Are we finally allowed to say 360 will never top KZ2 or U2.

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="Shewgenja"]

I was just responding to the claims about Crysis.. Which the lead developer has already come out and said the PS3 is their lead platform.. What was your earlier question? I'll take a crack at it.

FIipMode

Then there are the plain clueless whom oh for example GTA4 say "oh look at haw much smoother the framerate is for the PS3 and bla bla bla"

OH really guys??? I mean could that be contributed to the fact that the 360 is running a higher rez version of the game with AA? Also why does that stuff never factor in with the power discussions around here?

[QUOTE="Shoaka"]

Mass Effect 2 looks as good as Killzone 2.

Chutebox

I agree....ME2 it is not look the same good........Mass Effect 2 on the XBOX360 it looks better than KZ2.

ME2>>>>KZ2

[QUOTE="FIipMode"][QUOTE="vaderhater"]Ok then why are people making broad claims about how the 360 is not capable of doing anything like KZ2 and yet on the other hand we have alot of multiplats where the 360 does better? Then if it is a game where the PC factors in as well then the PC always has the best graphics. Well then someone says "oh the devs were just lazy" and so on yet somehow with the PC and all its different configurations they the devs have to take into account the game still can look its best.

Then there are the plain clueless whom oh for example GTA4 say "oh look at haw much smoother the framerate is for the PS3 and bla bla bla"

OH really guys??? I mean could that be contributed to the fact that the 360 is running a higher rez version of the game with AA? Also why does that stuff never factor in with the power discussions around here?

vaderhater

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="FIipMode"] Simple, those are ports.FIipMode

Ok then why are people making broad claims about how the 360 is not capable of doing anything like KZ2 and yet on the other hand we have alot of multiplats where the 360 does better? Then if it is a game where the PC factors in as well then the PC always has the best graphics. Well then someone says "oh the devs were just lazy" and so on yet somehow with the PC and all its different configurations they the devs have to take into account the game still can look its best.

Then there are the plain clueless whom oh for example GTA4 say "oh look at haw much smoother the framerate is for the PS3 and bla bla bla"

OH really guys??? I mean could that be contributed to the fact that the 360 is running a higher rez version of the game with AA? Also why does that stuff never factor in with the power discussions around here?

vaderhater

Well, I can't answerr for everyone. A lot of people look for ownage in the most minute ways. All three sides more radical fans do that. But, pertaining to your question, I think it has mroe to do with showing what the system can do. Perfect example is the texturing work done in Kameo. It took a good long while for a PS3 game to catch up with the technicality at work there. Since the game wasn't a AAAE or a particularly big hype train, it gets largely overlooked.

The power in the 360 is very accessible to developers. The 360, I would honestly say, is a more steady console when it comes to quality whereas on the PS3, the developers that really chomp into it are the ones getting good results on it. There's a huge disparity between the quality of... oh.. Haze when compared to a game like FolkLore (lol). Both those games are exlcusive to the PS3, so there's no reason to march to war over sucha comparison, it just is what it is.

In the same token, when it comes to the PS3, this generation cannoned off with such propoganda as "The PS3 only has 256MB of VRAM, so the 360 will always look better." and "Xenon has three homogenous cores with a lot more cache." and "Unified shaders will blow the daylights out of anything RSX can do." These systems haven't changed, just the software that runs them. So, when we compare games like Gears of War2 to Uncharted 2, it's because they really show what the systems can do and it's a match up of quality vs quality. The PS3 is continually doing things that it simply wasn't supposed to do back in '06 when everyopne just took J. Allard for his word. In the meantime, Alan Wake has yet to show up on shelves over a year after KillZone 2 has been said and done.

Some people do wonder when these supposedly equal system made from radically different technologies are going to show they are equal. It's not a dishonest question, just one that deserves some kind of explanation. I hope my answer is sufficient.

You know what guys? How come when a multiplat across the 360,PS3 and the PC comes along it is obvious that the PC version will look the best? Well its because of the power the PC has.

So please oh please explain why in most multiplat situations the 360 bests the PS3 time and time again huh? Where is this power? Why doesnt it show itself on these multiplats yet there is so many different combinations of PC hardware that can best the consoles?

Actually alot of the same guys post again and again how the 360 cant do this and that but have no clue or way of explaining how they came to such conclusions. Its really laughable.

vaderhater

maybe because the lead is PC and the 360 is pretty much a pc so its much easier to port it. i dont know what uncharted 2 and killzone 2 have in common besides they're exclusives and they dont have split screen(im guessing this is what you want me to say?). so you're saying its the lack of power that makes the ps3 multiplats look worse than the 360's right? so where is the power coming from to make its exclusives look so much better than the 360 games and other multiplats? none of us are tech guys so we cant explain what the 360 can or cant do but since the 360 is pretty much aPC and so much easier to develop for...why are their games not as good looking as the ps3s which is much harder to develop for? please explain, since you're laughing at other people im guessing you have extensive knowledge of programming.

Of course you are allowed to say it, doesn't stop it from being wrong though.

I'd say the jury is still out on whether the 360 can match U2 and/or KZ2 in visuals.

However if anything has a shot its Halo Reach and Alan Wake.... so by the end of this year I think we can safely say, yes or no.

I'd say the jury is still out on whether the 360 can match U2 and/or KZ2 in visuals.

However if anything has a shot its Halo Reach and Alan Wake.... so by the end of this year I think we can safely say, yes or no.

moistsandwich

That seems reasonable.

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

You know what guys? How come when a multiplat across the 360,PS3 and the PC comes along it is obvious that the PC version will look the best? Well its because of the power the PC has.

So please oh please explain why in most multiplat situations the 360 bests the PS3 time and time again huh? Where is this power? Why doesnt it show itself on these multiplats yet there is so many different combinations of PC hardware that can best the consoles?

Actually alot of the same guys post again and again how the 360 cant do this and that but have no clue or way of explaining how they came to such conclusions. Its really laughable.

karsa-orlong

maybe because the lead is PC and the 360 is pretty much a pc so its much easier to port it. i dont know what uncharted 2 and killzone 2 have in common besides they're exclusives and they dont have split screen(im guessing this is what you want me to say?). so you're saying its the lack of power that makes the ps3 multiplats look worse than the 360's right? so where is the power coming from to make its exclusives look so much better than the 360 games and other multiplats? none of us are tech guys so we cant explain what the 360 can or cant do but since the 360 is pretty much aPC and so much easier to develop for...why are their games not as good looking as the ps3s which is much harder to develop for? please explain, since you're laughing at other people im guessing you have extensive knowledge of programming.

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

I'd say the jury is still out on whether the 360 can match U2 and/or KZ2 in visuals.

However if anything has a shot its Halo Reach and Alan Wake.... so by the end of this year I think we can safely say, yes or no.

Shewgenja

That seems reasonable.

[QUOTE="karsa-orlong"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

You know what guys? How come when a multiplat across the 360,PS3 and the PC comes along it is obvious that the PC version will look the best? Well its because of the power the PC has.

So please oh please explain why in most multiplat situations the 360 bests the PS3 time and time again huh? Where is this power? Why doesnt it show itself on these multiplats yet there is so many different combinations of PC hardware that can best the consoles?

Actually alot of the same guys post again and again how the 360 cant do this and that but have no clue or way of explaining how they came to such conclusions. Its really laughable.

vaderhater

maybe because the lead is PC and the 360 is pretty much a pc so its much easier to port it. i dont know what uncharted 2 and killzone 2 have in common besides they're exclusives and they dont have split screen(im guessing this is what you want me to say?). so you're saying its the lack of power that makes the ps3 multiplats look worse than the 360's right? so where is the power coming from to make its exclusives look so much better than the 360 games and other multiplats? none of us are tech guys so we cant explain what the 360 can or cant do but since the 360 is pretty much aPC and so much easier to develop for...why are their games not as good looking as the ps3s which is much harder to develop for? please explain, since you're laughing at other people im guessing you have extensive knowledge of programming.

The majority of multiplats are ported from the 360 to the PS3, and that's why they don't look as good.

The thing about the PS3 is it can use Cell for either game logic or graphics, so it can cannibalize CPU resources to expand on the capabilities of RSX.

So yes, PS3 can have that graphics edge. Provided you only care about graphics and are willing to sacrifice AI, physics, game logic etc. to make games a little shinier.

Ok so what happens if Crysis2 answers that question? What just because its a multiplat it does not count....vaderhater

Cervat Yerli has already stated that the PS3 is no longer the lowest common denominator. Unless Crysis2 is coming out for the Wii, where do you think that puts the 360 in the pecking order?

The thing about the PS3 is it can use Cell for either game logic or graphics, so it can cannibalize CPU resources to expand on the capabilities of RSX.

So yes, PS3 can have that graphics edge. Provided you only care about graphics and are willing to sacrifice AI, physics, game logic etc. to make games a little shinier.

AnnoyedDragon

Funny, no one has said anything particularly bad about U2 or KZ2s physics and/or AI, though... Maybe it has to do with the fact that Cell has more cache on-die than 360?? If you add up the 7SPEs + the 512 for the PPE, the Xenon looks paltry...

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="Shewgenja"]

That seems reasonable.

Shewgenja

Cervat Yerli has already stated that the PS3 is no longer the lowest common denominator. Unless Crysis2 is coming out for the Wii, where do you think that puts the 360 in the pecking order?

[QUOTE="Shewgenja"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]Ok so what happens if Crysis2 answers that question? What just because its a multiplat it does not count....

vaderhater

Cervat Yerli has already stated that the PS3 is no longer the lowest common denominator. Unless Crysis2 is coming out for the Wii, where do you think that puts the 360 in the pecking order?

I wouldn't want to take that as my stance in this debate. If you want to, that's fine. There is nothing wrong with having a bit of faith in Crytek, they do know how to deliver, so I'll give that to ya.

Halo Reach and Alan Wake both look fantastic but still not near the level of Killzone 2 or Uncharted 2. A year after Killzone's release MS haven't shown a game near it's level graphically so I think it's fair to say PS3 is the more powerful machine, some may think I'm stating the obvious but many seem to think they're equal.

Yes I know Reach was in Pre Alpha so it could still suprise us.

LiquidSnake1001

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]

Halo Reach and Alan Wake both look fantastic but still not near the level of Killzone 2 or Uncharted 2. A year after Killzone's release MS haven't shown a game near it's level graphically so I think it's fair to say PS3 is the more powerful machine, some may think I'm stating the obvious but many seem to think they're equal.

Yes I know Reach was in Pre Alpha so it could still suprise us.

ihazfishsticks

The console wars ain't over yet, guys.

And from that standpoint, it ain't over until it's over.

It depends on what the developer wants to focus on, mostly. Not the power of the machines, as it's been said multiple times, they are very close to each other.

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

[QUOTE="FIipMode"] Post like these on System Wars instantly tell you who has and who hasn't played certain games.ihazfishsticks

Lol yeah your so right. I have never seen so many corridors in my life. Sheesh look at all the closed spaces.

[QUOTE="ihazfishsticks"][QUOTE="FIipMode"] Post like these on System Wars instantly tell you who has and who hasn't played certain games.FIipMode

Lol yeah your so right. I have never seen so many corridors in my life.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

[QUOTE="ihazfishsticks"] Are you trying to imply that I haven't played KZ2? I can assure you that I own a PS3 and I have played and beat KZ2 and also spent extensive time with it's online (even though it's nearly a ghost town now). What exactly in what I said was wrong? KZ2 is a closed corridor shooter. It's all about tight corners and small areas. It's very linear and has one path to follow. As far as scope and size of levels goes, KZ2 can't even compete with Halo:CE.ihazfishsticks

Lol yeah your so right. I have never seen so many corridors in my life.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

[QUOTE="ihazfishsticks"] Are you trying to imply that I haven't played KZ2? I can assure you that I own a PS3 and I have played and beat KZ2 and also spent extensive time with it's online (even though it's nearly a ghost town now). What exactly in what I said was wrong? KZ2 is a closed corridor shooter. It's all about tight corners and small areas. It's very linear and has one path to follow. As far as scope and size of levels goes, KZ2 can't even compete with Halo:CE.ihazfishsticks

Lol yeah your so right. I have never seen so many corridors in my life.

KZ2?UC2? 360 hasnt recovered since MGS4 came out.

I will never say never but so far the ps3 is ahead now.

Yeah, lets wait.. sound awfully familiar doesn't it? Btw, to the guy saying that KZ2 is a super linear corridor shooter, obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, since he hasn't even played the game.

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

BlancoBX

[QUOTE="BlancoBX"]

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

vaderhater

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="BlancoBX"]

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

TintedEyes

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="BlancoBX"]

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

TintedEyes

Who cares as long as the games are good?

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="vaderhater"]Yet you guys dont seem to understand what a graphics engine built from scratch specifically for a console can do.

Anjunaddict

Why would I take your word over Microsofts?

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="BlancoBX"]

Ease of development + similarity to pc architecture + "equal power" + 1 year head start =(should) a 360 exclusive that AT LEAST matches KZ2 a game released a year ago...how is this not understood globally?

P.S. graphics arent everything and are probably the least important thing when I look to buy a game

TintedEyes

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"] Well why doesn't the 360 have a game that looks like KZ2? its obvious Microsoft want a game on their system to beat KZ2, they said it themselves, so maybe the 360 is the problem.TintedEyes

Why would I take your word over Microsofts?

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"] I don't really think Microsoft wants to put in the time and money into developing something as pretty as Killzone 2 when they aren't going to get much out of it. Yeah, they can say they will but thats just PR bull that we hear from all companies. Hate to break it, but graphics are way down the scale in terms of what makes a game great. Anjunaddict

Why would I take your word over Microsofts?

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="vaderhater"]Yet you guys dont seem to understand what a graphics engine built from scratch specifically for a console can do.

lafiro93

Shortly after Killzone 2 was released.

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"]

Why would I take your word over Microsofts?

TintedEyes

Yeah, lets wait.. sound awfully familiar doesn't it? Btw, to the guy saying that KZ2 is a super linear corridor shooter, obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, since he hasn't even played the game.Szminsky

Anything else you'd like to tell me that I haven't done? I'm not a fanboy FOR the PS3 so obviously I must have never played the game?

I liked KZ2, it was a great game in a lot of ways. However, to achieve it's graphics level it sacrificed scoped / size. It also had technical issues. This is not a lie, it's an unbias opinion. Maybe you should try to have one?

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]Ok so what happens if Crysis2 answers that question? What just because its a multiplat it does not count....Shewgenja

Cervat Yerli has already stated that the PS3 is no longer the lowest common denominator. Unless Crysis2 is coming out for the Wii, where do you think that puts the 360 in the pecking order?

The thing about the PS3 is it can use Cell for either game logic or graphics, so it can cannibalize CPU resources to expand on the capabilities of RSX.

So yes, PS3 can have that graphics edge. Provided you only care about graphics and are willing to sacrifice AI, physics, game logic etc. to make games a little shinier.

AnnoyedDragon

Funny, no one has said anything particularly bad about U2 or KZ2s physics and/or AI, though... Maybe it has to do with the fact that Cell has more cache on-die than 360?? If you add up the 7SPEs + the 512 for the PPE, the Xenon looks paltry...

On Page 29 and CryEngine3 beta, it shows Xbox 360 to be slightly faster than PS3.

Complete frame time (lower is better)

Xbox 360: 30,3 ms

PS3: 32,1 ms

PS; "the final LPV rendering stage is much faster on PlayStation 3 because we use half-resolution rendering mode with MSAA remapping trick". What happens if PS3 use full resolution instead in the LPV stage? PS3 will have a higher complete frame time.

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

As it stands right now there isn't a single game on the Xbox 360 that looks on par with Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2. Also, there isn't anything in the near future that looks as good either. Maybe in a couple years someone will surprise us, but by that time the Playstation 3 would have gotten an ever greater looking game so the Xbox is always going to be playing catch-up in terms of graphics.

We've already seen the new CryEngine running on PS3. Are there any vids of it running on 360, or are you just assuming it will be better for some reason?

Funny, no one has said anything particularly bad about U2 or KZ2s physics and/or AI, though... Maybe it has to do with the fact that Cell has more cache on-die than 360?? If you add up the 7SPEs + the 512 for the PPE, the Xenon looks paltry...

Shewgenja

My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas, that stands. I wasn't out to say this would result in bad physics and AI, only that you are cannibalizing resources that could have gone to enhance physics and AI in order to make the game shinier.

PS3 could be using those resources to offer game play not possible on the competitors platform, yet they don't for the most part. This is what makes the "only possible on PS3" argument so shallow. If you are mostly using Cell for effects; then there is little reason why a supposedly lessor platform couldn't duplicate the experience, just scale down the effects.

If Cell was being used to significantly enhance game play, then you could say it can only be done on PS3. But if you are just out for eye candy; then the lack of a Cell processor is not an issue.

The thing about the PS3 is it can use Cell for either game logic or graphics, so it can cannibalize CPU resources to expand on the capabilities of RSX.

So yes, PS3 can have that graphics edge. Provided you only care about graphics and are willing to sacrifice AI, physics, game logic etc. to make games a little shinier.

NVIDIA RSX doesn't equal ATI Xenos e.g. 1. RSX doesn't have tessellation hardware, 2. RSX's pixel shader shalls during texture fetch, 3. RSX is vertex shader limited.ronvalencia

I'm not interested in nit picking on this old debate, what I said was correct, Cell can enhance a games visuals at the cost of taking performance from typical CPU tasks.