@ntm said:

I do wish I had a powerful gaming PC to play this, but due to not having one, I can't play it on PC, so I don't have that option

You do though!

• Sell every PS3/Xbox 360 game you have.
• Sell both those consoles.
• Use that money to build a gaming PC.
• Thank me later.

I have only played it myself on the PC. But they talked briefly about this on this weeks podcast and it seems the PS3 version is better.

PS3 version is where its at for console. Also, you get the first Bioshock on the disc as well as a bonus so Id go with that one. Same version I'm playing and I can attest that its a pretty decent experience. The load times are a bit suspect but other than that its pretty amazing they got it looking as good as they did on the PS3.

@expensiveham: Huh... I listened to the podcast, I don't remember them mentioning one was better than the other. I keep hearing that the PS3 version (though it being somewhat inconclusive) is better. The fact that both Bioshock and Bioshock 2 were a little worse on PS3 has me worried; that's the reason I don't know which to get. I really want it on 360 because that's where I originally got the first, but if it's not the better version, I don't want it there.

@demoskinos: I guess it's cool that the original comes with it, but I already have the first on that.

@ntm according to in-depth analysis both console versions look basically identical, but the PS3 version suffers from screen tearing whereas the 360 version does not.

In terms of performance the PS3 is said to have a slightly smoother framerate (due to lack of vertical sync) while the 360 version suffers from heavier frame rate dips in busier firefights.

In conclusion: If you don't mind screen tearing and want a smoother experience then go with PS3 -/- If you can't stand screen tearing as some people and don't mind slightly worse framerates then go with the 360 version. Apart from that both console versions suffer from really aggressive post-AA effects which heavily blur the textures in order to hide jaggies but it's identical on both versions.

I've played and beaten the PC version and purchased the 360 one to play through again. The difference in quality of visuals is really staggering. That said, ingorance is bliss so you won't notice anything out of the ordinary unless you play the PC version at a friends house or something.

Every review or news that specified a better version between PS3 and 360 said to go with the PS3 one if possible.

@humanity: Really? Well that's a flip. The original Bioshock on 360 had the lack of vsync with the unlock frame rate option on, but ran at a near 60 frames per second, while if it was on, on the PS3 version, it ran around 30 to 40, but without screen tearing. Alright, thanks a lot. I was trying to find the in-depth analysis. This was the answer I was looking for, can you show me the site that you found this? I prefer the 360 version to the PS3 version of the original because I don't mind screen tearing as much as a low frame rate.

Nope. Not true PS3 has V-sync enabled from the start you CAN take it off which unlocks the frame rate but also makes you much more prone to screen tearing. With it locked I never once saw a screen tear however.

OH! You can do it in this one too!? :D I really like that implementation; to unlock the frame rate. So basically, when you turn it on, it goes pretty fast? So it should do that for both PS3 and 360!

I'm just relaying what was said by the fine folks at Digital Foundry that spend inordinate amounts of time studying minute details of all the versions.

But read for yourself, here is the article: LINK TO ARTICLE

@humanity: Aw, yeah, that's the site I was looking for. Thanks. I guess they do have it up already.

@ntm: Yah, so I'm not saying that @demoskinos is a dirty rotten liar, I'm just saying he's completely wrong ;^)

@humanity: Well thanks for showing me what I hadn't found myself, that's all I wanted to know. Seems this poll is over.

@ntm: Anytime I'm always here to help Google things!

Out of curiosity which version did you choose? I've played a little over an hour on the 360 and performance isn't horrible or anything.

I dunno about the PS3, but the 360 version had a ton of technical problems when shit was going crazy and skylines came into play. I should have played it on the PC.

@humanity said:

He's not wrong. PS3 version does have V-Sync enabled at the start. The difference with the PS3 is it's adaptive V-Sync so that it turns off when things are hairy and frames drop low. Otherwise it's on.

@humanity: I haven't chosen yet. I'm not sure which one I want, but it may be the 360 version... Though it might be the PS3 version :P. I don't know. I'd play with the Unlock Frame Rate on to get a better frame rate 'cause FPS matters more to me than vsync.

@gunstarred: Did you unlock the frame rate?

Played it on PS3 without a hitch but 360 owners seem to be struggling. I'd like to see a next gen console release by the time we get to a GOTY Edition. Would pay for a second copy to get a fully realized version of Infinite!

@ntm: Maybe it was during yesterdays liveshow. But Patrick mentioned that "the PS3 version seemed to be the way to go" and then Jeff or Ryan shouted something like "DAT DAVE LANG MAGIC".

My experience with Infinite was on xbox. Ran perfectly fine. My one complaint was textures could be horrible and pixelated.

And with the PS3 version not being different on that front either. Id say xbox as Screen tear is annoying as shit. While lower FPS I don't really recall seeing it when it did happened. Playing Resident Evil 5.....I remember screen tear.

Ps3 version should crash in price or be lower in my experience vs xbox.

The truest way is pc but as you said thats not a choice.

I played the 360 version and it was fine. However, there were dips in performance in especially busy fights. Also, and this was such a disappointment, during one of the major events, I had a messed up texture issue that kind of ruined a story moment. For people who have played it (don't click if you don't want to know)

During the trip from the bottom of the ocean to the lighthouses, the glass on my bathysphere was totally glitched and I could only see a few inches at most. The rest of the *glass* was white. At first I thought it was a stylistic choice to look icy of frosty, but obviously not. I ended up watching that part on youtube to get the full effect. It really sucked.

-_____-

stick to sony son

I can't speak to xbox, but I played it on my PS3 and it played great. It mostly looks good, but more important than that the framerate was solid for me the entire way through. I never noticed any noticable framerate drop.

PS3 ftw.

@jimmyfenix: Says the one with the cartoon-ish Marcus Fenix icon?

i have both consoles and i love the gears of war franchise from (1-3) that doesnt mean i show more favoritism to microsoft quite the opposite actually. i have leaned more towards sony in the past year due to there plus program and do the majority of my gaming on the ps3 :)

78% of that poll is for PS3 so go with it. I played mine on PS3 and it was smooth sailing the whole time.

know before you do get a console version (as i do suggest pc) that you will be running a new game on an 8 year old console (in xbox's case). I have the game for xbox, ps3, and pc (because of siblings also), and as i play the pc version i noticed that the graphics on the ps3 are a bit better than the xbox, though the overall game is not different in anyway.

I would suggest the ps3 version if you cannot run it on pc.

Ha ha, alright. That's cool. I wasn't really assuming you chose favorites, only that I initially found it ironic to see that icon and then see that comment; it was less about what you feel and more about what I saw, if that makes sense.

@dorkpheasant: You mention because of siblings, so if that's the case, do you and your siblings use different TV's? I'm saying that because a different TV as well as resolution being used for games can make a difference.