Weird inconsistancies in Lemming claims... *56k no dice*

[QUOTE="neo418"]

I agree with the blu-ray point ya made cause nothing comes close to blu-ray quality.

Crappy pics of gears are crappy though

YekDastan316

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Both of those looks like a PS2 game.. wow.

Espada12

I know.. that's how bad the pictures he is using are... O.O

gears of war seems to have this issue even on pc sometimes if you look at peoples models lol the textures wont be high res didnt load when u turned the second u looked at them like move alittle around and high res texture will finally appear lol samething with gears on 360 videogamesdead6

post the worst gears of war 2 pic for this comparison!
GO!

[QUOTE="Zaibach"]

[QUOTE="videogamesdead6"]lol thanks for proving how pointless blu ray is the damn picture doesnt even look any better than dvd LOL honestly i thought dvd looked better videogamesdead6

While your there have the doctor test for color blindness as well. Seriously if you cannot see the people in the background are so much clearer in the BR shot versus the DVD shot you really should have your eyes checked.

[QUOTE="HAZE-Unit"]

[QUOTE="Hanass"]

IT's the PC version.

swazidoughman

And this.

It's like playing bullshots.

And heres Crysis. Once again proving PC gaming dominates all.

[QUOTE="tumle"]

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

• If you're going to have a graphics argument, you pick the best screenshots from each game. It's a given all games are going to have some texture issues here and there
• Don't generalize all 360 owners, they have opinions which differ and vary

CannedWorms

why should it be any different to how lemmings treat cows?

And i think the TC has some valid points, but messed up a little when he used that gears pic, because now the lemmings only want to talk about that one point in his topic.

oh ok sry then, just the wording that confused me:)

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

[QUOTE="HAZE-Unit"]

And this.

Rikusaki

It's like playing bullshots.

I have an 8800gt, so 16xQSSAA isn't really that great in most new games.

Although at the time of purchase it was the best bang for the buck card.

[QUOTE="videogamesdead6"][QUOTE="Zaibach"] You need to see your eye doctor asap, and please dont drive.

360hammer

While your there have the doctor test for color blindness as well. Seriously if you cannot see the people in the background are so much clearer in the BR shot versus the DVD shot you really should have your eyes checked.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

It's like playing bullshots.

swazidoughman

I have an 8800gt, so 16xQSSAA isn't really that great in most new games.

Although at the time of purchase it was the best bang for the buck card.

I will never understand lemmings redicilous claims either, it seems they have really good eye sight, or maybe us gamers need glassess in order to see how the 360 gamesare more graphically better looking than crysis, killzone 2, uncharted..etc.

And heres Crysis. Once again proving PC gaming dominates all.

*picture*

shutdown_202

Final version doesn't look as nice :(

The blue ray and dvd comparsion showed some differences, not much but some. The blu-ray was crisp and the dvd was good but a little fuzzy.

Sorry son but RE5 on 360 looks much better even cows know this already...and if U2 was on 360 it would look better aswell same for KZ2 :lol:Syferonik

[QUOTE="360hammer"]

[QUOTE="videogamesdead6"] the dvd had better colorenygma500

While your there have the doctor test for color blindness as well. Seriously if you cannot see the people in the background are so much clearer in the BR shot versus the DVD shot you really should have your eyes checked.

i never thought there was much difference between the two systems but looking at that re5 pic makes me realize i was wrong

that was the pic you used to show that there is very little difference? really? is it really that bad on ps3? there has to be more to this than what i'm looking at maybe the people who made the re5 comparason pic were biased for the 360 or something

EDIT: ok i looked at the re5 pic again, maybe the ps3 looks worse because the guys more in the background or something, seriously the textures on that toon look as bad as the ones on resistence 2

[QUOTE="videogamesdead6"]difference between blu ray and dvd is not worth the money. plus so many movies that are on dvd that you cant even buy on blu ray. Hell there's many movies on vhs that still havent even come to dvd yet.DBhova23

I use a 23" 1080p monitor with my PS3.

Even on that small of a screen the difference between 480p and 1080p is extremely massive.
It's worth it even with a smaller screen.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

It's like playing bullshots.

swazidoughman

I have an 8800gt, so 16xQSSAA isn't really that great in most new games.

Although at the time of purchase it was the best bang for the buck card.

[QUOTE="MegajerkNYC"]

Gears 2 looks good. But no one can deny that it has texture issues.

wolverine4262

[QUOTE="shutdown_202"]

And heres Crysis. Once again proving PC gaming dominates all.

*picture*

swazidoughman

Final version doesn't look as nice :(

Really? Cant say ive played it myself but i've seen some videos on ultra high that look just as good, or atleast near the quality of that pic.

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"] Haha, yeah. :P What graphics card do you have?

mitu123

I have an 8800gt, so 16xQSSAA isn't really that great in most new games.

Although at the time of purchase it was the best bang for the buck card.

Yes it is.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

I have an 8800gt, so 16xQSSAA isn't really that great in most new games.

Although at the time of purchase it was the best bang for the buck card.

swazidoughman

Yes it is.

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] This might be a dumb question to ask, but is the RadeonHD 4850, which is what I have, is better than a 8800GT?

mitu123

Yes it is.

A 8800gt can still run newer games on the highest settings.

Just not with 16xQSSAA :cry:

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

Yes it is.

swazidoughman

A 8800gt can still run newer games on the highest settings.

Just not with 16xQSSAA :cry:

[QUOTE="wolverine4262"]

[QUOTE="MegajerkNYC"]

Gears 2 looks good. But no one can deny that it has texture issues.

Panther501

[QUOTE="shutdown_202"]

And heres Crysis. Once again proving PC gaming dominates all.

*picture*

swazidoughman

Final version doesn't look as nice :(

It can look like the pre-alpha game if you tweak the ToD settings correctly, like so:

Sorry son but RE5 on 360 looks much better even cows know this already...and if U2 was on 360 it would look better aswell same for KZ2 :lol:Syferonik

Visually RE5 on PS3 and 360 are actually pretty much the same.

The big difference is the type of AA used.
360 uses MSAA which in the case of RE5 can be anywhere from 0-4x
PS3 uses Quincux which does remove many jaggies (about as much as 4x), but it also causes a minor blurring of the image which can make textures seem lower quality even though in reality they're equal.

There are also some shader effetcs that are inferior on the PS3 version, but it's nothing that anyone would notice during regular gameplay.

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] Hmm, maybe it wasn't such a dumb question, I wanted to know to be able to run newer games at high settings, LOL.mitu123

A 8800gt can still run newer games on the highest settings.

Just not with 16xQSSAA :cry:

Bah! I'll just use what I have until I make a whole new build in 1-2 years

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

A 8800gt can still run newer games on the highest settings.

Just not with 16xQSSAA :cry:

swazidoughman

Bah! I'll just use what I have until I make a whole new build in 1-2 years

There's a noticeable difference between RE5 on 360 and PS3. Here's a few shots and a link to the comparison. Not a huge deal, but the 360 is obviously better. Notice the fence detail in the first pics, chainsaw detail(esp. chain) on the second pics, and overall face detail in the third. Not only that, the 360 version is sporting better AA, textures, and shaders. Not only that, the PS3 is even missing geometry and effects found on the 360 version. Better is better cows. Accept this.

RE5 Comparison

Also, Killzone 2 is the best looking console game, but not by much. Gears and RE5 easily give it a run for it's money.

LOL Topics like these are what make SW so great. :DDoolz2024

Like I said before, the blur caused by Quincunx results in the illusion lower detail.

And what seems like better normal/bump map detail is probably caused by the gamma/contrast of the 360 version.

ALSO! In the same post you compared a crappy KZ2 screenshot to a good Gears2 screenshot which makes you just as bad as the OP.

swazidoughman

The QAA may contribute to lower detail, but it's obvious there are detail maps missing on the PS3 version. I post in-game shots. If you think one looks better that's on you. Stop trying so hard. The 360 version is obviously better. Better AA, textures, shadows, and shaders.

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

Like I said before, the blur caused by Quincunx results in the illusion lower detail.

And what seems like better normal/bump map detail is probably caused by the gamma/contrast of the 360 version.

ALSO! In the same post you compared a crappy KZ2 screenshot to a good Gears2 screenshot which makes you just as bad as the OP.

gamecubepad

The QAA may contribute to lower detail, but it's obvious there are detail maps missing on the PS3 version. I post in-game shots. If you think one looks better that's on you. Stop trying so hard. The 360 is obviously better. Better AA, textures, shadows, and shaders.

Textures are completely equal.

Higher contrast is likely what brings out the extra "detail".

Better AA in this case is subjective since most of the time it's 2x which doesn't remove as many jaggies as QAA.

Lol there is no difference. Even with those pictures blown up and in your face you cant see the difference.

A real difference is how much glaringly better Uncharted looks then Gears 2