Corey | 
January 21, 2009 | 
“…sometimes sharp isn’t all that great.”
 |
 |
|
 |
|||||||||
| Ubisoft |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Ubisoft | |||
| Ubisoft Montreal |
1 | 1 |
Ubisoft Montreal |
|||||||||
| Action/Platorm |
1611 mb | none |
Action/Platform | |||||||||
| Release: 12/02/08 | 10 sec | 10 sec | Release: 12/02/08 | |||||||||
| ESRB: Teen |
Low | Med | ESRB: Teen | |||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||
 |
Head2Head – Prince of Persia We pit Prince of Persia for the PlayStation 3 against the Xbox 360 version. One has graphics that are nice and smooth, while the other a bit sharp and crunchy. Which one should you get? Check out the video and judge for yourself. |
|
 |
 |
|
Ubisoft did a fantastic job of keeping Prince of Persia running smoothly and looking great on both platforms. Both versions look amazing in motion. But there are a few gripes I have to make about the Xbox 360 version. First, I feel that the Xbox 360 graphics are a bit too sharp, which works against a game with an illustrative style. For anyone out there that has used Photoshop, it feels like they applied a sharpening filter to the whole image. Everything has a crunchy feel to it, especially the outlining effect. So in this case, sometimes sharp isn’t all that great. While the PlayStation 3 version is softer, it is never consider blurry. They have the graphics tuned nicely. Another issue that was present on the Xbox 360 was frame tearing. This typically happened during intense battles where Elika preforms her special attacks. I did not see any frame tearing during our capturing of the PS3 version.
Roll over to see differences. Notice how sharp the branches are in the Xbox 360 version.
Roll over to see differences. This one is more subtle. Notice the sharpness on the cliffs silhouette and the palm tree in the Xbox 360 version.
Roll over to see differences. Notice how jagged Elika’s outline is on the Xbox 360 version.
The PS3 version requires a 1611mb hard drive install to keep up with the Xbox 360’s load times. Both versions of Prince of Persia load rather fast (around 10 seconds) or takes place during a cinematic, so you never really feel it. And since Elika tosses you to a checkpoint every time you fall, the gameplay is never interrupted with a progress bar.
| G R A P H I C S | ||
 |
Visually, Prince of Persia is very close on both consoles. While the Xbox 360 version has sharper textures and post processing effects…sometimes sharp isn’t all that great. At times the Xbox 360 version feels “crunchy”. For a game that has an illustrative art style the visuals should be smooth and natural. Luckily, the PlayStation 3 version did it right. |
 |
| P E R F O R M A N C E | ||
|
The Xbox 360 version frame tears at times during combat. During our captures, I didn’t see the PlayStation 3 version frame tear once. | |
| C O N T R O L | ||
|
Control is a tie, they both control equally well. |
 |
| L O A D I N G | ||
 |
The PlayStation 3 version has a mandatory hard drive install (1611mb) lasting around three and a half minutes. Even with the hard drive install, the game still has brief loading in the beginning. Both versions have the same initial load times. The programmers mask the in-game loading with cut scenes so you won’t even know it is there. This win goes to the Xbox 360 for keeping pace and not wasting hard drive space. |
|
| O U T C O M E | ||
|
Overall, the PlayStation 3 provides the better experience. Graphically it is softer than the Xbox 360, which in this case is an advantage. Also the PlayStation 3 version has little, if none, frame tearing. |
|
Loading ...
These differences are pretty small. Although, the PS3’s advantages do outweigh the 360s.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
ugh… the 360 version has ambient occlusion, and the branches you pointed out have transparency, the 360 version is superior graphically and it does this without destroying image quality by blurring the entire screen.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
In the last Pic the 360 looks better. Images in the background look better. I think Elika’s broadened outline was part of the design and the PS3 version doesn’t show as well because it kinda washout. Also checkout the shading on the building in the background, The shading on the 360 looks far more superior than the PS3. In terms of controls, PS3 is better because it’s controller is perfect for platforming games.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I’ve played them both and I honestly think the 360 version is a little better. Although, I’m huge on graphics. More so than I should be. The graphics on 360 just look better and I liked the controls. They seemed smoother on the 360 as compared to the PS3 where I felt it was a little more clunky at times.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I agree with then also some parts on the Xbox look way to dark. Very hard to see anything with dark colors.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
ofcourse the x360 version is better, they ported the game to PS3.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
nice compared,
the difference ain´t that big but there is just a little one…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What about image quality. Should there be a difference between a 720p and 1080p?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Both versions suck. I really hate shell shaded graphics. It looks plain ugly. I got this game as a present and I haven’t beaten it yet because the graphics just bore me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
PS3 owner: I’m all about texture quality, especially when it’s in HD. You notice it a lot more, if a game is muddy then in my eyes it sucks. I have to say the 360 version would be my choice if I owned the console.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
I know i’m a little late, but just now i got to play both of the games versions. i have to say, this article is just misleading concerning screen tearing. not only is the tearing apparent in the gameplay outside of fights but it is clearly noticeable on both, the ps3 and xbox360 version of the game.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0