Rage on Ps3 and Xbox 360

#1 Posted by Nefhril (74 posts) -

So anyone who have picked up both the Ps3 and the 360 copy of Rage? Would be interesting to know if the texture pop-in is worse on the Ps3 with the 8 gig install vs the 20+ gig full install on the 360...

#2 Posted by DJJoeJoe (1333 posts) -

every keeps saying 8gigs mandatory, though I assume a ps3 user can just install the game proper? Or is 8gigs the only install they can do? Eitherway it seems like the texture pop in stuff is slightly worse on the ps3 for reasons unknown, the ps3 in general has a harder time with raw textures because of memory though so that could be part of the issue.

#3 Posted by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

Yeah, I keep hearing and seeing that the 360 version has a slight edge over the PS3 version.

Seems like 360 is the way to go until they fix the PC version.

#4 Posted by Nefhril (74 posts) -

@DJJoeJoe said:

every keeps saying 8gigs mandatory, though I assume a ps3 user can just install the game proper? Or is 8gigs the only install they can do? Eitherway it seems like the texture pop in stuff is slightly worse on the ps3 for reasons unknown, the ps3 in general has a harder time with raw textures because of memory though so that could be part of the issue.

Think 8 gig is the limit on Ps3, read something about id software wanted more. From the start they only got 5 or 6 gig but manage to get 8 for the installation...

#5 Posted by Crash_Happy (737 posts) -

I thought I read that the 360 was the primary platform when they were developing? Certainly that's why I ended up opting for the 360 version.

With PS3 installs it seems to be that you don't get a choice about how much you want to install, seems a mistake to me and I'd be quite pleased to hear that Rage was different.

#6 Edited by halfcirclepunch (10 posts) -

PS3 Version is better according to Id

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1022158/rage_ps3_version_uses_every_core_no_nasty_texture_popup.html

#7 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7617 posts) -

@halfcirclepunch: All the reviews say otherwise. Plus Carmack himself had some really nasty things to say about the PS3.

That article sounds like PR speak.

#8 Posted by Nefhril (74 posts) -

Seems like everyone plays on the Xbox 360 right know... must be someone who's sitting on a Ps3 copy

I think both the 360 and the Ps3 suffers from pop-ins but with the full installation on 360 the pop-ins would probably not be as bad(?)

#9 Edited by halfcirclepunch (10 posts) -

@WinterSnowblind said:

@halfcirclepunch: All the reviews say otherwise. Plus Carmack himself had some really nasty things to say about the PS3.

That article sounds like PR speak.

http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head-rage-screenshot-comparison/

Just judge for yourself. To me there is a diffrence in draw distance (in favor for the 360) and some of the textures (very first pic) look sharper on the PS3. In the end I doubt the gameplay experience will be significantly better or worse on either PS3 or 360, so just go with your gut. I for one don't want to bother disc swaping so I go for the PS3.

#10 Posted by Crash_Happy (737 posts) -

@halfcirclepunch: Urk. I forgot about disk swapping.

#11 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@halfcirclepunch said:

PS3 Version is better according to Id

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1022158/rage_ps3_version_uses_every_core_no_nasty_texture_popup.html

Too bad it's the other way round in the actual game. PS3 has more texture pop-ins.

@halfcirclepunch said:

@WinterSnowblind said:

@halfcirclepunch: All the reviews say otherwise. Plus Carmack himself had some really nasty things to say about the PS3.

That article sounds like PR speak.

http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head-rage-screenshot-comparison/

Just judge for yourself. To me there is a diffrence in draw distance (in favor for the 360) and some of the textures (very first pic) look sharper on the PS3. In the end I doubt the gameplay experience will be significantly better or worse on either PS3 or 360, so just go with your gut. I for one don't want to bother disc swaping so I go for the PS3.

Do you need glasses?

Look at some of the pictures on the second page. The PS3 version looks a tad more blurry and the contrast is a little weaker.

#12 Edited by halfcirclepunch (10 posts) -

@Crash_Happy: Yeah, that's bothersome. Not that the install on the PS3 is MUCH better but atleast you do that once. Disc swapping for multiplayer is just weird.

#13 Posted by kpaadet (413 posts) -

Have id fixed the disc swaping problem Brad mentioned in the QL?

#14 Posted by tekmojo (2302 posts) -

3 disks...

#15 Posted by nohthink (1223 posts) -

Wow so even with 20 gig install, you still need to swap discs? That sounds ridiculous. I would rather play with one disc and see some "not really terrible"(as Patrick says in the quick look) texture pop in.

#16 Posted by Nefhril (74 posts) -

@tekmojo said:

3 disks...

lol, well if the game performs better that's not a issue... for me :)

I wonder how many is going to touch the third multiplayer disc, vehicle combat a bold move I say.

#17 Posted by DJJoeJoe (1333 posts) -

@nohthink: All the install on the 360 does is off load that data onto tha hard drive which allows for faster read times for streaming data, since a hard drive is always going to be able to stream data faster than a dvd rom drive, you still need the disks because otherwise you could rent a game install it then send it back, also swapping disks isn't a big deal you do it once in the middle of the game during what would normally be a load screen. I've seen my roommate do it in mass effect 2 and it was tastefully done, and I've done it myself for LA Noire and that game installed a FULL 3 disks worth of data, swapping twice and I couldn't tell you where it happened and hardly noticed it. It's not a big deal, it's something you think is unless you own and use the console in question.

I actually didn't know the ps3 had an install limit, that's really lame. Streaming the data off the hard drive is the way to go and I love installing all my games, with the ps3 you can get infinity larger hard drives too so it's a bummer it's limited like that (I have a 20gig la noire install on my 360 lol).

#18 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@tekmojo said:

3 disks...

And?  
 
Also 2 disks. The main game is on the first 2.  
 
Why is disk swapping such an issue...
#19 Posted by ttocs (782 posts) -

I'm going for the PS3 because of the single disc and the images/videos I've seen the graphics look marginally better on the PS3 or so close it's impossible to differentiate. In the end, it's going to be similar for everyone else. Go with whatever one you want because they are going to be very very similar.

#20 Posted by Protome (349 posts) -

The games virtually look identical on both 360 and PS3, and when the 360 version is installed it has slightly less pop-in. That said, it's is exactly that "slightly less. So just go with whichever you feel like really.

#21 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11391 posts) -

Given the choice between slightly less texture pop in or no disc swapping, I will go with no disc swapping. Because texture pop in isn't that bad! (probably)

Online
#22 Edited by tekmojo (2302 posts) -

@The_Laughing_Man & @Nefhril:

It's not convenient or practical for me to quickly play the game (switching from SP to MP). Ease of access is a huge selling point for me, thus why Steam and high capacity storage mediums have me sold.

#23 Posted by ttocs (782 posts) -

The only real issue with Rage being multiplatform is that the PC version isn't doing so hot. So, if you normally buy PC titles you might want to come to the dark side and get a console version if you are able.

#24 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@tekmojo said:

@The_Laughing_Man & @Nefhril:

It's not convenient or practical for me to quickly play the game (switching from SP to MP). Ease of access is a huge selling point for me, thus why Steam and high capacity storage mediums have me sold.

Its a disk...a easy swap. 
#25 Posted by ttocs (782 posts) -

@The_Laughing_Man said:

@tekmojo said:

@The_Laughing_Man & @Nefhril:

It's not convenient or practical for me to quickly play the game (switching from SP to MP). Ease of access is a huge selling point for me, thus why Steam and high capacity storage mediums have me sold.

Its a disk...a easy swap.

But why do it? If you have an option to play seamlessly or have to swap discs why wouldn't you choose the option that involves seamless play? It may be a small hassle, but it's still a hassle.

#26 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@ttocs said:

@The_Laughing_Man said:

@tekmojo said:

@The_Laughing_Man & @Nefhril:

It's not convenient or practical for me to quickly play the game (switching from SP to MP). Ease of access is a huge selling point for me, thus why Steam and high capacity storage mediums have me sold.

Its a disk...a easy swap.

But why do it? If you have an option to play seamlessly or have to swap discs why wouldn't you choose the option that involves seamless play? It may be a small hassle, but it's still a hassle.

I do not see it as a hassle. It seems kinda lazy if your gonna base a purchase a game on that little fact. But to each their own. 
#27 Posted by ttocs (782 posts) -

@The_Laughing_Man said:

@ttocs said:

@The_Laughing_Man said:

@tekmojo said:

@The_Laughing_Man & @Nefhril:

It's not convenient or practical for me to quickly play the game (switching from SP to MP). Ease of access is a huge selling point for me, thus why Steam and high capacity storage mediums have me sold.

Its a disk...a easy swap.

But why do it? If you have an option to play seamlessly or have to swap discs why wouldn't you choose the option that involves seamless play? It may be a small hassle, but it's still a hassle.

I do not see it as a hassle. It seems kinda lazy if your gonna base a purchase a game on that little fact. But to each their own.

When you buy a game you look at the pro's and con's of each item. They are virtually identical in all ways except disc swapping. Since that's the only identifiable difference, you make your decision on that. Unless of course you have friends who play on the 360, then that becomes a selling point. Or if you like achievements over trophies. But, with all those aside, when you just compare the two games without social features, it's better to have everything on one disc rather than 3.

#28 Posted by laserbolts (5365 posts) -

I don't care how many disks there are. I will choose to play rage on my 360 controller over ps3 anyday. It's just a matter of comfort for me.

#29 Posted by ttocs (782 posts) -

@laserbolts said:

I don't care how many disks there are. I will choose to play rage on my 360 controller over ps3 anyday. It's just a matter of comfort for me.

Exactly. That's an outside preference that helped you along with your decision. For someone like myself though - I don't mind the PS3 controller and will be choosing PS3 over 360 simply because of the single blu-ray.

#30 Posted by Nefhril (74 posts) -

Ps3 - No disc swapping

Xbox 360 - Faster/Less texture pop-ins

Well don't mind swapping discs. Have to get off the couch sometime right, so Xbox 360 it is for me then.

Thanks everyone! Now let's bring the Rage!! :D

#31 Posted by Krakn3Dfx (2502 posts) -

Played the PS3 version for about 3 hours last night, game is awesome, frame rate is mad solid pretty much all the time. There are some questionable texture quality issues when you get close up to stuff, but whatever, when you're out in the world it looks amazing.

Not as open world as maybe I was hoping for, but still a blast to play.

#32 Posted by zebwinz (16 posts) -

About two hours into the 360 version and for what some outlets have called "the best looking game on the system", I'm thoroughly disappointed. If you un-focus your eyes, sure it looks great. If you look right at a railing or wall or vending machine, it looks terrible! I have the game installed (all 3 discs) and I've even left the controller alone for several minutes to see if a pretty texture would pop in, but they never came. It also seems like the game is trying to guess what textures you'll be looking at. Try turning side to side after what little textures are there have loaded. (sorry for the strange sentence!) The textures will continue to pop in and out. I won't even get in to the canned animations. Very disappointed and glad I only rented it from Gamefly. Saved me from wasting $60 twice this month (X-men Destiny was the other)

#33 Posted by Xero0 (56 posts) -

i own the ps3 version and rented the 360 version.

after 2 hours on each version, they seem very identical except for the obviousy 1 disk on the ps3 and 3 on the 360.

texture popping occurs on both systems.

#34 Posted by Hizang (8532 posts) -

I picked it up for the PS3 today, and I was really bummed about the texture pop in. Its so bad I am even having troubles just playing the game, I may wait until a patch is out.

#35 Posted by Andorski (5365 posts) -

@halfcirclepunch said:

@WinterSnowblind said:

@halfcirclepunch: All the reviews say otherwise. Plus Carmack himself had some really nasty things to say about the PS3.

That article sounds like PR speak.

http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head-rage-screenshot-comparison/

Just judge for yourself. To me there is a diffrence in draw distance (in favor for the 360) and some of the textures (very first pic) look sharper on the PS3. In the end I doubt the gameplay experience will be significantly better or worse on either PS3 or 360, so just go with your gut. I for one don't want to bother disc swaping so I go for the PS3.

The people behind lens of truth are amateurs. Digital Foundry breaks it down to a science.

So it comes down to whether you want less texture pop-in (360) or no disk swapping (PS3).

#36 Posted by laserbolts (5365 posts) -
@MooseyMcMan

Given the choice between slightly less texture pop in or no disc swapping, I will go with no disc swapping. Because texture pop in isn't that bad! (probably)

Yes and disk swapping is such a chore!
#37 Posted by Rowr (5824 posts) -

can someone let me know how sharp it looks on the xbox 360? One of my main issues with 360 games is its complete and utter lack of anti aliasing.

#38 Posted by deutschgrrrl (13 posts) -

@Nefhril: I have watched friends play on Rage on their PS3 but I have it for XBOX 360 and I gotta say, XBOX 360 version looks way prettier than PS3. The graphics are awesome

#39 Posted by thechronodarkness (294 posts) -

The texture pop in is definately worse on the ps3 version, but not by a huge margin. Not enough to ruin the game though. Like on the bombcast, get past the first 10 minutes, and it doesn't bother you. I'm just surprised, a game running sooooo smoothly on the ps3. I've NEVER seen that before, from a game that looks this good. And yes, the 7.6 gig install is all you can do. I will tell you though...the loading times are horrribbbbllleeee. Jesus, go into the city for 3 minutes to get a mission, and back to the wasteland...each loading screen is like 2-3 minutes. For the 7 hours I played to beat the game, I guarantee at least 30-40 minutes of it was in loading screens.

#40 Posted by MetalMoog (908 posts) -

In most multiplatform games the 360 versions have less texture pop in. Such is the case with Rage, Borderlands and Dead Island. Whenever I had the choice I always went with the 360 versions.

#41 Posted by eastcoasteric (58 posts) -

I have a PS3 and a 360 but I'm more of a PS3 guy, but I love the Microsoft exclusives like Gears and Halo.

But anyways, I picked up RAGE for the 360 after almost getting it for the PS3 because it allowed the "full" install, versus the PS3's 8 gig install which may attribute to the lag in graphics (but certainly not they way they look, because regardless of normal belief, the PS3's lack of GPU memory is made up in raw processing power).

I did both, I played the game for about a hour without a install of the game, I have a 4 gig xbox so I went out about picked up a cheap $15 USB 16gig flash drive and installed 1 disc at a time and it fixed major graphic pop up's and sound issues, for the most part. (best $15 i've ever spent!)

Though it certainly still does have noticeable pop up's but it's not nearly as bad as when it runs off the disc alone.

It all comes down to a matter of preference, I'm sure id is working their asses off trying to fix all the pop up issues but I'm also sure that they are limited by the abilities of EACH console and while the PS3 has the pure power to be a work horse, Sony doesn't allow bigger installs than the 8gig they got away with so we'l never get a full fix on that platform, but on the other hand the 360 doesn't have the muscle for a path to fix all the issues, just some...but at the same time they allow over 8 gig installs.

It's a catch 22 situation and it really comes down to a matter of preference and while I'm enjoying the 360 version a lot, this game is rater addicting and easy so a quick platinum trophy could easily be done (with the right amount of time) so it makes the PS3 version better in that sense.

But it all comes down to you, which system do YOU want to play it on? When you decide, go out and just buy it...who really cares seeing the games are pretty much identical (with a few shadow texture differences that look better on the PS3)

#42 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11391 posts) -

John Carmack should just hold Jack Tretton at gun point until they allow full game installs on PS3.

Online

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.