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

Forums - Gaming - Xbox 720 Is Similar to PS4, Ubisoft Says

DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
enditall727 said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games

yea i was under the impression that the Gamecube had the best graphics out of the 3 until Conker Live and Reloaded came out on Xbox

 

That game looked damn good and it was also the last game from that generation i played



Are you telling me that Conker looks better and it pushes tech more than RE4 on GC? Or even Starfox Adventures?



Around the Network
DigitalDevilSummoner on 03 April 2013

A similar machine tech wise is not gonna work in MS's favor. they will need a lower price to compete. 199 $ + 2 year subscription ?



D-Minaj225 on 03 April 2013
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games



Conker? Dont make me laugh...all that post processing effects cant make up for such tiny, low poly models/environments. GC selling the least doesnt mean a shit in terms of tech performance, you know it right? Plus im a gameplay over grafix guy 100%, so i hope you werent referring to ME on

conker looks better than star fox adventures but re4 is a good example

oh and i didn't mean to label u as a graphics guy sorry bout that



 

D-Minaj225 on 03 April 2013



 

enditall727 on 03 April 2013
DieAppleDie said:
enditall727 said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games

yea i was under the impression that the Gamecube had the best graphics out of the 3 until Conker Live and Reloaded came out on Xbox

 

That game looked damn good and it was also the last game from that generation i played



Are you telling me that Conker looks better and it pushes tech more than RE4 on GC? Or even Starfox Adventures?


yea Conker Live and Reloaded looked good

 

I might be wrong but i believe Conker Live and Reloaded was the best looking game on Xbox, God Of War was the best looking game on PS2 and i cant remember what the best looking Gamecube game was

 

I just remember that Conker was the closest to next gen that the 6th gen had seen at the time

 

I'm not sure if there was a game that looked better than Conker though because i didn't play everything

 

Edit:



Around the Network
DirtyP2002 on 03 April 2013
DigitalDevilSummoner said:
A similar machine tech wise is not gonna work in MS's favor. they will need a lower price to compete. 199 $ + 2 year subscription ?


ehm... MS can easily do that, but Sony can't. Sony might have problems if there are 2 nearly identical consoles on the market again. One is $299 and one is $399.

But this is the way a lot of PS3 fans think. They base their arguments on the assumption that the PS4 will sell automatically better than the next Xbox if both are the same and priced the same.

As if the 76 million people who bought a 360 would have preferred the PS3 if they only could afford it. You never consider that people bought the 360 over the PS3, just because they like it better.

In fact in 2011 the average pricepoint for a 360 was higher than the average pricepoint for a PS3 in NA according to NPD.



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...

DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games



Conker? Dont make me laugh...all that post processing effects cant make up for such tiny, low poly models/environments. GC selling the least doesnt mean a shit in terms of tech performance, you know it right? Plus im a gameplay over grafix guy 100%, so i hope you werent referring to ME on

conker looks better than sf: a but re4 is agood example

oh and i didn't mean to label u as a graphics guy sorry bout that



no problem As far as im informed, the Xbox was the one that had better res. and texture quality. Plus it had modern shader tech too. PS2 was the one that pushed more polygons, and was by far, and logically, the one that was maxed out 101% due to its insane popularity. Nintendo GC appears to be the most balanced package.



enditall727 on 03 April 2013
DirtyP2002 said:
DigitalDevilSummoner said:
A similar machine tech wise is not gonna work in MS's favor. they will need a lower price to compete. 199 $ + 2 year subscription ?


ehm... MS can easily do that, but Sony can't. Sony might have problems if there are 2 nearly identical consoles on the market again. One is $299 and one is $399.

But this is the way a lot of PS3 fans think. They base their arguments on the assumption that the PS4 will sell automatically better than the next Xbox if both are the same and priced the same.

As if the 76 million people who bought a 360 would have preferred the PS3 if they only could afford it. You never consider that people bought the 360 over the PS3, just because they like it better.

In fact in 2011 the average pricepoint for a 360 was higher than the average pricepoint for a PS3 in NA according to NPD.

it will

 

the 720 is going to get outsold HARD if they launch at the same price and at the same time worldwide

 

you can quote me on it



DigitalDevilSummoner on 03 April 2013
DirtyP2002 said:.

They base their arguments on the assumption that the PS4 will sell automatically better than the next Xbox if both are the same and priced the same.

Yeah.



Turkish on 03 April 2013
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?


Probably, it'll have the same amount of ram and a similar cpu, the gpu will be weaker, Durango is said to have 12 CUs while PS4 has 18 unified CUs. Durango has 2 CUs less than HD7790, PS4 has 2 CUs less than HD7870.