In that screenshot comparison Videogameszone checked the differences between the PS3 and Xbox 360 version BioShock 2. Hint: Click on "Screenshot in HD" to view them in original size.
I don't see any difference. WELL DONE 2KMARIN!
Look at this: http://www.videogameszone.d... huge difference.
that's great they both look exactly the same
Something fishy is going on with these images. I have a feeling they have mixed up a few. Take a look at this one, now the Xbox 360 has sharper textures: http://www.videogameszone.d...
They're the same. Same res and AA. The 360 version is a bit darker, that's 'bout it. EDIT: What's with the major screen tear in the first shot? I'd like to see Digital Foundry's examination on this. BTW, good work 2KMARIN. Much better than that sub-par port you gave us two years back.
All those that think these screen shots look the same need to get their eyes checked.
Like always, I'll wait for Digital Foundry to make their comparison.
I will get the version for the console I have most friends on. The graphicsl differences are so slight that it comes down to fun with buddies.
Seriously man this is the same stupid website that has always either mixed up the Pictures and/or takes the pics when the 360 is loading its textures!All so that the Ps3 version can look superior. I dont know about you guys but ill wait for the Lens of Truth to do the comparisons the PROPER way THE non-biased WAY!! These guys did the EXACT same thing with that failed game Dark Void, they took comparison shot right when the 360 version was loading its textures! These guys are FAIL plain and simple!
What would it matter? Even if they switched them ALL, there's almost NO differences between them anyhow.
like usual these pics are not even the same. I could probably get more comparable shots without even trying if I was to do this.
Even If he is a known fanboy (and some time's a troll), I don't see anything wrong with his comment!!
It must be my eyes, but there's a pretty clear difference... The PS3 version is sharper. Look at image 2, where it says "Fallen Fallen is Babylon" and "Adonis Luxury Resort" You cant even read the 360 version. http://www.videogameszone.d... Strange... I was actually going to rent the 360 version because I finished the original on the 360. Looks like I'm just going with the PS3 version then.
@SeNiLe911 Yeah, in that screenshot the 360 version looks more detailed, especially in the rocks and in the ceiling on the upper right. The PS3 version also looks a little blurrier in that shot. But again, I don't really find this site's captures to be reliable. I will wait for comparisons from sites that have proven to be accurate.
wow, thought I would never say this, but look at the second screenshot! the PS3 version is vastly superior... the words are much sharper :O
they never throw in the PC comparisons. already got it preordered on steam. I got the first one for console, but when i bought the 2nd for PC they included the first one for free. i can safely say there's a huge difference. can't wait to play the 2nd.
LOL this site just fumbled the ball
this site is [email protected], they always do the worst pic comparisons. wait for lens of truth not this wannabe site.
The first 4-5 shots had me thinking the ps3 version was better, but then the last 4-5 had me thinking the 360 was better. My conclusion? A draw. I think the problem with these pics comes down to very one simple thing. There is no LOD to speak of in this game. So really how the textures look depends upon how close or far the person is when taking an image capture of the scene . I think I am making a pretty qualified statement when I say that the closer you are to the object... the blurrier it gets in this game. If you review all the pics again, maybe we can all correlate this. I say whichever console took a further shot away from the scene has sharper textures. The lighting effects may also be slightly different between the two consoles.
@1.13 Oh crap, you're right. I don't know how I missed that. @1.14 Take into account that he's twice as close to the rocks in one compared to the other.
Those look mixed up! In some the PS3 version looks vastly superior and in others the 360 version looks vastly superior! There is one really blurry version, but it looks so bad, I can't believe it's real! Looks like PC versus consoles; But I can't even believe a console version looks that bad!
you are all forgetting how horrible of an engine unreal 3 is. I'm fairly sure that the differences can be attributed to the textures not fully loading when the capture was taken. Just my two cents other than that they look the same.
the 360 version would look better xD guess i was wrong
But killzone 2 looks better than Bioshock 2, so it don't matter which version of Bioshock 2 is better because it's only marginal.
Bubbles for you m8!! SIKE!! Wow that ps3 version is the ruler of all...dam!
^ I stopped reading your comment there considering you are "supposedly" new to N4G. How would you know what members are what if you basically just joined N4G? Oh I know the answer. I think we all do.
And by "just joined" u mean? been checking the site for 2-3 months now, but recently created an account(almost a week ago).. Sorry, but ur not as smart as u think u r!
lol: i thought it would look better on x360... http://www.videogameszone.d...
Minor differences as far as what can be seen in the screenshots. But we need to see proper comparisons to know if their are any other differences.
@jaidek its not the first time I have seen that from that site where one console looks better in one set of shots then another looks better in another set. That site is very unreliable for comparison shots but once again I have to say it. DO we HAVE to have one of these articles everytime a multi-platform game is released SERIOUSLY??
From what I can see from the screen-shot that FangBlade posted at 1.1, the 360 version is blurrier but that is probably a result of anti-aliasing. I notice the scene isn't as sharp, but there's also less aliasing on the loose concrete slabs in the foreground. It's a tradeoff. Anti-aliasing with a little loss of sharpness, or sharpness with a bit of aliasing? Both versions may not be identical, but they even out to be pretty darn equal I think. Some of the other shots make the PS3 version look less sharp, but what I noticed every one of these shots is that the textures that appear blurrier are always closer to the camera. Like the rocks on the ground & the footprints on the floor shots, he is standing a lot closer to these focal points on the PS3 version than the 360 version, which make effect how sharp the textures look in the shots. Overall it's a pretty poor comparison because the shots are not staged similarly enough to make a truly fair comparison.
In some pics the PS3 looks better. In others the 360. Which has the best frame rate?
I agree, it all comes down to performance. The other issue I have with this sites images is that they are inconsistent. Some images are further away, others have different angles and even weapons. Makes it hard to compare 1 to 1.
Some look better? The only differences I saw was a screen tear in the first screen on the 360 side (And that might be common on both sides for all we know) and a blurry hand-print texture on the one PS3 side (And THAT might be because he's 2x closer in the PS3 shot. But I agree about wanting to know about the frame-rates. I'm sure they won't be too far off from each other, they usually aren't these days (excluding some games of pornstar witches).
I think if its that hard to compare 1 to 1, then they both are pretty much the same.
Learned not to trust this site. Lens of Truth is better.
If you don't mind, could you elaborate on what they did to lose your trust? A specific comparison, perhaps.
It's that this site is not as percise as the other. This site does take the screen shots at the same moments, they are doing different things. Like in one of those pics the PS3 pic shows the guy just standing there while below it shows the 360 pic of him shooting the plasmid from the left hand. Lens of truth gets the pictures identical and the frame-rates are spot on for both in lens of truth. I just am able to see a clearer and more decisive difference then this site. Some pictures on this one show the 360 to be blurry and a few pictures show the PS3 to be blurry. This site is just not as good as lens of truth. It has done that with MW2 and I think borderlands too.
-Yeah, this site seems a little flaky. Their comparisons often do not agree with what other comparisons show and they do not represent what I see when I actually compare the games myself. Something is very strange about their screenshots. So, like many other people, I will wait for the more in-depth analysis from Lens of Truth and Digital Foundry. Especially Digital Foundry. Their comparisons and technical analysis go deeper than those of anyone else.-
agreed. digital foundry is very good.
I will wait for Lens of Truth or Digital Foundry. However, either way I will enjoy this game! The first one was amazing and I doubt any differences is significant enough to change the game play experience (sans performance though)....
Digital Foundry is the best. Lens of Truth also do a pretty good job, but Digital Foundry have more technical knowledge and they go a little deeper in their analysis. Several of the people that contribute to Digital Foundry are programmers/developers and they have a lot of knowledge about the technical side of video games. Lens of Truth do their best to be unbiased but they sometimes miss things or they come to strange conclusions. For example, I bought the PS3 version of Mirror's Edge based on the fact that Lens of Truth claimed the PS3 version was better, only to later play the 360 version and realize that it was better. The PS3 version has more jaggies and screen tearing and otherwise the two versions were very similar. They gave it to the PS3 version because they liked the way Faith's hands in the PS3 version look in certain places and because of some subtle artifacting in the shadows in one location in the 360 version. Believe me, I have played through both versions and the things Lens of Truth mentioned are minuscule and are not seen 95% of the time, while the difference in screen tearing and anti-aliasing affects basically the entire game. It's for a few cases like these that I don't trust Lens of Truth 100%, but they are still doing a pretty good job and I appreciate their general lack of bias. I like them both, but Digital Foundry has been a little more reliable in my experience.
first picture is very funny there is a huge tear thru the screen they must have seen that and done it on puprose.
Do i care if there are tiny differences? NO!
there's no difference. they made sure they stand by their statement about fanboyism. good job 2k.
I agree I don't really see much of a difference if any.
Another poor comparison from videogames.de Next time let the textures load in both versions before you grab the screenshots ;)
Yeah they should stare at the wall a couple of seconds before the textures load... its only fair in still shots, right?
If the 360 can't load textures quick enough then that is just tough to be honest!
No, you guys don't get it. The textures load in equally fast on both versions. What he is saying is that when they take the 360 screenshots they purposely take shots of unloaded textures or catch it when there is a screen tear, like in that first screen shot.
It's pretty obvious if you look at the fountain in the secon pic.
Unreal Engine has terrible texture pop-in... on any platform! That is probably why half of the shots look better on PS3 and half look better on 360! It's just a poorly done comparison... I mean in execution, because all comparisons are poorly done in taste!
PS3 is clearly sharper
no differince tho 360 does slightly look a little blurry nothing to worry about tho
The screen shots look very similar so good job 2k. There are many things that would make the same game different on the 2 systems. Framerate, loadtimes, and how well multiplayer runs, I don't like people comparing games based only on the still shots it is not the full story. Both systems should be able to run this game in the same manor and it looks like everyone will get to enjoy another great game. Bioshock one was terrific and 2 looks like they managed to at least meet that standard.
the Limited Edition for my PS3 tonight, my PS3 told me if I didn't pick it up tonight, it would send BIG SISTER after me, AAAAHHHHHH!!! :P :D
Dont see much of a difference...only thing is sometimes ps3s textures look sharper and sometimes 360s,did somebody mix those two?Still,the game looks a bit meh...
Hasn't done any comparisons lately because they are biased and only do games that they can give xbox 360 a win
Apparently you haven't been to their site recently.
Ionix, like the guy above me said, you must not have gone to their site recently. They have continued to do comparisons and they generally do a good job. Quit being such a butthurt fanboy.
http://www.videogameszone.d... looks like the same artifacts in 360 GTA4.
I can clearly see that the PS3 version is at least 2% sharper. And to think those morons at Gamestop told me I'd be happier with a 360, HA. Thank you for this screenshot comparison, now I know for sure which console to buy. 'rolls eyes'
Good stuff 2K, both look pretty much identical. Any very minor differences just simply wouldn't be noticed when playing.
some pics look better for ps3, some for 360. doesn't help that the comparison shots arn't identical, but regardless already pre ordered through steam :p i do hope the ps3 version turns out good though after the problems with bioshock 1, if i wernt getting for pc the ps3 is where i would be at tbh
Bioshock 1 for PS3 look pretty on par with the 360 after the Patch.
Actually, even after the patch the PS3 version still had a jerkier frame rate and a blurrier look due to the fact that it was sub-HD. http://forum.beyond3d.com/s... The 360 version has a smoother frame rate, sharper textures, more saturated colors and runs at full 720p. It looks like they did a much better job on Bioshock 2, but we still need to see more detailed comparisons to see how both versions perform.
pre ordered the superior pc version with steam. 33usd and bioshock 1 free lol
come on guys, you'll know if the 360 version looks better because people will claim they look the same, the 360 is sporting better color an better teaxture, just look at pic set 7 an look at the water on the stairs. http://www.videogameszone.d... or just look at the floor on pic set 9, http://www.videogameszone.d... as simple as it is the 360 still has the texture advantage, I dont know about load time or framerate but the 360 version does look slightly better!!
all im seeing in pic 9 is that the PS3 version, you are closer to the enemies getting shocked, while the 360 version you are far away from them. The both look %99 percent the same. there's no difference.