790°
Submitted by Faztkiller 1396d ago | article

PS3 vs 360 Face-Off: Dead Rising 2 | Digital Foundry

Digital Foundry: "In the case of Dead Rising 2, a new studio also means a new engine: only recently, with the development of Marvel vs. Capcom 3, has the publisher allowed the use of its prized Framework MT technology outside of its Japanese HQ, so Blue Castle Games utilised its own technology for this release. The result is pretty impressive: the tech manages to process the requisite multitudes of zombies rather well and the draw distance and LOD transitions are fairly smooth with only minimal amounts of pop-up.

Disadvantages arrive in the form of sometimes-basic environments and lighting, along with some low-poly characters, but the overall effect is impressive. The question is, does the technical accomplishment translate over to the PS3 version of the game?" (Dead Rising 2, PS3, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 »
KratosGirI  +   1396d ago
I'm happy with my PS3 version.
Karooo  +   1396d ago
:(
capcom hates the PS3

free dlcs for 360 and a port for ps3
#1.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(33) | Disagree(26) | Report | Reply
KratosGirI  +   1396d ago
So?

I have a 360 and a PS3, but I decided to get the PS3 version because it's my preferred console.

Besides, I can't download Case Zero because it's IP locked.
#1.1.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(33) | Disagree(36) | Report
Blacktric  +   1396d ago
@Kratos Girl

Same here. I hate that stupid region locks. I can't even download Gears Of War 2's Last Day trailer because of the same reason.
Computersaysno  +   1396d ago
Terrible port. Always gonna be the pc version for me though, its only 18 pounds in the uk. That it will be better than the console versions is a given. 50 quid video card says so.
#1.1.3 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(15) | Report
darkride66  +   1396d ago
It's interesting to me how many multiplat games are out there, and how infrequently we see these types of comparisons, and when we do see these comparisons on sites like Eurogamer - they mainly focus on strong 360 games. What about the other 98% of games, because if reviewer scores speak the truth, the vast majority of multiplat games seem to review better on the PS3, and have since 2008.

Some ports are good on the PS3, some on the 360 but most games are so close you'd never notice. What I hate is the usual crowd that use these comparisons as some proof that their console is better than the other. It's not. It speaks to the developers strenghts. Nothing more.
chanto23  +   1396d ago
I said the port was horrible a few days back...
when i first got the chance to play the game and i got a lot of disagrees...

Believe me now?? Damn!!!

http://n4g.com/news/613432/...
commodore64   1396d ago | Personal attack | show
ExplosionSauce  +   1396d ago
Bleh
That's a shame. How much effort is Capcom really working on these games?
Daed Rising 2 is overall visually unimpressive(both versions).
Natsu X FairyTail  +   1396d ago
Great game.
DaTruth  +   1396d ago
Still don't understand why they port over the compression! 360 version 6.1GB. PS3 version 5.91 GB.

This is the case with every multiplatform, 360 lead game. Cell is designed to run uncompressed code from a disk format that requires no compression and spares loss of memory, reduced image and sound quality that is synonymous with compression. Yet it is like these devs are just stuck in a feedback loop and can't fathom writing code without it.
SilentNegotiator  +   1396d ago
I'll go ahead and buy it used, then.

I'm not supporting games with iffy ports.
edgeofblade  +   1396d ago
DaTruth is skewed.

Half of what you said made no sense. What does "uncompressed code" mean? It's frickin code! And all the cutscenes are done in engine, which this article shows runs MUCH better on 360.

You're worse than a troll.
maxcer  +   1396d ago
@ DaTruth

are you going to enlighten us on your 9/11 conspiracy theory too?
Chug  +   1396d ago
O.o
I was crucified for submitting this story yesterday... http://n4g.com/news/613432/...

Also had a few crybaby little girls put me on their ignore list JUST for submitting it and was even accused of making up and writing the story myself just to bash the PS3...even though the PS3 is my console of choice. What a weird, insecure bunch we have here on N4G.

On Topic: Even though I wasn't much looking forward to DR2, this is still a big disappointment to me. Definitely won't be picking this one up...at least not until it drops way down in price.
#1.1.13 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(1) | Report
Hallmark Moment  +   1396d ago
LOL@KratosGirI
You don't have a 360 I've seen some of your past comments. You're getting the PS3 version even though it's inferior because you only have the PS3.
SaberEdge  +   1396d ago
"The PS3 rendition of Dead Rising 2 appears to be using an entirely different approach to the rendering. V-sync is disengaged completely, as is the 30FPS frame-rate cap. What this means is screen-tear is an ever-present element of the image"

Well it turns out that 2brothers and 2 sisters blog (or whatever it was called) was right about the pervasive screen tearing in the PS3 version.

It also goes to show that some of the people claiming that the 360 version has just as much screen tearing as the PS3 version were just talking out their you-know-whats.

"there's some good news for Xbox 360 owners. Probably the most immediately apparent upgrade over the first game is that the developer is running with v-sync active, meaning that there is absolutely no screen-tear at all"
UnwanteDreamz  +   1396d ago
Rejoice fangurls!!! Another average lookingame looks marginally better on your average console.

Lets see average multiplat, check.
Commodore64 and Hallmark commenting like proud fathers, check.

All is well in the land of troll. Holla at me when you have something worth bragging about.
Traveler  +   1396d ago
I told people my PS3 version had lots of screen tearing and I was basically told I was a liar. Nice to get some vindication.
Aquanox  +   1396d ago
The Xbox 360 is definitely the console king of multiplatform titles.

And contrary to what we might have thought before, this is NOT going to change anymore.
#1.1.18 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(6) | Report
lexington  +   1392d ago
I'm sure that capcom hates 30+ million ps3 owners that may be potential buyers....uh....ok.
darkziosj   1396d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(5)
bustamove  +   1396d ago
Are you kidding me? This guy says he's happy with his PS3 version and he got four disagrees saying that?

Anyway, I have yet to try this game out but I'm sure it's not as bad on the PS3 as that other site claimed.

darkziosj: Really mature.

Did you play the PS3 version?
#1.3 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(23) | Report | Reply
plenty a tool  +   1396d ago
i'm going to get the 360 version
now wait and see how many disagrees i get
TOSgamer  +   1396d ago
I would have to assume your new here...
plenty a tool  +   1396d ago
was you asking
if i was new here, the guy above me?
Longrod_Von_Hugendon  +   1396d ago
The whores in the Xbox version have bigger tits than in the PS3 version! I'm not buying this ported crap!

Yeah never intended to get this game so who cares.
#1.4 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(18) | Report | Reply
Sony360  +   1396d ago
Yet here you are making irrelevant comments.

You angry?
maxcer  +   1396d ago
...and i never wanted to post a reply to you comment anyway so who cares.
3dawg  +   1396d ago
i wonder if he's angry about the bad port or the tits
Longrod_Von_Hugendon  +   1396d ago
Wow. Retarded? lol4rl
zeddy  +   1396d ago
this is the reason i like exclusives.
StanLee  +   1396d ago
Having a console for just exclusives makes no sense. There are many great multiplatform games and the negligible differences are only worth arguing over by fanboys. The problem is, Sony justified its console's initial price tag by labeling it the most powerful console. It then spent millions within its internal development studios building the software to justify this claim. The fact is, the PS3 is the more powerful console but developers aren't going to change the foundation of how they've developed games for the pass 15 years just to appease Sony's fanboy base. It isn't worth the investment. The compromises made to PS3 multiplatform games aren't even discernable.
Brklynty1  +   1396d ago
Yea Lee but...
When they all come out looking like this Piece of Sh!t right here you cant blame PS3 owners for only caring about their exclusives more than multiplats.
plenty a tool  +   1396d ago
stan lee
dont even bother. some of the crap that gets wrote on here about exclusives makes me believe that this site is not for gamers at-all.

this gen has produced some truely idiotic individuals
Rhythmattic  +   1396d ago
Oh Stan,

However, you may be correct, but what about if your not ?

Having an exclusive OS makes no sense either...

Problem is , Apple did the same, they spent millions in internal development (Software & Hardware) building to justify the claim....

Deal with it MS boy,
Life beyond it exists...

I own multi platform, multi OS, Multi console systems....

To Add , you cant go telling me, if the internet becomes "The Cloud", and all games are distributed that way, I'm going to be happy missing out on the absolute, get the "F" outta here game, thats an exclusive to "X" device.

As for me, I'm buying it.

I'm a gamer.

+ bubble for you to answer.

Edit: "Having a console for just exclusives makes no sense" If they are there, Yes it does...
#1.5.4 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(8) | Report
Active Reload  +   1396d ago
@StanLee
I usually don't ever see a worthwhile comment from you, but that one is one of the best comments I've read on the internet.
UnwanteDreamz  +   1396d ago
@Stan
While I agree with your comment, I have to wonder who it is meant for. The guy said he likes exclusives and you pretend he said he "only" likes them. Next time you might want to respond to what he actually said. Sounds like you put words in his mouth.
#1.5.6 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(8) | Report
Computersaysno  +   1396d ago
Meh
#1.6 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(11) | Report | Reply
chazjamie  +   1396d ago
well, this should of stayed exclusive. just look at capcoms love for the 360. not sure why they even bothered with a ps3 version
BubbleSystemSuck  +   1396d ago
i really like more the lightings on the ps3 version
Pistolero  +   1396d ago
i really prefer the crappier graphics of the ps3 version...it's so much better with crappy graphics.
Strikepackage Bravo   1396d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(18)
pangitkqb  +   1396d ago
It's sad that Capacom, the classic dev, still hasn't stepped up it's game this gen on PS3.
Frankly, I don't understand it. At this point the average performance differences on multiplat Games are tiny. Why isn't Capcom meeting the same quality as so many other devs? It's bizarre they don't understand that releasing sub par versions of their titles is slowly alienating the world's 38 Million PS3 gamers. Come to think of it, I haven't purchased a single Capcom game in the 3 and 1/2 years I've owned a PS3...because Capcom's games ALWAYS require massive installs and the performance and visuals are STILL subpar.

No wonder your revs are down, Capcom. Other devs, that work harder to ensure quality across all platforms, deserve consumer money far more than you do.
Jinxstar  +   1396d ago
I have. Street fighter 4 and Super street fighter 4. Other then that nothing. Big fighting game fan and fan of the fighting game dev's at Capcom. However games like Lost Planet, Resident Evil and Dead Rising just have wonky controls, sub par graphics no matter what your preferred console is, Lame stories and just don't hold up to western adventure games like Uncharted, GOW, RDR, Dead Space or others...
bjornbear  +   1396d ago
8 people don't agree that you are happy
how dare you kratosgirl *smh*

well, this happens when devs port from one platform to the other (and don't do it well)

ported games always suck, its just a shame devs are more used to 360 (more time with it)

+ its Dead Rising 2, the dev team behind it probably used the same "engine/structure" from dead rising 1 and changed things up, thus having it all in "360 code" - which never bodes well on PS3 =|

however, how this is a BAD thing I don't know. It works, and although in lesser quality, its still available on both consoles - more people enjoying the game.

@everyone using this as "proof" that PS3 "isn't" more powerful - you are confusing console HARDWARE with DEVELOPER COMPETENCE to PORT A GAME.
its stupid logic, as stupid yet as valid as saying - is there ANYTHING on 360 NEARLY as mind blowing as Uncharted2 or GOWIII or GT5? no, thus 360 is weaker > retarded arguments are retarded.

in the end, both console owners will enjoy the game =) (as opposed to it being exclusive)
#1.10 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(17) | Report | Reply
SaberEdge  +   1396d ago
Why is it "developer competence" when it comes to all the multiplatform games, but it's not developer competence when it comes to exclusives?

I mean, we know that Sony has more studios and that several of those studios are known for their technical know-how. Which developers under Microsoft's umbrella are really focused on pushing graphics? Lionhead? Rare?

Honestly, it's easy to see that Microsoft simply doesn't have the kind of studios that are interested in trying to really push graphics.

So why is it that if the PS3 gets a great looking exclusive the PS3 gets all the credit, but if the 360 gets a great looking multiplat it doesn't get the credit and it is all of a sudden because of "developer competence"?

That is an illogical line of reasoning in my opinion.
ECM0NEY  +   1396d ago
Its not a ported game
It was developed on both consoles at the same time...
#1.10.2 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report
VINNIEPAZ  +   1396d ago
All this fanboy arguing is so funny to me. Just do like I do, get all the systems and you will always have the best version. Kinda simple huh?
#1.11 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
cgoodno  +   1396d ago
The problem is that everyone is still using a single Engine to port either PS3 code to the 360 or 360 code to the PS3. In the end, all they're doing is programming for the lowest common denominator which results in both having their faults and usually the PS3 looking worse off because they don't want to take any time to program for more than 3 SPEs.

They need to have two teams that will take the core data and modify it for the strength of each one rather than just cutting out the parts that don't work on one or the other.

Either that or at least put your core development on the PS3 with an engine that is able to translate from 7 SPEs to the 360s 3 cores with regard to data processing and memory management. Going the other way just isn't going to work and will result in more work with lesser results.
IHateYouFanboys  +   1396d ago
the PS3 only has 6 SPEs available to developers.

6 single threaded SPEs vs 3 dual threaded cores = both the PS3 and 360 have 6 threads running at 3.2Ghz.

and you do realise that these concurrent development games - theyre not ports - DO have different teams generally working on the different platforms, dont you? its not just one bunch of people making both.
talltony  +   1395d ago
IHATEYOUFANBOYS
Your wrong... let me explain why.
All the 6 spus on ps3 run at 3.2ghz.
The 360 has 3 cores that run at 3.2ghz. when the the 360 has 2 threads per core each thread would not run at 3.2ghz. It would be half that so 1.6 ghz per thread on 360 and 3.2ghz per thread on ps3.
#1.12.2 (Edited 1395d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
Introspective   1396d ago | Spam
Sony360  +   1396d ago
And once again
The 360 version is the better one.

Let me guess. The developers just hate the Ps3. Or are they "too lazy to code" for it?
cgoodno  +   1396d ago
IMHO, it's not the developers. If the developers had time, they make both of them as good as they can for their respective platform. The problem is budget management by the upper management and the desire to design their games in a manner that makes them as equal as possible across both platforms.
mittwaffen  +   1396d ago
Capcom hates the PS3?
Dude please think logically.

The PS3 has strong points, but mainly the game needs to be catered in its favor. Meaning when you port a game designed to run on unified shaders (360/PC's--this is how Schools teach you to design) to PS3 with (vertex/pixel/SPU's) its slightly limited in rendering the same image (If the scene is limited by one of the three). But when you have scenes that uses all three equally (Very hard to do when its designed for unified) would solve this.

Its unlikely however as the first option is much more efficient in time/money for companies. Usually most MPlat comparisons the 360 will win because of this. But you can see that when a game (Exclusive usually) is made for the PS3 it clearly shines when utilized properly because of the additional bandwidth the SPU's allow; but people need to understand that because a exclusive (catered) game looks amazing shouldn't mean all Mplat should either, that is highly ignorant to state without knowing how the PS3 works.

This will likely be the case the whole gen (Since DEV costs have always been on the rise and most publishers push and push to keep them low) with the odd Mplat game being used for the PS3 (but even then, if the engine isnt up to the task the PS3 version might suffer, or the Xbox will be losing out on the additional SPU post processing effects (overlays/particle effects, filets etc might be more limited).

That is the most honest view you'll read on here, anything differently is most likely a little fan girl running his mouth.
#1.15 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
acky1  +   1396d ago
What?
What is going on with the comments in this thread! They are so so similar with any differences being completely negligible...whats all the beef about? Its the same game where you go around killing zombies, who the fuck cares which version is marginally better. Get someone to watch the vids in this article without knowing which is which and most will find it hard to pick out a clear winner.

Anyone planning to play both versions side by side? No? Then shut the hell up and just play the damn game. (On PC if it matters that much)
#1.16 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
Traveler  +   1396d ago
No, I have the PS3 version and have never played the 360 version, but I could tell right away that it had a ton of screen tearing and it really bothers me. I hate screen tearing worse than anything. It makes a game feel broken and unfinished.
kevnb  +   1395d ago
so let me get this straight
if an article says the performance is bad, then you believe it. If its obviously bad but the media acts like its not... Both versions look poor performance wise, dr1 was better.
#1.17 (Edited 1395d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
vhero  +   1395d ago
The PC version is the superior version anyway so who cares?? The 360 fanboys can say what they like but the PC version blows them both away. Going through this though PS3 hasn't really done that bad and considering all capcom had to do for 360 version was port the original game engine they didn't have much to do. With PS3 version they had to port it to an entire new console. You forget it was on 360 first (the first game) so they ported that engine over and PS3 is NOT built the same way 360 is and vice versa that's why FF13 looked so bad on 360. The PC version seems like it was a new build though and looks dreamy.
DelbertGrady  +   1396d ago
Disc Size
(360)6.1GB
(PS3)5.91GB

Install
(360)6.1GB(optional)
(PS3)2840MB (mandatory)

lol.

@Karooo - It's funny that the PS3 version is smaller but still needs a 2.8 gb mandatory install to work. And the fact that the install doesn't make the game run better, like the optional installs on the 360 usually do.
#2 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(38) | Disagree(28) | Report | Reply
Karooo  +   1396d ago
whats funny in that?
explain
Godmars290  +   1396d ago
What's not to understand?
The PS3 version is a smaller file size on - on disc no less, has a smaller install though its required, and yet it has issues. With the obvious question of why didn't the devs use the obvious extra space they had to fix issues.

Hell, given that they were already treating the PS3 version as a 2nd class port, why didn't they just delay it?

Its not really funny, just sad that coders would screw up on such a level.
#2.1.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(9) | Report
Pennywise  +   1396d ago
He just says "lol" because he has nothing of value to add. He thinks it is funny that devs can take advantage of the mandatory harddrive each PS3 has... Hardy har har. Sony gives the devs options to install, which makes the game play better on the PS3. Imagine if the company you worship - Microsoft would have been so short sighted this gen and allowed devs to do that? That calls for a LOL.
buying1999   1396d ago | Spam
raztad  +   1396d ago
Just when I was starting to get interested in this game :( It is kinda sad. Such a bad port. Pretty bad job there Capcom. Actually even worse than Bayonetta.

Technical shortcomings + less content make this game hardly a $60 purchase. I'm gonna wait for a price cut down to 20 bucks. It is all I can pay and not feel like wasting money.
#2.1.4 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(11) | Report
jambabie69  +   1396d ago
huh penny wise
"He thinks it is funny that devs can take advantage of the mandatory harddrive each PS3 has..."

how the hell did capcom "take advantage" of that in this game....if it still runs and performs worse than a console that has always had a "hard drive less" version?

i don't get your point? thing is you got agrees for an overwhelming confusing/ bs statement.....
cgoodno  +   1396d ago
@raztad
No way is this worse than Bayonetta. The loading times are bad on both the 360 and PS3, but at least they're not increased on the PS3 and the reduced textures don't suffer as much as they did in Bayonetta.

I'm definitely disappointed in the development results. It's 2010, they shouldn't be having this issues in developing for the PS3, let alone the 360 (framerate). Like I said two weeks ago, Capcom lacks in competent developers, IMHO.
Jazz4108  +   1396d ago
Andatmory installs on the ps3 take forever and they are the result of slow ass bluray and a slow ass operating system. Ps3 is a mess and the only ones that can even utilize its systems are first party devvs backed by sonys money.
andron666  +   1396d ago
It's strange...
But maybe the PS3 data is compressed since you'll have to install it anyway.

Can't wait to play it though, it's in the mail, got a great deal...
Godmars290  +   1396d ago
And yet its on a disc that literally has ten times the space, making compression unnecessary.

This is just a result of lazy coding. Adopting the 360 version for the PS3 instead of actually considering the system.

@Pennywise:
Sony might give them the option to install, but in this instance its clear that it was exploited to no benefit.
#2.2.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(10) | Report
Pennywise  +   1396d ago
Godmars290, absolutely... I am not disagreeing with you there. My comment is a direct response to the stupidity of trolls trying to make like HDD installs are some sort of negative aspect, when in fact they are not.
DigitalAnalog  +   1396d ago
@Godmars290
I couldn't call these devs "lazy".

Just simply...

"Technically Inept".

-End statement
andron666  +   1396d ago
I agree...
I'm no developer so I'm just speculating. Just saying that the data might be arranged differently on the 360 versus PS3 disc, so you can't compare them just by size. They might have duplicate data on the 360 disc to speed loading or something.

It's too bad the PS3 port is weaker, but I'm still looking forward to it nevertheless since it doesn't affect playability much...
maxcer  +   1396d ago
since you fanyboys are so good with lists how many developers is it now that are "lazy"?
Pistolero  +   1396d ago
yes, the majority of 3rd party developers are lazy....that makes so much more sense than to realize that the ps3 is just less efficient and more difficult to work with. /s

it makes so much more sense to think that hundreds of 3rd party developers are "technically inept" than to realize that a couple Sony owned developers are just really talented and can overcome the ps3's shortcomings. /s

sure, that makes soooo much sense.
Treyb3yond  +   1396d ago
Mass Effect 2.
You still laughing?
Godmars290  +   1396d ago
Have yet to really see anything on the PS3 version,
So I don't even know why you brought that up. Dragon age may look better on the PS3 than 360, but that's not really saying much.
Pistolero  +   1396d ago
yeah, i am...since I already played it over half a year ago and the fact that i was able to play ME1 before that and import my saved data into ME2.
PSFan100  +   1396d ago
@DelbertGrady
it's ok, all PS3 consoles come with a hard drive, so a mandatory install isn't a problem. ¬¬ Dead rising started on the 360 it's common sense the xbox version would be the lead format and the PS version would be the port. 95% of the time ports are never quite as good as the lead. But almost as good when it comes to the PS3.
RustInPeace  +   1396d ago
Have you taken into account that the 360 also has the DLC that can be imported into the retail game? Maybe that extra space is used on the importing character option? Let alone the fact that the next DLC requires that you own the game to play it...
likedamaster  +   1396d ago
Great comment Delbert. You were addressing the fanboys and look how they respond. Bubbles.
Pennywise  +   1396d ago
jambabie69, let me spell it out for you since it is sooo hard for you to understand:

- He is laughing about 200mb more on the DVD.
- He is laughing about a mandatory install.

There is extra content on the 360 version. Compression could be different on the PS3 version because of the install... who knows.

The fact is Sony put a hard drive in every single PS3 and let the devs decide if they want or need installs. This is an advantage as far as I am concerned.

Just because devs don't know how to code doesnt mean the console is inferior. I think that has been proven time and time again with PS3 exclusives blowing the 360 out of the water with graphics.

If this is too hard for you to understand... maybe a few more years of Sesame Street will do you good.
mittwaffen  +   1396d ago
This is easy to explain.
PS3 Blu-ray read rates are VERY VERY slow compaired to DVD9, that is why they force installs of the most used files to speed this up.

Badda boomb bada bing, nothing shocking..I need to install all games on my PC before I play them, thats why people who complain about Disc Changing, or Installs are fools.
vhero  +   1395d ago
Smaller - compressed thus explains the mandatory install @Delbertgrady.. Do you read what you write before you write it?? Why not be less of a fanboy and actually be more of a gamer?
DigitalAnalog  +   1396d ago
I would've bought it for the 360 anyways..
I mean, it's the only OTHER console that has Dead Rising 1. (Don't count the Wii)

Besides, bad port is bad port.

EDIT: As a side-note. This is NOT how you do multiplats CAPCOM. Especially if you want to kick this off as the next "Biohazard". Besides, MT Framework 2.0 works very well on the PS3, why the f*ck do you have issues NOW?

-End statement
#3 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
iNcRiMiNaTi  +   1396d ago
This isn't using MT Framework. If you read this article it states that this game is made by a US team and Capcom hasn't given anyone outside of their japanese studios rights to use the engine until recently. So blue castle had to create an engine from scratch for this game
plb  +   1396d ago
Could care less about this game to begin with. Loading times around every corner are enough to put me off. Any dev who cannot make a proper PS3 port in this day doesn't deserve the money IMO.
#4 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
Treyb3yond  +   1396d ago
COULDN'T
It's COULDN'T care less. What is it with Americans and gimping a perfectly decent language??
#4.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(11) | Report | Reply
plb  +   1396d ago
Forget could/couldn't let's talk about football/soccer ;0
sajj316  +   1396d ago
The reality is guys .. its a port and a bad one at that. Lowered resolution (30% less) and no vsynch and still chugs below 20 fps in some scenes. No visible uptick in improvements despite a heft HDD install -> which means, it probably performs much worse if just run off the disc.

Translation = No Buy
zenghangyu1   1396d ago | Spam
rekof  +   1396d ago
so what ,.. Gamecube version of resi4 looks better than pc,..regardless the resolution,.. It is a fucking game,.. it is playable and looks the same,..

and they are pixel hunting,..

So I have it 1920*1080 with 4 AA ,blur, 16Aniso,..80 fps constantly on my pc ,.. to 56inch TV,.. still looks dated,.. Lol I could run qake3 arena 8k×6k pixles,.. does not mean a donkey dick,..

and to is not even AAA title,..79 at most,.. it is quite good,.. Im level 20 right now,.. and restarted 3 times,.. to get my stats up,.. gonna messup the motorcycle dude as we speak,..

Xbox360 exclusive owners are like mentally masturbating over bullshiet,.. we all know 360 is dead ,.. no AAA exclusives ,.. and ps3 shits on it graphically ,.. GOW3 and unchearted2 shit on any game on pc right now ,..
#7 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(20) | Report | Reply
360 man  +   1396d ago
theres a reason you only have one bubble.

and just to kill your statement. does god of war 3 and uncharted shit on this

http://www.youtube.com/watc...
ShabbaRanks  +   1396d ago
i played crysis on a friends PC
And other then the graphics I wasnt impressed by the gameplay and the overall experience. . . And the multiplayer sucks IMO
Snakefist30  +   1396d ago
@360 man
Lol way to make ur statment more BS.U need 2000$ just for 5870 4 gb ddr3 amd phenom x6 1050T to get this kind of great graphics.Were I can get $300 dollars to buy a ps3 with Great Exclusives and with great graphics.
#7.1.2 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(13) | Report
360 man  +   1396d ago
looooooool $2000? hell no

you played uncharted at 720p right?

so a 5770 with a decent pc will cost you roughly $600 and you can play crysis maxed with 1400*900 resolution. you obviously pulled that $2000 number out of your ****
Thoreau  +   1396d ago
that is not 360 footage so
?????????????
ECM0NEY  +   1396d ago
@ShabbaRanks
Hey i felt the same way about Uncharted 2.

GoW 3 was sick though!
#7.1.5 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
nickjkl  +   1396d ago
still cant get a game to run at the same resolution

ps3 version 576p with mandatory 2.8 gig install is unacceptable loss of texture detail lack of dlc screen tear

game should of stayed a 360 exclusive at least then they could of made it run better

should of realized it the entire time it was just a port never meant to be multiplat
#8 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
DOMination  +   1396d ago
Another example that the PS3 really is struggling now. All these comparisons are getting pointless because the 360 wins every time.
bustamove  +   1396d ago
....Did the 360 win with FFXIII, one of the many major releases in 2010? Answer that. Come on, you have enough bubbles to do that.

Please back up your statements. Unless you've played the PS3 version YOURSELF instead of depending on comparisons, then you have no room to talk.
plb  +   1396d ago
Only time the 360 wins is when it's used as a lead platform by devs who don't know how to properly code for PS3. PS3 exclusives speak for themselves. Show me a 360 game that can match the likes of GoW III, Uncharted 2, or GT5 just to name a few.
#9.2 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(20) | Report | Reply
ECM0NEY  +   1396d ago
Which is almost every game...
#9.2.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report
Treyb3yond  +   1396d ago
And yet...
Has next to no games of it's own... :-/
Pistolero  +   1396d ago
complete BS....the 360 had a much better lineup of games this year than the ps3....at least for my tastes....I am not trying to say the ps3 sucks or that some people might not prefer the ps3's lineup this year, the issue i have with people like you is that you are being completely dishonest and acting like your opinion is law.

in my opinion there was way more exclusives i wanted on the 360 this year than on the ps3.
on the ps3 all i like this year is god of war 3....especially after lbp2 got pushed back.
on the 360 i like alan wake, mass effect 2, splinter cell conviction, fable 3, halo reach.
not to mention that i get most of my multiplats on the 360 too.

so this idea that the 360 has nothing to play is simply laughable to me. it's the ps3 that didn't have much to offer me this year.

but hey, to each his own. i'll respect your preferences if you respect mine.
Apotheosize  +   1396d ago
Most games start on the 360 and then get ported to the PS3, thats why we get bad ports. Only recently have developers been switching and starting to build first on the PS3. FF13, Vanquish are all games that first started on the PS3 then moved to the 360. But he is right, its only recently that this started to happen.
DOMination  +   1396d ago | Well said
@bustamove: Okay, FF13 'won' on the PS3 but that's only because the 360 version was rushed out 75% through the development on the PS3 version. This is the ONLY example of a PS3 version being better and it wasn't even a great game anyway!

What does Assassins Creed, Vanquish, Dead Space and Batman: Arkham Asylum have in common? All PS3 leads and yet EXACTLY the same on 360 (better even, in some cases) so stop using this as an excuse. The PS3 continues to struggle with multiplatform titles and ONE title out of the hundreds that have released does not suddenly change that.
360 man  +   1396d ago
wow you actually have a point there.

when theres a lead game on ps3. performance is usually the same on both consoles, but when its vice versa the ps3 always struggles to keep up.

if you disagree please state your reason. and NO Fanboyism
Roonie  +   1396d ago
LMAO
vanquish on 360 has massive screen tear while ps3 has none.

Dragon age on ps3 looks better 360 looks washed out hence why gamespot gave 360 version lower score.

FF13 576p 3 disc with compressed files on 360.
bustamove  +   1396d ago
Excuses, excuses, excuses. Again. have you played those games side by side to make the comparison YOURSELF? How do you know that Eurogamer isn't doing this just to stir up flamebait? I played those games and they don't look as bad as the media are making them out to be.

You don't know what you're talking about so spare me, please.
#9.5.3 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(14) | Report
Meisadragon  +   1396d ago
no
Most of the games are optimized for both consoles, even the ones PS3 leads.

Dead rising 2 was made for 360 in mind so was bayonetta, FFXIII was made for PS3 in mind. Its hard to port such games for the other consoles.

Vanquish, deadspace are optimized for both consoles
jambabie69  +   1396d ago
have an agree
the ps3 fanboys have ONLY ONE GAME to boast about being "better" on their console they make love too.

i think its funny that 1 now equals the same as 100 to the sony fanboys. do you guys really want some one to list ALL THE MULTIPLATS THAT HAVE BEEN SUPERIOR ON THE 360?

lol it would take a full page. just accept that multiplatform games 99% of the time are better on 360, and move on. it is a shame that the ps3 is almost 4 yrs old and we are even having these comparisons still anyways.

to bustamove- excuses excuses excuses- you hit it there man, all i have seen from the sony camp on n4g is excuses, excuses, excuses.

some of you need to grow up seriously, and quit acting like it is YOUR JOB to protect/defend the ps3. serious question....HOW MANY OF YOU ON N4G GET A PAY CHECK FROM SONY TO DO THIS 24-7 LIKE YOU DO?

because even if the answer was x amount, it still wouldn't be enough for working 24-7 like you guys do!
gorillaurban  +   1396d ago
wwow you need to think b4 u speak forget to mention some other titles aka borderlands looked and played faster 4 example. but just so u can shut up with your 360 rant, look @ the developer of rage and he even states that the ps3 is quite a bit more powerful than the 360 fact. the reason why some like bayonetta look better are becuz they tranfer the codes aka port and lose small amounts of code fact. ps3 exclusives and more opted for,destroy 360 hands down. dont mistake me 4 a fanboy i aint broke like most so i do have both systems .
talltony  +   1396d ago
I have no problem whatsoever agreeing
That the majority of multiplats are better on 360 but I do have a problem with those ignorant people on this site implying that it's because the ps3 is graphically weaker console. Their are many reasons for a poor ps3 multiplat but that is not one of them.
talltony  +   1396d ago
So sick of you fanboys. When it comes to this subject I truly believe that you are blinded by your wishful thinking when the truth is as clear as day.
ECM0NEY  +   1396d ago
@ gorillaurban
Who cares how powerfull the PS3 is? When 90% of developers dont utilize that power.

I'm Rich... Not really but I have all 3 consoles.

I buy every Mplat on 360. I also just rent PS3 exclusives bc they usually arent very long. But I did buy MAG which is sweet game. Cant wait for 2.0 :)
Bell Boy  +   1396d ago
Another example that the PS3 really is struggling now?....gotta love the comments by the crack abusers...lol
Apotheosize  +   1396d ago
Bad port? What do you expect? 360 to PS3 always end up like this, This is the developers fault, hopefully more of them learn from this
#10 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(12) | Report | Reply
4cough   1396d ago | Immature | show | Replies(1)
hiahai   1396d ago | Spam
JUDALATION  +   1396d ago
Typical Capcom B.S... You just lost my 60 bucks!
I really did not mind that this game was a port and that the PS3 is clearly less impressive than the XBOX version... But the fact that Capcom decided to give the PS3 exclusive content that was not given to PS3 users has resulted In me not buying this game... If I hear great things I might rent it... Capcom needs to be taught a lession. I think PS3 users should do the same and not buy a Multiplatform game if they are short changing us.
jetlian  +   1396d ago
how are
they short changing you? not like they giving 360 owners free content
testerg35  +   1396d ago
If it was the other way around, there would be a lot more PS3 comments about sub-hd.
Apotheosize  +   1396d ago
I totally agree, fanboys of both sides have to realize, you guys are all the same

Now watch the disagrees
BeAGamer  +   1396d ago
doesn't really matter, I'm picking up FIFA 11 instead

"Now watch the disagrees"
bustamove  +   1396d ago
But it's not, is it? Maybe people should play the games for themselves instead of depending on online comparisons to make a decision.
yippiechicken  +   1396d ago
bustamove,
You keep saying things like "Maybe people should play the games for themselves instead of depending on online comparisons to make a decision."

I own both consoles (all 3 actually) so I use sites like Digital Foundry (and others)so I can buy the "best" version.

Why wouldn't I want to spend my hard earned money on the superior version of a game? I would rather not guess at which version is better and end up buying the inferior one when all I have to do is check out some of these sites. Pretty simple actually.
dead_eye  +   1396d ago
seem to run the same on the video. don't have xbox so be getting the ps3 version at some point. got a bunch of mates playing the ps3 version and enjoying it.
WetN00dle69  +   1396d ago
Im buying both version cause i have friends playing this on LIVE and PSN!
Ohh and to the 360 fanboys talking shite!
We will see you here for the Lords of Shadow comparison sometime next week!
May you all have an awesome day today.
Ohh and may you all have an awesome zombie killing day!
SuperStrokey1123  +   1396d ago
Well i actually have 3 copies of this game on preorder i did with trade promos with EBgames. I plan on using all of them as gaming garantees though and drumping the value (gaming garantees give you 100% of the games value back in teh first week) into Dead Space 2, infamous 2, Black Ops, GT5, New Vegas and a couple others...

Looks like i wont be missing out on too much though for only keeping it for a few days and rushing through it.
ManiacMansion   1396d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(2)
sailor75   1396d ago | Bad language | show | Replies(1)
ceedubya9  +   1396d ago
About what we expected
If you own both consoles, the 360 version is the better version. If you only have a PS3, maybe rent the game first to see if you like the style of zombie action, and make your decision from that.
ShabbaRanks  +   1396d ago
i dont care
Im getting the PS3 version and I got both consoles,because my friends are almost all on psn. . . By the way Reach isnt even in HD and Its still fun and not noticeable not my eyes. Anyways Ive read a few reviews for DR2 and both versions lag at times. . . Lots and lots of zombies guys
TABSF  +   1396d ago
Getting the PC version
Bangladeshimo   1396d ago | Spam
The real killer  +   1396d ago
There are lots of fanboys going on here.

The game developers holding the PS3 down for more than 4 years and that will keep until Microsoft release their new powerfull console.

Don´t get me wrong, the 360 is a console with very limit hardware specification, like no Blu-Ray drive, less powerfull CPU/less faster and efficient RAM/Less powerfull GPU and after 4 years it has inbuild WIFI N.

This why multiplat programmers keep the PS3 versions less quality than the 360 counterpart, they will never use the PS3 the potential, this generation will win by the weakest console and that is the 360.

Even Insommaniac will bumb the PS3 version down becouse they have a agreement with Microsoft.

That´s why Sony use all their money and resource for their own interne studio´s with great succes and proof that no single multi developers can´t match it.
#24 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(21) | Report | Reply
hoops  +   1396d ago
The Xbox360 GPU is more powerful. You missed the memo. It's also mre efficient.
It's the Cell CPU working in tandamn that gives the PS3 the edge.
And FYI. No console ever wins a generation based on power. Ever.
The PS2 won and it the weakest console on the Market.
The Xbox1 was never fully used for its power. The PS1 won its generation and it was weaker than the N64.
Atari2600 won and the intellivison was more powerful...then came the collecovision. It was the most powerful and it lost.
hoops  +   1396d ago
"
Don´t get me wrong, the 360 is a console with very limit hardware specification, like no Blu-Ray drive, less powerfull CPU/less faster and efficient RAM/Less powerfull GPU and after 4 years it has inbuild WIFI N."

And the PS3 also is very hardware limited. The Xbox360 just a bit more.
When both these last generation systems can run JUST 10% of its games at 1080p running REAL AA at 60fps, then i will call them next generation systems. Until then, they are both limited.
The PS3 and PS3 both use 5+ year old GPU technology. They both use CPU technology that's dated. Only 512 megs of Ram FOR EACH SYSTEM. This is why all console games have a mix of low and high resolutions textures. You can only use so much Ram for it. 512 megs only is a joke.
Total bandwidth for the PS3 and Xbox360 totals less then a 5770 GPU from ATI.
That's what you call LIMITED. They are both limited.
divideby0  +   1396d ago
another developer another failed attempt at a port.
was NOT buying the game for either console ne way
Clarence  +   1396d ago
Don't waste money on dead rising 2. Rent it.
Krakn3Dfx  +   1396d ago
I'll just pick it up on the PC on Steam for $40, looks and runs a hell of a lot better than any of the console versions and is $20 less to boot.

Also, F M$ and their exclusive DLC crap, if anything, it makes me LESS likely to buy it on the 360.
hoops  +   1396d ago
I almost never buy any mult--platform game for my Xbox360 or PS3 if it's on the PC. Why would I?
You get actual HD gaming on the PC with frame rates above the locked 30fps or less seen on all console games.
No mods. Pay for online. And the PC version is cheaper. Looks better in all aspect and runs better.
killzowner  +   1396d ago
fairs
But youd be missing out on the online gaming community of the PS3/360.
You also get actual HD gaming on consoles and 60fps, also, ever heard of MLAA "Worst case scenario is an image quality superior to 4xmsaa"
paintsville  +   1396d ago
I would've figured this wouldn't be a problem this late in the game. I mean ps3 is 4 years old??? I'm beginning to wonder if developers are totally to blame here.
Thoreau  +   1396d ago
this is a simple port problem...
nothing much more to see, if i do get dead rising 2 it will be on the 360 but is a multiplatform game. nothing special...
Solotov  +   1396d ago
the PS3's less powerful GPU
the PS3's less powerful GPU is really hurting for Dead Rising 2
MmaFanQc  +   1396d ago
kinda ironic....
since the ps3 simply curb stomped and took a shit on ALL the best looking 360 games.....

"but but but...the ps3 gpu is way less powerfull than the 360..."

sure.....
#30.1 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
Jazz4108  +   1396d ago
The ps3 did what????? it curb stomped the 360? what are you 5 years old. This title is about the 101 games that look and play better on the 360 and your saying the exact oppisite.If the ps3 was so great then the devs now in the 4th and 5th year of making games for it would of come up with more then 3 or 4 exclusives that look and play better then the 360. Did you not realize that almost every hame that comes out on both systems either plays better or as good on the 360 and in most cases like this one its better by along shot.
jneul  +   1396d ago
@jazz it's because it was ported from 360 to ps3, the same happened with most ps2 games that went multi to the original xbox, however that did not mean that xbox less not as powerful as for graphics nothing on the xbox has done MSAA(16X AA) at 720p at 60fps, so nice try guys, and if you wonder what i'm talking about take a look at GOW III, and soon infamous 2 will be using GOW III methods
what about all the games that run better on ps3 like ff13, dragon age, and batman??
i am tired of trying to explain why to you all, you just can't understand that ps3 is not as gpu/memory reliant and has a different architecture
#30.1.2 (Edited 1396d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(6) | Report
NinjaAssassin  +   1395d ago
@jneul

That's not at all true. The Xbox almost always had the better looking multi-platform games even though they were often ports.

That is why it is kind of silly to use that as an excuse for why multi-platform games usually look worse on the PS3.

If the PS3 was truly more powerful it should have no problem regularly producing the better graphics in multi-platform games. Especially after nearly 4 years on the market. Blaming it on developers is really dishonest and illogical.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
10°

Top 50 Biggest Emotional Moments in Video Games

16m ago - Robert Workman (Prima Games): Every player has a list of his or her favorite video game moments,... | Culture
10°

Ingress invades iOS: Google's augmented reality game hits iPhone

16m ago - Developed by Google's "in-house startup" Niantic Labs, Ingress has been seen as the poster boy fo... | iPhone

Modern Combat 5: Black Out Now Available On The App Store

25m ago - Modern Combat 5: Black Out is now available for purchase on the App Store. | iPhone
10°

Sidescrolling Adventure Game The Phantom PI Mission Apparition Now Available On iOS

25m ago - Adventure game The Phantom PI Mission Apparition is now available for purchase on the App Store. | iPhone
Ad

Start Making Games for the PS4

Now - Want to design the next generation of video games? Start learning game design today. Click for more info on how to get started. | Promoted post
30°

AMD Mantle Really Impacts Graphics

26m ago - GamingWorm says: AMD's Mantle API we all know about that. As running games on Mantle API improve... | PC
Related content from friends