Fallout 3 on PS3 “inferior” claim clarified
Welcome back. You're a regular here, so why not follow us on Twitter too...
The interweb is ablaze today with reports claiming the PS3 version of impending Bethesda RPG/actioner “Fallout 3″ rates poorly compared to the PC and 360 iterations of the title. Though it’s sure to be fervently leaped on by one side of the fanboy schism (and arduously defended by the other) we can’t help but feel that a poor choice of words in the original article will fuel this debate higher than it really should be.
Stating that the PS3 version “compares poorly to its Xbox and PC counterparts” may be grammatically correct but it does not paint a clear picture. Luckily C&VG have come out and clarified the comment in an effort to remove any ambiguity by simply stating: “[...] the PS3 version looks the same as on Xbox, but things in the distance are slightly jaggier/rougher, the textures seem ‘muddier’ up-close and the frame rate is choppier, especially during the last few story missions (which may be the same on Xbox, but we’ve not seen the equivalent scenes to comment)”.
It does seem to us from the above that, while to some degree salving the original stark term of “poorly”, they’ve opened another Pandora’s box by claiming that the majority of the frame-rate issues were not compared on the other version. A small point as we’re sure there could be other frame-rate drops but still, the science of “console comparison” demands an empirical test of like-with-like.
So, though we’re sure this story will rage and rage (maybe even up to the heights of the Orange Box debacle) it’s vital that PS3 Fallout fans understand that there is no real story here. The two versions are near identical. The game is awesome. One has a slight advantage over the other which is so small that the vast majority of us wouldn’t either a) notice or b) care.
But why the differences at all you may ask? Andy Kelly, the reviewer of the PS3 version from PSM3, succinctly sums up the reasoning behind the deviations with: “[...] the dull truth is that games will almost always look slightly better on the format they were originally coded for.” We couldn’t agree more. Remember, we have been down this road before with similar claims made that Burnout Paradise (of which the PS3 was the lead console) looked better on the PS3, trumping the 360 version. The fact is, Fallout 3 has a pedigree of being a PC title and will look better on high-end rigs; the system it was primarily designed for. Considering the closeness in architecture between the PC and the 360 it’s a nobrainer that there would be slight improvements seen in the latter’s version compared to the PS3. The point here is that, just like Burnout, the differences are marginal and, apart from asinine bragging rights between the two zealot camps, no one really cares.
Well as far as I see it, Fallout is like Oblivion and Half Life before it. It’s a port of something coded on a PC. Xbox handles that well because it’s made by people who work with PC’s. The PS3 has a different architecture so tweaks have to be made.
When it came to The Orange Box, I could tell it was a PC port because it ‘felt’ like a PC port. Didn’t stop me from whuppin’ the Combine though. I guess it’s the old school gamer in me that doesn’t really care if a game looks a teensy bit rough as long as it’s a pile of awesome fun.
I’m with you on this one Brodiesan, who really cares?
Not too concerned with this but what I do hope is that Fallout 3 has a strong questing vibe to it & that it’s not just tacked on.
For minor graphical differences who really cares? It’s the extra content that we may not get that bothers me.
I’m with you on the extra content but we still don’t know the deal Microsoft signed for the exclusive DLC. It may be a timed exclusive or a complete “hands-off” to PS3 owners.
Either way, it’s like the DLC for GTAIV. That game (and this one!) are big enough without it and, hand on heart time, there is a very small chance I would dish out more money to play extra content for a game I’ve played a long time ago* and have since moved on to other things.
*Full disclosure, I haven’t actually played GTAIV yet. It’s sitting there on my shelf along with a bunch of other games – laughing at me. I might as well wait for the trophy patch at this rate.
I’m not sold out on buying a game just for the graphics, it’s all about the game play for me. The game looks amazing.
I’ve never played a Fallout before but the way they are saying how interactive and how much stuff there is to do, I’m starting to think this will be the one to turn me
Majiesto! I call Blasphemy on that
Never played a Fallout before…
I should have also added that I’m still anxiously awaiting my pre-order.
@Brodiesan – I haven’t played GTAIV yet either. I also haven’t played through Oblivion yet. I tried a couple of times to get into but kept falling asleep (I fear the same may happen with Fallout) Hence I never got the Shivering Isles expansion which I feel is overpriced.
@Kawaii – Yes this game does look amazing.
@Majiesto – I’ve also never played a Fallout game before. (Captain Panada is probably going to call me a blasphemer too
)
Aghh we need a edit button. LOL…Panda not Panada
Perhaps you were thinking of Captain Panaka ?
As for Oblivion. I want to pick it up. I do. So many people have extolled its virtues that it’s almost compulsory at this point but when I hear that some people have put in 350 hours of gameplay and are still not finished I start to get the shakes.
I’ve never played Fallout before, I’ve played a few hours of GTAIV (although my husband has completed it so I’ve seen lots of the game), and I love Oblivion, although I don’t give it as much attention as I should. I think the depth that this game is bringing will draw a lot of people in.
Oblivian is an excellent game, I haven’t played it as much as I should, but I love it. Brodie it’d take you years to complete if COD4 is anything to go by
It could be just because I´ve played Fallout and Fallout 2 about 10 times each
Some of the greatest games of all time.
I gave up on Oblivion before it completely ruled my life. I guess I have really turned a corner there. I have refrained myself from playing a game I was enjoying too much.
Fallout virgin here as well
The apocaliptic RPG theme is right up my alley, so I am really surprised I never heard of the Fallout franchise back in my PC gaming golden age. I am looking forward to Fallout 3, it does not seem to follow a mold or formula that I can tell.
I played GTAIV. I banished it to the what the hell I was thinking when I bought this crap corner. I made up my mind to force myself re-play it once Trophies are patched. My name is Danny_D and I am a Trophy whore…
I have fallout 3 for PS3 and I can honestly say the image is crisp, bright and sharp.
My ps3 is connected via HDMi to a Bravia running at 720p.
My only disappointment is the slow pace of the game, not my thing I’ve discovered.
Well, since this story hit there have been contradictory reports coming out that, in fact, the opposite is true and the PS3 version looks better than the 360.
You’ll have to do a bit of Googling to find the comparative images but, once again, it doesn’t matter. Sorry to hear the game’s not your thing Turk. I’m still looking forward to it as soon as my backlog is depleted.
God bless those lean Summer months.
Fallout 3 my asre.
They should call this “Steptoe and Son – Apocalypse Not Long ago.