@sieaner

Not for the ps3 version the online is terrible.

When I play this using a TV which may or may not be 1080p compatible, but is certainly 1080i compatible, it switches from the 1125i in the XMB (that is what the TV says) to 750p, despite the back of the box saying that it is 720 and both 1080 s compatible, but what really matters is that it looks good, and play good

so a game with incredible levels of detail runs at 60 frames per second, but a 120 less scan lines compared to 720p?
wow call of duty 4 now looks like total garbage due to this 'cause resolution is the only thing that matters

Wow mike b bringing his crap into this thread

im outa here.

@MikeB: Even if it was possible for them to make a better version on the PS3 than on the 360, do they have enough incentive to do it? At this stage, I don't think so. Maybe in the future, if/when the PS3 starts selling competitively and when developers know the hardware better. Until then, I doubt we'll see many 3rd parties significantly using whatever advantages the PS3 may have.

MikeB said: Too bad, I can easily understand why the XBox 360 version is 600p (too limited amount of EDRAM, bottlenecked shared bus design) but I would have hoped they aimed at least for rendering in a HD resolution on the PS3. More respect for Berthesa for making Oblivion on the PS3 720p and making it overall run better than the XBox 360 original, I was a little bit critical of them as they didn't use more SPE power to make the game run truly at a solid framerate on the PS3 (apparently the middleware they are using is advancing nicely, did they improve the GOTY edition at all?), but I'm still enjoying the improved version and I'm currently at level 30 with maximum strength and intelligence. COD4 on the PS3, 600p instead of 720, 5.1 audio instead of 7.1, less than 5 hours single player campaign. IMO this game (like many games nowadays) is a bit overrated by just looking at the specs, there seems to be lots of room for improvement. 60 FPS is good though, but R&C: TOD seems technically more impressive. The game looks really sweet over here!

The EDRAM may seem small, but you are forgetting that if the PS3 needs the same amount of texture memory as the 360, it has to eat into its fram buffer as well.  Remember that the PS3 has 256MB+256MB=512MB, but the 360 has 512MB+10MB. So even assuming the EDRAM does not have speed to make up for its size, a PS3 game using about 256MB of texture memory would have just as small an amount for its frame buffer.

I play it at 1920x1200 4xAA on my PC


I've played all versions, they hardly look much worse than my PC version. Complaining about this stuff is so lame. How does it even more a difference? As long as it looks good (which it does).

OriGin said: I play it at 1920x1200 4xAA on my PC I've played all versions, they hardly look much worse than my PC version. Complaining about this stuff is so lame. How does it even more a difference? As long as it looks good (which it does).

Did you read my post? I answered all of this.

1) To a gamer there is little difference because the game is still going to look great regardless. So from a gamer's perspective there is little difference, no doubt.

2) To a customer there should be concern, you should want to know if the company lied.  If they claimed to develope the game independantly but actually just ported the 360 version then there is a serious problem there from a customer perspective as you have been lied to.

That shouldn't be hard to understand and I have absolutely no problem saying that if that doesn't concern you as a customer then you are kidding yourself.  Yes the game looks great on all systems but what kind of person would continue to do business with someone who is clearly willing to lie to sell products. 

This isn't about one looking better or worse, this is about unethical corporate practices.  Especially when you consider the line about "We programmed it.".   

@ LordTheNightKnight

The EDRAM is really just special purpose memory, but it's really too small to work with for high resolution graphics. The memory bandwidth is far more relevant as 512 MB is more than enough to work with despite what some may claim, regarding memory the PS3 has Blu-Ray to constantly stream new data (much more than would be possible with CD or DVD) and the PS3 has a harddrive by default, look at the harddrive as something similar to virtual memory on a PC being able to stream data much faster than a DVD or Blu-Ray disc. Apart for those crucial facts the PS3 has more than 512 MB memory to deal with, there are for example also high speed local memory stores for each SPE, very neat indepent processors with which you can create lots of effects and other complex calculations.

It'll become more common, especially if the 360 keeps picking up PC games the gap will become more apparent. The technology bar is rising pretty fast again (thanks largely to directX 10 hardware becoming more affordable).

Say if the 360 grabs a game like Crysis, it's going to have to sacrifice something and resolution will be the first to go, it's generally what happens every cycle. Consoles rule for a while, then tech outruns them and PCs are back on top.

This cycle will be especially interesting because instead of the usual bloom or shader or lighting upgrade, it's complex calculation, which opens a huge door for gaming. I imagine the PC will see a big revival once everyone starts catching up sort of like they did in the late 90s with all the new design possibilities.

It's one of the bigger reasons the tech difference between the 3 consoles doesn't bother me, compared to the massive jump dx10 they're all just fighting over scraps in the visuals department.

In a lot of ways it makes me happy, because I would like to see more games concentrate on art design than pure realistic graphics. I think Psychonauts was a great game for demonstrating that art direction will carry a game much further than very temporary technological power.

CS is a nice example of a game that went the realistic route, it looks laughable now, as where TF2's graphics will have a charm that far outlives the technology.