn't put as much money (LOL), and they didn't have time to put out games that look that good? Uncharted 2 is supposed to drop this year, I am sure it would like to have a word with you.


check the Media? I'll leave the screen shot and video comparisons to you bro. I can just touch that little icon on my PS3 and see those games up close :P

The Dude3559d ago

All games look better on the 360. Every multi platform game has looked and played best on the 360.

WIIIS13559d ago

Thank you for a very civilized and studied response which I wasn't quite expecting.

I however disagree with your contentions.

I wish to state at the outset, if you will take my word as truth, that I do have all 3 consoles. I have played some of the best PS3 exclusive games like Uncharted, MGS4, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet & Clank and Resistance 2.

I cannot see why you would say that because the 360 had a year's start, it should be ahead of the 360 in terms of graphics. We did not see PS2 games being graphically superior to Xbox despite the early start of PS2. The Xbox's superior hardware simply and quickly trounced what the PS2 was capable of. Maybe you are saying that developers are still learning to program for the PS3. But it has been more than 2 years now and many games have been released during this time. That argument is therefore diminished and holds little weight. Particularly when SFIV is not a graphically or technically demanding game. So there should really be no excuse why the PS3 version is inferior if the PS3 is supposed to be better.

And the truth of the matter is 360 games have not required that kind of time and budget on graphics. Yes, a lot of money might have been spent on 360 games in terms of marketing, but that is not the issue. That is why you would have seen 2 PGRs and 2 Forzas even before a single full GT game is released on the PS3. This is a fact, not an excuse. Apart from the Gears series, you don't have any 360 game in which the marketing angle is so intensely focused on graphics and/ or animation. Unlike Heavenly Sword. Uncharted. MGS4. KZ2. GT5. I figure it is because MS wants to make money, so they want their games out fast.

The advantage that I do see on the PS3 are the animations (which made Uncharted great) and cinematics (which was what MGS4 was about). However, I do not believe those are a reflection of the graphical horsepower of the consoles. PS3 games have the luxury of indulging in animations and cinematics because of blu-ray storage space.

You say that multiplatforms are going to be basically the same and that developers are going to make them equal. Fair enough a comment. However, I can't understand fanboys who try to go further and say that the 360 is holding back the PS3 on multiplatforms. Now that is plain rubbish. How can the 360 be holding back anything when the PS3 version is not even equal the 360 version?

The true test I suspect will come in the form of Final Fantasy XIII. Videos of that game hint that the graphics are going to be astounding and possibly going to be the best on any console when released. Let's see which console performs better then...

JHUX3558d ago

I agree with you in some aspects.

With what I was saying with budget, yes a ton of that is poured into marketing (which Microsoft is great at), but also 30million I believe was the developing cost for halo3. With the year head start I didn't quite make that clear, and you are right about the xbox being better graphically than the ps2 when it came out. My previous argument on that doesn't quite hold up you are right since the 360 came out with developers already very experienced on how to program for a machine like that (basically PC). I was more pointing out that developers have had such tough times learning how to program the ps3, but still off the bat the ps3 came out with some of the best looking games this gen. I think that we will continue seeing its "power" for say unlocked more and more and continue to take the lead when it comes graphics (exclusives). I think we will also see that games aren't going to need this kind of time after these initial big games are released to put out that kind of quality. Like Killzone 2 for example, a majority of that time was put on making the engine, and now that it is done we will see the next one faster, and they will also be sharing there technology with other ps3 developers.

On multiplatform games I stand by the fact that the developers goal is to make them equal. Even though I feel that the ps3 can put out better graphics overall than the 360, I think it has been proven that the 360 can still hold it's own, and people who claim that multiplats are being held back are pretty much just fanboys. Trust me any kind of fanboy annoys me as much as it probably annoys you, and you just gotta learn to weed them out on this website, as they are bad on both sides of the "war". It's no question that development is easier to do on the 360 than the ps3, so that's going to be the first choice for any developer, on a multiplat game there not going to have the funds to equally create each game, so in most cases it will always be a port. It would be nice if they were able to just create each game from scratch on each system, but the time differences and money differences prevent that.

In my previous post I apologize for downright saying you were wrong, in my opinion in some cases I believe you were, but reading back on some of it in some cases you made good points.

Hope this post made sense, had a small operation and these painkillers kind of make me forget a lot of stuff haha.

+ Show (51) more repliesLast reply 3558d ago
-EvoAnubis-3559d ago

This is going to be a train wreck when it actually goes live on the site.

happyface3559d ago

glad I have the superior version on Xbox 360 - very fun game!

Sheddi3559d ago

Are u glad about the d-pad too?
I guess it all comes down to what u prefer the most.
Better d-pad or better graphics?

Black_Jack3559d ago

put it this way, if psn SFIV players played against Xbox live players online, ps3 players would destroy them, thats how bad the dpad on the xbox is.

ceedubya93559d ago

Its just that the D-pad for the 360 sucks a little worse. So we are comparing to see which one sucks worse. Really, the best way to play on either console is with an arcade stick, or even the new fightpad that has six face buttons and a better D-pad.

-EvoAnubis-3559d ago

I spent some time looking through your commenting history. Based on that, I can easily see that you'd claim the 360 version was superior even if it was the graphical equal to Eternal Champions on the 32X. Your opinion is irrelevant.

pumpkinpunker3559d ago (Edited 3559d ago )

lack of anti-aliasing on a HD console is unacceptable. Also, check out screen shot differences. I would be pretty mad to be a Sony fanboy and paid all that money for a game that doesn't even play Street Fighter 4 in true HD. Oh wait, I just described N4G.

gamesmaster3559d ago

360 fanboys use this against ps3 fanboys, but isn't the lack of AA a reflection of poor development on capcoms part. i mean we know the ps3 can do it. multiplatforms performing not so well on ps3 isnt a reflection of the ps3's hardware but of the laziness of devs and impatience to get these games out of the door.

DaTruth3559d ago

It's a proven fact that 360 fanboys will buy a game they didn't even want because it is deficient on the PS3; Since Xbox lost last gen they know that they're sensitive to these things. People who want the game regardless wouldn't care. So it gets them a few extra sales.

1ikedamaster3558d ago

I haven't used the d-pad for fighting games since the SNES. I'll be on the 360 version thank you.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3558d ago
Lucreto3559d ago

The different is tiny and I can barely see it even looking close.

Unless people will have the two versions playing in the same room and using magnifying lenses you will see no difference.

Kushan3559d ago

Yet we see this kind of thing for pretty much every single multi-platform release, with people literally breaking out the magnifying glasses to find the smallest of differences in order to jump around proclaiming one console as "superior" to the other.
Kinda sad, really, when you think about it.

jackdoe3559d ago

Actually, you need to pause the game as well when performing an ultra combo.

Marceles3559d ago

"However, you might notice the edges in the character close-ups"

Didnt notice and I was playing it all afternoon