Assassins Creed Head to Head (PS3 vs 360) from IGN

[Blahaha]

Can't post link because I don't have 10 post yet...



Quote:

"The frame rate is not only far more noticeable, but you can see the difference between the two consoles at any point in the game, not just large open environments. Simply rotate the camera around Altair in the first town and the PS3 clearly runs a good 5 to 10 frames a second behind 360. This really becomes apparent when performing a quick move like the leap of faith from a building's ledge. What looks highly stylized on 360 only highlights the poor frame rate of the PS3"

[Darkfalz]

http://jbooth.blogspot.com/2007/10/p...-and-spin.html

"...The shader processing on the ps3 is significantly slower than on the 360, which means that a normal map takes more fill rate to draw on the ps3 than it does on the 360. And I'm not talking about small differences here, we're talking roughly half the pixel pushing power."

"...developers must spend significantly more time and resources getting the PS3 to do what the 360 can already do easily and with a lot less code."

"...getting equivalent performance out of the PS3 requires a lot of work unique to the platform, and in many cases, even with all these tricks, you still won't see equivalent performance. Thus, many ps3 games have simplified shaders and run at lower native resolutions than the 360 versions."

"...Sony let their hardware be designed by a comity of business interests rather than a well thought out design that would serve the game development community. They are going to loose hard this round because of it, and I hope that in the next round they take lessons from this round and produce a more balanced and usable machine."

Tragically, the PS3 is just inferior (as a game console).

[RedRedSuit]

Can't post link because I don't have 10 post yet...



Quote:

"The frame rate is not only far more noticeable, but you can see the difference between the two consoles at any point in the game, not just large open environments. Simply rotate the camera around Altair in the first town and the PS3 clearly runs a good 5 to 10 frames a second behind 360. This really becomes apparent when performing a quick move like the leap of faith from a building's ledge. What looks highly stylized on 360 only highlights the poor frame rate of the PS3"

Amusingly, the GameSpot review contradicts this directly:

There are few differences between the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions. PS3 owners are blessed with a slightly more solid frame rate,

http://jbooth.blogspot.com/2007/10/p...-and-spin.html

"..."

Holy irrelevance, Batman!

[michealo]

we need more quotes from various sites claiming the opposite of each either....

gamespot said "PS3 owners are blessed with a slightly more solid frame rate, although the 360 version features a little more contrast in the lighting, so it's pretty much a wash."

that's like the 3rd time Darkfalz has posted that today.

[RedRedSuit]

we need more quotes from various sites claiming the opposite of each either....

Well, GamesRadar was totally gushing over the story. IGN calls it downright weak.

[KTA]

Hilarious, for once reviewers are completely all over the place on a game contradicting one another.

GI gave it a 9.5 and says its a game to remember, on top of that gamespot gives it a 9.

I'll give my own reveiw this weekend, but likely i'll love it.

People seem to want to bash this game. I haven't really read in depth on reviews to avoid spoilers. But it looks like my type of game. And FYI mario galaxy looks WAY better in motion than the pics, way better than Mario sunshine as discussed last week. (in 480p its very vibrant)

Not to get off topic, just wanted to throw that out though.

[Das Koopa]

Amusingly, the GameSpot review contradicts this directly:

Are you kiddinig me Gamespot. This is the same company that gave resistance a 8.9 out of 10. They obviously don't know anything. Why do you think this game lost its exclusive rights to the PS3?

[RedRedSuit]

Are you kiddinig me Gamespot. This is the same company that gave resistance a 8.9 out of 10.

Actually, they gave it 8.6.

Also, I'm not really sure what that's supposed to mean; that's about average for the game and in no way unusual.

They obviously don't know anything.

Err... okay?

Why do you think this game lost its exclusive rights to the PS3?

Because Sony was too slow to secure exclusivity. What does that have to do with anything?

[exploited_consumer]

and assassins creed got a 7.7 on ign http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/834/834676p1.html from there review it sounds like a boring game.

[Clessy]

I really wanna love this game but i'm defanitly thinking it wont be as great as the hype has lead it to be.

[Silentmist]

I really wanna love this game but i'm defanitly thinking it wont be as great as the hype has lead it to be.

Yup, no way is this a blind buy for me now

[Indy_aka_Rex]

I really wanna love this game but i'm defanitly thinking it wont be as great as the hype has lead it to be.

What do you expect, Ubisoft basically ripped off Thief and made it all Parkour.

From this day forth, Assassin's Creed shall be known as: Thief of Persia.

[Clessy]

I've always called it prince of persia 4 but I mean AC could oe been so much better if it had inovative quest instead of the same events over and over in each chapter.

[goatmother]

So in conclusion lots of screen tearing and crappy framerate on both but one is slighty even worse (just not sure which one, lol).

A.I. looks retarded, fighting mechanics look way to simplistic as well.

Still the graphics look sweet with very cool views of climbing up buildings and looking around the entire city. I also like the concept. A shame it sounds like it was rushed on both consoles or Ubi was simply reaching too far for their own good.

[Onslaught X]

Such mixed reviews for Assasin's Creed. Quite interesting.