GT - PS3 comparison videos bias towards 360

[commuter]

Hello,

If you ever looked at GTs comparison video comparing PS3 and 360 games, it always looks like the PS3 games looked washed out.

GT finally gives a reason for this. Basically, they don't use the full potential of the PS3 and it is clear they are bias against PS3. They also state most PS3 users don't know the settings to get the optimal performance so they don't need to use it.

Here is the article...

http://gtshane.gametrailers.com/game...blog&id=232557

[mainman]

Adjusting the White levels is for x.v.color only right?

I thought Superwhite had got nothing to do with RGB, I thought it was only to enable/disable x.v.color.

[Bourne1]

I hate that site. They are obviously bias, might as well put it on the deushes forehead.

Oh and my ass that I didn't know about the settings before reading the damn article. I knew about those settings before I even opened the box. What an uneducated comment that was.

[Papi4baby]

The problem is... the world may never know.

They might be biased, but looking at it from a PC perspective is somewhat real. ATI cards have always(in my eyes) been better at color reproduction, while Nvidia have usually been faster while sacrificing some quality. The newer series(8) are not like that thought.

[DezNutz]

I like how you state you are using default settings out of the box for both the 360 and the PS3, but than you state you are using component cables for output. When I bought my PS3, it did not have component cables out of the box, so that would be a change to the setup than correct? So it really appears you are selecting which changes to make to the out of the box setup, and the changes you have selected is to go to the highest level of output the 360 is capable of (at least when it was released prior to the "elite") and use component cables. So you agree to make some changes to default settings to get to the best the 360 is capable of, but only make the PS3 output up to par with the lowest 360 capable output?

[DrasticPlastic]

Can someone please copy/paste that article in a thread, that link is blocked from my work so I can't read it. I want to see what they have to say about the settings.

[XSilentCobraX]

Article.


Well, I honestly can't believe that it's come to this. This entire thing is absolutely hilarious to me, but here goes anyway.

So all the PS3 fans have their controllers in a bunch over the fact that we do not adjust the settings on either the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 in our comparison videos. First of all, we have never said anything to the contrary. We have not misled anyone or got "caught" as some rabid fans have stated. We have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong. And no, we're not recording the PlayStation 3 footage in standard definition as some, again, have hilariously stated.

We have done these comparison videos the same way since the very first one, and I'd definitely be interested in hearing how other sites do their comparison videos. The first issue we had when doing these videos was that it's impossible to capture footage from the PlayStation 3 using HDMI due to piracy protection. Yes, we realize that HDMI is supposed to be a superior cable. And yes, we realize that you can't set RGB to full or adjust the white levels without HDMI. I'm guessing a lot of you didn't even know about these settings until this whole thing.

So, to place both consoles on equal footing we decided that we would use the HD settings that come preloaded on each console and component cables for each. You've got to figure that both Microsoft and Sony know how to set up their machines to get maximum performance out of the box, right? And then we'd take things several steps further by using the same capture equipment, encoding, and every other piece of equipment or process that a piece of video goes through before it's live on GameTrailers.com. This creates an even playing field for both consoles.

I guess the issue here is that PlayStation 3 fans believe that setting the RGB to full and adjusting the white levels--something that most PS3 owners will never even know exists--is the only way to make these comparisons fair. But where do we draw the line? Then do we go into the Xbox 360 settings and start screwing with stuff until we think it looks better? Who exactly decides what "looks better" means? One person likes dark blacks, another may like more detail and a lighter display. There's no other solution to this problem other than to do what we did, which is leave the consoles on their default settings and create as scientific an environment as possible--meaning making sure all variables that can be controlled are made the same.

We're sorry if some of you feel genuinely slighted, but come on now, it's obvious that there was no malicious intent with these comparison videos. It's simply impossible to do them the way some of you want them to be done because of piracy protection, and in all honesty, I don't think we'd adjust the settings on the PS3 for these even if we could. It's just not fair. We're not slighting either console with these comparisons and we've created as even a playing field as possible in doing them. Maybe the better question is why the PS3 requires an HDMI cable and setting tweaks when the 360 is good to go out of the box with either component or HDMI.

Anway, that's the full story. After reading so much erroneous garbage posted all over the internet we figured it was time to set the record straight before things got out of hand.

[Giyomu]

Originally Posted by Papi4baby

The problem is... the world may never know.

They might be biased, but looking at it from a PC perspective is somewhat real. ATI cards have always(in my eyes) been better at color reproduction, while Nvidia have usually been faster while sacrificing some quality. The newer series(8) are not like that thought.

+1

no bias at all.
develop on ps3 is much harder than develop on 360

[DezNutz]

Originally Posted by Giyomu

+1

no bias at all.
develop on ps3 is much harder than develop on 360

LOL, I did not realize we had game developers here. so what company do you work for, and what games have you developed on both systems?

All I have read from companies that develop for both systems, and that each is difficult in it's own right and takes some time to adjust too. Although the PS3 allows you to do more, so that may take more development time.

-And as for the PC comment, it does not really apply like that towards consoles. The Video Card in consoles is not the sole graphics provider. The PS3 uses the cell in conjunction with the graphics card towards graphics, hell even the 360 does this to some extent.

[Shin-Ra]

Originally Posted by Giyomu

+1

no bias at all.
develop on ps3 is much harder than develop on 360

Did you bother to read what this thead is about?

Seems every time I see you post here it's to take a jab at multiplatform games on PS3 like Assassin's Creed which everyone else seems to think are near enough identical.

[Weez_Dawg]

Well, the problem is I only know of 360 fanboys on the internet, but I have never met one in real life. Everyone who is into gaming has or wants a ps3. It is kind of like a status symbol. Everyone always asks me about my PS3 and I have gotten a few people to buy one, but my standard answer is: buy the 360 if you want to play games right now, but buy the PS3 if you want to play games for the next 5 years.

[maconomics]

Originally Posted by commuter

Hello,

If you ever looked at GTs comparison video comparing PS3 and 360 games, it always looks like the PS3 games looked washed out.

GT finally gives a reason for this. Basically, they don't use the full potential of the PS3 and it is clear they are bias against PS3. They also state most PS3 users don't know the settings to get the optimal performance so they don't need to use it.

Here is the article...

http://gtshane.gametrailers.com/game...blog&id=232557

That is total BS from Game-trailers!

[Shin-Ra]

They wouldn't buy a new tv and leave it on factory default settings (or maybe they would) just as you'd set up your tv correctly for PS3 input via component, you need to adjust for direct component capture before compression.

[kingofgrills]

The only issue I don't take exception to in their "explanation" is the use of video component cables instead of HDMI due to HDMI's copy protection schemes. I've never tried video capture on my PS3 yet, so I can't refute it. However, for anyone to put out comparison videos for everyone to see without optimizing both systems being compared is beyond ludicrous.

Any reviewer or even casual user tries to optimize a system to get the best picture or sound possible. To not do it, as they have explained, is just passive agressive B/S directed at the PS3. If they make it their job is to put out game trailer and game comparison videos, and they don't even bother to make them look good, they're not worth the effort to see them.

Boycott 'em.

[phranctoast]

I stopped trusting the site for comparisons during the Half Life 2 fiasco. They showed the slowdown during the ps3 version that was captured intentially while the game was quicksaving. The 360 lacks a quicksave option and its definitely not a fair comparison to show one version as its trying to save data to the HDD while the other isnt. Even my PC chugs a second or two when I QS.

[Psx0005]

Originally Posted by commuter

Hello,

If you ever looked at GTs comparison video comparing PS3 and 360 games, it always looks like the PS3 games looked washed out.

GT finally gives a reason for this. Basically, they don't use the full potential of the PS3 and it is clear they are bias against PS3. They also state most PS3 users don't know the settings to get the optimal performance so they don't need to use it.

Here is the article...

http://gtshane.gametrailers.com/game...blog&id=232557

If this is your sole basis for the 360 being better than the PS3, then may I politely suggest that the next time you wish to start another 360 vs. PS3 thread that you bring a tad more ammunition than that of a clearly 360-biased site?

[Papi4baby]

Originally Posted by DezNutz

LOL, I did not realize we had game developers here. so what company do you work for, and what games have you developed on both systems?

All I have read from companies that develop for both systems, and that each is difficult in it's own right and takes some time to adjust too. Although the PS3 allows you to do more, so that may take more development time.

-And as for the PC comment, it does not really apply like that towards consoles. The Video Card in consoles is not the sole graphics provider. The PS3 uses the cell in conjunction with the graphics card towards graphics, hell even the 360 does this to some extent.

Yes it does apply it works on the same concept as a PC, both the 360 and PS3 are more like computers than game consoles.
The video card handles all 3D and drawing, the CPU handles all calculation. And while you say they work together, yes offcourse they do.