Face-Off: Mass Effect on PS3

EuroGamer: "Five years on, Mass Effect is still a good-looking game - it's more refined on PlayStation 3 but it's missing motion blur and anti-aliasing."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
pixelsword2353d ago (Edited 2353d ago )

It doesn't matter because it doesn't affect he gameplay while in motion and you wouldn't even notice; as a matter of fact, the 360 version looks fuzzier when you slow it down, but again, when in full motion, you probably won't notice that, either.

WrAiTh Sp3cTr32353d ago

That's called Motion-blur, lol.

pixelsword2353d ago (Edited 2353d ago )

No, it's fuzzier when images of the game that have no motion blur applied are viewed.

That's called fuzzy images, lol.

Siren302353d ago

I've played through mass effect on the 360 atleast 5 times. I've played about 7 hours on the ps3 now and my opinion is the ps3 version is better. Loading times are pretty close to the same, the graphics look cleaner and the framerate does drop a little but nowhere near as bad as the 360 version.

legionsoup2353d ago

Good to know. Definitely picking up trilogy, but was waiting to see which version to get. Thanks!

nukeitall2353d ago

One thing that isn't mentioned is content wise, the PS3 version will never get Pinnacle Station DLC. Apparently it is due to corrupted source code.

Bummer. So if you want the best version, PC is it with all the DLC and all the performance your PC can handle.

JAMurida2352d ago

I was going to wait for the Digital Foundry report on the Mass Effect PS3 port, but gave in and bought it, (was only $15). Overall I'm happy to of just got to be able to play the first game, (I only own a PS3). It's not even funny though how the first is far greater then the other two installments IMO, but that's another topic...

I wonder though, if having a SSD installed into your PS3 would vastly improve the performance/loadtimes like it did with Gran Turismo 5.