Bioshock was removed from the store so there's no way to know how it runs. Now, show me a game that's currently playable on an iPhone 6S that looks as good as a PS3 or PS4 game.
Like I already said there isnt an iPhone 6s, or even iPhone 5s exclusive game right now. Developer want to reach as many consumer as possible and develop the games for weaker hardware (iPhone 5/4s).
This is an tech demo made for the iPhone 4 (around 1/30 of the power of an iPhone 6s).
nope your saying graphics (animations, details and co are all graphics) and physics + co is game content and thats wrong. Not beeing able to show one single video about your points just prooves this.
good day.
Youre basicaly reducing the very engine of the game to "graphics". But anyways its clear this is an impossible conversaion, its like a scientist talking to a fervorous religious about evolution, the religious doesnt need to have any facts or know anything cause he believes he already has all the asnwer, therefore he debunks anything presented by the scientist with unfundamented belief, its like talking to a wall. Also what videos ? There are videos of TloU runing on PS3 everywhere, just google it. What I want to see is a video of a game runing physics, animations, contextual interactivity, AI, expressions and handling all these system together as well as TLoU does on a PS2, youre the one saying PS2 can do it, so plz show me PS2 doing it, with some technical breakdwon explaining exaclty whats going on there and why thats the same as TLoU.
This was my last reply to you, keep believing on "Noas Ark" cause as I said this is not a debate theres no argument coming from your side, a debate needs 2 sides presenting arguments, not 1 doing it and the other saing "show me video" or "send me a link".
Ps3 GOW 3 boss battle:
Ps2 Shadow os the colusses boss battle:
TLOU Ps3:
Silent Hill 3 ps2:
your welcome:
ps: your probl right, but your not the "scientist" ;)
Sorry I had to reply this was too funy, Im rolling in the floor laughting. Altough trying to compare Shadow of the Colossus to GOW3 Titan was kinda good, mechanicaly those fights are widly different, Cronus is a living scenario basic, Shadow of the Colossus is more analogus to what happens in Dragons Dogma combat albeit its way more clunky since you know PS2 was limited as fck when compared ot a PS3/X360.
To school you just a tiny bit Ill do a very small part of your work for you, this is a direct quote form a Santa Monica dev:
“Dynamic environments mean we can take literally anything in the game, including creatures or in this case, extremely large thousand foot plus creatures,” reveals Sony Santa Monica’s John Hight, “And turn them into an environment that Kratos can now navigate, battle on, find treasures.” The idea was mooted during God of War on PS2, but only PS3’s technology allowed the developers to build it. A similar technique was employed by Naughty Dog in Uncharted 2, but Hight claims GOW3’s approach is more advanced. “Ours is a soft body collision which allows us to take any organic character, and turn it into a level. We’ve been working on it for almost two years.”
Now the Silent HIll 3 trailer to say thats the same as TloU (wich you also linked a trailer that incidentaly doesnt actualy happen in game, wich makes things even funier) was pure comedy gold, theres an abyss of mechanics, systems, animations, AI so big between TloU and Silent Hill 3 (wich isnt even a good Silent Hill game) its not even funy. If your definition of what makes TloU what it is is it has cutscenes, than heck this game could be reproduced bit by bit on a Atari, would be totaly the same game. Youre either just playing your fervorous religious card again or never played either TloU or Silent HIll to understand just how retardedly far apart these 2 games are froma technical/technological standpoint.
GOW 3 was fully scripted while SOTC runs in real time.
There arnt even any physics for the boss fight in GOW3 scince its just fully scripted.
Alle you talked about the last of us is even more ridiculous. All your mentioned "impossible to do on ps2 things" from TLOU are from pre rendered cut szenes. You never noticed that TLOU cutscene wernt running nativly on the playstation?
Playback pre rendered cutszenes (like dvd playback) on the ps2 wouldnt be an issue.
Quoting developers and believe them "it wouldnt be possible" but claiming others people technica knowlegede...just wow :D
I predict Nintendo will never be successful in the console-making business again.
Wii U is too much of a disaster. Third parties have jumped ship for good. Nintendo can't sustain interest when VR is becoming the next hot innovation. Nintendo is lagging so far behind the competition they are done for.
Nop, you are basing this by the fact that Sony and Ms don't have exclusive franchises that appeal to you, that's not objective at all. For me their franchises are more interesting that everything Nintendo has done in the last 15 years and looking at the sales I'm probably not the only one.
Also, could you explain to me how is PC gaming objectively dead as well? I don't see it
Im not. Both have exclusive franchises that are appealing to me. I have 11 Ps4 games right now, 5 are exclusives (Last of us remastered, Nathan Drake Collection, Bloodborne, Order 1886 and Until Dawn).
But those exclusives are nowhere near as POPULAR as nintendos franchises. Please learn the difference between POPULAR and my own personal preferences.
In terms of console game sales, sony and microsofts titles dont move much consoles. People are getting the playstation and xbox to play FIFA, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Battlefront, Grand theft Auto, The Elder scrolls, Witcher, Fallout, Destiny, Assassins Creed, Batman Arkham, Metal Gear Solid and co.
In the top 10 of playstation 4 titles (sales whise) there is just one single exclusive (The last of us remastered) on rank 9.
In the top 20 there are 2 playstation exclusive titles.
Now check Wii Us top titles.
Except for Fifa, if people was getting consoles for third parties they could get a pc instead. Yes, wii u's top 20 is dominated by Nintendo, but that doesn't change that most of the ones not Mario-related don't sell that much, without mentioning they have no competition there, unlike Sony and Ms on their consoles.
Just because the graphic gap between gens is not as noticeable as before doesn't mean people will stop buying xbox/ps. And again, if they really cared about graphics they would be playing on pc, so no, they will keep being relevant (unless they stop selling consoles). The question is if Nintendo's gonna regain some market share with the nx
GOW 3 was fully scripted while SOTC runs in real time.
There arnt even any physics for the boss fight in GOW3 scince its just fully scripted.
Alle you talked about the last of us is even more ridiculous. All your mentioned "impossible to do on ps2 things" from TLOU are from pre rendered cut szenes. You never noticed that TLOU cutscene wernt running nativly on the playstation?
Playback pre rendered cutszenes (like dvd playback) on the ps2 wouldnt be an issue.
Quoting developers and believe them "it wouldnt be possible" but claiming others people technica knowlegede...just wow :D
"There arent any physics for the boss fight in GOW3 since its flly scripted" this take the prize of most absurd comment on this whole thread (and considering the amount of insanity you spew thats saying a lot). Sure dude no physics at all, Kratos just flies around like a ragdoll while Chronos clips trough the world and enemies floot on his back. And lets just ignore that the games dev told us the tech used to make Chronos and Gaia possible couldnt be achieved on the PS2 (even tough they tried to do it on the PS2).
And you must have some issues comprehending things cause Im almost 100% talking about gameplay in the Lat of US. The contextual interactions and the advanced AI the game has coupled with incredible animations is basicaly what makes the world belivable and alive and not just a scenario where you shoot ppl. Since your example to why TLoU would work on a PS2 is a trailer of a scene that doesnt happen in game and you did confirm on this last post you think the game is just a colection of cutscenes Im more than sure you never played the game so what the hell are you talking about ?
This thread reminds me of the classic The Drill's thread where he predicted Xbox One would overtake PS4 "globaly in the US" by the end of 2015, good times.
You seem to be walking a thin line with this one/picking and choosing to fit an argument on this one....Okay so then Ocarina of time was possible on SNES...just 2D with less animations, polygons, resolution, details and co.
In that case it would be a completly new/other game. Ps2 and ps3 games will (aside from graphics) be and play very, very similar.
Nope it would be the same game in 2D with the logic you are currently using. Which I feel is kind of a LONG reach if you ask me. And no PS2/PS3 games would not be and play very very similar. You can't dump it down to "graphics" with everything going on in the certains games(destructible enviroments, AI intelligenc) just adding more to everything I have already mentioned. All of that adds to the CONTENT of the games not just how they look(graphics as you keep repeating). All of that would not have been possible on the PS2, why you keep dumping it down to graphics is beyond me.
The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...
Listen to yourself. Just re-read what you wrote. How can that actually make sense to you?
Now you're going to use a handheld as an example of what would happen to a Sony/MS home console if they lost third party support? A handheld that promised console quality games that never once delivered the experience? Have you considered that perhaps the reason games sold so poorly is because the concept that playing the exact same game as you can on your console, except worse in every way on a much smaller screen isn't very appealing? No. It must be the lack of third party support. It only had the likes of franchises like Metal Gear Solid, Borderlands, Assassin's Creed, Fifa soccer, Persona, Call of Duty, Minecraft etc. you know, some of the most popular third party franchises in the world. Big deal, right? Besides, you're cherry picking games. Uncharted and LittleBigPlanet pulled respectable numbers, and Killzone sales actually weren't too terrible either - it definitely didn't lose Sony money. Also, need I remind you that the PS Vita actually has quite a reasonably healthy following in Japan? Maybe not the best example to use - but I digress.
Also, you're meaning to tell me that the likes of Mario Bros, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda outsold the likes of Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest on a Nintendo console?! Colour me surprised! Its almost as if those games have quite almost always sold better than Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest regardless of the platforms those games are on! But I should also probably remind you that Monster Hunter sold better on the PSP on a much smaller install base, and two of the top 3 best selling Dragon Quest games are on Sony consoles, so those are also not great examples to prove your point. Third parties don't sell as well on Nintendo consoles as they do on other consoles. It's been that way for decades. You'll be hard pressed to find a mutli-platform third party game that sells better on Nintendo than they do on Sony or MS consoles. There's a few, like Just Dance, but the vast majority sell much much better.
No, Nintendo's win doesn't matter because it's winning in a dwindling market. The home console base appears to be expanding in spite of Nintendo dropping the ball so badly with the Wii U, and the hand held base is shrinking dramatically despite Nintendo having virtually no competition. There were over three times as many PSPs and DSs sold at this point in their life than 3DSs and Vitas. That isn't shifting the goal posts. That's a realistic perspective. You might claim that Nintendo forced Sony out of the 3DS space, but the truth of the matter is that they read the writing on the wall that says its getting harder and harder to make a successful handheld video game console, and decided to put their time and effort into expanding their presence in an expanding market. There was more than enough room for the PSP and DS to exist, there's certainly no reason to think that the 3DS drove the Vita out of the market when the 3DS is selling less than half of its predecessor.
Before this post, you claimed that Sony's first party software sales would go up if there was less third party support while Nintendo's first party software sales would be more in line with Sony's if Nintendo had more competition from third parties. Then I pointed out a few examples to the contrary and now you go on a rant how well Nintendo's IPs always sell and that third parties do better on non-Nintendo platforms. In other words, Nintendo is better than Sony.
As for the other point, the home console market is shrinking as well.
So Nintendo is better than Sony and MS because Nintendo has a rabid fanbase that only plays Nintendo-made games and buys them like they didn't go out of style a decade ago, and Sony and MS's fanbases tend to support both first and third party games because gamers on platforms that actually have that option. Okay. If that's your criteria then you got me beat. I mean it's a completely and utterly meaningless judgement but if that's the nail you want to hang your hat on, all the power to you.
Of course, by your same criteria Call of Duty must be the best shooter series ever (because sales).
The home console market is shrinking? Maybe you should tell Sony and Microsoft, their increased console sales beg to differ. Ohh wait let me guess, it must be shrinking because a Nintendo console isn't selling as well. It's cool.
So Nintendo is better than Sony and MS because Nintendo has a rabid fanbase that only plays Nintendo-made games and buys them like they didn't go out of style a decade ago, and Sony and MS's fanbases tend to support both first and third party games because gamers on platforms that actually have that option. Okay. If that's your criteria then you got me beat. I mean it's a completely and utterly meaningless judgement but if that's the nail you want to hang your hat on, all the power to you.
Of course, by your same criteria Call of Duty must be the best shooter series ever (because sales).
The home console market is shrinking? Maybe you should tell Sony and Microsoft, their increased console sales beg to differ. Ohh wait let me guess, it must be shrinking because a Nintendo console isn't selling as well. It's cool.
Remember what the original point of contention was? If third party games get removed from the equation, then Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft all have the same to offer, according to you. I disagreed and said that Nintendo has a lot more, and that's backed up by people buying more Nintendo software than either Sony or Microsoft software. If you want to know the whole point why I am arguing with you, it's because I knew that it will freak you out that Nintendo is better at something. Which fits for your final paragraph just as much:
Only one response ago you insisted that you aren't one of those people who shift goal posts. So much for that. Now we are supposed to remove Nintendo consoles from the equation, because otherwise the numbers would show that the home console market has been shrinking this generation.
That is not backed up by people buying more Nintendo software. Sales don't mean that one company "offers more" than another. I could just as easily argue that Sony has sold more consoles than Nintendo has 3 of the last 4 "generations" therefrore Sony offers more. It would be equally meaningless.
I'm not moving the goalposts. If you really want to factor the Wii into last "generation" and not count it it an anomoly that brought millions of people that otherwise wouldn't have bought a game console as part of the "market" then be my guest, but it doesn't help anything. The Wii was quite obviously a fad. Including it in the perspective of things just creates a giant spike out of Nowhere and then after settling the trend continues as expected. In data analysis we call it an "outlier" because including it just skews the numbers so out of a wack that it completely distorts market number that are otherwise pretty easy to read.
Yeah but the mobile version only has to be a on 5-6 inch screen so aliasing doesn't matter as much. The home console version can run at 1080P with AA, it doesn't matter so much on a portable, you certainly don't need 1080P for a small portable screen, hell I find for resolution 960x540 on the Vita looks perfectly fine for image quality at that ballpark of screen size.
PowerVR already has the GT7900, that's even beyond the A9X, Nvidia likely will have the successor the Tegra X1 later this year too.
The A9X is used for iPads and they most certainly don't feature 5-6 inch screens ...
WITHOUT taking throttling into account the A9X has a lower perf at 1080p in the iPad Pro than the A9 at 540p in the iPhone 6s so the latter is arguably closer at been able to deliver console like graphics than former with comparable amount of perceived aliasing ...
And do you know why Apple isn't using the GT7900 ?
The Tegra X1 has already salvaged it's own transistor density gains and so I expect most of the improvement on it's successor to come from them using a FinFET structure. I give them a 50% better perf/wat at BEST ...
