PS3 Reviews coming in. As powerful as Sony want you to belive ?

scrapland

So did you believe the hype. 1080p gaming. 60FPS. Far exceeding the 360 as the PS3 is True HD.....

Well the first batch of reviews are in and do they prove sony to be the proveribal BS spreaders from hell or heavenly graphics angels from cloud nine ??

Lets see...


First up is Tony Hawks Project 8.

Gamestop.com http://ps3.ign.com/articles/745/745182p1.html
7/10 review score

Those frame-rate problems hit the PlayStation 3 version of the game significantly harder than the Xbox 360. Other than the choppy frame rate and slightly sharper graphics on the PlayStation 3, some of which is only noticeable when using an HDMI cable on a high-end HDTV, the games look roughly the same. But there are other, more significant differences between the two versions. The Xbox 360 version has online support for up to eight players, including a new game mode called walls, which gives your skater a tall trail behind him that behaves sort of like the light cycles in Tron--if you hit another player's wall, you're out. The Xbox 360 version also uses its online support to present a lot of different online leaderboards. Much like Amped 3, many of the different goals in the game have their own individual leaderboard, which adds some competition to the single-player game and gives you a reason to keep on playing the same goals again and again. Without this, the PS3 version feels sort of flat by comparison.

oooch. that's gotta hurt, maybe a second opinion.. over to IGN we go.
http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/sports/tonyhawksproject8/review.html?sid=6161341&tag=topslot;action;2

The PlayStation 3 version of Tony Hawk's Project 8 has a number of things that set it apart from the Xbox 360 version, two of which are very bad. One good thing is the ability to use the SIXAXIS to control your skater. You have the ability to turn, balance and perform tricks with the controller, and each of these three options is able to be set individually. If you only want to balance with the SIXAXIS but would prefer to still use the classic controls for tricks and steering, you can use that.

The first major issue that the PlayStation 3 version has is that it doesn't include any online support. Considering that the Tony Hawk series was the first online game for the PlayStation 2, even before the Network Adapter was ever released, makes this seem curious. And the fact that this is the only major launch title that isn't online but should be is basically inexcusable. Tony Hawk's online play is good fun, and it's really disappointing that Neversoft included it with the Xbox 360 version but not this one.

The second problem with the PS3 variant of Project 8 is that it simply doesn't run all that well. The game chops up left and right, sometimes to the point where the controls don't feel responsive. It's bad enough that the camera isn't always perfect, but when it's staring at the bottom of your board and the game is running at 15fps, well, there's a major problem. That's not to say that it always runs poorly, as it can be reasonably quick most of the time, but Project 8 chops up way more often than is normally forgivable.

It's certainly disappointing that the PlayStation 3 is so far behind the Xbox 360 game. Framerate issues are apparent at every other turn, and the lack of online play really hurts. Project 8 is a worthy game to pick up, just preferably not on this system

Not looking good then...

Ok the other game thats out and reviewd is Gengi

Gamestop.com http://ps3.ign.com/articles/744/744611p2.html
Score 6/10

This is especially true if you're running the game at its highest resolution of 720p on a widescreen, high-definition display. Although the graphics are impressive, they're not earth-shattering and have some rough edges such as how the game's frame rate will noticeably bog down when a lot of enemies are onscreen. Some of the battles in Genji really throw a lot of enemies at you, evoking a Dynasty Warriors sort of feel to the hack-and-slash action. But as good as these parts look, the game seems to struggle a bit to keep up with it all. Note that the frame rate drops are apparent even when playing the game in lower resolutions.

Frame rate problems and 720p highest resolution.. but what of 1080p sony ? what of the power of the Cell ????


mmmmmm


I'll add more games as the reviews come in..
But initially it looks like the Sony Bull**** Marketing Machine has tried to
decieve us all again.

Kinetic^

Ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha...........it's going to be ****e!!!!!!!!!!!

Retr0gamer

To be honest these are early games so the code is far from optimised. The xbox 360 initial releases had horendous fps problems as well.

I saw some Resistance footage on Eurogamer. It runs nice and smooth in HD but really doesn't look any better than Gears of War. They tried to show why the cell chip was so important and they just showed features that have been used on the previous generation of console. Also resistance could be fun but it doesn't look like anything special at all and the scripted sequences are awful.

fifth

What do you mean 'far exceeding the 360 as its true hd'

You're saying I'm running my 360 through my HDtv for nothing then yeah?

Seriously is this what we've to put up with!

scrapland

funkyflea wrote:

What do you mean 'far exceeding the 360 as its true hd'

You're saying I'm running my 360 through my HDtv for nothing then yeah?

Seriously is this what we've to put up with!

LOL..

If you look at sony's packaging and labeling of blu-ray movies and games they started using this crap that 1080p was TRUE or FULL HD, mainly because the 360 lacked it. However microsoft updated the dash and 1080p on the 360 is also possible...

The difference between 1080p & 1080i isnt huge, in fact it would depend more on your TV's scaling capabilities than anything else, but it was just somthing Sony latched onto to differentiate itself from the 360 and prove it had more graphical ooomph....

It was all lies though - but hell a chimpanzee with an iQ of 34 should have known better especially after the crap Sony came out with about PS2 before it launched....

Most developers have already stated that the difference is minimal between the ps3 & 360, just that most of us would have given the edge to sony, especially after a 12 month gap between the two machines. However interviews from developers have actually put the edge to the 360.

GrumPy

Retr0gamer wrote:

To be honest these are early games so the code is far from optimised. The xbox 360 initial releases had horendous fps problems as well.

Which launch titles are you talking about?

I saw some Resistance footage on Eurogamer. It runs nice and smooth in HD but really doesn't look any better than Gears of War.

Gears of war looks better to me. and that Resistance thing were they show cased what the cell chip was able to do, was laughable. :rolleyes: "Oh, and this explosion grenade thingy has 50 seperates particals, no other processor can do this zomglol resistance ftw"

It looks like a generic fps to me.

Retr0gamer

Irish GrumPy wrote:

Which launch titles are you talking about?

Gears of war looks better to me. and that Resistance thing were they show cased what the cell chip was able to do, was laughable. :rolleyes: "Oh, and this explosion grenade thingy has 50 seperates particals, no other processor can do this zomglol resistance ftw"

It looks like a generic fps to me.

Well Oblivion for one and I've heard the framerate on PGR3 is stuck at about 30 fps and the kameo framerate wasn't great either. Quake IV is a classic example. The 360 could have easily pulled it off but a bad conversion meant some bad framerate issues. I could list some more but they are all forgettable and I've forgotten them.

I was laughing at the Resistance cell chip showcase as well. Have to agree with the generic fps comment as well.

Kinetic^

Retr0gamer wrote:

Well Oblivion for one and I've heard the framerate on PGR3 is stuck at about 30 fps and the kameo framerate wasn't great either. Quake IV is a classic example. The 360 could have easily pulled it off but a bad conversion meant some bad framerate issues. I could list some more but they are all forgettable and I've forgotten them.

So you've got nothing basically :rolleyes:

steviec

A couple of third party games aren't gonna make or break the console. It's as good a launch as the PS2 had and look at how that turned out. Of course people like to spout out about 'emotion engine' and look at how Sony lied to us before, but if you can't appreciate some of the absolutely stunning games that have come out on PS2 then I don't know what to say. All of the consoles have their place and I'd rather not see any of them fail, with the development studios Sony have they will have some great exclusives, there's no doubt about it. Just as MS and Nintendo do.

GrumPy

Wii ftw!!!11eleventyzoomgrs! and so forth.

Should be interestng to see some actual gamers opinions on how the games play though. And if theres any problems with the launch consoles hardware...

Dont be at yourself

A bit sensationalist, isnt it? Compare two versions of a multi-platform game, one that's been released on an established machine, and one that's been rushed out the door for launch on a radically new machine, and it's no surprise we get comparisons like these. It's an unfair comparison - if you wanna get an idea of how powerful the PS3 is in comparison to the XB360, compare the top teir exclusive titles a year from now.

Also, I thought you've all been harsh on Resistance. I had absolutely no interest in the game prior to seeing that Eurogamer.tv thing - it always struck me as a bog standard FPS. But the production values are unbelievable, in terms of sound, animation and the general atmosphere that they've created - it's definitely on my list!

DeVore

Why should I buy something that has been "rushed out the door for launch". Its not an unfair comparision because the cash I have to hand over IS comparable.

DeV.

projectmayhem

Irish GrumPy wrote:

Gears of war looks better to me. and that Resistance thing were they show cased what the cell chip was able to do, was laughable. :rolleyes: "Oh, and this explosion grenade thingy has 50 seperates particals, no other processor can do this zomglol resistance ftw"

It looks like a generic fps to me.

i played resistance (go me, yay etc.) and gears is a prettier game, but resistance has got more action on screen at any given time. that's down to cell.

the fact that sony/insomniac said things about the particle physics etc. doesn't mean much to you, but did it mean anything when microsoft/epic talked about water interacting with the characters in gears of war in real-time?

they're all at this BS stuff, but sony gets called out on it because the bloggers have sony in their crosshairs.

the processor is impressive. to the point that IBM have been touting it in lectures and their internal network publications (i was at one of said lectures). it is impressive, and a bunch of ported 360 games and launch titles are hardly going to show it off. same way 360 had issues at launch, but it's being forgotten now because the devs are getting used to the system.

and generic fps? gears is a great game but don't distinguish great game from revolutionary, completely ungeneric game.

Dont be at yourself

Why should I buy something that has been "rushed out the door for launch". Its not an unfair comparision because the cash I have to hand over IS comparable.

DeV.

Obviously it is ridiculous buying a PS3 at the moment, at that price, and with the quality and range of games available.

The point I am making is that it is unfair to compare one system's launch titles against another system's second generation titles (especially when the PS3 has radically different architecture), and then make assumptions regarding the comparative power of the two machines, as the OP did.

Ciaran500

projectmayhem wrote:

i played resistance (go me, yay etc.) and gears is a prettier game, but resistance has got more action on screen at any given time. that's down to cell.

Surely you could just say that's down to the type of game it is. Resistance is all about large scale wars while gears is more about two men fighting to survive.

*N.B.* I don't know much about the story of Gears and don't want to!!!

mcgovern

Retr0gamer wrote:

Well Oblivion for one and I've heard the framerate on PGR3 is stuck at about 30 fps and the kameo framerate wasn't great either. Quake IV is a classic example. The 360 could have easily pulled it off but a bad conversion meant some bad framerate issues. I could list some more but they are all forgettable and I've forgotten them.

I was laughing at the Resistance cell chip showcase as well. Have to agree with the generic fps comment as well.

Resistance is also set to 30fps.

LookingFor

IGN's Resistance review

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/745/745206p1.html

But let's be honest, Resistance doesn't have to be perfect to be fun, and fun is exactly what it is. From start to finish, Fall of Man is one hell of an outstanding roller coaster ride that every last PS3 owner needs for day one. Epic boss battles (the final few are crazy!), ever-changing scenery, addictive weaponry, and a unique thematic are just a few of the reasons Resistance stands out. But above all else, it's the multiplayer elements that truly ascend this one to the next level. It's a must have for sure.

9.0 Presentation
Insomniac has created a compelling mythos and the unique blend of World War II-level battles with alien technology is a great mix. Expect load times only at the beginning of stages.

8.5 Graphics
A mix of 20th century war machines and intergalactic alien hordes makes for quite the interesting art style. A solid 30fps framerate and plenty of bells and whistles easily impress.

8.5 Sound
When connected to a capable speaker, Resistance will blow your speakers to kingdom come with great audio effects and stellar voice acting. Don't expect to hear much musically, though.

9.0 Gameplay
Experience the best weapons to come along in a shooter for quite some time united with challenging enemies, tight control, smooth online play, and insane boss battles. Seriously fun.

9.5 Lasting Appeal
Between 12-15 hours of single-player action, multiple (and very challenging) difficulty levels, four hidden weapons, unlockable secrets and skill points, and a ton of multiplayer options. Hot!

OVERALL
9.1
Outstanding

The online sounds brilliant, and that's really what the game needs to give it legs and make it stand out. The weapons are also anything but generic, but it's easy to jump to that conclusion about the game generally if just casually looking at screens or footage of the game. Asides from Resistance, the game to look out for early in PS3's life is Motorstorm. It's out in December in Japan, and looks sensational, perhaps Sony's most convincing early title in terms of communicating the system's credentials.

scrapland

Yep thank god Resistance has lived up to the promise though.

9.1 on IGN

Closing Comments
But let's be honest, Resistance doesn't have to be perfect to be fun, and fun is exactly what it is. From start to finish, Fall of Man is one hell of an outstanding roller coaster ride that every last PS3 owner needs for day one. Epic boss battles (the final few are crazy!), ever-changing scenery, addictive weaponry, and a unique thematic are just a few of the reasons Resistance stands out. But above all else, it's the multiplayer elements that truly ascend this one to the next level. It's a must have for sure.

Another Takefrom Chris Roper
Resistance: Fall of Man has everything that a flagship launch title should. It looks great and runs well, it has a compelling single-player campaign and its multiplayer aspect is not only fantastic fun but it shows off the PlayStation 3's online capabilities. This is the PlayStation 3's showpiece game through and through, and we're thrilled to get something this complete and expansive at launch.
Insomniac is well known for its weapon and character design, and the developer doesn't disappoint with Resistance. The creatures that come at you through the course of the game not only get bigger and stronger, but move, act and think differently, providing for ever-changing encounters. The weapons are wildly unique, each offering multiple modes of fire that challenges the player to come up with different strategies and think on their toes.

While the single-player game is good, multiplayer is likely to be what's most fondly remember about Resistance in years to come. To say it's big would be an understatement. With 40 player support, more than a half-dozen game types, the ability to play as humans or Chimera... I could go on and on. The point is that it's fun as hell and should keep us all glued to our systems for weeks if not months.

40 player online.... This is going to be the driving force for the PS3. Thank god - it needed this in it's launch.

Wierd discrepancy though in the review, they fail to mention graphics resolution... which is 720p not 1080p as first promised, but 720p is good enough anyway....

Further enhancing the atmosphere are the visuals themselves. Though they're certainly not the most impressive we've ever seen, they're still pretty powerful and accomplish a number of remarkable technical feats. The framerate is locked at 30 the whole way through and doesn't falter anywhere... ever. In fact, regardless of how many enemies and moving objects were on the screen at one time, there wasn't a single frame hitch the entire way through.

LookingFor

They certainly didn't promise 1080p. They said they might include that if they had time before launch, but in the end they stuck to 720p.

GrumPy

projectmayhem wrote:

and generic fps? gears is a great game but don't distinguish great game from revolutionary, completely ungeneric game.

I aint played either, have you played gears?

I guess it's only fair to give resistance a chance by playing it, have to wait and see.

And I dunno how gears vs resistance came about :rolleyes:


But yay for tons of new games, and a hdtv soon

scrapland

LookingFor wrote:

They certainly didn't promise 1080p. They said they might include that if they had time before launch, but in the end they stuck to 720p.

Go back and read the interview from a couple of months ago in Games TM. The developer promised 1080p His words not mine.

Not that 1080i which I assume the game supports will look that much different regardless. Most HDTV's this side of the atlantic dont go upto 1080p yet anyway....

Eitherway it's good to see at least 1 decent title for launch...

Roll on R6:Vegas & COD3 reviews.

LookingFor

scrapland wrote:

Go back and read the interview from a couple of months ago in Games TM. The developer promised 1080p His words not mine.

I'd like to see that quote, because any time I've seen them talk about it, they've been quite clear it was a maybe thing.

KdjaCL

Early release bad FPS excuse is complete and utter bollix, if thats the case it should be a 30 quid game not full whack with a "it runs like a dog" sticker on it.

Developers could have made the games on workstations and ran it on the debug Ps3s when they got them so any lag on a console is shocking in this day and age.

Ridge racer seems to be the only game worth getting but its Ridge Racer 7...i mean hardly the reason you buya next gen game when it has 7 tagged onto it.

Im sure Sony sold all there consoles at launch and im sure Ebay will have a good few of them in the next few days.


kdjac

wayne040576

scrapland wrote:

Go back and read the interview from a couple of months ago in Games TM. The developer promised 1080p His words not mine.

Not that 1080i which I assume the game supports will look that much different regardless. Most HDTV's this side of the atlantic dont go upto 1080p yet anyway....

Eitherway it's good to see at least 1 decent title for launch...

Roll on R6:Vegas & COD3 reviews.

1080p won't give you any noticable improvements unless you have a telly that is at least 50 or 60 inches in size. I've read a few articles that even claimed that you would need to have at least a 65 inch screen to notice the difference between 1080p and 720p. The only tellys that support it and give any benefit are high end for home entertainment enthusiasts and that's the way it will be for a few years to come. Expect to have to pay well over 5000 for a tv that supports 1080p properly.

projectmayhem

Irish GrumPy wrote:

I aint played either, have you played gears?

But yay for tons of new games, and a hdtv soon

haven't played gears. just going off reviews and forum fodder on that.

and yes, the st. stephens' day is when i buy a hdtv

GrumPy

projectmayhem wrote:

and yes, the st. stephens' day is when i buy a hdtv

Good man, I hope it's a 65" 1080p lcd though... cause if it isn't theres absolutely no point in buying a ps3.

scrapland

wayne040576 wrote:

1080p won't give you any noticable improvements unless you have a telly that is at least 50 or 60 inches in size. I've read a few articles that even claimed that you would need to have at least a 65 inch screen to notice the difference between 1080p and 720p. The only tellys that support it and give any benefit are high end for home entertainment enthusiasts and that's the way it will be for a few years to come. Expect to have to pay well over 5000 for a tv that supports 1080p properly.

Err that's what I said in the quote. There is not really that much difference, it would depend more on your set...


I can definetly see a difference between 720p & 1080i on my 42" Philips Ambilight LCD TV. 1080i does look better.

I can also see a difference between 720p & 1080i on my Dell 24" monitor.

However I switched my 360 to 1080p and on my native resolution monitor 1920x1080p dell monitor, I can see VERY little difference between 1080p & 1080i (if any)

I always knew 1080p was just somthing Sony was throwing out there in marketing hyperbole in order to have one over M$, the reality is hardly anyone will use it, and when they do the difference is going to be negligable. And most games developers will NEVER use it.


I have no doubt there will be some extreme killer games for the ps3, and given a year there will be a slew of great titles available for it, but the point is there are a lot of people who really did believe the hype and thought the machine was going to really be 2x as powerful as the 360. The reality of the matter is the machine is not and if developer comments are anything to go on, the machine actually has less graphical oomph than a 360.

Still exclusive titles like WarHawk and MotorStorm are looking cool , as long as they do get it out by March (somthing they refuse to guarantee at this stage which isn't looking good).

GrumPy

scrapland wrote:

I can definetly see a difference between 720p & 1080i on my 42" Philips Ambilight LCD TV. 1080i does look better.

How much you pay for that tv again?

*cough ripped off

scrapland

Irish GrumPy wrote:

How much you pay for that tv again?

*cough ripped off

ssshhh you

projectmayhem

Irish GrumPy wrote:

Good man, I hope it's a 65" 1080p lcd though... cause if it isn't theres absolutely no point in buying a ps3.

32" samsung 720p will have to suffice from then until march. i'll spend about €3500 extra on a nice new BRAVIA when the ps3 arrives. i mean, what's €3500 when you're already spending €600, right?

scrapland

projectmayhem wrote:

when you're already spending €600, right?

actually its €629 for Ireland.... typical we dont follow our EU competitors..