first of all, i did not at all pay that rediculous pricetag of 600 to get a system with subpar games a the time and no benefits over the compeition. First adopters disgust me. I did however get it when it was 400. Why, altho i did own every ps game, i was sure that the ps3 would over a good library of games but most importantly, i was hyped about the Cell. I would in a heartbeat, have gotten a 360 it had a HD-dvd drive. the ps3 just seems like a superior console. 4 years later, it still is a superior console and the slight differences in graphics proves it. there is talk tat the ps4 might be weaker than the next xbox due to costs, etc. this notion makes me sick. If thats the case, i will go for the next xbox immediately. I want the best tech out there. People who games based on their favorite franchises disgust me. i hope sony continues the trend of superioirty, this time i better be able to see the visual fedility compared to the other ones.
let me rephrase, there are good games that are 30 fps but they would be a better experience at 60 fps. the only reason games are at 30 is obviously due to tech limitations, hell, to have witcher 2 play on super crazy on my gtx, i need to play at 30 fps. No one can tell me that a game would actually be better at 30 fps than 60.
It disgusts me how I play a game on consoles at 30fps and see the glory of how it feels at 60fps. I cant describe it much but the feel is much better, it seems more realistic. Try going from Bad company 2 to Call of duty on ur ps3, the feel is much better even if BF is a better game in some senses. anyone who says 30 fps is ok or prefers to play at 30 fps is just trying to justify his inferior console. At one point, infamous 2 in a less intense and increased to 60fps (im guessing there is no V-lock) and the movements just felt so smooth. Why do you think these pc dudes spend a ton of money on gtx580s when games dont even use them well this gen, to get that 60fps. I better not be playing 30fps next gen. Do you guys think 30fps is enough? I dont.
[QUOTE="deadlyabdus123"]wait for review scores, i dont see why u guys hate it so much, the trailer didnt look bad to me, it looks like the same old pretty much. Im happy as long as the gamplay is similar and in 60fps, screw how he looks. People like you caused infamous 2 from having a pretty looking guy back to an ugly bald guy, developers shouldent listen to fans. Same happened with max payne 3, well nothing happened but gamers complained about playing as a bald fat guy, fans make me sick. Yangire
DMC runs at 30 FPS if I remember correctly.
screw it then lol, 60fps i what i expect from my DMC
wait for review scores, i dont see why u guys hate it so much, the trailer didnt look bad to me, it looks like the same old pretty much. Im happy as long as the gamplay is similar and in 60fps, screw how he looks. People like you caused infamous 2 from having a pretty looking guy back to an ugly bald guy, developers shouldent listen to fans. Same happened with max payne 3, well nothing happened but gamers complained about playing as a bald fat guy, fans make me sick.
I feel like alot of problems stem from the pure graphical abilities compared to PC and the Lack of ram. for example: number of objects on screen or lower textures. Im just wondering if there is a pure cpu problem with the consoles. I remember one developer arguing for a crappy terrain deforming game that the Wii didnt have the cpu power capable to process terrain deformation. I feel like cpu wise, the current consoles (360 and ps3) are on par with PCs (for their limited uses cause console cpus arent multipurpose). With more ram on the memory and graphics side, would the current consoles be able to compete with pcs?
they are bottom feeders of IW, they sicken me in how they took MW2 and rehashed its ideas and even used an older engine looking worse that MW2. And as far as balance features go, how dare you, how dare you people say treyarch are better at balancing, NO, they saw wat the problems were and fixed it. How did you guys expect infinity ward to know that people were gonna boost in FFA or scavanger blast all day. I wish serious harm to the developers of treyarch and their families, they disgust me. IW does a good job and tent to extend the series, Treyarch relies on cheap gimmicks. Worst of all, they are bad programmers, they couldent even make the ps3 version on par with 360, ps3 is plagued with lag. Any other developers you guys think are scum bottomefeeders?
Because GTA 4 was way less fun than San Andreas and Vice City. GTA 4 is way too much limited (because of Rockstar trying to make the game more realistic I guess) and has no fun cheats. The game became boring very fast and the story wasn't that great. But I can see and respect the effort put into developing that game.pomd1
I thought RDR was pretty boring at times. I still liked the game ,but it annoyed me that it felt like I spent 70% of the game riding through the desert on a horse.
UnknownSniper65
this, RDR is a good game overall and good experience but fun factor is much less than gta4, which is why i dont know how people can say its better when they complain how boring gta4 was compared to SA. I hope rockstar does nothing to make you all happy. The progress they are making with the games is better than peoples simple minds can understand.
Log in to comment