Is it me or does the PS3 version look horrible?

#1 Posted by ch13696 (4582 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

So I've played and beaten the Xbox 360 and PC versions of Mass Effect 1 & 2. I've picked up Mass Effect 2 yesterday and just got a chance to play it today. So, I've played maybe a couple of hours so far and I do not remember any other version being like this. Nothing looks really polished and none of the edges looks smooth. I mean, I don't know if it's just me. Is anyone else experiencing this at all?

#2 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

it's you

#3 Posted by TooWalrus (11800 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

lol

#4 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5711 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

Well the PS3 never was good at handling AA. But I play on PC now, it's been a while since I played 360 so I can't remember what it looks like. The quick look looked fine though. Some better lighting but that was about it.

#5 Posted by timay (190 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

I dont own it yet but the ps3 version is supposed to be using the mass effect 3 engine. So totally possible its not fully polished yet. Still plan on picking it up soon

#6 Posted by TheMustacheHero (6654 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@MordeaniisChaos said:

" Well the PS3 never was good at handling AA. But I play on PC now, it's been a while since I played 360 so I can't remember what it looks like. The quick look looked fine though. Some better lighting but that was about it. "

lol "handling AA" it has none at all. PC master race blah blah...

#7 Posted by gamb1t (964 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" So I've played and beaten the Xbox 360 and PC versions of Mass Effect 1 & 2. I've picked up Mass Effect 2 yesterday and just got a chance to play it today. So, I've played maybe a couple of hours so far and I do not remember any other version being like this. Nothing looks really polished and none of the edges looks smooth. I mean, I don't know if it's just me. Is anyone else experiencing this at all? "

your tv/monitor have 1920x1080 resolution?

#8 Posted by Zajtalan (1137 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

none of the edges look smooth because it's a game

#9 Posted by Killroycantkill (1320 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#10 Posted by ch13696 (4582 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@gamb1t said:

" @ch13696 said:
" So I've played and beaten the Xbox 360 and PC versions of Mass Effect 1 & 2. I've picked up Mass Effect 2 yesterday and just got a chance to play it today. So, I've played maybe a couple of hours so far and I do not remember any other version being like this. Nothing looks really polished and none of the edges looks smooth. I mean, I don't know if it's just me. Is anyone else experiencing this at all? "
your tv/monitor have 1920x1080 resolution? "

Yep. I haven't tried it on my LED yet though.

#11 Posted by AuthenticM (3514 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#12 Posted by ch13696 (4582 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#13 Posted by Enigma777 (5970 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

I've only played the demo on the PS3, but I found that the faces look way too plasticly...

#14 Posted by Kenny (66 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

Well its supposed to be running on the Mass Effect 3 engine, which I assume is a modified version of the engine from the second game. I don't know what they changed exactly but some things may not look as good if they changed how its rendered but didn't change the model?

#15 Posted by SuperWristBands (2029 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"

lol. Respect bro.

I only played the demo (and by played I watched a bit of the opening) and it looked kinda blurry. The problem is that I can't remember if the 360 was like that so my input is probably not that valuable.

#16 Edited by CL60 (16906 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg

#17 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4266 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"

wait.... arent u the OP? ahhh well nvm. in side by side comparisons the lighting isnt that great in the ps3 one but really, thats not gonna affect your overall gaming experience...

#18 Posted by RobotHamster (3948 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#19 Posted by MisterMouse (3493 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#20 Posted by ch13696 (4582 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@CL60 said:

" it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg "

Wow, I knew it. I thought this was supposed to be on their new engine. What happened?

#21 Posted by Yummylee (18138 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG said:

" @ch13696 said:
" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"
wait.... arent u the OP? "

Jesus, fucking comedy Gold. Was laughing for minutes on end.

#22 Posted by Afroman269 (7388 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

It looks about the same despite the lack of v sync. Framerate is still an issue........oh how I love you PC version.

#23 Posted by face15 (1137 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@kingzetta said:

" it's you "

#24 Posted by Raven_Sword (3271 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696:

I think its just you. It has a different lighting scheme, thats about it.

#25 Edited by Raven_Sword (3271 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696:

Nothing happened. It looks fine, its just that one screen that has a different lighting on it to make it look like the textures are worse, but It just think the lighting is different. If you actualy read that comparison they did on eurogamer, they say both look about the same, its just the lighting is different.

#26 Posted by ryanwho (12083 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @CL60 said:
" it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg "
Wow, I knew it. I thought this was supposed to be on their new engine. What happened? "

@pyromaster222 said:

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"

lol

#27 Posted by Klaimore (927 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

Yep its not you I have both consoles and I have compared games from on them. The Xbox always looks better, and in some games also better frame rate on the 360. The one thing that PS3 can do perfectly is their exclusives those look amazing but yeah just about every game that comes out for both 360 or ps3 has looked better on the 360. I find it unbelievable that after all these years they still cant make it right its sad.

Online

#28 Edited by Slaker117 (4831 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

The Unreal engine has a history of not being great on the PS3. There is more raw power in the PlayStation but it's harder to optimize for, so even though ME2 is using an updated version, it's fighting an uphill battle. No surprise it doesn't look better.

@Klaimore:
Almost every multiplatform game is developed with the 360 as the lead. They sell more there so devs spend more time optimizing that version. Most sort of phone just in a PS3 port. They make it work fine, but the architecture is so unorthodox, polishing it up is a pain.

#29 Posted by ryanwho (12083 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

The closer you model your console after a PC, the easier it'll be to optimize for. This isn't rocket science or even elitism. Sony made the PS3 like this literally so it would take longer to optimize, which is fucking stupid. You only do that so you can say, and be correct, that "PS3 games continue to look better with each year". Which is true, but only because they look like shit year one because of the core partitioning and other nonsense.

#30 Posted by Levio (1395 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you!"

How are you gentlemen.

#31 Posted by Klaimore (927 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@Slaker117: Indeed and you are absolutely right its just sad though. I remember when my cousin but it at launch and we played Resistance Fall of man and we were amazed it was awesome. Later he purchased games like Rainbow Six Vegas and GRAW the comparison was just sad. The fact still stands that yes the PS3 is far more powerful with amazing titles God of War III and Uncharted.

Online

#32 Edited by ryanwho (12083 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

You can't really speak to what ports of those games would look like. Its all hypothetical. GOW and Uncharted are very directed and linear which is why they look that way, and that's the same reason fighting games tend to look so good. There's much less to account for so everything can be more detailed. There's absolutely no reason for a thinking man to assume the 360 versions of those games wouldn't look as good. None. The reason they look good has far more to do with the optimization the devs put into it, it has nothing to do with something the PS3 hardware alone is capable of doing. GOW2 looks better than many Gamecube games, doesn't mean GOW2 couldn't run on the Gamecube. That's fucking nonsense.

#33 Posted by Swoxx (2903 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

It's you

#34 Edited by Slaker117 (4831 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@Klaimore: The way Sony build the thing, it's really their fault. So much power is going to waste because of the way it breaks convention for no good reason. Unless you're a first party dev, the cost of optimizing for the PS3 is not worth it. It is sad, but on ht hardware side, not the software.

#35 Posted by rjayb89 (7553 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@CL60 said:

" it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg "

Nuh uh. That can't be. It's like they took a screen cap of somebody's PC version running at poop settings.

#36 Edited by ryanwho (12083 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

If you optimize for the PS3, your game will almost certainly run as or more efficiently on the 360 because it'll have a bit of RAM to spare. Last gen this was beneficial because the PS2 was the leader and the weakest hardware console, so ports of PS2 games ran really efficiently and were easy to do. This time there's no good reason to lead with the PS3 so you've got inefficient ports. Similarly, Venetica was made for PC and ported to consoles, and it doesn't run especially good on PC to begin with so that game is inefficient as fuck. A port of Civ 5 to consoles would be a nightmare. Basically if you develop for the weakest console the game will look good on everything else and if you develop for a high end PC it'll look like shit on anything else. If the PS3 was the industry leader, we wouldn't have this inferior port problem because people would make the game for PS3 first and it would run fine on the 360 from there.

#37 Edited by NTM (6419 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696:
Not that I have the PS3 version since I already have the 360 and PC version (and don't feel like it's worth it right now), but did you make sure to turn off the grain affect? That makes it a whole lot worse in my opinion.

The only thing I noticed when I played the demo that was worse, and better in spots was the framerate.

#38 Posted by Portis (1254 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"

Wait, what? This post confuses me.

#39 Posted by kidman (438 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@rjayb89: You are incorrect.
Everyone, here's the article - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-masseffect2-face-off?page=1

#40 Posted by solidwolf52 (287 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

I noticed some framerate issues... I feel it gets kinda choppy more than I remember on 360

#41 Edited by kingzetta (4307 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696:
http://www.lensoftruth.com/?p=26591&page=2

#42 Posted by KaosAngel (13766 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

The PlayStation 3 is weakest compared to the Xbox 360 and PC, so it's no surprise that multi-platform games look bad on it.

#43 Posted by Vitor (2660 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@CL60 said:

" it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg "

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-masseffect2-face-off

Uh - read the whole article before just showing that one out of context image.

Yes, the normal maps on certain textures have been paired back due to the fact, while the PS3, like the 360, has 512MB of Ram, unlike the 360, the PS3 has this split in 2 x 256 blocks, making it tougher for developers to pump out bigger files.

But no, it's not a huge downgrade and the two versions are basically like for like in terms of both having advantages and disadvantages over the other. The game by no means looks awful.

#44 Posted by Kazona (2991 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

What I find more interesting about this topic, is that you beat the game on two seperate platforms, and then decided to buy it again on a third. Why? I mean, I can understand getting it on the PC as well because it's the better version, and it allows you to import downloaded save games. But what sensible reason could you possibly have for buying it for a third time?

#45 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @kingzetta said:
" it's you "
"

you are fucking brilliant

im gonna unfollow you just so i can follow you again

#46 Posted by PufferFiz (1311 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

WHO FUCKING CARES PLAY YOUR FUCKING GAME AND SHUT THE FUCK UP

#47 Posted by CoheedFavorHouse (670 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

@ch13696 said:

" @CL60 said:
" it's not you. The game truly does look bad on the PS3. Plus has framerate issues, and the audio is out of sync at times.

YUCK

http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_ps3.bmp.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/1/8/7/3/8/texture1_360.bmp.jpg "
Wow, I knew it. I thought this was supposed to be on their new engine. What happened? "

i was about to say, i just saw a thread the other day comparing the 360/PS3 versions and the PS# version looked significantly worse

#48 Posted by JerichoBlyth (1044 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

If you've played the PC version on the highest settings then the PS3 version will look like a shined up dog turd in your estimation.

#49 Posted by laserbolts (5116 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

I haven't played the game but I watched the quick look and it looked amazing.

#50 Posted by Clinkz (1118 posts) - 2 years, 3 months ago

You bought all 3 version of Mass Effect 2? I'm sorry dude.

Mass Effect 2

After a violent death by an unknown force and a timely reanimation by the human supremacist organization Cerberus, Commander Shepard must assemble a new squad in the seedier side of the galaxy for a suicide mission in the second installment of the "Mass Effect" trilogy.

Comment and Save