which is pointless. They all look good. I just think it's funny that COD4 pretty much proves the hardware in these systems is pretty negligable. Call of Duty 4 was out a long time ago and looks as good as anything and runs on everything and looks the same on everything.
This pretty much proves the difference in hardware is pretty negligible. The ps3 has slightly more ability to have more going on on screen. Thats the only difference i see. The actual look of the game is debatable. The textures in killzone are nothing impressive. Although in Uncharted and MGS it has great textures so who knows. Gears 2 has great textures not as much going on. Surprisingly out of those 3 games COD4 is probably the best mix of textures and a lot going on. Killzone probably has the most going on, but the worst textures out of those 3. Gears probably has the best textures but the least going on. So in other words, who cares.
The only thing i got out of this is Call of Duty 4 really is an amazing technical achievement and a headache.
[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"][QUOTE="delta3074"]of course it was worth it, pushing the boundrys of technology is always worth it, even if it isn't as successful as some people wanted, one guy uses ps3's donated by SONY to track stars and astral bodies, if there's an asteroid heading our way, he will spot it, try and tell me that ain't a good thing, the ps3 with the cell does more than just run games and play BR movies, take folding@home for exampleHarry_Balzac
Well for technology's sake, yeah its a good thing. But for Sony sake it was not. And the spokesperson for Sony has finally arrived. Now my Hirai.....Can you tell us why? Before you mention how much Sony lose per console.....please be aware that PS2 also had a few year period of garnering Sony losses per unit sold. Blu Ray is great for mine......I have no problem with it being there...and would prefer it to be there than not.....and as for the cell......Well yes, it is a complicated, hard to harness piece of the PS3 infrastructure........But it is what sets Sony's machine part from the others......Wii has the Nunchuka, 360 has the pc friendly thing going, and PS3 has a bit more unknown potential and possibly diversity in the cell. And as shown with PS2's emotion engine....the best capabilities that come from the system are usually later in the consoles lifecycle. So yes, Cell was worth it, and has the potential to be a very lucrative edge for Sony and PS3.....We have multiplat developers coming out more and more saying 360 is coming close to tapping out power, and that they have yet to do that with PS3. So I say for gamers 1stly, and ultimately Sony down the track....the cell was a great feature to add.
thank you harry balzac. lol.... I agree the ps3 might shine a bit down the road but i dont see anything on the system that gives it this huge edge. I believe games like uncharted 2 are tapping the cells "power" and we are pretty much seeing what it can do now. It's still not at a huge advantage. yes you might be able to get slightly better looking games and better draw distances and more photo realitic environments but its really not like the 360 cant do really good stuff as well. They both have enough powah to get through.... Games like Alan Wake, Mass EFfect 2, Forza 3, Splinter cell, World at War all, FFXIII all look excellent running on the 360. So im going to spend $400 to get maybe 4 games, 2 of which i might actually play that look slightly better and do really pretty environments? That's not happening.
That said if the ps3 had a ton of exclusives and all the multiplat developers taking advantage of it, yes it would be worth it. When it comes down to a few games looking really nice, and compromises every else, no it's not.
good call. did anyone actually buy that phillips thing? i remember seeing one at sears and it was hilarious.
Yes, I bought it. :oops: However, I can't for the life of me remember what games I played on it save for the Tennis one that came bundled with it.
nice. I had a 3d0. That was the one purchase i made where i think i went a bit too far. Although the 3d0 was actually pretty good. Star Control II was one of the best games ive ever played. They had a few games that were really good. I had a jaguar for a day. I bought it returned it and traded it for the 3do. I feel i got my moneys worth out of the 3do at least..
I'm sort of a tech nerd, not really but I'm always interesting in advances in tech and stuff. I was watching the tech demo for Backbreaker and this game pretty much exposes Madden for what it is imo. Of course EA has the money and the licensing so people are going to buy madden, but Backbreaker is so far ahead of anything madden is doing technically it's ridiculous. EA is also cashing in on the wii and the wiimote, with all their EA sports titles but if you look at the games themselves they actually have less production value and are dumbed down versions of past games. If you've ever seen the movie Idiocrisy am i that far off in thinking a lot of these developers are actuallly going backwards instead of forwards and taking things out of their games to make money? EA has always been really bad with that kind of stuff. I used to be a big fan of EA back in the day. They used to be the best but for the past decade or so they've gotten really bad.
Log in to comment