hsrob said:
TheNoobHolocaust said:
This is where the Blu-Ray disc really starts to shine, The 360 and PS3 may be on level playing field processor-wise. But because of Blu-Ray and its 25gb per layer disc, PS3 has more potential to make the games bigger, and better looking without compromising the game length/graphics.
I believe that we have been seeing this with recent games, 360 developers often lower the game resolution so they can fit the game onto a 4.5gb per layer disc.
For Example, Alan Wake had the potential to make the resolution 720p, but its assumed either they got lazy (unlikely for a game that has been in development for 4 years) or they couldn't find a way to fit the game onto a single 9gb dual layered disc without shortening the game (thankfully they didn't), so they reduced the game's resolution.
For another example, Final Fantasy XIII, which I think was handled better, Square Enix split the game onto 3 dual-layered discs, although the game's resolution was 576p (instead of the 720p on the PS3 version), the game wasn't drastically different form the PS3 version.
I think in the near future most 360 games will be made on more than one disc.
|
What size disc is Crysis on?
|
Face palm, you guys still don't get me do you... Not once did I say that either console has been maxed out. I said a Dual-Layered Blu-Ray disc gives a game 50gb to mess around with, and with that they can add more light effects, scenery, and visually appealing things, not to mention they can extend the length of the game, as opposed to DVD where you only have 9gb to work with on one Dual-Layered disc.
And why bring PC into this if everybody knows PC graphics > Consoles graphics.
Again this is IMO, in terms of potential in Graphics PC > PS3 = 360 > Wii. Notice I said POTENTIAL, I say that because of hardware specs. And for future reference please ask if you don't understand what I am saying, don't flame, this site doesn't need to turn into a flamebait in every thread.
