RAGE - best looking game on consoles will be best on X360

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is not the best thechnical achivment after all.

and Carmackalso say that the CELL is not better then the 360 CPU but the 360 GPU is better then the RSX:

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3,"

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

really after all the pissing and moaning the people at Id were making over Microsoft forcing them to make a smaller game so that it would work on the 360.

frankly i don't care for this game at all. believe it or not the only Id game i've ever liked was the original Doom. nothing else has interested me.

so whether it is better on 360 or PS3 is a non-issue to me.

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is notthe bestthechnical achivment after all.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

Nisim19

sometimes you can just clearly see which dev is lazy.....

So PS3's experimental CPU architectures development difficulty strikes again?

Real or not; I find the damage control comments on the story amusing.

"Rather have 30ps than 4 DVDs..."

Plus :roll: @ anyone who now tries to accuse John Carmack, a renowned programmer, of being lazy for not working well with Sony's ridiculous console hardware.

So PS3's experimental CPU architectures development difficulty strikes again?

Real or not; I find the damage control comments on the story amusing.

"Rather have 30ps than 4 DVDs..."

Plus :roll: @ anyone who now tries to accuse John Carmack, a renowned programmer, of being lazy for not working well with Sony's ridiculous console hardware.

AnnoyedDragon

yup such a rediculous hardware even Naughty Dog cant develop for it....oh wait

Looks like there are no winners here guys.:(

ID makes terrible games in my opinion. Doom 3 was garbage.

yup such a rediculous hardware even Naughty Dog cant develop for it....oh wait

sikanderahmed

Surely you know better than to try to use that as a counter argument? I'm sure if ID had the funding and support Naughty Dog was getting from Sony they wouldn't have any development difficulties either :roll:

1st party and paid for 3rd party exclusives are not representative of the real world development environment.

Devs lazy.. or being smart instead of wasting money on a platform that doesnt make that much money. hmmmm which one :O

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is not the best thechnical achivment after all.

and Carmackalso say that the CELL is not better then the 360 CPU but the 360 GPU is better then the RSX:

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3,"

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

Nisim19

That game is on 4 discs? :oCouth_

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is not the best thechnical achivment after all.

and Carmackalso say that the CELL is not better then the 360 CPU but the 360 GPU is better then the RSX:

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3,"

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

ermacness

Not the greatest argument, no offense. Uncharted 2 is a linear game that doesn't have to stream a vast open world of rich texture detail.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

yup such a rediculous hardware even Naughty Dog cant develop for it....oh wait

AnnoyedDragon

Surely you know better than to try to use that as a counter argument? I'm sure if ID had the funding and support Naughty Dog was getting from Sony they wouldn't have any development difficulties either :roll:

1st party and paid for 3rd party exclusives are not representative of the real world development environment.

even thirdy party devs dont moan about ps3s hardware as much as these super professional devs like carmack and that fat gabe newell from valve. lazy devs are lazy. if they dont have the funds then just dnt develop for ps3 then

So PS3's experimental CPU architectures development difficulty strikes again?

Real or not; I find the damage control comments on the story amusing.

"Rather have 30ps than 4 DVDs..."

Plus :roll: @ anyone who now tries to accuse John Carmack. a renowned programmer, of being lazy for not working well with Sony's ridiculous console hardware.

AnnoyedDragon

So I guess that games with outstanding graphics on PS3 like Killzone and Uncharted are just a figment of a collective imagination. In reality no developer can do them. That explains all.

Now that John Carmack said it'll run better on 360 its the best looking console game? Okay.

yet, how many different sites gave U2 "the Best Graphic Award" at E3?:lol:ermacness

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

So PS3's experimental CPU architectures development difficulty strikes again?

Real or not; I find the damage control comments on the story amusing.

"Rather have 30ps than 4 DVDs..."

Plus :roll: @ anyone who now tries to accuse John Carmack. a renowned programmer, of being lazy for not working well with Sony's ridiculous console hardware.

RedruM_I

So I guess that games with outstanding graphics on PS3 like Killzone and Uncharted are just a figment of a collective imagination. In reality no developer can do them. That explains all.

even thirdy party devs dont moan about ps3s hardware as much as these super professional devs like carmack and that fat gabe newell from valve. lazy devs are lazy. if they dont have the funds then just dnt develop for ps3 then

sikanderahmed

You haven't frequented SW very long if you haven't heard of any other developers criticising the PS3.

These developers Cows like to label as lazy just so happen to have little to no difficulty developing for all the other platforms. They just have a problem with the PS3, which just happens to have an experimental architecture CPU that many developers have talked about struggling with.

Don't blame good developers for Sony's poor hardware decisions.

So I guess that games with outstanding graphics on PS3 like Killzone and Uncharted are just a figment of a collective imagination. In reality no developer can do them. That explains all.

RedruM_I

You do realize how differently these games are built right?

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is not the best thechnical achivment after all.

and Carmackalso say that the CELL is not better then the 360 CPU but the 360 GPU is better then the RSX:

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3,"

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

[QUOTE="RedruM_I"]

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

So PS3's experimental CPU architectures development difficulty strikes again?

Real or not; I find the damage control comments on the story amusing.

"Rather have 30ps than 4 DVDs..."

Plus :roll: @ anyone who now tries to accuse John Carmack. a renowned programmer, of being lazy for not working well with Sony's ridiculous console hardware.

SparkyProtocol

So I guess that games with outstanding graphics on PS3 like Killzone and Uncharted are just a figment of a collective imagination. In reality no developer can do them. That explains all.

I'm amazed that some people are trying to use Uncharted 2 to try to argue against Carmack's knowledge. I bet he just laughs when he hears that stuff.

[QUOTE="SparkyProtocol"]

[QUOTE="RedruM_I"]

So I guess that games with outstanding graphics on PS3 like Killzone and Uncharted are just a figment of a collective imagination. In reality no developer can do them. That explains all.

BioShockOwnz

I'm amazed that some people are trying to use Uncharted 2 to try to argue against Carmack's knowledge. I bet he just laughs when he hears that stuff.

[QUOTE="ermacness"]

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]

RAGE will run on 60FPS on the X360, but on the PS3 it will run on only 20-30FPS.

if the best looking game on consoles will run so much better on the 360 that mean that the PS3 is not longer the most pawerfull console this gen.

looks like U2 is not the best thechnical achivment after all.

and Carmackalso say that the CELL is not better then the 360 CPU but the 360 GPU is better then the RSX:

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3,"

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220530

BioShockOwnz

Not the greatest argument, no offense. Uncharted 2 is a linear game that doesn't have to stream a vast open world of rich texture detail.

[QUOTE="SparkyProtocol"] Two big budget first party linear shooters vs third party large scale and invidual textureness of RAGE

I'm amazed that some people are trying to use Uncharted 2 to try to argue against Carmack's knowledge. I bet he just laughs when he hears that stuff.

OK, but it does whatever it need to do in a very impressive manner. If not, then it wouldn't have won the same award from more than 1 site;)

ermacness

[QUOTE="Nisim19"] ID didnt show RAGE on E3 so...Giancar

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best looking game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="ermacness"]yet, how many different sites gave U2 "the Best Graphic Award" at E3?:lol:

Not the greatest argument, no offense. Uncharted 2 is a linear game that doesn't have to stream a vast open world of rich texture detail.

LOL now cows say that Carmack is lazy? Nisim19

teh john carmack, and gabe newell are teh suxors and lazy. Who cares if they made the most infulential games of our time. PS3 HAS THE CELL ALL BOW BEFORE iT.

LOL now cows say that Carmack is lazy? Nisim19

I think to be fair, id doesn't have the resource to make games on so many platforms and expect them all to run equally well at the same time.

[QUOTE="ermacness"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

Not the greatest argument, no offense. Uncharted 2 is a linear game that doesn't have to stream a vast open world of rich texture detail.

Nisim19

[QUOTE="ermacness"]

OK, but it does whatever it need to do in a very impressive manner. If not, then it wouldn't have won the same award from more than 1 site;)

organic_machine

Bingo. Best looking game =/= the most advanced technically. There are many key factors.

[QUOTE="Giancar"][QUOTE="Nisim19"] ID didnt show RAGE on E3 so...BioShockOwnz

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best lookimg game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]LOL now cows say that Carmack is lazy? ermacness

[QUOTE="Giancar"][QUOTE="Nisim19"] ID didnt show RAGE on E3 so...BioShockOwnz

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best looking game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

That's pretty strange, considering how id was advertising their engine to developers by showing Rage running on 5 platforms all at 60fps.

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]LOL now cows say that Carmack is lazy? ermacness

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="Giancar"] any gameplay video for Rage on consoles to compare it to other games?Giancar

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best lookimg game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

Another extremely linear game that walks down a tried and true path.

[QUOTE="Nisim19"][QUOTE="ermacness"]OK, but it does whatever it need to do in a very impressive manner. If not, then it wouldn't have won the same award from more than 1 site;)

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]

[QUOTE="ermacness"]

OK, but it does whatever it need to do in a very impressive manner. If not, then it wouldn't have won the same award from more than 1 site;)

BioShockOwnz

Bingo. Best looking game =/= the most advanced technically. There are many key factors.

I know. There is no contest technically. Rage destroys Uncharted 2. The id Tech 5 is nothing short of genius. The fact that they can render such unbelievable textures without any hit on performance is mindblowing, and the fact that it gives developers tools to easily create elaborate maps within hours is stunning. id Tech 5 is probably the best engine on consoles.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="Giancar"] any gameplay video for Rage on consoles to compare it to other games?ermacness

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best looking game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

Wait, what? Neither of those devs were "legends". :? Facctor 5 made Turrican and Rogue Squadron. Silicon Knights made Eternal Darkness. Not exactly a John Carmack there, my friend. Neither dev has a legacy with Wolfenstein, Quake, and Doom in their past.

[QUOTE="Nisim19"]LOL now cows say that Carmack is lazy? ermacness

Because no one has put the same amount of time, money and effort into 360 exclusives as Sony has PS3 exclusives. Quick, name a 360 exclusive that runs on a proprietary engine, had a ~$40-60 million budget and had 4+ years of development time like Killzone 2.

And for those that inevitably will say "lol lazy devs" it's not a matter of effort, it's a matter of "how many dollars and how many man-hours out of a limited budget can a developer afford to sink into the PS3?"

[QUOTE="Giancar"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

And even with that said, RAGE doesn't have to look as good as Uncharted 2, as the structure and detail of the worlds will be the best of their time. RAGE will be the best lookimg game with open structure. I'm simply astonished that some would even mention Uncharted 2. Streaming rich textures in a larger scaled game uses a lot of RAM. It's much easier when you have a linear set path. That's basic knowledge. I think Carmack knows more than thes ones who try to bash him. He isn't a legend in the biz for no reason.

BioShockOwnz

Another extremely linear game that walks down a tried and true path.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]Sure it would have. There is a difference between technically advanced and looking good. When you're at E3, you're not out and about counting polygons and observing texture resolutions, you look at games. and because U2 is very linear, it has the capability to "look" better.

Bingo. Best looking game =/= the most advanced technically. There are many key factors.

I know. There is no contest technically. Rage destroys Uncharted 2. The id Tech 5 is nothing short of genius. The fact that they can render such unbelievable textures without any hit on performance is mindblowing, and the fact that it gives developers tools to easily create elaborate maps within hours is stunning. id Tech 5 is probably the best engine on consoles.