Jump to content

VIDEOGAME Thread...


Recommended Posts

Just completed Alan Wake, very very decent game.

Probably an 8.5/10.

Not to everyones taste but I found it very enjoyable and it was nice to have a game that was longer than 8 hours.

roughly how long is it? i'll probably be getting it when the price drops a bit. friday can't come soon enough for RDR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just completed Alan Wake, very very decent game.

Probably an 8.5/10.

Not to everyones taste but I found it very enjoyable and it was nice to have a game that was longer than 8 hours.

roughly how long is it? i'll probably be getting it when the price drops a bit. friday can't come soon enough for RDR

Well each episode and there are 6 are roughly 1.5-2 hours on normal and usually 2+ on nightmare which is the hardest setting which I am going through on now. Also you get a code for the first DLC episode which is due on 27th June which will be again 1.5-2 hours on normal.

But if you want to find all the collectables it will take alot longer as some of them are very well hidden.

So I would say on the first playthrough it will be anywhere between 9 and 12 hours without going after the collectables and like I said just by buying the game new you are given a code to the first DLC which will again be 2 hours ish.

It was just a nice change to have a game which went over 10 hours when compared to MW2 which takes about 6 hours to do and yet FPS' like Crysis, Halo and Killzone are criticised for having storys that last about 10 hours and MW2 doesnt.

And I know how you feel about RDR, I will hopefully complete Alan Wake again on Nightmare by then so I can trade it in to get RDR halfprice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently RDR suffers from significant downgrading graphically on the PS3 when compared to the 360 version.

"The major difference is said to be a likely 640p resolution on the PS3 (upscaled to 720p), compared to full 720p on the Xbox 360, a not insignificant 20% difference. Other apparent inferiorities include less grass, rougher antialiasing and lower framerates.

Opinions range from calling the differences a matter of personal preference to condemning the PS3 as the inferior console.

The game itself is being heralded as a masterpeice and certain Game of the Year candidate, so whatever platform squabbles ensue, the game itself is beyond reproach.

Even so, players are wondering just why a game with a budget in the hundreds of millions is suffering from the same lazy porting which afflicts so many supposedly identical “multiplatform” games."

Link with more screens

Edited by Tottenham Hotspur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the right video settings and right TV (HD), the game looks nothing like it does in those screens.

Sadly though it will always look inferior to the 360 version as it is upscaled to 720p rather than being true 720p, its just lazy porting which has blighted many many PS3 games such as Fallout 3.

Just because you have a kickass tv doesn't hide the fact the game upscales and so will never look as good.

Edited by Tottenham Hotspur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red Dead Redemption sports the same sub-HD resolution as its predecessor, Grand Theft Auto 4, on the PlayStation 3.

The lower resolution results in a slightly less sharp image compared to its Xbox 360 brother, it's been claimed.

The Xbox 360 version of Red Dead Redemption has been confirmed to be 720p with 2x anti-aliasing, whereas the PlayStation 3 version has been pared down to approximately 640p. That's a 20 per cent lower rendering resolution.

Veteran Beyond 3D technical forum member Al_Strong today confirmed the PS3 game's vertical resolution to be 640 pixel's high, but struggled to pin down its horizontal resolution.

Source. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=247104 So is CVG not credible enough for ya :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just bought Red Dead Redemption for the PS3, I have a 360, but it is abit unstable, and the PS3 is for me the superior system to play games on. Much of that is based on the fact that I'm much more addicted to the Trophy system then the Achivement system. I know the game isn't as good lookning on the PS3 as it is on the 360, but I belive it will deliver good graphics none the less.

To bad I have alot of school and work ahead of me, so I can't play it much the comming days :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just seen the figures for xbox live gameplay and I don't understand, why don't more people play BC:2 is So much better than COD6

Because Modern Warfare 2 is easier.

Also COD is a household name, Battlefield isn't so much for console gamers. But I agree it is a shame that not many people play it in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...