The “Break it Down” Blog

Putting on flame-retardant suit…

I just saw this “Review” (more like blog-comment, than a review) over on what can only seem to be a Sony/PS3 propaganda site. When you compare that sites 5/10 with the retardedly high rating the game is getting from everyone else, it’s hard to think the original poster had anything good to offer the tr0n when he posted.

Except there was 1 point that had me interested:

I also wonder how much better the graphics would’ve been had they not been compressed to fit on a DVD. Now I do not fault the developers for this, they only had so much system power to work with

And for those of you that already read my Demo impressions, you know I agree with the poster’s point about the XBox 360 being pushed to it’s limits and the game running the entire time at a max of 30fps and usually lower.

While I think it would take an engine redesign between the 360 and PS3 to fully exploit the power of the Cell, I am very interested in the point he makes about the textures needing to get compressed down to a DVD.

If you haven’t played the demo, Bioshock is a beautiful game… but texture-heavy is likely an understatement. For an environment to look that polished, I have to assume that the textures are not only huge but many in numbers as well.

PC.IGN already reported that the PC version of Bioshock outshines the 360 version. So is that an indication of the quality of the game when it’s not medium-restricted like on the XBox with a DVD drive?

Either way, we all know it’s coming to PS3 in a few months after Microsoft get’s it’s money’s worth for the exclusive launch, and then we can compare and contrast. I hope I’m right though, because so far most of my friends are getting the PC version, and I’d rather stick to getting it in console form… although using Steam was a nice surprise for 2K to do (makes it easier to get/manage/update/etc. on PC).