Which Format?

[Finsbury Girl]

OK - there are a few games I intend to pick up over the coming months, the question is, which format should I choose - PS3 or 360?

I do like 360 achievements but generally don't bother with multi-player adverserial ones - I'm a co-op bloke mainly.

So anyways, here is the list:

1) COD4

2) Orange Box

3) Lost Planet

4) Assassins Creed

Thanks!

[Matt]

There's nothing in it for CoD4, so go for whatever one your mates play online.

OB get 360, PS3 has a piss poor port apparently (don't ask me how, it's a 4 or 5 year engine isn't it?).

LP I don't know, I think the 360 has AA while the PS3 doesn't. the PS3 came much later so may have some other additions, like more maps or modes?

AC get the 360, I understand the PS3 version has a lot of screen tearing.

[Alex_976]

360 with them games.

[Kubrick]

COD4 isn't as smooth on PS3 and the controller is worse, so I'd say a clean sweep for the 360 versions.

Orange Box and Lost Planet in particular, are said to be much better. The extra maps that are in the PS3 version of Lost Planet can be downloaded for free on the 360.

[angelx]

Achievements are good fun, but for orange box I would try it on PC if you can run it, After trying the demo on my Xbox out of curiosity I wouldn't recommend it

[hudson]

Like above, for those games, 360 all day long.

[MattyD]

Eurogamer do a semi-regular feature where they compare both versions of multiformat titles. They have lossless high-res screenshots and some of them have those side-by-side videos (although quite how much difference you would be able to see in a compressed-to-buggery streaming video is debatable).

Here are their thoughts on these titles:

Orange Box - they say 360, no question.
Assassin's Creed - PS3 version 'a mocking shadow' of the Xbox version.
CoD4 - Only miniscule differences between versions.
Lost Planet - PS3 version has bleached colours, frame rate drops and a horrible blur effect, plus a 5Gb installation.

[Ouenben]

Really you're best getting the version that most of your friends have for online multiplayer games.

I personally get Xbox 360 versions as they tend to be cheaper, have less problems (Due to lazy porting to PS3?) and coz I like getting achievements.

[The Mole]

I would hold on a few weeks as it looks like the 360 maybe getting another price drop.

Personally at the moment the 360 has the edge, but i am getting more and more fustrated with one console after another packing in. Microsoft are quick at sorting the problems but still it should not be happening.

I think this time next year, the PS3 may have the edge. Developers are getting more use to getting the best out of the hardware and there is some nice looking exclusives coming.

[Family Fry]

I think finsbury already owns ps3 and xbox 360 consoles
Trying to decide which versions are better on the multiformat scale.
On those games specifically, I would say 360.
Think CoD4 was the only game that didnt have major differences cause infinity ward developed them side by side, put some time into it and it wasnt a portorama.
They are all really good games though

[EvilBoris]

Lost Planet Colonies recently came out for 360 so you can get everything for a budget price.

[Salsa Party Animal]

360 is better choice for FPS shooters games.

[tom-nook]

With muliformat releases the 360 version is almost always = or > the PS3 release.

I think a lot of this is primarily because games generally sell more copies on the 360 so that's were more of the development time / effort is directed.

[Matt]

As it happens, more resources are spent on the PS3 versions, as they require a lot more work than the 360 titles.

Until recently, the 360 was the lead platform for almost every developer. Several reasons for this - a better development environment, easier hardware to program, similarity to PC development, and the simple fact 360 hardware has been available for longer.

That's all changing now. A lot of people (most?) are moving to PS3 as the primary development platform. Again, several reasons for this. The biggest reason is simply the PS3 is harder to program for, and the GPU isn't as powerful. Sony insist on parity with 360 titles - if you want your game released on the PS3 is must match the 360 version. That's not always the case, and some big publishers will get some slack (ie the lower resolution of PS3 GTA4, no way Sony wouldn't let them publish that!). But on the whole, Sony demand parity between versions. So by leading on the more difficult platform, you aim for the best you can get out of that, and shouldn't have too much difficulty reaching that same level on the 360.

The other reason the PS3 is becoming lead platform, is because it's outselling the 360 now, and EA, for example, predict a much higher revenue from PS3 titles from Q4 this year (I think that is correct) than 360.

Now this doesn't mean developers are going the FFXIII route, developing on the PS3 and then, when it's done, porting to the 360. They'll be working on versions concurrently, but targetting the PS3 and putting more resources in to it [because it's more difficult to develop for].

The result is that 360 multiplatform titles may not be pushing the console as much as we'd all like. The irony here being that PS3 only titles will likely have an advantage over 360 only titles anyway within a year due to the Cell. But right now, multiplatform devs won't be busting their arse figuring out the Cell, so the PS3 version may well end up holding back the 360 version.

It's an interesting situation.

[mekanor]

1) COD4 - DS

2) Orange Box - PC

3) Lost Planet - PC

4) Assassins Creed - PC