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

Forums - Gaming - How many people know the 360 is more powerful than the Ps3?

josenieves1 on 01 February 2008

In line with the thread, I also don't like its "resurrection".



Wii code: 4679-4491-5808-6319,MKWii: 4296-3394-2843; Animal Crossing Wii: 3008-1736-4670.

 

Around the Network
sc94597 on 01 February 2008

Why does it matter which console is the best graphically. If you are looking for power just save up for a gaming pc. The games are cheaper and you get better graphics on pcs. Wow imo they are equal and if one is better it is only a small difference. Does it even matter as long as you get the general knowledge of whats around you in the games. It is all about games and how fun they are not which ones more powerful. People always compare hardware but you should really compare software. If you want to see something wonderful go outside.



totalwar23 on 01 February 2008
MikeB said:
SleepWaking said:
Yep I agree, who gives a fuck about that 5 percentage difference (if it even is that). especially MikeB and Crazzyman are driving me nuts. (MikeB why do you care so much about which one is more power full, isn't all because of the games, I mean come on look at your sig, imo it's just pathetic).

The answer is quite simple actually, why do gamers upgrade their PCs? Why haven't we all stuck to playing Snes games or Playstation 1 games?

With more power more can be accomplished, games can be pushed further. More enemies on screen, better AI, better graphics, etc. In the end this can result in far more impressive games especially in the game gernes I care about, huge sandbox games (GTA / oblivion), 3D shooters (Resistance 2 / Killzone 2), calculative intens strategy games (Civilization games), etc.

I think I fully addressed this flawed article in another thread. I don't understand why an article which is known to be incorrect and unrearched is dragged here time and time again. There have at least been a couple of other threads about this article.


First of all, when a gamer upgrade his/her PC, it's not to make a small 5 % increase. (Which is basically the case if you decide to trade in your 360 for a PS3. I don't mean 5% as the actual figures btw)

The power between the 360/PS3 is too close to even care which one is more powerful. If all developers just care about pushing games on the most powerful system, you see everything done on the PC. So the argument as to whether the PS3 or 360 is more powerful is pointless. It's about the games developed for both systems.



totalwar23 on 01 February 2008
pixelsword said:

That story is bogus, I read it through once before, and they shift information to make the 360 appear more powerful; for example, for those who read the story, if you recall when they quoted the PS3's numbers, they "adjusted" the triangles for the system, but they didn't for the 360. There are numerous other things they do there, but use your common sense: If the 360 is so powerful, why did they have to make Halo 3 @ 480p? I can't name a PS3 game that's 480p, especially since the game is supposed to be the biggest franchise that they have. Total baloney. The 360 couldn't run folding @ home, and even if it could, the contribution must be so small that the inventor of folding wasn't even interested in using the 360. Epic is trying to get Unreal to run on the 360 with it's huge levels, Crysis won't be playing on the 360 (and I don't mean the crytek engine, I mean the resource-hungry game), and Valve's programmers, which HATE the PS3, already said that they already tapped 90% or so of the 360's power.

So no offence, but that story is laughable.

You comment is laughable.

 



zackblue on 01 February 2008

Why did you bring this flame thread back? Its nothing but pure flamming and what console is better etc.. /close thread



 

 2008 end of year predictions:

PS3: 22M

360: 25M

wii: 40M

Around the Network
Hawk on 01 February 2008
totalwar23 said:
MikeB said:
SleepWaking said:
Yep I agree, who gives a fuck about that 5 percentage difference (if it even is that). especially MikeB and Crazzyman are driving me nuts. (MikeB why do you care so much about which one is more power full, isn't all because of the games, I mean come on look at your sig, imo it's just pathetic).

The answer is quite simple actually, why do gamers upgrade their PCs? Why haven't we all stuck to playing Snes games or Playstation 1 games?

With more power more can be accomplished, games can be pushed further. More enemies on screen, better AI, better graphics, etc. In the end this can result in far more impressive games especially in the game gernes I care about, huge sandbox games (GTA / oblivion), 3D shooters (Resistance 2 / Killzone 2), calculative intens strategy games (Civilization games), etc.

I think I fully addressed this flawed article in another thread. I don't understand why an article which is known to be incorrect and unrearched is dragged here time and time again. There have at least been a couple of other threads about this article.


First of all, when a gamer upgrade his/her PC, it's not to make a small 5 % increase. (Which is basically the case if you decide to trade in your 360 for a PS3. I don't mean 5% as the actual figures btw)

The power between the 360/PS3 is too close to even care which one is more powerful. If all developers just care about pushing games on the most powerful system, you see everything done on the PC. So the argument as to whether the PS3 or 360 is more powerful is pointless. It's about the games developed for both systems.


 Well said totalwar23.  It gnaws at my nerves when people get SOOOO stuck on numbers.  In anything, not just video games.

  I think a good example was this past weekend when I bought a new HDTV.  I ask a sales guy about what the contrast ratios mean exactly that are under all of the tech specs of the TVs.  The guy explainded how each company measures it different, so comparing numbers from different companys means nothing, really.  He said his recommendation to everyone is just to watch the TV, and if it looks good, or better than another to you, thats all that matters.

   EXACTLY!  Your experience with the TV or console or whatever, matters more than anything.  Whether the 'stats' agree with you or not.



Tag: Hawk - Reluctant Dark Messiah (provided by fkusumot)

Words Of Wisdom on 01 February 2008

Why did this old thread out of the dumpster?  It should've stayed there.



bulletstopper on 01 February 2008

This has been ragin since Genesis and SNES was going at it. In the end it doesn't matter! Which system has the best games is the real issue. Right now, it's the 360 hands down.



LordTheNightKnight on 01 February 2008
bulletstopper said:
This has been ragin since Genesis and SNES was going at it. In the end it doesn't matter! Which system has the best games is the real issue. Right now, it's the 360 hands down.

Actually, it's which games sell, and right now, it's actually a toss-up between all three systems, especially in different regions, whereas the PS2 was in the lead in games in every region. 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

pixelsword on 22 February 2008
totalwar23 said:
pixelsword said:

That story is bogus, I read it through once before, and they shift information to make the 360 appear more powerful; for example, for those who read the story, if you recall when they quoted the PS3's numbers, they "adjusted" the triangles for the system, but they didn't for the 360. There are numerous other things they do there, but use your common sense: If the 360 is so powerful, why did they have to make Halo 3 @ 480p? I can't name a PS3 game that's 480p, especially since the game is supposed to be the biggest franchise that they have. Total baloney. The 360 couldn't run folding @ home, and even if it could, the contribution must be so small that the inventor of folding wasn't even interested in using the 360. Epic is trying to get Unreal to run on the 360 with it's huge levels, Crysis won't be playing on the 360 (and I don't mean the crytek engine, I mean the resource-hungry game), and Valve's programmers, which HATE the PS3, already said that they already tapped 90% or so of the 360's power.

So no offence, but that story is laughable.

You comment is laughable.

 

Yes, yes, my comment is so laughable that you couldn't counter any of it's points. Go play with you $3.60... if it's back from repairs, that is.

 



Signature? Where's the pen?