the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about????????????????????
As with all Playstation brand consoles, they are very advanced, but difficult to program for and unlock their true potential.
Just as with PS2, we went from Summoner 2 and Fantavision, to MGS3 and Black, PS3 will go through a similar increase, only it won't just be in graphics, but rather all aspects, especially Physics and AI.
Give developers some time to get used to the system.
I agree but remember that ps3 is harder to develop for than 360 and the only games you have seen in action are launch games, lets wait and see about killzone 2 and mgs4
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
The Cell architecture is the hardest to develop for and much like the PS2, it's just going to take some time to get the great games out there. Think about the competition you speak of. It took the 360 a year to get Gears of War, which is the only game that has any real graphical jump over the PS3. R:FOM and Gears are being compared at a lot of sites. To me, that says alot about the PS3. 1st Gen game being compared to a second gen game.
The PS3 isn't going to blow the 360 out of the water in terms of hardware, but once developers get used to the hardware we will see some nice stuff, probably nicer than what's on 360. Factor 5 made the point that the depth and complexity of the PS3 hardware gives it a lot of headroom to keep growing into like the PS1, N64, and PS2.
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
One of the ps3's bombshells starts on the March 6th. It'll probably be the best online racing game out there. Myself, I've never liked racing games.....I've never owned a single one, however, this game made me put my $65 bucks for it because it's just too sick to pass on it. I loved the demo and I've not seen myself playing a demo this many times. I've played the demo at least 15 times. This is how I know this is going to be a great game. How many demos to you play a lot? Not too many....
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
You cant compare two consoles(360 and ps3) on graphics when one of the console games developers has had a year to work with that console. Give the ps3 game developers a year and then comment.
Time buddy. The 360 graphics weren't good in the beginning. Look at the overhyped Perfect Dark...it sucked. BTW, Gears is the only good game so far for 360, or ANY next-gen console. Wii Sports is an excuse for spare plastic and blank media.
Are those games first party games? No! I bet the games ur talkin abt are also on the 360. Now there lies the problem. SInce it is hard to code for the ps3, developers just port the game from 360 to ps3, hence affecting a lot of things like frame rate, and even graphics. motor storm is a first party, now look at the graphics. it wasnt ported from 360... direct sony material. now lets get EA to make nba live 08 coding purely ps3 code, and then again for 360 using 360 code and we'll see firstly how much money i'll cost them to do both, and secondly how much better the ps3's graphics would look like. Now watch out for killzone cuz its all ps3 code, nothing ported nothing messed with....
Patience my man, it has only been a few months. Gears of War (which is arguably the best looking 360 game) has come out after a of the 360 release. Just have a little patience, I'm sure we will all be gratified during the next months of 2007. Devs are starting to learn the ropes on PS3's capabilities so I'm sure a lot of games will match the 360 in terms of graphics and may even surpass it in a year's time.
RSX stinks, it is the only thing that is wrong with the ps3. If the RSX was built around 7900 technology and was more powerful then a 512mb 7950gx2, ps3 would be dominating
[QUOTE="Ravenstyle"]the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? gamefan
One of the ps3's bombshells starts on the March 6th. It'll probably be the best online racing game out there. Myself, I've never liked racing games.....I've never owned a single one, however, this game made me put my $65 bucks for it because it's just too sick to pass on it. I loved the demo and I've not seen myself playing a demo this many times. I've played the demo at least 15 times. This is how I know this is going to be a great game. How many demos to you play a lot? Not too many....
I love this game. I too have the demo and am waiting (not so patientally) for the release of the game.
Not trying to start anything, although this inevitably will. Everyone keeps saying the 360 has been out over a year, wait till PS3 has been out that long & it will blow away 360. But by that logic, it can also be said the the 360 will have been out for 2 years, giving them the same chance to up the graphics & gaming beyond where they are now. It is possible that the new PS3 games will always be comparable to the old 360 games given the fact the 360 will always be a year ahead as far as the whole learning curve goes. "Flame On"
lol yeah well the 360 will reach its max performance or threshold before the ps3 their is only so much more room for improvement before you use up all the systems resources, and ps3 has more headroom for development graphically....400th post!!!!
lol yeah well the 360 will reach its max performance or threshold before the ps3 their is only so much more room for improvement before you use up all the systems resources, and ps3 has more headroom for development graphically....400th post!!!!mmirza23
in all honesty, i feel the 360 has already reached or nearing its potential
in true MS fashion, I wont be suprised if they set out a new console with all the harware that should have been there when the 360 launched, just like it does with windows
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
wow come on resistance is a better looking game the gears of war
[QUOTE="RaptorVenom"]Not trying to start anything, although this inevitably will. Everyone keeps saying the 360 has been out over a year, wait till PS3 has been out that long & it will blow away 360. But by that logic, it can also be said the the 360 will have been out for 2 years, giving them the same chance to up the graphics & gaming beyond where they are now. It is possible that the new PS3 games will always be comparable to the old 360 games given the fact the 360 will always be a year ahead as far as the whole learning curve goes. "Flame On"Christopper
Valid point, although I think it is fair to assume that a console that has been out for 3mths really isn't expected to run before it learns to walk. Once the Ps3 has got a years worth of games under its belt, and although the 360 would still be the oldest out of the two. It will be a much fairer comparison than it is now and most owners would accept critisism alot more than they would now.
As far as accepting criticism, neither side will ever be able to do that well. As far as I am concerned, I don't care what is said of either system, I didn't make them & whatever is said doesn't affect me cuz I had nothing to do with it & they are just words. I thank you for saying I had a "valid point", most would have just calle me an X-Bot. You have a valid point as well. Other than the criticism part. :-)
neither of the consoles will deliver exactly what they claim. The difference is that Sony hyped their machine up way more than anyone else. Thats why people get disapointed. They should of taken a more low key approach. Seriously, you cant expect half of what they have been taunting because its just not possible this generation. Yes there will be some great graphics....but dont expect anything that will put RFOM to shame. That wont happen...that game has great graphics and yes maybe a little more can be achieved, but not anything THAT noticeable or mind blowing. Sony has always been really bad about overhyping, but this time around its been even worse.
In he end, both consoles will be pretty much the same...thats what ive been saying for over a year now and im sticking to that. Both have their strengths and their flaws....in my opinion you cant go wrong this generation. Its not like last generation that xbox actually had a noticeably better machine in almost every aspect. This generation its a wash...so give it some time and you will see some improvements, but dont expect the impossible.
Yes, the PS3 software so far has been a big letdown (that's why I haven't bought one yet.) Heck, my original PS2 died 3 months ago, and I still can't decide if I should buy a PS3 as a replacement. However, more than any other console in the last 3 generations, you can't talk about the graphics on PS3 without also discussing the Cell CPU. RSX was chosen because the 3D areas it sucks at (like vertex stuff) is EXACTLY what the Cell is great at. On a "normal" system (like almost everything else) the GPU does graphic stuff, the CPU does everything else. On PS3 the Cell's SPEs are part of the graphics subsystem. Yes, the GPU on 360 absolutly destroys RSX, but RSX isn't the only part of the PS3's graphics. Making RSX vs Xenos comparisons a little disingenuious. The way PS3 will (hopefully) catch up to 360 is by developers to stop using only RSX (and token SPE use) for graphics and start thinking RSX+SPE as the way to go. Until then, PS3 is always going to be graphically behind 360.
Not trying to start anything, although this inevitably will. Everyone keeps saying the 360 has been out over a year, wait till PS3 has been out that long & it will blow away 360. But by that logic, it can also be said the the 360 will have been out for 2 years, giving them the same chance to up the graphics & gaming beyond where they are now. It is possible that the new PS3 games will always be comparable to the old 360 games given the fact the 360 will always be a year ahead as far as the whole learning curve goes. "Flame On"RaptorVenom
you're right in a way, and in a way wrong.
After a while Ps3 graphics will surpass 360 and it games are definitely more rounded. rated M games and shooter do get boring after a while. There is so much you can unlock, therefore if you say what you are saying now compare the final games for PS3 to the final games for 360 when the next gen comes.
Also LOOK at the PAST! PS2 came out before XBOX and 360 no doubt by now everyknows many games (not all - plus I'm talking about top games) can look better than PS2. Well 360 is in the same boat now, after a while you'll see a difference. But what happened to people saying gameplay counts???? ZOE, MGS4, FF, KH, something from the makers of Shadow of Colossus, White Knight Story, motorstorm. Much more variable library than shooters and Mature games. It's just that ports from 360 are hurting PS3 (you could almost say lowering its potential).
BTW if you think game devs are going to make amazing tip top best looking games, taking advantage of any console right away you have a very warped sense of the gaming world.
i don't know if this might be said or not but you have to keep in mind that people are comparing lets say resistance with gears and they are like gears looks better or they look similar you have to remember that gears is a year older if you compare the ps3 launch with 360 launch they look better but it looks like the or not as good to those that a year old.
Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3.
Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. pimperjones
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now.
[QUOTE="pimperjones"]Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. RahKayne
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now. Even the folks at Nvidia was inclined to admit that RSX is just a souped up 7800GTX. I love Sony and I love PS3 but Sony spent way too much money on the Cell and simply ran out when it came to GPU development. Call of Duty 3 is the only game out right now that can accurately portray the GPU strength of both systems as it runs on the brute strength of the graphics processor.
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
RSX doesnt produce the lighting, AI, modelling, physics, those are handled by Cell. RSX produces textures, which are easy to do, considering thats all its doing. Unfortunately programmers havent been able to go through that route because its just released and, the multiplatform games have to be programmed very similary to eachother on all consoles because the amount of time it would take to optimize each game individually for each console would be quite a mad process and cost alot more.
[QUOTE="RahKayne"][QUOTE="pimperjones"]Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. pimperjones
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now. Even the folks at Nvidia was inclined to admit that RSX is just a souped up 7800GTX. I love Sony and I love PS3 but Sony spent way too much money on the Cell and simply ran out when it came to GPU development. Call of Duty 3 is the only game out right now that can accurately portray the GPU strength of both systems as it runs on the brute strength of the graphics processor. aha, they didnt run out of any money, Sony is worth more then MS dude. They simple didnt need a high powered graphics card, + the 7800GTX was the only graphics card avail at the time, + Cell handles everything bar the last pieces of game development. let me put it this way, in pcs, the graphics card is more important then the processor for gaming, while in consoles, (YES they are different technologys, software and hardware, optimized for games, PCs are not), the Processor is actully more important then the graphics card, the PS1 didnt have a graphics card, the PS2 graphics card was there just to beef the system up by 0.5x, and in PS3 its the same, hardly helping.
[QUOTE="RahKayne"][QUOTE="pimperjones"]Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. pimperjones
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now. Even the folks at Nvidia was inclined to admit that RSX is just a souped up 7800GTX. I love Sony and I love PS3 but Sony spent way too much money on the Cell and simply ran out when it came to GPU development. Call of Duty 3 is the only game out right now that can accurately portray the GPU strength of both systems as it runs on the brute strength of the graphics processor.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but PS3's version of Call of Duty was better than 360's, the models looked better, the buildings and depth of perception. Only reason why 360 fans like it above PS3's is because PS3's was more lighter, and for WWII everyone wants a dark environment. (plus some more textures, however that's the devs fault) That's personal choice, so don't base that off of reviews. Gamespot did something recently about this, so did gametrailers. Dunno where you getting this significant diference between the two for that game, cause they look pretty much the same. I'll give you a link, however I don't wanna bring up old news.
I'm talking about framerates, PS3 and poor framerates I played it. I don't give a hoot about light and darkness cause I can up the contrast on my TV. I talking about smooth framerates. I never said that PS3 will have worse graphics, I said PS3 has a crap GPU, but with better work on the CELL maybe things will change in terms of graphics.
[QUOTE="pimperjones"][QUOTE="RahKayne"][QUOTE="pimperjones"]Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. RahKayne
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now. Even the folks at Nvidia was inclined to admit that RSX is just a souped up 7800GTX. I love Sony and I love PS3 but Sony spent way too much money on the Cell and simply ran out when it came to GPU development. Call of Duty 3 is the only game out right now that can accurately portray the GPU strength of both systems as it runs on the brute strength of the graphics processor.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but PS3's version of Call of Duty was better than 360's, the models looked better, the buildings and depth of perception. Only reason why 360 fans like it above PS3's is because PS3's was more lighter, and for WWII everyone wants a dark environment. That's personal choice, so don't base that off of reviews. Gamespot did something recently about this, so did gametrailers. Dunno where you getting this significant diference between the two for that game, cause they look pretty much the same. I'll give you a link, however I don't wanna bring up old news.
They do look the same, completely, and someone was saying about framerates on the PS3 sucked, well thats aload of crap coz no one else complained and nothing came up on the GS site, or GT. + the basketball game had better textures on the floor, the HDR is better in Need for speed????? what!! no its not its better on PS3, well my opinion, Ive been doing Computer and Classical Animation for 5 years now, and on the 360 version the hdr, bloom effect overthrows an image of a tree, while in real life that wouldnt happen. Not if the lights are miles away in the back ground, what are they? BEAM LIGHTS, + the brick work was more detailed on the walls of the building on PS3, in rear view mirror, those low polygon count 'reflected' buildings, (not reflected, thats called translution imaging, no game on EARTH can do that) are on the 360 version, what? 4-5 polygons, and on the PS3 some aint there, hmmm ever considered that they might have been forgotten about???? U cant program a single software unit for multiple hardware units at one time, it was forgotten about when they were developing that game for PS3 RIGHT AFTER!!!! OMG, its original programmed console, XBOX 360. Same thing happened with madden, the shirts looked rushed on the PS3, ever consider they are? The texture detail on the 360 is at least 1x the amount of pixels then the PS3 version, it was rushed for launch, meaning all these games are 360 ports. And oh whats this, Tiger Woods is better on PS3 overall? hmm, well there ya go.
the developers who made PS3 claim that the Playstation is all that, which i can agree with, however i have yet to play a PS3 game that looks as good as any of the XBOX 360 games i have played. so what's with all the hype about the graphics engine with the RSX card that can produce unparalleled graphics. I OR ANYONE WHO PLAYED OR HAS A PLAYSTATION 3 HAS YET TO SEE THEM. i have a PS3 and i have always loved playstations, since i have all three consoles, but i know that is a lie, because they have yet to come out with a game or even a trailer that can prove their claim. My PS3 is hooked up to a HDMI monster cable and displays pretty good graphics on my Samsung HDTV, but i have seen much better from the competition. i am no lawyer, but where are these spectacular and unmatched graphics the developers are talking about???????????????????? Ravenstyle
The PS3 just released, and developers aren't going to know it from top to bottom as soon as they receive their dev kits.
Not trying to start anything, although this inevitably will. Everyone keeps saying the 360 has been out over a year, wait till PS3 has been out that long & it will blow away 360. But by that logic, it can also be said the the 360 will have been out for 2 years, giving them the same chance to up the graphics & gaming beyond where they are now. It is possible that the new PS3 games will always be comparable to the old 360 games given the fact the 360 will always be a year ahead as far as the whole learning curve goes. "Flame On"RaptorVenom
you make an interesting point, but if you compare ps3 current to 360 next they look similar or decent aswell but may ps3 2nd be better than 360 3rd who knows time will tell
The person that made this thread is wrong don’t you know that the PS3 version of Oblivion is better than the X box 360 version in every way graphics, load times ect. This is according to Bethesda and shows that if a dev team work to make use of the PS3 hardware it CAN surpass the 360. "The real enhancement is in the visuals and, to some extent, the loading times. The game seemed to have a slightly smoother and more Consistent frame rate than it did on the Xbox, though the difference wasn't enormous, and it seemed to us that the textures looked just a tad sharper. More obvious (and confirmed by Bethesda) was an improvement to the game's texturing over large distances. Remember how the original Oblivion had a line set an arbitrary distance in front of the player beyond which ground textures turned into kind of a muddy mess? That's all taken care of now, thanks to a new custom pixel shader. The effect is only noticeable outdoors--though it's more accurate to say the effect is not noticeable if you've never played a previous version of the game--but it's a nice addition nonetheless. Oblivion will make extensive use of the PS3's hard drive by caching multiple gigabytes of data, which seemed to help with load times from what we saw". This is a great achievement for a system that has not even launched outside of North America and Japan and the 360 has over a year head start give it some time PS3 will win over 360.
[QUOTE="RahKayne"][QUOTE="pimperjones"][QUOTE="RahKayne"][QUOTE="pimperjones"]Quit beating the dead horse already, its been discussed and proven in numerous threads that teh RSX is a crappy GPU, Sony knows this, gamers know this and so do developers. RSX is garbage compared to the xenos360 but the CELL is suppose to make up what the RSX lacks in power. How that'll pan out nobody knows, so far just in GPU alone the PS3 is getting thrashed by teh 360. Just look at the poor frame rates in Call of Duty 3. Alyxm1
that's because it's a port from 360, if a game is made for a systemit'll most likely have better FPS than if it's ported to another no matter what kind of GPU. Plus devs making 360 games know how to use that hardware better, and have easier tools to work with, dunno how you expect them to do the same for the cell processor and bluray and the gpu, let alone they got the final dev kits months before PS3 actually came out. You sound like you are from SW, so I'm not going to argue. RSX crap???? I don't have time to go into now. Even the folks at Nvidia was inclined to admit that RSX is just a souped up 7800GTX. I love Sony and I love PS3 but Sony spent way too much money on the Cell and simply ran out when it came to GPU development. Call of Duty 3 is the only game out right now that can accurately portray the GPU strength of both systems as it runs on the brute strength of the graphics processor.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but PS3's version of Call of Duty was better than 360's, the models looked better, the buildings and depth of perception. Only reason why 360 fans like it above PS3's is because PS3's was more lighter, and for WWII everyone wants a dark environment. That's personal choice, so don't base that off of reviews. Gamespot did something recently about this, so did gametrailers. Dunno where you getting this significant diference between the two for that game, cause they look pretty much the same. I'll give you a link, however I don't wanna bring up old news.
They do look the same, completely, and someone was saying about framerates on the PS3 sucked, well thats aload of crap coz no one else complained and nothing came up on the GS site, or GT. + the basketball game had better textures on the floor, the HDR is better in Need for speed????? what!! no its not its better on PS3, well my opinion, Ive been doing Computer and forbidden>
Don’t forget you bought PS3 for the "POTENTIAL" so just be patient and wait.
In 4 or 5 years it will surpass the graphics of the other console and you will be prod of your purchase. :D
______________________________________
LMAO, I don't know about that I say 2-3 years, and look at Motorstorm a 1st gen title and it looks almost as good as the trailer. Just wait until devs get used to the PS3 especially in November you'll see some really jaw dropping games.
Log in to comment