colonelstubbs said: Considering the 360 is a slightly pimped up xbox, comments saying it usually takes 4-5 years to reach the peak of a consoles ability dont apply here. If you disagree, compare halo 2 with halo 3. Difference in graphics? Not really. Graphically geow2 looks fractionally better than geow1, so id say there isnt much more to pump out of the 360

 

 Very funny. By that same regard, I think MGS4 looks only a little better than MGS3.

At any rate, I'd love to see a company make a AAA Xbox 360 game that used the same budget as MGS4. You know, 200+ developers, 4 years, $40m+ for 1 game.

The fact that it takes such a HUGE game to have PS3 fans start claiming superiority is staggering. Gears was made for about 1/4th the budget of MGS4, yet people are saying that MGS4 looks slightly better. Crazy that a $10m game that was made 1 and 1/2 years ago is being compared to a game that came out last week, and cost over $40m, no?

I disagree, MGS4 does not look slightly better it looks way better than anything out there. Every critic has admitted that it is the best graphics ever seen on a console. Only Crysis is comparable to it which sais a lot. GOW I am afraid does not look anywhere as good and I have played both.

PooperScooper said: selnor said: PooperScooper said: Anthrasax said: selnor said: 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.     @Selnor Might as well consider your words as valid to yourself. I've been around for months and I always catch some fanbot drivel from you time to time. (quite often to tell the truth)     Your new so im going to let you know. What selnor and starcrsraft did was trolling. They are just looking to cause trouble, and while doing so they completely derailed the thread. MikeB came in here to talk about the topic and he is allowed to do so. What selnor did was childish and wrong And I for one report both starcarft and Selnor. So lets not derail this thread and stoop to their level and get back on track. OT: I have no clue So what about reporting someone for derailing the thread in the first place. I'll give you a clue it starts with the Kameo using 85% of CPU bit. If that is not trolling WITHOUT eveidence I dont not what is.     And trolling. and 85% CPU is on topic. I dont see your point...

So your saying that his comment is completely ok? The fact that he states one of the worse looking release games nearly uses all of the cpu cycles with no evidence at all and you expect for people to believe him? I dont like the way fanboys stick up for one another in this situation. I am leaving this thread as even the title lends itself to this sort of thing happening. I do not want to be apart of this with what you have started now in this thread.

 

 

Well of course people are not going to be as much impressed by a sequel's graphics as they were by the original's years ago. That's only logical.

One more comment to those who think the 360 is a "slightly souped up Xbox":

Play Ninja Gaiden Black (Xbox) and then Ninja Gaiden 2 (360). Team Ninja is famous for tapping a lot of a console's hardware, and Ninja Gaiden 2 is obviously much above its predecessor. Many more enemies on the screen, more detailed environments, the framerate doesn't drop to 30 fps when using Ninpo...

NJ5 said: One more comment to those who think the 360 is a "slightly souped up Xbox":

 

To further this tangent.....

 

If the X360 is a souped up Xbox, why is the X360 having to emulate the Xbox for backwards compatability?  Woudln't it have B/C right out of the box like Wii if that supposition were true?

 

CPU:
Xbox - Intel
X360 - IBM

GPU:
Xbox - nVidia
X360 - ATi

 

Hello?

selnor said: PooperScooper said: And trolling. and 85% CPU is on topic. I dont see your point...   So your saying that his comment is completely ok? The fact that he states one of the worse looking release games nearly uses all of the cpu cycles with no evidence at all and you expect for people to believe him? I dont like the way fanboys stick up for one another in this situation. I am leaving this thread as even the title lends itself to this sort of thing happening. I do not want to be apart of this with what you have started now in this thread.

 

 Next time you try to discredit someone you might want to state facts yourself. That's all I'm saying. Look at the behavior you encourged from starcraft and jagged.

His comments were on topic. The topic was about the 360's limit. His post was about the 360's limit. Yours however was not on topic. You could have put a little more effort in your post and stated facts to discredit him then just saying "I dont read your posts"

Oh yeah and I must be sticking up for him because I'm a fanboy. It just can't be a simple case of you are wrong in this situation. Yup god damn that Ps3 making me stick up for people I don't know...

If that were true I beg of you to look for any other time I've stuck up for him.

He is a regular here. And on at the same time I am... so if it were the Ps3 making me stick up for him why have I never done it before?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't internet speculation and group-think also dictate that the original GoW still looks better than any game on the PS3? This site is pretty Sony friendly, so you might not have heard that, but it's the common view.

I disagree. I think the games look like crap. Dark, grey, ugly.

 

The best looking games are multiplat, CoD4, GRiD, Assassin's Creed. In most cases, it's impossible to tell the difference, and I'd say that if the 360's tapped, then so is the PS3, because having owned both systems, the difference graphically is so small, it is inconsequential. As in, it makes absolutely no difference which console a game is on graphically as long as the developers don't screw it up.

Of course, that's contrary to Sony's promises, but it's the truth, and topics like this are really grasping for straws. Just silly.

colonelstubbs said: Considering the 360 is a slightly pimped up xbox, comments saying it usually takes 4-5 years to reach the peak of a consoles ability dont apply here. If you disagree, compare halo 2 with halo 3. Difference in graphics? Not really. Graphically geow2 looks fractionally better than geow1, so id say there isnt much more to pump out of the 360

It's fairly obvious that you have probably never seen Halo 2 or Halo 3 played on a HDTV. Halo 3 isn't a graphical powerhouse, but it looks at least twice as good as Halo 2. I'm playing through Halo 3 right now and I can attest to that. Comments like that make you appear to be a hater instead of a person with a serious comment.

Like stated by other, size of disk means nothing, pure BS even. If you have higher rez texture on a disk it wouldn't matter because you would be limit by your ram. You can't squeeze anymore into the ram and would cause a bottle neck. I would also like to say the ram in the 360 is more flexible, being able to take that 512 and allocated it more to Cpu or to Gpu considering what is needed. Also no, the 360 has a lot more breathing room to advance in coming games.