Top
420°

Lens of Truth - Head2Head: Castlevania - Lords of Shadow Analysis

Lens of Truth writes "Welcome back all for another highly anticipated Head2Head. This week we take a look at Castlevania: Lords of Shadow for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.We were able to preview Castlevania: Lords of Shadow at this years E3 conference, and ever-since we’ve really been looking forward to doing this Head2Head. Now that time has come and we finally get our chance to chain whip our way through hordes of vampires and werewolves to grant one version the title “Lord of Castlevania”.

Read Full Story >>
lensoftruth.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
donkeydoo3290d ago

OMG how long has it been since the Xbox 360 version actually lost one of these comparisons?

ArcFatalix3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

Final fantasy xiii, darksiders, split second this year

not bad. Since most games are lead on the 360, using DVD in mind and 5-6gb in size.

edit : are you saying 360 is more powerful and its not architectural differences? that both versions are not same?

donkeydoo3290d ago

All I'm saying, it has been a while since the PlayStation 3 has won any comparison.

toaster3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

Both versions look filthy as hell, you should be ashamed of calling your consoles an "HD" platform.

tinybigman3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

but me and my friend were talking yesterday and we came to this conclusion that CV is a bit to long. even though both of us are really enjoying the game we feel like it's starting to weigh on us.

personally we all that i have going on around me a game who's length is between 10-15 hrs is more than perfect. this 20 hrs is feeling way too long.

i'm on the last part of chp 6 to the 2nd lord of shadow and i must have put in over 12 hrs already with 6 more chps to go.

milf_sex3290d ago

Take note multiplatform devs - lead on ps3, and port to 360. The Ps3 version will be slightly better due to superior hardware, but the 360 version is playable.
Unfortunately, most cunt hole developers lead on 360 and port to ps3, resulting in a few poor performing ps3 versions due to their inability to tackle ps3 hw.

Amphion3290d ago

Yes, CV: LoS is starting to feel a bit long. I think these type of games should not go over the 12 hr mark.

I don't mind a longer game though. One of my favorite games ever is Half-Life 2 and it is one of the longest shooters ever made at around 15-20 hrs easily, but HL2 is paced so perfectly that you never feel like the game is getting too long. You never ever did the same thing twice and the game just kept innovating and surprising you at every corner.

CV: LoS though is starting to feel like it's repeating itself though and I am only on Chapter 5. It's a good game, but it shouldn't be 15 hrs!

Game-ur3290d ago

No I will hate you. /s

It's rare for an action game to be this long, you should relax and take a break between chapters, how about one chapter a day, and you will always have 4-5 hour games like Vanquish.

HolyOrangeCows3290d ago

Castlevania got it right, The Force Unleashed 2 is looking to have gotten it right, plenty of other titles took advantage of the Ps3's architecture this year...

I wish more developers were getting it right, but it's nice to see that many developers have finally gotten things figured out.

units3290d ago

faster load times no mandatory install is reason they choose the ps3 this time round and you do know darksiders was patched

tinybigman3290d ago

i do take breaks i just feel that some of the chps long a little too long and it really doesnt feel like a true castlevania game just yet. other than that its a great game

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3290d ago
Marcus Fenix3290d ago

the PS3 version is the better version, faster loading times + single disc + better framerate, I've finished the game and enjoyed it very much, it has puzzles that require thinking, wish there were alot of games that had puzzles as opposed 2 previous gens, somethin like the original silent hill, resident evil 1&2&3, legacy of kain: soul reaver 1&2....etc

Akagi3290d ago

PS3 should have won anyway, it was the lead platform when being developed.

Good job, devs.

GWAVE3290d ago

It's been a while since the Ps3 won these comparisons...

...on this website, which means nothing. They use component cables and screwy settings on the PS3 version (it has been confirmed and proven several times) instead of HDMI cables. The comparisons from Lens of truth are rubbish.

RageAgainstTheMShine3290d ago

how do we know they did not modify these images to their liking?

this is not like the SNES vs Genesis Era, there is no telling with this crap comparisons

Soul Train3290d ago

They use HDMI for their full Head2Heads. Please get your facts straight before you comment. Also you may need glasses if you think that's component.

hackersdelight3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

Before commenting try reading the FAQ page on their site. I try to check multiple sites for my info and seem to end up trusting LoT and 1up usually. According to the FAQ video is capture HDMI from source so it never hits your TV. So to rebutle your comments GWAVE and GHINASKY check your facts first before making any accusations. Although I think some of the staff members seem to gloat when the PS3 wins. Not in a biased sense but definately a game fan way. I'll take gamers of pixel counters any day.

Eiffel3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

You all do know it was developed on the PS3 then ported to the 360. You make it seem like every other comparison has been biased. Do your homework and find out what platform a game was developed on, and you'll know the expected results.

It's not rocket science.

Whatever platform was lead with development will of course look better than the one ported.

vhero3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

Said it for all other comparisons and will for this who cares who won?? As long as you enjoy the game? I am impressed though how close they look on both the textures are almost identical only lighting differences in the game really (other devs need to take note as this is how ALL multi platform games would be). PS3 won as they were exactly the same in quality because it's PS3 and what I mean by that is the fact it has a blu-ray and that should be a good enough reason in reality as MS dropped the ball with no DVD and even 360 owners know it's not good enough but hey it's gets you a cheaper console so they ain't too bothered lol. But seriously these devs obviously took time on both versions not just 1 version then did a shoddy port.

I am also guessing the mandatory install on 360 must be a space saving thing?? As I can't see otherwise why it's there.. Also it still loads faster on PS3 even with the install on 360 is that right??

Jazz41083290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

I am playing the game now and there is no mandatory install on the 360 version. Edit: I cat believe some idiot disagreed with me. I own the game. The only reason to install it on the 360 is to avoid disc swapping it is NOT mandatory. Look it up if you don't believe me. Joystiq just wrote an article about this.

bananlol3290d ago

360 i stalls are as mandatory as somethig can get without beeing truly mandatory. The install feture must be the greatest os update ever, because before it games were almost unplayable because of the horrendous sound the crappy dvd made.

Solidus187-SCMilk3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

If you install it it takes only like 5 seconds to load, its what I did. If you have them both installed you still have to switch discs at the certian part. It didnt bother me because it loaded really fast tho. With it installed it re-loads in 1 second after a death. So installing is worth it. I think this game had some option to install one disk and not switch or something, but I installed them both.

If you instal it on 360 it will load much faster than if its running off the disk, and faster than the ps3 version. With it installed it usually takes around 5-7 seconds to load a new level and 1-2 seconds to load after a death.

I think installing can be worth it for some games, but its not needed to play them.

BillOreilly3290d ago

yea i beat the whole game without installing only studdered on the necromancer fight with like 50 minions on screen. Damn good game, well worth 60 bux. I will replay on the hardest diff. I wont spoil it but that ending was so dope.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3290d ago
deafwing3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

i already platinumed the game and enjoyed it; anways I thought everyone knows by now that the 360 always comes out with darker darks and ps3 tends be on the lighter side; do people actually still care?

Jazz41083290d ago

@bananlol. You must have a really crappy 360? My launch system was not quiet but it was nnot so noisy that it bothered me. My new 360 is quiet and makes no more niose then my ps3 which I love both systems.

ArthurLee3290d ago

Well this is a good "one of these" for the PS3 to win. Batman, Final Fantasy XIII, and now Castlevania. Three awesome games rightdare.

Man In Black3290d ago

Funny how with most of their other comparisons, when the 360 version has a slightly better framerate, they're quick to point it out, and act as if it's a huge deal. Here, the PS3 has a slightly better framerate, and they barely say anything about that.

Trroy3290d ago

I noticed that as well. Almost every review of the game has noted the PS3's superior framerate, and yet LoT downplays it... like usual.

Soul Train3290d ago

Again people talk about things which they have no idea about.

DF said they were using eurogamers "review copies" for their Castlevania face off. So you can pretty much flush the DF comparison down the toilet. The retail copies appear to be different. I guess both of you missed that part.

Ju3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

No need to protect these guys. There are quite a few comparisons where the frame rate is a bit lower on the PS3 and it usually gets dissected like crazy. Here, it is conventionality ignored.

Not saying it is worth mentioning. It is not. And neither are all those other ones where the PS3 is half a frame lower.

niceguywii603290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

What makes you think PS3 won? I don't see it.

"Final fantasy xiii, darksiders, split second"

Three games out of how many? FF13 was in development for years on PS3 and then rushed on the 360 in the last few months. Darksiders and Splitsecond are garbage games lead on PS3 to avoid the PS3 hardware struggling to match the 360's performance then the devs slapped together the 360 version and called it a day. Naming off a few games in favor of PS3 hardly negates the hundreds in favor of the 360.

Back to Castlevania I don't see any difference except for the slightly sharper picture and better color on the 360 version and a green tone vs the PS3's red tone.

A Cupcake for Gabe3290d ago

LoL you're ever so ridiculous..

Denethor_II3290d ago

PS3/360 visuals were near identical, aside from a couple of PS3 shots that had slightly more colour, but that could be down to console settings. The average fps slightly favoured the PS3, but again, side by side, they look identical. The load times are quicker for the PS3 and to round up, it's all on one blu ray as opposed to two dvds. I hope that clears things up for you.

Here we have undeniable proof that when devs lead on the PS3 everyone gets a great, smooth running version of the game. But I must say 360 fanboys do tend to blow up and overstate any differences in a game that is in favour of the 360.

Ju3290d ago

Maybe it doesn't mean anything. But at least, some of those, like FF XIII and now Castlevania are some of the highest rated games.

Don't say they are just half ass ports, these are top titles. On both platforms, 360 and PS3. Obviously, if the PS3 can win in this category, that just shows for all the other titles it was certainly not the platform which can't keep up here.

And yet, I still think those titles are not on the level of exclusives, still (but very close). It's getting there.

HolyOrangeCows3290d ago

"then the devs slapped together the 360 version"

I see N4G's town zealot has insider information on developers...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3290d ago
+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3290d ago
Bloodlyte3290d ago

Oke I'm really gonna be nitpicking so dont hate please.

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

If you watch the first comparison clip, the part where the horse jumps the broken bridge and you see the werewolves jumping after him in slo-motion, you can see that the light the horse emits is reflected off the werewolves on the PS3 version, whereas the Xbox360 version has no reflection.

Shogun Master3290d ago

Yes you are really nitpicking :)

Information Minister3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

But nitpicking is the very essence of these comparisons.

I remember the good old days, when you could immediately tell the difference between Mortal Kombat on the Mega Drive and Mortal Kombat on the SNES. Now you need side-by-side screenshots, zoomed in 400% and assisted by image analyzing hardware, because the human eye can't detect the differences by itself. How pathetic is that?! Does it make any sense to you? And still, the flamewars we create over those insignificant differences dwarf any schoolyard quarrel of the early 90's.

AKS3290d ago

If these tiny differences are really that important to you, I think seeing a game running on my PC might make your heads explode.

Bloodlyte3290d ago

I have both consoles, so I always want to get the better version. This comparison didn't show the difference in lighting and I just wanted to show that.

But what I don't understand is what does your PC have to do with the console comparison of Castlevania?

asyouburn3290d ago

Most of these "comparisons" are purely from a graphical standpoint, sometimes performance, but in some cases, you have to factor in other things as well, such as controller configuration and other aspects. for instance i preferred the ps3 version of bayonetta over the 360 because after playing both, i found the DS3 to be more responsive than the 360 pad. this outwieghed the framerate and texture differences to me.

AKS3290d ago

Some of you guys spend hours debating about little pixelated grass textures or differences in shadows when both versions look about the same. It's comical to me. The differences between console versions are usually marginal.

I guess the disagrees either suggest this was taken as an attack on consoles (it wasn't; I have been playing my PS3 more than my PC and I also own a 360 and a Wii) or an attempt to justify the ongoing fanboy wars that rage here daily. Keep fighting each other, then.

DigitalAnalog3290d ago

PS3 is the superior version. Although, this has more to do with convenience of a disk. Considering it's blu-ray and no "mandatory" install. The game somehow runs faster then the 360 version (take that you blu-ray haters).

All in all, it's situations like these that show WHY the PS3 needs to be as a lead-development platform. Happy people from both camps. As for multi-console owners, the choice is very readily apparent.

-End statement

donkeydoo3290d ago

They both look really close, also in one of the images the goblin in the Xbox 360 version was missing his mask.

goosepoose3290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

lens of truth, seems like a toned down version of eurogamer. a less academic take on comparisons. someone once said lens is a poor mans digital foundry. compared to df, they look cheap, dirty and unorganised (that commentary section is a mess, that black script is just stank). however, their comparisons are usually spot on, except for the tekken 6 comparison. that was rubbish.

anyway, they seem to be saying what df said. which is good. if i was in the business, i would reference df.

Joe Bomb3290d ago

DF tries to melt your brain. Some of the stuff he says is just not needed. IMO he is more of a pixle counter then a gamer, but I have to admit I tend to look at both sites.

MGRogue20173290d ago (Edited 3290d ago )

I think it's safe to say that the game is 100% identical on both platforms.

Anyone that says otherwise is clearly a fanboy for one console..

vhero3290d ago

The game itself looks 99.9% identical only thing different is lighting and the obviously install/disc issue on 360. Which isn't that bad... Some people like myself prefer single discs over multiple but most don't mind.

ArthurLee3290d ago

I prefer the sigle disc because later in the game when backtrcking you would have to switch discs on the 360, which isn't that big of a deal, just a little annoying + I am out of room on my 360 HDD so installing this game is not an option for me.

jetlian3289d ago (Edited 3289d ago )

there is no install issue on 360. So that was a lie.

Joe Bomb3290d ago

Close win for the PS3 here and a good job by Mercury Steam.

Baron793290d ago

Get this and play on whichever system you have, the game is great!

Show all comments (69)
The story is too old to be commented.