• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Final Fantasy XIII post-release comparison/garbage thread

So far I'm liking the game. Only up to around Chapter 3. It's difficult for me to figure out how to attack two targets at once. Sometimes I seem to do it, and then when I try to do it again I cant.
Plus I wanted that Mom in my party. Any Mom that can hold a rocket launcher should be in my party.
 
Salz01 said:
So far I'm liking the game. Only up to around Chapter 3. It's difficult for me to figure out how to attack two targets at once. Sometimes I seem to do it, and then when I try to do it again I cant.
Plus I wanted that Mom in my party. Any Mom that can hold a rocket launcher should be in my party.

You should have guessed what was going to happen, when the character was just named "Mother".

Moms are tough!
 
chandoog said:
really ? that's new to me, is it a persistent problem or just secluded to one area ?
Many people have reported that chapter 8 (I believe) has a very poor framerate on 360 throughout much of the gameplay. I don't know what it looks like or how bad it is, but there have been quite a few comments on this.
 
Mizzou Gaming said:
I've been watching a buddy play the 360 version for several hours and it looks phenomenal. If you only own a 360 and have been reluctant to pick it up because of cries of "inferior" you have nothing to worry about. Pick this baby up.

Having said that, I'm not suggesting the PS3 version isn't superior-It is, but "inferior" in this case is still fucking amazing.

I hope no one that is interested in the game and only have a 360 isn't second guessing because it's not as good as the ps3 version. People tried to suggest that Bayonetta only exists on 360 (in a way) but when I played ps3 version it still blew me away. I got it after a patch but I never got to a point where there was horrible framerate problems. I read it was going to be at a boss fight or something but I beat the game now and everything was awesome.

Just get it for whatever is convenient for you. If you have both systems and just want the best one get the ps3 version.
 
I got it for PS3 and played about an hour. Went over to a friends and saw the 360 version, I could tell more in the cut-scenes than anything that it had some compression going on. Amazing looking game regardless.
 
Mizzou Gaming said:
I've been watching a buddy play the 360 version for several hours and it looks phenomenal. If you only own a 360 and have been reluctant to pick it up because of cries of "inferior" you have nothing to worry about. Pick this baby up.

Having said that, I'm not suggesting the PS3 version isn't superior-It is, but "inferior" in this case is still fucking amazing.

Well said.
 
SonOfABeep said:
Loving the PS3 version, but the dithering is still noticeable in it.

Love the HD cinematics though.

Yep, get rid of dithering and PS2 quality running animations for the sequel please. Also better ground textures wouldn't hurt.

Rest of the tech and gameplay is awesome, loving the game so far!
 
chandoog said:
Article only mentions that one instance and makes note of nothing like that happening in the other analyzed clips.

Assumption is all well and good about how it could possibly be there in future scenes as well, but then that's like saying how the frame rate in the PS3 version might drop in future scenes as well like it does in some of the opening one's.

http://i40.tinypic.com/314ozf8.jpg
Lens of truth's speculation about the possibilities of more deleted scenes is rather odd. But that's not much different than DF assuming the minimum frame rate in the 360 version is 26FPS based on their video analysis..which happens to show it actually drops below 26FPS..

DF24.jpg
 
schennmu said:
Wait, so DF felt the need to point out the slight advantage for 360 in cut scene close ups, but failed to mention that the PS3 performs better during gameplay?

I'm not calling bias on DF, but this has got to be their worst face off ever! :lol

You do know that you can't even begin to notice a difference of 0.02 frames missed in a second right?

Really. There's a big difference between seeing a cutscene drop to 20 FPS, and something dropped to 29.92 compared to 29.96 or whatever.
 
WrikaWrek said:
You do know that you can't even begin to notice a difference of 0.02 frames missed in a second right?

Really. There's a big difference between seeing a cutscene drop to 20 FPS, and something dropped to 29.92 compared to 29.96 or whatever.

Sure, but shouldn't they point out that the framerate during gameplay (where it actually matters) is rock solid on both platforms?

Also, I am having a hard time noticing any drops in cutscenes so far.
 
Just got myself a new tv (old sd tv in bedroom broke). Only 32" but oh my fucking God this game is looking so much better than on my old 32. Menu system being the same as on ps3 is a nice touch too but a bit confusing at times. :lol
 
I think some site should do a real comparison of chapter 8 (if there is anything to the complaints). It would be interesting from a technical POV to see which particular features it uses.
 
dark10x said:
Many people have reported that chapter 8 (I believe) has a very poor framerate on 360 throughout much of the gameplay. I don't know what it looks like or how bad it is, but there have been quite a few comments on this.

Nautilus and Pulse apparently have issues, dropping down to 15fps in some places.

And everyone already knew MS paid for FFXIII. I believe even Sony said something to that effect two years ago.
 
NemesisPrime said:
DF links should be banned from GAF. They have no clue at all.

Lion Heart said:
I agree 100%.


It appears they are just as clueless as Digital Foundry (see the "26fps minimum" claims). Should DF be banned too?

In the interest of free speech, and letting GAF members develop their ability to discern the erroneous from the valid, we should encourage not restrict information that can fuel debate.

Oh and not every "problem" can be solved by reaching for the pitchfork.
 
This game has my opinions on a roller coaster. I really start getting into everything, but then some cheesy dialogue from Snow (whom I hate more that Vanille right now) ruins everything. Blah blah Hero blah blah Hero....

I want to strangle some of these characters.

Then, more of the story unfolds, the combat gets slightly better, and then I think "Hey, this really is a good Final Fantasy....and then Vanille will pop up and ruin it all.

I really have no idea what to think at this time. I'm about 4 hours in and I'm NOW just getting some more abilities.

Graphics, settings, music, story (at least the part I can understand) are top notch, but the dialogue is such crap so far. How much longer until it gets much better?

(Keep in mind I've been playing FF since the 1st one on NES. I disliked VIII, X, and X-2)
 
Kagari said:
Nautilus and Pulse apparently have issues, dropping down to 15fps in some places.

And everyone already knew MS paid for FFXIII. I believe even Sony said something to that effect two years ago.

Well Toriyama (or was it Kitase) did say that Nautilus "pushes the PS3 to its limit" or something. I personally don't see it, but maybe its something in the background that's eating CPU cycles! :lol
 
Nemesis121 said:
I want PC version..........

And I want a million dollars.

duckroll said:
Well Toriyama (or was it Kitase) did say that Nautilus "pushes the PS3 to its limit" or something. I personally don't see it, but maybe its something in the background that's eating CPU cycles! :lol

I don't remember that, but I guess the 360 can't handle it.
 
Zoe said:
It'd probably be identical to the 360 version.
Well, no, judging from the TLR 360 -> PC transition it would run at 60 FPS in 1920x1200 with 4xAA. And AF. And no transparency dithering. It would be glorious (even more so than it already is!). I think maybe they didn't do it because of health concerns -- people could get seizures from the sheer awesome.
 
gkrykewy said:
Why on earth would you say that? Both consoles are already obsolete from a PC perspective; maximum resolution would certainly be >720p.

Given the amount of effort put into the 360 version.
 
Durante said:
Well, no, judging from the TLR 360 -> PC transition it would run at 60 FPS in 1920x1200 with 4xAA. And AF. And no transparency dithering. It would be glorious (even more so than it already is!). I think maybe they didn't do it because of health concerns -- people could get seizures from the sheer awesome.

Or time. The team has already moved on to Versus XIII.
 
gkrykewy said:
Why on earth would you say that? Both consoles are already obsolete from a PC perspective; maximum resolution would certainly be >720p.
Because Final Fantasy VII PC. Hoping a PC version would be as good as the 360 version is actually delirious optimism.
 
gkrykewy said:
What was that, 1998? Before FFXI... and plans for FFXIV (using the same engine, no?)

This thread is giving me cancer.
It's a joke about how badly Square has handled some console-to-PC transitions in the past. It's OK to make jokes sometimes, you know.
 
gkrykewy said:
What was that, 1998? Before FFXI... and plans for FFXIV (using the same engine, no?)

This thread is giving me cancer.

XIV uses a different variation of Crystal Tools. XIV started out with PC as the lead platform, as opposed to XIII, which started as PS3 lead platform.
 
gkrykewy said:
Why on earth would you say that? Both consoles are already obsolete from a PC perspective; maximum resolution would certainly be >720p.
Resident Evil 4 PC version.

Took years to come out. Port of PS2 version rather than GC version (PS2 version is missing lighting and shader effects, worse textures and sound)
 
mintylurb said:
Lens of truth's speculation about the possibilities of more deleted scenes is rather odd. But that's not much different than DF assuming the minimum frame rate in the 360 version is 26FPS based on their video analysis..which happens to show it actually drops below 26FPS..

DF24.jpg

Whoa! wait! what?

Is the text that comes along with this screenshot a joke?

:lol :lol :lol :lol

Are DF really that pissed?
 
Kagari said:
Nautilus and Pulse apparently have issues, dropping down to 15fps in some places.

And everyone already knew MS paid for FFXIII. I believe even Sony said something to that effect two years ago.
Were there framerate issues in those areas on PS3?
 
miladesn said:
ok, I'm about 10 hours in,PS3 version, this game seriously needs AF

Biggest technical problem with the original version of the game by far. Who the fuck doesn't include AF in this day and age?

Ploid 3.0 said:
Just get it for whatever is convenient for you. If you have both systems and just want the best one get the ps3 version.

It's pretty funny that this is the conclusion everyone pretty much knew would be the case in advance. :lol
 
WrikaWrek said:
You do know that you can't even begin to notice a difference of 0.02 frames missed in a second right?

Really. There's a big difference between seeing a cutscene drop to 20 FPS, and something dropped to 29.92 compared to 29.96 or whatever.
Thing is, I've only seen the close up frame drop issue ONCE in the four hours I've put into it, with a LOT of close ups in that time. Strange huh?
 
charlequin said:
Biggest technical problem with the original version of the game by far. Who the fuck doesn't include AF in this day and age?

AF is expensive on current gen consoles though. Bandwidth issues.
 
Top Bottom