PS3 vs. 360 - Riddick: Dark Athena comparison screens

As the european release of The Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena is getting closer, Cynamite has put up lots of comparison screenshots from both the PS3 and Xbox 360 version of the game. Can you tell the difference?

[onijutsu]

i always wonder if they bothered to turn on full hd in the ps3 settings

EDIT: sorry thats full rgb isn't it :P

[HWG]

Just so you are aware, the FULL RGB settings are for OLDER PC-level color TVs. Turning on the Full RGB settings on TVs will make the colors look darker, but it will also crush the blacks and cause problems in the output of the picture. What they should change that setting to say is "PC RGB" or "TV RGB".

I made this post on the IGN boards not too long ago to someone who said something very similar to what you said.

"RGB Full, before anyone says a word, is misleading. It is meant for PC style DVI displays that used 0-255 color values as base. Modern HDTV's used 16-235, and using Full compresses these channels and resamples the color data - which can accentuate or even cause additional banding."

Now you know why this setting is not used for PROFESSIONAL reviewers.

[Ghoul]

Its not that easy, and your mixing things up.

"Just so you are aware, the FULL RGB settings are for OLDER PC-level color TVs"

This is wrong RGB full is only for MODERN HDTV's and all PC-LCD monitors, read lower for explanation.

"RGB Full, before anyone says a word, is misleading. It is meant for PC style DVI displays that used 0-255 color values as base. Modern HDTV's used 16-235, and using Full compresses these channels and resamples the color data - which can accentuate or even cause additional banding."

Wrong, older TV's use only RGB Limited because of TV-standards, older HDTV's too.
PC-LCD all use RGB Fullrange and MODERN HDTV's can use the FULL RGB space too but it shouldn't allways be chosen especially when watching a movie (read below for explanation).

"RGB Full Range (HDMI)

Adjust the output settings for TVs that support RGB full range. For RGB video signals, the range of color scale that is input varies depending on the TV in use. This setting is for use when the TV is connected to the PS3™ system using an HDMI cable."

For GAMES
-----------------------------

Only modern HDTV's can display as older TV's can only display a limited RGB space 16-235 (because of TV-standard's)
any pc-lcd can display RGB Fullrange as they dont have those TV-standard's.

RGB Fullrange enables the output of the "missing" RGB spaces wich result in more variaty in the blacks 0-16 and whites 235-255. (read expetion for movies below)

RGB Fullrange is only for HDTV's that support it and will result in a much more vivid picture [(in games)if your HDTV supports it].

For MOVIES
-----------------------------

Almost allways keep it to limited as all DVD/BLU are encoded in TV-stadard's and hence are allready limited to RGB 16-235.

Enabling RBG Fullrange on DVD/BLU will result in worse whites and blacks as it "deletes" or "flattens" the fine contrasts.

****************************

- If black sometimes appears bright and sometimes appears pale on the screen when [Limited] is selected, set this option to [Full].
- If black appears dull on the screen when [Full] is selected, set this option to [Limited].

****************************

Everyone needs to test it out themself for games if theyre HDTV supports it, and for movies stick to limited RGB and adjust your TV settings for movies.

EDIT::

"Now you know why this setting is not used for PROFESSIONAL reviewers. "

Well the complaints where more then fair since the reviews are NOT professional if they didnt use the correct settings in the first place. It's a fact no matter what you think that a reviewer playing a ps3 game on washed out greys IS using the wrong setup in the first place no matter if its about FULL or LIMITED.

and all complaints are correct if someone shows of comaprions or reviews with wrong setup PS3's and mostly allways get a lower score because of flaws that are the reviewers OWN fault.

[Kain81]

thx for the Info^^

Bubbles

[MURKERR]

is that multiplats are near enough equal now

only fanboys would see this as a bad thing

[Doctor_Doom]

I did the right decision and bought the xbox360 version, but the ps3 copy looks good too.

[HWG]

Ghoul, obviously you're not aware that all these PS3 games are devised for the standard 16-235 output. So therefore, you are wrong. These games were designed, as the movies were, for that output. Thus using a 0-255 crushes blacks and offsets whites. You get a WORSE picture if you're using a 0-255 setting on a 16-235 TV ( which ALL modern HDTVs are. )

Ghoul is also the same idiot whom tried to 'prove' me wrong months ago on a similar topic of the XBOX 360 vs the PS3's graphical horsepower. I proved him wrong on a number of occasions and he will always 'disagree' with me regardless of his 'facts.' I wouldn't take anything Ghoul has to say with merit as he is nothing but a fanboy.

[Ghoul]

"Ghoul is also the same idiot whom tried to 'prove' me wrong months ago on a similar topic of the XBOX 360 vs the PS3's graphical horsepower. I proved him wrong on a number of occasions and he will always 'disagree' with me regardless of his 'facts.' I wouldn't take anything Ghoul has to say with merit as he is nothing but a fanboy."

your on some kind of paranoia ?

seriously dude that sounds so silly i can't really believe your serious. That "topic" you said was a discussion where you only bashed the ps3 without lackluster arguments and wrong info.

i have MUCH better things to do than stalk you and disagree or whatever. *shakes head*.

But im getting used to the fact that eitehr side calls me a fanboy whenever i defend a system (360, pc, wii, ps3 whatever)
It's just to easy trying to bring down my comment by saying im a fanboy.

oh and thanks AGAIN for your insult but im getting used to that since most start to insult when they run out of arguments.

have a nice day hwg

EDIT ::

"Ghoul, obviously you're not aware that all these PS3 games are devised for the standard 16-235 output. So therefore, you are wrong. These games were designed, as the movies were, for that output."

its funny this is something different you said above, in fact now your using my arguments and only state that all games are made for a 16-235 (TV-Standard), your switching your argument.

[HWG]

Yes, yes, I'm sure you're so high and mighty. The fact of the matter is ... well you're wrong! Your intelligence through and throughout has been rather disappointing on any subject you take up with me. You always come into the argument trying to one-up the person whom stated their facts right the first time. God forbid anyone give your beloved PS3 distaste, because you would live and die for your system would you not? As far as I'm concerned, you're nothing but a trivial waste. You always seem to think that if anyone challenges you, they're deliberately insulting you. Which in this case, let me be clear, you're on a very unstable pedestal. You're not right on this instance, as I researched this exact topic many months ago when I had the same question. Every single AV expert gave me the rundown and told me exactly what settings I should use on my 52" LCD ( LN52A750 ) which is a top-of-the line television that I don't think you'll come across anytime soon. I know the settings to use for high end televisions, and if you're running on a 2001-2002 era HDTV that used DVI input or BASE HDMI as PC input, then tada you should use Full, because the PS3 will upsample and convert the 16-235 that it is programmed to output to 'appear' correct on those televisions. On any modern HDTV, using these will result in off whites and crushed blacks. Anyone who disagrees with me on this has problems in their TV configuration.

[Ghoul]

jeez whats up man ?

the only one attacking is you, i "tried" to discuss this matter.
your the one insulting and calling me a fanboy and suggest im a broke kid by naming your superduper tv "that I don't think you'll come across anytime soon".

oh and i said it earlier. TEST IT OUT, its not allways full and not allways limited wich looks best, but you take this as a personal attack. then please learn to discuss as i am in no way attacking you in person, other then you.

EDIT::

i just wanted to say a "corrected version" couse your projecting YOUR tv settings onto everyones else tv. and its not that easy as they differ greatly (sadly).

btw good comment on your tv from rahzel
http://www.avsforum.com/avs...
try enabling fullrange and set HDMI Black Level to Normal.
just a try nothing else, so please dont feel attacked again.

i dont have yout tv but maybe it helps

[ThanatosDMC]

Pretty bad quality screenshots. He should have used at least fraps or something. These are just taken from a tv by a still cam.

[The Lazy One]

You are both somewhat right.

Not all modern HD-TV's work with the 0-255 range, so you should really check your TV before changing the settings.

You definitely shouldn't set your PS3 to full RGB if your tv is set for video standard, which I'm guessing a lot of people do due to poor labeling of settings.

[Ghoul]

thats all i said,

if you read my first comment i carefully explained that there is no wonder-setting you can switch on or off.

you need to test it out individually if your tv has Full or not and if it benefits in a better picture or not, there are many ways to get the best picture. you cant blindly enable RGB Full like some suggest (hwg is correct on that one) instead you have to work it out yourself to see wich one is best for you.

i just explained how it works and how people can find theyre best setting.

[Einhander]

360 looks better in those screens and in the Eurogamer comparison as well, not a big enough difference to make a fuss, still buying the ps3 version.

[I did not murder him]

I was going to say the same thing.

Some sets can now use the full PC range. But the same RGB features *being turned on excuses* can be applied to the 360. You hear all kinds of stuff on this site like Super white^YCbCr claims when games default to RGB

I don't think RGB-FULL has anything to do with the missing detail^textures and the lower rez in the PS3 version though.

This is a very bad comparison.

All the big comparison sites will tell the viewers what settings are being used. I'm sure they use the settings that make the PS3 version look its best depending on the equipment they have.

[Jaces]

Again and again the only difference I can see is one screen is lighter than the other. hmph.

Really no difference other than that.

[Zeevious]

You could have simply tried them!

Every TV is somewhat different, and the most important thing is the native color gamut & the TV's settings...usually set to a display mode just for display at the point of purchase, not your home.

This is easily done with free SD or HD calibration patterns:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs...

THEN try the two settings and see which one works best for YOUR setup.

For more detailed console settings you can also find console specific recommendations & specific TV settings.

[cliffbo]

why don't games look washed out like that on my machine... oh yeah: full RPG

[I did not murder him]

Who disagreed with me? come on you should know by now I only post when I'm pretty much right.

http://www.eurogamer.net/ga...
http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

The PS3 and 360 versions almost look like two different builds at times lets get real people.

No one is talking about faded contrast problems and yes this issue can not be fixed with RBG. Folks are pointing out the lack of detail and sharpness in the PS3 version. The PS3 version doesn't even seem to be near the resolution the 360 version is not to mention different effects missing like lighting and so on. PS3 textures are blurry.

Goodness if you can't finally see the difference when looking at the 14th screenshot then you need to see a eye doctor.

[Jaces]

Well if anyone forgot, this game was exclusive to the Xbox awhile back.

It makes sense seeing as how the 360 is a bit better looking in some cases since the PS3 got it as a port. Still a great game though, on my 3rd play through.

[stevenhiggster]

It's nowt to do with RGB full or limited, if the tv is set up correctly then it won't be an issue. Most of these places are using the same tv on the same settings for both. If you set up the tv for one then it goes without saying that it won't be correctly set up for the other. I don't have RGB full on mine because when I do the blacks and shadows are too dark, I have a Sony Bravia with Live Colour Creation and the picture is absolutely perfect without RGB full. So just buy a decent TV and set it up properly for whatever you are veiwing. I can gaurantee you that no colours or blacks ever look faded on my PS3 because I have it set up properly!!

[crazy1704]

PS3 version clearly looks better, nicer colors and better textures

[lowcarb]

"PS3 version clearly looks better, nicer colors and better textures"

Ok now take off the fanboy goggles and look again lol. They both look close enough to the point where this comparison is stupid.

[HWG]

The fanboyism in that comment is disgusting. Both games use the exact same source material. The 360 and PS3 have identical textures, and what not. To say otherwise is absolute ignorance on your part.

Now if you want to talk about better looking games, take a look at the PC. I'll enjoy my 2560x1600 resolutions, higher textures, 16x AF and 8x AA. Enjoy your fanboyism, I'll enjoy 60+ FPS of High Def goodness.

[Why o why]

like 90% of comparisons in 08 and 09

[HWG]

I love how the PS3 fanboys 'disagreed' with me because I proved them wrong. I hate fanboys, they're ruining this site.

[Why o why]

all your doing is attacking others. So what if you sound like you know what you're on about. Sometimes peoples posona's filter into their comments and your hate for ps3 fans seems to ooooze out everytime you type something....just an observation

[solidjun5]

He attacks like his life depends on it. It's not serious man.

[boodybandit]

What's up with you?
Too much red meat?
Steroid use?
Not enough sun light?
Chill and quit taking things so seriously. You'll live longer. ;)

These comparison articles get N4G members no where. It just ends up turning into a war nearly every time. Judge for yourself with your own eyes and don't rely on sites to give accurate comparisons. All I know is games on my displays (on the PS3 and 360) usually look different then what I see in most of these comparison articles submitted here.

[Statix]

You haven't proven ANYONE wrong. In the case of multiplatform games, it is almost a constant that textures differ in their resolution between platforms; this is fully evident in several of the screenshots for Riddick; there are clear instances where one can see how the textures differ. Don't pretend to speak so authoritatively on a subject for which you obviously have zero technical knowledge.

[aaron5829]

is always sensitive to "fanboy" comments...

I dont know about you guys, i never seem annoyed or "disgusted" with the "fanboy" comments...

If you are really a neutral, you can really enjoy those "fanboy" comments. They are funny and hilarious at times.

but attacking others, calling others a fanboys, makes you look more like a fanboy.

On Topic. It's pretty much useless now, doing comparisons such as this one... They are getting so close.

[phosphor112]

It's a port from PC/360 to PS3, they are all gonna look different, so sit down shut up and play the game.

[Fishy Fingers]

If you can see much difference then you have better eyes than mine. Nothing there that you would notice in-game. Some of them arent even taken at the same frame.

Strange though, I think the game looks great when your playing it (both formats) but those screens dont.

Edit: Eurogamer have a better comparison up if your interested http://www.n4g.com/NewsPend...

[edhe]

These stills don't show much difference. Eurogamer video shows some minor differences that again show the cheaper console to perform better.

[DelbertGrady]

I see a huge difference!

I just can't tell in which version it is that I see it...

[thereapersson]

Get over yourself already, Edhe.

[n4gn4gn4gn4g]

For the features that are important to me ... the PS3 works out cheaper.

Is this what you meant?

[solidjun5]

he tries to bait you and then email you gloating how he did it and will continue to do it. He leaves a paper trail on kotaku.

[Ju]

Eurogamer has a one sided weight on their comparisons, as always. I can't really see a difference. I was however surprised that the PS3 demo ran butter smooth 1080p and I can't really say if that's scaled or not. BTW: These guys have a different opinion then EG: http://www.lensoftruth.com/... (so, in the end, its an opinion after all).

[edhe]

Xbox 360 Arcade Console
£124.99 Free Delivery

Sony PlayStation 3 PS3 Console with 80GB HDD + FREE Killzone 2
£289.99 Free Delivery

Play the game for half the price.

Go on, keep trying to justify why the ps3 is important to this generation. So far i can't see one reason beyond an increased need for multithreaded processing.

Just to pre-empt - Cell? No. Bluray? Nice, but it's only data. You could use floppies and still have HD. Free online? Not even caught up with launch-level xbox 360 live yet, anything else? Exclusives? they're just games.

Every article like this that comes along just confirms my decision that buying a 360 this generation was the right thing to do to get the best versions of the games i want to play.

It's undeniable, sadly. You can disagree all you like but the bottom line is that it's true. I wish i was interested in the ps3 titles so i could maybe slip justification in for blu-ray, but it's not happened yet.

Even found out today that wipeout HD isn't 1080p native afterall thanks to it's use of the Dynamic Frame Buffer, which in itself is actually pretty sweet though.

Go on, someone give me a real reason to crank out over 250 smacks for another console.

[Ju]

That is related to Ridick in what way ? Well, if you got your 360, why would you buy a PS3 to play that game? Go get the 360 version. Well, what's wrong with that ? I got a PS3, so, I won't get a 360 to play that game, obviously.

And OTHO, you can simply flip that argument and I could say give me a reason to get a 360, for not having WiFi, free online (which I enjoy a lot), and the BD rom, one of the major reasons I got one (well, and the reliability). I mean, I have all that, why would I want to downgrade ? (just the HDD alone add a similar price to both, BTW). I got Cyrsis, GeoW (1) and ME1 now for my PC. And since I have them, I haven't really touched any of those games for more then say 30 minutes. I got the games I want and that's what I play. Others might have a different taste and go with what they like most. Works perfectly fine for everybody, IMO.

[FamilyGuy]

Whether it be limited or full they still used the WRONG setting when displaying the PS3 version.

But beyond that, did anyone else notice the screen tearing more apparent on the 360 side? It was ridiculous. Does the 360 have a setting to remove or lower those? If you didn't see it, wait for the scene where it pans past the kids face up close. Any panning scene really...

[Sir Ken_Kutaragi]

'KILLZONE 2' WINS!!! ;-P

[Deadman64]

You forgot your copyright dude. I'll add it for you!

(c)Sir Ken_Kutaragi Sad Comment #7412

Please remember to add! Thanks! :)!

[thehitman]

I dont think those screens are any good to begin w/ though.

[ultimolu]

It looks the same to me. I didn't see a drastic difference.

[DARK WITNESS]

Someday over the Rainbow.....

[thereapersson]

I see NO difference, save for some lightning or color discrepancies between the two. People who are arguing about this sort of crap really need to get outside and stop gaming for a while.

[Robearboy]

Normally when doing a comparison one console seems to have a different shade/darkness to the other, on this the screenshots looked identical in everyway possible, take away the ps3/x360 tabs and you wont be able to tell the difference

[peeps]

the eurogamer article is good because it looks at all 3 systems and looks at the performance as well rather than just the graphics. http://www.n4g.com/News-315...

[iistuii]

All these comparisons, untill they sort out the AA on the ps3 versions of multiformats as with GTA & R5 for example, i'll just buy the exclusives on my ps3 and the rest on pc or 360

[-MoOkS-]

The 360 version is clearer and has better lighting.
Ps3 looks blurry ( hiding the bad textures? ) and textures arent as sharp.

[talltony]

The 360 version is hiding the bad textures with being the darker version. its been said before that the ps3 version has the better lighting. But who cares they look so similar i dnt even care.

[Kleptic]

not to mention...the game fecking sucks anyway...360 fanatics are some of the only people I have ever witnessed squabble over which versions of painfully mediocre games look better...this is the second game in the last month to be visually superior on the PS3 in some very slight ways (Wanted: weapons of fate being the other)...and who fecking cares?...both games are floaters...move on...

if killzone 2 was multiplatform...i would be very interested to see a comparison of the two versions...but it isn't...yet remains the best looking console game ever created (unanimously declared by nearly every single gaming media source)...until the 360, and its army of ignorant fans, put something up to counter it...this multiplatform debacle is simply piss in the wind...

[tudors]

the eurogamer shots favor the 360.

[I did not murder him]

They don't see the difference seeing the results but if the results were different it would be a night and day thing.

[cereal_killa]

Woooohoooo in b4 the Muppet's *puts on 360 Fanboy goggles*

http://imagecache.allposter...

Yup its official 360 fanboys have the superior version if you look at the first pic for the PS3 you can see the missing pixel that the 360 with out a doubt isn't missing to bad that only Muppet 360 fanboys can see this because without these goggles I received when you purchase a 360 you would think they look exactly alike.

[-MoOkS-]

Another multiplat that looks better on the 360.

[table]

I hope to god that the only reason you said that was to piss off ps3 fanboys.

If you actually did beleive that the 360 screens were better and have convinced yourself of this in all the comparisons we see then you are lying to yourself and your insecurities are showing, you feel that you bought the wrong console.

[ThaGeNeCySt]

this is SOOOOOOOOO 2007 lmao

[123360]

eurogamer is a complete joke i own both systems,it makes me laugh how they make the differences sound game breaking.360 ports and ps3 ports are almost identical.you can,t be playing the game to notice thats for sure.if they was to do a 360 comparison on its ports all would be fair but to try and find fault on just one system smells of desparation for hits or a pure fanboy grudge.the worst part these are for c games at best,do they pick on the aaa stuff,not unless they want to lose there advertising revenue.giving ea the score they did for the godfather has cost them big time so i would exspect more of this crap coming soon.having played the same games on both systems from borrowed copys theres very little difference at all what ever system when in comes to multiplats.

[-MoOkS-]

Eurogamer obviously saw a difference.
It's an industry fact that multiplats look/perfom better on th 360.

Get over it, instead of calling a respected gaming site a joke.

[facelike]

Kinda Looks like Eurogamer turned up the contrast and brightness on the PS3 Tv more while capturing it.

[commodore64]

another multiplat better on 360?

*goes back to sleep*

[123360]

mooks your,e the biggest joke on ng4,you need to own both systems then you can comment other wise shut the f*ck up fanboy.think for yourself be the shepard not the sheep.baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[timestoby]

the blacks in the demo were grey anyway,plus the graphics are horrible on ps3,maybe rrodbox has the AA turned on and maybe it will have less jaggies,who knows?

[illjaden]

There is almost no difference. I own at the moment only a PS3 (Have owned both). With that said there is a small difference looking at some pictures, in one of them the 360 version looks better, and in another the PS3 version looks better. Done.

[solidjun5]

looks the same from my point of view. Oh well.

[ikral]

OMG it looks better on X360, let me sell my PS3 for that reason. People who are spending their time comparing two versions of same game are just sad. Play version for your console, kids. Or go outside and meet some people, you know, real people.

[Xymes]

Terrific, another crappy game!

[redsquad]

Quite enjoyed the demo (on PS3), but not enough for a purchase. As such, doesn't matter to me which is perceived to be "better" (If any version is, of course)

[Ju]

Oh, I liked it very much. And I like the Ridick story line. But I agree, I need to have $60 laying around to buy it. I do not, so I'm waiting for it to drop to $40 (or so).

[PsYcHoToE1]

If you really want to nitpick then here is what to look for. In the beggining of the game when you land and it's riddick the bounty hunter and the 2 prisoners, you are outside. If you look at the top of the fence on the left you will see that some of the texture does not show on the PS3. Where it does on the 360. It does not break the game what so ever. The PS3 version graphics are a bit washed out where the 360 versions looks a bit more full and pure.

Flame on........

[Ghoul]

;) haha that was really nitpicky

[Socomer 1979]

i wonder if xbox support offers counseling for its victims of battered xbox gamer syndrome.
Must be really tuff messing with a old xbox360 and all its old games giving him the same boring experience year after year.

[Krew_92]

Similar to me, all games have looked similar since like half way through 2008 (for me)Oh well seems there will always be heated debates about which one is "better looking" =(

[kaelix]

Look at the pic they used for the article, I glanced at it, and it looked like a stoned Mel Gibson.

On Topic.... hard to tell the difference and if you need still pictures to tell you the difference then there really isn't any difference when your going to be busy playing the game instead of oggling onto the screen to see any particular difference lol.

[altimako02]

or full rgb is a vga setting not hdmi which is digital

[Ju]

I believe this has nothing to do with VGA or HDMI or what so ever. I guess its historical defined through the MPEG encoder which usually encode in YUV rather then in RGB. VGA transmits RGB, I do actually not know if HDMI does RGB or YUV (I thought it can do both). Anyway, computers (and games) usually were always rendered in RGB, YUV had advantages in encoding of video, and lately is used for textures, too. RGB is always in the range of 0-255, while YUV caped from 16-235. The first is FullRGB, the second (obviously not). Some info is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... ( and a portion of interest reads like:
--
Y' values are conventionally shifted and scaled to the range [16, 235] rather than using the full range of [0, 255]. This confusing practice derives from the MPEG standards and explains why 16 is added to Y' and why the Y' coefficients in the basic transform sum to 220 instead of 255. U and V values, which may be positive or negative, are summed with 128 to make them always positive.
--
I don't have a source for the MPEG referral. But that explains, why FullRGB does not make sense for movies, because they are usually encoded with a limited range. blowing that up would amplify the lower and higher parts of the signal - unnecessarily.

[Sibs]

Should I see a difference? I see none...

[redsquad]

Even if somebody DOES own both main consoles, they're not going to buy the game on both are they? As such, even they'll never truly know "which is best?", instead going for just the one that suits them.
So, the 'differences' are meaningless.

[Kleptic]

they shouldn't buy the game regardless...did you play the demo?...I know some older xbox fans are all over it for the butcher bay remake or whatever...but the view cone in this game is all kinds of messed up, and the combat is lame...lame being a bit generous on my part...

[devilhunterx]

I did the right thing. I didnt buy this garbage.

[goflyakite]

Coming from a PS3 owner I can admit that some of the screens look better for the 360, but there are also some for the PS3.

Either way I don't really like the look of this game, even from the demo. Very dark and grainy, you can't really see too much. Didn't really like the game play either.

[Halo3 MLG Pro]

Well people have to remember that we are just judging screenshots here. From these screenshots I think Riddick clearly looks better and the colors are more vibrant on the 360 version but that doesn't mean it's the better version. Their are other factors involved too like framerate, loading times, etc...

[GiantEnemyCrab]

So if we do a Gears 2 vs Killzone 2 comparison it's all good. But if we compare the same game that is on 2 different platforms it's lame?

So when I see the inevitable Ninja Gaiden 2 vs Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 comparisons I expect to see all of you people saying the same thing about how these comparisons are stupid. My bet is that it will be okay to compare then.

With that said, there is hardly any difference between the 2 and nothing a single console owner should worry themselves about. I've had my fill of Riddick on Xbox 1 so I'm not buying either.

[andron]

The pictures are from different angles and makes it hard to compare.

The Lens of Truth comparison is much better: http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

[jaseo]

the whole FULL RANGE RGB banter has been filled with ignorance.

Ju's comment offers a good explanation. VIDEO is YUV.(there is 444 RGB, but that's not related to this). It can be full range or "broadcast legal". When converting to RGB, you can remap it to full range or you can keep headroom.

I can tell you that mismatches in what something was created on, and what it is viewed on happens quite a bit in the film/tv post production pipeline.

[kratos-i-am]

and was bitterly dissapointed as it looked just so awful! I found it suffered from a low resolution resulting in a certain lack of detail. Considering this game relies so heavily on atmosphere this is unnacceptable and unless the full game is drastically different, I would deter anyone from buying this game for the Playstation.

Now I haven't played the 360 or PC versions but from what I gather they are alot better.

But to be honest why would you buy this game for full price when you can buy the original on PC for $10-$20, or buy better games like Killzone for the same price?

[kaveti6616]

They both look the same. End of story. I always get sucked into these comparison views out of curiosity, and especially in this case, there is almost no difference between the 360 and PS3 versions. In fact, if the images were switched (if the 360 was labeled as the PS3 image and vice versa) you fanboys would say that image looked better than other. Hell, I didn't even see jaggies. Anyways, I've read reviews and it doesn't even seem like that good of a sequel, not worth the time it takes to make the comparison shots.

[bilbobob]

the difference people see. Look at the posts above me. 19, 20. One guy says it looks the pits, the other says it looks just fine and the same as the 360 version. I would fall on the side of 20 having seen both.

Tho I dont see why the screen shots for the PS3 version dont show the blacks like the 360 version. dont know about other ps3 owners but my tv shows the game like the 360. the ps3 version pics look like someone turned up the contrast.

Maybe its something to do with the software running on the free laptops from M$ this site is using that makes the PS3 version look that way.

Only joking.......Or am I!

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

360 4,532

PS3 3

[danfry]

Looks shat on both systems!!