CGI-Quality said:
kain_kusanagi said:
CGI-Quality said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Naughty Dog needed the truckloads of cash from Sony to create Uncharted 2 and 3 and the upcoming Last of Us. Without the money for R&D, Naughty Dog would have done what most developers do, use Unreal Engine. Nuaghty Dog is talented, no doubt about it, but other developers have tons of talent too. The difference is Sony needed Naughty Dog to hit a home run with Uncharted 2. Sony needed Uncharted 2 to look better than everything else at the time. Sony was willing to pay what ever it takes to get that. Naughty Dog pulled it off thanks to that money. Most publishers are willing to have good enough graphics instead of paying for outstanding graphics.
|
I don't think the Uncharted games had that big of a budget (or The Last Of Us, for that matter). The Killzone games had higher budgets than the Uncharted games, and the latter are considered better looking titles. I'd argue that mainly Naughty Dog's talent has allowed for the results.
The PS3 is a percent, or so, more powerful than the 360 (in peak performance and number crunching), but that has hardly impacted the final products. Sony's teams were just better equipped with in-house resources (going back to Naughty Dog + Santa Monica's tech wizardry), which is why their exclusives stayed ahead.
Halo 4 is built with in-house resources (pulling away from the redundance of the Unreal Engine 3.0, many 360 exclusives are known to run on), and it shows.
|
Sony spent money on building the resources that Naughty Dog, Santa Monica, etc. used. Naughty Dog's budgets may not have been huge, but the money Sony spent to make sure their 1st party devs had the tools to thrive was sky high.
|
If so, that's a good thing. It helped produce better titles.
|
I'd argue certain things there. Better visuals at the time yes, better games I dont know. I think alot of Uncharted 2's high reviews were due to a game finally showing what Sony promised at the beginning of the generation. Great console visuals. Media fianally had that GAME to say yeah look at it. That overshadowed Uncharted 2 IMO. Uncharted 1 was a better game. Much more enjoyable. Uncharted 2 had alot that could be left out. IMO. So much so I own U3 and yet to play. I just have no drive to start it rigt now. The only drive being its possible visuals to see. That surely says alot about the first game over the 2nd.
OT:
Without a doubt Microsoft only really had 2 developers trying their damndest for visuals for 360 for a long time. Epic and Turn 10. Epic have done amazing considering Unreal Engine 3 is designed for several systems.
And I also think Turn 10 have showed that the 360 is not behind a certain other console in power when comparing like for like a certain racing series with another in the visuals department locked at 60fps.
Playing the demo of Forza Horizon is one thing. But playing the full game is quite amazing stuff. Some of the scenery ( like going through the forest in autmny leaves wile the sunsets. So far the most amazing thing Ive seen a console produce as a fully released game. ) Its like detail + eye watering lighting. Also the first time you see the festival in sight at night. The best lighting Ive seen a console produce by a looooonnnnggg way.
But Halo 4 is not out yet. I hope 343 have squeezed even more out.
Just a shame first party devs didnt push the system 4 years ago.
Crytek are also worth a mention. Currently as games you can buy, Crysis 1 is my 2nd most impressive visuals of any console game. Yes its amazing in some parts. Truly amazing. There is texture issues compared to PC, but no FPS currently on consoles including Crysis 2 impressed quite like Crysis 1 on 360.
Currently Online 
