User Avatar Image

The game is superior on 360

posted by beavermatic on - last edited - Viewed by 362 users

I've been able to play both PC and 360 versions.

on my PC, i ran all settings maxed, at 1920x1080.

The games graphics look dated on PC, and most envirotmental textures looked pretty subpar. I was using a wired 360 controller on PC, so I didn't encounter any of the keyboard/mouse bugs, not video card issues people were reporting.

HOWEVER, on the xbox 360.. its a completely story.

I guess the game was made with console in mind... the graphics look as good as anything else out on the console market, the game runs flawless, and even enviorments and details at 1080p look amazingly well. The low-res textures don't seem to be apparent, and the fx of really seem to make a better looking game... such as blur and depth of field.. it really makes those background trees, plants, rocks, etc look very nice... masking their low-res nature very well.. I'm not seeing alot of those same FX as great on the PC. Even lighting on the console appears better an no apparent issues. The foliage textures don't seem nearly as 2d.

and even load screens/scenes feel normal.. they dont just skip or seem too fast as they do in PC

just a thought

9 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • I personally find this very surprising seeing how 360 was confirmed much later.

    But i don't know how porting or getting games to work for different systems works so yeah.

    I have it for the PSn and PC. The PSN one lags but it's on and off. The lag was bad when I first played it but then I went back and it wasn't as bad as the first time. The PC one runs much smoother then my PSN one after I toned down the graphics and shadows but I still had some slight lag going.

    Anywho, glad you got a great playing experience out of the game. Not to say I didn't enjoy mine. I love the game. lol

  • Fact. Buy it for 360 to get the full experience out of this game. The controls on PC (without the gamepad) were taxing at times, whereas the 360 I never had a problem, even felt like I was actually performing what was happening onscreen at times. The lags were minimal, aside from the pause after every part of each chapter. The graphics were maxed far beyond what my PC could handle. Very enjoyable. On PC I could only keep myself interested for a couple hours, until I put in the 360 version. Then I stayed up from mindnight to almost 8am playing the game til the end.

    You don't have to worry about graphical settings. That's what I love about console games.

  • Just going out on a limb here:
    Maybe, just maybe it has something to do with the fact you xbox is running full HD 1080p, as that is what xbox does unless you are playing old original xbox games that can't even be upscaled to full HD.
    Your computer is quite probably not running 1080p HD, which would obviously make the graphics look worse.

  • emo hoe:


    my pc and 360 are set to same resolution. 1080p *is* 1920x1080.

  • @beavermatic said: emo hoe:


    my pc and 360 are set to same resolution. 1080p *is* 1920x1080.

    Not true.
    1080p hd runs at 1920x1080 yes.
    But a 1920x1080 resolution is not automatically HD.
    HD is a slightly different graphical format that includes more than just a resolution, it has better colouring, deeper blacks, whiter whites, sharper edges etc.

    My pc runs 1920x1080 resolution and has a HD capable graphics card, but it don't mean its all magically HD. Put a dvd and a bluray of the same movie side by side on screen and there's still a notable quality difference.

  • I am aware of some color correction enhancement in a TV's version of 1920x1080 (1080p[rogresive scan])

    However the resolution is still the same.

    And you forgot to mention about upscaling. Whereas the PC version does not have to upscale... the console version of Jurassic Park appears to upscale the scanning from 720p to 1080p. So thus, where this should cause textures & etc to look worse, on a console, it makes it apparently look better by hiding and masking alot of the textures without making them as "clear". I found the clarity of the PC version for most console ports usually make ingame detail look like crap at higher resolutions in some cases... of course you have to add in the fact the console also uses far lower res and color depth and whatnot and a few other tricks to get it to look good on that specific hardware for limitation reasons.

  • You still don't seem to grasp the point:
    Just because it is in 1920x1080 res DOES NOT make it HD. High Definition's benefits has nothing to do with the screen resolution, it just happens that 1920x1080 is one of the resolutions it currently runs at and is completely inconsequential to the visual improvements of HD compared to SD; heck get a good graphics card and you can display SD at much larger resolutions that 1920x1080.
    Your pc will be displaying SD images at a 1920x1080 resolution.
    Your xbox will be displaying 1080p HD.

    The HD display looks better because HD is better.

  • I do grasp the concept. I fully understand how progressive scan, non progressive, interlace, and these resolutions work.

    I'm merely trying to state 1080p actual resolution is 1920x1080 pixels (hence the 1080 portion). There are other color correction requirements that 1080p has that 1920x1080 PC games may or may not support.

    Please tell me your not saying thats incorrect...

    to confirm, please read:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_ready

  • I agree, I've played it on my PC and 360, and it just plain plays and looks better on the Xbox. But the PC version is still pretty nice, or at least worth it for all the deluxe goodies!

Add Comment