Hedon Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 360 version = Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osirus23 Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 I didn't get a 360 for better graphics, I got it for better games. and Blue-Ray is already a dying technology IMO. I can DL a 1080p movie is like 1hr at home. Because a current technology's market share is determined by one's personal opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undu Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 I didn't get a 360 for better graphics, I got it for better games. and Blue-Ray is already a dying technology IMO. I can DL a 1080p movie is like 1hr at home. WARNING: TROLL ALERT Please, keep calm and remember not to feed the troll! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedon Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 I think optical media is on it's demise, so I agree with that part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex566 Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 What people should be asking is the following: Is this due to the poor port done by SE or is it because of the 360's hardware? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draken Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 oh the PS3 is clearly superior, may be because if it's super powerful 7 core Cell processor!! wow! :laugh: Now seriously, that will be my first FF :s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted February 18, 2010 Veteran Share Posted February 18, 2010 (edited) i figured the same thing. blu rays have WAYYYY more space for textures, audios and FMVs. Sticking with regular dual layers dvd is definitely beggining to hurt the 360. and if they plan on keeping this console for 10 years, it's only going to get worse and worse. Yeah, those tiny 9GB DVDs will really limit the fidelity of my downloaded games... oh, wait. Besides, if 27GB wasn't enough space for their game, they're doing it wrong. And are they really shipping on multi-layer Blu-Ray discs? The difference in graphics quality is surpising given the Xbox's hardware advantage, but also expected given Square's preference for and relationship with Sony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneKnee Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 oh the PS3 is clearly superior, may be because if it's super powerful 7 core Cell processor!! wow! :laugh: Now seriously, that will be my first FF :s Oh ffs here we go again. The most likely explantation is that either Square Enix has made the Xbox360 version the way it is to make the PS3 look better, or, just like standard console ports, most of the effort was put into one system while another team made a half arsed attempt to port it back to the Xbox360. We have seen plenty of games which have made the Xbox360 verison a lot better because the graphics card is far superior. That's not me being a fanboy because I own a PS3, but that's just white paper based facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoredBozirini Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Yeah, those tiny 9GB DVDs will really limit the fidelity of my downloaded games... oh, wait. Besides, if 27GB wasn't enough space for their game, they're doing it wrong. And are they really shipping on multi-layer Blu-Ray discs? The difference in graphics quality is surpising given the Xbox's hardware advantage, but also expected given Square's preference for and relationship with Sony. So because the game doesn't fit in an old DVD9 it means that they did the development in a wrong way? Sorry Brandon, but I'll side with the game developers on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldgunner Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 I doubt 360 development has been going on as long as they say, quite frankly the port looks **** poor. Intentional or not its a disgrace. Maybe the game engine is designed for cell systems and was difficult to port I don't know. Maybe it wasn't worth investing too much in the port we can only speculate. Maybe they'll patch it to fix the resolution issues like they did Ghostbusters (PS3). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stezo2k Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 A lot of people forget the game was actually designed for the PS3 from day 1 so i spose it was always going to be better makes a change anyway, most games usually look better on the 360. bayonetta was horrible on the ps3 compared to the 360 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draken Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Oh ffs here we go again. The most likely explantation is that either Square Enix has made the Xbox360 version the way it is to make the PS3 look better, or, just like standard console ports, most of the effort was put into one system while another team made a half arsed attempt to port it back to the Xbox360. We have seen plenty of games which have made the Xbox360 verison a lot better because the graphics card is far superior. That's not me being a fanboy because I own a PS3, but that's just white paper based facts. humm .. I was being clearly sarcastic, of course both machines can have comparable performance, that's good for the PS3 because that kind of games are associated with it, have a bigger install base in Japan and a myriad more of reasons, that's not my kind of game so I'm not going to get it on the PS3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 18, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted February 18, 2010 What people should be asking is the following: Is this due to the poor port done by SE or is it because of the 360's hardware? The game is not a port, it was built on two separate graphics engines. FMVs are certainly because of 360's hardware (and HD audio), but you'd expect the resolution to be nowhere near that low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 The game is not a port, it was built on two separate graphics engines. FMVs are certainly because of 360's hardware (and HD audio), but you'd expect the resolution to be nowhere near that low. You should, considering some big name titles on the 360 are running at sub 720p, Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 You should, considering some big name titles on the 360 are running at sub 720p, Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 come to mind. MW2 also runs sub-HD on the PS3, so does GTA 4 ( Runs HD on the 360 ). So that goes for both camps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 MW2 also runs sub-HD on the PS3, so does GTA 4 ( Runs HD on the 360 ). So that goes for both camps. Oh I know, and Tekken 6 runs at a lower resolution a(but looks slightly better if you don't mind motion blur being off). But audio made it seem like the 360 NEVER has games running at that low of a resolution, which isn't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 18, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted February 18, 2010 576p what the hell runs at that? Halo/MW2 are 600 or 640p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 576p what the hell runs at that? Haze :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell-In-A-Handbasket Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 after i see compare shots i will decide, but i was holding off on pre-ordering 36-/ps3 version till i see ingame for myself. i might be gettin the ps3 version after all. and for the record, i have done the demo's of multiplatform games on my own PS3/360 with my 60'HDTV through HDMI and found in alot of cases, the 360 version is the more detailed, but each game is diffrent fortunatly i have the equipment where i can have both games running at the same time on the same TV , and do a comparative by switching imputs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 18, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted February 18, 2010 Haze :p Haze is a POS, but well by the looks of it FF13 might be bordering on that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderermy Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 PS3 360 :no: :no: :no:, however I didn't buy the game for the graphic :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 19, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted February 19, 2010 Jeeez oh Square, what a rush job... I don't think FF13 is going to go down well at all in the west (critically at first, after sales probably from gamers), least I have my Yakuza 3 for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted February 19, 2010 Veteran Share Posted February 19, 2010 So because the game doesn't fit in an old DVD9 it means that they did the development in a wrong way? Sorry Brandon, but I'll side with the game developers on this one. I thought it was 3 discs? That isn't enough? Considering what BioWare has fit onto 1-2 discs with Dragon Age, ME2, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted February 19, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted February 19, 2010 I thought it was 3 discs? That isn't enough? Considering what BioWare has fit onto 1-2 discs with Dragon Age, ME2, etc... 10 hours of FMV cutscenes. Those games above do in-engine cutscenes for the most part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soniqstylz Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 I doubt 360 development has been going on as long as they say, quite frankly the port looks **** poor. Intentional or not its a disgrace. Maybe the game engine is designed for cell systems and was difficult to port I don't know. Maybe it wasn't worth investing too much in the port we can only speculate. Maybe they'll patch it to fix the resolution issues like they did Ghostbusters (PS3). Well, if you look back on here, there were rumors posted by a certain MS employee regarding exclusivity and the multiplatform nature of the engine almost three years ago. They've had time to get their **** straight on this port. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts