By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?


not really, res is quite often sub 720p and that is with dealing fps-issues. The point is: they and ms won't achieve higher polygon models (e.g. with tesselation), better textures, better ai, deeper and richer worlds *AND* run games at 1080p60. You can't have both as this will be extremely performance-hitting. Yes, both consoles will most definitely have a lot of power but they can't do miracles.

Look at current PC-games: Most of'em are console-ports. And how do they look? Like polished versions from the consoles. Better lighting, better textures, better res, more fps. But mostly *not* more detail. Still same poly-models, sometimes better lod, but overall not really better graphics. And now look what PC you need to play these at 1080p60 and what you have to spend for a PC like that.

To me, I would be fine at 720p with a stable frame-rate BUT I want more detailed worlds, more complex worlds and better poly-models.

ah I see what you're saying now.  I think they could still have a console that can run Battlefield 3 PC version or other games that seem to have a big difference.  I think multitasking could be a big selling point and streaming which can be achieved with easily affordable RAM.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers