The Wii has reached it's graphical limit...oh no it's damned now! Even if this graphical thing is true it really means nothing in the grand scheme of things!
Wii - 3810 4459 0841 8442 - (Message me to add me)
360 - LuminalACE
PS3 - AUS-ACE
The Wii has reached it's graphical limit...oh no it's damned now! Even if this graphical thing is true it really means nothing in the grand scheme of things!
Wii - 3810 4459 0841 8442 - (Message me to add me)
360 - LuminalACE
PS3 - AUS-ACE
Im surprised this thread didnt get locked

| MikeB said: @ Squilliam It obviously wasn't... Why are you talking in past tense? The Unreal engine can be heavily adapted to tap into more processors. But the best used approaches in doing so are more beneficial to the PS3 architecture, yet beneficial to both platforms (more so to PCs sporting more cores). I was talking in past tense because that claim have been proved to be false unless you make the proviso that it was all they could achieve with the budget/programing techniques of the time. If the Spectrum of CPU design difference runs from PS3 --------> Xbox 360 -------> X86 PC its very unlikely that optimizations for the PS3 would even be applicable to the PC. They are completely different architectures. Only more stuff.... Well only more stuff needs to be ported from Core 1 to Core 2/3 on the Xenon. "Microsoft Directions in Parallel Computing and Some Short Term Help: "Xbox 360 Compiler and PgoLite Update: You are speculating. Furthermore multicore development is still in its infancy so its a big statement to call the Xenon 100% tapped out. Not really the case, look at the game engine design of 360 launch titles and CPU cycle usage. There are some important bottlenecks relating to shared system RAM bandwidth and shared L2 cache between all three cores (relevant to talk about if looking at theoretical peak performance). Considering that many of these so called 100% usage scenario type games were ported to the PS3 and were blatently neglectful of much if any SPU usage I would have to call BS on that. If they were using 100% of 3 cores, the PS3 versions should have been absurdly terrible. Considering Halo 3 went for a funky light engine that required the game to be rendered at 60FPS the game outside of the lighting was pretty good too. First of all the lighting engine isn't really that impressive, secondly the game is rendering 30 FPS and slows down towards lower FPS in parts of the game. Rendered 60 FPS then 2 frames were combined into 1 to do the HDR lighting. So runs at 30, renders at 60. Pretty much the same deal as COD IV considering the rendering rate and the resolution were the same. Furthermore when you say easily, I hope you're talking about games with budgets under 20 million right? Technically. The game budgets aren't entirely invested into technology advances, developing supreme game assets, hiring good actors, hiring game designers, hiring audio professionals, etc cost the bulk of the money. Actually having only a small team of very talented coders usually yield far greater technical advancements than a huge team of mediocre talented programmers. Once you gain advancements developers can share knowledge and even code with other developers, it will only improve for the PS3 over time (it will also become cheaper). What you're doing is comparing games which Sony feels they have to invest heavily into to "prove" that the PS3 has huge gobs of power when the Xbox 360 running a generic engine with only some specific tweaks can pull uncomfortably close to a game which cost 2-3x to make and was meant to be the technical highlight of the PS3. |
Tease.
| Griffin said: Rock_on made some really great points in this thread, one might say the 360 has peaked and the fact that there is no graphical differences between Gears1 and Gears2 proves this. Of course i'm not saying this, i'm just saying one might suggest it. |
Rather a cowardly way of putting your view across. Just don't try it in a court of law because it wouldn't be a very good defence.
Nice he got banned. The thing is, he'll never stop doing this until he gets bored of it. He's probably got a sockpuppet or two ready to keep up with the trolling whenever rock_on gets banned.
edit: also, discussing technicall issues with MikeB is pointless. The guy has no work experience in the field, he's a physical therapist. He just repeats whatever sounds good to his sony-loving ears.
edit2: damn, squilliam just beat me to it and with more words to boot =(
obieslut said:
it will be a game that was ps3 exclusive. that gets released on the 360 about a year later. thats what i think, with slighly downgraded graphics of course.
when this happens though, thats when you 100% know that the console has reached its limits
|
Kind of like lost planet?

I have to give Rock On credit, when credit is due. No matter how hard his topics fail, there's usually lots of win in the rest of the thread. Like the following:
Omac: Rock_on_2008 is reaching his fanboyism limit on Vgchartz. Impossible, because his fanboy heart is powered by TEH CELL.
Darc Requiem: This is duplicate thread and reading is fundamental Rock On. You may want to brush up on your comprehension skills. Also am I the only one that wonders how Rock On has so much time to post when he enjoys his PS3 so much? Even though, he should have plenty of time with all the bannings, that time is probably spent strategically planning his troll campaign.
Bitmap Frogs: Nice he got banned. The thing is, he'll never stop doing this until he gets bored of it. He's probably got a sockpuppet or two ready to keep up with the trolling whenever rock_on gets banned. Probably, has sackboy plush's of all the big name vgchartz members that he's playing with right now.
edit: also, discussing technicall issues with MikeB is pointless. The guy has no work experience in the field, he's a physical therapist. He just repeats whatever sounds good to his sony-loving ears.
edit2: damn, squilliam just beat me to it and with more words to boot =(
The average Sony Fanboys have always been on the absurdly childish side. Even when, Sony was dominating, but now it's starting to get really sad.
| Rock_on_2008 said: As expected, the Xbox 360 is slowing on the "wow" graphics factor as the console makes it over the hill.
This might be as purty as she gets, boys. "We're certainly approaching the upper end of [Xbox 360 graphics]," said Gears of War 2 producer Rod Fergusson, in an interview with Gamasutra last week. "But just looking at all the [PAX} demos we saw today -- ours and others -- it's clear that all the games just keep improving, and keep pushing that bar." Historically, consoles reach their graphics potential near the middle to end of their five-year life expectancy. The Xbox 360 will celebrate its third year on the market this November. But that doesn't mean Xbox 360 owners can no longer expect graphical flourishes in the coming years. Says Fergusson, "There will be games in development that won't ship until 2010, and I'm sure they'll look killer... I still think there's room to grow." |
Thats not what the article stated it said they still have some more troom for improement and should top off in about 2-3 years which just happens to be when the new somsole should launch
PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.
Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game
Xbox live:mywiferocks