In that screenshot check Videogameszone compared the Xbox 360 to the PS3 (preview) version of Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands.
But is it just me, or is Ubisoft's graphics are just "not" up to standard? -End statement
YH not looking good, and if the ps3 version looks like that, ubisoft needs to let someone else port their games.
That's because it's a game based on teh Movie which will be out soon . So it'S a rushed out Product.
Both versions look like crap but the PS3 one looks very washed out.
Been saying it ever since this game was announced - this will suck and not be up to Ubi's PoP standards. Just a rushed movie-tie-in game no matter what they try to say. It clearly shows. Someone let me know when they go back and make a sequel to the 2008 Prince of Persia game.
Its been a long time since I thought a Ubisoft came actually 'looked' good. They typically play just fine, but their engines seem to be a generation behind at all time. I feel like I'm playing a cartoon every time I play one of their games.
However, the PS3 version suffers from being sub-hd or really poor textures. I'm not gonna be blinded by fanboyism, the Xbox360 is clearly the winer here; Ubisoft should just give up already! Click on "Bild in Originalgröße" to see higher resolution pictures which is located on the lower right side below the image :-)
Agreed with everyone above. The Xbox version looks slightly better, but they both look...sub-par. Like Natsu said, this game was rushed, which sucks because I'm a fan of the series. Oh well.
Did you even play "Sands of Time"? -End statement
Bob Dole thinks the 360 version is slightly crispier. But it doesn't matter to Bob Dole, he'll be too busy tearing up the wild west in Red Dead Redemption to play this game. Bob Dole.
Seems that QQAA will be the PS3's karma for the rest of the generation.
yeah PS3 looks lighter then the 360 version idk but this can be fixed with lighting adjustment (just like MW2)
Want more colour?, pick up your TV remote guys not hard.
Lighting? It's much more than that. Ps3 version is all washed out and textures are blured thanks to QQAA.
i was looking at the gameplay on gt and it looks crap gameplay wise. although its similar to the original games it looks like somethings missing and im not sure what it is. if i get the game looks like it will have to be the 360 version even though id rather it on ps3. i will just wait for reviews
i only got PS3. so i dont care..
Look at the light coming down in the door way for PS3, 360 don't have that effect in the picture.
I'm no fan of the 360, but what purpose do you have for pointing that out other than some lame attempt to suggest that the PS3 version is doing something that the 360 version isn't apparently capable of? The difference is obviously due to a variation in what occurred during the gameplay, not anything to do with a special effect. Regardless, both versions of this game look like total crap, and clearly aren't using either systems hardware to a fraction of what they're capable of. God of War Collection looks just as good if not better, this game looks like it's barely even from this console generation. Maybe I'm missing something, is this also due out on Wii and PS2? Probably developed using some crappy early version of UE3, which is why the PS3 version looks slightly crappier, as we all know that engine has never been able to properly utilize the system's resources. I hope Crysis 2 really raises the bar so that everyone switches to CryEngine and then maybe we can finally put that terrible engine to rest. It's done well on the 360, but it has always sold the PS3 short, and there's plenty of evidence from proprietary engine's that the PS3 can do much, much better. This game fails.
I'm guessing the PS3 version is upscaled. That's how they tend to look. Or qaa.
i have all systems though i like the look of the 360 version better im stil going to get the ps3 version anyways
360 wins with sharper graphics and walmer colours.
walmer colors FTW! =P
360 looks better because of better lighting, could probably be fixed just by adjusting the brightness/contrast on your TV or ingame though.
Well, based on that screenshot the Xbox 360 version looks better with deeper/warmer colours But these german websites always do very bad jobs of these things, I like to wait until Lens of Truth.
Why are people approving these types of articles? X vs Y this and that.
These are actually the first screenshots I've even seen of the game. Never bodes well when they hold everything back till release. Not looking to great to me, shame, enjoyed the last with it's stylised look and disappointing ending.
I think everyone is missing the point. The game is just a movie tie-in. It's like that Transformer's game. Why are people interested in comparisons of what will be a bad game.
Ubisoft has not contributed any good games this generation, don't even say AC2 'cause that game was a casual bore fest.
both are same, just that different in brightness..compare graphich not compare in this way, need to compare in a very close range and polygon details, lightning effects etc..
It's just being released simultaneously with the film. The film's sort of a big screen re-imagining of the Sands of Time, whilst this is an interim chapter between the Sands and Warrior Within; an Interquel. So it's kind of depressing that the reboot of the old style looks so sh*t. I was expecting a more acrobatic, intense version of Assassin's Creed, but this just looks weak. The draw distance in some of those shots was absolutely dire. Still, looks better than that dreadful looking wii port.
Both look like PS2 games did they forget to flip the HD switch lol??. Its funny though looking at every1 trying to see which looks like the better crap out of the 2.
The PlayStation 3 version seems to display better high dynamic range rendering by showing more detail in dark/light areas, but that can be fixed with the TV from the looks of it. In the end the graphics are the same whether one shows more in light/dark areas without over powering the shadow casting.
A pack of rabid baboons? I think this game was meant for the original XBOX and PS2. No excuse for this slop... SMH, ruin another franchise shall we? Why are you guys going along comparing these? "This turd is better than that turd. This one has light brown swirls and corn kernels in it! Yummm!" Dude, it's still shyt! This should've been a PSN and XBL title for $15-$20 according to looks.
The last Prince of Persia!
This looks like its going back to Warrior Within, Sands of Time type of game and graphics. I do like the originals better than the last POP, that one was poor IMO. This new one though, the graphics look PS2 (not HD). Watched some gameplay on GT and it is very similar to Warrior Within/ Sands of Time. If it's a fairly long game with decent reviews then I might give it a go as I loved WW/SoT.
Both versions look like crap. IMO. PS3/Xbox 360 versions look exactly the same with 2 minor exceptions. ---PS3 = Better Lighting. ---Xbox 360 = Better Shading.
..after all those "resolution doesn't matter" articles about sub-HD in Alan Wake and SC:C, the resolution does matter again so we all can participate in pixel countin' wars? ))) . Yesterday it doesn't matter, today it matters... The vane of a brain indeed.
this play like and look like a game that should have been on the ps2
or do the graphics just suck for both consoles
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.