Yah the 360s loading is a lot more stuttery, and again the 360 is darker. Also is it just me or do the distance trees look better in the ps3 version?

PS3 - much beter loading times and draw rate.

- better lighting

- stronger colours in some places





360 - in some areas, the colours are stronger

- better textures in some areas (e.g the cobbled roads in the town)

The loading times have been tweaked to hell using blu ray and duplicate data. But the colours for me look alot better in the 360 version overall. And the textures in everything are much deeper and more detailed in the 360 ones. Walls, stone pillars, floor everything looks better. A years extra development time has fixed popin issues but the bottlenecks of the ps3 has induced less detailed textures and duplicated data in blu ray. Its hardly ideal tbh.

if they always had the intention to go multi platform then it would have been created on a pc or 360 since both are easy to port between then ported to the ps3. Or it could be in development on the ps3, and in development on a pc/360 with two different teams. Each building thier own engine.

They wouldn't graphically overhaul this game even if they had the time. The reason it took so long was because it was still hard to program for the PS3. If you have a game that sold millions of copies, then why bother doing a complete remake. This is a port, plain and simple. All they did was iron out some bugs. I don't understand why anyone should expect this to be amazingly better.

The PS3 seems to just blurr everything in the background to make it look better. on this game and Armour core

and this is no more than a port



bethesda already stated that the 360 is their centeral platform even more than the pc due to ease of development yet we see the ps3 version much better



this isnt simply about the far-detail [which is relaited to a patch bethesda will make] the ps3 version has better close-up and character detail,less pop-ups,much faster loading times



the Enemy animation on the PS3 is far...far...better than the 360 by a great margin [all thanks to the cell and SPEs which are specialized in this type of calculations]



this is no more than a port.....wait until the second half of 2007,then wel have a lot to talk about

What do we win when this console war decides a winner? These arguments are so heated all the time. It must be pretty good. I keep checkin my mailbox for an xbox 360 or a PS3 prize, but I haven't gotten anything yet.

its only ps3 first gen games and they already look better than 360's 2nd gen game's ...by this time next year ps3's 2nd gen game's will look even better than 360's 3rd gen games!!!!!!!!!! !!!

Your a moron. Oblivion looks best on PC and it is on a regular DVD9 - Same as the 360. The PS3 version had more time for optimization and because of this it does look better than the 360 version. Why is everyone fighting about this? You fanboys need to spend your time playing games and STFU. I will say one thing about this comparison though. The 360 versions TV is not properly calibrated(too dark) and they may have not defraged the hard drive before hand.

Development does not work like that. All game use close or all 100% of a systems power. What really matters is the efficiency in which it is used and the tricks the developers can come up with to make it appear that much better(like normal maps). The 360 hasn't been maxed out any more than the ps3 has.

No one knows how to code for PS3 because of its vastly different processor. So tell me its fair when the 360 version was probably just ported from PC which saves a massive ammount of time.

They created an entire game from scratch and optimized it for the PC and 360 the best they could while making their dead line. Then they were given a whole year to take that pre existing game and do absolutely nothing to it but port it over to the PS3 and make it run well. So after that year it runs better and looks better than the 360 version. Do you want a *****ing prize? I am fresh out of college and I could have done that by my self in my mothers basement.

All I have to say is that when you watch both systems during the fight the 360 jumps around literally it was horrible, PS3 was smooth, but mostlikely due to 1 year extra development time. Improving over the PC and 360 version. I'm pretty sure the developers will take what they have learned from the PS3 version and try to update the other two versions to give them a speed boost, but I dont know if they can fix the type of slow down that I saw through out the video.

I remember this game, it was pretty good. Thinking about re-installing it on my PC, I mean, since its old and all the cool people beat it long ago. So I hear the PS3 just got this game, good for you. Maybe Sony will get cool games sooner next time eh. Neh

For all who thinks that BR is the future, consider the UMD. "With an open mind, fanboys"...

" they were both release or close to release at least for pal, so it is fair, especially how the ps3 is harder to program for."



That is teh Most retarded thing i ever heard. The game is over a year old before the PS3 came out... so ofcourse they had extra time to work out the bugs and framerate issues.



Oblivion for PC and 360 had a TON of bugs.. Betheda knew it, and just fixed some of them later.



It does not matter that the PAL version was clsoer to the PS3 launch... Thats stupid that you would even say "well the PAL version was close so its a for comparison" When they didnt enhance teh Pal version...

How are you supposed to do a decent comparison when these the comparison videos are highly compressed and running at less than a tenth of the real resolution?



This is judging next gen visuals based on standard def commericals.



Totally freaking pointless.

But that does not mean I am going to go out and buy that version. I own Elder Scrolls on the 360 and do not want to waste more money for the same game even if it looks a little better.

on the ps3, the game looks more like the PC version ( which I have ), on the xbox 360, the shadows are looking more darker, but the range of things appears better ( from farther ) on the ps3. hard to tell which is the best!

Every comparison I've seen with multiplat games on PS3 and Xbox 360 have been just about equal. The only difference has been that the 360 for some reason like to make the brightness almost nonexistant while the PS3 uses ordinary brightness levels.



Almost every 360 game tones down darkness almost all the way and contrast up so it can shine through the dark. If you look at the games not designed for such dark conditions, they look like garbage. Take Armored Core for example, alot of the stages are so dark all you see is black. Meanwhile, games utilizing it like Gears of War look fantastic.

That's rather dumb logic Vietone.



Lair at CES this year was reported to have BIG problems with framerate. It's quite obvious of course that further optimizations are needed to improve the framerate, but at some stage, developement will have to stop and the game engine locked down before release. So even when the game is released, Factor 5 will probably find other ways they could have improved performance, and these improvements will make there way into the game engine of a sequel (if there is one).



So more time means further optimizations and improvements can be made, even for released games. Bethesda has made improvements to the game ENGINE itself, so the patch from Bethesda is not for the shader ONLY, it also includes improvements to the game engine for both the 360 and PC. We'll have to wait and see how it turns out, but it's resonable to assume that the performance will be improved on both the 360 and PC versions, and so the PS3 and patched 360 version may look and perform about the same.



We'll see.

Armored Core is better (only by fraction though) on the 360. Multiplatform games (such as CoD 3) were ALL better than their PS3 counterparts. Oblivion is an exception because it's uh, well, COMING OUT A YEAR AFTER THE 360 VERSION.

You should learn the difference between your and you're before you go throwing stones.



God I hate the grammar police, but I love when they're hypocritical.

wtf forget the *****ing wrinkles retards who gives a ***** about that? focus on the decorations on his clothing, thats a huge *****ing difference imo.



as a owner of 360, i declare imba. the ps3s much better after all.

It installs without you knowing it. It never asks and just does it while you play

I'd imagine you can only do so much with a lack of physical RAM. 256Mbs of it doesn't cut it.

Well i didnt see a great difference, at least 1 that makes 1 much better than the other!!!

Its true that it came 1 year later than the x360 version but the consoles have about 1 year difference so they had just about the same time for program on the 2 consoles, the only thing that counts is 4 the bug correction of the game core itself but we are not pointing that, and it wouldnt be fair!!

Right now i belive that the 2 consoles are pretty much equal!!!

Now we must wait if time changes that!

I'd actually say this game looks better on the 360 thanks to it being darker, I played the hell out of Morrowind which is pretty dark so to me Elder Scrolls games look better dark (plus it makes sense since there in ro artificial lighting yet in the time Oblivion is set in, that dungeon on the PS3 was a little too bright considering it had one little lamp lighting it)

They were pretty equal until the ruins just magically "appeared" on the 360 version. Up until that point, I could chalk up graphically differences to the low resolution of the trailer, but that DEFINITELY killed the 360 version. PS3 version is WAY better. Skin tones are way more life-like, bump-mapping is better, lighting is far more realistic.

1) If you are a halfway decent programmer with any grasp of the concept of multi-threading, programming the Cell is no different than programming a standard processor, except it runs better with multiple tasks.



2) Yes, the PS3 Cell 64 bit octo-core processor CAN indeed easily outperform a DUAL core pentium, as evidenced by the Folding@Home project, and it can do so within the feasibility of emulation.

Dude, you really need to get a life. You're actually spending your time worrying about something like this that was more than likely caused from the player standing in a slightly different proximity from emperor's beautifully torch lit face. LMAO!



Cross platform games are always going to be lame. Games of this type always default to the lowest common denominator, and never take advantage of the superior systems graphical strengths or abilities since it would take too long to port the game with all new and improved graphics. Taking a look at first party games, it's clear that the PS3 has some major power behind it, and only needs time for devs to start creating games based on it's abilities.



Cross platform games have always been dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, and as sorry as it is, in this situation it's the 360 that's holding us all back. Sad.

Now don't get me wrong I'm all for ps3, but wasn't the 360 version released like last year?



Wouldn't that give developers a bit more time to refine the game when it was being made for PS3?

halo 3 looks better on xbox 360 than ps3 "cough"

The thing that struck me was the ruins on the xbox popping in. That looked pretty bad. Also the backside of the shield looked more defined. I think the PS3 looked better. Dollar for Dollar, the machine is better built. Hands down, winner.



Well at least you can buy the new xbox 360 when it comes out. And reinvest in Bills retirement fund.

"You will notice 360 is actually bump mapping the stones to make them look rounded, whereas PS3 is just a flat, blurry texture"



I noticed that too.



I'm sure all the PS3 fanboys would have noticed it too if the bump mapping was on the PS3 version and not the 360. ;)

C'mon, I had to say it. And don't tell me this place wasn't asking for it.

YOU cant compare a now 360 budget title with a new PS3 release thats just stupid, if you want to compare then wait a few more days and compare 360s shivering Islands ..

bill gates lives in constant fear of chuck norris's PC crashing

I have both systems and can sat that the ps3 is nicer looking the 360 verson was blurry sometimes. Bethesda said it would look better but come on its a year later it gonna happen with any game if motorstorm or resistance fall of man went to the 360 they would be upped a bit in looks they play the same so what is the probmlem same game really its not going to decide anything so all fanboys on both side should shut up and play oblivion yes?

time is the reason the game looks better on ps3 with more time 360 could have done the same or better discussion closed.

Shatterdome has been correct the whole time, I dunno if people have missed it - or just refuse to believe it...



"per pixel HDR lighting"



Whoever did the video for each version should have done the same exact thing in both. Instead we get controversy because the torch is so blatant in the 360 version, and the PS3 owners somehow refuse to believe it...



Overall, the lighting and textures are better on the 360 in my personal opinion.

-------------------

My favorite part of all this is the "Pop in" being so forth telling of the future of Next Gen Gaming.



Of course there is going to be differences, but let's face it - The systems are pretty much equal. I saw someone mention KillZone... The likelihood it turns out anything like that video at E3 is very small. PS3 shot itself in the foot by saying how god like The Cell is, and so far, it's on par with Next Gen. I have zero problem with both systems being close graphically, I do have a problem when your PR department goes around hailing it as THEE true next generation in gaming...

that was just a Xbox360 port to ps3, so its basically a copy of the original 360 graphic to a small data ps3 disc, if developers had used the real dual layer 50gb disc and build it from ground up, that be a different story for the ps3 version.

I post this without reading other people's comments.

I think that the xbox 360 has good graphics,but i saw some pop up(white trees),and less vivid colors.

SO for THIS game i think ps3 has the upper hand.

It's not up to the PS3's graphics processor to produce light in a way that it thinks the light will appear. It's up to how the programmers tell the light to appear on other surfaces. Maybe the developers thought that the lighting effects on the Xbox360 were a little too over the top and sacrificed Viewing distance, so they changed it on the PS3 version to be a perfect equiliberium. The PS3 has superior Hardware advantages, so we'll leave it to how developers tell it to handle the game. No Doubt more "Creative" games might be introduced on the 360, but I am more happier playing Gran Turismo than Forza, and Happier playing Metal Gear Solid than weak ass Splinter Cell.



There is a reason that there is 256mb of Ram... if they saw the benefit of adding more do you think they would have done it? yes. The amount of data that passes through the RAM on the ps3 is astounding to say the least, the Cell core takes full advatage.



The PS3 is a newer console, and more time has gone into R&D on it. It is not a games console and more of an Entertainment Device. Think of the benefits in a year or so with all the extras that developers and sony play on giving the ps3... I'm afraid all you X360 owners have to look forward to is a camera and a cooler on the back to fix your freezing issues.



Please dont be a fanboy and think logically.