PS3 vs 360 Games

I own both a PS3 and an Xbox360. I purchase my games, unless they're exclusives (MGS4, GT5:p) for the 360 as I prefer the controller layout on the Xbox far more. I have big hands and the PS3 controllers, with the rumble feature, still feel like lightweight toys to me and they're just not ergonomic for me.

That being said, graphics are roughly the same for each platform, and if the controller wasn't a key issue, I'd really have no preference for single player games. Xbox Live is greater than anything Sony has at the moment, so multiplayer games are Xbox auto purchases for me.

However, the November Xbox update might prove key swaying me further over with the game full HD install option. And why I can't tell MGS4 to just keep every chapter installed instead of just the current one I played, bothers me to no end.
 
snaggletooth said:
since the titles across platforms are pretty much identical, i'd buy the ps3 on [...] its present ability to play blu-ray discs.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just because it's Friday, but what does watching movies have to do with PS3 vs. 360 games?

Actually, none of what you said is really on topic. Please go back and READ the first post. He already owns both systems, he's trying to find the difference in the games for each.
 
Leadsalad said:
However, the November Xbox update might prove key swaying me further over with the game full HD install option. And why I can't tell MGS4 to just keep every chapter installed instead of just the current one I played, bothers me to no end.
Click to expand...

Some PS3 games give the option to fully install the game onto the HDD. Lately we have seen developers make mandatory installations because they don't want to use alternative methods as other games run fine without loading times and have no HDD installs. MGS4, I can;t tell you why they chose to do it the way they have. In the end, it has all been up to the developer.

In the end, I like the idea of installing a full game, hate that some PS3 are required but I also dislike that I still must use the disc on either PS3, or 360 after game install.
 
It depends on the game. like Rockband for instance. I'm currently in a gamesharing group for Rockband 2 DLC. The group's sole purpose is to purchase the entire Rockband library via gamesharing. Hard drive space is not an issue here as well, the majority of the users in the group have 200GB+ 2.5" sata drives installed on their PS3's. ( I currently have a 500GB sata drive installed internally for a mere $160 when I intially purchased it)


I prefer driving games on the PS3 due to the Logitech G25


Although, i'm looking forward to the 1st party exclusives from both platforms
 
My reasons I own a 360 over a PS3 are:

1. Price - Before the price drops the PS3 was way too costly for me to consider
2. Game Library - All the games I wanted to play were or planned to be on 360 (not a Metal Gear fan)
3. Controller - I hate the analog placement and shoulder buttons of the PS3 controller (big hands). The lack of force feedback, while minor, also added to my dislike of the PS3.
4. Friends - I have 4 friends who owned a 360 before I bought mine and only one of them had a PS3 (which is mostly just a big dust magnet since 360 gets played a lot more)

I don't have a big HDTV and I rarely watch movies so the formats of the systems didn't affect my decision as far as that goes. Other then the RRoD issue the 360 is a great console and I'm very happy with it.

Edit: I just realized this thread is about game comparisons, I need more caffeine. :eek:
 
tirminyl said:
Some PS3 games give the option to fully install the game onto the HDD.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that to be true. I don't think there is one single game on the PS3 (besides games released on PSN such as Burnout Paradise, GT5p) that allow you to fully install the game on the PS3.Some games are up to 5 or 6gb of install files, but not the entire game.

That has also never been an option in every single PS3 game I have played. Link please.
 
I also have a 360 and PS3....while the PS3 has a slicker interface and makes a fantastic Blu-ray player, I usually choose the 360 for games that are available on both systems. The reason is two-fold....if there is any difference in the graphics/performance it is usually slightly in favor of the 360 and I also like the 360 controller better...especially for racing games. I've decided that the only PS3 games I will play/own will be exclusives. Neither system is perfect...if you could add the PS3's quiet Blu-ray drive and interface to the 360's slightly superior graphical power, online community and controller...you would have a near perfect console.
 
I have both and buy all my games on the xbox360 (except PS3 exclusives ofcourse).

-Its system most of my friends play on
-Better online experience (features, chat options, interface, achievements)
-People actually use mics (+ and -)
-Games usually run a little better and some have exclusive DLC.
-Prefer controller
-Larger selection of games

My only complaint about the xbox360 is the DVD drive noise which will be remedied soon with the install to hard drive option coming out.
 
I have all the systems and I'm a big 360 fan mainly because of the Xbox Live. It has a great interface, easy to get a game on, and most of my buddies are on there. That beings said, you can't go wrong with a PS3, it has a nice library as well and blu-ray to boot! Personal preference at the end of the day.
 
Klob said:
At a cost though. PS3 online gaming is free. FREE>NOT FREE.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really enter the equation if you're already paying it though... which most multi-console owners would be - if only to play the exclusives online.
 
i had 360 and returned it for 3 reasons ALL THE FUCKING GAMES ARE MOTHERFUCKING FPS!!!!!!! there is only a few rpgs in which they all suck hairy balls. secondly when the 360 gets a little hot the game will freeze up constantly and the retarded dvd drive scratches game disks to the point where it cant be read any more.......i'm getting PS3 and i'm going to enjoy some motherfuckin' RPG's
 
So some of you are thinking 5/6 gigs is a lot of space, you do realize how big the BR disc are, and how long a full game install would take? :p
 
Baker said:
So some of you are thinking 5/6 gigs is a lot of space, you do realize how big the BR disc are, and how long a full game install would take? :p
Click to expand...

Where did this come from? And who cares how long it takes as long as you have the option to install or just play. And to answer your question, what, 1 to 2 minutes per GB? Thus, proximately an hour for a full BR disc.
 
ClearM4 said:
Where did this come from? And who cares how long it takes as long as you have the option to install or just play. And to answer your question, what, 1 to 2 minutes per GB? Thus, proximately an hour for a full BR disc.
Click to expand...

So after maybe 1 full game install, you'll have how much space left for other things? Sounds good in theory, but in reality, all their 40G models off the line won't be able to support this feature. (let alone all the 20Gs out there) I know upgrading your harddrive is an option, but to add a feature thats not usable off the shelf..

I was just bringing up the fact that some people complain about the time it takes to do the mandatory install, which isn't close to the size of a fully loaded BR disc.
 
Baker said:
So after maybe 1 full game install, you'll have how much space left for other things? Sounds good in theory, but in reality, all their 40G models off the line won't be able to support this feature.

I was just bringing up the fact that some people complain about the time it takes to do the mandatory install, which isn't close to the size of a fully loaded BR disc.
Click to expand...

The complaint is about mandatory installs. PS3-Soul Caliber IV there is an optional 15 min install for ~3GB and 5 second loads vs 20 second loads streaming from the disc (From Eurogamer comparison review). Having the option make it a non issue.
 
mista ting said:
i had 360 and returned it for 3 reasons ALL THE FUCKING GAMES ARE MOTHERFUCKING FPS!!!!!!! there is only a few rpgs in which they all suck hairy balls. i'm getting PS3 and i'm going to enjoy some motherfuckin' RPG's
Click to expand...

I breeze through these threads because they're usually just fanboy wars (and this is), but I had to literally laugh out loud at this one. I'm not sure what your definition of an RPG is... but you're doing it wrong.
 
Techx said:
I tried to look for other threads that address this issue but really couldn't, if there is and I'm missing it then sorry. But I just recently got a ps3 and already have a 360 and am now torn between which system to buy certain games for. How do I know what would be the best system to get them for? I guess it depends on each game and how well the developer did on it for each system. Like dead space for instance, is 360 or ps3 better, or is it just about the same so it really doesn't matter which system you get it for? Would PS3 ever be better since the BR discs can hold more info and would have stuff like higher-res textures? I've seen comparison articles like on IGN but they actually make you pay to read it, screw that I'm not paying IGN squat for the free and better info I can get from you guys :)

Thanks
Click to expand...

Buy it for the system that has the better multiplayer (meaning you have friends who play it) and the system which has the controller you prefer.
 
mista ting said:
i had 360 and returned it for 3 reasons ALL THE FUCKING GAMES ARE MOTHERFUCKING FPS!!!!!!! there is only a few rpgs in which they all suck hairy balls. secondly when the 360 gets a little hot the game will freeze up constantly and the retarded dvd drive scratches game disks to the point where it cant be read any more.......i'm getting PS3 and i'm going to enjoy some motherfuckin' RPG's
Click to expand...

10/10, I loled.
 
Here is going to be my review of the entire systems + setups + games - organized so you can extract what you want.


Hardware
This really depends for me, which hardware you're talking about. 60gb PS3? 80gb MGS(BC) PS3? New 80gb PS3?
Original 360... etc.

I own 2x 360s ( Falcon Halo3 and a gen1 premium system(never RRoD)
Also own a 60gb PS3

I'm an xbox fanboy, but I try to stay pretty level headed about it, there are only a few things Ill defend.

First off, hardware alone, my PS3 is far superior. The ability to change the hdd is a huge plus for me. I love the media xbar more than the 360's OS. Also, the ability backup to USB, stream music, videos, etc without hacking the system is a huge plus(not for me since I have a HTPC). Also, the blu-ray drive and built in wireless have its pros. I've never used my card reader on it.
The PS3 is far quieter despite using almost 2x the power at wall.

The 360 on the other hand(mah baby!) I prefer because of the controller. I find it crappy that I had(didnt need to, but in my mind) to replace all of my sixaxis for DS3's.
The noise doesnt really bother me since the music volume is significantly higher than the system noise.

360 is BC, New PS3s are not.(read bottom for my interpretation)

Only thing I find useful about the PS3's motion sensing ability is making mah pimp LBP character dance around on the screen!

Sounds like I prefer the PS3 more :-P.


Interwebs - all inclusive

First of all, youd be hard pressed to find anybody that would prefer to use a wireless connection for any reason other than simplicity. I think everybody (if they could) would use a wired connection on either system.
With that being said, I wont use the PS3's wireless. I have an Ethernet cable running through my walls, around the room(from router) to a switch behind my TV, where my PS3/360/Wii/HTPC are all connected.

The PS3 does have a nice perk with free internet service, but...
I hate it. Sans price (50/yr), I believe you wouldn't find anybody that wouldnt prefer Sony's connection over Live's if it was free.

It's a sore subject for most, because they really do force the 50/yr on you, if you wish to play online. For me, Ive played different MMO's, payed for a vent, various CS and CS:S servers over the past 8 years of my life. 50/yr for me is well worth the extra quality. To some it's not, to many it is.

Games

Here is where the big kicker is for me. I dont need a blu ray drive(HTPC), I dont need wireless internet, I just want to play kickass games on the systems.

360 pros:
Larger game library, hands down. Walk into a gamestop- look at the size of the new/used walls. The 360's is at least 2-3x larger. This is because of the same reason the PS2's library is larger than the original Xbox.... time on market.

Flip over almost every 360 box... max resolution is 1080p. Now we all know something around here, resolution isn't everything. Texture quality, AA, AF and such can make up for lower resolutions, but the thought still holds true. Ask all the 30inch 2560x1600 gamers around here if they're okay dropping AA/AF levels to run a higher resolution.

Achievement whore: Gotta get em all!

Xbox live. Im already paying for it, I might as well use it. Not to mention that the internet service is far superior. If I buy a game that I will play online, it automatically goes to the 360 if I can.

In game music : I realize that PS3 will be getting this at some point, but it pisses me off that everytime I play LBP, I have to listen to the same music. Props M$.

360 Cons:
IMHO, inferior hardware ability
and
lack of support for large games sporting higher texture quality etc.

I dont mind swapping disks. Usually RPGs are the only games that this is needed, and for me at least, disk swap times are usually a good place to take a break from gaming. Always a boss before disk swap, story just ended is mini-climax.

PS3 Pros:

Potentially better graphic quality.
No need for disk swaps
The anti scratch on Blu-ray is amazing.

PS3 Cons:
This really kills the system for me.

Flip over PS3 boxes, many games that are 1080p on 360, show up as 720p on PS3. What gives. Sony, you granted me a system with far greater power, and the developers gimped it. Sure, as I said above the textures could be significantly better, but I have yet to notice any game - sans 1 - that Ive seen an extreme improvement in visual quality.

I blame this all on the developers. What good is a 50gb disk, if all it seems you're doing with it is porting the 360 (DVD size) over to the disk. I dont know if this is factually correct, but it seems that developers could seriously 1up the 360 if they produced MGS4 quality games for all titles. Madden 09 would be stellar if they used the entire disk.



Facts - Myths - History according to ME

I am an RPG and FPS lover... in that order.

IMHO since the beginning of time, Sony's systems have always excelled in RPG's The sheer number and quality of them. Also in RPG's I do actually prefer the DS3 since the D-pad is used a lot for better control in turn based RPGS.
But where are they on the PS3 :(
360- lost Odyssey, inf undiscovered - Fable 2

Also Square has always done an amazing job with cutscenes. I still think FFVII's cinematics are beautiful. Im glad that the PS3 version wont just be a port.

FPS for me are just horrid on the PS3. I prefer Halo any day over Haze. I prefer GoW over Resistance also. Dont give me this shit that GoW is a completely different kind of game than resistance. They're both shooters, just different perspectives.

Finally - a myth. After reading the dev report on GoW2, I disagree with only 1 part of it. The interviewee(forgot who) stated that, they were just starting to scratch the surface of the 360's computing power.
While maybe not a myth, completely false to me. Even if the 360 has more balls that we can give it, M$ has to do 1 of 2 things:
1) Release an affordable 1tb drive for the system for anticipation of the ISO rip
or
2) Add support for larger media disks.

While I dont mind swapping disks. It would be a turn off for every single game to be produced to blu ray capacity using 5 DVD's. For me this would make it mandatory that their would be ~50gb ISOed to the 1tb drive, with one "game disk" for DRM or whatever you want to call it.
By the time this surfaces, M$ needs to have the 720 out.

I think the 360 is at its limits. PS3 is not. But for now, ill roll with the 360.

A little more on BC support. First of all, who really uses it? I do- I just finished playing FF8, FF9, and FF10.

The reason I believe they dropped it was simply cost saving efforts. Remember when PS3 launched? How many people bitched about the ~600 premium? A lot did.

What I think needs to happen. M$ needs to (at least on the elite version) toss in the wireless network adapter and 1 yr xbox live(for 400 bucks still). Elites arn't moving fast enough. Seriously, how expensive is the cost on the network adapter to produce? How expensive is it to give someone 1 yr of xbox live? Its not.

Then the only thing people will be able to say that the PS3 offers over the 360 is the blu-ray support. I cant argue that since I dont need it. All I can say on that topic, is microsoft cant do that. If they added the support, then EVERYONE would need to replace their 360 since the media will be blu-ray. The system is older than the PS3, and it deserves to miss some key points.

BTW:
Little Big Planet has given my friends and I the most enjoyable gaming fun in a long time. The frustration is offset by the fun and creativity and the "cuteness" of the game. Great going Sony, amazing title.

Sorry for the long winded statement, I hope it was a decent and fair overview(even though I struggle with 360fanboyism)
 
mista ting said:
i had 360 and returned it for 3 reasons ALL THE FUCKING GAMES ARE MOTHERFUCKING FPS!!!!!!! there is only a few rpgs in which they all suck hairy balls. secondly when the 360 gets a little hot the game will freeze up constantly and the retarded dvd drive scratches game disks to the point where it cant be read any more.......i'm getting PS3 and i'm going to enjoy some motherfuckin' RPG's
Click to expand...

Hello? 360 has way more exclusive RPGs than the PS3 does. Right now I can think of one PS3-exclusive RPG that has been released, and that is Disgaea 3. That's it.
 
well written but how many games out there are true 1080p and not just upscaled?
 
Cloud15x said:
First off, hardware alone, my PS3 is far superior. The ability to change the hdd is a huge plus for me.
Click to expand...

I agree about the PS3 hardware being superior "quality" wise. No question. I also agree about the non-proprietary HDD. However, one thing I like about the 360 HDD is the mobility of it. The ability to be able to remove the HDD, since it was designed as portable, and take it to a friends house. I can have it filled with games, movies, tv shows, demos, music collections and games saves, and take it to a friends and put it on their Xbox and watch/play all of the above as well as have music playlists set for a party. The other advantage to that is that even though my HDD is gone with me a friends/relatives, my son at home can still play the Xbox 360 while the HDD is gone, and I am away with it.

I stream music, videos, etc without hacking the system is a huge plus(not for me since I have a HTPC)
Click to expand...

I have been able to stream more to my 360 than my PS3.

The PS3 is far quieter despite using almost 2x the power at wall.
Click to expand...

2x power? As in the power supply in the unit?

First of all, youd be hard pressed to find anybody that would prefer to use a wireless connection for any reason other than simplicity. I think everybody (if they could) would use a wired connection on either system.
Click to expand...

Well stated!

1080p
Click to expand...

Almost all 360 games say it because it upscales to it. Very few games actually have 1080p. Virtua Tennis 3 does, and it looks good. It's an MS marketing scam.

PS3 Pros: The anti scratch on Blu-ray is amazing.
Click to expand...

I know of many people who have scratched blu-ray disks that are no longer able to be read on their PS3. It's not as amazing as I once thought prior to release.

Flip over PS3 boxes, many games that are 1080p on 360, show up as 720p on PS3. What gives. Sony, you granted me a system with far greater power, and the developers gimped it.
Click to expand...

Well, I think the difference is that the 360 can upscale games better. The PS3 doesn't have far greater power, as Sony has led you to believe. It has a better processor, yes. But the graphics card is not as good as the 360 card, and the memory bottleneck also hampers the PS3. In the end, it probably is actually less powerful due to bottlenecks (though the processors spanks the 360 processors). It's also related to the way Sony is selling their games. The game is actually being produced in 720p, and Sony is properly advertising it. Microsoft on the other hand is cheating the system by stating 1080p, when in fact, it is not native 1080p. 1080p > Upscaled 1080p obviously. I think it's a marketing scam, and MS should stop it. It was MS whos said that we don't need 1080p, right? Or something to that effect?

I blame this all on the developers. What good is a 50gb disk, if all it seems you're doing with it is porting the 360 (DVD size) over to the disk. I dont know if this is factually correct, but it seems that developers could seriously 1up the 360 if they produced MGS4 quality games for all titles. Madden 09 would be stellar if they used the entire disk.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. And I believe the reason that developers are not using the entire 50gb is because it already costs the 10s and 100s of millions of dollars just create a single 8gb title, let alone a title with 6 times more content or graphical development.

1) Release an affordable 1tb drive for the system for anticipation of the ISO rip
or
2) Add support for larger media disks.
Click to expand...

I agree with #1. I want 1 TB HDD for my console as well.

Sorry for the long winded statement, I hope it was a decent and fair overview(even though I struggle with 360fanboyism)
Click to expand...

Very good read man!
 
Thanks guys, I tried to wrap it together the best I can. While sleeping I came up with another pro con on the controller:

While one may argue that it sucks M$ doesnt give you a rechargeable battery pack(I agree), it upsets me that once the PS3 lit-ion battery dies, it goes into the trash....oh excuse me - a "proper waste disposal."

I have 4x of each controller, but 8x rechargeable battery packs + 4x AA battery doors.

For me, 360 controller is like triple bagging it, if one breaks, you got 2 more!

And you're right, the 1080p might just be a bullshit scam.. Like I said, there is very little visual difference between the two in video quality.
 
The Hedon said:
I agree about the PS3 hardware being superior "quality" wise. No question. I also agree about the non-proprietary HDD. However, one thing I like about the 360 HDD is the mobility of it. The ability to be able to remove the HDD, since it was designed as portable, and take it to a friends house. I can have it filled with games, movies, tv shows, demos, music collections and games saves, and take it to a friends and put it on their Xbox and watch/play all of the above as well as have music playlists set for a party. The other advantage to that is that even though my HDD is gone with me a friends/relatives, my son at home can still play the Xbox 360 while the HDD is gone, and I am away with it.
Click to expand...

I call deja moo! I think we need to get in contact with Toms hardware to do some synthetic benchmarks on it!

Heh, I hope youre right, it would make me feel better knowing I have a faster graphical system!

Either way it doesnt matter. Its all about the quality of games and the personal experience.

Last thing: Sony, why teh thermal buttons. It makes me sad panda. I dont know if they're working until they do something!

Like last night I vending machined me a wrong pop because it used a touch panel rather than a tactile input system.

I like recesses my finger can go into, and when I push, the button does something with me - "affirming my wishes"

If anyone is going to refute this - show me a picture of your thermal keyboards!
 
For me, I got the PS3 40GB. I liked the PS2 controller, and the PS3 was in the same vein. I also like the interface. Granted, I haven't really played with the 360 interface, so I can't comment there. I will say that my unit has been easy to work with and use. It feels intuitive and the features are seamlessly integrated.
Second, the reliability of the 360 was disconcerting. I can understand some sort of defective product making it to the consumer--hey, that sorta stuff happens--but, there's been far too many people that have run into the RRoD. The people from work that I know have one have had to send there's in at least once before.
Now, I don't go out looking for console failure stats, but I've run across one PS3 failure, which happened to be here from what I recall.
I also like the fact that you don't need some special upgrade from MS if you want to upgrade your HDD. Right now, the situation is fine, but down the road, I just might want to drop in something more spacious, and I like the thought that I can slap in an inexpensive upgrade of my choosing.
 
I have both, I prefer my PS3. I dont like paying for live(though its not much)
I like bluray. I'm always worried my xbox will die(It has before)
 
I had a 360 only for a year or so after ps3 came out. Last summer i bought a ps3 though, and i still kinda stuck with buying most things on xbox till the last 4 months or so. I've now gotten used to the ins and outs and differences between the two and i've been buying all my games, other than exclusives to xbox and music games (for past instruments and stuff carrying over that i alreay bought for 360 ), for ps3. I like the save game and data functions and that stuff a lot better on ps3. I know that if i ever want a 200 gig hard drive i can buy one and throw it in for a real price instead of paying double for a special xbox one. PSN allows people to host their own servers PC style, which is what i'm used to from playing pc games my whole life, this allows for servers to actually have good ping in games like socom. Where pretty much every time i played a game on xbox live it was super laggy, halo, etc.

Overall I like pretty much everything about PS3 better.
 
Weird. Just got quantum solace and resistance 2 in.

007 ps3 is 1080p
Resistance 2 is 720.

Fail insomniac. L2 mgs4.
 
Cloud15x said:
Weird. Just got quantum solace and resistance 2 in.

007 ps3 is 1080p
Resistance 2 is 720.

Fail insomniac. L2 mgs4.
Click to expand...

QoS runs on the CoD4 engine and therefore, I assume, defaults to 720p if your tv supports it if it is anything like CoD. 1080p is just upscaled on that engine AFAIK and is just there for ppl using older HDTV's and can only get 1080i.....same as the vast majority of 360 games AFAIK

For true 1080p look at most of the PSN downloadable games (or just standard XMB) they are PIN sharp....that is true 1080p and something I doubt we will see on all mainstream games till at least the next gen.
 
Tigerblade said:
QoS runs on the CoD4 engine and therefore, I assume, defaults to 720p if your tv supports it if it is anything like CoD. 1080p is just upscaled on that engine AFAIK and is just there for ppl using older HDTV's and can only get 1080i.....same as the vast majority of 360 games AFAIK

For true 1080p look at most of the PSN downloadable games (or just standard XMB) they are PIN sharp....that is true 1080p and something I doubt we will see on all mainstream games till at least the next gen.
Click to expand...

Actually, MOST of the PSN titles are NOT 1080p.
 
On the hardware argument ---- Sony marketed the PS3 as being the far supeior console --- a supercomputer, etc, --- it is utterly false.

It has taken a couple years to prove this absolutely but all you need do is look at game reviews to prove this point...

Gamestops compared some 30+ titles side by side. All but a couple look better on Xbox 360.

Note: As well known in the world of PC gaming. The graphics card is more important than CPU and the 360 has the better graphics card over the PS3 --- thus the 360 will have longer legs for the long term marathon so long as Microsoft wishes to support it... The problem is that MS likely won't. MS originally stated 5 year lifespan on 360. Sony stated 10 year on PS3. So even though the hardware performance award in this console gen falls to 360...the longevity award may likely fall to Sony.
 
Kim Shane from Microsoft has stated that the 360 will be here through 2012 at minimum, which is 7 years, at least. Not 5.
 
The Hedon said:
Actually, MOST of the PSN titles are NOT 1080p.
Click to expand...

Only ones I can think of that aren't are Warhawk, Siren and Burnout. All arguably mainstream games as they are all available on BR in the shops too. EDIT - Add Pain to that list too, that's all I can see in my games folder that aren't.

It's games like Calling all Cars, fl0w, Pixel Junk series that I mean are 1080p clearly as they are so damn sharp, they look absolutely fantastic on my tv and you can easily tell the difference between them and upscaled 1080p games like CoD4 etc

Having said that games like Virtua Tennis 3 are 1080p and sharp as a tack too, I guess it depends on the genre/type of game.

My main point still stands tho, mainstream games are on the whole are upscaled 1080p....on both consoles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top