video game quotes

Follow us on: &

You may have read recently that there are some… issues with the PS3 version of BioShock, which at first seemed to only apply to textures on the Big Daddies (if not, it’s the very next story). 2K officially responded and owned up to the error, which is cool of them, but it now seems that the PS3 version’s overall graphical quality doesn’t quite match up to the 360 version, as evidenced by the included screenshots.

Click images for a larger view:













At first glance, the images above don’t appear to be all that different. There wouldn’t be a problem at all if people played their PS3 games on a 10-inch television. Unfortunately, clicking the images and viewing them a little closer makes it obvious that graphics whores with their 50-inch HDTV’s will not be happy.

The PS3’s visuals overall appear to be a bit blurry when compared to the 360 counterpart. This, of course, doesn’t mean BioShock is going to be any less of a compelling game on the PS3, it will just be a not-quite-as-good-looking-as-it-could-be-but-still-compelling game on the PS3.

These screengrabs were taken from a Japanese site, and while the fact that it’s Japanese has no bearing on my opinion, the person that posted the images may very well be a 360 fanboy and is only trying to sabotage the game. Honestly, though, I don’t think that’s very likely considering there’s only 3 people in Japan that own an Xbox 360.

We also must take into account that this was only the demo. The visuals may have been compressed to make a smaller download file, and it also may not be the final build of the game. Then again, just to play devil’s advocate, maybe it’s just because the PS3 sucks.

       
spacer Add Ripten to your RSS reader Be Ripten's Myspace friend Follow Ripten on Twitter Be Ripten's Facebook fan Add Ripten to your favorites Email this page Print this page
  • Patrick Steen
    They look the same, apart from a blur used on the PS3 version to create a faux anti-aliasing. Both have 0xAA - but some previews, such as IGN, note that the PS3 version has smoother edges.

    From these images, only Big Daddy has a much lower texture resolution (apparently a bug with texture streaming in the demo) whereas the rest has the same texture resolution with this blur over the top. I don't know why they do it - most seem to think it makes things look worse. If you can't do real AA, just don't do it at all.
  • Spriggs
    So you say, hey, it could be a number of factors like an old build, compression, but the title? Come on now. Just stop it. I hope when you get a 360 demo early in the future that you say the 360 version sucks. The standard here being set really puts you in a stupid position in the future to post pretty much anything from a demo that looks sub par. Sucks to be you with that responsibility now. LOL
  • Patrick Steen
    In fact, looking at all these images. The only difference seems to be that slight blur - as I said, no texture difference. And what's worse - even the HUD is blurred on the PS3 shots. So either there is global blurring in this PS3 demo of Bioshock, or it's a poor photoshop.
  • Dan Landis
    I wish I knew what the fuck Spriggs was trying to say...
  • Dan Landis
    I also wish I knew what the fuck Patrick was trying to say...
  • John Kershaw
    I just replayed the demo to see what the fuss is about and tbh, can't see it. The PS3 version does have a blur-type effect over it. I assume to help with anti-aliasing? Or it could be a sub-HD to HD scaling (though I'm playing on SD so it's near impossible to see)

    There is also the single BigDaddy corpse. The first (animated) BigDaddy you see looks perfectly fine.
  • Patrick Steen
    There is blur over the PS3 images which also blurs the HUD...your health, how many bullets. It would be extremely unlikely that a visual effect would be applied to the HUD to make the HUD blurry - meaning that the PS3 images could very well be photoshopped.

    BioShock PS3 is not Sub-HD. It does appear to be there to improve AA.
  • Limanima
    I own a PS3 and I can confirm that the PS3 version corresponds to the shots. It is infact blured. As for the XBox version I don't know because I've never seen it.
    But this smells like another bad game port. Unreal Ungine 3 sucks on the PS3.
  • Officer Jack Mehoff
    I'm not seeing it guys, sorry. Aside from the Big Daddy, it looks the same. Maybe I'm blind. They say that happens when you do that too often.
  • Justin
    Sub-par graphics or no, I'll probably pick it up anyway for the new difficulty rating and challenge rooms.

    BTW I want to mail 2K roadkill for not giving this new content PC or 360 owners.

    Dead possum son, dead possum.
  • tbonedakilla
    looks like the same pictures, just ps3 version of the 360 screen shot has a blur effect put on it. So its fake or somebody is really good and standing in the exact same spot. ITS FAKE and you all are stupid assholes for believing it.
  • Dan Landis
    Who says we believe it? Either way, the pictures are not the same, and anyone that knows what they are looking at (which apparently isn't you) can see that. I certainly have my doubts, as expressed in the article, but I wouldn't be surprised if this were true either.
  • 3sicasity
    the pictures look like same images edited to look different. how come the screen grabs are identical for both systems?
  • Justin
    Sweet, merciful, baby Jeebus. God forbid anyone, anywhere, at any time makes a statement or criticizes the 360 or PS3.

    Wait... dear Lord... did I just put the 360 before the PS3 in that statement? Oh God... I meant PS3 or 360. You know what happens when Sony "fanbois" see that kind of faux pas. C-A-S-T-R-A-T-I-O-N.

    But what about the 360? If Bill Gates finds out that we put his console second-fiddle to Sony's, then he'll unleash a torrent of exocet missiles from his "mother ship hovering over Seattle."

    Please help. Either I offend the hordes of slavering PS3 mutants or Bill Gates will turn my flat into a smoking crater.
  • pixelsword
    I fail to see the point; "blurry" doesn't mean bad in this case, playing the PS3 version looks very smooth. Sorry, it just does.
  • JAJA
    only fanboys would see the difference besides the blurring effect. stupid rumors to begin with. the game still plays as good. since when did graphics define a game? crysis looks good but plays like sh!t.
  • Meresin
    Who cares? R2 looks vastly better anyway, and the separate coop campaign sounds really awesome. :P

    Gee, pay $60 for a port of a year-old game, or pay $60 for a superior game with not only a good single-player campaign, but also a good coop campaign, and full multiplayer. *ponders real hard*
  • Sam Naylor
    Either way, there's barely any difference. Only videophiles are worried about this sort of tiny difference.
  • You know I think they should ONLY creature exclusives for PS3, no multiplatform games. Because everytime this happens is just makes the PS3 look bad. If I were to buy a PS3 (which I hoped to do for FF13 until that was announced for 360) I'd have no reason to buy any multiplatform games for it.
  • Creature... it... this is what I get for posting anything at 3 AM.
  • Blah
    It wouldn't suprise me if some lame Xbox fanboy did this on purpose, remember the GameTrailers videos of Grid where both versions were 360 but one made to look worse?
  • Patrick Steen
    There's no doubt that PS3 Bioshock demo is slightly "blurrier." Question is why they'd do this (I suspect AA) and whether the images are legitimate.
  • mananimalX
    Its not just the "blur" ..its the lighting in the 360 that the ps3 does not have, the 360 will always have a better graphical lighting engine than what the ps3 can produce...the darks and lights are far superior on 360 games, hence the blur look..
  • Nuno
    Hmmm...

    Gotta buy me some glasses... Heck, I think the PS3 version is better. "Softer", therefore, prettier.

    I don't see missing lights.

    Alas, played the demo, looked great: no screen tear, great atmosphere, good graphics.

    Shittiness? Only in this article.
  • Abaddon
    "the 360 will always have a better graphical lighting engine than what the ps3 can produce…the darks and lights are far superior on 360 games, hence the blur look.."

    In your mind.
    you fail to make sense.
  • @ Blah

    Conspiracy theories won't exactly make you look like YOU aren't a "lame fanboy" either.

    @ Patrick

    If both versions have 0xAA then I wonder why they felt the need to blur the PS3 version. The 360 version looked just fine without it so.. what are they trying to accomplish here? I can't imagine the tiny bit of pseudo-AA would be worth the blurriness (and from the look of the screens.. it's not) So.. why?
  • Patrick Steen
    Mananimal: There's no difference in lighting. Any difference you might want to see is upped contrast on the 360 version - this is something you do on your TV. The actual lighting engine is no different, plus on a side note Nvidea graphics cards can produce a wider light range, being 24bit in comparison to ATI's 16bit. of course there's a memory penalty to use all that 24bits.

    David: Well I don't think people would disagree that Bioshock would look better with AA. 2xAA should be a standard this generation. But yes, I agree - I don't really know why they do it. The only time you're really going to notice it is side by side, and many people (including devs) hate the sight of jaggies. For exmaple, for them to accomplish the temporal blur in DMC4 it costs more than if they weren't to do it, but it costs less than doing 2xAA. So devs must see a reason for it.

    Plus many are saying it doesn't look as bad as it does here - which makes me wonder about the blurred HUD in the pictures - why blur the HUD also? Usually the HUD is sharp. I suggest we forward to question to the developers.
  • Mykul
    I do see a "blur" on the PS3 screenshots, but who know the truth behind the screenshots? I own a PS3 but wont be playing this on PS3.
    I played this on PC ages ago now, where it looks and plays like a dream.

    FPS's should be played on a PC.

    Fanboys make me laugh, the PS3 and 360 suck compared to a good PC. (go on fanboys... give me shit for this comment)

    PEACE OUT!! :)
  • kAATOSade
    How player has almost same position and the same amount of health and eve, even amount of hypos match exactly. Looks like fraud to me.

    But i don't really care since demo looked great on my PS3.
  • kAATOSade
    "How player has almost same position and the same amount of health and eve"

    Well i should have looked pictures more with more precision :S I was wrong.
  • Dan Landis
    That's big of you to admit that, kAATOSade. I commend you.
  • acetpg
    to be honest, it ain't that really "bioshittiness"
    probably the guy who wrote this is a ps3 hater dunno....but it aint that bad looking. i think the graphics are a bit more detailed then the x360...but what do i know huh ???
  • Dan Landis
    Apparently not much. Maybe you need some more practice with reading comprehension. An excerpt:

    "This, of course, doesn’t mean BioShock is going to be any less of a compelling game on the PS3, it will just be a not-quite-as-good-looking-as-it-could-be-but-still-compelling game on the PS3."

    Yeah, total PS3 hate.
  • acetpg
    yeah sorry, i only read the first 2 or 3 paragraphs...the article got kinda boring afterwards ;P
  • Dan Landis
    You mean like when you were looking at the pictures?
  • Sorry Ace, I keep telling Dan to write on a 4th grade level, but he insists on using big words that often put astute readers like yourself to sleep. Sad really.
  • Soulja Merc
    its not the same picrure just being blurred by someone check the 9th picture the xbox 360 version has the light off and the ps3 one has the light on
  • Stuart Hamilton
    Hiya guys. Anyone feeling put off by this webpage do not fear, i've played the PS3 demo and it's exactly the same as the 360 version that i played on my 360 on the same tv i'm using with my PS3. Why the switchover? Red ring of death! 360 fanboys are making crap like this all over the web (because they lost Bioshock as an exclusive) they've taken 2 pics of the 360 version, Photoshopped one of em (blurred and so on) and said it's the PS3 version. Imagine this; how blurred and rubbish would Metal Gear Solid 4's 50gb of game have to look to work on a 360. Lots.
  • Tim
    I've seen both version, on HDTVs, and they look the same.
  • mookins
    There's not a damn thing wrong with the game on the PS3. I played the demo and the graphics were pretty good. Yes, the 360 and PC versions are probably better because *gasp* they came out first and they're on the Unreal Engine!

    It's obvious that Unreal Engine doesn't always work with the PS3.
blog comments powered by Disqus
  • Recent Ripten Posts
  • Recent Blog Comments
  • HaloisOverrated: Where is my patch for dedicated servers? Hell, with the money that Infinity Ward is making,... »
  • stop jerking off: What's wrong with you? Jacking off to Link when you should've jacked off to Zelda?... »
  • Rangebar Merani: Whoa! You're being way hardcore but that's all you. But I do kind of agree with you... »
  • DavidGX: I don't really care for football but goddamn I wanna try this game. I love stuff like... »
  • is fan of L4D: You don't get points in L4D, giant lenin »
  • Recent Forum Mumblings
    Ripten Team

     

    Publisher / Editor-in-Chief
    Chad Lakkis | Email | AIM

     

    Host / Editor
    Jon Zungre

     

    Associate Editor
    Dylan Duarte

     

    Writers (US)
    Demi Adejuyigbe
    Brian Albert
    Gavin Bard
    Stephanie Gutowski
    Sean Mitchuson
    Rangebar Merani
    Dan Landis

     

    Writer (UK)
    Sam Naylor

     

    Our Friends

     

    G4TV The Feed
    g4tv.com/thefeed

     

    Meet In The Lobby
    meetinthelobby.com

     

    Negative Gamer
    negativegamer.com

     

     
    Ripten Top Ten Lists
    Featured Games & Events