August 24th, 2009
Posted in 
“Devil in the details.”
 |
 |
|
 |
|||||||||
| Eidos / WB |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Eidos / WB |
|||
| Rocksteady Studios |
1 | 1 |
Rocksteady Studios |
|||||||||
| Action | 1077 mb | n/a |
Action | |||||||||
| Release: 08/25/09 | n/a | n/a | Release: 08/25/09 | |||||||||
| ESRB: Teen |
Low | Low | ESRB: Teen |
|||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||
 |
Head2Head – Batman Arkham Asylum Lens of Truth takes Batman Head2Head inside Arkham Asylum. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
||
The Lens of Truth is very excited to be able to put Batman to the test with a Head2Head in his new game, Batman: Arkham Asylum. We have to say, Batman surely put up a good fight on both systems, but we are happy to say we believe Batman does better on one console. So watch the video and see for yourself.
Watching the video proves that Batman: Arkham Asylum is one of the most nicely ported games for the current consoles. Overall, the gameplay seems the same and, for the most part, if you only had one console you shouldn’t feel left out. However the Devil (or Joker) is in the details and when you nitpick this game across the platforms, it’s a close one but we believe there’s a dominant console here. This was a tough one. The biggest problem was that Batman: AA didn’t run perfectly on either system. When one system seemed to be winning, the other system countered with its own advantage. For example, while the Xbox 360 had occlusion shadows (SSAO), the PlayStation 3 had more defined self-shadows on the guards in their interrogation cutscenes.
Another issue came from the cameras as pointed out towards the end of the video. Although it seemed like both systems were rendering at the same size, the Xbox 360′s camera was zoomed in, in comparison to the PlayStation 3. This means that on the PlayStation 3, you could see your surroundings better, which helps out when you’re being attacked by multiple bad guys. A zoomed in camera may not be a big issue until you’re in close quarters and not sure where to go because you can’t see as much.
Some issues just couldn’t be explained. As seen in the video, when you zoom in on the glass in PlayStation 3, the camera generates some odd artifacting. The Xbox 360 doesn’t have this issue, and quite honestly, we haven’t seen an issue like this before. The truth is that although this seems to be an issue on only one console, it’s only an issue when you zoom in on glass.
This race was so tight, we had to go back to the video again and keep a score card per shot. To our surprise, the score card sided in favor of the PlayStation 3. The PlayStation 3 won with better mipmapping, better overall shadows, better self-shadows, a better camera view, and better light sources. It wasn’t a run away win, though. It is important to note that the Xbox 360 won for the glass issue, occlusion shadows, motion blur, and we even gave a point to Xbox 360 for having a cleaner texture on the Wayne building. The PlayStation 3 wanted the win so badly, it got exclusive with the Joker and it’s really hard to say ‘no’ to a clown. Although the exclusive Joker played no part in the video Head2Head, we have to say that for your money, you’re obviously getting more on one console, and that’s the point of the entire comparison.
| G R A P H I C S | ||
 |
Although both consoles had issues, the PlayStation 3 had a few less and having a camera that shows more helps when being attacked from all angles, or if you need to find a place to hide. |  |
| P E R F O R M A N C E | ||
|
Both consoles dropped frames and there was screen tearing. It would have been nice to see one console with neither screen tearing nor frame skipping. |
 |
| C O N T R O L | ||
|
Tie. Identical controls. |
|
| L O A D I N G | ||
|
Tie. The PlayStation 3 has a 1 gig install that took only 3 minutes and yet one could argue that with a mandatory install, PlayStation 3 should have performed better. However the latter could counter that if the Xbox 360 had a mandatory install it should have done better…which we know is impossible since not everyone has a hard drive. |
|
| O U T C O M E | ||
|
Although we’re pretty sure you’re gonna be happy with buying Batman: Arkham Asylum on either console, we believe the PlayStation 3 is the better game even if it wasn’t a perfect win. |
|
Loading ...
Tags: Batman, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Community, Head2Head, Verdict PS3 Winners, Verdict Screenshot H2H*To ensure color accuracy from the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii U output, the PlayStation 3 has RGB Full Range set to "Full" and Super White "On", and the Xbox 360 has Reference Level set to "Expanded" and HDMI Color Space set to "RGB". Our capture card we have captured segments from the AVS HD 709 . Blu-ray, HD DVD, & MP4 Calibration suite.
As you will see, each system matches each other at the SOURCE LEVEL. No contrast or gamma settings are manipulated before or after capturing our images/videos. We strongly believe that these types of corrections are done on a individuals preference and should not be adjusted by us. Finally, washed out looking images that are due to contrast or gamma differences will not have any influence on our final verdicts. Please Read through our F.A.Q page if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly from those screens, it looks like the 360 is better. It just looks slightly more polished.
Agreed, Farzan.
There are pros and cons to each, but screenshots make the 360 look a bit better. The occlusion shadows>self-shadowing in this particular game at least. Look at the downed red monster shot.
I think OLEPALM’s comment about forced impartiality is interesting…
It is very close.
360 does look better and they never do head to head with 360 games installed before comparing.
This comparison was bogus. I’m sorry, but it is becoming more and more apparent that Lens of Truth is more concerned with appeasing fanboys of both sides and stretching to make things seem equal, than it is with giving us the truth.
I am not a fanboy. My user name is also my PSN ID. But the truth is the truth, and this comparison was not truthful.
I did my own comparison and what I saw is not in line with what Lens of Truth is reporting.
First of all, the 360 version had anti-aliasing whereas the PS3 did not. I also saw more screen tearing in the PS3 version. The 360 version also seemed sharper and some of the textures looked a bit cleaner. These things had a far bigger impact on the graphical presentation of each version than the extremely minor things LOT mentioned.
The good news is, the developer did a very good job and came closer to platform parity than what we have seen from most cross platform titles, and they should be commended. But there were a few differences.
The claim of the PS3 version having better shadows and better light sources is completely false. I’ve even gone back to the games to double check what they are talking about, but there is very little difference and whether the subtle difference was better on one console or the other is completely subjective.
Likewise, their claim of the PS3 version having a better camera view is completely subjective. I felt the slightly closer camera view in the 360 version lent it a more cinematic and dramatic feel, while not hindering gameplay in anyway.
That is the problem with Lens of Truth comparisons, they do very little actual technical analysis. Where is the detailed frame analysis that will give us factual and detailed information on frame rate and the degree of screen tearing?
Instead we get a bunch of extremely minor things mentioned that have very, very little impact on graphical fidelity and are completely subjective in the first place.
The things we multi-console owners need to know is if there are differences in framerate, screen tearing, texture resolution, contrast ratio, color saturation…those kinds of things. Not some arbitrary and subjective judgment that is meaningless to the individual.
Lens of Truth try so hard to give it to the PS3 and the only way they give it to the 360 is if the differences are blatantly obvious and significant. If the differences are even slightly close they will do their best to find some extremely minor subjective differences in order to give it to the PS3.
Digital Foundry does a much better job of giving us the pertinent factual information we need to make an informed buying decision. Moreover, they do actual technical analysis that is lacking in the Lens of Truth comparisons.
That said, the PS3 version of Batman Arkham Asylum is a fairly solid performing game and it does have the extra Joker content, so it should definitely be considered. But people should be armed with the truth, and the truth is, the 360 version does perform somewhat better than the PS3 version. Whether game performance or the extra content is more important is up to the individual.
@psykosonikninja
How did you manage to get both retail copies of this game when doing you comparison? Its not even released yet???
Anyway, digital foundrys comparison is of the demo, things could change in the final code and it looks as though they have. Besides, I don’t even think that guy knows how to play games.
LoT has proven (once again) to be the best guys for the job. And I thank them again for leading me to the (slightly) better version.
Hope you didn’t use the demo psykosonikninja…
Sorry psykosonikninja, but you are a fanboy. I stopped early in your rant, right about here ” First of all, the 360 version had anti-aliasing whereas the PS3 did not”.
It is a simple known fact that Batman:AA uses the Unreal Engine 3 and furthermore it is fact that this engine does not support anti-aliasing. I have compared the demo side by side myself and there is no merit in what you are saying.
I could probably nitpick further, but I have a personal policy to stop after the first falsity is revealed.
I believe that all 360 games get free AA out of the GPU… Someone correct me if I am wrong. Check the article http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=2610&p=8
You are a idiot. Any amount of comparing shows that the PS3 version has no AA while the 360 one does. I own the game on the PS3 for the Joker content and my roomate has it for 360. I can promise you it is obvious. Look at batmans utility belt in the trophy room in both versions for a easy comparison.
Actually it is quite the opposite. When both versions are similar the 360 is given the win and everything gets blown out of proportion. When the PS3 usually offers the better version, LOT makes it seem like the differences are very small.
Let’s face it, and your long rant is evidence of this. The media this gen has learned one valuable thing and it has worked. 360 fans are immature fanboys. Slanting everything against Sony gets them more hits from people like you, and it is very pro-american of them. Now that there is absolutely nothing to justifiably even complain about in the slightest with the PS3, and these sites are STILL reaching to bash the PS3… suddenly people are finally seeing how biased these American gaming sites (or rather blogs) have been.
I mean, if the PS3 had a 54.2% failure rate (proven a fact), absolutely no GREAT games to look forward to (Mass Effect and Splinter Cell are GOOD games, but don’t kid yourself in thinking they come near Uncharted 2, God of War 3, The Last Guardian, Final Fantasy Versus 13, etc. etc. etc.), charged you for an online experience that is inferior to what your competitor gives their customers for free (The lag on xbox live makes the games unplayable, how do you guys play those slideshows?), the inferior performance, and an SD disc drive, the PS3 would not stand a chance.
People like you make me laugh, get with the times, the 360 is dead… and 54.2% of them were suicides, the rest or retired and died of old age (dated hardware).
That poll that you’re talking about is completely unreliable & actually isn’t scientific. 5,000 people surveyed is barely a fraction of overall consoles. Fallacious data, and nothing more.
The failure rate of the 360 is is down to acceptable levels now. Too many people are putting to much faith in the Game Informer article that stated the 360 has a 54% failure rate.
How many of the 5,000 polled, owned launch consoles? The article did nothing to let people know anything, other than out of 5,000, 54% of them had a faulty 360. They should have broke it down to how old their 360 was, etc. This is a text book example on why you shouldn’t always believe what you read, or at least question it.
If people did their research, they would know that the current 360s on the market have new, smaller CPUs, and GPUs that run A LOT cooler. I agree completely that the 360 is the most unreliable console this gen. I mean, only a blind fanboy would think otherwise.
However, MS has done good to fix the problem, and they have the failure rate down to a more reasonable level. But, thanks to stupid articles like the one in GI, people are going to be confused on the matter, and fanboys don’t help the situation, either.
It seems like lens of truth is trying so hard to be impartial, or strive toward being objective, that this seemingly obvious tie goes to the PS3. I will agree that the bonus content for the PS3 version gives you more value for money, but that is not what I come to Lens of truth to see – its differences in the actual graphics. Reviews of the content can be found elsewhere.
I like the PS3 version better, the graphics to me look identical. The only reason the PS3 version to me is better is because it gives you a much larger view. The 360 version always seems like it’s in zoom mode, which can be annoying. So it’s almost like having a fullscreen vs widescreen movie. While both look the same, widescreen will always give you more to look at.
Have the PS3 won this one? That’s weird, with the 360 having more effects and (supossedly) better framerate I thought the outcome would be otherwise.
Note that I only have a PS3, but this just feel strange.
I think that depends on tv. a really huge tv(40+)” 360 looks better. Smaller screen one goes to ps3. If the joker map blows ps3 got screwed.
Thanks Lens Of The Truth, now I can make up my mind and get the version I want,
I have downloaded the high quality HD video, and I could see what Lens Of The Truth meant by the point of the entire comparison, Thanks for saving me the time and the money. You will always get my support Lens Of Truth.
I am also a robot. I need to have my opinions programmed for me. Thank you, Master.
I have said it once and I will say it again: When it comes down to PS3 VS Xbox 360 comparison of cross platform games it is better left to the lads of DIGITAL FOUNDRY!
The bunch of hoots at Lens of Thruth never sees to surprise me as to how inaccurate and unprofessional they can be when doing these HEAD-2-HEADS.
Is it really hard to make out from the pics above which game is marginally better? No!
Having both consoles myself, I always compare games as to know what to buy! In this case the PS3 version seems to have swayed me with the JOKER as DLC.
However, after having played and compared both games I found the Xbox 360 version of Batman to be the better version.
While both games look phenomenal, the PS3 clearly showed more ALIASING problems.
SELF-SHADOWING was not present on the PS3 version of the game. And to my at least it seemed as if some textures look low-res.
Having JOKER as DLC on the PS3 seemed like a foregone conclusion but to me, at times at least, it’s quality over quantity.
…
My eyes don’t deceive me… as to you guys, from Lens of Truth, you have a responsibility to your readers as to give them the unmitigated truth! It’s never a good thing to be the bearer of bad news but if you call yourselves the LENS OF TRUTH than you have got to live up to that responsibility and name!
I like most articles on this website and the LIVE HEAD-2-HEADS. Even though the results are often incorrect.
As for future comparisons it’s best to head over to EUROGAMER’S/DIGITAL FOUNDRY game comparison analysis.
First off they are far from incorrect. Without fancy tools like DF they are pretty spot on with their comparisons.
“While both games look phenomenal, the PS3 clearly showed more ALIASING problems.
SELF-SHADOWING was not present on the PS3 version of the game. And to my at least it seemed as if some textures look low-res.”
Yes, the Xbox 360 has antialiasing, but this game doesn’t suffer as bad from the aliasing due to its dark nature. And as for the PlayStation 3 not self shadowing…that is completely untrue. And to further burst your bubble, by looking at the screenshots you can clearly see the textures are equal resolutions.
Honestly, they could have just tied this one. They are so close in terms of visuals and performance.
I personally will be picking this up on the PS3 for the DLC and the better camera vantage point.
Bullshit, pure and simple. Both DF and LOT features mentioned the technical differences, but only one gave one an edge because of the camera and little issues.
The two versions are nearly identical, yet people can’t seem to stop bitching when their preferred console isn’t picked.
@Cheboury
First off Digital Foundry sucks, thay never can see beyond his frame rate analyzer program to actually see the obvious differences that are right in front of his FACE. Lens of Truth always shows differences only an experienced gamer could find, for example the glass glitch on the PS3 version.
I have also played both version of the game and you are lying through your stained teeth because both games look pretty jagged and unless you have a capture card and got a screen shoot of both games and zoom in 400% your making things up. Lastly NUMB NUTS Lens is comparing the retail version of the game and not a 6 month old demo version. So I’m glad you’re relying on Digital Foundry demo comparison and not the retail version.
Rudesole, I think you are off base on this.
We need factual technical analysis, not arbitrary subjective opinions about minor things that have little bearing on the actual graphical quality of a game.
Do you actually believe something silly like artifacts when you zoom in on a pane of glass has as much impact on the graphical presentation as something like screen tearing or frame rate? Give me a break. I noticed the difference in screen tearing between the two versions early in my first playthrough. I did not notice the glass artifacts in the PS3 version until I read this comparison and went and looked for it myself. Even then it was so minor that I can’t even believe they thought it worth mentioning.
Also, if you could not see the obvious difference in the amount of aliasing between the two versions you simply aren’t very perceptive. It was noticeable right off the bat for me. Looking down a hallway had a noticeably more jagged appearance in the PS3 version than in the 360 version. Another area where it really jumped out at me was during the conversations with guards and other characters where I would see jaggies and edge crawl on Batman and the other characters in the PS3 version and very little in the 360 version.
Finally, I just wanted to add that Digital Foundry uses actual tools to perform detailed analysis, but subjective impressions will also be pointed out. The important thing is, though, that the objective data is always the core of the analysis and the subjective stuff is just given as an aside.
You missed my whole point. Digital Foundry did his analysis on a 6 moth old demo build. Some of those issues you pointed out probably were addressed and fix on the final build. And again you are lying about the differences between the aliasing. Now just to be clear I’m talking about the demo version, Both games looked like there were absolute no anti-aliasing used, and unless you could zoom in 400% there was no way anybody could tell the differences. Actually the PS3 seem to have less aliasing and I have proof. Remember I’m talking about the demo version here, right after you you hit the start button at the main menu the next menu is a zoomed in shot of Batman’s head, take a look around the edges of his face. The Xbox 360 had a lot more jaggies than the PS3 version. Now what? should I believe my own eye or is Digital Foundry the answer to all questions about video game analysis.
I admit I haven’t played the retail version yet, but on the demo, the aliasing on the PS3 version was more pronounced from what I saw. The shimmer on edges was more distracting to me on the PS3 version. Enough so that I noticed it immediately. I have both systems and get whichever version of a multi-platform game is most appealing to me. I know I’m not being a “fanboy” or making it up.
Before the demo it was a forgone conclusion to me that I was buying the Ps3 version. I even had the PS3 one pre-ordered, but switched it over to the 360 one after seeing the demo. This was before reading any head-2-head comparisons like this. It was based on the visual evidence I saw. I know I’m not making this up because or being a blind “fanboy” because I wouldn’t have given up the Joker content unless I there was a perceivable difference that mattered to me. The visuals and atmosphere is a big part of the experience, and this was noticeable enough for me that I wanted to go with a slightly better visual experience throughout the campaign where I’d be spending most of my time.
I am actually surprised the difference in aliasing (albeit slight) wasn’t mentioned in this comparison because there is a difference, and I’d say it’s even less nitpicky than some of the comparisons here because it not just isolated to a single effect or item at one point in the game. Again, this is coming from someone who owns both consoles so I can pick and choose and don’t have to root for only one. I’m kinda bummed that I think the 360 one looked better, because it means missing the Joker challenges. If anything I wanted the PS3 one to be better hands-down for that reason. I think switching over my PS3 pre-order should be evidence enough that it’s not made up. I would have thought I was crazy to prefer the 360 version in leiu of the extra PS3 content.
Again, I was looking at the demo. The final may be different, I dunno, but I don’t think it’s any different. The best example I can give is to look at the wastebasket and stack of papers in part of the comparison video where it’s split-screen and Batman is walking down the hallway. In the demo look at the edges of the cable in the vent as you crawl through it, the bars in the hallways with the three thugs underneath, or the edges of hallway walls and items as you walk around. It is more “shimmery” on the PS3 version. Believe me, I spent a ton of time flipping back and forth trying to convince myself the difference wasn’t noticeable, but it was. I can understand if some people can’t notice it, but there is a perceivable difference in aliasing. I know I’m not crazy or making it up because it made me re-think my choice before readin anything on the net, and others here noticed it too. Perhaps some people are less sensitive to it than others, but calling people biased or liars is unfair. I should also mention I play on a 50″ screen. On a smaller one it might not be as noticable.
good to see a dev finally properly utilize the unreal engine on ps3. id say its pretty much a tie though, ps3 won by a trivial amount in my opinion, though both have their flaws to begin with.
as for any of you commenters that are arguing over which one is better, if you guys really cared so much about graphics, you would get the PC version, cause it bats both console versions out of the park. (get my little pun there?)
as for me, even though i could get the PC version, ive decided to get the ps3 version. cause honestly, id rather have joker maps then better graphics.
I’m loving this game and I wish the game would never end. I haven’t had so much fun with a game like this since Metal Gear Solid and that is saying something. Oh one of your pictures just helped me solve one of the riddler’s riddles! Thanks Lens of Truth and keep it up.
Tie in graphics, but content is what makes a good game and 360 didn’t have the joker!
Eurogamer’s DigitalFoundry is retarded, if you read any of their previews whenever the Ps3 version has the edge it’s all very minor and they tie it. Not to mention they are known as very biased towards the 360, in particular their commentary towards Uncharted running on the 360.
tldr; CRY SOME MORE, Ps3 got the definite version. Slander Lens of Truth sum moar plz.
Man, is it good to have you guys on this one. I had pre-ordered the PS3 version for the extra content. I was agonizing over the decision because I was afraid the 360 would be superior graphically. You have put my mind at ease. I have found your comparisons to be very useful in the past. I think your methods are most like what the gamer will experience in the “real world” not some lab simulated gaming environment. Keep up the good work.
I lost absolute all respect for Lens of Truth. I own both copies for both systems and the 360 does a better job in AA and shadowing. These two things make a huge difference in how the game looks. The PS3 version is more jagged and this game is huge in its atmosphere. The less shadows on the PS3 version make this game feel less atmospheric than the 360. The PS3 does do a better job than the 360 in very very minor things as mentioned but not enough to give it an edge. The 360 version is sharper and with the shadowing engrosses you more into the atmosphere of the game than the PS3. It really does make an impact.
The conclusion of this article is poorly justified. Digital Foundry just cemented itself as the best site for comparison with greater quality. Lens of Truth should be ashamed of themselves to slump this low.
Would you mind explaining how you obtained a copy for both the PS3 and 360 before the release? And why would you even own both copies? Coughbullshitcough.
I own both consoles and I own a gamestop in Pasadena, CA. It is not bullshit.
You own a GameStop and you sure sound like a true GameStop idiot employee. First off you are a fat lair because the aliasing on both games are equally jagged, and if you have proof then show it don’t just talk about it. Also Digital Foundry failed to show any proof of anti-aliasing and their who comparison was biased on a 6 month old demo. Also the screen space ambient occlusion found only on the Xbox 360 looks terribly and I’m glad the PS3 doesn’t use that. If you look behind some pipes found in the jail cells, the shadows look really bad and their clearly offset about a foot of the walls. If you watch the video Lens clearly shows the shadows on Batman him self look like a pixelated mess (1:40). The fact is I don’t own a GameStop but I have both console and played both demos side by side and the PS3 version just looks sharper and you see more of the screen with the camera pulled back. Actually if you think about it the PS3 is rendering more geometry than the Xbox 360 so maybe the devs push the camera up on the Xbox 360 to help the frame rate.
@MercGH
You are right, its not bullshit your telling, its SUPER FUCKIN BULLSHIT!!!
Gamestop is a corporation and CANNOT be privately owned, nice try loser.
Ps3 is way better besides it says 720p everyone knoes if it would be 1080i ps3 would win because the shitbrick cnt handle 1080 even though games say its 1080 it not its always 720
Thanks Lens guys, glad you reviewed the WHOLE game, not just the demo! I am glad I pre-ordered the PS3 version (for the Joker) because like DaddySasquatch I worried about the XBOX overpowering it graphically. The only thing I saw that concerns me is you guys listed the PS3 version as having 1080p; I could’ve swore it was released in 720p. Can you clarify on this? Is the final game released in 1080p?
BTW I don’t understand why some of you bleeding heart fanniepacks go through so much trouble to write your elaborate insults on these comparisons. Go to DF and worship if you please!
umm because this review is justified poorly is why many of us are writing these elaborate objections. go play the game for both systems and see for yourself.
“Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win AND never quit are idiots.” – Despair, Inc.
I have both consoles (80 gig ps3 and elite 2008 360), and I’ll have to say that more view is a plus especially since it takes more power to display the extra view, therefor thats why I would say its a win for the ps3.
Nice comparisons as always ppl just can’t take criticism about their console.
Here’s and answer buy a PC, nothing beats those graphics;)
Hm i never thought about it that way but did you notice that when both batmen are sprinting the view is the same?
And yeah the physx on PC really makes the game a lot immersible.
i like when the ps3 has the rare occasion of winning, 360 fanboys scream ps3 favoritism.
oh and good luck on that anti-aliasing argument. 360 fans seem to like to scream that flaw even when it isn’t a problem. id rather have a tad edging problems than screen tearing.
just by playing both demos, they are not that so off that it even matters. im going ps3 for its exclusives..
Wow I dont know how many times i’ve seen the lens of truth give the nod to the 360 and I just sat back absorbed the news and moved on, 360 fans were all but complacent… Now all of a sudden the ps3 pulls out a slight nod and lens of truth is the most biased comparison site on the internet.. Most of the aa, shadowing, screen tearing, and so on that ps3 detractors love to point out arent even noticeable in game… Im usually so focused on the game that I dont even notice minute technical hiccups like these.. Now if it inerfered with my game then yeah i would notice but they dont… So why must all of these people make a mountain out of a mole hill with this issue…. Seems to me they are just looking for reasons to attack the ps3… if you hate the ps3 that much just dont buy one.. Im tired of all the sniveling….grow up please….
yeh i think that the ps3 deserves to win, but only because of the joker gameplay stuff, which could end up on 360 eventually anyway, based on how some other ‘exclusive’ DLC seems to be making its way onto other consoles, (e.g fallout 3 DLC). but i think that graphically the 360 looked better, apart from that bar blur on the water of course, also i prefer the camera to be zoomed in a bit more, because i like to see details more clearly, and i think its easier with a closer camera, and i have played the demo on the 360 and the camera doesnt impede the gameplay at all, in fact i thought the camera was very well placed when i was playing it, i guess it’s a matter of personal preference.
but for me, 360 wins, (without including DLC)
Dear God…
Most of the Head 2 Heads give the nod to the 360 versions. The PS3 is preferred just once from time to time and all you 360 loving lunatics go into a f!cking rampage and point out such trivial bullsh!t that is either unnoticeable or not important. It’s the same exact game that will not affect your gaming experience all because one pixel is better than the other. Stop crying and accept LOT’s decision. All you people do is show insecurity and disrespect of the developer’s great work. They did a damn good job with Unreal Engine 3 and the PS3 and all you ungrateful bastards do is cry some more. I swear to God this generation of video gaming pisses me off. Rant over.
Sorry, but isn’t a 360 fanboy problem. I see this as no different than all the PS3 fanboys ranting when a 360 version of a game is deemed better. Fanboys are fanboys. Doesn’t matter if it’s PS3 or 360, Mac or PC, Chevy or Ford. Zealots of any side of any argument can’t see past their own tainted glasses to consider the validity of any argument that doesn’t support their position 100%.
PC version WINS.
On what setup??? To many factors come in to play with a PC, and for what more anti-aliasing? I have Bio-Shock, Crysis/Wars amongst others and I have an GForce GTX 280 graphics card with over a 1GIG of on board ram and the again the differences in graphic were so small and very disappointing. What I’m saying is with a graphics card like mine the differences in graphics should make the consoles of this generation look like a Super Nintendo and that’s not the case at all.
Eh. More AA and higher res textures are nice but don’t forget about the 60+FPS compared to the 30FPS that most console games seem to run at. I prefer a better frame rate. That’s just me.
yeah, if you want to spend $2500 on a PC with minimal improvement over the console version.
Nice comment, it even makes more sense than what the Lens noobs are saying. And dont worry about that other guy who replied he’s retarted.
I would say the graphics where very very similar however when I played the demo on the 360 I thought that the camera was too close, almost half the left hand side of the screen was taken up by batman himself.
Before either side screams “noob” and/or “fanboy”, I just want to clarify my earlier comment (posted earlier on this thread)- the PS3 and Xbox360 versions are so close to each other, that calling either one a win seems wrong. Lens of Truth has declared many other games an Xbox360 win, so I think this game got a victory to please their PS3 crowd, when the visuals clearly seem identical, even considering the (small) differences.
By this I’m NOT saying that Lens of Truth is biased, far from it, just that in this case, an obvious tie seems to become a win for X platform, for other reasons than the visual quality, which I believe is against the purpose of these tests.
If I’m wrong, I wouldn’t mind the staff explaining their position.
Thanks for the comment. Anyway to answer your question..With all of the staff each having over 20 years of gaming experience, the most sought after prize for most 3D games is the camera. Having experienced these attempts countless times over the years and the frustration that comes along with a camera being stuck in walls and not positioning itself correctly, a game like Batman with enemies and objectives located throughout the environment, a good camera makes for the whole experience. You are right in thinking technically the game is a tie, a few +’s for one system a few -’s for the other tend to equal themselves out. But overall the camera on the PS3 is in a better position and makes for a better gaming experience, hence your winner. Also if you read the verdict John does state that it is not an overwhelming victory for the PS3 and the 360 version is still a great buy. Once again though as we have always stated, WE ARE HERE FOR THE GAMERS because we are gamers ourselves. So if you own both systems and have a choice we are helping YOU with the decision. But ultimately it is still your decision.
Thanks for the reply. Having played the game, I would hardly call the camera an ‘issue’(though its a bit odd that the two versions have different camera positions, as there are no technical reasons, I can think of, for that choice)
Your reply do clarify your position and I respect LOTs decision.
I don’t why LOT lied but they have just lost all credibility. Anybody can see that the 360 version looks nicer. I own both consoles and I did a comparison in 1080p and in 720p and no matter which res you use the 360 version is the clear winner. I will not be giving this site anymore hits.
So when did you do your comparison? The game just came out today. So did you buy both retail version and compared them? Where’s your proof that the Xbox 360 version is better? Bill Kill Kill your self please.
I did it with the demos you nitwit!
Oh and just incase you try to pull the ” oh but that was a 6 month old demo and not the final build” crap THE 360 VERSION LOOKS BETTER IN THE LOT COMPARISON AS WELL!
360 version looks better to me too…
hmmm, seems that ppl are missing the complete point of the article and its statements let me paste a phrase
“Although both consoles had issues, the PlayStation 3 had a few less and having a camera that shows more helps when being attacked from all angles, or if you need to find a place to hide.”
I dunno why ppl are puttnig words in thier mouths and saying well textures this graphics that….
Clearly says CAMERA! Get over it.
Same graphics, but you can argue the ps3 can see more which should be stress the graphics more, THATS it, nothing about looking worse or looking less crisp.
You can never satisfy fanboys liquid. I can even guarantee you that if the systems landed on a tie, their would still be an argument that Lens of Truth is biased.
It really disgusts me that the team here does so much to help console owners only receive so much backlash and disagreements.
I guess they knew that false accusations is part of the job description.
The second roll-over image pretty much shows the difference between PS3 and X360, the PS3 has lower-res textures and it lacks shadows!
Lens of truth? are you blind?
(I own a PS3)
What you see there is SSAO (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion) and Lens of Truth already mentions the PS3 is missing that.
But did you notice on the second non-rollover image the 360 seems to be missing or has less-defined self shadows? You failed to mention that.
or the water pick is another example is the water roll over.
psykosonikninja has made some very valid points……
I compared the demos …..And the 360 version looked better …admitadly only the demo…..My PSN is X_Phile_CBC (before ps3 fans doubt this)
This website is for multi-format owners,not for ps3 fanboys to get off on (i see a few have posted on this game)….
And the same when 360 wins ….imature fanboys get of on it…..
However,i respect LOTs verdict ….But going by the demos,i will have to check both (retail) versions before purchase……
Games are very expensive ….And i want the best experience possible…..
Whichever console this maybe…
Oh…..And digital foundry are not rubbish ……This is just fanboy talk.
Grow up.
PSN = X_Phile_CBC
Actually Boony, psychoninja seemed offended that his preferred console didn’t get the nod. All he did was note the differences that LOT mentioned and said “they’re subjective”, even the camera.
That was something alright. If technical comparisons will make you enjoy one version or another, seek help.
If I went by that purely on the DF analysis, the PS3 version of RE5 should’ve been a less playable mess. Guess what? It was just fine.
@ SG79
Thats not the point …..Games are expensive,so i always buy the superior version (thats available to me)…
Why shouldnt i? …This is just common sense…….Its my hard earned money..
And yes,if one version is technichally better than the other,i will ALWAYS buy the superior version …..This is the advantage of being a multi-format gamer…
Ofcourse if you only own one machine,your still going to enjoy a game regardless …..You will have know idea of the differences…..Again,this is common sense….
Going by LOTs article ……I will be buying the ps3 version….
I have know love whatso-ever for machines (or SONY or MS for that matter)…
I only love games….I just wish all my fellow gamers had the same mindset…
Keep up the good work LOT….
You say that, yet you agreed with psychoninja’s post that was basically a rant that the 360 version didn’t get the upper hand.
You have a point when a game is technically inferior by a wide margin and there aren’t any demos out. In the case of Ghostbusters for example where the PS3 version was vastly inferior. You really didn’t need an article for that though.
I stand by what I said, especially that I actually own both systems and often buy multiple versions of some games.
On a side note, using the the whole “I own both” line as an argument is very weak when one disagrees or agrees with an article or feature.
And man, this isn’t an IM. Punctuation and spelling mistakes shouldn’t be there.
I see better shadows on Xbox 360. I see less jaggies on 360. I like how the PS3 has a full picture but it’s not a huge deal. I dont get that water picture with the blur. Some screens look better than others. I dont think the PS3 is better. It’s either a draw or 360 wins. I have all three new consoles.
holy crap. i got the collector’s edition and i didnt know the “metal” batarang was changed to a plastic mcdonald’s toy. very disappointing. i returned it and got the regular.
head 2 head rules! both myself and the staff at my local game shop(who are sick of me returning games for one console to try it on the other)thank you.
Hi!
Just wanted to say that your comparisons is of great use to me, as i own all current-gen consoles. Keep up the good work!
/Sweden
Er…just buy a version that you feel comfortable. These guys is doing this review based on their good will, free time and receiving this amt of backlash is really uncalled for.
If you wan the ps3 version, then get it. If you wan the 360 version, get it too. Bickering and blaming everyone here is just a denial response that you still dunno what you want.
I will always get the 360 version cos it has never failed me in terms of graphics. Probably that’s what I feel too. I dun, however, go around and flame the pple who wants to claim ps3 having a better game. In actual truth, the differences are so small that it doesn’t add up to anything. Both versions are playable, isn’t it? So what’s with all these ()@#&#$&*(@!() ??????
As an owner of both consoles and both versions of the game, I can tell that 360 wins hands down: better framerate, antialiasing (there’s no antialiasing on PS3 at all), better colors, better shadows, better “gloss” on glossy surfaces, and overall more detailed image. Jaggies on the PS3 version are a huge annoyance, especially if you have a big screen TV (I have a 46 inch Sony Bravia 46XBR8). The difference might not be as pronounced on average TV screen, but on XBR8 it’s pretty big, and I’d certainly go with the 360 version without a doubt.
Wow. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such rampant fanboyism… although I guess the subject matter of this site (comparing XBox360 and PS3) kind of invites it. You guys need to take a deep breath, focus on the gameplay, and stop working yourself into a frenzy because on one console this game has a shadow out of place behind some pipe in a corner.
Also, pretending you own both consoles, or pretending you own a different console than you actually do to cover up the fact that you’re just an XBot or a PS fanboy, does not make us take you more seriously when you’re bashing one console or another.
I don’t need to “pretend” that I own both consoles – I don’t really care what console to play on, but if I have a choice of buying a game for one or the other – I’d like to know which one would make the better value. For me it’s a bit easier, since I also use GameFly service, where I can rent both versions and “keep” one of them, if I like it enough. In case of the Batman I did buy the PS3 version, and rented the 360 one, although I wish I’ve done it the other way around.
I’ve seen both games running on our 40″ Samsung at 1080p. You can force 1080p on the PS3 version.
To be honest, the 360′s textures are slightly better. Most obvious on some of the guards.
Regardless, the difference in quality is so small, unlike a lot of multiplatform games we’ve seen in the past. Both versions look amazing.
My wife bought the 360 version for achievements, and I got the PS3 version for the Joker exclusive.
Good comparison guys i am not a regular to this site but i will be now. I did have one comment to add though the ps3 version actually has native 7.1 surround sound which is a clear advantage over the 360′s 5.1 mix yet noone has mentioned this fact . i have both consoles as well in fact 4 x 360′s and 2 ps3′s one of which plays ps2 software as well.
I have never seen a more useless lot of feedback from people in my life most of which missed the entire point of the article.
I have the collectors ps3 version on order through game purely as after reading about the joker content it is going to add extra playability to an already stunning game.
I played both demos on a 40 inch sony hdtv and i must be blind as i couldn’t tell them apart from each other apart from the sound. i didn’t even notice a camera zoom difference either have to say. i’ll go along with the fact that a slightly zoomed out camera is going to be rendering more of a scene which taxes a system more so that is interesting why they are different camera positions on each system. I can only imagine had killzone 2 come out as a cross platform release what then. this game uses all the cores of the ps3 to produce unbelievble lighting effects that in my opinion the 360 could only dream of . Also drakes fortune has supperior lighting and shadow to anything on the 360 as well. it is not even up for debate that when programmed properly the ps3 is stunning but is the 360 less of a game console probably not as i enjoy them both for different reasons. fanboys do seem to be taking over this site which is a shame as beneath it all it shows they are passionate gamers just a pity they can’t see passed a certain console to concentrate on what is actually important and that is playing good games and supporting the devs so that we can continue to do so.
LOT are entitled to their views.
The very fact the PS3 version has no AA and has clearly less detailed textures really makes me wonder about the motive of LOT here, sad really as I was enjoying their articles but this one is so far wide of mark it’s untrue.
Digital Floundry – Give to the 360
IGN – Give to the 360
Having played both it clearly goes to the 360.
Back to school for the LOT team I’m afraid.
can you provide a link to the IGN comparison?
Wow, I am really disliking all these fanboy rants. Whatever version it is, its obvious some people just say “360 looks better” as if its going to justify their buying of Xbox 360 or a PS3.
Obviously for this to be legit it has to be done the way its done by these guys. The conclusion can be debated, but everything seems to be done right. Both are full versions on HDMI.
I downloaded the HD Video of side to side and it confirms what they are saying in their review.
regardless of how it looks if they made two individual batman games on and used each console to the best of its ability ps3s version wouldv been better
I frequent the website often, but never get around to commenting. I wanted to toss in my opinion on the Batman head2head. First off, the guys here at Lens of Truth do a great job with their head2heads. I would say that 90% of them are spot on. It’s just that every once in a while they completely miss the mark with what they are trying to achieve –to choose the definitive version of a cross platform game. I feel that Batman is one of those misses. Minus the Joker DLC, Batman is technically superior on the Xbox 360. You simply cannot overlook anti-aliasing, ambient occlusion and motion blur in light of a better camera on the PS3. No matter how slightly it may impact the visuals in this game, the fact is the features are present on one and missing on the other. Simply put, the PS3 should not have won the graphics category.
You guys have a great track record when compared to DF and other comparison sites. Just don’t forget your target audience, the multi-system users. Make sure you are not skewing the facts in order to give wins to a specific system, let the facts speak for themselves. If that means the Xbox 360 wins more so than the PS3, so be it. Your users will thank you. It’s better to be truthful and unbiased with facts backing you up than to judge solely on opinion.
Keep up the good work, learn from past mistakes and move forward with a clear focus.
I agree with you sir.
My 1st comment ever is right under yours.
AA was clear to see right of the Bat with the demo and was the Deal breaker.
I don’t like having to strain my eyes when using a 40″ tv.
I total disagree with you here. I bought the game to play Batman not aliasing, ambient occlusion and motion blur. I want to play Batman and in this type of game the camera is the most important aspect. BTW there is motion blur in the final build on the PS3, I’ve witness it myself last night. The shadows on the PS3 version look way better than the Xbox 360 version, which could easily be seen in the video above. Also I really think the whole 2XAA on the Xbox 360 that everybody keeps quoting is ridicules. I mean if the Xbox 360 used 4XAA then yea the differences would be dramatic, but the fact is unless you could zoom in 400% you can’t see any anti-aliasing on either console. Actually it looks pretty aliased on both systems. So technically they are tied, because the Xbox 360 has SSAO and the shadow maps on the PS3 are better, but technically speaking having the camera pushed back a little on the PS3 means the view frustum is rendering more geometry than the Xbox 360 version. Maybe the Devs did this on purpose to insure the frame rate on the Xbox 360 version matched the PS3 version?
I’ve played this game for 40+ hours now on 360 and I haven’t seen a single screen tear. You should install to the hard drive before your comparison. just because 360′s install is optional doesn’t mean it doesn’t help performance.
also, the ps3 version doesn’t have as much AA or maybe it doesn’t have it at all.. but the 360 does. you can even see it on his cape during your close-up. more jagged on ps3.
The game screens tears as soon as you hit start on both consoles, so your lying right off the bat. You saying that now discredits your whole comment.
ps3 fans like to scream RROD against 360 just like 360 users like to scream no anti aliasing against ps3.
What annoys me about this discussion is – as well as many others – that we’ve seen dozens of multiplatform games that are inferior in many ways on the PS3 platform (and there have been a lot not being scrutinized on LOT – yet), we’ve seen lower screen resolution, we’ve seen lower resolution textures, we’ve seen lack of anti-aliasing (or the use of Quincunx AA which usually blurs the picture) and lack of advanced pixel shader effects, and even lack of V-lock on PS3 games. Not necessarily at the same time (though it has happened), but these are the usual suspects when we compare the Xbox360 multiplatform games with the PS3 games. So… when we see a great looking game like Batman, where we have – for all intents and purposes – technical parity between the PS3 and Xbox360 version (LOT gives the victory to the PS3, other sites to Xbox360, so its a close call either way), some PS3 followers seem to hint, ever so subtle, to a technical superiority on the PS3 platform.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary on so many other games, this is the conclusion?
At the same time, when we do see a PS3 game, that is inferior to the Xbox360 console (which we’ve seen a lot of) some people claim the developers are ‘lazy’, ‘gets money from MS’, ‘bad programmers’, ‘it doesn’t have an impact on the gameplay’ etc.
Seen objecvtively, the evidence point to the PS3 being very hard to get the best from, when you’re trying to reach a deadline – there’s no denying that the Xbox360 has the edge here as the results at LOT, Digital Foundry and Gamespot points at – so instead of pointing the finger at the developers, PS3 followers should look at the inherent difficult nature of the PS3, and the somewhat awkward design of its hardware.
But I guess its easier to blame the developers.
That being said, however, in the right hands and with the right amount of time, the developers can achieve great results on the PS3, as we’ve seen from 1st tier developers.
But I don’t think its fair to call the PS3 ‘superior’ based on the occassional multiplatform games that achieves a win or parity for the PS3 – because for every ‘win’ for the PS3, there are at least 2-3 ‘wins’ for the Xbox360 (looking at the total sum of multiplatform games).
XBOX360 AVG(29.982) Tearing(0.570%) Lowest(29.0)
http://zoome.jp/ps360/diary/324/
PS3 AVG(29.944) Tearing(1.418%) Lowest(28.0)
http://zoome.jp/ps360/diary/323/
I think the Lens of Truth scored the controls wrong. The Ps3 has Sixaxis options! The controls shouldn’t be a tie.