PSM3 have quite liked Fallout 3 since they gave it a 90/100 in their last review because, according to them, "Fallout 3 is as action-packed as a Call of Duty game"... However, it seems that they are also a bit concerned by how the game compares to the Xbox360 and PC versions. Here is what they had to say about it :<blockquote>Fallout 3's world looks incredible, tinged by the chill of the desolate, post-apocalyptic emptiness. But, sadly, the PS3 version compares poorly to its Xbox and PC counterparts. It's not a deal-breaker, but PS3 clearly wasn't the lead platform -disappointing since Oblivion looked better on PS3 than on Xbox.</blockquote>Coming from a Playstation dedicated magazine, odds are it might be true.
PSM3 Fallout 3 review, not impressed with PS3 version
- Thread starter MrBumble
- Start date
Jack The Knife
It Wandered In From the Wastes
How did they manage that? Playstation 3 has got better specs than Xbox360.
And as mentioned in the german PC Action review, the PC version looks worse than Oblivion did, but still Fallout 3 has higher requirements.
And as mentioned in the german PC Action review, the PC version looks worse than Oblivion did, but still Fallout 3 has higher requirements.
Paul_cz
Mildly Dipped
"Fallout 3 is as action-packed as a Call of Duty game"
Thats rich : ). But it doesn't have to mean anything bad, as long as most of the combat is avoidable (not that I will be avoiding it - energy weapons all the way for me!).
Thats rich : ). But it doesn't have to mean anything bad, as long as most of the combat is avoidable (not that I will be avoiding it - energy weapons all the way for me!).
Texas Renegade
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
They seem to have a tendency to feel PS3 versions are not as good as Xbox. It is wierd considering they are a PS3 mag, but they have several times downgrade the PS3 version of the game graphically, and I have been unable to see what it is they are referring to.
Most recent example was this years NCAA Football 09, they said it wasn't as good as the 360 version, yet my buddies and I have not been able to see it. Plus, most other mags, including IGN, rated them as equal graphically so who knows.
The combat line, I would just put down as playing to the masses.
Most recent example was this years NCAA Football 09, they said it wasn't as good as the 360 version, yet my buddies and I have not been able to see it. Plus, most other mags, including IGN, rated them as equal graphically so who knows.
The combat line, I would just put down as playing to the masses.
TheWesDude
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
they certianly showed their displeasure!
thats just horrid to give it a lowly 90%!
i bet beth must be pissed
thats just horrid to give it a lowly 90%!
i bet beth must be pissed
Texas Renegade
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Ausir said:
I thought it was stated that they it was a multiplatform developement and there was no actual porting?
Could be semantics or whatever, but I swear someone has repeatedly stated there was no lead system.
Texas Renegade said:
No, the Xbox 360 is the lead platform, they've said so multiple times. But they also talk about building up the ports from the ground up, like BioShock did - 2K actually dedicated separate dev houses to making sure the port would be good.
Bethesda guaranteed us dedication but it remains to be seen how good the PC interface is (Oblivion's was horrible) or what they did for PS3 (equal graphics is pretty much fucking them in the ass since the peripherals are nerfed)
Jack The Knife
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Ausir said:
They also stated they thought Oblivion looked better on PS3 than on Xbox360. And that was definitely a port.
But still. They made a game with higher requirements that look worse. (granted this be the case)
Anxion
First time out of the vault
Jack The Knife said:
No it doesn't have better specs the only thing ps3 got that the 360 doesn't is blu ray. But still the ps3 and xbox 360 runs pretty much every game at same frame rate and almost same graphics.
UncannyGarlic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
The PS3 has a lot more processing power than the 360, it's just a lot more of a pain to develop for because of how it handles the eight processors.Anxion said:
I may just be slightly overreacting, but I have been feeling more and more lately that PS3 has been getting the shaft. When the system hadn't been out too long, I already started to see exclusives that just annoyed me, like "Dead Rising" that were hitting the XBox and not the PS3. (uh...Capcom? Why?) After GTA IV came out (now for ALL systems) is when I discovered this DLC crap (for XBox only) and see that it's going to be used here as well. (yeah, WHY can't PS3 people get it? I download updates/patches just fine.) Now we're seeing this nice little bit of info.
It's getting annoying. I don't mind exclusives like, Sony has "Killzone"; Microsoft has "Halo". Sony has "Metal Gear", Microsoft has "Gears of War". The biggies never bothered me, you just say, "oh well," but now with this constant long list of exclusives next to DLC, I don't like that. This isn't me being a PS3 fanboy either, cause I wish everyone could get the same things. Especially at this stage. A few to promote each system fine, (especially when MADE by Sony or Microsoft) but not like 18 including special content. That's like when they use to come out with GTA for PS2 months early, but then when it hit XBox, they got bonuses. Both sides end up feeling kind of frakked with. I don't want that kind of favoritism on either side. I didn't pay $400+ to get screwed. (insert prostitute joke here)
EDIT: To get a little more on topic; it just feels like some of these developers start making something and then think, "oh...Playstation. Yeah, whatever. We'll get to that later."
It's getting annoying. I don't mind exclusives like, Sony has "Killzone"; Microsoft has "Halo". Sony has "Metal Gear", Microsoft has "Gears of War". The biggies never bothered me, you just say, "oh well," but now with this constant long list of exclusives next to DLC, I don't like that. This isn't me being a PS3 fanboy either, cause I wish everyone could get the same things. Especially at this stage. A few to promote each system fine, (especially when MADE by Sony or Microsoft) but not like 18 including special content. That's like when they use to come out with GTA for PS2 months early, but then when it hit XBox, they got bonuses. Both sides end up feeling kind of frakked with. I don't want that kind of favoritism on either side. I didn't pay $400+ to get screwed. (insert prostitute joke here)
EDIT: To get a little more on topic; it just feels like some of these developers start making something and then think, "oh...Playstation. Yeah, whatever. We'll get to that later."
beverageleverage
It Wandered In From the Wastes
I remember bethesda overselling the "minimum requirements" for oblivion by saying it could run on the nvidia fx5k series of video cards, which wasn't true out of the box but I think oldblivion mod made it possible. I think F3 will have a little bit higher requirements but not that much more, I think it is a mix of that and having more accurate minimum requirements this time around.Jack The Knife said:
anticlockclock
First time out of the vault
MrBumble said:
I want to know what is wrong with the PS3 version and why the 360 is always "top dog" when their fanbase is spoiled 13 year olds.
GarnetKrowe
First time out of the vault
Dammit!!! Why!! o Why!!
Outbreak said:
Possibly. I'm not a console gamer so it's hard for me to tell - personally I wonder why we need multiple consoles anyway when their capabilities aren't very divergent. At least Sega and Nintendo had clearly delineated audiences back in the day (kids for N, more mature for S)
But anyway, Microsoft is throwing a lot of money at console exclusives and this DLC exclusive nonsense. It's a money business, and the consumer gets the shaft. It is what it is.
PaladinHeart
Mildly Dipped
DLC content for 360 is probably treated better because XBox live is a service you have to pay for, whereas the online PS3 services are all FREE. Therefore Microsoft has some funds available to pay for those exclusives, whereas the PS3 online service is just "there" so basically they can put the extra DLC there or choose not to but there's no reward for them to do so, whereas on xbox live they probably get paid to do so.
Of course I guess I could be wrong and you don't have to pay for x-box live, or maybe these developers don't get a cut of that, if it is pay. All I know is I've heard xbox live is a pay service whereas I've played MGS4 and GTA4 online for the PS3 and it's completely free.
Also the PS3 is quite powerful but I haven't really seen anything pushing the limits just yet, other than this one HUGE movie called Metal Gear Solid 4. But that's just one long movie. Where's the epic games that the 360 could never possibly handle? I want to see something that really uses all the PS3 has to offer.
If they announce a PS4 system anytime soon I'm going to be thinking, "Why?". It still seems like the original Xbox and PS2 haven't been out all that long.
Most games I see, the only real reason they have to be on the latest platform, is just because it IS the latest platform. Everything else gets sucked into the portables market, which then has similar issues.
I'd like to see the video game industry do something similar to the movie and PC games market. I'm not sure how well that would work, but imagine generic console makers being able to get in on the market.
Of course I guess I could be wrong and you don't have to pay for x-box live, or maybe these developers don't get a cut of that, if it is pay. All I know is I've heard xbox live is a pay service whereas I've played MGS4 and GTA4 online for the PS3 and it's completely free.
Also the PS3 is quite powerful but I haven't really seen anything pushing the limits just yet, other than this one HUGE movie called Metal Gear Solid 4. But that's just one long movie. Where's the epic games that the 360 could never possibly handle? I want to see something that really uses all the PS3 has to offer.
If they announce a PS4 system anytime soon I'm going to be thinking, "Why?". It still seems like the original Xbox and PS2 haven't been out all that long.
Most games I see, the only real reason they have to be on the latest platform, is just because it IS the latest platform. Everything else gets sucked into the portables market, which then has similar issues.
I'd like to see the video game industry do something similar to the movie and PC games market. I'm not sure how well that would work, but imagine generic console makers being able to get in on the market.
shihonage
Made in USSR
Brother None said:
Because competition is healthy, it drives quality up, and prices down. A world where only either Sony or Microsoft had a console, would be a dark world.