Sections

Deus Ex: Human Revolution platform load times compared

Tuesday, 23rd August 2011 00:42 GMT By Brenna Hillier

There’s little dissent so far on whether you should pick up Deus Ex: Human Revolution, but on which platform? The impatient may be interested in this console load time comparison.

IGN ran a comparison and even videoed the results, which you can view below. Looks like an Xbox 360 install wins out slightly, with the PlayStation 3 slightly behind, although an install-free 360 definitely comes in last.

That said, it’s a matter of a few seconds, so if you have the option, you can probably just decide which controller you like better.

There’s no mention of how the PC version performs, because that’s dependent on the sweetness of your rig, obviously.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution releases on all three platforms on Friday.

Thanks, Joystiq.

Breaking news

21 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. DGOJG

    Nice one IGN, just keep fueling my belief you are totally biased toward the 360.

    Oh and 3…2..1..

    #1 3 years ago
  2. darksied

    I’m just glad it doesn’t matter WHAT system you buy it for because they’re close to the same. Don’t care who’s a second or two faster.

    And that the reviews are pretty much in line, that’s cool too. So I guess, just buy it.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Ireland Michael

    @1 That’s a ridiculous statement. If the game loaded faster on the PS3, the video would have shown that. As it stands, it doesn’t.

    Anyway, I’m more curious as to how frequently these load screens crop up more than about their length. Every time you die? That could definitely get annoying.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. lexph3re

    Good call on the countdown @1

    #4 3 years ago
  5. ultramega

    I have nothing against this video – if it truly matters to people which one loads a couple seconds faster – all the power to them. It just seems that IGN is crap these days, with their reviews being of a much lower calibre than many indie-sites. I would personally just see more time go into the reviews than see shit like this coming up… But to each his own.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. The_Red

    Has anyone played the game here? I’ve heard some serious complaints about load times at the earlier missions (Someone even compared them to DNF’s load times!).

    #6 3 years ago
  7. NoxNoctisUmbra

    My PS3 has a faster HDD then standard one that comes with. So it surrly will even beat 360 version…..

    BUT…

    few seconds this or this way dont matter. What matter is which version looks better and plays smoother.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. jiujinwoshizml

    Come go and see, will not regret it Oh look

    http://www。ifancyshop。com

    #8 3 years ago
  9. NoxNoctisUmbra

    I just read the review on the game on IGN, I still dont get what the fuck the guy wrote about.. small 2 page review on one of the biggest 40 hour game of this year.. 2 pages of just lame info about the game. I will buy it on PC tho, im heading to Steam now :D

    #9 3 years ago
  10. ultramega

    @9
    Exactly my point. IGN is just utter shite these days.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. stretch215

    Is that ps3 from disc time or installed?

    #11 3 years ago
  12. Ireland Michael

    @11 There’s no “disc time” choice for the PS3 version. It’s a 3GB mandatory install.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. deadstoned

    An SSD loading this game, would be “What loading time?” . Cant wait til they drop in price some more.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. CycloneFox

    Doesn’t matter on which platform. the loading times a re too long on any platform in my opinion. Well, I bought it already for PC anyway and will see when it arrives.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Gekidami

    lol How is this even news-worthy, i mean, really?

    #15 3 years ago
  16. AHA-Lambda

    @13 – apparently the load times are comparable across the board from what i’ve seen on neogaf. Yes, even on SSD PC

    #16 3 years ago
  17. OrbitMonkey

    Seriously how desperate was this journo, if to dig up a difference between the console versions, he resorted to sitting there with a stopwatch?

    Such dedication! Pulitzer in the bag :)

    #17 3 years ago
  18. Gekidami

    ^ I dont think doing it is useless, but this really isnt worth being reported by other sites when the difference is so weak. And it especially isnt worth its own article, if anywhere, this should have gone into the Shorts.
    I think Brenna had a lapse of judgement over how important this is.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. Dr.Ghettoblaster

    You have to show the load screens, as opposed to just the times, otherwise people will doubt you.

    Then you also have your idiots, comment #1, who for some reason can’t seem to handle the truth and ridiculously cry bias lol.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. Ireland Michael

    @15 For those who own multiple formats and want to make an informed choice about which version to buy?

    I mean, between levels those loading times might not be much, but if those are the loading times every time you die, that could get really boring really fast. So shaving off 10 extra seconds per loading screen makes for a huge difference in a sprawling 45 hour epic.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. OrbitMonkey

    ^ No difference really. Just makes a 45 hour epic into 45 hour 5 min epic ;)

    #21 3 years ago