Riiiiiiiiiiidge Racer! Xbox 360 vs. PS3 screens

I've got RR6 on the 360 and i'm playing it like mad, it's addictive and far better than you think on first play (it's not meant to handle realistically or feel "right" on first play; give it time it absolutley rocks for pure arcade gameplay as i'm sure RR7 will).

The points I will make may have already been said. Apart from the source differences (if true) making the 360 shot look dark/muddy (it doesn't look like that on MY screen I can assure you) they are pretty similar. However:

1. The resolution difference is obvious on RR7, it looks a little bit sharper. Having said this, I'm certain Namco could pull this off on the 360 with it's new upscaling, and remember not many people will actually be running @ 1080p due to limited 1080p TVS in circulation.

2. The lighting looks less dynamic on the PS3, more washed out as if they couldn't put as many dynamic lights in so relied on ambient (cheap) lighting, this does lend the PS3 shot a more "natural" edge but in reality when it's on screen and you are racing you will prefer more contrast as found in RR6.

3. I don't think I saw this mentioned and its probably a great tell tale sign. Look at the road stretching off in the distance, just under the cable car. On the Xbox this continues as a seamless texture up and around the bend until it blurs out of focus. On the PS3 however the texture has ALREADY dropped down to a lower level of detail (Mip Mapping) which suggests that it has had to reduce texture quality at a nearer draw distance than RR6 had to.

So some things look better and some worse. Bear in mind though that this is a year later and a whole new "title" later (7 versus 6) and frankly you would expect it to look at least as good if not better than it's previous version no matter what format it was on. I am confident that come RR8 if/when released on both formats you will see the 360 version excelling at Texture handling (distance LOD, sizes and quality), the 1080p or higher res should be on both by that time. There is absolutely nothing in the PS3s GPU that can "outdo" the one in the 360 (in fact it's the other way around), the lack of ram is speaking volumes in the PS3 shot.

And finally bear in mind that RR6 on the 360 is a very basic looking game to begin with, it play great but it's not supposed to be a graphical tour de force like PGR3 almost was. If the PS3 can not surpass convincingly a year old title with supposedly inferiour tech EVEN with it's resolution advantage then I can't see how it's going to beat out the 360 graphically in "anything".

"The XBOX version looks more like the art style of Burnout. The PS3 version went more of a realistic photo approach. Does joystiq know anything about different art styles?"

Different art styles? You've got to be shittin' me...Youre saying the PS3 used a totally different art style than the 360 version? Am I reading that right?

jdoki:

it's not better because it was basically built a year ago. The GPU was done, the CPU was, in theory, done, they were waiting on Blu-ray and games.

@43

Of course! That must be it! And that lack of rumble? Man, cars don't rattle or shake, they glide along frictionless surfaces, duh! Haven't you ever driven a car before? You totally drive with a joystick.

Realism is a touchy subject that has yet to truly be achieved by any game console, and probably won't be achieved this generation either. Things might look pretty, they might even look nigh-on-realistic, but really, photo-realism is only part of the realism puzzle.

@100
"I think some of you are on crack. The PS3 photos look much more realistic. I do a lot of professional photography and the 360 pics saturation, colors and distance shots are not even close to being realistic. I don't think that it is better in all regards to say, but most of that photo looks way more realistic then the 360 version."

No dude, you are on crack because you failed to comprehend that those contrast and saturation problems are NOT in the actual Xbox360 game but are due to the screen shot being taken (badly) with a camera.

As someone who has actually played the Damn game on 360 I can speak with confidence that THOSE LIGHTING ISSUES IN THE CRAPPY SCREEN SHOT should be ignored, go check out gamespot or something with loads of PROPER screen shots to do a fair comparision. Even I can see (and anyone can see, even those who are not pro-photo-workers) that the 360 shot looks "worse" from a lighting/colour point of view but that is purely down to the less than clinical screen grab process.

And to reiterate again, it's not that the ps3 version looks like rubbish (I think it looks better in some ways) it's that it doesn't do everything Sony promises, convincingly enough. And if you knew as much about game tech as you did about photos you would be looking out for tell - tale signs like the reduced LOD drawing on the PS3 textures compared to the Box and not judging them as still shots based on "photography" which reveals nothing more than a choice of colour pallete and placement and types of lights (it doesn't mean the hardware is any more "photorealistic"). And that is not even remembering what I said about the lighting flaws being down to the picture quality and not the source game as it's seen on your TV.

lol u guys kill me. The pic of the 360 version looks notably inferior. I showed my wife both without telling her which was which, and she agreed that the ps3 version looks much more "real".

This is the most retarded fan boy thread yet. Two F'ing bad pictures off the net and you're all at each others throats!?!?!

Go play the damned game on the PS3, anyone who has knows it is leaps and bounds better looking than the 360 version. It is not washed out like the images on that retards blog either. And the schmuck is showing a "cruise liner" missing from the ps3 version but fails to mention the damned tall ship replacing it right in the foreground... DUH, can you say desperate fanboy?

Oh yes, I forgot about the rumble.

The same "rumble" that so many PS3 owners-to-be have suddenly decided they never used/enjoyed/found of any value... well let me tell you that the sublime 360 controller (with rumble) works amazingly well with the graphically comparative (and with better texture detail) RR6.

And by that I mean it adds a tangiable amount of extra immersion and fun, when you use nitro the controller shakes furiously, when you drive over grids or strips the controller gives a sharp but subtle nudge... sure you don't think of it as the feature to end all features but you miss it if it wasn't there in a game like this! No argument about how "You don't bother with rumble" is gonna win this one, if you are happy taking a step back with your racers to a time before Rumble existed then be my guest but don't tell me how it doesn't matter because anything that can be done to involve more senses and give more feedback about gameplay is welcome... always.

@105: "Go play the damned game on the PS3, anyone who has knows it is leaps and bounds better looking than the 360 version."

Well if this was even true I WOULD HOPE it to be the case, and not due to hardware but due to it being a so called sequal which normally can improve on tech by quite a margin.

However regardless of all this comparing of poorly taken shots and the discussions of lighting (which has nothing to do with hardware being better, maybe just better choices/tweaks/colours in this version compared to last) the one fact remains:

THE FACT: Check out the mip mapping on both shots, the quality of the shots don't matter - they don't lie about mip maps. THE ps3 shot shows the road under the cable car in the distance has gone into low detail (next reduced texture down) far sooner than the Xbox360 has. In the 360 shot it goes off seamlessly into the bend of the road, on the PS3 shot it just abrubtly stops at the distance the devs have seen as a safe distance to use to ensure the frame rates keep up .

The main reason for this *MAY* well be the fact it's running in higher res, of course it's going to have to give something up. However the reduced ram/bottle necks of the ps3 show here that too many sacrifices have to be made to get that 1080p and the point all along was that the PS3 could do everything the box could do AND MORE at a higher resolution. The pictures show it quite clearly can not.

All discusions on lighting and contrast belong in an art meeting not a hardware technical comparison. The limited VRAM means they simply can't store as many detailed textures as they can on the Box so you will see more LOD popping in the future on the ps3 (unless it works around it by blocking draw distance/dropping resolution).

I want both systems to do well and be healthy competition to each other so we gamers win, but on a technical standpoint that mip-mapping issues has shown me that the PS3 is at least 30% hype.

"I showed my wife both without telling her which was which, and she agreed that the ps3 version looks much more "real"."

Well, gee I guess your technical expert wife has us all beat then. How many times, the XBOX 360 photo is a POORLY sourced shot. Go and compare proper quality screenshots the only positive you will find in the PS3 are a better resolution and the "taken for granted" extra polish you expect in a sequel.

Jesus christ! Its Riiidge Racer.. who the fuck cares.. be it #6 or #7 in the series, Its still crap!

So I dont care how much Sony praises 1080p 60fps, Its a shitty game! I'd rather playing a free flash game of Pong instead of this

I think the differences here are the differences in shaders. When a studio is making a dual platform game they are most likely sharing as many of the same assets as possible, and (hopefully) taking advantage of each system's strengths, so in this respect, games that appear on both systems will look very similar. HOWEVER, with the next gen systems' shader abilites, there are bound to be major differences. From what I know, the shader architecture is quite different between the PS3 and 360. And on next gen games, which make extensive use of various shaders, this could mean that games will look quite different. This is the difference I think is being seen here. PS- I'm no programmer, but I do work at a game company, so I'm not totally naive.

Leave it to the ridge racer series to not actually make new tracks, cars, etc., for a new game though... wtf is with that?

try again, thoughs are different scenes

ok. i hate the portbox. but i can see that RR6 looks superior (by far) ( Textures, environment shadows, world level of detail, grass,reflections,geometry, Effect like bloom, OverBright, etc)

the ps3 version looks like a pc game with all the options turned down, (except depth of view, and h resolution) its just a ps2 game with h res

@111 Hey it was just an observation by an unbiased person. I just think it's funny when the article was trying to imply that the 360 version somehow looks good compared to the PS3 version, and to an average person, as it is to me, the difference is obvious. Regardless of the quality of the picture, you can tell that the PS3 version still has much better textures and lighting. So sorry, lemming.

what's the big deal?

both RR6 and RR7 were/are launch titles, so neither push the machines they were created on. RR never does.

Well, uh... the trees look better in the PS3 version!

Regardless of which version you buy, you're getting the same tired crap. Wake me when they release the next Burnout.

JR

[[[You all have to consider that the chances are these images displayed has been altered as a photoshop job.]]]

The comparisons are screens of the almost exact locations of the same track, if 7 has the same but slightly altered content to 6 what is the point of buying a game that has no novelty?

Just to buy it for the PS3 if u haven't got a 360? Go ahead Namco needs business, But I dont see any further development work done to 7 apart from artistry = lacks value for money.

it also lloks like the top PS# pic is in development still, it has japanese you know

ok, so RR7 looks better than RR6, hell it'd better be.
Who'd want to buy a sequel that looks worse?

can we have RR7 (xbox360) vs RR7 (ps3)?

"JD" wrote:
"Brian... the images are not actual screen shots.. but digital camera pix of someone's TV."

Right you are; I don't know how I missed that since it looks very obvious to me now, but miss it I did, so thank you for pointing it out.

Did you miss the bow of a boat in the PS3 shot right next to the bridge? Look on the left side.

check out this crop
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/marmoc/Various/Untitled-3.jpg

which is better?

oh guys

guess what?

, ign just gave ridge racer 7 a 8.2 overall, and 7.5 graphics rating.

ign gave rr6 a 7.0 overall, 6.5 graphics.

ps3 version IS better than the 360.

argument over.

you silly billy xbots in denial

I used to think "I'm never EVER getting a PS3!" And I also despise Sony. That being said, the PS3 shots look more naturally lighted and realistic than the hyper-contrasty X360 shots. But someone already has said it, I have no way to tell that the screen shots haven't been post edited.

Keep in mind that I'm not pre-disposed towards either console. I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I think the shots from the PS3 look far better than the 360. I had no idea that grey-black pocked mass through the middle of the first shot comparison was a river until I looked at the PS3 version. At least, I think it's supposed to be a river.

The behind car shot for the PS3, the atmosphere rendering looks much better, as there's that natural blue shade apparent in the distance.

It's your own fault (and Sony's to some extent) because you're expecting the PS3 to be that much better that the 360 after only 4 months more time. Don't forget that this system was really supposed to come out in April 2006 so they didn't really have that much more time. The delay didn't give them more time to make the system more powerful.

Plus it takes more power to run a game in 1080p which makes it even worse.

wow.. i can't believe you idiots are comparing a game on a system that has been out for a year and a system that isn't even out yet. i guess thats why i hate the microsoft fanboys the most.

Haa haaaa, shocking!!!! All you stupid fanboys should just enjoy games for what they are, instead of wasting you lives analysing pixels!!!!!

Well regardless of which you THINK looks better (With them both being about equal) and the lack of power present in the PS3 Shots (the mip maps) this link will show you once and for all why the Xbox360 version is better and why the PS3 version should be avoided! (hint, it's f**xored)

http://www.gamebrink.com/forums/showthread.php?p=28670#post28670%3Cbr%20/%3E

Now, I dunno about anyone else but I've never seen THAT on RR6 so I guess Both RR6 and the 360 are FTW (or something) ;)

I feel sorry for anyone who has put a deposit down on the PS3 looking at stuff like that.

And for those people who think the 360 shot is actually anything like it looks then see here:

http://scr3.golem.de/screenshots/0601/rr6/Ridge_racer6_05.jpg

RR6 on Xbox360, perfectly natural lighting. The shot posted is taken badly with poor camera adjustment on a probably poorly set up HDTV set.

Here's another smaller one for ya!

http://media.teamxbox.com/games/ss/1279/1128701410.jpg

@126 > "126. wow.. i can't believe you idiots are comparing a game on a system that has been out for a year and a system that isn't even out yet. i guess thats why i hate the microsoft fanboys the most."

Why should that make any difference? You make it sound as if all sequels naturally look worse (when they should improve quite a bit). And when you consider that most Sony fanboys still believe that the PS3 has some "reality magic" in it to make things look better automatically then the game even if a DIRECT PORT of RR6 should look "better" on the PS3. It doesn't, they look about the same but there are natural improvements in the sequel as you would expect, these could easily be put in the a RR7 for Xbox 360 also. Again it is NOT a hardware issue here merely the march of time that has helped Namco learn from RR6 and make minor improvements to 7. The problem is that RR7 in some areas looks worse than the "year old" RR6 on 360 and you want to stay in denial by keep refering to that god awful photo that was posted up as an example.

I'm through here, I am trying to save you dissapointment when you eventually buy and realise the PS3 is no-more powerful (graphically) than the 360 and in some ways less powerful, the lack of VRAM and possibly non flexible hardware (shaders) are showing up already in the early crop of PS3 games. And we CAN compare them to rr6 because RR6 was released near the start of the 360's life also, it's a totally fair comparision... if not slightly unfair in the PS3s favour because of that year long extra to work out the glitches (which they haven't, the game is actually faulty if you see that thread posted above, graphical errors which seem to me due to the GPU overheating; being pushed to hard and that's yer 1080p for you.. enjoy it).

muahah

I wouldn't expect Consolers to know what a graphics card is.

Man Xbox360 muders the ps3 the cell pro isnt shit

ON THE SECOND SHOT, LOOK AT THE TRACK MAP, THEY'RE NOT EVEN ON THE SAME SPOT...I PERSONALLY OWN A 360 AND PS3, THERE'S NOTHING SPECTACULAR ABOUT IT

PS3 will blow away XBox, this is common knowledge based on leading facts. First picture isn't even a ps3 shot...never know with anybody on the web cause they could favor 360 over PS3 or vice versa so...its just BS...I'll put money on it that PS3 destroys 360 in every aspect...

....................................................................... THE 360 IS THE BEST...............................................................................................................

The bottom line is ya gotta own both systems.

im sorry but why are all ps3 clips not game footage but cgi if the graphics were better they wouldn't hide em if u ask me i could not give a fuk about the console war ive got a 360 n ill buy a ps3 woopy fukin do!!!!!!
And next time u put pix on of ridge racer make sure that its a real xbox 360 1 not a low res thnx NOT!!!

You guys are all a bunch of faggots (sony and microsoft lovers) for arguing this. Go get girlfriends and have some sex for gods sake!!!

why hasn't anyone said this but the difference in color quality between the two has something to do with your "Contrast" settings. you can easily adjust the Xbox 360 to have the same contrast washout as the PS3 on the second screen cap. color-quality is adjustable. and I can easily tell that the two versions do not have the same textures for the road as the Xbox360 version. though I have to admit the game does look better on 1080p but this is not a problem on the xbox360. ATI has a reputation for having a superior anti-aliasing solution than that of Nvidia. so I doubt that the PS3 has a superior graphics quality. Hardly the Xbox360 here is showing that it has the better quality overall with out having to be 1080p.

Okay, I've done a lot of research on this subject because I promised my stepson a console form ole 'Claus. He most wanted the PS3 because he has PS2 and PSP gear and I went white. Knowing that Sony is taking a loss to get Blu Ray into homes made me feel a BIT better.

Blu Ray risks/bargains aside (I guess we'll know in about 2 years), what I understand about the Cell Processor is that A. It is much harder for devs to currently utilize because, as proprietary tech, it doesn't have a nice programming interface package like MIcrosoft's XBOX360 and B. while XBOX360 might ultimately win in the rendering department, the real genius behind the Cell Processor is that it crushes conventional processors, including the 360's config, when it comes to physics and movement. I guess we'll see if the content hurdle is worth the physics reward in about 24 - 36 months. Comments?

"43. Clearly you guys aren't seeing this on an HDTV or you have your immersiveness turned down. Ridge Racer looks so real that I actualy feel like I'm driving a car."

Man, do you know how to drive? Unless your car has shitty suspension that forces your car to fishtail all over the place, and unless your car is equipped with some fantastic collision impact-absorbing materials, playing Ridge Racer n is about as real as that other bullshit "simulator" out there called GT4. No damage modeling. No real-world physics.

You call that driving? Shit, I'd hate to be in your car any time of the day, and I'd hate to be your insurance agent.

x box is rocking although ps3 is quite a top notch console only if you would like to spend some more of your living bucks then you will be in heaven. alrite then enough with the comparision and lets talk about games. what is life without games ?
microsoft and sony rocks !
good things never come in handy right ?
great consoles and promising game titles yet to be unleashed. thank you !