No console ever reaches their limit. They get to a point where advances between games slows down but no console ever reaches their peak.

Better tools, new programming tricks, compression techniques, etc....there will always be a another ounce to squeeze out.

@leo-j: Are you mixing it up with the Xbox? The 360 doesn't have a PC architecture, in fact its architecture is more close to the Wii than to a PC.

As for the OP's question, it's hard to know... There are obviously still tricks to learn and apply, and some smart developers will still figure out ways to make the 360 do more than it does now. It's very hard to know how much though, but I don't think you will see games far more amazing than you see today.

The difference between consoles and PCs is that consoles get more than tapped than PCs, so you'll see 360 games with better graphics than PC games with equivalent GPUs, but not far better.

 

Kind of odd that a PS3 fanboy posts this question...

At any rate, I'll give a dignified answer: Absolutely not. The 360 still has a ways to go on optimization, just like the Wii, just like the PS3.

Escpecially with Multi-Core Processing, developers have just started (even 3 years into it), begun to tap into what MCP can do - PS3 or X360. It's a new field, and I truely doubt that many middleware solutions, nor developers, have been able to come to terms with developing the strongest possbile title, using the closed development environment.

For Gears of War 2, the graphical comparisons to 1 aren't as awe-inspiring, because Gears 1 was the first true "generational leap" game, that really showed off what next-gen was about, graphically. However, Gears 2 is using the same engine, and I bet that they aren't optimizing for that much more horsepower.

Look at Fable 2, Fallout 3, and some of the upcoming 08 games - maybe it's just me, but alot of them look awesome, and better than 1-2 year old comparibles. Lost Odyssey looks better than Enchanted Arms, Condemned 2 looks better than Condemned 1, ect.

Are developers close to reaching the max potential of the X360? Maybe. But I think that there's some room for developers "getting more" out of the 360, but MUCH more room for developers striving for better coding which will allow for better performance.

And I'll leave you with this: what kind of improvement was there from Devil May Cry 2 to God of War 2? Thats the kind of improvement, graphically, we can still expect.

Hmmm, I think Gears 2 looks really spectacular! I could be really blind but how does this not look great?!... It looks visually stunning i.m.o. ~!

Oh I should clarify that what I wrote above pertains to graphics only... Even if we don't see amazing leaps in terms of graphics, we may still see amazing leaps in other areas such as AI, number of NPCs, scale, physics...

 

IMO there's still headroom, but game engine design is about optimal. You can still perform assembler optimisations, a launch game like Kameo already used up 85% of CPU cycles. PS3 games will grow much faster and further, there are still a lot of game engine design gains to be made on the PS3 (moving PPE and RSX workload onto the Cell's SPUs). The PS3 just has a lot more horse power under the hood.

Also DVD is getting way too small (texture, audio quality sacrifices and/or game length/diversity sacrifices) and if your game has to run without a harddrive that also limits some potential (I am thinking about caching rather than install).

I thought Halo 3 would push the 360 near to its limits, but that was clearly not the case. I think Gears of War 2 will be that game.

NJ5 - And I think thats where some are getting "hung up" on, in terms of graphics.

Graphics (atleast IMO) equate to what we see going on in the game....Texture quality, activities going on, onscreen, and such.

What if Gears 2 has a small increase in texture quality, but has 2-3 times the enemies doing more things onscreen? Is that not a graphical leap?

mrstickball said: NJ5 - And I think thats where some are getting "hung up" on, in terms of graphics. Graphics (atleast IMO) equate to what we see going on in the game....Texture quality, activities going on, onscreen, and such. What if Gears 2 has a small increase in texture quality, but has 2-3 times the enemies doing more things onscreen? Is that not a graphical leap?

That definitely is a graphical leap, and something which should be taken into account. If you have the same number of polygons per NPC, and more NPCs on the screen, there's no way to spin it; it's a graphical leap.

 

MikeB said: IMO there's still headroom, but game engine design is about optimal. You can still perform assembler optimisations, a launch game like Kameo already used up 85% of CPU cycles. PS3 games will grow much faster and further, there are still a lot of game engine design gains to be made on the PS3 (moving PPE and RSX workload onto the Cell's SPUs). The PS3 is has a lot more horse power under the hood. Also DVD is getting way too small (texture, audio quality sacrifices and/or game length/diversity sacrifices) and if you game has to run without a harddrive that's also limits some potential. I thought Halo 3 would push the 360 near to its limits, but that was clearly not the case. I think Gears of War 2 will be that game.

I never listen to your fanboy rants anymore. Notice I didnt answer your post last night? Want to know why? Because since I've been a member of this forum, you have said that your a programmer, and have worked on games. I could maybe believe that. But then last night during another debate to do with controllers you said you were a Physical therapist. Funny how you have a profession in every topix that comes up where you have a debate. I laughed so hard when you said that I nearly dropped my coffee. Every last drop of credibility went out of the window when you said that. LOL I know what the B stands for in mike B now.

 

 

MikeB said: IMO there's still headroom, but game engine design is about optimal. You can still perform assembler optimisations, a launch game like Kameo already used up 85% of CPU cycles. PS3 games will grow much faster and further, there are still a lot of game engine design gains to be made on the PS3 (moving PPE and RSX workload onto the Cell's SPUs). The PS3 just has a lot more horse power under the hood. Also DVD is getting way too small (texture, audio quality sacrifices and/or game length/diversity sacrifices) and if your game has to run without a harddrive that's also limits some potential (I am thinking about caching rather than install). I thought Halo 3 would push the 360 near to its limits, but that was clearly not the case. I think Gears of War 2 will be that game.

The number of used cycles is completely irrelevant for console games. Since developers know all hardware is uniform, there's no incentive to perform unnecessary optimizations to keep the cycle usage down. They could put the GPU rendering fairies outside the screen, and no one would notice a difference.