February 23rd, 2012
Posted in 
Welcome back for another exciting Head2Head! This week we take to the slopes with the demo for EA’s reboot of the SSX series on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Surprisingly, SSX “2012″ is the first game in the series to hit PS3 & 360, and also the first game in the series since SSX Blur for the Nintendo Wii back in 2007. Let’s see if the first trip to the mountains this generation is looking like an equal experience.
Rollover to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Rollover to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Click The Image to Enlarge.
Rollover to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Rollover to see the Difference.
Move the Slider to see the Difference.
Click The Image To Enlarge.
Pages: 1 2
Tags: *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.*
360 for me. It just looks a bit better. I mean look at the 8th picture here on this 1st page. Look at the difference in color and contrast of the mountains when you roll back and forth between the 360 shot and the ps3 shot.
Wow the over priced internet ready blu ray player has missing shadows all over the place LOL. The over priced internet ready blu ray player is slightly blurry and the over priced internet ready blu ray player has a weird green tinge along with be slightly washed out (as usual). The SUPERIOR Xbox 360 is significantly better in these shots. I fully expect the over priced internet ready blu ray player to fall behind in performance as well. Yet ANOTHER victory for the SUPERIOR Xbox 360. This should immediately be followed by a reply from a member of the Sony Defense Force using Play No. 1 “Blame developer”, No.2 “Personal attach”, or No.3 “Mentioning of UC3″. I’m curious which It’ll be this time. LOL
“Xbox 360 is the BEST console EVER made.” –John Carmack
@ BUYING1999
You should realy crawl back to the hole you came from with your crap.
@buy1999 Nothing personal, for me you could keep masturbating on “significantly better shadows” or bvllshit like this, but I’m worried for your memory. Why you keep repeating every time the same things? Why you keep quoting Carmack? Have you got some alzheimer issue?
@buying1999
you keep quoting you stupid over priced blah blah blah, In the uk you can pick up new 160 gig Ps3 for around £180 how is that over priced for a system that plays bluray, Dvd, Cd, Has web browsing, can stream and copy movies and mp3s from pc in a multitude of formats, has on-line movie and TV show streaming , can perform ‘Folding at home’ for the good of mankind, has a free online gaming service, a free online music video service and can communicate and stream video and games to both psp and Vita wirelessly anywhere in the world oh and has the best looking exclusive games of any console. The superior at ripping you off xbox 360 does not hold a candle to Ps3 sorry
Seriously buying1999
If you were playing the game you wouldn’t notice your so called “missing shadows” here or your “blurriness” there. Do you really examine every pixel of every game that closely? I’d say NO. You sad puppy!
Buying, I reached the point that i thumb down your comments first and I read them later. Guess what? I never regretted my choice. You are worse than an broken DVD disc to put into the overpriced internet ready DVD player.
There’s little between them”so i voted a tie as all it is is a gamma thing,realy guys how can you say one looks better than the other?
Yeah because mountains are blue and not gray!!!!!!!!!
He feeds off the attention, negative or positive. his mum musn’t of given him much attention as a child lol. Just like any annoyance, ignore it and it will go away!
Guys stop commenting on buying1999, he’s either a troll or a butthurt 10 year old that wants attention. Either way, if you ignore him, he’ll move on.
PS3 for an easy win
I’m on a PS3, and I noticed that the graphics seem less detailed on this system. It probably is because of the developers not taking full advantage of the hardware, in addition to the fact that it’s easier to program for the XBOX (DirectX). I wish the whole fanboy console war would quit getting in the way of intelligent debate. Even I can agree that the XBOX version looks generally better in these shots, and I like my PS3 over my XBOX (mostly because of free online, the benefits of PS+, etc). But yeah, it’s not extremely obvious, but the 360 just looks better in these shots, as much as I hate to admit it. At least I have my LBP.
WTF is with the green tinge in the PS3 version? 360 takes this overall for slighty sharper visuals but I would have leaned closer towards a tie if that green tinge in the 8th picture wasnt so apparent. It’s almost as if that PS3 shot was taken from a horribly calibrated display.
I noticed that as well, the color temp is warmer on the PS3 and colder on the Xbox. I wonder if that’s just the Xbox internal color correction or EA’s own doing.
@HMWX
If you think the xbox looks better in that shot, I don’t think you have seen a properly calibrated display before then.
Honestly I thought the colours in that shot look more natural on the PS3 as well. The hue is just TOO blue on the X360.
On the other hand, that’s the only advantage I’ve seen for the PS3. Otherwise I’d have voted a tie for the most part. Lighting is different in some shots and while it’s hard to tell, my opinion is that it looks more accurate on the Xbox. Image is a tiny bit sharper as well. Still the differences aren’t earth shattering. At all. There is though that first shot!! WTF is up with that?!? The sheen effect seems completely absent on PS3, lighting sucks, it’s a HUGE difference. I voted Xbox just for that shot, but I’m still appalled. Graphics seem pretty awful on both versions so not managing to get them to be equal is really ridiculous.
It’s true that the Xbox shot might be too “cool” in color tempurature but it still looks better than the PS3 because of the contrast difference. No matter how you look at it, the PS3 version in that shot looks washed out by comparison. It’s only in that screenshot though, which is weird since the others look fine color contrast-wise.
the color temperature does look cooler on the xbox and warmer on the ps3, but you can easily make them look exactly the same by changing the settings on your tv, thats what i did…already did my own comparison of these two games, and i see no difference.
@buyng1999 why dont you eat the peanuts and corn out of my shit and while your at it stop trolling you insect.
So have we finally reached the point where both version are identical?
Almost. At least quincunx has been put into the grave where it belongs. So many games that used it had bad coverage and the blur made the jaggies even worse (RDR being the worst offender).
There is a little diference between these versions but it looks good on both PS3 and XBOX360. I really don’t like that kind of game, but I’d get the PS3 version to play online with my friends.
Slightly sharper on 360 although this isn’t the most visually impressive game anyway. While blazing down mountains, I doubt you’ll notice the difference. I think the performance is a more important factor although I suspect it will be solid on both consoles.
I prefer the sharper look of the 360 version myself though no major differences.
Can’t really see any significant difference, certainly not anything which would be apparent except in a side-by side comparison like this.
I have to agree with the majority the 360 version looks a little better.
As a dual console owner I have to put my money on the 360 version.
Peace.
The 360 version appears to edge out the PS3. The colors look a bit better and the image quality appears to be slightly less blurry on 360.
Though, seeing that I don’t want to renew my Xbox Live subscription, I may just settle for PS3 version, deal with a slight decrease in visuals, and save myself from any online fees.
the 360 has edge, but nothing significant. The colours are bit odd on both tbh, Id have to fiddle around with them on either version to be happy.
Slightly sharper visuals on 360, but from normal viewing distances, you wouldnt care too much.
as long as performance is ok, then, id happily play either, although, i wouldnt happily play either, as i have no interest in game lol, but you get point
Okay the 360 version has the worst tint of blue I could ever fathom. How do fanboys honestly deal with this. By saying the crushed blacks and awful color temperature give better contrast. Lucky me I have a PC that makes this game look like crap. I played the PS3 demo and it looks like crap. I honestly think SSX Blur looked as good on a 480p CRT no doubt. This game needs a PC version like no other.
Anyway, when the next 360 console no longer has these crushed blacks you will realize it is your display that makes the blacks washed out. If you had an OLED display with perfect blacks you would not think the image is WASHED out. For the last time you guys are mostly tools who know nothing about calibration. It is pretty obvious most of you are in the 15 years old range. Good stuff but at some point you grow up and acquire knowledge about things instead of being a dumb fanboy.
If you knew anything about televisions you would not have an LCD, Ohh wait I’m sorry “OLED”. Plasma televisions have the best black levels to date not counting a CRT. An LED tv is nothing more than a glorified LCD, They lack color accuracy and have uneven black levels. Plasma televisions also have the fastest response time which is perfect for games. It seems like you are the one who needs to acquire knowledge here..
UNSCARRED785 before you “School” someone make sure what you are saying is accurate as well.
Best is still Plasma, 2nd best is OLED also called AMOLED this has nothing to do with an LED LCD tv. Like plasma, OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) has fantastic Color and black reproduction but it has a drawback like LCD it has a fairly slow responses time compared to plasma. But unlike Plasma it will not burn in. i bid you adieu
It’s not as clean cut as response time. People see response time and they automatically think that equates to faster for gaming. INPUT LAG is the single most important thing a consumer needs to find out before purchasing a display for gaming. Top of the line Kuro, Pansonic and Samsung plasmas have similar, and in some cases worse, INPUT LAG than LED/LCD displays.
All you have to do is put in the model number of any display than write input lag next to it. If it’s a mid to higher end model chances are a site has done testing on it to let you know what the input lag level is.
The only difference between OLED, LED and LCD is the back lighting. All three can not touch a plasma and all three still have the same drawbacks as a traditional LCD. I’ve yet to calibrate any of the three and have perfect color accuracy. Even over at Cnet, David katzmaier reviewed the best LED LCD tv made, the Sharp Elite. He couldn’t get The colors perfectly accurate on that. They just aren’t worth the money for anybody who knows a thing or two about televisions, Unless you’re one of those GO GREEN! people who need the most energy efficient products available.
Onto the subject of Input lag, Lcd ,led and oled all have far worse input lag than any plasma ever made. I know this first hand because unlike most people I’ve had the best televisions made. One is the Pioneer Kuro that you mentioned(which is still the best television to date) The second is the Panasonic V10 very high contrast ration but lacked the black levels of the Kuro. My most recent is the Samsung pn51d8000 and even that can’t compete with the Kuro. Before i had these television i owned an LED and an LCD from samsung and panny. Most of my friends have LCD televisions, Every single one that I’ve calibrated for them all had terrible input lag compared to any plasma i have ever tested! Response time is a big factor for gaming also, The better the response time the less motion blur you will have This is where any type of lcd falls way short for me in gaming or watching movies. Fact of the matter is, Any for of LCD to me is considered junk..
I disagree, input lag isn’t magically fixed because it’s a plasma tv, it’s based 95% on the hardware that comes before it reaches the screen, it could be a crappy lcd or the highest end plasma, but what type of screen isn’t going to matter if the hardware before it isn’t handled well (my cousin bought a 42 inch plasma, the input lag is upwards of 10ms on a good day, it also ghosts like the remake of poltergeist he actually returned it and got an led tv (along with a sexy surround system since he had to pay a lot less for it) and it does fine.)
besides this won’t matter once we all get HDMI2 inputs in our urethras so that we can think the video signal (I’m putting twenty bucks on the first group of male applicants all dieing from a combination of dehydration and starvation!)
Plasmas and LCD/LED TVs have about the same input lag.
However, my LED computer monitor is virtually lag free due to no extra video processing. I WIN!
By the way… I don’t get where people are seeing these really good black levels because I used to own one of the best Panasonic Plasmas and blacks were GRAY even if I had the brightness all the way down.
My Samsung LCD sitting right next to my Plasma had better blacks with the lights on and in the dark so I would really like to know where people are getting these crazy claims of plasma black levels. I’ll tell you one thing I liked about my old plasma was even lighting across the screen. My LCD has some light leaks. Also, Plasmas tend to get dead pixels.
@justspaztik
It’s not a simple as comparing display technologies as far input lag and (in some cases) picture performance goes. It varies model to model no matter what the display type or brand is. No digital display is perfect of course and none are lag-free, some people just arent as sensitive to it as others and claim an LCD/Plasma is lag-free. The only lag-free display currently available to consumers is a CRT, the closest I’ve seen a LCD/Plasma come to CRT is about 5-10 ms of input lag on some lower-end/smaller LCD’s.
Technology is rapidly changing. Before today I would agree with Unscarred about the plasma being top quality, BUT that was before this puppy came out. ———-> Sharp Elite PRO-X5FD LED <———— Better black levels than any television on the market. Problem is, no way I could afford it.
Here’s what was said in the Cnet review of the Sharp Elite.
“What you came to find out is whether we think the Sharp Elite PRO-X5FD has better picture quality than those alternative 2011 TVs or even than the legendary and now extinct Pioneer Elite Kuro from 2008. Yes and no, respectively. The X5FD deserves a 10 in picture quality, tying the score of the Kuro and beating every other TV we’ve ever reviewed. The Kuro still produces a better picture overall, especially from off-angle, but that hardly matters anymore since you probably can’t get one. And if you could, you’d still lose certain bragging rights to deep-pocketed Sharp owners since the X5FD is the only Elite TV that can handle 3D sources and comes in a 70-inch size. If you don’t mind paying any price to get the best current flat-panel TV, the Sharp Elite is for you.”
@HMWRX
LCD TVs have input lag usually, but when you use an LCD computer monitor, you’ll get almost zero lag. I’ve tested this. How do you think you’re able to use a mouse on a computer? Imagine if your cursor lagged behind your mouse movements? It would drive you nuts, but as you can see, the cursor always moves at the same time as your mouse moves.
However, if you hook a computer up to an HDTV, you will feel a lag with a mouse. The cursor will move noticeably after you move your mouse.
So LCD monitors are far faster than LCD TVs (due to TVs having signal cleaning circuitry in them). TVs are constantly upsampling and doing other magic tricks to improve the video signal before displaying it in it’s raw form. However, a computer LCD monitor will show you the image in it’s raw form without upsampling or cleaning up the image… that’s what makes it fast.
Yes, its true LCD monitors that arent designed to function as a television have lower input lag numbers than others do to less image processing.
However, they are STILL not lag-free when compared to a CRT display. There have been numerous tests on several sites such as these 2:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1131464
http://shoryuken.com/forum/index.php?threads/sub-1-frame-hdtv-monitor-input-lag-database.145141/
You probably don’t notice any lag when you use your particular monitor, but to someone such as a serious fighting game player where EVERY frame is crucial for timing, it WILL be noticeable.
I wouldnt expect a casual player to notice any latency below 15 milliseconds though, so it depends on the person.
Either way, the lag still exists.
i think they both look like crap. just one is more solid, and the other is runny, but both stink
To reduce the input lag on any tv disable all the post processing crap, ie motion flow as this increases the time before the image is displayed and make sure its in game mode which gives you the quickest responses.
This is worse than a tie. Both look worse than the PS2 version.
Not being funny but it looks crap on both consoles, and 9 times out of ten third party games always look better on 360. i have both 360 and ps3 and it makes me mad looking at these comparisons. we all know ps3 is more powerfull than the xbox 360 its just easier to make games on the 360 and the devs cant be arsed to use the ps3 to its full potential unless its a exclusive. So its always gonna be the same on third party games end of, am not a fan boy and i will be glad when we get the next generation of consoles with lots more ram a beast of a gpu that hopefully can keep up with high end gaming pc’s.
@khronikos first of all i have a mitsubishi laservue 75inch and that is state of the art and i am not even
close to 15 so why dont you eat my shit. I have a home theater that would blow your mind so dont assume you know things that you dont asshole. Man what is wrong with you?
Second of all I am a licensed pc tech and a isf calibrator and if any one doubts it i can produce proof I have a+ n+ mcse mcp novell and oracle certifications so I am offended that people assume that you are a piece of shit because you are on this site. I never troll and speak the truth. So to all of you here that are not trolls flamers or dickheads feel free to ask me anything you want and I will held or advise in anyway i can at least you will get accurate info.
Held is supposed to be help sorry typo lol i tried to edit but it does not work
Xbox 360′s version looks way to unrealistic. PS3 this time.
LOL, the game is unrealistic, period.
After playing both demos, I’m disappointed with the graphic quality overall. It’s not much better looking than SSX3 IMO and some of the textures and trees are ugly looking for a PS3/360 game.
I just played the demo on the PS3 and I didn’t see that greenish yellowish screenshot that LoT showed. Something weird is going on and LoT aren’t telling us what they did.
or more realistically, it might have been a graphical bug from the demo (old code is known to do this sort of thing)
PS3 is a newer console than the xbox 360. It is more powerful and has better graphics. Therefore i think PS3 has won this round
The 360 have better details like shadows and bump mapping in the background, other than that it’s insanely close and if you happen to get the PS3 version it’ll hardly be anything you really notice.
C O M E O N !
I’ve tried the demo on both consoles… they both look like crap in term of visual.
Anyway, when you play, you really can’t see no difference, it’s kinda easy to take screenshots and to look closely and then to say : “Holy Mother Of God! Look the cloud is darker on the ps3, and it’s kinda blue on the xbox.. SO IRREALISTIC MAN !” The fact is, graphics is not what matter in this game.. it’s just fun, period… if you want something realistic, go buy yourself an xbox and play Stoked… I go with the xbox for this one because since Amped (the 1st one) i’m kinda used to play snowboard games with the 360 pad.
and seriously… screentearing and FPSare really more important in term of gameplay (and maybe more with this kind of game) …. pixels are not. and here… the FPS is good on both, and no screentearing
Isle of man has a ssx social network at ssx.im
a clear PLAYSTATION 3 win. just look at the differences, they are huge! SUPERCOMPUTER that is called PLAYSTATION 3 wins by a mile.
better shadows
better textures
better AA
better, more life like looking game
Thank you sony for this GODLIKE machine that is upon us humans
mickeysoft version is only for sissies! aint that right, nintendont’s?!
A tie. Only difference being a slight EVER SO SLIGHT difference in contrast and color temperature. That is all. Anyone talking about imaginary differences in sharpness or aliasing or shadows is a delusional nutcase high on construction glue and anti-freeze.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ssx-face-off
Even notorious 360 nuthugger Richard Leadbetter ruled it a tie with no difference in either version being substantial enough to command an advantage over the other. Please just put the bullshit to rest little overzealous fanboys.
I would still like to see a proper head to head analysis. Each seem to have advantages in different areas. Xbox 360 runs in upscaled 1080p and slightly extra polish on the graphics, PS3 has the timed exclusive Mt. Fuji (until August) and FREE online play. Controllers are similar enough that mappings aren’t going to be drastically different if at all. Even though I know the basic differences, I would like to see how the final version stacks up. For me, it really is coming down to whether I trust my 360 not to red ring and I buy another year of xbox live gold enjoying the better visual quality or I go with my PS3 which has been getting some good playtime as of late and I would enjoy the SSX online experience without having to pay for online play. I don’t think I’m being too picky, especially since this site has been going downhill as of late as head to head’s are sporadic, in random categories, and never always complete. We may receive a title that gets a screen shot head to head, but never gets an analysis. This wasn’t even the final version, it was a comparison of the demo.
In this battle, the Xbox360 wins, again…
Head 2 Head Record Battles
360/ps3
Sniper Elite V2 – PS3 Wins 0-1
I Am Alive – Xbox360 Wins 1-1
Prototype 2 – Xbox360 wins 2-1
Dragons Dogma – Xbox360 wins 3-1
O Racoon City – Xbox360 wins 4-1
Ninja Gaiden – Ps3 Wins 4-2
Mass Effect 3 – Xbox360 Wins 5-2
Street Fighter X Tekken – 360wins 6-2
The Darkness 2 – Xbox360 Wins 7-2
MLB 2k12 – Xbox360 Wins 8-2
SSX – Xbox360 Wins 9-2