Fallout 3: PC vs. 360 vs. PS3

E

Einhanderkiller

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
2,363
Some nice comparison screens showing off the graphical differences between the three verisons.

(According to IGN, the PC version is superior in every respect--presentation, graphics, controls, and features--except for sound, in which it ties with the other versions. The PS3 version is the worst of the three.)

head-to-head-fallout-3-20081027050947508364.jpg

head-to-head-fallout-3-20081027050940430647.jpg

head-to-head-fallout-3-20081027050933305962.jpg
 
yesh.

The PS3 hand the 360 have basically a 2 gen old video cards, roughly like a 7900gt or a x1900ish.

When most people playing games here have an 8800gt or better.

No comparison, let alone since both render mostly at 720p
 
Bleh, the 360/PS3 look like they're at the same level as Quake 3. Which is.. 10 years old? Sure, they may have shadows, and a far larger triangle count, but the blurriness brings it back down to the same level.

Man, am I glad I don't play on consoles.
 
Yeah the PS3 version looks like A$$....WOW!!! Yeah the PC looks better but can I achieve those graphics with my socket 939 4800 2 gigs of ddr and a 8800 GT 512 and what would be my max resolution that would be the question. Great looks on the PC but can my modest rig hope to achieve that? Also don't discredit sound I'm sure it would sound awesome on my 1500 dollars home theater system. I would really like it for PC but can I run this thing to those PC visuals?
 
you can probably achieve near max settings with a 1200x1024, can't really say until we get some perforance reviews :/

And the textures on the non PC ones look so much like crap
 
AVT said:
Bleh, the 360/PS3 look like they're at the same level as Quake 3. Which is.. 10 years old? Sure, they may have shadows, and a far larger triangle count, but the blurriness brings it back down to the same level.

Man, am I glad I don't play on consoles.
Click to expand...

QFT... I dont doubt that Fallout 3 on the consoles achieves more technically, but the overall look still sucks.

can't discount the fact that graphically, Quake 3 remains to this day one of the best graphical showings of all time.......
 
FirewolfX said:
Wow...PS3 looks like ass.
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking that both the X360 and the PS3 versions look like ass compared to the PC version.

But then again, is anyone really surprised that gaming-powerhouse PC's easily outclass consoles (by comparison) in this day and age?

The gap was already well established a couple of years ago, and it hasn't stopped widening since.
 
So, this game has crappy graphics, and the graphics will be even crappier on consoles. Ok... if anyone sees the PC screenshots and thinks "WOW, that's great graphics," then I don't know what to say.

I am completely and totally stoked for this game (my copy is arriving via FedEx overnight in 9 hours), but the graphical comparisons are splitting hairs. The graphics are not the focal point of this game. They kind of suck. Get over it and grow up, people.
 
PS3 has better lighting than 360 but still has weaker graphics (less geometry, weaker textures, etc)

PC is where i will be playing this
 
Still getting on the 360 even though my PC is more than capable. I simply enjoy playing on the couch more than being hunched over a desk... like I do at work all day every day. I'll grab the PC version once it's cheaper and mods actually start coming out.
 
The PC version is very impressive. But, personally, I'm willing to tolerate a loss of graphics for a console game.
 
Sh!T + Fan is coming soon. Funny all these developers jump all over multiplatforms thinking its going to be a more sound investment for them. While this may be true in the short run, I do believe in the long run the majority of gamers will become frustrated with the more than lacking ports...
 
I want to know performance specs. I have an 8800gts 320mb in PC and I also have a 360. I don't care about graphics, I want to know how often the PC dips in framerate vs having a stable framerate on 360...
 
The engine seems pretty well optimized as well (at least so far). On the pc in my sig (running 4 gb of memory now), I can play the game at 2560x1600, settings at Ultra, and 2x AA/15AF (yes I know that's a weird # for AF but it's the highest setting in the menu), I stayed topped out at 60 FPS all through the inside of the vault (I was too lazy to turn off Vsync after I started the game).

I haven't gotten outside of the vault yet though so I don't know how well it will perform in the outdoor environment, but I'm pretty optimistic since there won't be many trees or grass to bog things down. :D
 
Reviews are starting to come in confirming PS3s quality is deficient compared to 360 and PC (with PC outpacing both consoles by a long shot). Also mentioned is that PS3 has major slowdown in some areas.

What we're seeing with the PS3 I think is the limitation of the 256 fixed framebuffer, and to some extent the difficulty of programming for the Cell.

I think we're at a point in both consoles life-cycles where PC has definitively eclipsed them (I suppose it could also be argued this happened a while ago...). Also, the arguement for PC's being more expensive than consoles for the same performance has pretty much been nullified at this point when a $100 CPU and $150 GPU can shame a console and games are cheaper on PC. I remember the same thing occured with Far Cry: for me this game was the sign that I should start investing more in my PC in hardware and games over XBox, PS2.
 
ign review said:
The difference in looks between the two console versions is small compared to the leap that comes with a top of the line PC.
Click to expand...

Graphics and mods make PC version a no brainer.
 
Furystrike said:
keep in mind that you are comparing a $700+ PC to a $179 xbox 360
Click to expand...


well if your going to talk money lets be honost.

we will leave the monitor for PC and HD tv for consoles out of the equation.

Quick check shows for a new non refurbished Xbox 360 arcade no HD $200 seems like a going rate.


now i could simply say buy a AMD HD4850 for $150 and put it in any none ancient system and you will beat the xbox360

you could realistically buy a full system from the ground up for $500 and still get better graphics and gameplay out of your pc over the xbox 360.
 
dajet24 said:
well if your going to talk money lets be honost.

we will leave the monitor for PC and HD tv for consoles out of the equation.

Quick check shows for a new non refurbished Xbox 360 arcade no HD $200 seems like a going rate.


now i could simply say buy a AMD HD4850 for $150 and put it in any none ancient system and you will beat the xbox360

you could realistically buy a full system from the ground up for $500 and still get better graphics and gameplay out of your pc over the xbox 360.
Click to expand...


Performance would be a whole 'nother subject though. You may turn on all that AA/AF eye candy, but how well will the pc handle it? There was already a post somewhere in the forums with a guy who had a 4870 x2 that said the outside environments were very taxing.

My point is there is always a tradeoff. Sure the PC can outperform the consoles, but at what cost and how well will it maintain the same level of performance? How much tweaking will you have do? That is an allure to running it on a console even though the textures are blurred, low to no AA, etc. No matter what 360 you have, you know it will perform the same.
 
Why is the scene with the black guy so drastically different between the PC and consoles?

Also, companies really need to give this "insane bloom with depth of field" thing a rest It looks pretty cool the first few times... then it gets annoying.
 
Loggahead said:
I want to know performance specs. I have an 8800gts 320mb in PC and I also have a 360. I don't care about graphics, I want to know how often the PC dips in framerate vs having a stable framerate on 360...
Click to expand...

This is my concern. Too many PC game reviews have the "average" framerate, which can be from 75-80fps and go as low as the teens. I'd honestly rather have a steady 30-40 that doesn't change instead of all of the ups and downs.
Is there any way to lock the framerate or guarantee that my 8800 GTX won't have framerates bouncing around?
If so, the PC one should work with the 360 pad, right?
 
Every review I read states "This looks great and performs well on a HIGH END PC". Well I don't have a high end pc so I need to know how it runs on a regular joes pc like myself. I mean i have a $1500 surround sound system and a 46 inch HDTV and this isn't a pure shooter so for me performance is what matters. Heck I played Mass Effect on the 360 and loved every minute of it with all its texture pop in issues. I would like to get this for PC due to the mods but really there aren't any now so that is really not a factor. In fact I'm still waiting on mods for Mass Effect to justify picking that up on pc and also waiting for the KOTOR II restoration project. Point I'm making is usually about time useful mods are completed the base game will be half price or less anyway and if I'm still interested I can pick it up.

FYI
AMD 64 4800 X2 (socket 939)
2 GB of DDR RAM
8800 GT 512 MB
24 inch soyo monitor 1900 x 1200
 
Commander0Zero said:
Every review I read states "This looks great and performs well on a HIGH END PC". Well I don't have a high end pc so I need to know how it runs on a regular joes pc like myself. I mean i have a $1500 surround sound system and a 46 inch HDTV and this isn't a pure shooter so for me performance is what matters. Heck I played Mass Effect on the 360 and loved every minute of it with all its texture pop in issues. I would like to get this for PC due to the mods but really there aren't any now so that is really not a factor. In fact I'm still waiting on mods for Mass Effect to justify picking that up on pc and also waiting for the KOTOR II restoration project. Point I'm making is usually about time useful mods are completed the base game will be half price or less anyway and if I'm still interested I can pick it up.

FYI
AMD 64 4800 X2 (socket 939)
2 GB of DDR RAM
8800 GT 512 MB
24 inch soyo monitor 1900 x 1200
Click to expand...

I'd reckon you should be able to push a tad higher resolution and IQ with that rig than on 360 (probably most noticably with viewing distance). I get you when you say you enjoyed Mass Effect on 360 just as much as on PC (I know I did), but Mass Effect didn't have any mods which Fallout 3 is sure to have with time.

If you're worried about not having a "home theater" experience on your PC, simple solution: hook your PC up to your home theater.
 
Wow, the landscape shot shows a huge difference between the versions. Icky soupy textures.

Also see that the PC screenshot is missing the shader effect when speaking to the black cowboy fellow, or perhaps it only does that when you're in dialogue and they weren't in that screenshot? Personally prefer that focus shader effect.
 
360 has AA, PS3 version does not
PS3 has HDR? 360 doesnt? (look at the lighting on the ant like creature)
PC has both, and looks better :)
textures in screenshot 1 look better on PS3
textures in screenshot 2 look better on 360
 
harmattan said:
I'd reckon you should be able to push a tad higher resolution and IQ with that rig than on 360 (probably most noticably with viewing distance). I get you when you say you enjoyed Mass Effect on 360 just as much as on PC (I know I did), but Mass Effect didn't have any mods which Fallout 3 is sure to have with time.

If you're worried about not having a "home theater" experience on your PC, simple solution: hook your PC up to your home theater.
Click to expand...

The catch with hooking your PC up to a home theater is that a 1080p TV has a pretty hefty resolution, and getting true surround sound with a PC can be a complete pain in the ass for anything but movies. Analog multi-out is the only decent way I've found, and not all receivers can even handle that very well. It can look and sound great, and it gives you a fun way to compare console games to their PC equivalents.
Still, even though I have this set-up, I'm still bothered by the infamous PC "average" framerate people tend to use. I think a static framerate even as low as 30fps looks better than one going from 75 to 15, to 20, to 50, to 40, etc. I find that the consoles do a much better job with consistency just because they're dealing with one hardware model. Even when you "lock" PC games at a framerate, they still don't do as good of a job.
Anyway, the HTPC experience is only as good as your PC, and even an 8800GTX can't push 1920x1080 on as many things as you think.
 
I swear some of you going on about dips in frame rate on PC's must have little to no PC gaming experience. Or maybe my PC history is just that drastically different from some of you? Or maybe it is just that some of you spend so much on your PC's keeping them current that you feel slighted if you can't run a game with everything maxed out? Either way some of the shit that gets said really makes me go. WTF?

I had a 16x12 21” CRT back before the Geforce 3 came out and I was still using a GF2 card. Sure it was a CRT so I could run as low a resolution as I wanted but having that combo I learned really fast that some games looked better at high res while others looked better at a lower res with AA enabled. Either way I learned really fast how to tweak setting in games to get them to play smooth and still look as good as I could get them too with my hardware.

If you want the console experience out of your PC and by that I mean pop the game in and play then you should be able to get that if the devs are doing the job right. Just let the game select the setting your PC can handle and forget you have any options. You should not get any serious frame rate dips if they did the job right. And the game will still look better then it does on the 360.

Or if you want to be 100% sure you get no serious frame rate dips hook your PC to a TV or ditch your high res PC LCD for one closer to the resolution the 360 outputs and run your game on that. You will with out a doubt get no frame rate issues and again have a game that looks better then the 360 version.

Or you could just be like the bulk of PC games and take the time to figure out what settings you should be using with your PC and LCD by tweaking the options the devs give you to get the most out of the game while maintaining a playable frame rate at all times.

If you are looking at game revives that show how the game played with X settings on various cards and see frame rates that dip in to the teens and from that conclude the PC isn't capable of maintaining playable frame rates in said game. Then well no one can help you and you should probably just find a console forum and stick to using you PC to Google game cheat codes and such.

Anyway after typing this and thinking about the shit I read in this forum some more I think I know where the problem is for many of you. It's like you go on line and read that Joe Blow says he is able to run the game at max setting at X resolution with his setup but since you can't get your PC to do the same it is like someone chopped a chunk of your eeeeepeen off. So you come here making but hurt comments bashing computer gaming and preaching console. Since the console provides the same experience to everyone with an HD TV you do get Joe telling you hie eeepeen is so much larger. Well except for multi platform games like this where the any PC that can play the game should look way better.

Oh and to the guy getting the game on the console cause he doesn't want to sit hunched over his home PC like he does all day at work. Maybe you should reevaluate your PC setup. I sit in a lazy boy nice and comfy at my PC with no need to bend over.

Now with that said some people prefer console gaming and thats fine. Just remember when you come to [H] you are dealing with at least some PC gamers. Not everyone is here to flash the latest eeeepeen they bought with mommy and daddy's money.

So as a long time PC gamer let me be the first to say that the PC is more the capable of providing playable frame rates in any game including Crysis with out blowing boat loads of cash and still provide better graphics then the consoles. And if you really like gaming on the console over a PC that shouldn't matter one bit to you. Just like I don't care that my PC is well below the standards around here at [H]. Play your damn game, enjoy it and fuck what ever anyone else thinks.
 
And the pc version is $10 cheaper than the console versions. Take that over a few titles a year and you could purchase a descent video card with the savings.
 
Domingo said:
The catch with hooking your PC up to a home theater is that a 1080p TV has a pretty hefty resolution, and getting true surround sound with a PC can be a complete pain in the ass for anything but movies. Analog multi-out is the only decent way I've found, and not all receivers can even handle that very well. It can look and sound great, and it gives you a fun way to compare console games to their PC equivalents.
Still, even though I have this set-up, I'm still bothered by the infamous PC "average" framerate people tend to use. I think a static framerate even as low as 30fps looks better than one going from 75 to 15, to 20, to 50, to 40, etc. I find that the consoles do a much better job with consistency just because they're dealing with one hardware model. Even when you "lock" PC games at a framerate, they still don't do as good of a job.
Anyway, the HTPC experience is only as good as your PC, and even an 8800GTX can't push 1920x1080 on as many things as you think.
Click to expand...

See this is exactly what I am talking about. Now you may have a point about sound but I am far from an audiophile so I don't know.

As for stable frame rates and the ability for the 8800GTX to push 1920 I have to call BS and I don't even own an 8800GTX.

People the devs provide PC games with settings that can be adjusted for a reason! Use them right and you will get playable setting at high resolution. I know this to be a fact because while everyone was busy crying about Crysis and poor frame rates I was running it on a 7900GS at 1680x1050 and enjoying the game play. Now when I get around to upgrading my video card in the future I will go back and enjoy the Crysis game play along with more of the eye candy it had to offer. Try doing the same with the next gen console and your old game.

So again if you enjoy just being able to pop the game in your console and play the game with the graphics the devs decided the console could handle thats great and have fun gaming. But don't try and tell everyone that PC's suck because devs give us the option to have far more eye candy then the console could handle and some people don't know how to tweak that eye candy to get stable frame rates. I have never had a problem getting a game to run at stable frame rates on any PC I have ever owned but it requires tweaking and even sacrificing of some eye candy. The sacrificing of eye candy should be easy for many of you console gamers to swallow since you already do that just by buying the condole version of a game.
 
people complaing about pc gaming and money to upgrade to play at max settings ect. Im pretty sure if consoles had upgradable parts many poeple would buy.
 
TGA said:
Oh and to the guy getting the game on the console cause he doesn't want to sit hunched over his home PC like he does all day at work. Maybe you should reevaluate your PC setup. I sit in a lazy boy nice and comfy at my PC with no need to bend over.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would be me. What the hell is this supposed to mean? Reevaluate my PC setup? #1) I wasn't being literal about being "hunched over". #2) Sitting in a recliner when I'm playing a PC game simply isn't practical for me. Why the hell would I buy different furniture just to play a PC game?

I don't limit myself to a single platform. I have all the current major consoles plus an extremely powerful PC. This isn't about "flexing my epeen" because fact of the matter is that I like games, period. All of em. Consoles, PC games, and handhelds. I just don't get the elitist PC attitude.

That being said, I'm *still* getting Fallout 3 on the 360 because I don't want a recliner for my office/PC room. I don't want to "reevaluate" my PC setup (whatever the hell this means). I just want to come home, put the game in my console and play with no worries. At the end of the day, do you really give a shit if someone doesn't want to play on their PC? I'm going to guess no. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top