Cross-X said:
Well it's just that I hear that statement a lot. Like even when Gears of War 3 was announced, Cliffy B said that Epic chose to stick with 30 fps because of the graphics. Or maybe every devs opts for the 30 fps on consoles because console tech isn't good enough yet to maintain 60 fps with amazing graphics? So I get that the Cell is an extra processor and so is the Cell the primary reason why the PS3 used to and still sometimes get crappy ports from the X360 version? Is that why Devs find it harded to develop for the PS3?
|
When they say 30FPS will have better graphics than 60FPS they mean because the console isn't working so hard to produce 60FPS, it can put more energy and computing power into making the game look pretty.
The CELL is generally held to be marginally more powerful than the Xbox 360's PowerPC, while the PS3's VideoCard is inferior to that Xbox 360's. All in all, it would be fair to say that the PS3 has a marginal power differential over the Xbox 360. But the architecture of the CELL and PowerPC is different enough to make porting either way difficult.
When you install a game to the harddrive, the game is fed to the CPU and GPU straight from the HDD, rather than from the disc. The read speed (date transfer speed) from an HDD will almost always be MUCH faster than from a disc, which can often (not always) result in a more fluid gameplay experience.
starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS
