nightsurge said: Skeeuk said: @nightant your gonna have 2 accept ps3 can do better grafix than 360. move along No one has to accept anything until the 360 games get completely ground up custom engines for all their exclusives like the top PS3 exclusives.  Then maybe we can make a comparison and see.

alan wake was so was forza 3 so was ninja gaiden 2 im sure thers others that was 360 engine.

imo 360 games can come close to ps3 ones, but only if they span across multiple dvd`s

its you cant just compress everything on 1 dvd, a few examples.........

mass effect 2 looks better than mass effect 1 because they had more room to fit grafix on, same goes with forza 3 to some extent, ie if contents of second dvd were squeezed onto the 1st dvd then visuals would have to take a hit on forza 3 because of space,

but end of day realistically the general genres wont be on multiple dvd for obvious reasons, thus i feel ps3 exclusives may always have the edge.

another good example is the snes/megadrive vs neogeo, neogeo wasnt really that much more powerful, i mean it was more but not that much, the diff was the games came on 100 200 300 mega carts

*just imagine if alan wake was across 3 dvd`s, you cant deny it would look drastically better, including super crisp audio and video.

@Skeeuk:
The things that are the largest in a game are textures and sound (and if you do pre-rendered videos, those as well). The rest, like lighting, filtering, AA, post processing, physics, anything that makes a game actually look good, is basically instructions aka code, which is nothing in size compared to the ones mentioned above. The real kicker against the X360 was the lack of a hard drive in every console out of the box. The hard drive allows for a lot more optimization, and since the PS3 has that, and the X360 hasn't, the PS3 has a clear advantage in this regard.. Also..

Forza 3 was made in 2 years. It might be a custom engine, but there's only so much you can do in 2 years time
Ninja Gaiden 2 had a new gameplay engine, not a new graphics engine. That's completely different...

Mass Effect 2 looks better than Mass Effect 1 because they sacrificed AA to improve the lighting, and also resolved pop-ins and other annoyers. Mass Effect 1 never got the graphical praise it deserved because of those issues.

Some PS3 exclusives might have the edge, but it's not a universal rule..

If Alan Wake was across 3 DVDs, the only thing they could've improved were the videos. Seriously, space is not a real issue here, neither for the PS3 nor the X360. For both systems, the bottlenecks are in the hardware itself, not in the amount of space. Doesn't matter if you can put higher res textures on the disk if your texture filtering sucks during gameplay.. Might as well use some lower res textures to lower resource usage.. Sure, if you want to create a huge world, space might be a problem.. But games like GTA IV, Just Cause 2, Oblivion, FarCry 2, Assassin's Creed II all still fit perfectly on a single DVD.. The only problem might be RPG games..

It's a really nice looking game, but after playing Crisis on full details, console graphics simply cant compare.

So Direct X vs Open GL is a non issue, despite the fact that one API is limited to hardware and the other is limited to code? Sorry but it is NOT just a hardware difference.

And why the heck do people feel the need to bring up Crysis? It was a crap game that had very little going on. Alan Wake does better weather effects. But that is not the point. Why compare a game that looks great on limited hardware to a game that looks great only if you have the right hardware. One persons experience will differ to the next persons just based on that fact.

On topic and without the need for vulgarities, I think Alan Wake looks really good. I'd love to give it a go.

slowmo said: NoCtiS_NoX said: XxXProphecyXxX said: LOL!!! this thread is still going? the OP already admited he lost..... No "OMFG GOTY!!" No"OMG BEST GRAPHICS!" No"AAA+ BABY!" all in all didn't live up to anything it was hyped for but it's still good game so move on and quite sooking 360 ppl. And you know what's ironic? Some guy here told us that this become someoné's thread now but clearly this one became the other guy's thread now. He also told that he should've let the thread die and here he comes adding more fuel to the fire. Just love the hypocrisy here sometimes. and Yes! I am also guilty of such act right now but I just simply can't ignore this one. Is that an admission that you cannot help yourself but join in the trolling?  This thread is disgusting, the site is so PS3 biased and allows so much trolling from PS3 fans its unreal these days.  The thread should have been locked 20 pages ago when it started going off topic and somehow the only comment you have is the hypocrisy of one of my posts and ignore all the flaming and trolling in here.  I guess that says more about you than it does me.

Trolling? yeah sure whatever.

First off I am sick and tired of your constant complaining and whining. I know what's happening on this site, lots of vocal PS3 fans and I won't defend them but all this complaining won't help you. I think the best thing you can do is report them and complaining every chance you get is getting annoying. That's one of my reason that I only commented on your post and top that with your hypocrisy on this thread. That's the "simply can't ignore this one" was for. I just can't ignore you any longer.

Don't worry this is the last time I will qoute you in this thread. I have already said what I wanted to say to you. I won't derail this thread much any longer.

 

NoCtiS_NoX said: slowmo said: NoCtiS_NoX said: XxXProphecyXxX said: LOL!!! this thread is still going? the OP already admited he lost..... No "OMFG GOTY!!" No"OMG BEST GRAPHICS!" No"AAA+ BABY!" all in all didn't live up to anything it was hyped for but it's still good game so move on and quite sooking 360 ppl. And you know what's ironic? Some guy here told us that this become someoné's thread now but clearly this one became the other guy's thread now. He also told that he should've let the thread die and here he comes adding more fuel to the fire. Just love the hypocrisy here sometimes. and Yes! I am also guilty of such act right now but I just simply can't ignore this one. Is that an admission that you cannot help yourself but join in the trolling?  This thread is disgusting, the site is so PS3 biased and allows so much trolling from PS3 fans its unreal these days.  The thread should have been locked 20 pages ago when it started going off topic and somehow the only comment you have is the hypocrisy of one of my posts and ignore all the flaming and trolling in here.  I guess that says more about you than it does me. Trolling? yeah sure whatever. First off I am sick and tired of your constant complaining and whining. I know what's happening on this site, lots of vocal PS3 fans and I won't defend them but all this complaining won't help you. I think the best thing you can do is report them and complaining every chance you get is getting annoying. That's one of my reason that I only commented on your post and top that with your hypocrisy on this thread. That's the "simply can't ignore this one" was for. I just can't ignore you any longer. Don't worry this is the last time I will qoute you in this thread. I have already said what I wanted to say to you. I won't derail this thread much any longer.

 

Fair enough, I'm sick of reading constant 360 bashing in the 360 forums so I'll complain all I like.  I suggest you either stop people trolling the Microsoft forums or ignore those of us tired of having to wade through 50% of the posts that are users with no interest in the console or its games.

Just remind me by the way how your fed up of all my constant whining given I only ever post in the Microsoft forums usually, you must read a lot of Microsoft threads despite not having the console.  Once again, that speaks volumes imo.

@ NightAntilli

I thought you would stop?

Agreed.



You mean apart from textures and geometry data, right? Or you think such data is useless?

Luckily the PS3 is much more powerful for processing code than the XBox 360.



I don't think that would be a good idea, the pre-rendered videos show much higher detail levels and better lighting than in-game. If you would up these differences even more, the experience get less seamless.

And I don't agree, with more capacity the XBox 360 is powerful enough to include higher quality assets (with equal varierty) and then instead opt for 720 with x2 AA as that would start to make sense. Alan Wake runs in Sub-HD, but the truth is many PS3/360 multi-platform games which render in 720p could also have been done in Sub-HD without gamers noticing and instead opt using these resources elsewhere as the asset quality isn't high enough.

GTA IV is a good example. It looks better on the PS3, this due to better lighting, less pop-ins and better post-process filtering probably due to the RSX havin 8 more TMUs, each with twice the texture cache as on the 360. The assets aren't of high enough quality to matter enough to run in 720p or 640p. Actually the dithering on the 360 is pretty awful in that game.

360:


PS3:


360 fanboys made a big deal of the PS3 version rendering in 640p, but it's at best bittersweet if you look at the end result objectively.



It seems to be only a secret amongst 360 fans...

Rockstar (GTA IV):

"with Blu-ray, you've got plenty of storage, whereas on Xbox 360 there's no guarantee of a hard-drive and you're working with the DVD format. Does that create limitations?" His answer? "Yep.""

Carmack (Rage):

"We would love to set the thing up where it filled one Blu-ray disc versus three DVDs, which is about the right mix, but the game just…we can’t cut it into a third like that,” he said. “We can cut it into two pieces. We’ve got two large wastelands on there. We just couldn’t make an arbitary cut." (BTW, even a single layer Blu-Ray disc can hold well more data than three dual layer 6.8 GB 360 DVDs than what Carmack claims here)

Takeuchi (Lost Planet 2):
"This time, truly, the content that was cut was significant. We had so much content that we wanted to add this time. It ended up being a battle against disc space."

Some comments which may help you in your quest...

NightAntilli said: Hynad said: You say "that's not gonna happen", and you have the nerve to call anyone a rock? :D For a guy with the word "truth" as his avatar picture, you sure are afraid to admit that truth. Unless there is an obscure game I never knew existed, the XBox 360, for all the good that is on this system (that I do so own and love, mind you ;) never provided gamers with something close to God of War 3. Budgets are indeed hard or impossible to provide, so this argument would be moot to begin with. Do you think that although I own those 2 systems, I shit on my 360 everytime I turn it on? All this time, I didn't even say the 360 isn't a great system or anything of the sort even once. ¬_¬ The stance you have is different than mine here, and you call me names because of that? I only say you dismiss those games because you are incapable (so far) of agreeing to the obvious. While that "rock" has agreed that multiplatform titles are usually better on the 360, for reasons already mentioned, I don't take those into account when judging what I think is the best technical feat of this generation. Basically, what you seem to want me to say is: "Wow, this is the most impressive thing I've witnessed this generation but this other thing is more impressive." See how stupid that would be or not? Yes, I have the nerve to call you a rock, because you refuse to listen to reason, and are selective in your games. Where exactly did I say that the X360 has a game that comes close to those 3 PS3 games? I didn't. The whole point is that 3 games does not represent the whole library, be it all games, or exclusives only.. And you still don't get that, because you select your games and ignore the rest, and that's why I call you a rock, a biased one too. People that own both systems and like them pretty much equally will say that the overall difference is not as great as people make it sound. The stance I have is different than yours, yes, but that's not the reason I call you names. Look above. *sigh* I DID NOT DISMISS THOSE GAMES ANYWHERE. GTFO with your same argument over and over and over and over. I already refuted that one too. You're simply a fking repeater. Same goes for your reason of multi-plats. I even used your own statement against you, and you completely ignored it and kept preaching about how the PS3 is superior. And your last sentence is retarded. I'm not even gonna bother answering to it. You are a rock, because even though I prove to you with arguments why 2+2=4, you keep saying that 2+2=5. And also, I always gave you reasons why I call you things, but when you call me something, like "biased", you can't even properly tell me biased towards what.. So please, don't waste my fking time.

You keep on going on and on about things I already made myself clear.

Take a Porsche, and then a Ferrari.  Surely, the Porsche is better than the Ferrari, since there is more of them on the Road. ¬_¬

You'll find a way to go around the image I'm trying to make, like you did with all the others.  Not taking a minute to try and understand where I'm coming from.  You're so eager to impose your way of thinking to everyone here it's absolutely childish.

Reason told me that the 360 is the way to go for multiplatform titles. 

And reason tells me that I've seen absolutely nothing that comes close to Killzone 2, Uncharted 2 and God of War3 on the XBox 360.

Now one is free to admit and/or make whatever conclusioin he wants based on those facts.

My stance is as simple as this: I take the best I've seen as benchmarks.  

You take multiplatform titles as your benchmark, I take the best we've witnessed this current generatioon.  In no occasion do I mention the 360 might not blow me away with an upcoming game and send those 3 technical "kings" out of the way.  I'm saying right now, the 360 doesn't give me one reason to believe it will approach the technical wonder of those games.  It might or not in the future, but I won't admit it can do as good unless I'm shown proof that it is. 

In one of your first post in this here thread, you went as far as to suggest that if Naughty Dog was able to develop their own engine in a relatively short period of time, then the third parties should be able to do the same.   Basically saying that instead of taking a money/time conscious approach (a logical and smart business approach, one would admit), they should take the extra miles to develop an engine that could make the PS3's versions of the games look equal [or maybe better] compared to the 360's, and this for every different types of games they produce (One different optimised game engine for each of the different games the studios develop, just like Naughty Dog, Guerrila and Santa Monica do). 

What a sound proposition.

You also suggest that the approach of the 2 console makers are different.  That Sony is more of a graphics whore compared to Microsoft who are more community oriented.  To some extent, I will agree to that.  Yet one would see games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 pushing the online contents and components as far as what is found in the 360's exclusives.  Yet the 360 still trail behind in visuals for all of those.  One should be reminded of games like Little Big Planet and MAG.  The latter being specifically community driven AND a technical feat on console.

But I digress, it is unrealistic to suggest the developers to build engines after engines to make the 2 versions of their games look on par to each others when a decent engine can make it happen with little tradeoffs.

 

Mummelmann said: headshot91 said: Mummelmann said: headshot91 said: Mummelmann said: headshot91 said: Mummelmann said: headshot91 said: Eurogamer said the graphics were "decent" Yes, worded so by the eminent female reviewer with the following, impressive review resume from which to draw upon in her judgement; Dead or Alive: Paradise - psp Muscle March - wii Super Monkey Ball: Step & Roll - wii Plants vs. Zombies - iphone  Matt Hazard: Blood Bath and Beyond - 360 Critter Crunch - ps3 Tony Hawk: RIDE We Sing - wii Buzz!: Quiz World - ps3 Jambo! Safari - wii Jak & Daxter: The Lost Frontier - psp LittleBigPlanet - psp Take That Singstar - ps3 I think I'll pretend she smokes too much weed and read some other reviews instead. ooh tut tut tut, HAS to be biased because she only reviews mostly wii/psp games and is a female. Every single person in the world is biased, including you and me. And as I mentioned in my other post; her being a woman was probably insignificant but her review history is not. Can you not see how different this game will be from anything she's ever reviewed? The closest thing on that list is Matt Hazard, which is still far away (sidescrolling shooter a la Contra). Seeing that list should hint at what this person enjoys and plays most of the time. Personally, I hate Buzz, I find it meaningless and boring and would rather play a board game than this noise but I love RPG's. Ergo; I'd score Buzz very low (2-3/10) because I can't enjoy it but I might score a mediocre RPG 5 or 6 simply because I enjoy the genre and certain aspects of it. Can't you see where this could create some problems in assessing a games worth on its merit and premise? This reviewer doesn't just post a review without consulting anyone. It has to be edited and checked before it goes up. Just because she has reviewed only a few 360/ps3 games means nothing, i mean everyone has to start somewhere. We wouldn't be having this conversation if she had given it 10/10. Its not the score that bothers me, its her silly comment on how the graphics are "decent" when that clearly isn't the case according to the rest of the world and it shows that she doesn't really have a good grasp on things. There are most certainly no games on this genre that have visuals on par with this. Of course, she would know this if she ever played Alone in the Dark, Resident Evil 5, Silent Hill: Homecoming or Dead Space. Rest of the world? Well so far this thread has one review saying the game has the best graphics. It's all opinion, and just because she doesnt share that same view with you doesnt mean you can automatically bash the review. Checking all the other reviews up on Meta, the one from Eurogamer is the only one that states the graphics are "decent" while everyone else seem to think they are very good or great and that gives me every right to question that bit of the review. And just because you agree with it (for some reason) doesn't mean I can't "bash" the review. The lowest visual score I saw outside of Eurogamers "decent" was an 8.5, which is several notches above decent as it were. Its fine she didn't love the game and scored it a perfect ten (hell, I didn't expect that to happen at all) but at least she should get a clue about what's what in the genre, on the platform and on the market in general in regards to visuals.

Didn't you listen, i said its her opinion. You cant quantify graphics, some will like the art direction ect, others not so m much. Also i love how you inferred that i agree with the review, just because im telling you you can't just bash it. Also, i dont think they would have given a bigish game like wake to this reviewer without somekind of previous experience etc. Lets just agree to disagree