Quantcast
Locked: PlayStation 3/Xbox 360 Graphics Gap Will Start To Widen

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PlayStation 3/Xbox 360 Graphics Gap Will Start To Widen

Groucho said:
FKNetwork said:
obamanian said:
Killzone 2 got 9.5/10 in visuals in IGN, so i guess there is no confirmed gap anymore

Killzone 2 got a final score of 9.4 on IGN, Gears Of War 2 got a final score of 9.5 as did Halo 3,

So IGN still rates Gears Of War 2 and Halo 3 higher than Killzone 2, I guess the gap isn't widening after all then.....

 

 

Zelda: Ocarina of Time for the N64... 10 for graphics, 10 overall score!  Nintendo wins gR2pHiKs wArz, confirmed!

 

Take a step back, and think about how reviews evolve over time.  You really think Halo 3 can compare to GeoW 2 or KZ2?

 

 Likewise, if a game on the wii scores 9.0 on graphics does that make it better looking than a game that scores 8.5 on graphics on the ps3? I think not.

I'm pretty sure in the video review IGN stated that's it's the best looking game on any console. The 360 is at least a year older than the ps3 and already ps3 exclusives are looking better than anything on the xbox 360, and this gap will only widen with time - just look at uncharted 2 and heavy rain. Also, god of war 3 will likely turn out to be one of the best looking games on ps3. And then you've got GT5...



Around the Network

From the evidence I've seen, the best-looking PS3 exclusives will look slightly better than the best-looking 360 games. However, it won't be a big enough difference to matter - unless you're a Sony fan looking for something to brag about.

What I find funny is how Sony fans cling to graphics this gen, even though the difference is mild at best, and oftentimes the PS3 versions of games are actually worse. Meanwhile, last gen they didn't care that the PS2 had substantially worse graphics than the Xbox and Gamecube.



blizzid said:
From the evidence I've seen, the best-looking PS3 exclusives will look slightly better than the best-looking 360 games. However, it won't be a big enough difference to matter - unless you're a Sony fan looking for something to brag about.

What I find funny is how Sony fans cling to graphics this gen, even though the difference is mild at best, and oftentimes the PS3 versions of games are actually worse. Meanwhile, last gen they didn't care that the PS2 had substantially worse graphics than the Xbox and Gamecube.

 

 I've never had a ps2 although I just bought one on ebay and the fact that i'll be playing games with significantly worse graphics than my ps3 doesn't bother me - I just want to play the games that I have missed out on ^^

 



cura said: 

 I've never had a ps2 although I just bought one on ebay and the fact that i'll be playing games with significantly worse graphics than my ps3 doesn't bother me - I just want to play the games that I have missed out on ^^

 

The PS2 is a great system, and I think every serious gamer should have a chance to play its games. I wasn't knocking the system, just pointing out what I see as hypocricy on the part of some Sony fans. Enjoy your new system; no matter what genres you like, you'll find a lot of great titles.



Groucho said:
So... GeoW2 can improve leaps and bounds, despite being a 2nd iteration of an engine on the 360, but games like KZ2, being a 1st engine iteration and frankly looking better than GeoW2, can't get any better, and thus the 360 has more room to grow?

Come on 360 fans. You can come up with stuff better than that. Like "MS will figure out some genious way to make deferred rendering work on the 360 without blowing the GPU's eDRAM every time a render target is switched! I know, they are working on it right now! They said so!" or somesuch.

Unreal engine isn't made just for X360. Sure it has been optimized a bit, but its still not engine that has been made from scratch for X360. KZ2 engine is and stop calling me 360 fan I haven't even touched X360 ever(I guess, I must be on X360 side or on PS3 side. Theres no alternatives. -.-). Deferred rendering is needed because? Does Crysis use deferred rendering?... uhm... no... Does it look much better than any game on both of these consoles can ever look... yes... And yeah, G-buffer is also way too big for that small eDRAM(With reasonable resolutions.). So its a bit more complicated and I am not sure can it be done with X360 GPU.

@Squilliam

Ok, it does provide more memory for those pixel shader operations, which you can do with it.



Around the Network

Seems Gears 2 is getting higher scores in visuals in many sites

Guess there is no more "gap" to speak of, 360 is still ahead, Fable 2 has scored higher in most websites too

The best part for 360, is that UE3.0 is a multiplatform engine that hardly uses any of 360 power, while the KZ2 engine is made with only PS3 in mind

That means the gap 360 has over PS3 could be far bigger than it seems now



Griffin said:
blue-lady said:
The thread title is incorrect.

The Xbox 360's graphical advantage over the PS3 isn't widening THAT much.

The 360 will never be able to do anything better looking then KZ2.  The best the 360 has is H3.

 

 

As much as Halo 3 is an incredibly fun game, and has fantastic balanced online play compared to most other games - it is by no means the pinnacle of graphics.  Even Gears 1, released almost a year earlier, had better graphics.  By saying that H3 is the best the 360 has you really show a lack of knowledge of what the rest of the 360 library looks like.



obamanian said:

MGS4, Uncharted and Killzone 2 are set in tiny paths, and linear ones too, there is nothing next gen about their level design or detailed world, in fact Gears 2 has bigger and vastly more detailed levels

Infamous is big in scale, but the visuals are mediocre, while games like Two Worlds Temptation on 360 have amost Crysis visuals and are 2x the size of Oblivion, which is again far above anything on PS3

I'm sorry, Gears of War 2 is an amazing game but it is as linear as it gets.

 

And don't ever use Two Worlds in a argument for well, anything. The game sucks. (and the fact that Temptation is going to PS3 as well)



Deneidez said:
Groucho said:
So... GeoW2 can improve leaps and bounds, despite being a 2nd iteration of an engine on the 360, but games like KZ2, being a 1st engine iteration and frankly looking better than GeoW2, can't get any better, and thus the 360 has more room to grow?

Come on 360 fans. You can come up with stuff better than that. Like "MS will figure out some genious way to make deferred rendering work on the 360 without blowing the GPU's eDRAM every time a render target is switched! I know, they are working on it right now! They said so!" or somesuch.

Unreal engine isn't made just for X360. Sure it has been optimized a bit, but its still not engine that has been made from scratch for X360. KZ2 engine is and stop calling me 360 fan I haven't even touched X360 ever(I guess, I must be on X360 side or on PS3 side. Theres no alternatives. -.-). Deferred rendering is needed because? Does Crysis use deferred rendering?... uhm... no... Does it look much better than any game on both of these consoles can ever look... yes... And yeah, G-buffer is also way too big for that small eDRAM(With reasonable resolutions.). So its a bit more complicated and I am not sure can it be done with X360 GPU.

@Squilliam

Ok, it does provide more memory for those pixel shader operations, which you can do with it.

Actually the major difference is that it only has to be written once into memory.

 



Tease.

obamanian said:
Seems Gears 2 is getting higher scores in visuals in many sites

Guess there is no more "gap" to speak of, 360 is still ahead, Fable 2 has scored higher in most websites too

The best part for 360, is that UE3.0 is a multiplatform engine that hardly uses any of 360 power, while the KZ2 engine is made with only PS3 in mind

That means the gap 360 has over PS3 could be far bigger than it seems now

Exactly! a lot of reviews are giving Gears 2 higher scores for the graphics and overall score,

I thought Killzone 2 was meant to be getting solid 10's for graphics everywhere because it's the best thing since sliced bread? oh yeah, that's right, it's just sony fanboys spoiling yet another game by over hyping it! well done!

 

The bloke on the IGN video even said the hype may damage the game and some maybe disappointed by the game because of it, he (and the full review) also mention the sub standard textures in the game at times and the stuttering/slowdown when each areas loads up and two weapons in the game has really poor effects,a few reviews have also mentioned problems with the aiming system but not 100% what that is about yet,

Surely a game THIS good shouldn't have any of those issues mentioned above?! but credit where credit is due, the video review did say it is one of the best shooters around (didn't say the best though) and the best graphics he has seen on PS3 (didn't say all consoles, only ps3, listen again if you doubt this)

 

I will still buy this game for my PS3 (about time I used my PS3 lol) but all the over hyping is killing it before it's even out, why don't you just wait for it to go on sale rather than hyping it so much? if the game really is that good surely there is no need to hype it to death?