PS3 doesn't have any good looking open world games.

[QUOTE="darthogre"]LOL, and your proof that X360 has better looking open world games??? Let me guess Crackdown, bahahahahaha.spacesheikh

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"]Infamous actually looks better than RDR, and Infamous 2 from what we have seen looks like the best open world game on consolesAnjunaddict

lol certainly not

[QUOTE="spacesheikh"]

[QUOTE="darthogre"]LOL, and your proof that X360 has better looking open world games??? Let me guess Crackdown, bahahahahaha.metalgear-solid

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"] the 360 being easy to develop for does not make it equal to the power of the PS3, only games can prove that and from what we have seen so far no game on the 360 graphically looks better than Uncharted 2KevinButlerVP

Rage? A game doesn't have to be exclusive to have good graphics, you know.

*cough* Assassin's Creed 2*cough*

And inFamous is one of my favorite open world games this gen, but I will agree it doesn't look very good from a graphics standpoint.

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Plenty of games are easily in the same league as Uncharted 2 though, which is something a lot of PS3 owners seem to ignore. Only when a game comes out and completely annihilates it, it would seem, will PS3 owners stop using Uncharted 2 as some sort of barometer of the PS3's graphical power. The 360 and the PS3 are both equally inferior to the PC, and easily both in the same league in terms of graphics. Why some continue to argue that the PS3 is infinitely more powerful is beyond me. It's been five years and it still isn't producing anything significantly better than the 360. Is it not time to just admit that they're both about the same? waltefmoney

Rage? A game doesn't have to be exclusive to have good graphics, you know.

Well according to gamespot's own analysis, Oblivion looks better on PS3.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6171831/p-5.html

Assassin's Creed 1 and 2, Just Cause 2( the best looking open world game on consoles), Infamous 2 looks like it's going to be nice looking too. Lemmings...

/thread.

Well according to gamespot's own analysis, Oblivion looks better on PS3.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6171831/p-5.html

fun-da-mental

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"] still no game on the 360 graphically can match Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2, the proof is in the games not in how equal you say they areKevinButlerVP

Rage? A game doesn't have to be exclusive to have good graphics, you know.

Infamous actually looks better than Gears 2, and Infamous 2 from what we have seen looks like the best open world game on consolesKevinButlerVP

I hope you are joking! :|

Gears2 is one of the best looking console games, i can only see Uncharted2, KZ2 and RDR looking better than it. Theres dozens of exclusives on both consoles and multiplats looking better than InFamous...

[QUOTE="JohnF111"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

It has a few good looking open world games still not as good looking as 360´s ones.

Why? Because PS3 is not more powerfull than 360 :o They are about equal but 360 has the advantage of being easier to develop for....sounds simple to me!

KevinButlerVP

Yep, i agree! The fact 360 is as powerfull as PS3 doesnt have nothing to do with the fact it´s easier to develop for. It´s just just a bonus ;)

Also Uncharted2 is not that special anymore. It looks fantastic but not better than RDR on 360.

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"][QUOTE="JohnF111"] Exactly and i'm sure if you were to create a game you'd develop it using the xbox coding and then convert it to ps3 code or whatever the hell they do... But basically xbox is always going to win for multiplats until someone develops a multiplat natively for ps3 and ports it to xbox... Cell + Xenos = crap multiplats.PAL360

Yep, i agree! The fact 360 is as powerfull as PS3 doesnt have nothing to do with the fact it´s easier to develop for. It´s just just a bonus ;)

Also Uncharted2 is not that special anymore. It looks fantastic but not better than RDR on 360.

[QUOTE="fun-da-mental"]

Well according to gamespot's own analysis, Oblivion looks better on PS3.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6171831/p-5.html

Anjunaddict

But i think it still disapproves TCs point of '' PS3 doesn't have any good looking open world games. ''

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"]Infamous actually looks better than RDR, and Infamous 2 from what we have seen looks like the best open world game on consolesBus-A-Bus

lol certainly not

Hehe i just waited for someone to comment on that :D

:lol: @ draw distance

Infamous doesn't have very good draw distance but Uncharted 2 surely does. This debunks your claim that PS3 can't do better draw distance.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"] the 360 being easy to develop for does not make it equal to the power of the PS3, only games can prove that and from what we have seen so far no game on the 360 graphically looks better than Uncharted 21stPlaceWinner

Yep, i agree! The fact 360 is as powerfull as PS3 doesnt have nothing to do with the fact it´s easier to develop for. It´s just just a bonus ;)

Also Uncharted2 is not that special anymore. It looks fantastic but not better than RDR on 360.

Does he? I dont remember those exact words coming from him.

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

Yep, i agree! The fact 360 is as powerfull as PS3 doesnt have nothing to do with the fact it´s easier to develop for. It´s just just a bonus ;)

Also Uncharted2 is not that special anymore. It looks fantastic but not better than RDR on 360.

PAL360

Does he? I dont remember those exact words coming from him.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

lol certainly not

fun-da-mental

Hehe i just waited for someone to comment on that :D

:lol: @ draw distance

Infamous doesn't have very good draw distance but Uncharted 2 surely does. This debunks your claim that PS3 can't do better draw distance.

Well, RDR has those beautifull vistas and you can actually go everywhere!

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

lol certainly not

fun-da-mental

Hehe i just waited for someone to comment on that :D

:lol: @ draw distance

Infamous doesn't have very good draw distance but Uncharted 2 surely does. This debunks your claim that PS3 can't do better draw distance.

[QUOTE="KevinButlerVP"][QUOTE="JohnF111"] Exactly and i'm sure if you were to create a game you'd develop it using the xbox coding and then convert it to ps3 code or whatever the hell they do... But basically xbox is always going to win for multiplats until someone develops a multiplat natively for ps3 and ports it to xbox... Cell + Xenos = crap multiplats.PAL360

Yep, i agree! The fact 360 is as powerfull as PS3 doesnt have nothing to do with the fact it´s easier to develop for. It´s just just a bonus ;)

Also Uncharted2 is not that special anymore. It looks fantastic but not better than RDR on 360.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] but carmack said ps3 was more powerful1stPlaceWinner

Does he? I dont remember those exact words coming from him.

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

Yes because uncharted is story driven linear game, not every game has to be open world. Sure ND could make open world game if they wanted to and still manage to look great like uncharted:). Also, I am sure inFamous2 will look great or even better than some open world games currently out.

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

Does he? I dont remember those exact words coming from him.

PAL360

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] http://xbox360vsps3.org/2010/05/more-powerful-ps3-xbox-360-has-better-development-tools/ right here1stPlaceWinner

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

Indeed! Still we both know he said more than that.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] http://xbox360vsps3.org/2010/05/more-powerful-ps3-xbox-360-has-better-development-tools/ right here1stPlaceWinner

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

Carmack himself also said a month ago that he could make RAGE superior on ANY console but on ps3 they have to put much more effort to maintain 60fps.Not only that,he said that on anything strictly graphical 360 has edge over ps3.guess 360 is more powerful...

[QUOTE="genaroll"][QUOTE="fun-da-mental"]

Infamous doesn't have very good draw distance but Uncharted 2 surely does. This debunks your claim that PS3 can't do better draw distance.

Bus-A-Bus

Exactly.Everything in UC2 is just lod.Between those buildings there is nothing textured...there is no streets and you simply cant go there.While in GTA IV for example you get in heli and can go ANYWHERE in city and WHOLE city is visiable and rendered.

First, LOD is used is almost every game, including open world games. Secondly, the fact that you can go anywhere in the world is a mere gameplay choice and has little to do with graphics. The objects in uncharted screenshot above are also rendered as you move, they are 3d models, its not just a background image:)

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="genaroll"] Of course the distance will be high he is towering over everything.But in Uncharted you cant visit must of the places you see at anytime.fun-da-mental

Exactly.Everything in UC2 is just lod.Between those buildings there is nothing textured...there is no streets and you simply cant go there.While in GTA IV for example you get in heli and can go ANYWHERE in city and WHOLE city is visiable and rendered.

First, LOD is used is almost every game, including open world games. Secondly, the fact that you can go anywhere in the world is a mere gameplay choice and has little to do with graphics. The objects in uncharted screenshot above are also rendered as you move, they are 3d models, its not just a background image:)

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

Bus-A-Bus

Carmack himself also said a month ago that he could make RAGE superior on ANY console but on ps3 they have to put much more effort to maintain 60fps.Not only that,he said that on anything strictly graphical 360 has edge over ps3.guess 360 is more powerful...

By strictly graphical he probably means better GPU for graphics. As we all know, programming a game these days require more than just graphics, which involves I/O , sound, AI, physics etc. According to carmack himself, rendering graphics only accounts for 10% of game code:)

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="genaroll"] Of course the distance will be high he is towering over everything.But in Uncharted you cant visit must of the places you see at anytime.fun-da-mental

Exactly.Everything in UC2 is just lod.Between those buildings there is nothing textured...there is no streets and you simply cant go there.While in GTA IV for example you get in heli and can go ANYWHERE in city and WHOLE city is visiable and rendered.

First, LOD is used is almost every game, including open world games. Secondly, the fact that you can go anywhere in the world is a mere gameplay choice and has little to do with graphics. The objects in uncharted screenshot above are also rendered as you move, they are 3d models, its not just a background image:)

I know its not BUT just your saying that its just gameplay choice shows that you dont really have idea what you talk about.In open world games engine has predict EVERYTHING.You have thousends of choices to go and you cant store such textures as in UC2 in your main memory when you have open world game.In UC2 developers SCRIPTED everything.For example,lot of times when you have to climb on something you get help with that thus having longer time to do it BUT in that moment engine streams your next path.ND predicted everything,they put details and textures where they want,everything behind does not exist.Same cant be said for open world game...Not to talk about much less texture and asset types duo to much higher costs for open world games and such.

Anyway,the fact is UC2 would not look as good if it was open world game.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] all im saying is carmack himself said ps3 is more powerfulfun-da-mental

Carmack himself also said a month ago that he could make RAGE superior on ANY console but on ps3 they have to put much more effort to maintain 60fps.Not only that,he said that on anything strictly graphical 360 has edge over ps3.guess 360 is more powerful...

By strictly graphical he probably means better GPU for graphics. As we all know, programming a game these days require more than just graphics, which involves I/O , sound, AI, physics etc. According to carmack himself, rendering graphics only accounts for 10% of game code:)

Nope,he means as console.Anything on strictly graphical side is superior on 360.And graphics are by FAAAR most important thing in console programming.A.I,sound and physics take already accounted cpu time while graphics are always bottleneck.If it was not so devs would not use Cell as gpu assistant but they would use it for advanced simulations

[QUOTE="spacesheikh"]

inFamous, GTA4, RDR, MAG, Mafia 2. All these games look worse on PS3. Or at least below average. There isn't a single open world game that seems to use the fabled "powar of teh cell".

Cows, please stop calling these developers "lazy". Rockstar and Sucker Punch are not "lazy". The cell is not designed for these open world environments.

That is because only linear games can take advantage of the cell processor. The SPU's are useful in scripted and controlled situations while the 360's cpu can handle any task on any of its three cores.

Animal-Mother

First thing first, Mag is not an open world game.

Second, Infamous Isn't a bad looking game.

thrid GTAIV was fine on PS3.

Fourth do you have any proof of that?

Again Prove it with some links, you made a claim now back it up

Again I want lots and lots of proof, due to the fact your making bold claims here man.

The proof is there for all to see, what about rdr? Gta4 looked fine but not as good as it did on the 360. Where is yout poof and links to say the ps3 dosenthave worse looking open world games, you dont have any, we should all just use common sense and look at the games.

apart from slight graphical diffrences in multiplats they are both the same to be brutally honest.

[QUOTE="spacesheikh"]

inFamous, GTA4, RDR, MAG, Mafia 2. All these games look worse on PS3. Or at least below average. There isn't a single open world game that seems to use the fabled "powar of teh cell".

Cows, please stop calling these developers "lazy". Rockstar and Sucker Punch are not "lazy". The cell is not designed for these open world environments.

That is because only linear games can take advantage of the cell processor. The SPU's are useful in scripted and controlled situations while the 360's cpu can handle any task on any of its three cores.

lucky_star

EDIT: Isnt Rage supposed to look better on the ps3? Because of better quality textures. I guess you lost that one too.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="genaroll"] Of course the distance will be high he is towering over everything.But in Uncharted you cant visit must of the places you see at anytime.fun-da-mental

Exactly.Everything in UC2 is just lod.Between those buildings there is nothing textured...there is no streets and you simply cant go there.While in GTA IV for example you get in heli and can go ANYWHERE in city and WHOLE city is visiable and rendered.

First, LOD is used is almost every game, including open world games. Secondly, the fact that you can go anywhere in the world is a mere gameplay choice and has little to do with graphics. The objects in uncharted screenshot above are also rendered as you move, they are 3d models, its not just a background image:)

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

"Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations"."

Im not into tech thing but how is it better to have a bit more "virtual" power if you cant take advanage of it? Unless you prefer to have a console that is a bit better on paper over a console that shows it´s advantages in every single game.

Bus-A-Bus

Carmack himself also said a month ago that he could make RAGE superior on ANY console but on ps3 they have to put much more effort to maintain 60fps.Not only that,he said that on anything strictly graphical 360 has edge over ps3.guess 360 is more powerful...

does the 360?

does the 360?

CaseyWegner

i think RDR looks great

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

does the 360?

PiGsCaNFIy

i think RDR looks great

so do i. however, he already discounted the ps3 version.

[QUOTE="PiGsCaNFIy"]

i think RDR looks great

CaseyWegner

so do i. however, he already discounted the ps3 version.

Guess his reason is because its not the better version.

GTA4, RDR, and Mafia 2 look better on 360...

spacesheikh

He did mention RDR as a example of XBOX's good looking open world games.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] all im saying is carmack himself said ps3 is more powerful1stPlaceWinner

Carmack himself also said a month ago that he could make RAGE superior on ANY console but on ps3 they have to put much more effort to maintain 60fps.Not only that,he said that on anything strictly graphical 360 has edge over ps3.guess 360 is more powerful...

What do you mean overall?He said on graphical side,thats what we are arguing.Sure Cell is much better Cpu than Xenon but so is RSX,much weaker than Xenos.When you take everything in account,fact that you have to use alot of spus to help RSX it seems they are fairly equal,as games show.

[QUOTE="fun-da-mental"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

Exactly.Everything in UC2 is just lod.Between those buildings there is nothing textured...there is no streets and you simply cant go there.While in GTA IV for example you get in heli and can go ANYWHERE in city and WHOLE city is visiable and rendered.

Bus-A-Bus

First, LOD is used is almost every game, including open world games. Secondly, the fact that you can go anywhere in the world is a mere gameplay choice and has little to do with graphics. The objects in uncharted screenshot above are also rendered as you move, they are 3d models, its not just a background image:)

I know its not BUT just your saying that its just gameplay choice shows that you dont really have idea what you talk about.In open world games engine has predict EVERYTHING.You have thousends of choices to go and you cant store such textures as in UC2 in your main memory when you have open world game.In UC2 developers SCRIPTED everything.For example,lot of times when you have to climb on something you get help with that thus having longer time to do it BUT in that moment engine streams your next path.ND predicted everything,they put details and textures where they want,everything behind does not exist.Same cant be said for open world game...Not to talk about much less texture and asset types duo to much higher costs for open world games and such.

Anyway,the fact is UC2 would not look as good if it was open world game.

Yes, Engine has to predict everything in game (regardless if its open world or not), where texture costs has more to do with engine's LOD dynamic loading of textureas, fill rate and memory, which enables only certain things around the visible viewpoint working. Graphical power is determined based on how the objects are rendered on screen at single given viewpoint. When you are driving a car in GTA IV, its loading the textures of visible buildings, people that you can see. Its not loading textures and animations of someone dude sitting in bar or strip club in far distance invisible building. Logically, UC2 may look worse as OW because of designers may not want to spend crazy amount of man hours to texture and paint everything in a world as good.

Mafia 2 isn't out yet, so we can't really comment on that one. As far as GTA and RDR go i don't think it's a matter of opinion. They certainly look better on the 360, but you're absolutely right in saying it's hardly noticeable. Ninja-Hippo

Ironically enough, Eurogamer's face-off article on GTA4 has this to say:

"However, Rockstar has introduced a 360-specific post-processing effect that dithers just about every texture on-screen. It's an effect not present at all on the PS3 version and serves to introduce an oil-painting-like effect to the overall look of the game, particularly on background objects. Unfortunately, it also seems to actively distort the edges of detail in the textures and occasionally looks really ugly."

As a matter of fact, I own GTA4 on PS3 and Episodes on 360. I can tell you from personal experience that the mentioned effect really looks ugly, so much even that I personally prefer the look on the PS3 (which has its own technical downsides with respect to the 360 version).

Furthermore the face-off article on Episodes has this to say:

"However, it is definitely fair to say that performance appears to be much more like-for-like than it was in the original GTA. This selection of cut-scene and in-game action from The Lost and Damned should illustrate that nicely."

The framerate is better on PS3 in some parts and better on 360 in other parts of the game. Also the PS3 version apparently has improved with respect to the 360 version. But I thought it was the hardware? Guess that's not completely accurate then.

All in all, the OP is obviously considerably biased (how many of these games did you actually play on the PS3?).