Home Gaming Lost Planet on PS3 is not Pretty

Lost Planet on PS3 is not Pretty

49 second read

Kotaku has posted some bad screen shots of the PS3’s version of Lost Planet this morning.

Now can someone explain to me how it is possible that 10 months after the 360 version hit the shelves the PS3 version looks much much worse?

Take a look at the image above, I think it is pretty clear that the PS3 version is just not as good as the Xbox 360 version. However if you are still not convinced then click here. (Warning not recommended for graphics fans).

Now I know you are just going to say you don’t care about this game anyway, but really it is pathetic that every single PS3 port is the deformed child of it’s Xbox 360 parent. Just when are these developers going to get to grips with the PS3’s architecture?

Jaggies: Lost Planet PS3 Burns My Eyes, Their Blood Soothes

Last Updated: October 24, 2007


  1. Banana hammock

    October 24, 2007 at 08:58

    Hahahaha that’s classic.

    Just the other day i read a post (on Joystiq i think?) that had the same article but the other way around. Saying how much better the PS3 version looked (with screenshots!).

    Can we trust anyone these days?


  2. LazySAGamer

    October 24, 2007 at 09:14

    This screenshot has been confirmed by Capcom themselves. Can’t argue that


  3. SlippyMadFrog

    October 24, 2007 at 09:14


    This next gen war is a savage one with truth being distorted left and right, I guess we will have to wait until the game is released


  4. Banana hammock

    October 24, 2007 at 09:35

    @Lazy, if that’s true all it does is show Capcom’s laziness and lack of technical ability. There are ports out there that look great on the PS3, really there is no excuse for this.


  5. SlippyMadFrog

    October 24, 2007 at 10:01

    Capcom probably looked at the Cost-of-development vs Return-on-Investment and decided it’s not worth making it massively polished. If the PS3 had a simular arcitecture than the xbox360 and PC then you would have probably seen a polished game. If sony brings out a radicaly different architecture then this is what you get.
    No company is lazy, that is just crazy. It’s about $$$ and Lost Planet PS3 is not worth the investment since the install base of the PS3 is low plus the games attach rate is also very low.
    Banana, if you had a development company and you should choose a platform for which to develop a game, which one should you have chosen?


  6. papa-action

    October 24, 2007 at 10:17

    An estimated install base of about 5 mil consoles is nothing to be scoffed at. If they are going to release a crappy port of a game then why bother spending any money on it in the first place. This will just harm Capcoms popularity with PS3 fans even further.


  7. LazySAGamer

    October 24, 2007 at 10:29

    @Papa I agree with that so why are the port’s graphics so bad? If it’s because the game is not yet developed far enough yet then why release them?


  8. abev

    October 24, 2007 at 11:10

    I have also seen the same post but the other way around (Where the ps3 screen shots were clearly a lot better).
    So I dont know what to believe. At this point If a bad port is made I do chalk it down to lazy development, if some ports can be better on PS3 (such as DiRT) and some dual development games are also better (COD4) then there is no excuse to bring out a sub par game.


  9. Banana hammock

    October 24, 2007 at 11:30

    @Slippy, I would have chosen the Wii as it’s the cheapest and easiest to develop for and has the biggest install base. Plus you can easily port to the PS2 with it’s 120 million units.

    But that’s not what this is about, it’s about doing something properly. Other games are ported and look great, there is no excuse for not doing it with Lost Planet.

    It’s like these morons who say that the PS3 is usless with AI and that’s why their games are “dumb”. Well how are other companies making games with great AI on the PS3? The short answer is that they are better at making games that’s all.

    If you put in the effort you’ll get the reward.


  10. Ruslan

    October 24, 2007 at 11:56

    I think Lost Planet is the wrong game to make a profit on the PS3, its just a simple straight cash port to make some extra sales on the console. Same thing happened on the PC with the DX10 version which was more of a showcase.

    @Abev – Dirt is only “better” coz of the low res textures they used in the game. 😉


  11. SlippyMadFrog

    October 24, 2007 at 12:16

    I agree, the Wii is the best platform to make money on. Although if I wanted to make a next gen game, I would have opted for the Xbox360 instead of the PS3 because of the ease of development, install base and attatch rate.

    All these problems related to ports are only appearing on PS3 ports. I agree that some companies can do it properly but some can’t, but who’s problem is that? It’s certainly Sony fault for making it hard to develop for the PS3. My oppinion is that they came out this gen and thought that everyone is going to stop what they are doing and jump on the PS3 ship and start to learn the architecture. What actualy happened was that they stuck with the PC and Xbox360 architecture since they already know it and didn’t spend much money on PS3 R&D. Who can blame them anyway because as it is now, developers won’t get much return on their investment with the PS3 while they will get a lot more return on Wii and the Xbox360.


  12. abev

    October 24, 2007 at 13:37

    Firstly the guys at sony didnt purposely make its architecture difficult to use that would be retarted. It is simply a different mechanic which must be learnt, something which at this moment in time hasnt been achieved. But it most certainly will be. To keep saying that the ps3 is a failing console and to keep comparing it to the xbox when looking at progress is also stupid, the ps3 is still on its 1st gen games. Give it time. As Gavin showed us the otherday, when we align launch dates the ps3 is actually doing slightly better than the xbox, so lets stop beating it down shall we.


  13. Ruslan

    October 24, 2007 at 14:09

    We are only beating down on the empty promises that Sony said would change the way we play games and live our lifes. 😉

    And the numbers of folks who keep maintaining that the PS3 is superior to the other consoles even with facts on the contrary.


  14. abev

    October 24, 2007 at 15:27

    Im so glad I missed sony’s whole marketing speech, I never heard any of these promises so I can be bummed when they dont come true!


  15. SlippyMadFrog

    October 24, 2007 at 15:42


    “Firstly the guys at sony didnt purposely make its architecture difficult to use that would be retarted. It is simply a different mechanic which must be learnt”
    Precisely, who said otherwise?

    “to keep comparing it to the xbox when looking at progress is also stupid”
    The xbox360 is the PS3’s main competitor. In order for the PS3 to win this gen, it must surpass the Xbox360’s progress, therefore, it is very improtant to compare progress between the PS3 and Xbox360, regardless of when it launched. When this gen ends, the console in front wins, end of story. PS3 better start catching up.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also

Unlock the Benefits of Specialized Compression Socks

The world of compression socks has evolved, catering to individuals with specific health n…