Is it safe to assume X360 > PS3 in terms of graphics capabilities?

Why would it score lower?????? Is the story different? Are the voice actors different? Are the boss fight different? No, no, and no. Its either because it looks worse or runs worse, both tied to graphics and a lack of good design.PoppaGamer

The Xbox 360 has a superior GPU and better memory architecture which leads to better graphics. Those amazing-looking PS3 exclusives that PS3-fans love to point out would probably look better if they'd been done on the Xbox 360.

UnnDunn

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"]Why would it score lower?????? Is the story different? Are the voice actors different? Are the boss fight different? No, no, and no. Its either because it looks worse or runs worse, both tied to graphics and a lack of good design.Stevo_the_gamer

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/screenshots/original/2009/03/Ghostbusters_01.jpg

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"]Why would it score lower?????? Is the story different? Are the voice actors different? Are the boss fight different? No, no, and no. Its either because it looks worse or runs worse, both tied to graphics and a lack of good design.PoppaGamer

Not really since we all know PC is like probably the easiest platform to dev games for. Also, only an uneducated person would say the lack of MP in a game like Ghostbusters is due to hardware more so than dev laziness or inability.

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]:| PC version is lacking multiplayer while the PS3 and Xbox 360 version both have it. It lost points because of value.

Not really since we all know PC is like probably the easiest platform to dev games for. Also, only an uneducated person would say the lack of MP in a game like Ghostbusters is due to hardware more so than dev laziness or inability.

No it's never safe to assume that. You'll get your limbs torn off by cows.

since multiplats seem to be the only objective factors in graphics comparison... do you think its safe to assume; X360 fans have the most powerful console graphically this generation?

or you still believe dev needs more time with the PS3 even this late in the generation?

Mystery_Writer

Look Casey..er, Mystery Writer, it would be safe to say, IF we never saw Uncharted, MGS4, OR KZ2 for starters.

The PS3 is VERY Capable, but it's HARD to exploit. It doesn't matter is it's been out for a little over TWO Years, as if it's a DEV's first game, it's their first game.

Like Terminal's GHOSTBUSTERS, it was their first PS3 game and they screwed the pooch.

Who the heck said MULTIPLATS would EVER be the ONLY objective factor in a graphics comparison, you?

Develepers that really harnass a console, and don't use the LCD, will always EXCELL whether it be 360, PC, Wii, or PS3. No matter how bad a multiplat will look, it won't change the fact that very same console has great games.

Just because Hannah Montana looks better on CONSOLE A, doesn't mean anytyhing. GeoW, KZ2, Uncharted, Kameo, Ratchet...these are the games that are going to get pointed at.

You mean ghostbusters the video game is the key example of xbox 360 > ps3. I mean there aren't just better multiplat games (I mean ea, and activision, ubisoft are some examples) that show how great the graphics are. Go with far cry 2, dead space, or other games which are the exact same. The only major game that was different was fallout 3, and even that didn't have noticeable graphical differences (except tehre were crazy glitches I heard in the ps3 version).

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"] Lok slike I just got "teh owned" :0 Follow me here, though. If you had a PS3/360 multiplat where the 360 version got the MP and PS3 didn't, you don't think people would be claiming it had to do with how tough the PS3 is to make games on? Therefore, couldn't I make the same argument about Ghostbusters and the PC? (just playing devil's advocate)PoppaGamer

Not really since we all know PC is like probably the easiest platform to dev games for. Also, only an uneducated person would say the lack of MP in a game like Ghostbusters is due to hardware more so than dev laziness or inability.

No because like I said, PC is the easiest platform to develop for, its just fact in this case, arguing otherwise like in your Ghostbusters example is just plain wrong. If a PS3 game has MP for example and a 360 game doesn't, it is also most likely do to laziness/ developer incompetence and not hardware though it would be easier to argue your point since the 2 excell at different things. As for comparing exclusives, yeah you can, but it comes down to opinion when you are comparing something like Uncharted to Gears 2, its a matter of preference not undeniable fact. And again, while the PS3 exclusives look better, people are getting carried away. You guys act like in a 7+ year gen, the 360 will never be able to match what the PS3 has now, to which I am baffled. The difference in exclusives is not that much people. The games aren't even hitting there 2005-2006 target renders and yet you have people trying to say the 360 is maxed and the PS3 is just getting started? Its ridiculous honestly.

No it's never safe to assume that. You'll get your limbs torn off by cows.

OreoMilkshake

The best looking games (Minus PC obviously) are PS3 exclusive. I've yet to see a multiplat on either system that out does them. Use the "multiplats look better on 360" card all you want. PS3 still has the best looking game. Ps3>360 dr-venkman

[QUOTE="dr-venkman"]The best looking games (Minus PC obviously) are PS3 exclusive. I've yet to see a multiplat on either system that out does them. Use the "multiplats look better on 360" card all you want. PS3 still has the best looking game. Ps3>360 nhh18

Yes, it is, but it wasn't a HUGE upgrade from GeoW1, at all. No matter how you spin it, right now KZ2 is the Console Graphics King, before that was GeoW2/Uncharted.

As for comparing exclusives, yeah you can, but it comes down to opinion when you are comparing something like Uncharted to Gears 2, its a matter of preference not undeniable fact. And again, while the PS3 exclusives look better, people are getting carried away. You guys act like in a 7+ year gen, the 360 will never be able to match what the PS3 has now, to which I am baffled. The difference in exclusives is not that much people. The games aren't even hitting there 2005-2006 target renders and yet you have people trying to say the 360 is maxed and the PS3 is just getting started? Its ridiculous honestly.

ActicEdge

Really. Are you telling me that someone ediucated in game design and code couldn't tell you which one is harder to produce? That they couldn't tell you which one has the biggest draw on power? I find that VERY hard to believe.

Whats this "you guys" crap?

You make good points to the end but still have a fanboy spin on it. There is a good chance 360 could catch up. But there's a better chance the later console, the one with less time in many dev's hands, will be able to pull out further. And yes, the differences are minimal. So, why aren't more people realizing that instead of claiming soem 360 win with multiplats? And one your last statement (second to last sentence), you could flip the 360 and PS3 to make the same point.

[QUOTE="nhh18"]

[QUOTE="dr-venkman"]The best looking games (Minus PC obviously) are PS3 exclusive. I've yet to see a multiplat on either system that out does them. Use the "multiplats look better on 360" card all you want. PS3 still has the best looking game. Ps3>360 SolidTy

Yes, it is, but it wasn't a HUGE upgrade from GeoW1, at all. No matter how you spin it, right now KZ2 is the Console Graphics King, before that was GeoW2/Uncharted.

[QUOTE="nhh18"]

[QUOTE="dr-venkman"]The best looking games (Minus PC obviously) are PS3 exclusive. I've yet to see a multiplat on either system that out does them. Use the "multiplats look better on 360" card all you want. PS3 still has the best looking game. Ps3>360 SolidTy

Yes, it is, but it wasn't a HUGE upgrade from GeoW1, at all. No matter how you spin it, right now KZ2 is the Console Graphics King, before that was GeoW2/Uncharted.

Resistance 2 is the PS3 graphics showcase, not KZ2. The 360 can do equal graphics to the PS3, I've seen nothing yet on the PS3 that is superior.

I have seen awesome character models etc, however, it's always at the cost of ground textures or building textures and other details. GT5P has great car models, but the courses look rubbish. The Devs so far for 360 games seem to balance it all better.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="nhh18"]Geow2 is a very good looking game graphically.

SgtWhiskeyjack

Yes, it is, but it wasn't a HUGE upgrade from GeoW1, at all. No matter how you spin it, right now KZ2 is the Console Graphics King, before that was GeoW2/Uncharted.

Resistance 2 is the PS3 graphics showcase, not KZ2. The 360 can do equal graphics to the PS3, I've seen nothing yet on the PS3 that is superior.

I have seen awesome character models etc, however, it's always at the cost of ground textures or building textures and other details. GT5P has great car models, but the courses look rubbish. The Devs so far for 360 games seem to balance it all better.

Actually. Killzone 2 Multiplaer maps are better looking than any game this gen also.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]As for comparing exclusives, yeah you can, but it comes down to opinion when you are comparing something like Uncharted to Gears 2, its a matter of preference not undeniable fact. And again, while the PS3 exclusives look better, people are getting carried away. You guys act like in a 7+ year gen, the 360 will never be able to match what the PS3 has now, to which I am baffled. The difference in exclusives is not that much people. The games aren't even hitting there 2005-2006 target renders and yet you have people trying to say the 360 is maxed and the PS3 is just getting started? Its ridiculous honestly.

PoppaGamer

Really. Are you telling me that someone ediucated in game design and code couldn't tell you which one is harder to produce? That they couldn't tell you which one has the biggest draw on power? I find that VERY hard to believe.

Whats this "you guys" crap?

You make good points to the end but still have a fanboy spin on it. There is a good chance 360 could catch up. But there's a better chance the later console, the one with less time in many dev's hands, will be able to pull out further. And yes, the differences are minimal. So, why aren't more people realizing that instead of claiming soem 360 win with multiplats? And one your last statement (second to last sentence), you could flip the 360 and PS3 to make the same point.

Dude, code improves over time and unless these so called industry professionals are opening up these games and analyzing code (and can prove their credibility)I don't see why anyone cares about what they have to say. They have been wrong SO many times, I don't see why people trust them.

The "you guys" crap is me refering to people who say the same stupid argument over and over, you don't have to be part of that group if you don't consider yourself part of it. I wasn't trying to refer to you indivdually but rather the whole stupid SW mindset. As far as the, "there is a good chance the 360 could pull ahead" comment goes.where did I say that? All I said its ridiculous how people think MGS4 wouldn't run on the 360 and similar statements half way through the gen, I made no prediction about which one will have the best graphics in the future, I'm not physic. The last statement was not meant as a knock to the PS3 either, what I was saying is neither console has even hit their old target renders in terms of graphics yet, why do people think either is maxed. (I should have used either instead of the way I posted it though it went better with my theme.

I expected that my post would come across as fanboyish but my point stands. The difference in these titles graphics is not enough for us to be arguing about and yes, multiplats like Ghostbusters are a weak form of ownage.

Stop worrying about console differences and play the PC versions.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="pitty8982"]

they could look graphically better, but they'd also have less stuff computed at the same time, so they'd need to cut things out here and there.

pitty8982

why is that? (logical / factual explanation plz)

Well, weaker Cpu, you need to cut things out. Ps3 is capable of making a lot of stuff happen at one time, while the Xbox 360's CPU would not be able to process all that stuff. So, the best example is Killzone 2, with the xbox 360 you'd need to make less things happen at one time in order to carry all that data.
For example, you'd have 300 things going on at the same time on Ps3, but 200 on 360, because the cpu is weaker so it can handle less than the ps3's.

I don't know if you remember Resident Evil 4 on gamecube. It could handle way more than what the ps2 could do, so the devs had to cut things out in order to find the right compromise for the ps2's hardware.

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

[QUOTE="pitty8982"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

why is that? (logical / factual explanation plz)

Camer999

Well, weaker Cpu, you need to cut things out. Ps3 is capable of making a lot of stuff happen at one time, while the Xbox 360's CPU would not be able to process all that stuff. So, the best example is Killzone 2, with the xbox 360 you'd need to make less things happen at one time in order to carry all that data.
For example, you'd have 300 things going on at the same time on Ps3, but 200 on 360, because the cpu is weaker so it can handle less than the ps3's.

I don't know if you remember Resident Evil 4 on gamecube. It could handle way more than what the ps2 could do, so the devs had to cut things out in order to find the right compromise for the ps2's hardware.

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

Its one game, its hardly enough to star using as the common instead of the exception. Not that I agree with the guy in the first place but still.

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

Camer999

Who reads Eurogamer?

Okay, so Explain RF?

VOLITION, the Developer. That's it. Ask Volition.

It shouldn't take time to understand and exploit Sony's PS3, but it does.

Why don't you guys understand it's the Devs not being good with Sony's complicated machine? Sure, it's Sony's fault for making it hard to exploit, but when asking about a product, you ask the Devs.

Stop worrying about console differences and play the PC versions.

Nokanhav

No thank you, I'd prefer to play on a console where it has a much better chance of actually working.

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

SolidTy

Who reads Eurogamer?

Okay, so Explain RF?

VOLITION, the Developer. That's it. It was VOLITION's first game on PS3.

Why don't you guys understand it's the Devs not being good with Sony's complicated machine? Sure, it's Sony's fault for making it hard to exploit, but when asking about a product, you ask the Devs.

Sounded way too mean :(.

It mostly has better looking multiplats but I also agree that some of the 1st party PS3 games are more visually impressive than anything else on both consoles, so I'd say it's too close to assume anything.Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="pitty8982"]

Well, weaker Cpu, you need to cut things out. Ps3 is capable of making a lot of stuff happen at one time, while the Xbox 360's CPU would not be able to process all that stuff. So, the best example is Killzone 2, with the xbox 360 you'd need to make less things happen at one time in order to carry all that data.
For example, you'd have 300 things going on at the same time on Ps3, but 200 on 360, because the cpu is weaker so it can handle less than the ps3's.

I don't know if you remember Resident Evil 4 on gamecube. It could handle way more than what the ps2 could do, so the devs had to cut things out in order to find the right compromise for the ps2's hardware.

ActicEdge

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

Its one game, its hardly enough to star using as the common instead of the exception. Not that I agree with the guy in the first place but still.

THat is a game that looks like is takes the most processing from the CPU right now, and it runs fine on the 360, if that game runs fine on the 360, slightly better infact, why should a different game make a difference.

Best Looking Games By genre on Consoles: FPS: Killzone 2 TPS: RE5 Racing: GT5: P RPG: Mass Effect Platforming: Ratchet and Clank Fighting: Street Fighter 4 Sandbox: GTAIV Action/Adventure: Uncharted Best Over-all looking game, Killzone 2. Best looking upcoming 2009 title, Uncharted 2. Its better not to assume, the PS3 definitely has the edge.Adrian_Cloud

Conviction looks just as good as UC and Alan wake will be the best looking upcoming game and FM3>GT5 visually. oh and sandbox= Farcry two arguably the best looking game this gen(for consoles)

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

Explain Red faction, they both have alot of stuff going on and the 360 has better texture and AA and the effects work slightly better, go read the PS3 vs. 360 comparison. (on eurogamer)

nhh18

Okay, so Explain RF?

VOLITION, the Developer. That's it. Ask Volition.

It shouldn't take time to understand and exploit Sony's PS3, but it does.

Why don't you guys understand it's the Devs not being good with Sony's complicated machine? Sure, it's Sony's fault for making it hard to exploit, but when asking about a product, you ask the Devs.

Sounded way too mean :(.

Yeah, Saint's Row, that's right. Well, whether it takes 20 games to learn to use the PS3 or 1, it's obvious that some Devs have issues. Not all Devs, like Criterion, but not all devs want to spend the resources either.

Best Looking Games By genre on Consoles: FPS: Killzone 2 TPS: RE5 Racing: GT5: P RPG: Mass Effect Platforming: Ratchet and Clank Fighting: Street Fighter 4 Sandbox: GTAIV Action/Adventure: Uncharted Best Over-all looking game, Killzone 2. Best looking upcoming 2009 title, Uncharted 2. Its better not to assume, the PS3 definitely has the edge.Adrian_Cloud

Also all PS3 best looking games= custom engine 360s= multiplatform, you guys get an arguably better result...

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]Best Looking Games By genre on Consoles: FPS: Killzone 2 TPS: RE5 Racing: GT5: P RPG: Mass Effect Platforming: Ratchet and Clank Fighting: Street Fighter 4 Sandbox: GTAIV Action/Adventure: Uncharted Best Over-all looking game, Killzone 2. Best looking upcoming 2009 title, Uncharted 2. Its better not to assume, the PS3 definitely has the edge.Camer999

Conviction looks just as good as UC and Alan wake will be the best looking upcoming game and FM3>GT5 visually. oh and sandbox= Farcry two arguably the best looking game this gen(for consoles)

[QUOTE="pitty8982"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"] i don't think he (or other ps3 fans) could actually come back and answer your question logically.

they could look graphically better, but they'd also have less stuff computed at the same time, so they'd need to cut things out here and there.

why is that? (logical / factual explanation plz)

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]Best Looking Games By genre on Consoles: FPS: Killzone 2 TPS: RE5 Racing: GT5: P RPG: Mass Effect Platforming: Ratchet and Clank Fighting: Street Fighter 4 Sandbox: GTAIV Action/Adventure: Uncharted Best Over-all looking game, Killzone 2. Best looking upcoming 2009 title, Uncharted 2. Its better not to assume, the PS3 definitely has the edge.Adrian_Cloud

Conviction looks just as good as UC and Alan wake will be the best looking upcoming game and FM3>GT5 visually. oh and sandbox= Farcry two arguably the best looking game this gen(for consoles)

yes it does, you got me there, How?, and wait till we get more screens and vids.

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"][QUOTE="Camer999"]

Conviction looks just as good as UC and Alan wake will be the best looking upcoming game and FM3>GT5 visually. oh and sandbox= Farcry two arguably the best looking game this gen(for consoles)

Camer999

yes it does, you got me there, How?, and wait till we get more screens and vids.

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"] No it does not, lol. :) FM3 and GT5 aren't out. GTAIV is more impressive than Farcry 2. Alan Wake best looking upcoming game? Not so much. Adrian_Cloud

yes it does, you got me there, How?, and wait till we get more screens and vids.

The comma are in response to your response(redundent lol) so I am talking about alan wake.

[QUOTE="shutdown_202"]

Not really.

So far, the best PS3 exclusive graphics looks better than the best Xbox exclusive. The best PS3 exclusive also looks better than the best multiplat out between the consoles. I would say that so far it would be better to assume the PS3>360 in graphics.

Mystery_Writer

Eh, I don't agree. Microsoft and it's infinite moneyhat could'nt make Halo look better than uncharted. And 360s best looking game doesn't look near as good as uncharted or MGS4. I do agree, however, that you should play the games for what they are. And most multiplats have such a negligable difference.

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"][QUOTE="Camer999"]

yes it does, you got me there, How?, and wait till we get more screens and vids.

Camer999

The comma are in response to your response(redundent lol) so I am talking about alan wake.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="shutdown_202"]

Not really.

So far, the best PS3 exclusive graphics looks better than the best Xbox exclusive. The best PS3 exclusive also looks better than the best multiplat out between the consoles. I would say that so far it would be better to assume the PS3>360 in graphics.

Cicatraz_ESP

Eh, I don't agree. Microsoft and it's infinite moneyhat could'nt make Halo look better than uncharted. And 360s best looking game doesn't look near as good as uncharted or MGS4. I do agree, however, that you should play the games for what they are. And most multiplats have such a negligable difference.

They did not put alot of money in the devlopment though, just because you have doesn't mean you use it. For example (this is coming from memory) epic used 10million on GEOW 1, so I doubt it is much more if not less for GEOW 2.

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"] wait till we get more screens and vids of what? Adrian_Cloud

The comma are in response to your response(redundent lol) so I am talking about alan wake.

All you saw was the darkest part of it, not the town just some random dark gameplay that the detail got kind-of lost in. Either way it is 36 by 36 square miles so..

Why are all of the 360 supporters saying that because it has a very slightly better GPU, it has better graphics? When there is no proof anywhere. However, the PS3 pulls of games like Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Uncharted 1 and Metal Gear Solid 4.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="pitty8982"]

they could look graphically better, but they'd also have less stuff computed at the same time, so they'd need to cut things out here and there.

pitty8982

why is that? (logical / factual explanation plz)

Well, weaker Cpu, you need to cut things out. Ps3 is capable of making a lot of stuff happen at one time, while the Xbox 360's CPU would not be able to process all that stuff. So, the best example is Killzone 2, with the xbox 360 you'd need to make less things happen at one time in order to carry all that data.
For example, you'd have 300 things going on at the same time on Ps3, but 200 on 360, because the cpu is weaker so it can handle less than the ps3's.

I don't know if you remember Resident Evil 4 on gamecube. It could handle way more than what the ps2 could do, so the devs had to cut things out in order to find the right compromise for the ps2's hardware.

anyone could claim and conclude anything if he/she doesn't have to back his/her claim with factual proof.

here, i could simply say; more objects on screen = more polygons, more shading, more textures, etc.., and due to X360 superior GPU and more efficient memory, more objects can be pushed at once into each frame.

How would you argue that if I don't have to present any factual proof to what I just said?

All what you're saying is you believe X360 won't be able to run Killzone 2 better than PS3. Which is debatable. And if I say, X360 can run Killzone 2 better than PS3, it would also be debatable.

Hence, the only objective measure for which console is more powerful graphically is multiplats.

The Xbox 360 has a superior GPU and better memory architecture which leads to better graphics. Those amazing-looking PS3 exclusives that PS3-fans love to point out would probably look better if they'd been done on the Xbox 360.

UnnDunn

Actually, I would argue that those "amazing" looking 360 exclusives would look far better on PS3.

Exclusives are the games that truely show a consoles graphical capabilities since they are built ground up for the platform. And since PS3 exclusive almost always tend to outperform 360 exclusives in terms of graphics its PS3>360 in graphics capabilities.

EVOLV3

Until 360 comes out with something to rival PS3's exclusives visually then you can start assuming. Uncharted, MGS4, Killzone 2, and of course Uncharted 2. Ratchet also looks amazing, sort of like a low-budget pixar movie.

I don't see it happening. 360's best bet for it is Alan Wake, and that's not looking to surpass anything ATM.

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Exclusives are the games that truely show a consoles graphical capabilities since they are built ground up for the platform. And since PS3 exclusive almost always tend to outperform 360 exclusives in terms of graphics its PS3>360 in graphics capabilities.

adman66

Too Human?