RAZurrection said:
Uh the weak GPU was just a note he was pointing out that it was weaker and they had to use the CPU to assist, it doesn't really have much to do with them calling it the lowest denominator, he was just talking abou how the engine works on PS3.
Uh if i want to do a GPU comparison i'd sooner compare the games and leave the on paper stuff exactly where it is.
For a supposedly more powerful machince, it's certainly curious why most games released this year tend to run better on the "less powerful" machine...and if the PS3's least is 360 level graphics, how come I can't get the 360 bare minimum performance for Bayonetta or Ghostbusters, Resident Evil 5, Dirt 2 or Assassins Creed on PS3? Surely that means the PS3's least, is less then the 360s least...so it would be less..erer.
TBH such theoretics are pointless anyway without the performance to back it up. If we had official Wii specs it'd be easier, but from what they are rumoured to be, in theory it should be able to do more than an Xbox 1 since it has more RAM and what not...and yet I can't really see anything on the system the Gamecube did not do and there's nothing really like Ninja Gaiden, Doom 3 or Chaos Theory on Wii. If the Wii had higher performance, no-ones making use of it. Still theory hasn't really worked out this gen, the PS3 was supposed to have the best multiplatform games on paper, but it doesn't...and blu-ray's throughput means it's supposed to move data faster then a 12x DVD and yet it doesn't, instead relying on mandatory installations.
Oh, you mean the PS3 forum? TBH i wouldn't put my faith on their neutrality if they re-named it's Neutral Joe McNeutral, winner of this years Mr Neutral Forum of the year.
Uh, where did he clear it up? Point it out or transcribe it like I did with time indexs if you would. |
I can easily do a CPU comparison and say that the 360 is the lowest denominator when it comes to that as well, it's all just word games that you are twisting without realizing the actual differences in between the tech behind the hardwares. PS3 Exclusives do generally look better than the 360 ones, that's not paper at all, it's real world performance. On top of that, RE5 did perform better on the PS3 because it was worked on the PS3 first and then ported to the easier to dev 360, while the 360 had lower framrate, it was still able to catch up with the effects thanks to the shader prowlness of it's GPU.
The reason the Xbox had a bottleneck design was due to it's memory architecture, not so much the memory amount or the GPU performance, which they improved upon with the 360, it's not able to do something without sacrificing a lot of the other considering that Gamecube already did have games that looked much better than Xbox titles, but it had the major dumb problem of the 1.44GB storage limitation making the assests that much harder to fit the games with which always has been a downfall on Nintendo's part imo even during this generation(no HDD, SD is nice though, but DVD9 that can use the full DVD9 size, big improvement.) Mandatory installations is pretty much a thing of the past at this point during the PS3's lifespam unless it's one of the lesser impressive devs, but at least the PS3 comes standard with a HDD which is not something I can say about the 360 or the Wii.
No, anybody on the forum, I don't care who it is, I'm mainly a PC person who look down on console graphics and laugh at their faces, but I'm not ignorant enough to not understand the techs and workarounds(or understanding the language of English) because I'm simply, a gamer. I don't hate nor do I delve into Fanboyism, I do troll sometimes because it's the internet though /shrug. It's all just fun times.
The full quote is "but in our case, the PS3 is running at the top level." You are a funny guy and think you are smart apparently, that or turn deaf when it's something you don't want to hear lol, put "but in our case the" where you put in the (inaudable). YOU LOOSE!
