By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I think it's safe to say the PS3 is the definitive graphics king for this gen

slowmo on 13 March 2012

At least these threads give the mods a chance to ban all the trolling alt accounts that slide out of the woodwork. As for the OP, it has 3 games at most better than the best 360 has to offer, that's not very definitive imo and is very arguable as the 30+ pages have shown.



Around the Network
Badassbab on 13 March 2012

I'm amazed at how heated the debate on which console has best graphics can get. You guys should get a powerful gaming PC if it matters that much. Though I have to say getting the technically best PS3 exclusives running well on a PC would be much more difficult then the 360 equivalents due to PS3 hardware being very un-PC like. Cell, blu ray, rambus main ram....






NoCtiS_NoX on 13 March 2012
NotStan said:
When I saw the title at first, I knew shitstorm would commence no matter what . I could care less either way, but those 14 pages provided some very good entertainment.


I know right!? I tried to add fuel to the fire but I am unsuccessful. 



Michael-5 on 13 March 2012
killerzX said:
Michael-5 said:
killerzX said:
 

you realize, you lied again, as usual.

pre-alpha, is still playable. its just a early build, non-finished. just like the killzone 3 beta in december was pre-alpha. i saw nothing about them playing a level in that article, but i will take you at your word (which i shouldnt because you constantly lie and misrepresent, and back track on you own words).

also it was nearly 4 months after gears, 8 months after e3. thats a hell of a long time in game development. i was slihghtly exagerated the timeframes to get accross a point (i also thought gears 2 released in September) in other words...you lied.

no in other words, i thought gears released in September, and in other words my point still stands gears got realeased like 3-4 months after e3, so much closer to complete, killzone released 4 months after that, 8 months after e3. game was no where near finished. and my whole point is e3 awards for best graphics of non released non finished games is pointless. and by your own accord MGS4 has better graphics than KZ2, which is utterly ridiculous.

but none of that matters ign, gave their impressions of games during e3, before the games were release. they were unfinshised builds, opinions of nonreleased games. it doesnt matter we are talking finished product here. and by your own argument, MGS4 has better graphics than Killzone 2. because ign, said MGS4 had better graphics than gears 2.yup, that is correct.

yes you are very very very biased. i dont think i have every seen someone more biased before, and think they are innocent at the same time.

Guess you don't know your greek ABC's... Alpha comes before beta, not the other way around, and no they don't overlap, they are different stages in development.

it was called a "beta" but was still alpha code.

and if you look at the e3 footage it said pre alpha.e3 2008 or 2006? Not 2008.

 

Pre-Alpha is before the character models are all finished, Alpha is when all the models are done, and the game is technically playable, beta is the stage where they smooth it all out.

and the killzone "beta" was Alpha, and e3 build was pre-alpha

This below is pre-alpha

Notice, no background, floor, and only a character model? Not at all playable...

Take a guess which game it's for.

so in other words your whole argument is debunked and meaningless.

end of the year awards of finished games > mid year early impressions of non finished games.

Where does it say pre-alpha? Nowhere exactly.

Which end of the year award said Killzone 2 looked better then Gears 2? Nowhere exactly.

So unless you can find some major website saying other wise, IGN says Gears 2 > Killzone 2. That game has been in development since 2006, whatever was presented at E3 2008 was the late stages of the game dev, just like Gears. 3 months release difference doesn't mean anything, both released in the same fall/winter season. Now unless you actually have some arguement to return, instead of ignoreing facts and presenting opinion....and then calling me biased. Don't reply because I won't.

Also the game is a rumored Sony Smash Bros fighter. Kratos and Sweet Tooth are the only released character models.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

killerzX on 13 March 2012
Michael-5 said:
killerzX said:
Michael-5 said:
killerzX said:
 

you realize, you lied again, as usual.

pre-alpha, is still playable. its just a early build, non-finished. just like the killzone 3 beta in december was pre-alpha. i saw nothing about them playing a level in that article, but i will take you at your word (which i shouldnt because you constantly lie and misrepresent, and back track on you own words).

also it was nearly 4 months after gears, 8 months after e3. thats a hell of a long time in game development. i was slihghtly exagerated the timeframes to get accross a point (i also thought gears 2 released in September) in other words...you lied.

no in other words, i thought gears released in September, and in other words my point still stands gears got realeased like 3-4 months after e3, so much closer to complete, killzone released 4 months after that, 8 months after e3. game was no where near finished. and my whole point is e3 awards for best graphics of non released non finished games is pointless. and by your own accord MGS4 has better graphics than KZ2, which is utterly ridiculous.

but none of that matters ign, gave their impressions of games during e3, before the games were release. they were unfinshised builds, opinions of nonreleased games. it doesnt matter we are talking finished product here. and by your own argument, MGS4 has better graphics than Killzone 2. because ign, said MGS4 had better graphics than gears 2.yup, that is correct.

yes you are very very very biased. i dont think i have every seen someone more biased before, and think they are innocent at the same time.

Guess you don't know your greek ABC's... Alpha comes before beta, not the other way around, and no they don't overlap, they are different stages in development.

it was called a "beta" but was still alpha code.

and if you look at the e3 footage it said pre alpha.e3 2008 or 2006? Not 2008.

 

Pre-Alpha is before the character models are all finished, Alpha is when all the models are done, and the game is technically playable, beta is the stage where they smooth it all out.

and the killzone "beta" was Alpha, and e3 build was pre-alpha

This below is pre-alpha

Notice, no background, floor, and only a character model? Not at all playable...

Take a guess which game it's for.

so in other words your whole argument is debunked and meaningless.

end of the year awards of finished games > mid year early impressions of non finished games.

Where does it say pre-alpha? Nowhere exactly.

i cant be bothered to embed a video, but just youtube, killzone 3 e3 demo. it clearly says pre-alpha.

but i already proved you wrong about the alpha beta thing, which you lied and said it wasnt. so again comparing unfinished games in early builds is meaningless and stupid.

Which end of the year award said Killzone 2 looked better then Gears 2? Nowhere exactly.

most sites didnt compare gears 2 and killzone 2 as because the came out in different years. but using some deductive reasoning and logic, we can piece things together. so lets start, most sites gave MGS4 best graphics award over gears 2, including your precious ign.com. killzone2 looks much much better than MGS4, therefore KIllzone 2 is graphically better than gears 2 (which doesnt look impressive). furthermore lens of truth did an analysis of killzone 2 vs Gears 2, and killzone 2 came out on top. furthermore still in Digital foundry analysis of killzone 2 they talk at great length about all the bars and standards it raised with the only game coming close was Uncharted 1 (2007), they make no mention of Gears 2.

So unless you can find some major website saying other wise, IGN says Gears 2 > Killzone 2. That game has been in development since 2006, whatever was presented at E3 2008 was the late stages of the game dev, just like Gears. 3 months release difference doesn't mean anything, both released in the same fall/winter season. Now unless you actually have some arguement to return, instead of ignoreing facts and presenting opinion....and then calling me biased. Don't reply because I won't.

facts?  all youve done is cling to ONE site's meaningless opinion of e3 trailers, of non released, non finished games. that there is meaningless

Also the game is a rumored Sony Smash Bros fighter. Kratos and Sweet Tooth are the only released character models.





Around the Network
rakugakist on 14 March 2012

I care. I really do.



Aldro on 14 March 2012
Michael-5 said:
killerzX said:
Michael-5 said:
killerzX said:
 

you realize, you lied again, as usual.

pre-alpha, is still playable. its just a early build, non-finished. just like the killzone 3 beta in december was pre-alpha. i saw nothing about them playing a level in that article, but i will take you at your word (which i shouldnt because you constantly lie and misrepresent, and back track on you own words).

also it was nearly 4 months after gears, 8 months after e3. thats a hell of a long time in game development. i was slihghtly exagerated the timeframes to get accross a point (i also thought gears 2 released in September) in other words...you lied.

no in other words, i thought gears released in September, and in other words my point still stands gears got realeased like 3-4 months after e3, so much closer to complete, killzone released 4 months after that, 8 months after e3. game was no where near finished. and my whole point is e3 awards for best graphics of non released non finished games is pointless. and by your own accord MGS4 has better graphics than KZ2, which is utterly ridiculous.

but none of that matters ign, gave their impressions of games during e3, before the games were release. they were unfinshised builds, opinions of nonreleased games. it doesnt matter we are talking finished product here. and by your own argument, MGS4 has better graphics than Killzone 2. because ign, said MGS4 had better graphics than gears 2.yup, that is correct.

yes you are very very very biased. i dont think i have every seen someone more biased before, and think they are innocent at the same time.

Guess you don't know your greek ABC's... Alpha comes before beta, not the other way around, and no they don't overlap, they are different stages in development.

it was called a "beta" but was still alpha code.

and if you look at the e3 footage it said pre alpha.e3 2008 or 2006? Not 2008.

 

Pre-Alpha is before the character models are all finished, Alpha is when all the models are done, and the game is technically playable, beta is the stage where they smooth it all out.

and the killzone "beta" was Alpha, and e3 build was pre-alpha

This below is pre-alpha

Notice, no background, floor, and only a character model? Not at all playable...

Take a guess which game it's for.

so in other words your whole argument is debunked and meaningless.

end of the year awards of finished games > mid year early impressions of non finished games.

Where does it say pre-alpha? Nowhere exactly.

Which end of the year award said Killzone 2 looked better then Gears 2? Nowhere exactly.

So unless you can find some major website saying other wise, IGN says Gears 2 > Killzone 2. That game has been in development since 2006, whatever was presented at E3 2008 was the late stages of the game dev, just like Gears. 3 months release difference doesn't mean anything, both released in the same fall/winter season. Now unless you actually have some arguement to return, instead of ignoreing facts and presenting opinion....and then calling me biased. Don't reply because I won't.

Also the game is a rumored Sony Smash Bros fighter. Kratos and Sweet Tooth are the only released character models.


 

Now don't go find a way to go around this. It clearly says Pre-Alpha. I was at the game convention in Sweden called Gamex in 2010 November. It said Pre-Alpha there and I remember the full version making me drop my pants even more.



Michael-5 on 14 March 2012
Aldro said:
 

 

Now don't go find a way to go around this. It clearly says Pre-Alpha. I was at the game convention in Sweden called Gamex in 2010?? November. It said Pre-Alpha there and I remember the full version making me drop my pants even more.

Do we know what stage in dev Gears 2 was at E3 2010? I thought Pre-alpha came long before a game was ready for release, not months before release. Also do we know what stage the playable E3 demo was at? I thought alpha was characteristic of games which aren't ready to play yet.

Either Way, E3 2008, IGN said Gears 2 looked better then Killzone 2, both games were incomplete works, both games released relatively close together. Yes KZ2 released 3.5 months later, but it was in dev since earlier too (They also had playable versions as early as Playstation Day in August 2007, same can't be said for Gears 2), so there is no reason to think one game was more close to complete then the other.

 

Also P.S. to the other guy...I think MGS4 looks better then KZ2, can you find an article by some website (preferably a well known one) that says MGS4 looks better then Killzone 2? Otherwise I'll stick to what IGN say and put Gears 2 above KZ2, and personaly put Gears 3 above KZ3 (I know you put KZ3 1 rank above Gears 3, so it's really a matter of preference).

 

P.P.S. To add to my preference comment and how every game has their own benefits. L.A. Noire, although overall not that spectacular to look at, has the best face animations out of all games. So if facial expressions are a big deal for graphics for you, L.A. Noire would be your best graphics choice.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Aldro on 14 March 2012
Michael-5 said:
Aldro said:
 

 

Now don't go find a way to go around this. It clearly says Pre-Alpha. I was at the game convention in Sweden called Gamex in 2010 November. It said Pre-Alpha there and I remember the full version making me drop my pants even more.

Do we know what stage in dev Gears 2 was at E3 2010? I thought Pre-alpha came long before a game was ready for release, not months before release. Also do we know what stage the playable E3 demo was at? I thought alpha was characteristic of games which aren't ready to play yet.

Either Way, E3 2008, IGN said Gears 2 looked better then Killzone 2, both games were incomplete works, both games released relatively close together. Yes KZ2 released 3.5 months later, but it was in dev since earlier too, so there is no reason to think one game was more close to complete then the other.

 

Also P.S. to the other guy...I think MGS4 looks better then KZ2, can you find an article by some website (preferably a well known one) that says MGS4 looks better then Killzone 2? Otherwise I'll stick to what IGN say and put Gears 2 above KZ2, and personaly put Gears 3 above KZ3 (I know you put KZ3 1 rank above Gears 3, so it's really a matter of preference).

 

P.P.S. To add to my preference comment and how every game has their own benefits. L.A. Noire, although overall not that spectacular to look at, has the best face animations out of all games. So if facial expressions are a big deal for graphics for you, L.A. Noire would be your best graphics choice.



MGS4 got the most graphic awards in 2008 (Gears 2 failed to win)
Uncharted 2 got the most graphic awards in 2009 (Forza 3 failed to win)
God of war 3 got the most graphic awards in 2010
Uncharted 3 got the most graphic awards in 2011 (Gears 3 & Forza 4failed to win)

 

That's what the majority of gaming websites are indicating. It's a statistic fact based upon opinions where IGN as a whole voted rather than an article one person wrote comparing... unfinished .. showcases of E3.

Lmao..



Michael-5 on 14 March 2012
Aldro said:



MGS4 got the most graphic awards in 2008 (Gears 2 failed to win)
Uncharted 2 got the most graphic awards in 2009 (Forza 3 failed to win)
God of war 3 got the most graphic awards in 2010
Uncharted 3 got the most graphic awards in 2011 (Gears 3 & Forza 4failed to win)

 

That's what the majority of gaming websites are indicating. It's a statistic fact based upon opinions where IGN as a whole voted rather than an article one person wrote comparing... unfinished .. showcases of E3.

Lmao..

Yea, but MGS4 is a 3 year old game, how does it compare to the more recently released Gears 3, and even recent MP titles like Crysis 2?

MGS4 did look amazing for the time (same with UC2, and GoW3), and I still think they look among the best this gen, but do they look better then newer 360 exclusives? Also the majority of websites don't say anything favorable for Killzone as opposed to say Crysis, they only say it looks real good, or among the best, which I completly agree with.

360 is plateuing now, where PS3 isn't, so chances are we will never see a 360 game which looks better then Uncharted 3, but I still think games like Gears of War 3 look better then older PS3 exclusives, and MP games like Crysis 2, Mass Effect 3, and even Batman: AC, look as good as those showcase PS3 games.

The point I made earlier is that with the exception of Uncharted 3, PS3 games in general don't look better then 360. MGS4 might look better then Gears 2, but it's well below Gears 3 in graphics. (I know you agree since Gears 3 was your #5, above MGS4).

So we can't say the PS3 is the definite graphics king with only 1 game (Uncharted 3). If Sony stops producing games of that calibur, (and I don't think The Last of Us looks anywhere nearly as good yet), then PS3 and 360 are at a vertual tie graphically.

 

TGhe only thing we can say is that PS360 are the definate graphic king consoles, above the Wii, as even the best Wii games look poorer then the oldest 360/PS3 exclusives (Gears 1/Uncharted 1 look much better then XenoBlade or Zelda).



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results