The diffrences between 360 and PS3 graphically. ok...simple.......

PLaying the PS3 and 360 are some wonderful ways to lose yourself. My Wii is just for those nights I need something fun to do and Mario Galaxy still rocks. Any ways I have had the time to evaluate Both of the graphical monsters the PS3 and 360 are. I have a simple way to advise on what I think the main graphical differences are in the games for each.

first off the 360 can handle textures way better. Not to the point that a PS3 game doesnt look as good. But if you take the time to look at a tree in a PS3 version it looks the exact same from afar. As you get closer the textures are fine in detail but lack depth. What I mean is as you walk around the tree there is no shadows from the texture of the bark on PS3. It looks 3-d until you take a full view around t. The 360 simply makes it look like a tree. 3-d in depth and shadows and it can add to the expirience if your looking for that kind of thing.

The PS3 simply has more color to the games. Yes thats right, it does. Not to mention the resolution seems to pop more on the PS3. I dont know if thats cause of the rsx or cell. But either way the games look very high in resolution. THe lines I would award to the 360. Jaggies are not a problem for most people and a great tv reduces the effect dramatically. But the 360 has less jaggies I would say in genral.

The PS3 kills the 360 for movies. Period. It is a really nice movie player. I mean it kicks much arse.

Other than that I would have to say the PS3 still has the best looking game or demo in GT5P. But thats cause at times the game looks real. The 360 has the best graphical ability overall I would say though. ITs mostly cause its esier to get the performance out of it. Not to mention it is the main console to develope on for alot of developers. As that changes it may sway the other way and GT5P shows it can if done right. But could GT5P look better on 360? I would have to say yse it can. But we will never know.

So if your a graphics whor3 and need the top of the line system for that. It is solely my opinion that the 360 overall has the better graphics. But not by a large margin at all. But its there.

thank you for that BS we need more of this in System Wars.LoZonedOut

Some games look better on the 360, others on the PS3...it's really not that hard to figure out. If a developer wanted to, he could make trees look 3-D on a PS3 and a lazy developer can make crappy trees on the 360. If a game gets ported over from one to the other, more than likely the ported copy won't have the same quality as the original. Gears of War and Metal Gear Solid 4, two examples that it can be done right on either system.Newsboy

[QUOTE="LoZonedOut"]thank you for that BS we need more of this in System Wars.360-ps3-wii-pc

I totally agree with both posts.

[QUOTE="Newsboy"]Some games look better on the 360, others on the PS3...it's really not that hard to figure out. If a developer wanted to, he could make trees look 3-D on a PS3 and a lazy developer can make crappy trees on the 360. If a game gets ported over from one to the other, more than likely the ported copy won't have the same quality as the original. Gears of War and Metal Gear Solid 4, two examples that it can be done right on either system.360-ps3-wii-pc

No, it has absolutely nothing to do with the way RAM is organized on the two systems.

The video RAM is going to be used essentially to store textures. Everything else has to do with performance....how many shaders there are, the clock speeds, etc.

As far as the texture lacking depth....I think he's referring to normal maps or something. I don't know about you guys, but I've seen normal maps GALORE on both consoles and normal maps go a long way towards establishing depth and an actual physical appearance of surface texture instead of a high resolution 2D picture placed on the surface. And the best part? Normal maps don't require as much system resources as actual textures....both consoles should be able to handle a boatload of normal maps with ease.

Newsboy gives us his subjective opinion and it thus fails.

His analysis (I.E. his explanation of why things looked the way they do to him) is thus very fail. He has no idea what he's talking about. I have very little of an idea of what I'm talking about, but I'm quite sure when I'm gazing through very paper-thin write-ups on "graphics."

I've yet to see either console really out do one another. I'd call them even at this point.

my ps3 looks better in 720p than my xbox 360 does in 720p

the reflections look sharper, and the textures look a bit better, i can expect the same from 1080p

about the 360 handling better textures and graphics, id have to disagree... i played alot of games, but i cant find anything that looks better (graphics wise) than GT5P,MGS4 or uncharted

Blah, I have yet to see a game on the 360 that looks like

KillZone 2, Uncharted, and Heavy Rain

The best i've seen from 360 is Gears 2 which 360 fanboys only argument and even that

doesn't compare to KZ2 or Heavy Rain

Blah, I have yet to see a game on the 360 that looks like

KillZone 2, Uncharted, and Heavy Rain

The best i've seen from 360 is Gears 2 which 360 fanboys only argument and even that

doesn't compare to KZ2 or Heavy Rain

True-Legend86

i agree totally, i have seen nothing that compares to those games. you can throw MGS 4 on that list aswell.

I've yet to see either console really out do one another. I'd call them even at this point.

carljohnson3456

Blah, I have yet to see a game on the 360 that looks like

KillZone 2, Uncharted, and Heavy Rain

The best i've seen from 360 is Gears 2 which 360 fanboys only argument and even that

doesn't compare to KZ2 or Heavy Rain

True-Legend86

Blurzone 2 looks like garbage so.. fail

[QUOTE="True-Legend86"]

Blah, I have yet to see a game on the 360 that looks like

KillZone 2, Uncharted, and Heavy Rain

The best i've seen from 360 is Gears 2 which 360 fanboys only argument and even that

doesn't compare to KZ2 or Heavy Rain

Erik_Lensherr

Blurzone 2 looks like garbage so.. fail

Man that was...witty?

Killzone 2 looks amazing. MGS4 and Uncharted still look better than anything on 360. If u disagree, just look at Heavy Rain. Gears 2 is eh

It is a development time thing because the textures and environment look better in Oblivion for the PS3 than they do for the 360.wooooode

I think alot of people would argue Bioshock for that though =/ Still buying it =)

[QUOTE="360-ps3-wii-pc"][QUOTE="Newsboy"]Some games look better on the 360, others on the PS3...it's really not that hard to figure out. If a developer wanted to, he could make trees look 3-D on a PS3 and a lazy developer can make crappy trees on the 360. If a game gets ported over from one to the other, more than likely the ported copy won't have the same quality as the original. Gears of War and Metal Gear Solid 4, two examples that it can be done right on either system.BobHipJames

No, it has absolutely nothing to do with the way RAM is organized on the two systems.

The video RAM is going to be used essentially to store textures. Everything else has to do with performance....how many shaders there are, the clock speeds, etc.

As far as the texture lacking depth....I think he's referring to normal maps or something. I don't know about you guys, but I've seen normal maps GALORE on both consoles and normal maps go a long way towards establishing depth and an actual physical appearance of surface texture instead of a high resolution 2D picture placed on the surface. And the best part? Normal maps don't require as much system resources as actual textures....both consoles should be able to handle a boatload of normal maps with ease.

Newsboy gives us his subjective opinion and it thus fails.

His analysis (I.E. his explanation of why things looked the way they do to him) is thus very fail. He has no idea what he's talking about. I have very little of an idea of what I'm talking about, but I'm quite sure when I'm gazing through very paper-thin write-ups on "graphics."