Dead Rising 2: PS3 vs. Xbox 360

By Jamie Pert - Sep 27, 2010

Following on from our Dead Rising 2 review roundup today, we wanted to expand more on one of the reviews that looks at the Xbox 360 vs. PS3 verisons in detail, this EuroGamer article can be seen here.

If you check out the link above you can see a two page article which puts the PS3 and Xbox 360 side-by-side, here you can see identical screenshots from each platform and even a video showing framerates and general performance.

In this article we will summarize EuroGamer’s findings, on the whole it looks as if the Xbox 360 is better, shadows and lighting are far superior and the 30fps cap ensures smooth gameplay, whereas the uncapped PS3 version suffers from screen tear.

The PS3 version does cope better when there are a lot of zombies in an outdoor environment, whereas the Xbox 360 can sometimes struggle, however this is pretty much the only time the PS3 excels.

EuroGamer also suggest that the native resolution of the PS3 release is in fact just 1024×576, which has been upscaled to 720p, whereas the Xbox 360 version runs at a native resolution of 720p, this is sometime noticeable in these screens.

To conclude it seems as if the Xbox 360 version does have the edge, that said 95% of gamers probably wouldn’t notice the PS3 versions slight imperfections.

Do you own both consoles? If so, has EuroGamer’s comparison convinced you to buy the Xbox 360 version?

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

Also See: Capcom deny Dead Rising Collection despite Amazon listing

  • Guest

    It's always better to go with the X360 version, just for the fact that Xbox Live is a much bigger and more active community.

    You will still be able to find a game on Live in two years, where as on PSN and PC it's doubtful. Also, servers get shut down all the time on PSN and PC (so you can't play them on-line, period), where it rarely happens on X360.


      What are you talking about? All indications that I've seen suggest that 360 has about 7,000 user advantage over PSN… Which really isn't significant considering how many players there are… Not positive on the number, but since there's about 12 million players ranked in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 on the PSN I've gotta' say that 7,000 more players doesn't seem note-worthy at all. Also, I'm able to play all of my old games with ease on the PSN. This includes games with far superior sequels – not to mention there's a lot less obnoxious five year olds that should never have been given a microphone. At first I was irritated that a PlayStation mic costs like $50… but after being exposed to the LIVE community I realized it was really a blessing. By the way, have you been huffing paint? Are you seriously suggesting that the LIVE community has a longer-lasting gaming community for games than PC? People still play motherfucking Duke Nukem 3D on-line. You can play Ultima Online – as it was on the release date… LIVE hasn't been around nearly long enough to establish whether or not it will have the same kind of longevity as PC games, but guess what? It won't. The LIVE community will all but die off as soon as some future generation of consoles replaces it with something else. Also, as a frequent gamer of both on-line PC and PlayStation games I feel obliged to comment that I've never run into a situation where I just couldn't play on-line – barring Dead Rising 2, ironically. I got the Ninja pack, and if you're not aware – it's really more of a curse than anything. Players have to get DLC they can't use to be able to play with people in co-op that have the ninja pack. This is something I notice a lot about the rabid 360 fans – a complete refusal to accept reality complimented with bizarre and false claims of the 360's superiority. It has less powerful and less reliable hardware. Not to mention the fact that Microsoft charges for on-line play. Yeah, I know… Just $50 a year… I hear that all the time. It's not much money, I agree – but I resent the reasoning behind having the pay service in the first place. Know why they charge you money? Because you'll pay it. I just don't agree with that, not when it can easily be a free service, as PC, PlayStation 3 and I believe Wii have shown quite clearly. Yeah, PSN does have a lot of stupid costumes and stuff you can buy for $1.99… but having that available isn't hurting me – and I usually don't miss having those things in the game. If I really do then it's usually worth whatever they're charging. Having extra content available like that is part of how PSN stays free… it seems like a more than fair trade to me.

  • well i have both xbox and ps3 .. I dont get the point the point of these comparisons .. and the end of the day its basically exactly the same game , its like comparing your left hand to your right hand . there just no point ?

  • well i have both xbox and ps3 .. I dont get the point the point of these comparisons .. and the end of the day its basically exactly the same game , its like comparing your left hand to your right hand . there just no point ?

  • Rayjaya

    What it realy boiles down to is that programing for the 360 is exactly the same as pc, in other words they know all the little secrets to make a game run smoothly, ps3 on the other hand requires that devs take the time to learn the hardware (and in reality it would be better for the develpoers in the long run) but capcom realy does seem to be telling us ps3 owners that our buisness in unappreciated, or maybe the fact they put it out on ps3 was just a cash grab to try and stimulate their slipping sales.

  • Amenophis

    naaah same history fucking port, is the same fucking history, why they didn't a good job, ps3 is obviously the best console i mean in the harware cpu graphics etc, even in the online, but the 360 is the best in ram

  • micky bradford jones

    screw the x-box ,it burns up,then laseres the disc,and the red rings are super annoying also,why would anyone pay to play online ,ps3 is really the better consule and i bet the small imperfections arent even anything to care about.

    • Cameron

      We pay to play because xbox offers basic online content such as cross game chat which ps3 does not provide a basic online feature great job Sony. The ps3 also burns out just like any other CONSOLE not consule. You pay $50 a year for great service ONCE a year don't be a cheap skate.

    • KewlKink

      dude believe me i fix consoles for a living. let me tell you that the xboxs that red ringed where pretty much the launch consoles and that right now we have more ps3s in for repair than xboxs be it for the lens or the amber light of death. ps3s are the worst things to fix and they are very expensive we charge 120 for yellow lights or the lens or 80 for a bricked one. the 360 rrod of death takes 10 mins for us to do.

      • THE TRUTH

        I'm not sure where you're repairing consoles and what the market saturation is like, though I have a nagging feeling you don't actually repair consoles for a living – correct me if I'm wrong. I have to say, your personal experience, or perhaps fictionalized account does not match up with statistics consistently provided by various sources. A recent poll of 500,000 gamers came up with a failgasm of a result for the 360's failure rate. 42% of 360 owners reported a failure. Just take a moment to let that sink in – nearly half of the X-Box 360 consoles out there will likely fail. Of that 42%, 55% percent reported their 360 had to be repaired more than once. Of that 55%, 39% needed a third repair. Compared to the results from Microsoft's competitors (PlayStation 3 having an 8% failure rate and the Wii with a very impressive failure rate of less than 1%), it's clear that the 360 is a poor purchase, unless you have the extra cash for endless repairs. I've several friends who bought the 360, I've heard mention of at least a dozen repairs on this handful of people's systems, and – guess what? – not a single one of those systems still works. All of them broke down enough times that they gave up trying to afford to repair them and sold them off for very little cash back, with one exception. After having to mail his 360 away for the FIFTH time my buddy just smashed it rather than going for a sixth repair after it failed again. Too bad he didn't just smash it the first time and used all that would-be repair money to get a PS3. It's a much, much better system – assuming you care more about your system working than gossiping with the on-line nerds you pretend are real friends.

        (Cited poll:….

  • angelo

    Well it should be no surprise….these devs have given the 360 two exclusive episodes….its an old 360 exclusive anyways.

    They obviously didn’t take the time to make the game as good as it could be.

    Not really a concern to me after playing through the first episode on 360 I wasn’t really impressed.

    Even with that…these developers should stay exclusive rather than making a subpar port….same goes for u square enix ..(crappy ffxiii)..

    Either way…non story to me