BioShock's PS3 graphics identical to Xbox 360
103
For those out there who thought BioShock on the PS3 was going to exploit the full strength of Cell processors and Blu-rays, 2K Games' senior producer Melissa Miller, tells VideoGamer that the PS3 version "looks no different from the 360 version." It looks so similar, in fact, that when we saw it at E3, it never even crossed our minds to do an impressions post on the game. We just reported on the new DLC content and moved on. From what we've seen of it, BioShock on PS3 is the same as it ever was on Xbox 360. There, we've written our impressions post now.
Reader Comments (103)
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 4:40PM thund3rstruck said
So then the Bioshock senior programmer must have been lying on XPlay last night when he stated clearly that the team was able to include extremely high-res textures that couldn't fit on the 360 and that the PS3 version looked significantly better on the PS3 thanks to "the power of Blu-Ray"
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 11:17PM (Unverified) said
Why would cell help the graphics... that's the job of the GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNIT
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:50PM Dr Stabbingworth said
Fanboys are the new audiophiles. Seeing things that aren't there.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:54PM (Unverified) said
Problem is, Sony overpromised and underdelivered. PS3fanboys genuinely believe they are going to get Crysis graphics eventually. Its not. 360 and PS3 are very diff in architecture but really have the same limitations. PS3 has its advantages and 360 also has its advantages.
There is no game on PS3 that can't be on 360 even with all this junk Sony execs feed the sheep about "all games in 1080P and bluray" or "only possible on PS3" Case in point, FFXIII. MGS4 could be on 360 as well. Don't wanna flame or whatever but the truth is the truth.
Reply
There is no game on PS3 that can't be on 360 even with all this junk Sony execs feed the sheep about "all games in 1080P and bluray" or "only possible on PS3" Case in point, FFXIII. MGS4 could be on 360 as well. Don't wanna flame or whatever but the truth is the truth.
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:23PM (Unverified) said
"Oh yeah, I forgot I had a Wii too. Ooops."
A lot of people forget they have a Wii.
Reply
A lot of people forget they have a Wii.
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 2:06PM (Unverified) said
The fact that they're identical has nothing to do with the hardware. It's because the developers start out with basic groundwork to make sure that both games run efficiently on both platforms to make their large investment pay off when the game is released.
One is better than the other. But we'll never really know since it's in the developer's hands.
Reply
One is better than the other. But we'll never really know since it's in the developer's hands.
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 2:07PM Haggard said
I'm a PS3 owner but the stupidity of all console owners never ceases to amaze me. People keep throwing up the Cell and Blu-Ray as reasons why the PS3 is a billion times better than the 360, but the graphics of the system is determined by the GPU and both systems are quite closely matched on that; in that my PC is better than both :D
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 5:09PM arrrgh said
well if you're going to start talking money, when it all boils down to it, ps3 is still a damn cheap, well performing blu ray player that also plays games.
I did the future shop lcdtv+stereo bundle and got them to throw in a ps3 instead of the lousy stereo...
in the end i got a 40gb PS3 for $50. Not bad for a blu ray player
considering i paid 400 for my 360 and 275 for my wii
Reply
I did the future shop lcdtv+stereo bundle and got them to throw in a ps3 instead of the lousy stereo...
in the end i got a 40gb PS3 for $50. Not bad for a blu ray player
considering i paid 400 for my 360 and 275 for my wii
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:40PM MC Double Def DP said
Would you kindly wait 7 minutes for installation of Bioshock?
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:18PM puerrican85 said
Could be worse.... could be 20 minutes..
Devil May Cry.... )-;
Reply
Devil May Cry.... )-;
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:52PM (Unverified) said
I've said this before but I think since bluray has the extra storage space that developers should use it. For example in Grand Theft Auto 4 each time I leave the gun shop I shouldn't have to hear the same couple of lines. I doubt it's insanely cost preventive to give us bit more dialogue than "so long shooter" and that it's because it would anger the XBox users, but hell... I feel a lot of games are being held back by the shortcomings of the XBox.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:55PM Vcize said
No one is going to base their decision on whether or not to purchase the game based on the guy sometimes saying "see ya fella" instead of "so long shooter", so they're not going to put the time/cost into doing something that generates zero extra dollars.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 2:12PM (Unverified) said
I know a lot of reviewers that complained about the lack of variation on the sound effects in GTA4 and I believe they cut back to fit it on XBox.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 2:19PM FredFredrickson said
Ah, but you can't do stuff like that when you've got half as much RAM at your disposal.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 5:36PM (Unverified) said
LameDuck, a lot of bands would have paid to be included in the soundtrack
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 9:40PM (Unverified) said
That is weird. They SHOULD have put extra sound in the PS3 version since they have use of a Blu-Ray disc. Also, instead of lowering the resolution on the PS3 version, they should have put extra pixels on the disc.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:54PM spin cycle said
Haven't I read this somewhere before?
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/28/first-screens-of-bioshock-on-ps3/
Protip:
Ports are ports. They are don't for low cost, almost never would the graphics be changed. It'd just take too much effort. This was glaringly obvious on the ports to (for example) the 360 at launch. The Tiger Woods game ended up looking worse than the regular Xbox version (and costing more!).
If the game is going to exploit the capabilities of BluRay, it'll be by including some movie on the disk, like a making-of or something. Something like that is cheap to produce (is likely already on hand) and all you have to do is put a menu item in to access it.
Reply
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/28/first-screens-of-bioshock-on-ps3/
Protip:
Ports are ports. They are don't for low cost, almost never would the graphics be changed. It'd just take too much effort. This was glaringly obvious on the ports to (for example) the 360 at launch. The Tiger Woods game ended up looking worse than the regular Xbox version (and costing more!).
If the game is going to exploit the capabilities of BluRay, it'll be by including some movie on the disk, like a making-of or something. Something like that is cheap to produce (is likely already on hand) and all you have to do is put a menu item in to access it.
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 12:56PM hey buddy said
Still a valid release, as many people who just joined the latest/"next" generation of machines with a PS3 purchase might not have been involved when BioShock originally melted brains on the 360.
A lot of people will likely post about how funny it is that the PS3 finally gets games like BioShock and Oblivion a year late, but that logic can be flipped too: These PS3 releases muster even less interest to buy a 360 in some people's eyes.
Reply
A lot of people will likely post about how funny it is that the PS3 finally gets games like BioShock and Oblivion a year late, but that logic can be flipped too: These PS3 releases muster even less interest to buy a 360 in some people's eyes.
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:02PM (Unverified) said
I own both too and the reason baby jesus cries about the lack of any difference in the xbox360 and ps3 graphically is the silly ps3 installs to the harddrive for..umm no good reason.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:02PM (Unverified) said
You mean the Bioshock port for the PS3 is *gasp* the same as the 360 version? This is truly earth-shattering.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:03PM (Unverified) said
I think the port should cost a bit less than a real PS3 game since it's actually just an XBox game.
Reply
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:09PM FredFredrickson said
That's just ignorant. You should be embarrassed.
Can we end this silly notion that a "port" is just a sloppily configured emulation of the original game?
Reply
Can we end this silly notion that a "port" is just a sloppily configured emulation of the original game?
Posted: Jul 22nd 2008 1:27PM (Unverified) said
No it is not and I am not. By the way, you are the only one that has referred to ports as a sloppily configured emulation of the original game.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 224 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 162 comments
- Blizzard taking Valve to court over 'DOTA' trademark 117 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments










