Its amazing how far GT5 has come since it was released. Its a shining example of how to support a game without charging through the roof for dlc.
I just wish they could squeeze a little more out of the ps3 and address those jaggy shadow effects. I love in car views but the jaggy, flickering shadows are just too noticeable.
GT5 gameplay visuals are a real beauty and the beast affair. I especially hated the jaggy shadows when in cockpit view.
Unfortunately apart from the visuals the game has not changed much at all. Its still predominantly high speed bumper cars.
Is a 4.0 confirmed?
That's ok but it has to keep up. When the PS3 was first released it was a solid media unit however, apart from gaming TVs have better media support nowadays.
What debate? You get one or the other or both or maybe neither. Debates over which one is nothing but fanboy fodder and utterly pointless.
Could ask you the same question as there was definitely pop in.
Between this and Dark Soul's I wont even miss the lackluster visuals of Bf3.
Overall things look solid but texture popin was noticable and so was the lack of real-time reflection on the chrome work. Still know very little about this game and look forward to the reviews.
Yeah, I purchased 2 copies of BC2 on PS3 so my son and I could play online. After playing the beta for Bf3 we both have agreed to give it a miss.
What are you, like 10 years old or something? Oh and by the way they invented a little thing called punctuation, try it out sometime.
Amazing. All the chatter on N4G around multiplatform titles and yet nothing about a quality piece of DLC like this. Anyway, I have tried it and its a blast and well worth the low price tag.
Just because the PS3 features a different core (i.e. Cell) its deemed on par or better than a PC. If it were true then where the hell are all the native 1080p games running at 60fps with 4 x AA with no screen tearing or texture pop in.
The closest thing the PS3 has is Wipeout HD but I challenge anyone to pause that game and take a close look at the background visuals. Basically they stand up when you're running full blast round the track but they lack any real detail an...
As soon as the argument of "gameplay matters more than graphics" comes to the fore then you know the visuals are not up to scratch. I simply can't believe that console owners are defending what they're seeing in the beta. Jaggies, low res textures, poor character models and animation, screen tearing, floating bushes, clipping, etc, etc, etc.
Sure its a beta but these are the twilight years of both consoles. If developers can't push both platforms to...
Please define epic as R3 simply did not have a story or gameplay that I considered epic.
Funny thing is, I also wreckon that the multiplatform Crysis 2 also looked better than the exclusive R3.
Funny. I thought the PS3 mp looked extremely average and its deemed the better of the two versions. I think console owners from both camps should be complaining about the lack luster visuals. If BF3 is supposedly pushing both consoles then Dice need to find new developers.
Biggest joke is that on (NZ) PSN the game is going for $60. I can import it new on physical disc from halfway round the world for $30. DD pricing is simply pathetic.
Wow. I enjoyed Crysis 2 more than R3 single player.
Pathetic. I am not a PC gamer but debating which console version looks better is like arguing over rancid table scraps. The visuals on both are sub par and look like a game that's 2-3 years old.
This does not add up. On one hand we're being told the beta is an old build yet they are releasing patches for it. Why fix an old build when there is supposedly a newer, less buggy build?!?