you are aware that your replies shows that my opinion struck a cord with you? just because you have 2 systems doesn’t make you less of a fanboy. If your precious 360 is that awesome and flawless as you “say” than sell the PS3 and fully support the 360. see…. you wont do that because you know the system is starting to move forward and has alot of exclusives. Do your research. not every 3rd party game is better on the 360. COD was a prime example… go ask pixel counters if you cant read pro PS3 news.

When games are released at 720p only, the PS3 downscales it to 420p. From what I’ve heard the XBOX does not have this issue.

There has been numerous games I haven’t purchased for this reason alone. Sony could fix this issue with a patch, since Dev’s want to save money and time.

@hydro5135

what shadowjin pointed out was that the the developer raved about how the PS3 version of Ghostbusters would outshine the others. And it failed. it doesn’t take a genius to see thats what he means. Your post, from a readers point of view does come across as taking 1 word (slightly) and playing with it to post your own view. Did you expect him to end it with “the 360 version is the best”? to him, it was slightly sharper but he still pointed out every flaw on the PS3. Your original post would hold more ground IF you had voiced your opinion without playing with someone else’s words. You also do not NEED pixel counter to show you which versions better. I don’t agree on this article just like Ericbill, LordVonPS3, shadowjin and yourself.

Terminal Reality comment on the controversy. A spokesperson for the developer went on record saying: “the PS3 version of Ghostbusters is softer due to the ‘quincunx’ antialiasing filter and the fact they render at about 75% the resolution of the 360 version. So you cannot directly compare a screen shot of one to the other unless you scale them properly. The PS3 does have less available RAM than the 360 – but they managed to squeeze 3 out of 4 textures as full size on the PS3.”

3 out of 4 ain’t bad. Work more hours!

@MakaiOokami

there having a Vaseline special in your local target. with 20% more realism.

later they released a patch to tone down the blur but sill it looked blurry

MakaiOokami: More real it is the same game using less resolution and a blur filter. By what your are saying you need to take some Vaseline to your tv for every game look more real

No need to get defensive i merely pointed out in your reply what i needed to fully explain my point.
And you put slightly in quotes! (slightly) Personally I dont care what you have to say or what you have said. Putting you aside the point of this silly editorial is to rant on pixel counters with out sites like lens of truth or eurogamers ect counting pixels and such you wouldnt know what version of a game was better. Oh and im sick and tired of people pointing out how good uncharted and gtp5 look yeah they look great i just wish that all cross platform games had the same results. unfortunately there is only one game that looks better on the ps3 is Tomb Raider: Underworld
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-17-article?page=4
the reson being is that it is using a different engine but the frame rate suffers
call of duty is a good example of a game that looks good on both BUT (slightly) better on the 360
shadowjin: this is the better usage of the word slightly. So in this instance i go with the ps3 my preferred system

I would agree with you 100% here, except that you are leaving out one VERY important mitigating factor… HOW is the consumer to KNOW of the difference until after they have already PAID for the product? Part of the agenda of this article seems to be to “quell” the fury of gamers who – quite rightly – have had enough of these last-minute surprises foisted upon them in exchange for their hard-earned cash (incidentally, PS3 owners have to pay an average of a 20% markup over the same PC game). The entire point of my rant against the developers is this… Put a *&^%ing DISCLAIMER on the product stating the limitations, and then we all have to shut our big fat yaps… cuz if you didn’t read the box, you have no one to blame but yourself. Simple, huh?

Now, undoubtedly I will hear some tired excuse about how telling the truth to consumers is not in the financial interest of the company… Well boo-hoo. Either the big software publishers and developers will have to make a slightly lower profit margin, or – eventually – their brand will die as consumers become familiar with such unethical marketing practices and they begin to develop the reputation that they so richly deserve.

Is honesty REALLY that much to ask for???

P.S. – One last comment… Let’s say the explanation for the differences between platforms is highly technical, and only 1 out of 10 will even begin to understand it… at least it’s still there, in black and white, and everyone is within their legal obligations, with very little “gray area”.

the PS3 version was lead platform.

Thats why it became a hug deal on top of the visuals.

incase you missed it.

i pointed out every single thing wrong with the playstation version of Ghostbusters.. that by itself shows i detest the game. instead of sniping a sentence in a post read in full.

next time ill add a back story..

it looked slightly sharper to me because i watched a friend play the game for 2min on his 360. i prioritize woman and parting over game analyzing any day. Especially when your there to pick up a friend. From what i saw, the 360 version was better. i think anyone can tell by my post i was not impressed on the playstation 3 version.

I lost interest in the PS3 version after seeing it run on another friends HDTV. The quincunx anti-aliasing was the developers excuse as to why it looked “soft”. When it looks like shit, plain and simple.

i try to keep extra detail out of article postings. Just like i posted , they made a huge mistake in bragging about the game and not delivering. Plain and simple. when i choose to not buy the PS3 version because it looks shitty, i stopped comparing.

The Ghostbusters game looks a bit more, real to me from what i’ve seen on PS3. It’s more balanced and smooth. The 360 verison looks a little more poppy and videogamey (which isn’t bad but for Ghostbusters specifically it’s perferrable to me) and the PC version PWNS ALL graphically. Everyone knows the PC ports are usually the best so we can just stop comparing nearly identicle slightly graphically variable games.

I think the reason why people care about pixels, is that they care about resolution. Why do some care about resolution? Cause some want to use an HD projector and/or a HUGE t.v. and they don’t want to see some artifacting on the games.

Of course people with that much money can just buy the PS4 next gen and enjoy that with the crap ton of VRAM they’ll have with the tons of Cell Processing power.

/discussion

Regardless of pixel-count (which is meaningless to me), the PROOF is in the PUDDING! No one has accused Lens Of Truth or GameTrailers of “doctoring” the comparison photos of GHOSTBUSTERS, because the differences are EASILY verifiable with the naked eye. I do not even own a high-end large-screen HDTV… I can easily see the difference on my sub-standard 30″ ghetto HDTV. I think Atari/Terminal Reality/Sierra would be taking a bigger beating than they are getting (and rightfully deserve) if more gamers viewed the HD Ghostbusters Game trailer included on the PS3 in the bonus content section. This video was OBVIOUSLY taken from the XBox 360 or the PC version (I suspect it was the XBOX version), and is like a bucket of cold water in your face after playing the PS3 version for a little while. Don’t believe me? Try it for yourselves! If you can’t see the difference, you are either blind or viewing the video downconverted to SD.

No doubt, this is the absolutely crappiest looking game I’ve seen on the PS3 yet (it has been well-documented that Ghostbusters for the PS3 is the lowest resolution game for the console yet produced), which is – in itself – almost criminal. The PS3 is a HD platform… is it really unreasonable for consumers to expect that all titles released for the platform would conform to that standard? If not, it should be legally required for a company to label the product warning that it is SD ONLY. Furthermore, the above-named companies compounded the offense by releasing drastically different versions on all platforms, but gave NO indication on the packaging or in the advertising that these versions differed in the slightest. Finally, Terminal Reality succeeded in firmly lodging their boot into their esophagus by bragging early on that the PS3 was their “lead” version, and that it would be superior to other ports, when the reality is that the PS3 version is – by FAR – the weakest version on the market (yes, I am even considering that the PC version was completely missing any multiplayer component).

This kind of hucksterism needs to be nipped in the proverbial bud… it’s out-and-out misrepresentation and bait-and-switch tomfoolery. I sincerely hope that Terminal Reality and company are successfully sued, and that they lose a TON of money over this bullcrap. It’s unfair, unethical, and needs to stop – NOW.

The Lens of Truth website (is) an independent site, funded by a group of game developers and enthusiasts who enjoy gaming. Based on your post, im guessing your also aware. Lens of Truth is built on (there) spare time and they also allow user-submitted content, you could say there another Playstation lifestyle, except there not just Sony related news. Personally, i do not take this article as discredit towards there work. Its just another writers view point.

A game running at 718 instead of 720p is not a big deal but when developers say one thing and do another, like the makers of Ghostbusters who advertise 1080p and it drops to 540p. That is a huge visual drop, add screen tear, disappearing walls like i mentioned in the last post and bland graphics. They will be picked apart. The designers of Ghostbusters dug there own hole by promising full1080p, superior graphics and effects, even going on record saying that the Playstation version would have superior visuals than the 360. That last statement forced them into the spot light and made them easy prey.

I couldn’t disagree more with you statements i own both systems and when a cross platform game comes out i what to know the best choice/. and as far your statement go’s (slightly) sharper on the xbox version of ghostbusters is quite an understatement the lensoftruth site review of the game is 100% accurate to later confirm eurogame did a face off and ghostbusters looks like total crap running at 540p compared to 720p 2xaa (First of all,

PS3 Ghostbusters is rendering 518,400 pixels per frame. Xbox 360 is managing 921,600, so there’s some interesting mathematics going on in that statement. Secondly, if quincunx anti-aliasing is compromising your image quality to this degree, why not try another solution? With regards the RAM situation, it’s a well-known limitation that the vast majority of cross-platform developers have (thankfully) managed to overcome. via eurogamer http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-20

Im using ghostbusters as the perfect example of a cross platform game that looks like shit on the ps3. So if im going to spend $60 on a game and i owne both ps3 and xbox360 i want to know

http://g.imagehost.org/0719/Ghostbusters_PS3.jpg
http://g.imagehost.org/0029/ghostbusterxbox_360.jpg

now you tell me what version would you want
it is well known that the ps3 dosnt do well on cross platfom games so i need the pixle counters to inform me i normall buy the ps3 version but when its this bad hell no