selnor said:
Procrastinato said:
steverhcp02 said:
the 360 can "handle" killzone 2 as well.
The only reason, i gaurentee, that sony can claim "only possible on PS3" is because its on a BD, and obviously you cant play those in the 360. Seriously. Gears of war and SCV show its a moot point.
"business decision" on the other hand to me means MSFT paid something for this, obviously. Its business. It sucks for us PS3 owners, but anybody who thinks The game would net a loss on the PS3 because of dev costs is naive. |
KZ2 uses lighting techniques that caters very well to the PS3's strengths, and have been shown to perform very poorly on the 360, thanks to the way the (usually very fast) GPU caches framebuffer data.
So... KZ2, the gameplay, might be possible on the 360... but it wouldn't look anything like KZ2 on the PS3. It'd have to be rewritten to utilize the 360's strengths -- would that make it the "same" game?
|
WTF. STFU. It's proven that the 360 is capable of DirectX 10 lighting effects. Certain lighting effects that aren't available on the PS3.
Alan Wake has the best lighting Ive ever witnessed. It's much more gradual than KZ2, it's mistyness in the woods for example is majorly unsurpassed.
|
selnor, chill.
I'm not knocking the 360. All I'm saying is that KZ2 uses some rendering techniques (deferred rendering, which is a mechanism to do fancy lighting in a single pass, using large amounts of framebuffer memory.. which the 360 cannot do efficiently by nature of its otherwise awesome framebuffer caching mechanisms -- which cannot be circumvented), and that it could not, per se, be put on the 360 without significant changes.
I'm sure the same is true of Gears 2 and the PS3. Possible, but not without some potentially serious changes.
I'm merely making the point that this statement is relatively meaningless, by asking the question "does that make it the same"? That's for the reader/player to answer, for his or herself, isn't it?
