Can we come to an agreement that PS3 is 25 - 50% more powerful?

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="rawr89"]

probably because it takes a huge amount of time to re-do everything? if they were truly aiming for a 720p game, why didnt they start with 720p, and adjusted the variables i.e. graphics to cope with the 30 frame-per-second minimum?

rawr89

huh. tell me that when Halo Reach is released in 720p, 4x MSAA, and at a stable framerate. they have been using their engine since Halo 2. the Halo 3 2007 game was 640p. last year's Halo ODST was 640p. and now you're telling me that Halo Reach will be 720p? oh please. if Digital Foundry (or whoever it was) didn't tell everyone that Halo 3 was sub-HD, people like you wouldve still be thinking they played Halo 3 in HD. hahaha. Bungie didnt admit everything until someone took notice of it.

No, but we can agree that if PS3 cant even run RDR anywhere close to 360 quality, is definatly NOT any bit more powerfull

But does it have da foliage ?

No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

theseekar

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

No, but we can agree that if PS3 cant even run RDR anywhere close to 360 quality, is definatly NOT any bit more powerfull

theseekar

But does it have da foliage ?

Megaman5364

[QUOTE="theseekar"]No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

RavenLoud

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

[QUOTE="RavenLoud"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

chrisPperson

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

lmao Persistent are you still going on about Sub HD. PS3 can barely do 720p without sacrificing AA. You love graphics sooo much yet you game on a PS3. Stop selling yourself short.

lol. have you played GoW3 or Uncharted 2? 720p with MLAA (which is almost as good as 16x MSAA). 360 can not even top 4x MSAA. also, their biggest exclusives arent even in HD. lol.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="RavenLoud"] You know, I always wondered why the mods didn't ban you yet, now I understand. People like you are the heart and soul of SW and everything that makes it great, you guys are what keep all the smart people here: teh lulz is just too much. My hat off to you sir. I just learned an important concept today. :P

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

theseekar

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="RavenLoud"] You know, I always wondered why the mods didn't ban you yet, now I understand. People like you are the heart and soul of SW and everything that makes it great, you guys are what keep all the smart people here: teh lulz is just too much. My hat off to you sir. I just learned an important concept today. :P

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

theseekar

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

yeah we get it youra lemming.....tell us a new joke please.

And why the hell do you care bout graphics so much and were like omg da foliage with alan wake which is hillarious.Also your statement bout crysis in another topic was like the pot calling the kettle black it was ironic to such an extent im temped to post FYS's cover of that song.

I really think you need to get those fanboy goggles of my good man.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] I was going to respond to his post but I think you took the words out of my mouth. theseekar: "Last Gen" that seems to be your favorite word. From what I've seen, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, GOW 3, or even your favorite games- Halo Reach, Alan Wake, and Gears of War are by no means "Last Gen" in any sense. They are all great looking games, and it is really obvious you have possibly never even seen a PS3, much less played any games on one.jasonharris48

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

Yes, i never said Gears are good games, they are linear and boring, but i love the art, so i play it just for that

yeah we get it youra lemming.....tell us a new joke please.

And why the hell do you care bout graphics so much and were like omg da foliage with alan wake which is hillarious.Also your statement bout crysis in another topic was like the pot calling the kettle black it was ironic to such an extent im temped to post FYS's cover of that song.

I really think you need to get those fanboy goggles of my good man.

razgriz_101

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

When the 360 releases games at the same fidelity as heavy rain, kz2, gow3 and U2 then I'll beleive they're the same in terms of power.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="RavenLoud"] You know, I always wondered why the mods didn't ban you yet, now I understand. People like you are the heart and soul of SW and everything that makes it great, you guys are what keep all the smart people here: teh lulz is just too much. My hat off to you sir. I just learned an important concept today. :P

That being said, I disagree, in fact, AW is pretty much just as linear as MGSIV (it also had amazing detail), which didn't just get 10/10 for its graphics you know... The rest of your post is so full of bias and hyperboles that I won't even bother. I'll just let some other angry cow debunk you instead.

theseekar

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] I was going to respond to his post but I think you took the words out of my mouth. theseekar: "Last Gen" that seems to be your favorite word. From what I've seen, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, GOW 3, or even your favorite games- Halo Reach, Alan Wake, and Gears of War are by no means "Last Gen" in any sense. They are all great looking games, and it is really obvious you have possibly never even seen a PS3, much less played any games on one.chrisPperson

You seem so certain of something that is 100% false

U2 has a tiny world, that is not my fault that i cant consider a design used in PS1 era ... next gen, how could i ?

You see, i am nota PS3 ONLY gamer, so i have the choice to play in bigger, more open and using next gen detail, forests and lighting games on 360

This:

Is the sum total of the response you're going to get.

-----

OT: Neither is particularly more powerful

Doesn't Alan Wake have a ton of screen tearing...and I hear it looks like crap during the day. I don't understand how this game is represented as the top of the line on the 360. Yeah it's got open environments, great. But so does Infamous and it scored higher.

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

These games have no scale, you always play on a path, even at that fight

You mean you could leave the fight and exlore, sorry but we played a different game then !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you sure you played GOW3 ? Having some bigger looking wall or a titan or whatever around the path you play, does not make it big scale, just a path with a bigger wall around it

Xbox 360 has the best RDR version, so is 100% stronger than PS3

theseekar

But Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, and God of War 3 are the best looking console games to date. There probably isn't a credible journalist out there that would deny it.

People tend to believe those guys over you, so... sorry :)

No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

Notice how you always say "to me," or "for me." i.e. "they are just last gen in every way FOR ME." So that there insists that EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS OPINION.

Alan Wake was hyped to be a graphics king. It simply did not deliver, and it's about that time to let go. Yes, games like KZ2 and UC2 are older games... but they are still the most technically impressive on consoles.

Use your eyes, seekar, use 'em. I would tell you to use your head, but you're already doing it wrong.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

But Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, and God of War 3 are the best looking console games to date. There probably isn't a credible journalist out there that would deny it.

People tend to believe those guys over you, so... sorry :)

leadernator

No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

Notice how you always say "to me," or "for me." i.e. "they are just last gen in every way FOR ME." So that there insists that EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS OPINION.

Alan Wake was hyped to be a graphics king. It simply did not deliver, and it's about that time to let go. Yes, games like KZ2 and UC2 are older games... but they are still the most technically impressive on consoles.

Use your eyes, seekar, use 'em. I would tell you to use your head, but you're already doing it wrong.

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

I simply dont understand how that is possible

Do you ?

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

No, they are some of the most last gen looking game to date, small worlds (tiny to be exact), no dynamic volumetric lighting, no huge open areas and forests with weather effects etc

Maybe were best BEFORE Alan Wake arrived, after that game they are just last gen in every way for me

BTW, Alan Wake having huge open places, dynamic volumetric lighting, and open forests with thick foliage, is not a matter of opinion, this is hard facts

Like a hard fact is that no PS3 game to date has ANY of those !!!!

As for reviewers, thye gave 10/10 to MGS4 subD graphic, that was 100x smaller in scale, detail than AW and had no realforests or huge detail, or next gen lighting like AW

Reviewers = the least credible thing on the planet for me

theseekar

Notice how you always say "to me," or "for me." i.e. "they are just last gen in every way FOR ME." So that there insists that EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS OPINION.

Alan Wake was hyped to be a graphics king. It simply did not deliver, and it's about that time to let go. Yes, games like KZ2 and UC2 are older games... but they are still the most technically impressive on consoles.

Use your eyes, seekar, use 'em. I would tell you to use your head, but you're already doing it wrong.

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

I simply dont understand how that is possible

Do you ?

Well the whole world gets it, I don't understand why you don't.

Maybe it's because you make stuff up :|

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

yeah we get it youra lemming.....tell us a new joke please.

And why the hell do you care bout graphics so much and were like omg da foliage with alan wake which is hillarious.Also your statement bout crysis in another topic was like the pot calling the kettle black it was ironic to such an extent im temped to post FYS's cover of that song.

I really think you need to get those fanboy goggles of my good man.

theseekar

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

Notice how you always say "to me," or "for me." i.e. "they are just last gen in every way FOR ME." So that there insists that EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS OPINION.

Alan Wake was hyped to be a graphics king. It simply did not deliver, and it's about that time to let go. Yes, games like KZ2 and UC2 are older games... but they are still the most technically impressive on consoles.

Use your eyes, seekar, use 'em. I would tell you to use your head, but you're already doing it wrong.

leadernator

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

I simply dont understand how that is possible

Do you ?

Well the whole world gets it, I don't understand why you don't.

Maybe it's because you make stuff up :|

Well, explain it to me then, because i can hardly see how the only games that comes close to Crysis scale, effects and forests can be worst than U2 that is not even a million miles close to Crysis scale, effects and foliage

So, if you could be a bit more specific ?

I keep hearing that they are about equal, even the programmers and game designers agree. Hardware is something you can't dispute or measure for "teh graphics".

But what you can measure is talent, the talent of the developers and the designers behind the games. And so far, Sony's 1st-party devs have shown more dedication and aptitude than any 360 devs to date. Hence why, they produce high quality games that keep pushing the bar for consoles. While the 360 is yet to introduce a game that even rivals titles like Uncharted 2, GoW 3 or even Killzone 2.

So while the hardware might be equal, the actual commitment and expertise is different between the console devs. This gives the fans the illusion that the PS3 is pumping out better looking games due to "TEH CELL", when in reality it is the talent and the dedication of the developers that deliver the goods. Oh and also the humongous budget that Sony pays up.

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

I simply dont understand how that is possible

Do you ?

theseekar

Well the whole world gets it, I don't understand why you don't.

Maybe it's because you make stuff up :|

Well, explain it to me then, because i can hardly see how the only games that comes close to Crysis scale, effects and forests can be worst than U2 that is not even a million miles close to Crysis scale, effects and foliage

So, if you could be a bit more specific ?

son may i ask you got split personality disorder? cause in another topic you said Crysis was a bad looking game xD sorry but this irony is delicious om nom.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

yeah we get it youra lemming.....tell us a new joke please.

And why the hell do you care bout graphics so much and were like omg da foliage with alan wake which is hillarious.Also your statement bout crysis in another topic was like the pot calling the kettle black it was ironic to such an extent im temped to post FYS's cover of that song.

I really think you need to get those fanboy goggles of my good man.

razgriz_101

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

You may argue as long as you like, but you will DEFINATLY not convince me that all the best things about Crysis are non existent or dont matter

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

Well the whole world gets it, I don't understand why you don't.

Maybe it's because you make stuff up :|

razgriz_101

Well, explain it to me then, because i can hardly see how the only games that comes close to Crysis scale, effects and forests can be worst than U2 that is not even a million miles close to Crysis scale, effects and foliage

So, if you could be a bit more specific ?

son may i ask you got split personality disorder? cause in another topic you said Crysis was a bad looking game xD sorry but this irony is delicious om nom.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

theseekar

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

theseekar

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

Well, explain it to me then, because i can hardly see how the only games that comes close to Crysis scale, effects and forests can be worst than U2 that is not even a million miles close to Crysis scale, effects and foliage

So, if you could be a bit more specific ?

YuriSH

son may i ask you got split personality disorder? cause in another topic you said Crysis was a bad looking game xD sorry but this irony is delicious om nom.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

jasonharris48

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

What proof ? I am sayign that EVERYTHING matters, scale, detail, next gen lighting, charatcer models etc

I dont need proof for that, only those that say "but only what U2 does best matter" need to prove why what U2 does not do well, does not matter

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

theseekar

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

Lol what programs do you use? and what iteration did you start on? also what kinda tech stuff i'll be wanting examples and no copy pasta's.

oh aye on the matter of the polys.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5942.html

@ bolded point is that your best excuse b...b.b...bbut its linear *insert cry face here*....lemmings these days higher native res and poly counts mean more on the graphics level.

If by "Jugnle" you mean "Jungle", and you are calling Uncharted 2's jungles "Dungeons", then I can just as easily call Alan Wake's sequences dungeons as well. It's not like you can explore the entire planet earth in them, there are still invisible walls, IT'S A VIDEO GAME. Just sayin'.chrisPperson

You can call this a dungeon ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAM_gx5qH8g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOBN04saU4I&feature=related

Sorry, but no

The jungle in U2 was just walls, like a dungeon

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

razgriz_101

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

Lol what programs do you use? and what iteration did you start on? also what kinda tech stuff i'll be wanting examples and no copy pasta's.

oh aye on the matter of the polys.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5942.html

@ bolded point is that your best excuse b...b.b...bbut its linear *insert cry face here*....lemmings these days higher native res and poly counts mean more on the graphics level.

Sorry, but no, resolution and polygon counts are just one aspect, just that

And how do you even know how many polygons AW uses ? Link ?

[QUOTE="leadernator"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

I simply dont understand how that is possible

Do you ?

theseekar

Well the whole world gets it, I don't understand why you don't.

Maybe it's because you make stuff up :|

Well, explain it to me then, because i can hardly see how the only games that comes close to Crysis scale, effects and forests can be worst than U2 that is not even a million miles close to Crysis scale, effects and foliage

So, if you could be a bit more specific ?

Maybe Alan Wake isn't as open as you're hoping it to be.

You actually weren't being specific yourself. What evidence do you have that Alan Wake has a vast open "thick (lol)" forest with volumetric lighting (you don't even know what this means, admit it) that is garnished with "vast detail" (double lol)?

A video won't cut it. I'm looking for numbers. I need the square footage of Alan Wake's house. Plus the measurement of the entire forest area in virtual meters.

I also require you providing the number of virtual threads on Alan Wake's Jacket... not to mention an exact number of leaves on each tree plus the texture work. I'll give you say... 30 minutes?

Once you provide that, I'll let you know how many virtual black-heads are on Drake's face... and the square footage of the secret city of shambala.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] If by "Jugnle" you mean "Jungle", and you are calling Uncharted 2's jungles "Dungeons", then I can just as easily call Alan Wake's sequences dungeons as well. It's not like you can explore the entire planet earth in them, there are still invisible walls, IT'S A VIDEO GAME. Just sayin'.theseekar

You can call this a dungeon ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAM_gx5qH8g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOBN04saU4I&feature=related

Sorry, but no

The jungle in U2 was just walls, like a dungeon

Also, do want proof for you being a 3D graphics modeler (if that is what you mean, because I do amateur digital art and I call that "Graphics" too, so I don't know exactly what you mean).

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] If by "Jugnle" you mean "Jungle", and you are calling Uncharted 2's jungles "Dungeons", then I can just as easily call Alan Wake's sequences dungeons as well. It's not like you can explore the entire planet earth in them, there are still invisible walls, IT'S A VIDEO GAME. Just sayin'.chrisPperson

You can call this a dungeon ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAM_gx5qH8g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOBN04saU4I&feature=related

Sorry, but no

The jungle in U2 was just walls, like a dungeon

Also, do want proof for you being a 3D graphics modeler (if that is what you mean, because I do amateur digital art and I call that "Graphics" too, so I don't know exactly what you mean).

but i never said AW is open world, just that has 100x bigger open places than U2 has

So, you should provide me a video that i can freely explore an as big space as those in my AW videos

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

theseekar

Lol what programs do you use? and what iteration did you start on? also what kinda tech stuff i'll be wanting examples and no copy pasta's.

oh aye on the matter of the polys.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5942.html

@ bolded point is that your best excuse b...b.b...bbut its linear *insert cry face here*....lemmings these days higher native res and poly counts mean more on the graphics level.

Sorry, but no, resolution and polygon counts are just one aspect, just that

And how do you even know how many polygons AW uses ? Link ?

those are actaally 2 of the biggest factors and cmon graphics boy what progs you use over your so called 15 years of experience.Each time you dodge this i will take you less seriously.Also im actually gonna be looking for the poly count article i read about a couple of weeks ago just need to troll through google for it.

But cmon im still waiting for your reply on my bolded question.Keep dodgin and i am just gonna laugh and think your truely only around 14 year old whos ddone basic CAD in AutoCAD 3d.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

You can call this a dungeon ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAM_gx5qH8g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOBN04saU4I&feature=related

Sorry, but no

The jungle in U2 was just walls, like a dungeon

theseekar

Also, do want proof for you being a 3D graphics modeler (if that is what you mean, because I do amateur digital art and I call that "Graphics" too, so I don't know exactly what you mean).

but i never said AW is open world, just that has 100x bigger open places than U2 has

So, you should provide me a video that i can freely explore an as big space as those in my AW videos

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

What is closer to Crysis, Alan Wake or Uncharted 2 ? I would like to see your opinion

Because, like Crysis, Alan Wake uses wide open spaces, thick forests, dynamic volumetric lighting and U2 does not

So, you think U2 is closer to Crysis and how do you back that up ?

theseekar

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Eh higher native res,higher character poly ccounts (UC2 has 80k and AW has aaround 30k im sure),uncharted's animation are far more fluent aswell.Those are technical things which dictate graphics.I personally think its a great looking game, Alan wake is aswell but uncharted 2 beats it in a lot of ways.

Also you clearly havent played Uncharted 2 have you? cause last time i checked a couple of the early missions are actually set in very dense forests (jungle in burma)

open space does not dictate graphics or do i need to geta mallt and a piece of paper with that on it and bash it into your skull.I do graphics at college so i know my stuff technically whether you like it or not uncharted 2 on raw spec is the better game you cannot argue with raw data thats bout as bright as jamming a fork in a plug socket.

razgriz_101

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

Lol what programs do you use? and what iteration did you start on? also what kinda tech stuff i'll be wanting examples and no copy pasta's.

oh aye on the matter of the polys.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5942.html

@ bolded point is that your best excuse b...b.b...bbut its linear *insert cry face here*....lemmings these days higher native res and poly counts mean more on the graphics level.

All that matters is...

but i never said AW is open world

theseekar

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

theseekar

Yeh. Just flat out lie within 20 posts, that goes some way to improving your non-existant credibility.

[QUOTE="jasonharris48"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

and you mean next gen lighting, vast open areas, filled with huge thick forests with immense detail and huge visibility without faked 2D backdrops does not !!!! ???? dictate graphics ?

Link ? Proof ? Or is just your opinion ?

And BTW with jugnle in U2, you mean the narrow paths with walls around that had also a few trees stuck around those walls ? That is not jungle, that is a dungeon

Crysis was mainly hyped for its scale, and detaield forests and next gen lighting, all things that Alan Wake has and U2 does not

I am also doing graphics for 15+ years now, so when i see forests,i know is better than tiny paths and walls, vastly more detail and hard to light properly

theseekar

What proof ? I am sayign that EVERYTHING matters, scale, detail, next gen lighting, charatcer models etc

I dont need proof for that, only those that say "but only what U2 does best matter" need to prove why what U2 does not do well, does not matter

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

but i never said AW is open world

shinrabanshou

But i cant understand how vastly smaller worlds, no real forest ot thick foliage with vast detail, no dynamic next gen volumetric lighting make for ................. more technically imressive than huge open world, filled with extreme foliage detail and next gen lighting

theseekar

Yeh. Just flat out lie within 20 posts, that goes some way to improving your non-existant credibility.

That about does it :)

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] Can you show me a video in Alan Wake where you can explore the entire world? If you can, they I will honestly say that you are right and I am wrong, and that in fact Alan Wake is not a "Dungeon" game. Looking forward to it! :)

Also, do want proof for you being a 3D graphics modeler (if that is what you mean, because I do amateur digital art and I call that "Graphics" too, so I don't know exactly what you mean).

chrisPperson

but i never said AW is open world, just that has 100x bigger open places than U2 has

So, you should provide me a video that i can freely explore an as big space as those in my AW videos

I said i am doing graphics for 15+ years, not 3D graphics or modelling, or whatever you assumed

Right now i am not even at all in 3D, i am making a 2D XBLA RPG and using 2D painting progrms mainly, because art is my thing more than trying to do 3D which look ordinary 99% of the time

I used to model in 3DS max and Maya and do rendering too, not texturing though, hate texturing

Also have been using Autocad in 3D for years and still do, model building etc

Generally i do a million different graphics related things with PCs, whatever job i can find nd my own stuff, like my 2DRPG/adventure game

I dont work for a specific company, so i get to try many things too, not just 3D modeling for exmaple and thats it, i would kill myself if i only did that job

The best was making my own game, i can program a whole world, draw the backgrounds/spritesand mix interaction, graphics, story creationand AI in combat, so is hands down the most amazing thing i have ever worked with, definatly a million times better than any kind of 3D modeling

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

but i never said AW is open world, just that has 100x bigger open places than U2 has

So, you should provide me a video that i can freely explore an as big space as those in my AW videos

theseekar

I said i am doing graphics for 15+ years, not 3D graphics or modelling, or whatever you assumed

Right now i am not even at all in 3D, i am making a 2D XBLA RPG and using 2D painting progrms mainly, because art is my thing more than trying to do 3D which look ordinary 99% of the time

I used to model in 3DS max and Maya and do rendering too, not texturing though, hate texturing

Also have been using Autocad in 3D for years and still do, model building etc

Generally i do a million different graphics related things with PCs, whatever job i can find nd my own stuff, like my 2DRPG/adventure game

I dont work for a specific company, so i get to try many things too, not just 3D modeling for exmaple and thats it, i would kill myself if i only did that job

The best was making my own game, i can program a whole world, draw the backgrounds/spritesand mix interaction, graphics, story creationand AI in combat, so is hands down the most amazing thing i have ever worked with, definatly a million times better than any kind of 3D modeling

So basically you specialize in 2D, not knowing jack about 3D modeling, vast thick open world forests, volumetric lighting, and foliage.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

but i never said AW is open world, just that has 100x bigger open places than U2 has

So, you should provide me a video that i can freely explore an as big space as those in my AW videos

theseekar

I said i am doing graphics for 15+ years, not 3D graphics or modelling, or whatever you assumed

Right now i am not even at all in 3D, i am making a 2D XBLA RPG and using 2D painting progrms mainly, because art is my thing more than trying to do 3D which look ordinary 99% of the time

I used to model in 3DS max and Maya and do rendering too, not texturing though, hate texturing

Also have been using Autocad in 3D for years and still do, model building etc

Generally i do a million different graphics related things with PCs, whatever job i can find nd my own stuff, like my 2DRPG/adventure game

I dont work for a specific company, so i get to try many things too, not just 3D modeling for exmaple and thats it, i would kill myself if i only did that job

The best was making my own game, i can program a whole world, draw the backgrounds/spritesand mix interaction, graphics, story creationand AI in combat, so is hands down the most amazing thing i have ever worked with, definatly a million times better than any kind of 3D modeling

Hm. So you are making an 2D XBLA RPG with 2D painting programs. I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind.

A.) Which painting programs are you referring to

B.) What programming language do you use

So, 3D modelling is ordinary 99% of the time? Is that why you keep on saying Alan Wake is an incredible and varied game "foliage"-wise? Should this mean that all your arguments regarding graphics should be taken with a grain of salt? That's more or less what you are making it seem like.

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] Uh... you know what, I'm going to ignore what you just said to focus on what I asked you afterwards, because I am really curious how you do your "15 years of 3D Modelling". You do know that 15 years ago, we barely even had 3D computer models, right?

chrisPperson

I said i am doing graphics for 15+ years, not 3D graphics or modelling, or whatever you assumed

Right now i am not even at all in 3D, i am making a 2D XBLA RPG and using 2D painting progrms mainly, because art is my thing more than trying to do 3D which look ordinary 99% of the time

I used to model in 3DS max and Maya and do rendering too, not texturing though, hate texturing

Also have been using Autocad in 3D for years and still do, model building etc

Generally i do a million different graphics related things with PCs, whatever job i can find nd my own stuff, like my 2DRPG/adventure game

I dont work for a specific company, so i get to try many things too, not just 3D modeling for exmaple and thats it, i would kill myself if i only did that job

The best was making my own game, i can program a whole world, draw the backgrounds/spritesand mix interaction, graphics, story creationand AI in combat, so is hands down the most amazing thing i have ever worked with, definatly a million times better than any kind of 3D modeling

Hm. So you are making an 2D XBLA RPG with 2D painting programs. I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind.

A.) Which painting programs are you referring to

B.) What programming language do you use

So, 3D modelling is ordinary 99% of the time? Is that why you keep on saying Alan Wake is an incredible and varied game "foliage"-wise? Should this mean that all your arguments regarding graphics should be taken with a grain of salt? That's more or less what you are making it seem like.

I use painter mainly and some other utilites for sprite sheets

I use XNA of course and C#, what else ?

Most 3d games look alike, that is a fact, only very few have the extra details to set them apart, but those get closed environments

It is rather simple, no developer can ever model the detail in a artistic painting, and use so unique textures / models everywhere in current systems, that would kill any machine

Maybe we never actually see 2D quality of detail in 3D ever, because the time to create the material would be so long that developers could never make a game out of it

Square confirmed it lately, even with the huge team, they said that would take them 10+ years to make what FF7 did years back with 2D in 3D

That is what i meant, as for Alan Wake, is one of those games that give hope someday maybe 2D like detail will be put in games in real big 3D environments

Still that dream is far far away though

@ theseekar, did you really buy that BS Square said about remaking FFVII? This is coming from the same company who's main reason why FFXIII didn't have any towns was due to being to hard to create. BTW since you came you develop using XNA you would also know you would work with Open GL (if chosen to do so), DirectX (being more compatible to work with between XNA rather than XNA and OpenGL together) also, plus C++ C#. You came to work with these API's but I find that hard to believe.

On another topic someone chaffed at the idea that the PS3 was 3 times more powerful than the XBOX 360......rightfully so.

The PS3 is certainly not 3 times more powerful. For honesty's sake, I'd even like to volunteer that the PS3 isn't twice as powerful. But seeing how the XBOX 360 is having a hard time rendering its own 2010 exclusives in high definition whereas the PS3 isn't, I think its fair to say the PS3 is at least 25% more powerful, and possibly as high as 50% more.

Can we agree to that?

Persistantthug