PS3 version of Lost Planet has finally been revealed. Here is an image taken from an exact angle with identical lighting. It is obvious which version is superior.
so wait the other comparison was fake? im confused......does anyone know? @sangheili........thanks man, bubbles4u
The last one was from PSU. They compared pictures from the new PS3 pictures to the old 360 pictures which were release in 05. To make the PS3 look far better. Don't trust a site that is dedicated to a console to be honest. It was totally biased. Is it just me or does the PS3 version look like it lacks AA?
it does, it lacks AA, and textures arne't nearly as complex.
William, this is why there should be another comparison post. The other one was not representing the truth.
http://images.gamersyde.com... VS http://www.blogsmithmedia.c... Same image... looks like the extreme jaggies were caused by the resizing of the smaller image to the larger size...
this article is spreading lies. its the same image. well done macsto.
So explain the poor textures?
LOL. Reminds of Splinter Cell DA PS3 vs 360 comparison. http://www.n4g.com/News-342... Edit: @william You're right. And the lack of AA and texture can only be attributed to 256mb texture ram of ps3.
um yes..resizing an image only creates jaggies if it is a low quality image to begin with. any high quality image can withstand resizing without any problems, oh and why are all the jaggies exclusively bound to the edges of things in that image? they appear no where else except along the edges of polygons, resizing a picture doesn't do that.
Both of these comparisons are fake. The REAL comparison lies in the hardware itself. Play Lost Planet on PS3 with free online and no chance of your console dying the next week, or play on 360 where you have to live in fear of the red ring and pay for online. NOW I think it's obvious which version is superior. (Last time I checked, a few extra jaggies didn't make or break a game.)
Judging from the agree/disagree ratio on my completely true comment, I guess there are just too many hopeless 360 fanboys on this site. No surprise every other news submission is done to make themselves feel better about their crappy purchase. What have you to say now that the PS3 is $50 cheaper than the Elite, and offers free Wi-Fi, online, and Blu-ray? Originals like Folklore, Heavenly, Uncharted, Little Big Planet, and upcoming games like MGS4, GT5, FF13? "Uh, derr, derr, HALO SOLD 13 GAZILLION COPIES!!!1"
I don't think that is the reason. I think it is more because you are just flapping away on your soapbox with a one sided point of view. Buyers remorse is a b!tch and so is the waiting game!! I will probably pick up a PS3 at Christmas KNOWING FROM EXPERIENCE that my FREE PSN is a very watered down version of what I get for the low price of $50 for 13 months ($3.84 a month to be exact). BUT with the PSN limitations (if Firmware V2 does not address the want) I may just use my $$ for other things. I wish folks would stop pushing the FREE ONLINE ... it is like saying I get free DIAL UP FREE but have to pay for my 10Mbps broadband Connection. As for BR (or HD-DVD) ... some of us don't want either and are not willing to pay for either until we are 100% sure who will come out on top. And right now .. NOBODY KNOWS !!! I had one 360 (launch day console) crap out after a year, got a replacment from MS in 7 Days total and it runs a good 4 hours a day with ZERO issues. So by all mean, preach from your soapbox, but expect to be taken up on your bias, one sided comments.
Did you even look at the other photo before you flapped your gums? No Jaggies in the smaller one, Jaggies in the larger one. Its not as difficult as rocket science, or even as coloring within the lines. The two photos in the 'comparison' are in completely different environments and different lighting conditions, they just happen to be of the same object. This comparison is about as accurate as a Florida vote count.
@ synce, get a life kid everyone else http://omoikane.minstrum.ne... I don't know how you cannot look at that and say they look the same, the xbox 360 one is of the same model and has much better textures, no amount of lighting or in the environment differences can account for that much of a difference...
WHY ARE WE COMPARING A FINISHED GAME (360) TO A PORT OF A GAME THAT IS IN PROGRESS. (PS3) Seriosly some of the people above were the same people comparing the ps3 version of virtual fighter ps3 (finished) to the inprogress for (360). This comparisons make no sense and make fanboys of both sides pathetic. Trully pathetic you guys. Common sense, compare the games when they are both finally finished.
Well, it might well be true. BTW: I don't believe you the small image is original. It has a 800x450 size, which is a downscaled 720 resolution. There is no mode which supports 800x450 natively. But if any, I would simply account that to the early development state. Could well be they haven't implemented all the filters yet (and this has happened before, eventually the games turned out fine, best example is the latest Folklore demo which has improved way over the early demo - IMO).
Yeah the AA seems to be missing in the PS3 version as well as some poor textures. But it's still early I guess.
Are you blind? Take another look at the picture. Im starting to doubt you know what the word texture means.
Lol you chose that screenshot to show that the ps3 version is better? The xbox shot looks miles ahead of the ps3. My guess is that both versions will be pretty much the same in the end.
and get a life u waste of space anyone who looks at the screens from a true gamer pespective knows that the 360 one looks better. tbh i prefer the xbox360 but i like my ps3 just as much well who wouldnt with all the great games coming in the next few months. ppl need to start apreciating both the 360 and ps3 as there both getting great games. its a crying shame this site used to be great for gaming news but all the imature fanboys have torn the @rse out of this site (im talking about both sides)
madmax. people just need to play the games on their respective consoles and leave everyone else alone. why are people arguing over such little differences? all fanboys really need to just accept that both ps3 and 360 have their strengths and weaknesses, and they both have great games. but of course if they get to the level that nasim is at, they really become nothing more than a form of entertainment, IMO anyway.
its quite clear which is the superior version??? The game jst got showed for the 1st time and its not complete yet. I honestly believe the ps3 version will probably look better at the end of the day because its coming out a long time later and they will need a good reason to convince ps3 owners to take a 2nd look at the game. Quite frankly i am not even gonna consider this title. Only capcom title on my road map is RE5 and that 09. Dark void vid was lookin pretty good though
Ports are one of the things devs should get fired about. Make a total new game for another console. If you to lazy then dont.
You can't blame the devs for sony's choice of hardware in the ps3.
now that guy has a point.
HAHA so desperate to compare the 360 to the PS3.LOLOLOL. Uncharted looks better than any 360 game to date. period. And it has the most sophisticated engine to date. until Killzone 2 arrives. P L A Y B 3 Y O N D
Shouldn't they just work on a multiplat sequel?? This looks horrid.
exactly! they should have followed THQ, and work on getting the sequel on time to both platforms instead of working on a port for an old game. Okami deserves a port to Wii but not this game
There were a lot of gameplay mechanics issues with Lost Planet. A sequel that irons these issues out is preferable to a half assed port with rehashed content.
YEAH ITS TO EARLY IN DEVELOPEMENT TO JUDGE AND I HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT THE PS3 HAS FAR SUPERIOR GRAPHICS PERIOD.
Too early in development? It's done! They just need to put it through PS3 coversion. It's not like it's a game we haven't seen already!
Can you supply something that backs up your statement that the PS3 has superior graphics?
the xenos doesn't have the pixel painting power of the RSX not to mention that the Power PC cores in the 360 can't be used for graphical operations unlike the Cell+RSX combo which works as one to achieve a high number of TRUE HD render passes. That alone makes the PS3's graphical capability 6x more powerful than the xenos. the Cell has the 360 beat on EVERY front.
just to let you know, your wrong.... Nuff said. Central Processing Unit (CPU) performance. The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell. Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) performance The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU. Memory System Bandwidth The memory system bandwidth in Xbox 360 exceeds the PS3's by five times. Xbox 360 has 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth. The PS3 has less than one-fifth of Xbox 360's (48 GB/s) of total memory system bandwidth. Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements. A relatively small percentage of instructions are actually floating point. Of those instructions which are floating-point, very few involve processing continuous streams of numbers. Instead they are used in tasks like AI and path-finding, which require random access to memory and frequent branches, which the DSPs are ill-suited to. Based on measurements of running next generation games, only ~10-30% of the instructions executed are floating point. The remainders of the instructions are load, store, integer, branch, etc. Even fewer of the instructions executed are streaming floating point—probably ~5-10%. Cell is optimized for streaming floating-point, with 87.5% of its cores good for streaming floating-point and nothing else. Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU. Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU For shader operations per clock, Sony is most likely counting each pixel pipe as four ALU operations (co-issued vector+scalar) and a texture operation per pixel pipe and 4 scalar operations for each vector pipe, for a total of 24 * (4 + 1) + (4*4) = 136 operations per cycle or 136 * 550 = 74.8 GOps per second. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS. Given the Xbox 360 GPU's multithreading and balanced design, you really can't compare the two systems in terms of shading operations per clock. However, the Xbox 360's GPU can do 48 ALU operations (each can do a vector4 and scalar op per clock), 16 texture fetches, 32 control flow operations, and 16 programmable vertex fetch operations with tessellation per clock for a total of 48*2 + 16 + 32 + 16 = 160 operations per cycle or 160 * 500 = 80 GOps per second. @ ACTION BASTARD, it was copied from an unbiased site. Sorry, but i try not to spin anything in anyones favor. I just try to inform. I hate when people make things up. That's all.
Did you plagerize your post from a early sony press release? My own two eyes say the opposite of your old sony PR.
How about you form a response and not copy/paste, word for word, info out of a Major Nelson article. I love how many people feel smart by doing this. At least copy from an unbiased site if you going to pose like you know something about the topic. http://www.majornelson.com/...
@Dareaver1...I stopped reading after you brought up the 278GB/s bandwidth....will it ever stop? I guess not. BTW. Another one is the "its done. They just need to convert"...right. Here speaks another expert. And the "convert" writes the code itself.
yea, it is pretty obvious alright, its actually sad that the PS3 gets a port of this crap, capcom basically made PS3 users hype something up for nothing, I lost all my respect for them.
Why the concern now for a game you didn't care for on your system?
Xbox 360 beats this one down. That other comparison was a fanboys dream.
Thats why it was posted because you couldn't tell the difference. I did mention the 360 version still looked better because of one pic that still gave it away vs all the others in the eariler post. I probably have 10 dissagrees and 4 or 5 replies telling me I'm seeing things. Somebody tried the same trick the other day but I can't remember what game it was.
I think the supposed 360 picture looks a lot better than the apparent PS3 one too. Did not capcom give up a PS3 game recently saying that it was too expensive to develop for?
This is not a Duplicate story. WTF happend to the Lighting and the contrast?, and those are the least of the problems. I couldn't really tell from the other post but I did notice That Waynes coat fur was Last gen looking on the PS3 version. Why are PS3 games faded with weak contrast and powdered color depth(PS3 has 3 shades of Gray, Brown, Yellow and Green or when colorful has an powdered faded look. Has nothing to do with being a port and more to do with the devs taking advantage of the 360 hardware when they made this, PS3 ports to the 360 always look fine.
You mean the PS3 ports to 360 always look fine but in '3 shades of grey/brown/yellow/green with a powdered look'? I mostly own exclusives or lead platform games on the PS3 and 360 so far and I enjoy these games on both. When you look at a colorful game on the 360 and one on the PS3, they both look colorful - really!
Its a WIP build of lost planet. Look at Uncharted/Ratchet & Clank/Heavenly Sword and convince yourself the ps3 cant to high res textures.
I've played R&C demo and played the final game of Heavenly Sword, both games have high res textures and have beautiful colors. The games look mindblowing and feel "heavy" as a game that shows solid mass, rather than some junk thrown together as wireframe and filled with shotty textures and lame color schemes.
the best example of this is Virtual Tennis 3 where the players look ULTRA realistic on the PS3 as opposed to HORRID cartoon characters on the 360.
First off your name. You do not make fun of persons whom were born mentally handicapped, understand? My niece was born with Cerebral palsey and is both physically and mentally very challenged and has severe scoliosis and has now been given less than a year of life left as surgery to repair her spine that's laying on her heart has become to dangerous to do. The make a wish foundation just sent her and my family on a trip as a last wish to make her smile from all her pain she has. I'm sure the names funny to you but something like this isn't funny at others expense. I could go on but I wont. This is just like the idiots who park in handicapped parking when there fine, just f'in lazy. Sorry everyone for my educational announcement.
hhaha so you telling me the ps3 can`t do those textures?That`s the only advantage you`ll ever get ,comparing ps3 ports that is..
You should be used to it. Leave it to the Droids to cheat their way through, been doing it all year.
Are you saying LP for the 360 looks like what we see in the Right side of this pic?. LP for the 360 does not look like the image in the right side ot the pic.
Both pics could still be extracts from the 360 version side by side ,alpha or beta build vs final version..could very well be a valid comparison .Heck we all know ports are likely to suffer a certain degree of degradation
Wasnt this game supposed to be exclusive though thats why it said on the ugly x360 box, ''xbox only''. lol horrible game either way, Capcom can suck a nut.
Capcom I thank you for Devil May Cry but not this.
That's gross! It looks like a PS2 game. WTH Capcom.
Yeah, hurts uh?
Owning a PS3 is like having an abusive father who makes up for his abuse by buying you all sorts of cool stuff. Owning an Xbox 360 is like having an abusive father who asks you what you want for dinner, and then half way through your response punches you in the face and dies.
the mech's textures and polygon model is what people should be looking at not the lighting or the environment. PS3's polygons look way less and so do the textures. could this be just a small error......not really they had this demo in front of thousands i'm pretty sure they were ready. no one releases and plays an untested demo in front of thousands of people.
No they need to be looking at all the problems. The Lighting and the contrast are the least of the problems. The AA and the Textures are the first things you see. I don't believe PS3 fanboys wan't to admit the issues I bring up and is why I mentioned them and nothing else. BTW, I did not dissagree with you some fanboy did that incase you see this post.
Well, I can admit it. The PS3 shot (if it is one) looks sh!tty. So ? Just says that the current build is not good enough. Its definitively not an indication of the HW, if that is what you are trying to say. It still a 2008 targeted game, AFAIR, Capcom has still time to fix this. Could well be, that they have the engine running now on the RSX, fully blown. A straight port of geometry and shaders won't give you AA on the PS3. They have to touch that separately, I'd guess. AA on the 360 is still to custom, either (the "AA unit" does that for you), but they'd have to implement that again in SW on the PS3. If they don't it ends up like this. We have seen better in other games. e.g. here: http://images.gamersyde.com... or here http://images.gamersyde.com... or here http://images.gamersyde.com... or here http://images.gamersyde.com... or here http://images.gamersyde.com... So, well, I would place my bet on the current state of Capcoms engine, yes.
PS3 version looks like it doesn't have AA or motion blur (there is some in the mech screenshots but none in the monster screenshots) which is bullsh!t. A one year old port should not look worse if it expects to sell. I for one will not even consider getting the game if it does not improve. It is laziness on the part of the developers if it does not improve. However, you could already tell this from the last article with the screen shot comparisons.
comparing a finished game with one thats not isnt working for me....lets hold all opinions until we see the finished product. Why would they release pics that do look that terrible when they know people will compare is beyond the laws of logic though. lost planet was a fun game at the time it came out though...only thing that turned me off was the crappy multiplayer. wait a minute..so the other pics were of the older version of lost planet on xbox?
I keep up with every tid bit of info and the progress of every 360 game I think stands out. LP has never looked like what I see in these PS3 pics that I can remember(360's version has never had such a lack of texture that I'v seen going back to the earliest pics or first pics released).
And jesus at all the 360 fanboys jumping at this. Lost Planet was a pretty crappy game yet you are all gleefully cheering at Capcom's laziness? Jeez. Last I checked, Lost Planet was a pretty mediocre game that most of you would not have given a second sh!t's time over. What the fvck? And what is up with the PS3 fanboys and the denial? The screens are not very promising. Even if it is an early build does not excuse Capcom. It is a port of one year old game after all and the 360 version does indeed look better. But does it even matter? The superior MGS 4 and UT3 are prime examples of better ways to spend your money than on this sh!t. -edit- Reply to the post below me: Lol man. You really feel the need to convince yourself that the 360 is better? Sad man. Real sad. Wow, one game looks better on the 360! It can't be developer laziness, it has to be the hardware! End sarcasm. Look at DMC 4 which uses the same exact engine and try to make the same argument.
A "mediocre" game that looks worse on a supposed "superior" hardware, and to top that off the 360 is two years old and has DVD 9.
why are you fanboys bickering about this game? I have this game in my closet and I don't even play it, it's not that good. PS3 guys stop and Xbox 360 guys stop, this is pointless
All these comparisons are pointless.. If anything PSU did the best comparison of them all.. They took early pics of the 360 version and matched them to early pics of the ps3 version.. Make sense so far? How can you compare pictures from the final 360 version of lost planet to the final ps3 version of lost planet??? Answer, you cant because the ps3 version is no where near complete.. So why dont we all just wait for the ps3 version to be finished before we start comparing the two versions of the game..
If you want something to display what the PS3 can do, then look at MGS4 instead of a half assed one year old game port. And the early pics of LP still looked better than the PS3 version. It had motion blur and AA. Why compare the abilities of a console with a mediocre game?
they took early pics from teh 360 version and put them up againest pics of teh ps3 version that probly wont be that much better then the 360 version. i mean really how much do you think capcom is gonna optimize the game for the ps3? they are porting it, they aren't building it from the ground up that i hear of for the ps3 its a port.
it was finished back in 06 in japan for 360 capcom is not realy good with ps3's hardware thats all that this means. their not like konami, konami know's the ps3 hardware. In any case this could mean that capcom's future with 360 looks veary brite.