For those who play the RE5 demo...

[ketzergon]

...wich version has the best graphics, Xbox 360 or PS3???, i really wanna know.

Thanks

[Helegad]

Uh... what RE5 demo?

[Mr_Zombie]

I think the one that was shown during TGS and/or E3.

[James]

It's confirmed but not released yet.

I hear PS3 is the lead platform (which would mean that the performance overall is better) but I've had nothing to concretely confirm as such.

[Andyfer_Ruu]

I'm going to play the PS3 demo. I think they said there wont be any graphical differences in genral, but i think the ps3 has better shaders than the x box, making the graphics look more smooth. But yeah, i reckon the only differences would be because of the different technology in both consoles, so for example p3 will render things different than x box and so on.
Thats what i think anyway! then again i could be wrong.

[ketzergon]

Yes, i mean the RE5 TGS/E3/British Games Conference (don't remember the name) demo.

I hear PS3 is the lead platform

When watching any gameplay of the new multiplatform games, they always play the game in question in a Xbox 360, i'm no fanboy, but why always even with the Wii games (hehe sarcasm) use that console.

Still don't know what nex gen console buy, i'm going to buy one when RE5 come out.

[News Bot]

The winner for me will be the one with zero screen tearing.

[Umon Daisuke]

Since it's being developed on PC first, there really isn't a lead console platform per se. Their first simultaneous multiplatform release was nearly identical (DMC4), with differences that 90% of people didn't care about. The major difference was the cutscene framerate (30 on 360 and 60 on PS3).

Of course, the PC version wiped the floor with both and was well optimized.

[Carnivol]

The major difference was the cutscene framerate (30 on 360 and 60 on PS3).

Cutscenes ran at a constant of 30 on the 360, and a fluctuating 30~60 on the PS3 (though, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it actually dips below 30 and rarely even hits that max of 60 outside of scenes with nothing but scenery).

A locked constant is what most people would, and I share that opinion, as it doesn't give that feeling of choppiness that automatically occurs when you have a non-steady framerate (assuming that your locked framerate is higher than what normally "by default" would give the feeling of choppiness.)

[Rombie]

Carn - I dunno what you saw, but the PS3's framerate was constant. It was the 360 edition that had frame issues, particularly during cutscenes.

[Umon Daisuke]

The frame rate rarely dipped on the PS3's cutscenes, aside from one or two with closeups that had volumetric effects (start of mission 2 for example). Major action scenes such as the main intro, and boss intros were solid 60fps without hitches.

The direction of some of the cutscenes used some slow motion, which would've been a bit more jarring with 60fps than 30fps.

I could go one to note other differences between the two versions, but really, they were without a doubt the most "identical" versions. Little tearing was present with the 360 demo, but I don't recall seeing any in the final version.

[Vector]

I don't really notice framerate dips. It's just not something I look for.

[HecRPD]

I don't really notice framerate dips. It's just not something I look for.

Im definitly playing the PS3 Demo.Anyway thats the only system I own.

[Stars1356]

Im sure the PS3 version will be better but I don't think most people can tell the difference.