The Joystiq Challenge: Xbox 360 versus PlayStation 3

The videos don't tell much as they are both pre-rendered. In case no one understands till now, after 49 comments, pre-rendered means the visuals are not generated real time.

Hell, even pre rendered FMVs look as cool on the nintendo gameboy.

This comparison is flawed. Show us some in-game shots, and we'll make a comparison then.

I'd have to go with #2 barely. I was honestly interested in this somewhat silly test so I did it fairly, watching each trailer twice unknowing on which is which.

I went with #2 because the only thing that stood out to me, was the difference in glowing light flare coming off the main robot. In #2 the robots "glowies" not only glowed, but seemed to have another layer of sparking detail added in.

Regardless the power of the boxes is irrelevant, and I'm sure this game will look just as good on the revolutions dwarfed hardware. The winning machine will be decided by the xboxs success in japan and online establishment, ps3s ability to release at a decent time and keep it's price reasonable, and well if Nintendo can truely convince everyone to try something new. If any of the companies can convince you that what the other has isn't right, then they've outmarketed the others and won.

To be biased, I will state that the PSP sucks and is a misconcieved media player that eats doodoo.

-Ubercowboy

Grrr! Okay i was excited at the prospect of judging these two side by side but theres a problem, well a few actually:
-They're both too friggin small to see anything
-They were completely different videos with completely different footage; apples and oranges
-The first one was nothing but quick clips so i couldnt even SEE the graphics, let alone compare them...
I would have to say the second looked better though, just because it showcased more effects and let us see the objects loong enough to comprehend the textures on them.
Bad examples if i do say so myself.

the second video is better because it has a better framerate...it appears it has a smoother framerate than the first video.

I hate to say it but the first video looks more like xbox 360 because almost all the xbox360 videos i have seen havent shown smooth framerates but designers promise better framerates in the final build of the certain game

i'm still getting an xbox 360 because 2007 is just way too long to wait for a PS3...and for all i know the second video, if it is PS3 is just pre rendered like almost all the PS3 videos(just tweaked for good framerate).

even Nintendo fanboys arguing the graphical capabilities of their respective next-gen coffin...??

WOW,that has to be the least intelligent sentence i've had the misfortune of encountering in all whole life....nice going joystiq...you failed BIG TIME!!!

ROFL!!

"Hey dipshit, why don't you scroll up and read the comment I posted before you? I clearly said that the first one looks slightly better, and that the second one has better music (added to subtract the effect of having a shitty fps rate). The difference between my opinion and yours was that I didn't know which was which, until I read your moronic post. Tough shit, huh?"

Nice, and quite delicately handled. Have you ever considered motivational speaking as a career?

It told me I voted already when I hadn't ;_;

CK Tracksuit Jogger, I take offense at your innacurate and unfair portrayal of motivational speakers. You see, I myself am a motivational speaker.

My name is Matt Foley, and I live in a van down by the river.

I voted the last option...the only thing i could find that set them apart was the anti-aliasing on one building at the start of the second clip.

They look pretty much the same to me...

these aren't the same graphics we'll see in the game, are they? if they aren't, then it's no more impressive then a pixar animation film... which is good but has nothing to do with the console's power. so, these videos would have been the same had this game been on PS2 and XBOX.

They both sucked. I'm so pissed that I'm gonna have to shovel out the bucks to buy either of them. I think the tech specs war is pretty much over now. Not only am I disappointed graphics, but it's a 4th rendition of an already 'tired' game. I'm really starting to understand why it's time to have a 'Revolution'.
Bring it Sony Jabronis and BillBox Butt Bandits!!! =D

How about "This is Stupid"?

The 360 stuff at E3 only ran on G5s and developers only got their final dev kits very late into the process. Considering that there is no playablecode out yet for the PS3, can you make a comparison? Tech demos aren't as system intense as a final game, as there is substantially more code that is used to create the final experience.

Hasn't anyone noticed the trend yet? It happens with every console and every big graphical game - the final thing never impresses as much because we get caught in the anticipation factor. And two bit journalists make their rent simply rehashing the same crap for every new generation.

But it's fine. Let the big sites keep beating the dead hype horse, because games journalists simply aren't creative enough to think of something new. Just thumb-suck a pointless vs. article with some movies that may or may not be what the final hardware has in store for us.

Just to let everyone know that the 1st link to the movies was from the PS3 and the 2nd was made using the Xbox 360
sorry to spoil it for u, unless someone alreadly told everyone (i didnt bother reading all the comments made by everyone above)
I know you are be asking how i found this out but i'll let everyone guess (its really easy to find out which one is which!)for now......

The only way you can say either of them looked crappy is if you're a person who's spoiled by PC graphics.

I think the City looked better in the second trailer. and yes I do believe graphics do make a diference In people choosing a console. I bought an xbox instead of ps2 when I went to Eb and saw SSX tricky being played side by side on display for both systems. But I woud'nt have waited a couple of extra months to buy the xbox if it had'nt out Yet.

I think, if they were both black and white, they are nearly identical. The only reason the PS3 one gets my nod is that the colors are brighter, whereas the xbox video has very little color saturation. Since that is probably more of an encoding error than system problem, I can't see a difference.

I think the jokes on you i believe it's one long movie splitup (my thoughts).
But the secound one had more action in the filmclip,but graphs look the same to me and if they are from different console machines than there both unreal 360&ps3

Unless the cities are living and breathing a la GTA, I'm seriously unimpressed with both the technical aspects and the gameplay shown in these videos. I mean seriously, I'm still more impressed with the XBOX dancing robot promo that any of the games I've seen so far on the 360

They both suck. No wonder I don't like giant robot games...

I really couldn't tell the difference. I tried to pause both of them when there was an effect like smoke or explosions on the picture but they both look the same. However in the second one at 28 seconds I noticed that the "round" building was still not perfectly round. I was expecting that that will be gone next gen and you won't be able to tell a single polygon, but looks like some things will always stay the same.

w00t! Vote #3000.

Second one. Definately. The missles add a lot to the animation count, plus the smoke effects. It's lighter, too, so you can see it better.

Sure, both may look impressive, but when it comes down to it, they're both trailers. Show me gameplay. And what you'll find there is that you're seeing it on the 360 before the P$3 8)

Content aside, I liked the second one a little better then the first. The first one was verry collerfull, and had great smoke affects. My real problem with it was that by one part, it kept getting realy jaggy. Its near the end where the mech sort of lands and slides with the smoke and everything. Now the second one I think lacked color except by the force feild and thrusters. Now that might be because whoever made the vid just didnt feel that color is realy needed in a mech game, but I still hold it against the vid. I the way way the mettal lookeds in the seccond vid just seams more real. Also, the buildings seamed realy, realy smooth in the seccond one. Now my favorute part is the distruction aspects. Stuf just gets blown up, shot up, and totaly destroid in graphical bliss. So in total, they are both realy good vids, on a scale of 1-10 for graphics allone, I would give the first vid a 9.5 and the seccon a 9.8. Just my opinion.

Seeing how neither are gameplay videos, I'm not impressed at all.

I've never played a game from FROM Software where the CG looks like the gameplay. FROM uses lots of CG rendered at a much higher quality than the actual gameplay. This is no exception.

If the actual gameplay renders such a large city and mechs as detailed as in the intro, I'll eat my shorts.

Also, games from FROM software are usually crummy. Not BAD (mostly) but almost always not worth the asking price.

"Where's the "they both suck" option? :P"

That's listed under "Fanboy"

-TheTussin
tehtussin@yahoo.com

The more colorful enviornment goes to the PS3 version which has a cinematic quality while the Xbox 360 version is less brillant but has more impressive lighting character models and particle effects. Both takes are impressive very to say the least but id give the hand to the Xbox 360 version. Though i expect games to look better on the 360 for some time to come developers will be much more familar to the technology after so many months. Either way both are impressive hard to determine whether its the enviornment in the 360 version that has a situation making the arena so glum or its that it hasnt rendered that aspect in the footage either way the 360 version gets the thumbs up.

I highly doubt that everyone that has posted viewed both videos both were impressive but if you havent do yourself a favor and take the time to glance at the two and make a valid opinion.

And to #73 FROM has made excellent games in the past and the Armored Core series apart from the PSP iteration is an exceptional mech series. This footage is far from CG though if it was it would be unquestionable as to if it was or wasnt. Either way if it was CG one would have not looked so superior to the other.

I mucked up and saw "ps3movies" of one of them when i downloaded it.

They're both good...

Nice try, but I could see the URL and clearly know which one is which. I won't spoil it.

The fact remains that these are both just cgi movies in the games. The gameplay is where I want to see the graphics. I think a PS2 game could render the same cgi movies with out noticable difference. I don't think Sony has shown any gameplay graphics for the ps3 yet. I'm sure it's because they aren't that impressive yet, just as the ps2 didn't have the same calibur graphics at launch as it does today. It will be interesting to see how much the 360 evolves before the PS3 launches, my guess is not very much.

why this is futile:

- even if the game is released for both consoles, it'll probably be based on the exact same build, and then ported to either system. therefore, the graphical quality and polygonal count will be almost the same, even if one of the consoles is more powerful than the other.

- one of these trailers (the ps3 one) is much older than the other, so therefore it may show an early build, whereas the other could easily be captured from a more refined engine version.

- the trailers do not show the same content. one of them has closeups of textures, the other doesnt. one of them has physics simulations (the crumbling building), the other one doesnt. to do a direct comparison, they would have to use two different engines, and then recreate the trailers elements precisely in both of them. not realistic. again, it'll probably use the same engine on both platforms.

How are we supposed to tell which one is better when the video quality is nowhere near the same? The first one suffers from tiling and artifacts because the bitrate is too low for the amount of action on screen. The second looks to be a higher bitrate and doesn't have that problem so the image looks sharper. The first looks like it is in color with the second looking like it is in black and white (with a splash of blue). I can tell you which VIDEO looks better, but that really doesn't mean a thing when you want to know which one represents better graphics.

You left out the "pre-rendered video has no legitimate meaning" option. I think we'll have to wait until we see something substantial from all the offering companies... like an actual GAME.

C'mon Joystiq... I used to like this site as a forum for intelligent discussion, but clearly I'm not alone when I say, "this is a new low..."

list this under

"our readers are obviously fuckwits, they'll rise to any old shit....."

poor show, very poor show indeed!

WWWWWOOOOOOWWWWW finally got the quicktime, after 2 corrupted downloads, and after downloaded almost 150 MB in my crappy internet conection, i must say i like the second a little more, but not by much, and im not impressed with either one, totally agree with 81, i dont think both were in game play.

And really who wants, one (sony or microsoft) win the "war console" , if either one win and kill the adversaries, all we (gamers) will lost, just think, if one win and become the world leader in consoles (by more than 90%), what company will challenge the winner, no one, and the console market will become another monopoly, and trust me (more if microsoft win) they only care about money, the games prices will go up, the next console (1 in all market) now will cost $999, the games will be $99, i dont care who wins the war console, i care no-one win, just go to the retailer software store next to your home and see the price for a windows XP, its almost more cheap buy a basic computer, because there is a monopoly, if microsoft dont have the 90% of PC SO, you think they will sell you their crappy windows XP for that price, no way,for another example you can buy a tv really cheap because are dozens of companies making them, and no one hold more than 50% of market, so, no one must win the "console war" (at least i hope not).

God, i prey for no-one win the "next console war"
God, i almost want for nintendo dont dissapper
God, i also ask for another console, maybe sega returns
God, we need more developers, so the games improve and the prices down
God, dont tell me im asking for imposible or stupid things because im just a gamer that loves play games in any-company console
God, this is my last post, my last hope, please listen,i know im not the onlyone that think the same about this

"STUPID NEXT CONSOLE WAR"

the second video seems to be an xbox 360 movie from the url link (fyad.org only shortens the link...is there a site that actually hides the link?)

can't wait to get my hands on the actual 360 games if and when i get the console

hope the news that the 360s are all out of stock is bogus

look they were both pretty awesome but all in all i think the second one was graphicaly superior however i do love sony and i would much like to know which one was which. i have already casted my vote and would like to be informed.

Game Release Date 12/31/2006.

Um... That's a year off. And if I wasn't sure before, I am now:

THESE ARE PRE-RENDERED.

THEY DO NOT REPRESENT GRAPHICS OR CPU CAPABILITY ON EITHER SYSTEM. NOR DOES IT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE LOOK OF THE ACTUAL GAME -- AT ALL.

Sheesh.

-Pie

Well, both of them are sweet. But i think the 2nd one is a little better, that's only because it has more light. Im sure if the same scene was shown, both would be the exact same.

the 360 will be friggin awesome. cant wait for halo3.

the first traile is technically/graphically superior because of the particle effects, physics, and fuller color...the second trailer has better presentation and action...but the 2nd one didn't get a chance to show off physics....

Although the second trailer showed much better lighting effects, and better environments "from a distance", the trailer for the first seemed to show the game actually switching into real gameplay; none of this pre-rendered garbage that doesn't hold water for either console. when a building was destroyed in the second trailer, I was extremely disappointed to see that the building fell apart in chunks that looked almost identical to what they would look like on the previous-gen consoles. the fact of the matter is that the second, while not as cinematically entertaining really showed off what that particular console could do. How are we supposed to judge a game simply on pre-rendered material. also keep in mind that graphics aren't the only important features to a game, gameplay is more important, I'd rather take a game with friggin' lame graphics with fun gameplay, i.e. Mario, Mercenaries, ect. than a game that is superior in graphics but is BOOOORING!, i.e. Gran Turismo 4. Both trailers were amazing but we need to keep in mind that the gameplay is definately more important than the graphics. I almost want to take that excuse for a controller that sony made to look like a boomerang, and throw it at whoever designed it, wondering if it would come back to me. and don't give me that, "well this one's shinier, and I like shiny things bullcrap. My final choice.......... Trailer 1, I hope badly that it's the 360.

what program will play these trailers ?

Just want to say, After you vote and see the results, you will notice that the majority of voters select the second video feed, be it major or minor difference. This should lead the average consumer(if basing their decision solely on grafics) to decide on the producer of the second feed. If you're one to look at the other aspects... Sony has the game market cornered(based on the japanese game manufacturers)And Microsoft has the(though maybe not illustrated through tech specs) technical market cornered.

THE PS3 GETS MY VOTE BECAUSE OF THE GRAPHICS. THE 360 VERSION WASS TOO BLEAK AND I SAW SOM ANOYING GLITCHES IN THERE...(HIDDEN). SO OVER ALL I THINK THE PS3 IS BETTER.

(ANYWAYS I LIKE SONY BETTER... AND I HOPE XBOX GOES DOWN JUST LIKE NINTENDO)

You won't see much difference in the graphics of multiplatform games. If you played the game on both consoles you'd see the PS3 would be superior but not by that much. To make a real comparison of graphics you'd have to compare exclusives like MGS4 and Halo3.