Shitty display for both. Either way the 360 needs to make up for that Chrome Hounds POS. Not exactly ground breaking stuff. With Gears being out for the 360, and Motorstorm for the PS3, game makers shouldn't even try until they can at least offer something comparable to those titles graphically. ANd this CAN'T be using the HDMI port, or even standard HD cables. Kinda crappy for both...keep it.

Reply

I think that I'm done wasting my time wondering "which one is better".

I've concluded that these two systems just each take a completly different route to travel to roughly the same destination.

Yeah, it's still kind of fun to compare and converse about it, but I think I'm done w/doin that.

Anyone else out there agree w/me?

Reply

Most people find the PS3 too bright looking....

Except, of course, for people who have bothered to calibrate their displays...

I love when these 'head to head' tests are done but they don't mention if display calibration took place. I'm sure if they calibrated, there would be little difference.

Reply

LOL SKATING ROBOTS!!

Reply

PS3 = OpenGL rendering, 360 = Dirext X rendering. That could lead to a difference. ???

Reply

My judgment from the video and screens:

360 has AA, perhaps more effects (reflections, heat haze) and a better frame rate.

PS3 has better texture filtering.

Reply

Setting my Xbox Fanboy feelings aside, I have to say I like how the PS3 version looks over the Xbox 360. If the Xbox version wasn't that dark, I would look at them closer. As it stands, PS3 looks easier on the eyes.

Reply

Either way, the game looks really boring.

Reply

I think its the settings, more than a comparison of which is better. Do we know that the default visuals are the same for this game on both the 360 and the PS3?

I think that's the first question to be asked.
The second question is why does it matter?

I mean, sure, the PS3 visuals appear to be better at the end of the gameplay when they go inside, but outside there is no mistake that the 360 looked better.

Why would one look better than the other inside and/or outside unless there was an issue with the settings of the gamer versus the consoles and the monitor being used?

I don't know, or care.

---
Additional semi-relevant information, haha:

I am a 360 owner which is why I read this stuff. However, everyone who is intelligent enough to NOT be a fanboy knows that Blu-ray is better. What keeps us coming back?

Gameplay, and Xbox Live.

So, Sony fanboys, are you willing to admit that Xbox is superior in online functionality? If so, we might be willing to give you the graphics argument.

Unfortunately, a true gamer doesn't give half a dookie about graphics.

--

Even so, if Blu-ray does win this format war nothing is going to happen to the Xbox 360. When a Format War ends the losers adopt the superior technology and that is that.

End of Story.

Afterall, Sony lost the last major Format War (Beta vs. VHS) and when the victor (VHS) became clear Sony, the loser, immediately absorbed VHS into themselves.

I think the bottom line is this: Who cares?

Sony and Microsoft are going to be sticking around regardless of who has the best graphics, latest technologies, or best online functionality.

A true gamer usually owns all consoles, and a PC, for elite gaming.

Fanboyism is the true crime here.

Yeah, yeah...I know this had little to nothing to do with the main topic, I just get tired of reading through all the Fanboy garbage.

Reply

King Kong on the Xbox 360 was a game that had REALLY dark graphics--you needed to turn the Brightness up on your TV set to play it. Ubisoft said that game was a launch game that was rushed, though. Armored Core 4 doesn't really have that excuse. It is almost as if one of the versions was finished first, and they said, "Oh, adjustment the brightness or contrast level," but it was adjusted too much, in both versions.

You can turn the Brightness on your TV up without a problem, but the Contrast on your TV is something that cannot be turned down without affecting the other colors.

With that in mind, the Xbox 360 version of the game is better than the Playstation 3 version.

But, it is also worth nothing that Amored Core 4 sucks on both systems.

Reply

what concerns me more than the differences in brightness and contrast is the complete lack of ambiences and a "living world." i know that's partly planned in the setting of the game, but it still seems like just a bunch of huge empty spaces with some intense action in a tiny speck of that broad expanse of nothingness.

it's like two cheetahs fucking on the serengeti plain.

Reply

Judging by this video, the Xbox 360 version looks much better, the PS3 looks too bright and the 360 looks better just based on that, but you can also see better detail on the 360 version.

Reply

""In this link

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/comparing-ac4-for-xbox-360-and-ps3-243722.php

ps3 seems to be better."

Sure, if you like aliasing and jaggies."

I thought the xbox 360 looked better by looking in areas, but when I zoomed out my vision, PS3 seemed nicer. And no, I don't like jaggies.. and I said "seems" not "is" sheesh

Reply

^Agree
Yeah... Atsui, what are you talking about?

Maybe you should look again at the pics and compare the PINK CIRCLED parts. You'll see better lighting on the model... and look at the window of the building... the reflection seen on the 360 isn't there at all on the PS3.

Reply

Dusty I agree. This 360 v. PS3 shit is old. (Much like the GSXR vs. R1 arguments in motorcycles...go GSXR) To be honest, you don't miss much if you own a PS3 in regards to online gameplay. I mean Live is better, but thats because of all the extra stuff you can do and the interface. I mean you can buy PS2 quality games and downlad trailers and shit from the PS network. At the end of the day I want to play online. Hell when I was hooked on Halo I liked XB Connect better than Live. At least I could get into a no radar game that wasn't MLG, and know what I'm getting into before it starts. If you don't know what XBC is then nevermind, if you do then you know what I'm talking about. The games are consistently better than Live, even though it isn't in a pretty package. I mean Live is good, but not good enough to make me forget how HD DVD is getting its ass kicked. As far as aliasing and jaggies, if it's that important then OK, but if its a shitty game anyway (as 70% of games on BOTH systems are), then why does it matter? I mean people are excited over this? This is a victory? They did the same thing for Def Jam Icon (shitty) and NBA Street Homecourt (shitty). If you want a victory, make a good game that lasts longer than 4.5 hours. If my aim was to make a video that makes either look better, I'm sure I could. They are both comparable systems. The PS3 costs more because of the Blu ray technology, which is worth the money in the long run. Thank goodness MS gives you an option on the HD DVD player. We'd all be pissed if the 360 costed $600 with that bullshit player.

At the end of the day, if you have know someone with a PS3 check it out. It really isn't that bad. If you have the money and like HD DVDs, the PS3 is a cheap option to get onboard w/ blu ray, and get some sick games going as well. As an owner of both, this shit doesn't make me rush out and buy a game on one or the other. Based on my home comparisons, its too close to call in most cases...
I guess the bottom line is this is stupid.

Reply

Both have their positives, but I think the PS3 one would be easier to play since the lighting makes it much easier to see. The Xbox seems to have a problem in that 90% of the games are just too dark. Sometimes the darkness add to the realism, but in this game, it takes away from it IMO as even in direct sunlight, it appears too dark.

Having the choice, I'll buy the PS3 version of AC4.

Reply

Both have their positives, but I think the PS3 one would be easier to play since the lighting makes it much easier to see. The Xbox seems to have a problem in that 90% of the games are just too dark. Sometimes the darkness add to the realism, but in this game, it takes away from it IMO as even in direct sunlight, it appears too dark.

Having the choice, I'll buy the PS3 version of AC4.

Reply

I see what you mean savvydoc. Yes, you are so right. The 360 does seem to kick ass here based on reflections and jaggies. It's hard to tell in all areas, but in those aspects, the xbox wins in this battle.

Reply

I find it extreamly funny how the comments on the 360 fanboy site seem more civil than the comments on other blogs regaring the PS3.. As A PS3 fanboy I have to say that in doors PS3 is supperior, but out doors I was a little dissapointed. It seemed the 360 gave the outdoors a more alien atmosphere while the PS3s just looked plain.

Dont get me wrong, the graphics were very pretty but I'm undecided which I like better.. the lighting on the 360 bugs, but i could probably get over that, the overall look is better on the 360.. then again, I just perfer the whole interface and controller for the PS3..tough decisions on which to get..

but now i'm just rambling :p game on Xboxfans, game on

Reply

If the 360 versions gamma or brightness can be tweaked up, then I'd have to go with the 360 version.. the textures have more detail, IMO. This genre isn't my cup o' tea though so it doesn't matter to me in the end.

Reply