RazorDragon said:
ninjablade said:
RazorDragon said:
ninjablade said:
RazorDragon said:
ninjablade said:
considering how small the upgrades were i'm sure, the 360/ps3 version could look just as good with extra dev time, the only thing i noticed in the direct feed captures for DF is thr better reflection mapping on the road, and before people get riled up, just look at ninja gaiden RE 3 on 360/ps3 its runs so much smoother and looks better then wiiu version, not to mention it looks and runs better then vanilla ninja gaiden 3, extra dev time always helps a game look better, just look at forza horizone it looks much better then then need for speed most wanted on any console.
|
Higher-resolution textures take a huge space in RAM. So, no, it wouldn't look as good no matter how long the dev time was on PS3/360. Also, to run at a better framerate with higher-resolution textures and higher reflection mapping draw distance, you certainly need a better GPU than what the PS3/360 offer. NG3 case was very different, as the dev didn't had a finalized dev kit and it was a launch window game, so it was probably a rushed port. It's not like NG3 is a graphical masterpiece to use it as a benchmark for the graphical capabilities of multiplatform games, Darksiders 2/Assassin's Creed 3 had way better graphics than it and were also launch window Wii U games.
|
forza horizone looks much better then need for speed wiiu much better lighting textures and clean aa, need for speed MW had a dead line, and a small budget compared to horizone, the frame rate is on par, its a bit better by a very small margin, you do know that 360 versions of MP have bigger advantages then need for speed wiiu does that mean ps3 or 360 can't pull it off, with more dev time, just looks up some faceoffs between 360/ps3 the advantages in some games are much bigger then need for speed wiiu has on 360/ps3. better textures, huge frame rate advantage, higher resolution. your talking about a game where even direct feed captures it hard to see a differnce and the frame rate is pretty much on par with wiiu having a very small advantage.
|
I agree that Forza Horizon looks much better, but texture-wise it's not even a competition. Forza Horizon's environments are much more open than NFS MW's, it simply can't produce better textures with 360's/PS3's GPU. It's always a tradeoff, if you do something bigger/better, something will have to be worse. The truth is, Wii U has more RAM than PS3/360, therefore it'll always have an advantage texture-wise if used correctly. Sure, some 360/PS3 multiplat games have bigger differences than the one described in NFS MW, but when you take in account that these systems are on the market for 7 years and Wii U is just in 4 months, it's clear that devtime is not a matter here. If it were to look better on these consoles, it would've looked better because PS3/360 hardware is already known for 7 years while Wii U is a new hardware, therefore, the best way to utilize it's capabilities is still not known by developers.
|
why are textures a gpu problem, i thought it was memory, and i seen textures quality go up along with detail in many games, so i don't what you mean by this, post pics from df or look at the comparison, your talking about about the game looking better by a 5% differnce at best, just look at ninja gaiden 3 for 360/ps3 the enhanced port seems to have better graphics more detail and better frame rate, just because of more dev time, i'm comparing ninja gaiden 3 vanialla to ninja gaiden RE3 for 360/ps3.
|
A nice example would be trying to run Crysis with the highest-res textures on a 1GB HD 4670 and then on a HD4870 512MB. Which one of those will offer better framerate? It's quite obvious it'll be the 512MB HD4870. To be able to use higher-res textures, you need more RAM, but to use them and also run the game at a better framerate you need a better GPU. About the DF comparison, they were able to notice it and from what I've looked on the internet, many gamers were also able to see the difference in texture quality and reflection draw distance, so if it was better only by a "5%" difference nobody would notice. The difference was noticed, so I'm inclined to believe it is a considerable difference. About NG3 RE running better than Vanilla, I tried to find some kind of comparison between the two versions on Google but it seems nobody did it. However, since RE graphics didn't improve from the Vanilla version, I'm not sure if framerate will be any better.
|
