By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mazty on 22 January 2010
Edit Thread
Lord Flashheart said:

To stop this becoming a quote war i've condensed your messages but have posted links to them for you

Mazty said:

 Dated tech is really showing it's limitations and this is being reflected in gameplay. Plus, Arc's due in Fall, whereas Natal just seems to be the eyetoy

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=3073537&page=11&postnum=14

Mazty said:

Alan Wake, Splinter Cell, Mass Effect 2 & KUF 2 are on PC,.  Devs have admitted to reaching the limit of the 360's CPU, which will then bottleneck graphics, whilst DVD causes lower res textures to be used as less DVDs is cheaper for the publishers and therefore better to use.

You forget to say why Natal will boost sales. It's just an eyetoy. Got to remeber the 360 had dated tech in it when it was made, and it can't keep on churning out market-winning titles because of that technical limit.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=3073839&page=11&postnum=16

For the record as it stands A. Wake isn't coming out on the PC. Those devs (I would like quotes but I know you don't like that) are in the minority or 'lazy devs' due to others saying the 360 isn't maxed out. DVD doesn't mean the 360 can only do low res textures. That is simply silly. The 360's far superior GPU means the 360 can do high res textures as well as the PS3 in fact better. Compare marcus Fenix to Solid Snake. The 360 wasn't released with dated tech or you need to expand on what you mean because you can say the same for the PS3 (tacked on gpu) the wii and PC's. Natal is an eyetoy? You haven't read up on Natal have you? or eyetoy for that matter. FUD and stirring.

Mazty said:

Most average gamers know it's cheaper to play multiplatform games on PC than it is to pay for a 360. You should realise the idea that someone who is wanting to purchase a PS3 of 360 most likely already owns a PC, and therefore may not be swayed by mulitplatform titles, which have dated specs making them easily playable on PCs from the last three years, not to mention PC games are much cheaper than console games.  How do you expect Mass Effect 2 to be the best graphics on consoles when it isn't exclusive meaning it won't get the most out of the 360s hardware? Considering the 360's GPU is only slightly better than the PS3's, yet the CPU is far worse, unless all 48 pipelines are used (which apparently isn't feasible so I've heard), the 360 can't hope to out match the PS3's GPU & CPU, while having access to higher res textures on bluray disc. The issue with textures has already been seen in Dragons Age: Origins, and for the Devs benefit, they keep game size to a minimal if going over more than one DVD.

From what I can see from the first 12 mins of gameplay on youtube in HD, on the 360 there is still little to none AA, flat textures, 'simple' lighting (in todays standards) and low poly models, but plenty of bloom. The close up at 11:27 shows that a lot of the nice lighting is nothing more than good texturing & bump mapping, which dissappears close up. The required PC specs say an 8800GT GPU and from what I can see, that's the kind of graphics the game is producing.

Don't get me wrong, it looks like a hell of a game, but considering it's not an exclusive, I doubt it will be able to blow audiences away with an unseen level of graphics. I'd place more hope with exclusives such as GT5 on the PS3 (if it's ever released) and Halo: Reach on the 360.

 

The 360's GPU was custom built around the 360 hardware and the CPU (which was co-funded by Sony) is using cell tech in it and was designed for gaming first. Not a multimedia cpu, it was designed to work with and compliment the hardware. It is a gaming CPU that you can't buy of the shelf. The GPU wasn't an off the shelf thrown in at the last minute weaker GPU so your comment shows how little you know.

If you havent seen AA on a youtube video, really youtube? then I am not surprised. Despite everyone says it looks stunning you have to be different. Even if it doesn't have AA it might not need it. But stick to youtube vids for graphics. I'll use the game itself. I could post some youtube vids of GT5 for you? It wont be pretty. stop making things up & play the game. You have no evidence that there is no AA or the textures are flat and the lighting is poor other than youtube. Everyone else can see the ME2 pics and everyone disagrees with you.

As for GT5. You don't want to post gameplay shots until the games released but you will use official bullshots from Sony? Why not post shots from Prologue? Why use specially released pics not in game but dismiss the use of ingame shots from the released content?

You want to wait until the game is released before judging it but wont allow the same for ME2? How about you try to be patient play the game (unlikely) before making things up. It's laughable that you can make statements like that for me regarding GT5 but won't follow you're own advice for ME2.

Well what does Natal offer that the eyetoy doesn't? Both have depth detection etc.
Yeah I made a mistake that Alan Wake is going to be on PC  as I missed the news that it wasn't. Doesn't change much of that list.
EA say the 360 CPU is maxed out: http://www.edge-online.com/news/we%E2%80%99ve-%E2%80%9Cmaxed-out%E2%80%9D-xbox-360-says-ea-games-vp
DVDs are causing problems:
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169963
And note that the reason devs don't do as many DVDs are required is because of the production cost. Same game price of £39.99, yet more discs, so less profit.

The CPU is using essentially an off spin of the PPE of the Cell. That is it. It is missing the important part of the Cell - the SPUs. I actually said the GPU in the 360 is stronger - because it is, as its has 48 unified pipelines, whereas the PS3 only has 32 designated pipelines. However, the Cell acts as a GPU as well and has been used by both Naughty Dog and the GoW3 devs to apply effects such as field of depth, motion blur, MSAA etc. The GPU in the 360 can hardly be called 'far' superior - the figures just aren't there, nor are the results.

What game doesn't need AA?!?! That's like saying a game doesn't need lighting. Or colour.

No AA? I said it looks too low as someone on this thread said it's only 2x, and 2x may as well be none. Got any figures?Bullshots...uhuh. Sure. Why no shots from prologue? Generally because of the 3 year gap that's widening between Prologue and the actual game. If you think the graphics haven't been improved in over three years, oh dear.

What in game shots?!?!?!?!?! The game hasn't been released! Duh, stop asking for something which cant happen.
I've seen high quality youtube vids of ME2 (Gamespot HD) and the game looks good, but the graphics don't look outstanding. And again, if you expect "best grafics EVOR" on a non-exclusive title, you need to learn how consoles work.