Battlefield 3: Does Hi-Res pack prove that console graphics are poor?

Product-Reviews writes: Two things to think about here: 1) It’s great that EA DICE are thinking about improving the graphics further for the console version, but 2) Does it mean that gamers were generally correct in slating the quality of the console graphics, and this is a last ditch attempt by DICE to calm the fears? Why haven’t they included the hi-res textures from the start, and why has this bombshell only come out one week before release?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
tr00p3r2539d ago

I agree to an extent, the graphics are more than fine.. but it does make you wonder.. when were they going to tell everyone about this last minute mandatory install?

Considering that it came via an indirect question during an interview, it seems like they were not going to make it public knowledge..interesting.

Agent-862539d ago

From my understanding, it isn't a mandatory install; it is optional. If you have the HDD space, though, I don't see why you wouldn't install it.

Dlacy13g2539d ago

Everyone needs to remember not everyone has HDD space for that install on both the 360 and PS3....there are still many 20Gb units in the wild for Sony... So you build the game to spec so all can play (more sales)... Then you give the option for those who can to install hi rez. Everyone is happy.

malol2539d ago (Edited 2539d ago )

cant wait for the PC Hi-Res textures packs
going to be crazy bananas

deadpoole2539d ago

I dont know why ppl are sooo stuck up about that games should just run off DVDs ... I would take installation of game on my HDD anyday over running the game using just DVD, BRD or whtnot.

Modern Warfare 2 ... Continuouse grinding, tearing, running, churning ... I dont know what happens is drive but this is how I feel when I play modern warfare 2 on PS3 ... noise is just toooooo much for disc spinning in drive.

I had to install Dead Space 1 and 2 in Xbox 360 because all that loud noise of disc spinnin was ruining the whole atmosphere. Plus HDD is always lot faster compared to any disc drive.

AKS2539d ago

@deadpoole Agreed. I think some of the console wars nonsense plays into it. It seems like many viewed Sony as including a hard drive in every PS3 as a great thing but bizarrely having games actually utilize it is somehow viewed as a negative. I certainly don't want to put any additional wear on a BD-ROM drive than I have to. I am happy to install games whenever I can.

I thought these stupid mandatory install submissions would eventually diminish in frequency as people started to figure out that performance may be improved when installed and that HDDs are very cheap, but there seems to be no end to whining about installations.

decrypt2539d ago


Console gamers really dont care about performance, if they did they'd all be gaming on PCs. It doesnt really matter to them if every time load screen takes 10-20secs extra, the initial 5min install is just too much of a hassle.

DaTruth2539d ago

Anybody can replace a HDD in a PS3, better to wear it out than to have to replace a BRdrive; that cost money and time to send it away! You can practically buy a new PS3 for that money!

The drive just died on my Ipod; there's F#$*-all I can do about it!

damnyouretall2539d ago (Edited 2539d ago )

i aint too worried about the last minute anouncment. if its the only way to make the game look better, well so be it. we all have hard drives man. why does this bother people? it only re asures me that it will look decent, and better than the beta

banner2538d ago


What is it with pc gamers not understanding that console gamers don't like to play on little 22" monitors in a rolling chair.

gamingdroid2538d ago

The issue I believe is that many gamers have grown accustomed to the instantness of consoles. I for one like that, but I also like options so being able to choose is nice ability.

That said, given the option I always install. Why? Because that darn optical drive spinning for hours means my console will die sooner.

It's easy to replace a hard drive, NOT so easy to replace the optical drive.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2538d ago
SilentNegotiator2539d ago

They're adding nicer textures to the console versions than they originally had on the console versions. That's a sign that console graphics are POOR?

Besides, they don't even have all of the graphical options in the PC version of the beta. Will that mean PC graphics are poor when they add then into the final thing?

What kind of logic is that? They're "desperate" to calm people's concerns....but does that matter if they're ADDING THE HIGHER RES TEXTURES, anyway???

gamingdroid2538d ago

I'm assuming that "high resolution texture" is standard on PC, which does shed consoles in a bad light.

I think it's pretty much a given that PC is superior in the technical/graphical department. Even if all the assets where the same, and the frame rate was fixed, you still would benefit from smoother experience, higher resolution and more effects.

I played Gears of War on PC, and it was night and day from the Xbox 360 version. I expect most if not all PC games to be considerably better compared to the console. Yet, I still choose my console for ease of use and instant gratification (for the most part).

dredgewalker2538d ago


I played gears too on the pc and played the 360 version at my friends house. The pc version might still look superior but it's still the same good game on the 360. Sometimes we just get too obsessed with the "graphics" that we lose sight of one of other significant factor in a good game and that is gameplay. I'm still playing a lot of old games on my pc cause they are still good and their gameplay holds up to a lot of modern games. It's actually sad to think that most of the evolution in games are just "graphics".

gamingdroid2538d ago (Edited 2538d ago )

I didn't have my gaming adapter at the time and played the entire game through on the keyboard/mouse. I did not like that so it wasn't entirely the same for me.

You are right that the same game mechanic is entirely there and that the graphic isn't the what defines or makes the game fun. I certainly appreciate the graphics, but game play hands down win over graphics every single time.

The thing is the graphical gap is huge between console and PC so it is quite noticeable even on my [email protected] PC.

I think the main innovation in games these days are from shooters really working well on consoles (and aren't second fiddle to PC), motion control, smarter AI, overall streamlined online experience and mainstream online features for consoles.

That said, I don't necessarily understand why people keep saying there is no innovation in gaming. I feel there is soo much innovation and I never have an issue finding games or things to do. I'm having a hard time finding time!

fluffydelusions2539d ago

So people are expecting high end PC graphics from sub $250 consoles? For $199-$250 I cannot complain

Organization XII2539d ago

my $250 GPU is 20 times more powerful than both consoles combined. I'm not trolling, that's a fact.

OpenGL2539d ago (Edited 2539d ago )

@ Organization XII

The Geforce GTX 580, the most powerful single GPU on the market is around 10x as powerful as the GPUs in the PS3 or 360 (at least on paper) and it sells for between $450-600 depending on the manufacturer and what version (1.5GB or 3GB) you get.

superrey192539d ago


Well that's not bad at all considering it's a fairly new card and that's how much ps3 and 360s cost in the beginning. Come next generation, for another $500-$600, i would be surprised if the ps4 or 720 were 10x more powerful than the current gen.

OpenGL2539d ago

@ superrey19

I'm not saying it's bad at all (the PC is my primary gaming platform) but he's exaggerating the power of PC hardware when it's unnecessary as it is already so far ahead.

Blooper622538d ago

PC gaming is overrated. Yeah having a $600 graphics card is nice and games will look pretty but they won't look $400 better than a top notch PS3 game. Which is a shame on the developers part. Think what a game thats 10x better looking than Uncharted would look like. It would be insane!

gamingdroid2538d ago

I don't think anyone does, but isn't it a given that a more expensive piece of equipment is expected to give better performance?

The question is, if that difference actually yields a result that is worth it? For me, for the most part it isn't enough. The PC gap though is growing, so I'm more and more tempted to do it!

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2538d ago
Persistantthug2539d ago

Not exactly the same mechanics, but somewhat similar outcome.

Morgue2539d ago

Should I plug my ram cartridge back into my N64 in hopes it'll play BF3?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2538d ago
Gamer30002539d ago

"Does stupid articles like this one prove that gaming journalism are poor?"

gravemaker2539d ago

consoles graphics are poor, this is obvious

cochise3132539d ago (Edited 2539d ago )

gears 3, uncharted 3, rage, gow3, killzone, Arkham city, and bioshock infinite all beg to differ. As old as the current gen is, it still produces some amazing visuals.

Laxman2162539d ago

Yeah when you think about it, its actually kinda amazing the graphics some developers can come out with, given the technology is about 6 years old now.

Washington-Capitals2539d ago

Games like uncharted and god of war specifically look amazing because of the ART DIRECTION AND PRODUCTION VALUE. Games like Crysis and Rage look good cause of their technical prowess of the engine. Different approaches but they both achieve amazing results.

Anyone remember a game called Okami on PS2? That game looked amazing, and that was because of the art direction not because the PS2 was some beast graphical machine.

SilentNegotiator2539d ago

For $250 or less, consoles do great things in the graphics department. 720p is fine with me. No need to put anti-console sediment into every other article.

stu8882539d ago

going to enjoy getting banned...

your a dick! this is obvious.

Tyre2539d ago (Edited 2539d ago )

@Gravemaker No there not, PC Elitists are just ridiculous over-critical and spoiled. Console gamers do not judge a game on its jaggie shadows or low-res textures in the 1st place and most of the time they are quiet and do not make a habit of posting negative comments about developers or games. U guys make me sick. Have a more positive attitude towards games, the gaming community and developers in general, cause this fashionable bashing will lead to nothing, there's no magic in a breakdown. U all should be ashamed.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2539d ago
zeksta2539d ago

Simple answer: The Beta's graphics were reduced to cut the size of the download.

nitrogav2539d ago

Exactly , just saving bandwidth .Imagine millions downloading 4 GB beta demos like the pc one . I got both the pc and ps3 betas down and loving both . Yes the graphics are better on pc but so what ? . The game is the same and good news about the hires pack with the full game . My preorder is ready and waiting .

Optical_Matrix2539d ago

Well, if the person that wrote this article, would kindly look at the latest Uncharted 3 footage....he may need to re-evaluate that statement. Because judging by what I saw in that 2-3 minute video, ND have proven that console graphics are not poor. And don't even get me started on Gears of War 3, God of War III etc.