Fallout 3 Graphics Comparison

[Telefrog]

I know, I know... It's just a penis measuring contest between the three platforms with the PC being the obviously easy winner (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.html?tag=topslot;img;2). No surprise, right?

But what the hell is going on with the PS3 version!? Is it on medium settings for some things? The water effects in particular seem to be scaled back. In the first comparison shot, the reflection of the bridge on the left seems to not be rendered at all! The draw distance on items seems to be severely handicapped on the PS3 as well. In the second shot, the parking lot arch next to the bus completely disappears from the scene.

What happened? :confused:

[civil]

I don't know, as I'm playing it on the 360.

But one that that annoys the fuck out of me (and this happened with Oblivion too) is that when I begin a conversation with a character, as it does that little zoom in to their face their visage goes dark. It's like suddenly we're in a church confessional and the priest has got mood lighting on to get into my pants. Turn the lights on and let me keep my dick in my jeans, fuckers.

[muddi900]

I don't know. The game automagically selected ultra-high on my box. It looks really underwhelming until you get a landscape view. I have downloaded the HD texture pack, but I haven't tried it.

[J Arcane]

Honestly, except for one bush in that last shot, the only difference I really noticed was all the PC shots look all washed out.

I will say though, that if you go in manually and turn EVERYTHING up, FO3 PC looks absolutely amazing. Ultra High isn't even that impressive by comparison, since it doesn't remotely max out all the options.

[menage]

I initially bought the PS3 version, thinking it would probably be better since there's an HD in there and all, and I didn't want it to break during epic questing. How wrong I was, the whole lack of anti alliasing in the PS3 version makes the whole thing look absolutely horrible compared to the 360 one. The framerate shudders even in the first vault bits and the whole thing is buggy as hell.

Switched it around the day after, never been happier with a choice.

It's been handled by a different team though, who made some very poor choices. Shame, cause I know for sure the PS3 could handle it if they really put the effort in.

[jeffbax]

I have Fallout 3 for the PS3. It has some flaws for sure, but I still enjoy the hell out of it. I don't know how it happened like this though considering how well Oblivion PS3 turned out.

[muddi900]

Honestly, except for one bush in that last shot, the only difference I really noticed was all the PC shots look all washed out.

I will say though, that if you go in manually and turn EVERYTHING up, FO3 PC looks absolutely amazing. Ultra High isn't even that impressive by comparison, since it doesn't remotely max out all the options.

It's maxed out every option except AA, which is set at 4x. Everything in the advanced options. I also checked the TweakGuide, which only helped me to turn of Vsync.

EDIT: Of course, I am playing it in XP, so it must be the DX9 mode.

[Telefrog]

It's been handled by a different team though, who made some very poor choices. Shame, cause I know for sure the PS3 could handle it if they really put the effort in.

Was it a different team at Bethesda, or was it contracted out to a third party?

I had heard the PS3 version was sub-par, but I thought that was just console warz fanboy talk. I figured the 360 and PS3 versions would look the same. Obviously, I was wrong.

[carnage11]

Holy shit that second PS3 shot looks horrible. There's no excuse for that. The jaggies all over the place?


I actually don't notice much of a difference in the PC and 360 versions though. The PC version looks a lot brighter I guess.:confused:

[Seika]

Why are the images so small?!

Here is one of my PC screens, see the difference now?

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/4264/screenshot215rn7.jpg

[jeffbax]

Aside from AA, there really isn't much between the 360 and PS3 relative to the PC, I'm not sure what you're seeing that makes it otherwise..

[Abednigo]

The trees look awful in the console versions. I have the PC version and it doesn't look "washed out" like some of those screenshots look. I only have my settings at High and it looks amazing. It just slows down occasionally when I enter VATS.

[Telefrog]

Aside from AA, there really isn't much between the 360 and PS3 relative to the PC, I'm not sure what you're seeing that makes it otherwise..

The missing terrain objects? The lack of AA? The lower quality water reflections?

[muddi900]

The PC screens have been downsampled to 1280x720 for the sake of comparison and Gamespot's bandwidth.

While the PC version runs smoother and has higher resolution, the textures are same on the 360 and PC version. There are some fine details here and there but the eye mostly can't tell a difference.

[H.Bogard]

Aside from AA, there really isn't much between the 360 and PS3 relative to the PC, I'm not sure what you're seeing that makes it otherwise..

Look at the foliage and aliasing. You'll see it.

And the PC version looks washed out in the article because someone at Gamespot has apparently fucked up the gamma/brightness.

It's maxed out every option except AA, which is set at 4x. Everything in the advanced options. I also checked the TweakGuide, which only helped me to turn of Vsync.

EDIT: Of course, I am playing it in XP, so it must be the DX9 mode.

No DX10 specific eye-candy in FO3. Or none that I've noticed so far.

These comparisons are pretty much meaningless until you have a 720p (or higher) video showing each version in motion.

[Deadend]

Gasp! Games that are ported to PS3 look slightly worse?!

I would like a Mirrors Edge comparison for the PS3v360 dick measuring contest.. even though it's sort of pointless.

Hell, past the first year of the consoles lives, this shit doesn't matter. As by then we would have found out if the system can in fact deliver, and well look! both PS3 and 360 can deliver, but not as good as a PC that costs much more and is using parts that are much newer than both the PS3 and 360. As I don't think a $600 PC from 2006 can do what a PS3 can, nor can a $400 PC from 2005.

So.. I don't care about this shit anymore, as I trust the graphics on PS3 and 360 to look really close, now.. framerates, loading times, online crap, DLC, those are the things that matter.

[menage]

So.. I don't care about this shit anymore, as I trust the graphics on PS3 and 360 to look really close, now.. framerates, loading times, online crap, DLC, those are the things that matter.

I'm usually an advocate of PS3/360 equality in terms of graphics, power, etc. Even though there's always slight differences I really don't care about most of them.

Trust me, Fallout 3 is a disaster compared to 90% of the games out there. I bought some multi platform games on the PS3, like Soul Calibur 4 and GTA and I see no difference. Or not enough for me to care about. After 10 minutes of Fallout 3 on PS3 I knew this wasn't the game I saw in the trailers. The last thing I want is to have a game so jaggy it's actually disturbing my immersion in it. That's never happened to me before. The 360 version might not be the PC one as well, but that still looks pretty decent.

Now, this has nothing at all to do with bashing the PS3, I just think the dev team has put it's efforts in the wrong places. For some more background info, read this.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/fallout-3-triple-format-face-off-article

On another note. I think I jinxed my 360 now, cause it started to do strange shit yesterday when playing F3, go figure:D

[carnage11]

Well I think the 360 version looks better than the PC version!


*throws fuel on the fire, then runs*

[Mr. Murphy]

I think it's funny how many people are using the phrase "looks awful". Frankly, we're talking about varying degrees of awesome here, so I'm not too concerned. Even on the lowest settings, the game looks better than a lot of other games that I'm still playing.

It certainly is a shame that the PS3 team didn't at least get it looking as good as the 360 version. I noticed a difference in the two, mostly with the water and the bushes, but it just isn't enough of a problem in my world that I'm going to say it looks awful by comparison.

[Virtual Machine]

While the 360 version is clearly the better version on consoles, i think there's too much noise being made about the differences between the two. Both games are still 9-plus scorers, and PS3 gamers really aren't missing out on anything they would notice. Fallout 3 is still the game of the fucking year, no matter which machine you're playing it on.

This shit is redonkulous.

[muddi900]

Look at the foliage and aliasing. You'll see it.

And the PC version looks washed out in the article because someone at Gamespot has apparently fucked up the gamma/brightness.



No DX10 specific eye-candy in FO3. Or none that I've noticed so far.

These comparisons are pretty much meaningless until you have a 720p (or higher) video showing each version in motion.


Well Graphically the game is a let down. Or maybe I was expecting too much.

[H.Bogard]

Well Graphically the game is a let down. Or maybe I was expecting too much.

Oblivion's engine (Gamebryo modded) hasn't aged well. And the consoles haven't gotten any stronger either.

[menage]

Wow, I wouldn't call it a let down. The version I'm playing has a far more optimized engine than Oblivion. Smooth and with way less hiccups. I fucking love how this game looks.

[Deadend]

Oblivion's engine (Gamebryo modded) hasn't aged well. And the consoles haven't gotten any stronger either.

It would have been fine, except the animations were basically terrible.

[violent]

Not sure but the game looked better than all those on my rig.

[JayVe]

I think they all look great, but some are more great than others.

The most disappointing thing is that we were all promised to be blown away by the super-power of the PS3, only to have it come along and be essentially just as powerful as the 360, but harder to program great-looking games for. Why get an extra job to afford a PS3 when you can play Fallout 3, looking better, on a 360 that costs less than a Wii?

[violent]

I think they all look great, but some are more great than others.

The most disappointing thing is that we were all promised to be blown away by the super-power of the PS3, only to have it come along and be essentially just as powerful as the 360, but harder to program great-looking games for. Why get an extra job to afford a PS3 when you can play Fallout 3, looking better, on a 360 that costs less than a Wii?

You know what bothers me? All this incessant "PC gaming is dead" talk. I bring this up because I kinda see it as a grip similar to yours with the PS3 but on the other side. In one hand you see unmet potential whereas in the other you see unappreciated potential.

[SilentScreams]

I play it on the PC with everything maxed out at 1920x1200 resolution. It runs smooth as you like and looks fantastic. Admittedly my PC is brand new and near enough top of the range to boot, but the point I was going to make is those screens they use for the PC version are awful. They must have loaded it on a lame PC to make it a closer contest for the consoles.
The only graphical issue I have is that sometimes while I'm walking across the wasteland the sky flickers a bit. I think it's a glitch with the shading or something. It might be intentional, but if it is, it was a bad decision.

[JayVe]

You know what bothers me? All this incessant "PC gaming is dead" talk. I bring this up because I kinda see it as a grip similar to yours with the PS3 but on the other side. In one hand you see unmet potential whereas in the other you see unappreciated potential.

I hear ya. I don't believe for a second that PC gaming is dead, but I KNOW that it is dead for me.

Hear me out for a sec. Personally, I don't see myself upgrading my PC for games ever again. Yet there are still plenty of people who do, and there are tons of advantages to playing on PCs such as better graphics, free multilplayer, thriving communities of modders, and mouse support. Atop that, just about everyone has a PC, meaning the non-graphically intensive titles can run on a huge installed base of machines. For example, my PC is 7 years old, and can run WoW, Guild Wars, and even Spore. Yes, they all look a bit assy, but end up being playable and fun.

I'll agree with you, that in the mainstream mindset, the PC is very much under appreciated as a gaming platform.

[violent]

There is nothing wrong with not choosing to upgrade a PC for the sake of gaming. It's simply bothersome when people throw one of their catchy buzz words to disregard it. That's neither here nor there though. Point here is that Fallout 3 was indeed fantastic.

[JayVe]

There is nothing wrong with not choosing to upgrade a PC for the sake of gaming. It's simply bothersome when people throw one of their catchy buzz words to disregard it. That's neither here nor there though. Point here is that Fallout 3 was indeed fantastic.

Agree and agree. :D

[mesh]

About the only thing I see is FSAA on the pc, other than that they're all brown blobs to me.