Straight from GameTrailer's mouth regarding the videos: "We don't create these videos for the fanboys. That's not the point. We create them so that people who own both systems can be a little more informed on which version to buy. It's the fanboys that turn the comments section for these videos into a debacle. As for using RGB or adjusting the white levels on the PS3, that completely defeats the point of these videos. We play both systems on default settings with the same cabling. If we were to adjust the settings on the PS3 to make it look better then we'd be sacrificing the integrity of the video. It's not the other way around."
So what they're saying is that they aren't taking advantage of the PS3's full-HD capabilities. It's built for that. But they aren't using it that way in their videos. Either crank both up to their maximum potential or get out, we say. Feel free to leave your thoughts as well.
[Thanks, Christian!]
[Update 1: Took out an uninformed sentence regarding Xbox video output. We apologize for the inaccuracy.]
[Update 2: Gametrailers offers another explanation here.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
1-16-2008 @ 6:08PM
Pulse-Wave said...
So they DON'T want to maximize the PS3's built-in capabilities? Odd, that.
Reply
1-17-2008 @ 10:56PM
Mike Jenkins said...
Are 90% of gamers going to change their settings every time they play a different console, if they touch their settings at all? NO! Most people don't bother messing with settings they just want to plug something in, turn it on, and start playing. This is why their comparisons are best for informing gamers as to which version to buy because most gamers use the default settings anyway. Wouldn't you be pissed if you saw that the GameTrailers comparison made the PS3 version look as good as the 360 version, then when you buy the PS3 game and go to play it it looks like shit on your TV? I would! I'm glad they use the default settings because it's an honest comparison between the two systems.
1-16-2008 @ 6:11PM
MattyD said...
Most definitely needs to be using full potential for a valid comparison...
Why would you want to play the game at the scaled back version otherwise.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 7:46PM
Haiddasalami said...
Its like playing a crysis on low with a high end system.
1-16-2008 @ 6:11PM
miguel said...
I agree, it is completely unfair to compare a game without showing the best quality available. Isn't that the point of the comparisons to show how good the game can be?
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:15PM
Limanima said...
I totally agree with you. They should compare both system at their optimum configurations, with the color/brightness/contrast to best fit the system.
Those comparisons are plain silly...
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:16PM
Elsnerma said...
Agreed. Both systems should be compared with the best picture they can possibly put out. Fanboyism aside, that's the way you should compare ANYTHING really. That's like comparing two guitars straight out of the box without taking the time to tune them first.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:57PM
AL7AIR said...
Nice analogy and I second that :) I own both systems and had several opportunities to test multi-platform games and demos on the same screen, and with the right output settings on the console and perfectly matched input settings on the television the differences are next to nothing, especially when it comes to the "washed out" pictures shown in way to many comparison videos. Sure those settings aren't helping poor ports to a better frame rate and anti aliasing, but then again who's seriously comparing those titles to judge system power? Or better yet the fun you'll have when playing a game :)
1-16-2008 @ 7:00PM
AL7AIR said...
Nice analogy and I second that :) I own both systems and had several opportunities to test multi-platform games and demos on the same screen, and with the right output settings on the console and perfectly matched input settings on the television the differences are next to nothing, especially when it comes to the "washed out" pictures shown in way to many comparison videos. Sure those settings aren't helping poor ports to a better frame rate and anti aliasing, but then again who's seriously comparing those titles to judge system power? Or better yet the fun you'll have when playing a game :)
1-16-2008 @ 6:17PM
XanthouS said...
Man, that's really silly. Biased or not, they're putting out incorrect information and cutting off the PS3 at the knees.
If you're going to use the same settings/cabling, at least compare a PS3 to the Elite so they output via HDMI...
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 7:04PM
Hashbrown_Hunter said...
Exactly. They should max both consoles out and compare them, or state that the comparisons take place on default settings in the video.
1-16-2008 @ 6:17PM
Fiefdom said...
I agree with the position on the matter your post implies you hold. Perhaps the videos would be more informative and worthwhile if they displayed the differences between a PS3 game on default settings with RGB cables and the same game with the best picture the PS3 can produce. That would allow for a more accurate basis of comparison for any PS3 owner with HD.
Fabricating a random and exaggerated analogy, one could more easily relate to this concern by imagining the 360 as only outputting in black and white and therefore using a black and white TV in defiance of the PS3's support of color. As I stated, the analogy is grossly exaggerated and is not to be taken in a literal sense at all but the idea behind it is relevant.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:23PM
PETEJOZ said...
I am blocking Gametrailers so I never visit the site again.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:27PM
wicko said...
Definitely biased. Take for example the 360's issues they had previously with VGA, games looked washed out. So they added an option to fix that, and people use it. Its funny how they nitpick about cabling and whatnot. If you're going to go out of your way to use identical parts, why wouldn't you use identical colour settings and brightness settings? By not doing that, all that you gain is the knowledge that default settings should ALWAYS be tweaked. This is something that should be done regardless.
I find myself going out of my way to ignore the brightness difference and possible washout so I can see the real differences that count: Texturing, lighting, enabled features, shaders, etc.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:27PM
joey said...
I'm confused, why do they say that the 360 only outputs to 480p? Doesn't it output upto 1080p, even without HDMI?
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 7:09PM
katz said...
No, 1080p is only achieved through HDMI.
they can however produce 1080i and 720p over the 5-plug component cables.
and the default may be 480(i/p) for NTSC regions, but it's 576(i/p) for PAL regions (meaning most of the world).
oh, and all of the above goes for both consoles.
the difference is that only the ps3 was designed with 1080p in mind, and the 360 who got HDMI over a year and a half after launch can't give true 1080p games, because they won't run on those with older consoles. that is if any of the old ones haven't gone to RRoD boot-camp yet.
1-16-2008 @ 7:53PM
Severe_Gamer said...
That is not entirely true. Most TVs are incapable of taking a 1080p input through component even though the 360 CAN output a 1080p signal via component. For example, the Sony KDS-A3000 actually has 3 1080p component inputs.
That said, the 360 is a system built around 720p. So even though the system is outputting a 1080p signal, it is really only an upscaled 720p signal. Most 360 games read 1080p on the back, but that is just a straight-up lie since it is upscaling the game up to 1080p.
Finally, I agree with everything everyone is saying. If they are going to compare systems, they shouldn't dumb down the more powerful system until it looks like the weaker one. If nothing else, they should post their test settings and hardware with each video (much as with videocard benchmarking).
1-16-2008 @ 6:28PM
tomoguisuru said...
It's true, take for example the PS3 version of the Orange Box. The issues that they showed aren't even really there. I own the game on my PS3 and have never seen any of the issues they showed. ( and yes, I'm running everything in HD including audio)
I think that they are doing everything they can to put down the PS3 version. Personally, I have nothing against the 360 but when people "rig" the comparison, that's when I have a problem.
If you want people to take your opinions seriously, don't try to fake them out.
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:29PM
never$$hort said...
The shitty thing is that they aren't the only site using these unfair comparision methods (hint: Gamespot)... I was actually banned indefinately last year from Gamespot for complaining to them that thier comparision shots were totally unfair and that if they were to do a fair test they needed to max the Ps3 out via HDMI and calibrate the display settings... Seriously who in thier right mind could say that this fair?? Its not our fault the 360s crippled and maybe if more people saw REAL COMPARISIONS on these sites, they would realize this and ditch that ugly hunk of junk..
Reply
1-16-2008 @ 6:29PM
Joe said...
480p? Huh?
All Xbox 360's output 1080p max.
Wow Nick... 'tis a shame.
Reply