So Gears of War cant be done on PS3?

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

Remmember that your link is from a FORUM .You cant quote things from forums :).There are so many thing i can pawn this guy on but i dont want to waste anyones time.

Just know that the MOST demanding game so far was undoubtable CRYSIS.The next KING of the RING is undoubtably FAR CRY 2.In terms of demanding system.The developers of FC2 have clearly stated that PS3 suites their needs !

Forget it looks like a 2 year old forum post by some dumb xbox fanboy...i shouldnt bother reading through it anymore.So far what ever we have seen on PS3,IF NOT BETTER but EQUALLY gud looking to Xbox 360 titles.

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

Remmember that your link is from a FORUM .You cant quote things from forums :).There are so many thing i can pawn this guy on but i dont want to waste anyones time.

Just know that the MOST demanding game so far was undoubtable CRYSIS.The next KING of the RING is undoubtably FAR CRY 2.In terms of demanding system.The developers of FC2 have clearly stated that PS3 suites their needs !

Forget it looks like a 2 year old forum post by some dumb xbox fanboy...i shouldnt bother reading through it anymore.So far what ever we have seen on PS3,IF NOT BETTER but EQUALLY gud looking to Xbox 360 titles.

lesner87

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)caseypayne69

The PS3 has 2 pools of Ram. 256 for Memory and 256 for graphics. However the PS3 can pull ram from the memory pool and use it in graphics. Hence using what ever it needs.

[QUOTE="caseypayne69"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)vaderhater

The PS3 has 2 pools of Ram. 256 for Memory and 256 for graphics. However the PS3 can pull ram from the memory pool and use it in graphics. Hence using what ever it needs.

Nice article..And i think you need to read it again.

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1

Thats what i have been trying to say.Both consoles are equal in terms of graphics/processing power.What can be done on 360 can be done on the PS3 and vice versa.

[QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

mephisto_11

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

[QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)Steppy_76

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

[QUOTE="Steppy_76"][QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)ermacness

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

what about them?

[QUOTE="vaderhater"][QUOTE="caseypayne69"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)lesner87

The PS3 has 2 pools of Ram. 256 for Memory and 256 for graphics. However the PS3 can pull ram from the memory pool and use it in graphics. Hence using what ever it needs.

Nice article..And i think you need to read it again.

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1

Thats what i have been trying to say.Both consoles are equal in terms of graphics/processing power.What can be done on 360 can be done on the PS3 and vice versa.

[QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="Steppy_76"][QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)lawlessx

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

what about them?

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

ermacness

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

everything is grey (literally everything)

4-5 enemies on screen at once

corridor environments

terrible textures

gears 2 character models look better

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Blanco98"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)imapieceofwood

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

yeah im sure that ps1 level texture quality would make the 360 sweat

yeah only on gamespot but on gr and metacritic which tallies every site: gears 1, halo 3, smg > mgs4

mgs 4 didnt even make the top50.

well here it the gamespot forums. so MGS4>halo 3,smg and gears

lulz at the people here... istill post here but i just read the gamespot reviews but don't use them as a definite review, they've been a joke since gerstmann gate; it all started after kevin left.......

[QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

mephisto_11

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

everything is grey (literally everything)

4-5 enemies on screen at once

corridor environments

terrible textures

gears 2 character models look better

Do you just copy and paste that response for every Ps3 game?

Do you just copy and paste that response for every Ps3 game?

Chutebox

once i see sometihng technically and visually impressive i'll stop

once i see sometihng technically and visually impressive i'll stop

mephisto_11

Right.

[QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

mephisto_11

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

everything is grey (literally everything)

4-5 enemies on screen at once

corridor environments

terrible textures

gears 2 character models look better

[QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

mephisto_11

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

everything is grey (literally everything)

4-5 enemies on screen at once

corridor environments

terrible textures

gears 2 character models look better

[QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)mephisto_11

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

yeah im sure that ps1 level texture quality would make the 360 sweat

I'm sure it can be done on the 360, but the amount of discs required would just suck. I think that the Blu-ray is PS3's biggest asset, and it's a damn good one. The "cell" has yet to impress, and I don't think that it will on the PS3.

Too bad that all the 360's didn't come standard with a HD as that would partially negate this one big advantage the PS3 has over the 360.

[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="Steppy_76"][QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)ermacness

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

what about them?

Uncharted looks better then gears in almost every department. organic_machine

uncharted looks much better than gears. so who cares?NaiKoN9293

Too bad Gears is stilla b etter game than uncharted... OWNED

I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)vaderhater

Its just a bunch of propaganda. As much as i love Gears of War, Uncharted's graphics are superior. Sorry man, thread fails.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Do you just copy and paste that response for every Ps3 game?

mephisto_11

once i see sometihng technically and visually impressive i'll stop

lol?

[QUOTE="ermacness"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

textures and character models couldn't be done. yes uncharted has great textures but it is lacking technically.

in before the powah of the cell

mephisto_11

I love when people say games look great but are "lacking technically." What the hell does that even mean?

If it looks good, it looks good. End of story.

it means that you can make the game look really good but you water down most other aspects to achieve that level of visual fidelity. ie uncharted's weak character models, no splitscreen, no online, no coop, 4 enemies on screen, corridor "jungles". but sure the leaves and water look pretty if you tone down everything else.

everything is grey (literally everything)

4-5 enemies on screen at once

corridor environments

terrible textures

gears 2 character models look better

Gears 2 character models look like action figures. Don't get me wrong i love the game :D 8)

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]Uncharted looks better then gears in almost every department. Toriko42

Yes really...

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)Haku_Ryushi

Its just a bunch of propaganda. As much as i love Gears of War, Uncharted's graphics are superior. Sorry man, thread fails.

Gears of war could be done on PS3 minus the splitscreen. Unchartered = no splitscreen, UT3 on PS3 = no splitscreen.

Halo3 = splitscreen, Geow = splitscreen, UT3 360 = splitscreen.

killzone 2 is gonna be nothing like in those trailers,if there is any gameplay. link it.

gears of war 2..is gonna be best game of the year 08.

[QUOTE="Steppy_76"][QUOTE="Cedmln"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)ermacness

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

simple.....multiple copies of the EXACT same game data used only once for the 360 version. I believe that Oblivion ended up with 4 copies of the same general game data.

[QUOTE="stereointegrity"]UT3 looks better then gears.....so i dont see why it cant be doneMojondeVACA

anythings possible a year after the ps3s UT3 release......

killzone 2 is gonna be nothing like in those trailers,if there is any gameplay. link it.

gears of war 2..is gonna be best game of the year 08.

Evolution-X0

yes it cannaruto7777

[QUOTE="naruto7777"]yes it canvaderhater

He is concise. Wish more people were like that :(

killzone 2 is gonna be nothing like in those trailers,if there is any gameplay. link it.

gears of war 2..is gonna be best game of the year 08.

Evolution-X0

mgs4,lbp,gta4 all disagree

I have yet to see a game on either platform that I felt could not be done on the other one.SpruceCaboose

Yeah i was thinking the same damn thing.

every game can be done on every console , PC , 360 and ps3

wii ?? LOL :lol:

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

lesner87

I have yet to see a game on either platform that I felt could not be done on the other one.SpruceCaboose

This.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

MojondeVACA

True. And one of the reasons the ps3 runs at lower true resolutions is because it has to render 2 frames at a time, due to the way the frame buffer displays the frames on the monitor/tv, which differs from the 360s method. 360 method works faster and thus higher resolution makes for a better image.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

MojondeVACA

Well from about every review i have seen almost every one said it looks better on ps3 also from videos i have seen pop in happens on the 360 so yes it actually does run smoother on the ps3 due to the install.

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]I can see this being true to some extent because of the way the ram is on the PS3. http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1066963-1.html Have fun:)Cedmln

Just like MGS 4 can't be done on the 360.

Sorry to burst your bubble but Kojima himself said MGS4 could run on the 360. At-least be real about it.

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

no thanks i'll continue to post here and use gamerankings. i dont play the "system wars" game rules lol

SpruceCaboose

Then don't expect anyone to take your arguments seriously.

I hate to burst your bubble but people can cite whatever source they please here, there are no rules, you won't get banned. If you want to bury your head in the sand every time someone mentions a non GS source, who do you think is the one that'll look silly?

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

TC you should try doing some research before putting up such a topic.I dont see any reason that GOW cant be ported to the PS.That article is so BS.That its talking of 256mb of difference between RSx and 360s GPU :D.Did you even know that 360 shares its memory.That means its NEVER even getting above 400mb of ram ! Hell its running even below that.No wonder so far the games which require a kick out of the system lag on the 360 example GTA IV.

MojondeVACA

Typical Xbox fan.You got it the other way around.The PS3 version has much more noticeable AA than the 360 version.About the resolution,people can tell the difference from 10 feet away.So it really doesnt matter :).