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

Forums - Microsoft - Has the Xbox 360 reached it's peak in terms of graphics, Please read!!

crumas2 on 15 December 2008
Garnett said:
DMeisterJ said:

I thought the argument's (in favor of 360 devleopment) always been that the 360 is tons easier to develop on since it has a PC-like Architechture, unlike the PS2 and PS3 which are foreign. So theoretically, wouldn't it take a shorter amount of time to max out a 360 rather than the PS2/3?

I don't think it's peaked yet, but I'd probably say Gears 2 will still be in the top 5 looking 360 games when all is said and done.

Negative DM,Thats for the CPU,Its easer to program the CPU for...

 

Something people need to keep in mind is that a console is not a single execution unit or even a single subsystem... it consists of a combination of CPU/cores, GPU/video support chips, bus support chips, scalers, blitters, etc., etc.  Taken together as contributing to a complex system overall, it's very difficult to say that a particular platform has been mostly tapped out.  Those components can often be used together in novel and new ways that simply having a good dev kit doesn't account for.

 



Around the Network
Ender on 15 December 2008
megaman2 said:
mrstickball said:
Why are people claiming the X360 has reached it's peak? That kind of argument reeks of Playstation 3 fanboyism.

Look at 09/10 games: Star Ocean 4, Resident Evil 5, Alan Wake, Halo Wars, ect. Don't they look better than Infinite Undiscovery, Dead Rising, and Command & Conquer 3?

There will be diminishing returns, but I think that if the system is easier to program for, that doesn't mean that developers are going to max it out in half the time. Some may be confusing 'easier developing' for 'easier to max out'. Look at the Gamecube - it was VERY easy to develop for...Did that mean that it maxed out in 2 years? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Twilight Princess looked like a step up in what the GC was able to handle, and it came out ~5 years into the GC's lifecycle.

Just stating simple facts MRstickball and no need for the playstation 3 fanboyism or else i will have to call out the troops lol keep it clean!

 

 

What facts have you stated?  Given the history of consoles it's silly to think the 360's potential has been maxed out.  Honestly, your OP just looked like PS3 fanboy flamebait.



BenVTrigger on 15 December 2008
TKC-Muzzer said:
BenVTrigger said:
TKC-Muzzer said:
People are forgetting that the 360 is common architecture so a lot of programmers know how to push it already. The gears guys said they have almost maxed out but can find different techniques to improve the look of things. The cell on the other hand as yet to be exploited and looking at Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 the 360 programmers are going to have to weave some magic to compete.

 

frame for frame the 360 can easily compete. Now in terms of raw power the ps3 is definatley stronger and its top end will probably be higher but no i don't think its impossible to see a game of killzone 2 quality on 360

 

I disagree. GOW2 looks great but it's not a huge leap from the first and lets face it there is not a lot else being released on the 360 that makes you stand up and take note. After just veiwing the Uncharted 2 screens in the other Forum i feel the PS3 might set the standard. Graphics are not just about textures which is what everyone mentions about Gears 2 when comparing but overall atmosphere. You would have to assume with the likes of the cell proccessor in Killzone 2 doing a lot of the graphical tricks before the graphics card kicks in whether the 360 processor can also help out at is a more common technology. Don't get me wrong the 360 is a great machine but at the end of the day M$ did not invest any money in producing new technology they were just using what was already there and surely that will have limitations. M$ were in to make it quick so less was spent on the development of the 360 and thats why mine feels like it's held together by tape and sounds like a jet. Without anything for the developers to learn about the technology it's harder to push it.

I only say all this as i look at my 360 and the release schedule and wondwe what is next?


have you not seen the star ocean pics? they aren't revolutionary but they are certainly better than RPG's of last year. Mr. Stickball is exactly right. Sure the return or level of jump we see in improvement may decrease sayin the system is maxed...is well completely off base and 100 percent guaranteed incorrect. as someon else said given the time and money the ng4 still hasn't even been maxed out

Ender on 15 December 2008

Also, GoW2 shouldn't be compared to games that haven't been released yet.



TKC-Muzzer on 15 December 2008
d21lewis said:
How long did it take to make Gears 2? Half as long as it's taking to make Killzone 2? Given time and resources, the N64 probably hasn't reached it's full potential. No. I don't design games, but history has shown me that there's ALWAYS more power to be squeezed out of a console.

On an unrelated note, there's ALWAYS more toothpaste to be squeezed from a tube of toothpaste. My cousin's brother once squeezed enough toothpaste out of a toothpaste tube to fill a bathtub. True story! :P

 

There is some logic there but look at this way. Gears 2 has also taken 4 years to make as they are bulding on the first. So both Killzone 2 and Gears 2 are four years in the making so your point is not valid. Gears 1 was a step in making Gears 2.



Around the Network
TKC-Muzzer on 15 December 2008
BenVTrigger said:
TKC-Muzzer said:
BenVTrigger said:
TKC-Muzzer said:
People are forgetting that the 360 is common architecture so a lot of programmers know how to push it already. The gears guys said they have almost maxed out but can find different techniques to improve the look of things. The cell on the other hand as yet to be exploited and looking at Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 the 360 programmers are going to have to weave some magic to compete.

 

frame for frame the 360 can easily compete. Now in terms of raw power the ps3 is definatley stronger and its top end will probably be higher but no i don't think its impossible to see a game of killzone 2 quality on 360

 

I disagree. GOW2 looks great but it's not a huge leap from the first and lets face it there is not a lot else being released on the 360 that makes you stand up and take note. After just veiwing the Uncharted 2 screens in the other Forum i feel the PS3 might set the standard. Graphics are not just about textures which is what everyone mentions about Gears 2 when comparing but overall atmosphere. You would have to assume with the likes of the cell proccessor in Killzone 2 doing a lot of the graphical tricks before the graphics card kicks in whether the 360 processor can also help out at is a more common technology. Don't get me wrong the 360 is a great machine but at the end of the day M$ did not invest any money in producing new technology they were just using what was already there and surely that will have limitations. M$ were in to make it quick so less was spent on the development of the 360 and thats why mine feels like it's held together by tape and sounds like a jet. Without anything for the developers to learn about the technology it's harder to push it.

I only say all this as i look at my 360 and the release schedule and wondwe what is next?

 

have you not seen the star ocean pics? they aren't revolutionary but they are certainly better than RPG's of last year. Mr. Stickball is exactly right. Sure the return or level of jump we see in improvement may decrease sayin the system is maxed...is well completely off base and 100 percent guaranteed incorrect. as someon else said given the time and money the ng4 still hasn't even been maxed out

No RPG last year had WOW graphics in my opinion, the fact you say they are not revolutionary makes a point. Killzone 2 in the graphics department raises the standard in all areas. plus your last point hits the nail on the head, are M$ willing to spend four years and millions of pounds on a game or are they looking for 2 year gaps to keep people interested. I mean Halo 3 was supposed to be the last but due to the fact they have no big name exlusives in 2009 they have had to persuade Bungie to make an expansion pack so they have something to hype (i have not forgiven them for Halo 3)

Plus with less common technology there is more for developers to learn surely.



BenVTrigger on 15 December 2008
crumas2 said:
Garnett said:
DMeisterJ said:

I thought the argument's (in favor of 360 devleopment) always been that the 360 is tons easier to develop on since it has a PC-like Architechture, unlike the PS2 and PS3 which are foreign. So theoretically, wouldn't it take a shorter amount of time to max out a 360 rather than the PS2/3?

I don't think it's peaked yet, but I'd probably say Gears 2 will still be in the top 5 looking 360 games when all is said and done.

Negative DM,Thats for the CPU,Its easer to program the CPU for...

 

Something people need to keep in mind is that a console is not a single execution unit or even a single subsystem... it consists of a combination of CPU/cores, GPU/video support chips, bus support chips, scalers, blitters, etc., etc.  Taken together as contributing to a complex system overall, it's very difficult to say that a particular platform has been mostly tapped out.  Those components can often be used together in novel and new ways that simply having a good dev kit doesn't account for.

 


this post just won the entire thread.

mrstickball on 15 December 2008
megaman2 said:

Just stating simple facts MRstickball and no need for the playstation 3 fanboyism or else i will have to call out the troops lol keep it clean!

 

Question:

Why is a person that does NOT own a Xbox 360, or ever post in the Xbox 360 forum asking this question?

You don't care about the X360's lineup.

You don't care about what the X360 offers.

You own a Playstation 3.

So why are you arguing this? Because you want to believe the X360 has peaked, and that your Playstation 3 has not? Your the one that came in here arguing that KZ2, GT5, Heavy Rain, and others were going to 'raise the bar' and failed to mention anything about the X360 because *gasp*  you don't own a 360!

Why is it, again, that you came here? To stir up trouble for a system you don't own? Why not ask Wii owners the same question? Their console is easy to develop for, and just as valid of a question. Why not ask Playstation 3 owners the question, rather than come here and stir up trouble? I'm looking at your post history, and 85% of the manufacturer postings are in Sony forums.

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

megaman2 on 15 December 2008
Ender said:
megaman2 said:
mrstickball said:
Why are people claiming the X360 has reached it's peak? That kind of argument reeks of Playstation 3 fanboyism.

Look at 09/10 games: Star Ocean 4, Resident Evil 5, Alan Wake, Halo Wars, ect. Don't they look better than Infinite Undiscovery, Dead Rising, and Command & Conquer 3?

There will be diminishing returns, but I think that if the system is easier to program for, that doesn't mean that developers are going to max it out in half the time. Some may be confusing 'easier developing' for 'easier to max out'. Look at the Gamecube - it was VERY easy to develop for...Did that mean that it maxed out in 2 years? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Twilight Princess looked like a step up in what the GC was able to handle, and it came out ~5 years into the GC's lifecycle.

Just stating simple facts MRstickball and no need for the playstation 3 fanboyism or else i will have to call out the troops lol keep it clean!

 

 

What facts have you stated?  Given the history of consoles I it's silly to think the 360's potential has been maxed out.  Honestly, your OP just looked like PS3 fanboy flamebait.

You're such a child if we were to compare graphical powerhouses of the ps3. Games such as Uncharted, Metal gear solid 4 and games such as Killzone 2 which critics have cites as the best looking console game ever, along with gt5, infamous, heavy rain and God of war 3 all set to take huge leaps in terms of graphics. My thread's purpose was to have a general discussion not  create flamebait but you're too inmature to understand so let's leave at that!

 



Ender on 15 December 2008
BenVTrigger said:
crumas2 said:
Garnett said:
DMeisterJ said:

I thought the argument's (in favor of 360 devleopment) always been that the 360 is tons easier to develop on since it has a PC-like Architechture, unlike the PS2 and PS3 which are foreign. So theoretically, wouldn't it take a shorter amount of time to max out a 360 rather than the PS2/3?

I don't think it's peaked yet, but I'd probably say Gears 2 will still be in the top 5 looking 360 games when all is said and done.

Negative DM,Thats for the CPU,Its easer to program the CPU for...

 

Something people need to keep in mind is that a console is not a single execution unit or even a single subsystem... it consists of a combination of CPU/cores, GPU/video support chips, bus support chips, scalers, blitters, etc., etc.  Taken together as contributing to a complex system overall, it's very difficult to say that a particular platform has been mostly tapped out.  Those components can often be used together in novel and new ways that simply having a good dev kit doesn't account for.

 

 

this post just won the entire thread.

 

Agreed.