I'm feeling the ps3's visuals

ps3 newer exclusives do things the 360 cant imo. MLB the show 09, MGSIV, Killzone, LBP, Resistance 2 would have to be dumbed down on the 360 imo. White Knight Chronicles will be the same. FF will be dumbed down because of the 360 which is a shame.

piercetruth34

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

ps3 newer exclusives do things the 360 cant imo. MLB the show 09, MGSIV, Killzone, LBP, Resistance 2 would have to be dumbed down on the 360 imo. White Knight Chronicles will be the same. FF will be dumbed down because of the 360 which is a shame.

Reistance 2 and White Knight Chronicles are fugly. LBP isn't all that awe inspiring either. Again, you are trying to tell me that 3-4 years into consoles with about a 7 year life span the 360 can't do baseball, MGS4 and Killzone 2? Get out of here man.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Unless we are designers or hardware gurus. We have no idea what each is capable of, so saying something like that is just silly.

lundy86_4

I have a CS degree and am a hardware guru, so saying something like that isn't silly. Plus it has nothing to do with that anyways. Just look at the games and what they are doing. They are much more complex than anything that has been done on the 360. A lot of it has to do with the media but it's also a computational thing as well. There is too much going on on screen as far as character models and what they are doing. The 360 could possibly try to replicate these things but there would have to be a compromise somewhere.

Well from what I see both are pretty well balanced so far, and until I see something to the contrary I will take your statement with a grain of salt. In all honesty, neither has outshined the opposition.

I agree with you that the 360 is no slouch. I think it's a great system but it's starting to look like the ps2 of last gen, which is nothing to scoff at. It's a great system and probably the best system this gen as far as longevity and everything in between. But the ps3 is starting to show its capablities imo... Thats why i finally bought one. Take MAss Effect for example. This is a good looking game, but the framerates chop a ton at the end when there is a lot of stuff going on. Yeah yuo can just dela with it and its fine and not that big a deal but that happens for a reason. The cinematic sequences chop a ton as well towards the end because its a stunning game and the media cant cache fast enough. There is also a ton of popin. On the ps3 look at the cinematics in killzone from the start, they are stunning and smooth and the character models and expressions are humanlike and completely synced perfectly with the game action. you dont even notice a difference between the cinematic adn actual gameplay. MLB The show is the same look at the mascots and the detail of the baseball itself. Everything in the game is incredibly detailed and flows seamlessly. GTA IV is a great looking game and a multiplat and one of the better looking games on both systems but you can tell its not up to par with some of these later ps3 exclusives. There is draw in and popin in GTA IV and the models arent nearly as advanced as what you see in Killzone. Gears 2 is a great looking and playing game. It has some amazing cinematics but the game is also structured and restrictive and certain things are not interactive because the hardware cant handle it. Thats what im saying is the 360 can do some amazing things but compromises are being made. That is not the case with some of these ps3 exclusive games of late.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

I have a CS degree and am a hardware guru, so saying something like that isn't silly. Plus it has nothing to do with that anyways. Just look at the games and what they are doing. They are much more complex than anything that has been done on the 360. A lot of it has to do with the media but it's also a computational thing as well. There is too much going on on screen as far as character models and what they are doing. The 360 could possibly try to replicate these things but there would have to be a compromise somewhere.

piercetruth34

Well from what I see both are pretty well balanced so far, and until I see something to the contrary I will take your statement with a grain of salt. In all honesty, neither has outshined the opposition.

I agree with you that the 360 is no slouch. I think it's a great system but it's starting to look like the ps2 of last gen, which is nothing to scoff at. It's a great system and probably the best system this gen as far as longevity and everything in between. But the ps3 is starting to show its capablities imo... Thats why i finally bought one. Take MAss Effect for example. This is a good looking game, but the framerates chop a ton at the end when there is a lot of stuff going on. Yeah yuo can just dela with it and its fine and not that big a deal but that happens for a reason. The cinematic sequences chop a ton as well towards the end because its a stunning game and the media cant cache fast enough. There is also a ton of popin. On the ps3 look at the cinematics in killzone from the start, they are stunning and smooth and the character models and expressions are completely synced perfectly with the game action. you dont even notice a difference between the cinematic adn actual gameplay. MLB The show is the same look at the mascots and the detail of the baseball itself. Everything in the game is incredibly detailed and flows seamlessly. GTA IV is a great looking game and a multiplat and one of the better looking games on both systems but you can tell its not up to par with some of these later ps3 exclusives. There is draw in and popin in GTA IV and the models arent nearly as advanced as what you see in Killzone. Gears 2 is a great looking and playing game. It has some amazing cinematics but the game is also structured and restrictive and certain things are not interactive because the hardware cant handle it. Thats what im saying is the 360 can do some amazing things but compromises are being made. That is not the case with some of these ps3 exclusive games of late.

That entire paragraph lacks one shred of evidence and is all completely subjective.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

I agree with you. People need to start realizing the 360 dosent have the power of the PS3 is a fact and games like these 2 show graphics that are not seen on the 360. So if the 360 can produce these types of graphics why havent they?djsifer01

Unless we are designers or hardware gurus. We have no idea what each is capable of, so saying something like that is just silly.

I have a CS degree and am a hardware guru, so saying something like that isn't silly. Plus it has nothing to do with that anyways. Just look at the games and what they are doing. They are much more complex than anything that has been done on the 360. A lot of it has to do with the media but it's also a computational thing as well. There is too much going on on screen as far as character models and what they are doing. The 360 could possibly try to replicate these things but there would have to be a compromise somewhere.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Well from what I see both are pretty well balanced so far, and until I see something to the contrary I will take your statement with a grain of salt. In all honesty, neither has outshined the opposition.

lundy86_4

I agree with you that the 360 is no slouch. I think it's a great system but it's starting to look like the ps2 of last gen, which is nothing to scoff at. It's a great system and probably the best system this gen as far as longevity and everything in between. But the ps3 is starting to show its capablities imo... Thats why i finally bought one. Take MAss Effect for example. This is a good looking game, but the framerates chop a ton at the end when there is a lot of stuff going on. Yeah yuo can just dela with it and its fine and not that big a deal but that happens for a reason. The cinematic sequences chop a ton as well towards the end because its a stunning game and the media cant cache fast enough. There is also a ton of popin. On the ps3 look at the cinematics in killzone from the start, they are stunning and smooth and the character models and expressions are completely synced perfectly with the game action. you dont even notice a difference between the cinematic adn actual gameplay. MLB The show is the same look at the mascots and the detail of the baseball itself. Everything in the game is incredibly detailed and flows seamlessly. GTA IV is a great looking game and a multiplat and one of the better looking games on both systems but you can tell its not up to par with some of these later ps3 exclusives. There is draw in and popin in GTA IV and the models arent nearly as advanced as what you see in Killzone. Gears 2 is a great looking and playing game. It has some amazing cinematics but the game is also structured and restrictive and certain things are not interactive because the hardware cant handle it. Thats what im saying is the 360 can do some amazing things but compromises are being made. That is not the case with some of these ps3 exclusive games of late.

That entire paragraph lacks one shred of evidence and is all completely subjective.

How does that lack evidence? I explained everything i was saying lol. You guys are obviously in denial man. I've owned both consoles and am seeing these things right in front of me. IT's pretty obvious these games have better visual things going on on the screen.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

I agree with you that the 360 is no slouch. I think it's a great system but it's starting to look like the ps2 of last gen, which is nothing to scoff at. It's a great system and probably the best system this gen as far as longevity and everything in between. But the ps3 is starting to show its capablities imo... Thats why i finally bought one. Take MAss Effect for example. This is a good looking game, but the framerates chop a ton at the end when there is a lot of stuff going on. Yeah yuo can just dela with it and its fine and not that big a deal but that happens for a reason. The cinematic sequences chop a ton as well towards the end because its a stunning game and the media cant cache fast enough. There is also a ton of popin. On the ps3 look at the cinematics in killzone from the start, they are stunning and smooth and the character models and expressions are completely synced perfectly with the game action. you dont even notice a difference between the cinematic adn actual gameplay. MLB The show is the same look at the mascots and the detail of the baseball itself. Everything in the game is incredibly detailed and flows seamlessly. GTA IV is a great looking game and a multiplat and one of the better looking games on both systems but you can tell its not up to par with some of these later ps3 exclusives. There is draw in and popin in GTA IV and the models arent nearly as advanced as what you see in Killzone. Gears 2 is a great looking and playing game. It has some amazing cinematics but the game is also structured and restrictive and certain things are not interactive because the hardware cant handle it. Thats what im saying is the 360 can do some amazing things but compromises are being made. That is not the case with some of these ps3 exclusive games of late.

That entire paragraph lacks one shred of evidence and is all completely subjective.

How does that lack evidence? I explained everything i was saying lol. You guys are obviously in denial man. I've owned both consoles and am seeing these things right in front of me. IT's pretty obvious these games have better visual things going on on the screen.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

I agree with you that the 360 is no slouch. I think it's a great system but it's starting to look like the ps2 of last gen, which is nothing to scoff at. It's a great system and probably the best system this gen as far as longevity and everything in between. But the ps3 is starting to show its capablities imo... Thats why i finally bought one. Take MAss Effect for example. This is a good looking game, but the framerates chop a ton at the end when there is a lot of stuff going on. Yeah yuo can just dela with it and its fine and not that big a deal but that happens for a reason. The cinematic sequences chop a ton as well towards the end because its a stunning game and the media cant cache fast enough. There is also a ton of popin. On the ps3 look at the cinematics in killzone from the start, they are stunning and smooth and the character models and expressions are completely synced perfectly with the game action. you dont even notice a difference between the cinematic adn actual gameplay. MLB The show is the same look at the mascots and the detail of the baseball itself. Everything in the game is incredibly detailed and flows seamlessly. GTA IV is a great looking game and a multiplat and one of the better looking games on both systems but you can tell its not up to par with some of these later ps3 exclusives. There is draw in and popin in GTA IV and the models arent nearly as advanced as what you see in Killzone. Gears 2 is a great looking and playing game. It has some amazing cinematics but the game is also structured and restrictive and certain things are not interactive because the hardware cant handle it. Thats what im saying is the 360 can do some amazing things but compromises are being made. That is not the case with some of these ps3 exclusive games of late.

piercetruth34

That entire paragraph lacks one shred of evidence and is all completely subjective.

How does that lack evidence? I explained everything i was saying lol. You guys are obviously in denial man. I've owned both consoles and am seeing these things right in front of me. IT's pretty obvious these games have better visual things going on on the screen.

I also own both consoles. None of that is evidence, you quote games with completely different graphics engines and try to draw similarities. You sya you have a degree in CS, yet what you state I know, and I major in Political Science.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

That entire paragraph lacks one shred of evidence and is all completely subjective.

kingtito

How does that lack evidence? I explained everything i was saying lol. You guys are obviously in denial man. I've owned both consoles and am seeing these things right in front of me. IT's pretty obvious these games have better visual things going on on the screen.

There are reasons why you hear people say that the ps3 is only using xx percentage of their power right now and the 360 is already making compromises.... If you look at the ps3 they are seamless and detail can still be added to a lot of the models on the screen. The ps3 still has a lot of room to build. The 360 not so much. I can see these things when i look at what a game is doing and what the code is actually doing. Yes programmers will find additional ways to prolong the 360 but the ps3 is actually becoming the easier system to program for because the groundwork has been set,.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

How does that lack evidence? I explained everything i was saying lol. You guys are obviously in denial man. I've owned both consoles and am seeing these things right in front of me. IT's pretty obvious these games have better visual things going on on the screen.

piercetruth34

There are reasons why you hear people say that the ps3 is only using xx percentage of their power right now and the 360 is already making compromises.... If you look at the ps3 they are seamless and detail can still be added to a lot of the models on the screen. The ps3 still has a lot of room to build. The 360 not so much.

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="kingtito"] Just because you type something on the internet doesn't mean it's evidence or fact for that matter. lundy86_4

There are reasons why you hear people say that the ps3 is only using xx percentage of their power right now and the 360 is already making compromises.... If you look at the ps3 they are seamless and detail can still be added to a lot of the models on the screen. The ps3 still has a lot of room to build. The 360 not so much.

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

ps3 newer exclusives do things the 360 cant imo. MLB the show 09, MGSIV, Killzone, LBP, Resistance 2 would have to be dumbed down on the 360 imo. White Knight Chronicles will be the same. FF will be dumbed down because of the 360 which is a shame.

piercetruth34

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

There are reasons why you hear people say that the ps3 is only using xx percentage of their power right now and the 360 is already making compromises.... If you look at the ps3 they are seamless and detail can still be added to a lot of the models on the screen. The ps3 still has a lot of room to build. The 360 not so much.

piercetruth34

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

I believe 10, but it's not about what I know here. I'm not the one trying to prove a point, you made a statement with nothing to back it up.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

lundy86_4

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

I believe 10, but it's not about what I know here. I'm not the one trying to prove a point, you made a statement with nothing to back it up.

I gave examples man. This is a message board. What do you expect? Would you like me to do a puppet show for you?

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

There are reasons why you hear people say that the ps3 is only using xx percentage of their power right now and the 360 is already making compromises.... If you look at the ps3 they are seamless and detail can still be added to a lot of the models on the screen. The ps3 still has a lot of room to build. The 360 not so much.

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

If you really majored in Computer Science you should know that somebody saying it's "using xx percentage" is simply a marketing gimmick.

kingtito

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

How is that? Because people like to say what people want to hear and just say the fair thing because it's not worth upsetting anyone? The ps3 is a more powerful or advanced system from a technology and computational standpoint. These things have already been stated and were stated when it was first released. It took a while to take advantage of it because the system was vying for software against microsoft which is not an easy task, but we are starting to see games now that take advantage of it and games that were developed specifically for the hardware. IT just took a while.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

piercetruth34

I believe 10, but it's not about what I know here. I'm not the one trying to prove a point, you made a statement with nothing to back it up.

I gave examples man. This is a message board. What do you expect? Would you like me to do a puppet show for you?

All you gave were examples of where the 360 struggles, and where you perceive the PS3 not to struggle, any fanboy could come along and just ask you to explain why multiplats look better on the 360 than PS3.

At the end of the day you gave no proof. You gave something you saw and perceive to be a statement of a fact. That is not evidence.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

If you know anything you should be abel to answer what the #2 is in binary within 2 seconds.

How is that? Because people like to say what people want to hear and just say the fair thing because it's not worth upsetting anyone? The ps3 is a more powerful or advanced system from a technology and computational standpoint. These things have already been stated and were stated when it was first released. It took a while to take advantage of it because the system was vying for software against microsoft which is not an easy task, but we are starting to see games now that take advantage of it and games that were developed specifically for the hardware. IT just took a while.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="kingtito"] Yep that would certainly prove he knows what he's talking about. /sarcasm Please you've yet to provide an ounce of evidence backing your claim. Experts "you know those people that ACTUALLY know what they're talking about" have said they're just about even in almost every aspect. kingtito

How is that? Because people like to say what people want to hear and just say the fair thing because it's not worth upsetting anyone? The ps3 is a more powerful or advanced system from a technology and computational standpoint. These things have already been stated and were stated when it was first released. It took a while to take advantage of it because the system was vying for software against microsoft which is not an easy task, but we are starting to see games now that take advantage of it and games that were developed specifically for the hardware. IT just took a while.

I would have to write a book and I'm not going to do that now. People wrote articles on this man. Read any technology site like anandtech or whoever and they will breakdown the hardware for you. The ps3 has a better media player and a more powerful cpu from a computational standpoint. The 360 has a very nice graphics card and comparable specs but the ps3 has been known to be about 3 times more powerful since they were released. IT was always questioned whether the software would take advantage of which. That i agree with is it comes down to software and how much developers can get out of the hardware or are willing to, but we are starting to see some of that. There is so much that goes into it ultimately from marketing to development tools to everything in between, and those are just specs. But from a flat computational power perspective the ps3 is a more powerful system. That is known. Blu-Ray is also a more advanced media technology. The cell also has 7 or 8 mini processors i believe vs the 360's 3 cores which allows the developers to do more if utilized correctly.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

How is that? Because people like to say what people want to hear and just say the fair thing because it's not worth upsetting anyone? The ps3 is a more powerful or advanced system from a technology and computational standpoint. These things have already been stated and were stated when it was first released. It took a while to take advantage of it because the system was vying for software against microsoft which is not an easy task, but we are starting to see games now that take advantage of it and games that were developed specifically for the hardware. IT just took a while.

I would have to write a book and I'm not going to do that now. People wrote articles on this man. Read any technology site like anandtech or whoever and they will breakdown the hardware for you. The ps3 has a better media player and a more powerful cpu from a computational standpoint. The 360 has a very nice graphics card and comparable specs but the ps3 has been known to be about 3 times more powerful since they were released. IT was always questioned whether the software would take advantage of which. That i agree with is it comes down to software and how much developers can get out of the hardware or are willing to, but we are starting to see some of that. There is so much that goes into it ultimately from marketing to development tools to everything in between, and those are just specs. But from a flat computational power perspective the ps3 is a more powerful system. That is known. Blu-Ray is also a more advanced media technology. The cell also has 7 or 8 mini processors i believe vs the 360's 3 cores which allows the developers to do more if utilized correctly.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying. We are starting to see that. Keep laughing dude, because I'm right. Ultimately it depends on the developers but we are starting to see what the ps3 is capable of.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying. We are starting to see that. Keep laughing dude, because I'm right. Ultimately it depends on the developers but we are starting to see what the ps3 is capable of.

piercetruth34

You don't explain why it has the capabilities to push these graphics though, you seem to taper of the argument when you get close to anything technical.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

How is that? Because people like to say what people want to hear and just say the fair thing because it's not worth upsetting anyone? The ps3 is a more powerful or advanced system from a technology and computational standpoint. These things have already been stated and were stated when it was first released. It took a while to take advantage of it because the system was vying for software against microsoft which is not an easy task, but we are starting to see games now that take advantage of it and games that were developed specifically for the hardware. IT just took a while.

I would have to write a book and I'm not going to do that now. People wrote articles on this man. Read any technology site like anandtech or whoever and they will breakdown the hardware for you. The ps3 has a better media player and a more powerful cpu from a computational standpoint. The 360 has a very nice graphics card and comparable specs but the ps3 has been known to be about 3 times more powerful since they were released. IT was always questioned whether the software would take advantage of which. That i agree with is it comes down to software and how much developers can get out of the hardware or are willing to, but we are starting to see some of that. There is so much that goes into it ultimately from marketing to development tools to everything in between, and those are just specs. But from a flat computational power perspective the ps3 is a more powerful system. That is known. Blu-Ray is also a more advanced media technology. The cell also has 7 or 8 mini processors i believe vs the 360's 3 cores which allows the developers to do more if utilized correctly.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying.

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

[QUOTE="kingtito"] How is it more powerful? Please explain in full detail kingtito

I would have to write a book and I'm not going to do that now. People wrote articles on this man. Read any technology site like anandtech or whoever and they will breakdown the hardware for you. The ps3 has a better media player and a more powerful cpu from a computational standpoint. The 360 has a very nice graphics card and comparable specs but the ps3 has been known to be about 3 times more powerful since they were released. IT was always questioned whether the software would take advantage of which. That i agree with is it comes down to software and how much developers can get out of the hardware or are willing to, but we are starting to see some of that. There is so much that goes into it ultimately from marketing to development tools to everything in between, and those are just specs. But from a flat computational power perspective the ps3 is a more powerful system. That is known. Blu-Ray is also a more advanced media technology. The cell also has 7 or 8 mini processors i believe vs the 360's 3 cores which allows the developers to do more if utilized correctly.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying.

YEs and there are reasons why that can change in the real world once developers have the tools to take advantage of it. From a flat computational standpoint the ps3 is the more powerful system by a good margain. I'm not saying that has changed completely and microsoft isnt stupid and will find ways to get more out of the 360. It's a powerful system in it's own right and certain things can be masked, but the ps3 is more powerful and well designed system. The ps2 really started showing what it was capable of well after it was considered dead for the same reasons and had a ton of longevity to it. The 360 is a well designed system but it's not of the same blueprint and was not designed taking certain things into account. It will be fine and do well, but I think you will see some developers start to go the ps3's way.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

I would have to write a book and I'm not going to do that now. People wrote articles on this man. Read any technology site like anandtech or whoever and they will breakdown the hardware for you. The ps3 has a better media player and a more powerful cpu from a computational standpoint. The 360 has a very nice graphics card and comparable specs but the ps3 has been known to be about 3 times more powerful since they were released. IT was always questioned whether the software would take advantage of which. That i agree with is it comes down to software and how much developers can get out of the hardware or are willing to, but we are starting to see some of that. There is so much that goes into it ultimately from marketing to development tools to everything in between, and those are just specs. But from a flat computational power perspective the ps3 is a more powerful system. That is known. Blu-Ray is also a more advanced media technology. The cell also has 7 or 8 mini processors i believe vs the 360's 3 cores which allows the developers to do more if utilized correctly.

The 360 can push some amazing graphics because of it's gpu but underneath the ps3 has the capabilities to do much more with those graphics and that's what I'm saying.

piercetruth34

YEs and there are reasons why that can change in the real world once developers have the tools to take advantage of it. From a flat computational standpoint the ps3 is the more powerful system by a good margain. I'm not saying that has changed completely and microsoft isnt stupid and will find ways to get more out of the 360. It's a powerful system in it's own right and certain things can be masked, but the ps3 is more powerful and well designed system. The ps2 really started showing what it was capable of well after it was considered dead for the same reasons and had a ton of longevity to it. The 360 is a well designed system but it's not of the same blueprint and was not designed taking certain things into account. It will be fine and do well, but I think you will see some developers start to go the ps3's way.

Your evidence seems mostly anecdotal, just because you say it doesn't make it true, all you are doing is giving them more firepower in the end. You've given no reasoning, just what you believe, and that doesn;t make it true.

Both systems are even, and are capable of very similar in terms of game quality.

Until I have proof to the contrary.

The 360 has screen tearing on almost every game and you can see it struggle especially when alot is going on screen. It very chopy were as the PS3 is very smooth with little framerate issues and almost no screen tearing at all. To me when i play the 360 then i play my PS3 its night and day diffrence in output quallity. Thers nothing to argue about really if you know anything about how electronics work then you would know if coded right there is way more power to be worked with on 1 PPE and 6 SPEs than 3 PPEs on the 360 its simple math.djsifer01

Exactly that's why i used mass effect or any other good looking game on the 360 as an example. There is popin and framerate issues in any of these games where you dont see this stuff in games that were designed right using the cell and its spes. Mass effect is a great example imo b ecase its very noticeable at the end when there is a ton of stuff going on on screen and the 360 falters. The ps3 is capable of so much more and if you look at these gmaes and play both systems its night and day like you say. It's not even a debate really at this point. People denying this are exactly that, in denial at this point. The 360 struggles when there is a lot going on and certain things need to be integrated seamlessly from video to media to graphics. Yes the picture itself looks good but it doesnt all come together as well. There is no way the 360 could do killzone or mlb 09 and if they did they would have to dumb it down quite a bit or it would be a chopfest because the hardware wouldnt be able to handle it. It's simple math like you say and doesnt take a hardware guru or cs major to explain this stuff. Just look at the games. I'm not picking on the 360 either. I think it's an outstanding system with outstanding games. But the ps3 is starting to show it's advantages. Take mlb 2k9 for example. This is a game that was designed for both systems. It looks good at face value but if you play it you'll notice the hiccups and dumbed down AI. MLB The Show on the other hand is designed using the ps3's hardware and is a much more seamless and fluid game and also trounces all over 2k9 from an AI perspective. 2k tried to up the graphics to compete which they did at face value but it can't compare as a complete package because it was not designed for superior hardware.

The 360 has screen tearing on almost every game and you can see it struggle especially when alot is going on screen. It very chopy were as the PS3 is very smooth with little framerate issues and almost no screen tearing at all. To me when i play the 360 then i play my PS3 its night and day diffrence in output quallity. Thers nothing to argue about really if you know anything about how electronics work then you would know if coded right there is way more power to be worked with on 1 PPE and 6 SPEs than 3 PPEs on the 360 its simple math.djsifer01

[QUOTE="djsifer01"]The 360 has screen tearing on almost every game and you can see it struggle especially when alot is going on screen. It very chopy were as the PS3 is very smooth with little framerate issues and almost no screen tearing at all. To me when i play the 360 then i play my PS3 its night and day diffrence in output quallity. Thers nothing to argue about really if you know anything about how electronics work then you would know if coded right there is way more power to be worked with on 1 PPE and 6 SPEs than 3 PPEs on the 360 its simple math.T-Aldous

What do you expect IBM to say? They are selling both processors. Do you really expect them to say one is better than the other? That would be a marketing nightmare and business suicide considering Microsoft spent money to put their cpu in their machine. Do you really believe what IBM says dude? Are you really that naive? The Cell when it was originally marketed was their flagship processor. The 360 processor was marketed a step below. And no that both are in the two leading consoles they aren't going to say ****. Microsoft would never work with IBM again if they were going around telling everyone the ps3 has a better processor. If you notice how things are worded they say the xbox has a more than sufficient by todays standards to do amazing things as far as developers are concerned but when pure power and computational power is discussed the cell is a more powerful processor. It was IBM's flagship processor when it was put in the ps3.

The 360 has screen tearing on almost every game and you can see it struggle especially when alot is going on screen. It very chopy were as the PS3 is very smooth with little framerate issues and almost no screen tearing at all. To me when i play the 360 then i play my PS3 its night and day diffrence in output quallity. Thers nothing to argue about really if you know anything about how electronics work then you would know if coded right there is way more power to be worked with on 1 PPE and 6 SPEs than 3 PPEs on the 360 its simple math.djsifer01

This entire post is full of lies. Go check out eurogamer comparisons 360 vs PS3 faceoff round 1- 13.

360 games run better with less slowdown, use higher resolutions and have more texture detail than PS3 games. You fanboys need to stop coming up with this nonsense. If KIllzone were made on 360 everyone of you PS3 fanboys know it would run better and at higher resolutions.

[QUOTE="djsifer01"]The 360 has screen tearing on almost every game and you can see it struggle especially when alot is going on screen. It very chopy were as the PS3 is very smooth with little framerate issues and almost no screen tearing at all. To me when i play the 360 then i play my PS3 its night and day diffrence in output quallity. Thers nothing to argue about really if you know anything about how electronics work then you would know if coded right there is way more power to be worked with on 1 PPE and 6 SPEs than 3 PPEs on the 360 its simple math.EG101

This entire post is full of lies. Go check out eurogamer comparisons 360 vs PS3 faceoff round 1- 13.

360 games run better with less slowdown, use higher resolutions and have more texture detail than PS3 games. You fanboys need to stop coming up with this nonsense. If KIllzone were made on 360 everyone of you PS3 fanboys know it would run better and at higher resolutions.

It has nothing to do with being a fanboy. I had a 360 for 3 years and had no problems with it, but I'm looking at what is in front of me. I agree multiplats dont always run as well on the ps3 because it's a different architecture and most games are designed using a more traditional architecture especially when those games are designed to be able to play on multiple systems. But when games are designed for the ps3 it shows that it can do more. MGSIV, Killzone 2 and MLB The Show 09 show this. There was a recent article about how the 360 has already maxed its potential where they are just cracking the 50% barrier on the ps3 and there are reasons for that. They are two very different designs. The 360 was more based on what developers need and ease of development considering the time. It's like a pc vs a mac. I'm nto saying the 360 cant do some amazing things but it's ceiling isn't close.

Look at the specs of what is in each system. These are facts. Blu-Ray, the cell are potentially more powerful. We are starting to see that potential. The 360's xenon processor is perfectly fine for traditional processing and general processing functions, and is actually more powerful from a traditional design perspective, but the spes in the cell give it a lot more flexibility and range of ceiling if utilized correctly. Couple this with blu-ray and faster memory and this is why you are starting to see certain games chug on the 360 when there is a lot going on on screen.

The developer of red faction which has a lot of destructible environments stated they maxed out the 360 and couldnt even add another car on screen because of everything that was computing on screen. This is where the cell is at an advantage plus it has a better media player which can stream certain things seamlessly If you play mlb the show you'll notice the crowd and mascots and such are video like and life like, and so are the player models, because the ps3 can stream video functions like this better. The 360 wouldnt be able to do those things because the dvd drive and processor doesnt have the capacity. The 360 has a higher cache to offset some of these functions but you are going to run into bandwith issues because you are caching too much. The ps3 has quicker memory and a larger capacity plus it has several spes to handle each function so you arent running into the same bandwith issues. From a pure processing perspective the 360 is nice. But you are also taxing the cpu a lot more because of this.

I agree with you that the 360 has a ton of power at its core, but it's a design thing and a matter of selling developers on a direction and how games are designed. IMO, the ps3 is more forward thinking because of this. Yeah from a traditional design and how we've seen games developed the 360 is better and will output more power because of its 3 cores but if you design games taking into account the additional spe's along with better media and ability to output this stuff in raw digital form at 1080p the ps3 is capable of a lot more. Sony when it was marketing it's system talked a lot about being able to stream digital video and this is what they were talking about. Not just being able to watch movies but being able to integrate these aspects into games as well. A lot of what you see in games as far as player models are digitally captured things that can now be manipulated with a processor, so you will start to see more lifelike things on the ps3. This is the future imo.... Instead of having a cpu and gpu computing and outputting computer graphics and taxing the system, you will start to see these processors manipulating actual footage. In time the ps3's architecture is going to win out because it's not only going to be less taxing on the cpu, it's also going to be easier for developers to develop for.

This is why you've seen games shine on the 360 the first couple of years because it's really come down to a battle of gpu's because this is how games are being and have been developed to process as much graphics as possible but that is going to change. The ps3 is actually able to output a lot more. The 360 is already hitting it's peak and is actually becoming a dated design, and the ps3 is starting to shine. There is no way killzone 2 could be done on the 360 without being dumbed down. I also think FF they are going to take certain things out and dumb things down because it's now on the 360 and microsoft probably paid square to do this so it will look just as good, which is a shame. This is where microsoft can be sleazy and square is just as bad. I dont think FF as it was being designed from a video perspective would have been able to flow as seamlessly on the 360 as it was originally designed. I think FF is going to be dumbed down and ti wouldnt surprise me if certain aspects of the game are taken out that don't run right on the 360.

Sold my 360 and got a ps3 the other day. I had done the same thing a year ago and wasnt completely wow'd by it so i returned it. This time I feel differently. I got Killzone 2 and MLb the show and these are two games i feel couldnt be done on the 360. There just is a lot more going on under the hood and i can feel the power of the cell starting to take over.

piercetruth34

I think FF is going to be dumbed down and ti wouldnt surprise me if certain aspects of the game are taken out that don't run right on the 360.piercetruth34

There is no way killzone 2 could be done on the 360 without being dumbed down. piercetruth34

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]There is no way killzone 2 could be done on the 360 without being dumbed down. IronBass

There isn't a way to prove the contrary either. That is, a 360 version of killzone 2 would run the same as the PS3 version, because its not going to happen. I don't get why all these sort of 'ideally' arguments still exist either.

I don't get why all these sort of 'ideally' arguments still exist either.PSdual_wielder

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"] I think FF is going to be dumbed down and ti wouldnt surprise me if certain aspects of the game are taken out that don't run right on the 360.IronBass

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]Killzone 2 maybe, but a baseball game? How technically impressive can that really be?Nonstop-Madness

[QUOTE="PSdual_wielder"] I don't get why all these sort of 'ideally' arguments still exist either.IronBass

Me being the 1% I guess...

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="piercetruth34"] I think FF is going to be dumbed down and ti wouldnt surprise me if certain aspects of the game are taken out that don't run right on the 360.FlyingArmbar

Stop using the fanboy card lol. I told you guys I'm not a fanboy.. I like the 360 I just think the ps3 is more powerful. If you aren't please explain to me why Mass Effect one of the better 360 games chugs horribly when there is a lot of stuff going on. And don't use the developer argument either because Bioware is one of the best developers there is and develops games specifically to take advantage of hte 360. The fact of the matter is bioware developed the game and the 360 couldnt handle it. This is a game released during the systems second cycle. You'd need a high end pc for it to play the way it should the way it was originally developed. Also explain to me why games like Killzone 2 runs flawlessly from start to end when it is a much more graphically intensive game than mass effect. Also explain why we havent seen a huge jump in graphics on the 360 in quite some time? Why doesnt gears 2 look that much better than gears 1? Sure they cleaned some things up but there hasnt been a huge jump in graphics for any of the exclusives. If you look at the new halo shot it isnt a jump in graphics. It's because the 360 is pretty much maxed out. Orginally the ps3 had uncharted and mgsiv came out that were a jump in graphics. but multiplats still were better on the 360 and i already explained why. Uncharted was supposedly usig 25% of the ps3's cpu and now you have killzone 2 come out that's using over 50%. I would guess MLB the SHow is the same. LBP is also a nice looking game. Look at these games and tell me they dont look and do things better than anything on the 360. If you say otherwise you are blind or a fanboy. If you notice games like star ocean coming out arent a jump in graphics for the 360 because it's pretty much maxed out. There is nothing on the horizon that is a jump in graphics. Whereas the ps3 there is..... Yeah it's only 4 or 5 games but it used to be just 1 or 2 but there is a trend developing here. Now there are about 5 and they are going to continue to get better where the 360 has reached it's peak.

Stop using the fanboy card lol. I told you guys I'm not a fanboy.. I like the 360 I just think the ps3 is more powerful. If you aren't please explain to me why Mass Effect one of the better 360 games chugs horribly when there is a lot of stuff going on. And don't use the developer argument either because Bioware is one of the best developers there is and develops games specifically to take advantage of hte 360. The fact of the matter is bioware developed the game and the 360 couldnt handle it. You'd need a high end pc for it to play the way it should the way it was originally developed. Also explain to me why games like Killzone 2 runs flawlessly from start to end when it is a much more graphically intensive game than mass effect. Also explain why we havent seen a huge jump in graphics on the 360 in quite some time? Why doesnt gears 2 look that much better than gears 1? Sure they cleaned some things up but there hasnt been a huge jump in graphics for any of the exclusives. If you look at the new halo shot it isnt a jump in graphics. It's because the 360 is pretty much maxed out. Orginally the ps3 had uncharted and mgsiv came out that were somewhat of a jump in graphics. but multiplats still were better on the 360 and i already explained why. Uncharted was supposedly usig 25% of the ps3's cpu and now you have killzone 2 come out that's using over 50%. I would guess MLB the SHow is the same. LBP is also a nice looking game. Look at these games and tell me they dont look and do things better than anything on the 360. If you say otherwise you are blind or a fanboy. If you notice games like star ocean coming out arent a jump in graphics for the 360 because it's pretty much maxed out. There is nothing on the horizon that is a jump in graphics. Whereas the ps3 there is..... Yeah it's only 4 or 5 games but it used to be just 1 or 2 but there is a trend developing here. Now there are about 5 and they are going to continue to get better where the 360 has reached it's peak.

piercetruth34

Look at the God of War demo and tell me the 360 could do that. IF you think it can you are a liar. I'm not saying the 360 won't have good games and play to it's strengths but it can't do certain things that the ps3 can. I don't think there will be a huge difference between the systems and the 360 will continue to be good, but the latest batch of games have proved that the ps3 can do things the 360 can't. GAmes like GTA IV, Fallout 3 and Red Faction are as good as it will get graphically on the 360. These are amazing looking games with a lot going on under the hood, but don't expect better is all I'm saying. I'm not saying the 360 is dead here. It's way too good a system for that and microsoft is a lot smarter than that. But it is maxed in certain regards and can't do certain things that I've tried to explain already..

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]

Stop using the fanboy card lol. I told you guys I'm not a fanboy.. I like the 360 I just think the ps3 is more powerful. If you aren't please explain to me why Mass Effect one of the better 360 games chugs horribly when there is a lot of stuff going on. And don't use the developer argument either because Bioware is one of the best developers there is and develops games specifically to take advantage of hte 360. The fact of the matter is bioware developed the game and the 360 couldnt handle it. You'd need a high end pc for it to play the way it should the way it was originally developed. Also explain to me why games like Killzone 2 runs flawlessly from start to end when it is a much more graphically intensive game than mass effect. Also explain why we havent seen a huge jump in graphics on the 360 in quite some time? Why doesnt gears 2 look that much better than gears 1? Sure they cleaned some things up but there hasnt been a huge jump in graphics for any of the exclusives. If you look at the new halo shot it isnt a jump in graphics. It's because the 360 is pretty much maxed out. Orginally the ps3 had uncharted and mgsiv came out that were somewhat of a jump in graphics. but multiplats still were better on the 360 and i already explained why. Uncharted was supposedly usig 25% of the ps3's cpu and now you have killzone 2 come out that's using over 50%. I would guess MLB the SHow is the same. LBP is also a nice looking game. Look at these games and tell me they dont look and do things better than anything on the 360. If you say otherwise you are blind or a fanboy. If you notice games like star ocean coming out arent a jump in graphics for the 360 because it's pretty much maxed out. There is nothing on the horizon that is a jump in graphics. Whereas the ps3 there is..... Yeah it's only 4 or 5 games but it used to be just 1 or 2 but there is a trend developing here. Now there are about 5 and they are going to continue to get better where the 360 has reached it's peak.

FlyingArmbar

So what you are saying is the people who developed Killzone 2 are better developers than Bioware, because it runs flawlessly and that was bioware's fault? For some reason I have a hard time believing that.

Look at the God of War demo and tell me the 360 could do that. piercetruth34

[QUOTE="piercetruth34"]Look at the God of War demo and tell me the 360 could do that. IronBass

The Fact it's on the ps3 and not on the 360 proves it. I haven't seen anything that looks that good on the 360 have you? If you have then you'd have a point. But it's been proven wrong.

The Fact it's on the ps3 and not on the 360 proves it. piercetruth34

Look at this trailer dude in HD. It has everything i've been talking about from integrating realtime cutscenes to gameplay seamlessly all in realtime. The 360 can't do that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiFtG_-dh3w