@ ragnarok160 - you have no idea my friend. The consoles are equipped with aging 5 year old hardware that are barely capable at rendering at 720p and 30fps. Modern PCs render games at 1080p and above with full screen anti-aliasing @ 60+fps and many other effects that would make a console struggle to render 5 fps. Compare the VRAM of the 360 which is a measly 256MB with the VRAM of most modern cards which is 1.5-2GB.
We compare how Brink looks across the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC.
Brink makes use of the id Tech 4 graphical engine. Other notable games to make use of the engine include Doom 3 and Wolfenstein. Since the engine's release, it's been used in Prey and other id-related titles like Quake 4.
The game features a variety of environments, but because Brink is based around small teams of cohorts trying to clear various objectives, the maps all tend to be medium to small sized, which the id Tech 4 engine (not so coincidentally) excels at rendering.
Brink on the PC has the best-looking textures and features overall, but the consoles don't do all that badly (which we'll get to later). As usual, the PC version benefits from graphical horsepower and can drive extra features like ambient occlusion, antialiasing, high-quality post processing, and higher resolutions. Speaking of resolutions, the Xbox 360 runs at the lowest internal resolution, which is then scaled up to 1280x720. The Xbox 360 makes use of antialiasing whereas the PlayStation 3 does not.
We captured images on the Xbox 360 running at 1280x720 using a Matrox MXO2 Mini over HDMI cables. PlayStation 3 images were captured running at 1280x720 over component with an AJA Xena LH. The PlayStation 3 enables HDCP, which prevents HDMI image capture. Stills from the PC version of the game were captured using FRAPs at 1280x720with 4xAA/16xAF with maximum-quality settings running on a Radeon HD 5870. All images were shrunk down to fit into the rollover images. Zoomed images are pixel-to-pixel extractions from the original files.
We'll break down how the images stacked up as we go across each set.
Texture Lag on Consoles
Both of the consoles suffer from a little texture lag. Most games take a little while to pull in all the textures, but Brink does something interesting. When completely rendered, the console versions of the game pull in textures that seem to be on par with the PC high-quality variant, if we disregard the actual resolution advantage the PC gets.
The perk is nice, but it comes with a trade-off. Objects and terrain behind you get pushed out of memory, so when you look at them again, you'll trigger the low- to high-quality transition. In practice, if you're walking down a hallway, everything in front of you will appear high quality after the initial load. If you keep walking in a straight line, everything will remain nice and pretty. The moment you turn around, it will all get kicked out, and the low to high cycle will kick in for what you're looking at in that moment. Should you do another 180-degree turn and look forward again, you'll see the same transition again from low to high quality. The entire process doesn't take more than a second or two to finish, and if you're focused on shooting enemies, you likely won't notice much.
@ragnarok160 You cannot fine tune detail levels on a console nor can you adjust the screen resolution. And unless the title SPECIFICALLY states that it supports "TRUE 1080P" on the game box, guess what? You're not actually seeing it in 1080P, which is still nowhere near what a good monitor will be able to do. Please get your info straight next time.
@gino_pachino acually pc grphics are lower then consle, its because ur sitting closer to the screed and on a small frame that i make u think its better.
and since when the graphic make a good game? cuz for me the best games ever made it zelda ocarina of time,chrono cross/tiger, ff7 ,metal gears series, and diablo2
yes in graphic pc beat console but in quality/reliability/price here the order in my opinion thumbs me down if you want :1:ps3(no viruses never broke) 2:360(rrod GRR) 3:pc(viruses ARGGGG)....lol just killlzone 3 or the demo of resistance 3 got better graphic then the pc version of brink(and again i say it my opinion dont cry)..... and yes i know crysis 1 got amazing graph(maybe the best) on a steroid pc(1 of my geek friend :P got it on a overpriced pc whit this game)
Sure on PC u can take the best image but only a blind can't see that PS3 graphics is better then X Box. Also is recorded in Blue ray disc and not in DVD like X box.
@KANOOBS Listen buddy don't get me wrong I own an Xbox360 and wouldn't trade it for a PS3 and I have my reasons. But what the hell are you talking about, seriously?
um... I buy for gameplay more than graphics. Bethesda and Splash Damage are doing more to fix this, and I'm fine with that.
consoles wasn' teven design with the idea that a few years down the road they can still push out max graphic settings on games.And there is really no reason to compare,if you want graphics,get a pc.
also the ps3 in initial look the timer is at 9:26 and the "2 seconds later" is 9:25 and on the 360 the game clock is at 7:27 then 7:22 obviously we are being misled or they're really bad at timing screenshots
It's more fun to think of it as motion blur while you're sprinting or sliding around. also @patsy-cline you have to remember the consoles now get netflix, hulu, facebook, espn, can play dvds and music. You can get a ps3/360 and a netflix account and you've got no reason to have anything more than basic cable. Also you need a printer/scanner to print/scan things. A pc can't do that by itself
The game itself isn't so pretty why are these being compared. 360s GPU is already been proven that it can produce bettter graphics than the PS3 GPU. but the PS3's CPU is a little faster Than 360s CPU. But XBOX 360 always wins when comparing Graphical comparison's against PS3 its a given fact.
@tbs760 You gotta remember that the PC doesn't just play games. It can be your workstation, your home entertainment system, your gaming system, internet browser, your online business, manager of bank accounts, can be used to buy anything online, scan and print any document and an unlimited amount of weird and wonderful applications to download over the net for benefit or fun. And before you ask, I use it for all of the above. $200-300 for a console is a bit of a rip-off for just games if ya ask me... And yet I still fell into the trap. Consoles are great for opening video games to a wider audience, but it greatly slows down the PC in terms of technology. I love both consoles and PC but PC more. :)
What true gamers you all are, fighting over which game has the (small) edge in terms of graphics... laughable.
Sorry...PC to run this game...$500 plus. A console (PS3, Xbox 360) to run this game with MINOR graphic drop...$199 to $299. Nuff said.
You guys need to figure out a better way to present these comparisons. Those underlined links are awkward to try and hover over, and there's no indication of when the alternative images are loaded. Little square graphical buttons that are easier to hoverover would be an improvement.
you pay \$50 for best graphic, or you pay \$60 for crap graphic, wow a lot of bad consumers these days :roll:
@TheGameKraze I love these kind of comparisons, especially if they are video and published soon when the game gets released. Sometimes I can pick game on other consoles if it's better. oh and BTW console can never beat a PC at least in this Generation
Why Why Why???? we all knows that there is a hardly difference between Xbox 360 and PS3 graphics. thn why again and again gamespot bring this stupid comparison? We don't care it anymore. Can gamespot bring discussion such as "Art work in games" which may appeal to gamers and other.
Really? Do people really still care about these comparisons? They are not going to sway anything. PC gamers will always say the PC is better, The PS3 gamers will always believe that the PS3 is more superior, and the X360 gamers will always claim their games have the best graphics. These kind of flame bait articles are pointless.
@jamesAboy19 thats $500 AU, and u might get on for 450 on sale at best, if ur form america it might only be $250 (which is messed up as our dollar is worth more, freaking tax !! ) im not fanboying but... really just dont troll on me was just putting out some price to value compare, recently bought both a PC and PS3 and they where the numbers i came up with do sod off,
to all those fools talking about the mythical $5000 PC's let me state this.. a 2 -3 year old PC GPU such as the Radeon 4850 or Nvidia 8800 series will still run circles around any console. and those cards can be found for less than $100 today. The top end cards of this generation however just make consoles look silly. so you dont have to buy the latest tech to play games in a full 1920x1080 lines of res buy last gens stuff for cheaper and you can still play all the console ports,you want at full HD res (or higher) PC specific games tho such as Metro 2033 and Crysis 1 are another story.
Just for starters, who plays at 1280x720 on PC? I play games maxed at 2560x1600 and that craps all sorts of nastiness over the PS3 and Xbox. It's always funny reading PS3 and Xbox fanboys saying how their console looks better than PC. None of these console screen grabs come anywhere close to the texture res of the PC version. The character from the title screen looks like PS2 graphics on the PS3 and 360, it's a complete joke. Everything is blurry and jaggy and stretched. Enjoy your 6 year old, $300 hardware while I enjoy my $5000 PC xD.
Oh yup ps3 looks so much better than the xbox, it's a good thing i got the ps3 and not xbox LOL jk while both games can run the game and look good at the same time, they are indeed getting old compared to the PC so i dont really care aslong as the game runs smooth.
THE JAGGIES ON THE PS3 LOOK HORRIBLE THE XBOX 360 VERSION LOOKS SMOOTHER. PS3 FANBOYS WHEN ITS SMOOTHER ON PS3 YOU ALWAYS SAY IT LOOKS BETTER THAN XBOX 360 COZ ON THE XBOX IT HAS TOO MANY JAGGIES AND NOW ITS THE OTHER WAY ROUND DECIDE WHICH ONE LOOKS BETTER JAGGIES OR SMOOTHER BUT DON'T USE THE EXCUSE TO SAY ON PS3 ITS ALWAYS BETTER LOL
Wow! Can't say I've ever seen flaws like that in a game... this thing must have been seriously rushed.
Ps3 has the more realistic looking character textures form the pics shown Although the worldly textures look best on pc. So yeah Pc probably, the best bet but Im not a pc gamer so I'll get it for ps3.
i admit that my 360 and ps3 is getting old.. oh wait, the dev seems lazy when it comes to a game that 'perfectly tuned'
wow both are blurry but the 360 looks like the wrong textures were put in place or something (from the before and after), look at the circle vent thingy
GS gave this game a - let me say - solid 6.0... Now, why the whole thing about: great game, must see it, let's do some blogs and comperations... Guess some producer is very angry about the 6.0 (after all the money was invested in the commercial) - now "someone" is trying to create a facelift...