Mbrans25den Whatever.. the threds about popcorn now. "if not worse" First, I can't remember what we were talking about... If it was blu-ray, then you must be a fanboy. Because this is a HD disc, its obvioulsy the dominant media. Only a fanboy would say "worse".
This thred is now about popcorn. Seriously, who eats salted? I hate it. its like.. nice, lovely popcorn, with the devil thrown on it. Sweet/toffee ftw.
Mbrans25den Sorry but games are still ported regularily.. hardly any time is the game made twice for the different consoles. This is a graphics comparison, games can definatley get better textures with patches. It's been done before. The PS3s hardware is very capable of rivaling the Xboxs, look at the exclusives (the games NOT PORTED). Your violent approtch to that post was terrible.
Jeremiah06, Yes, I agree with you. It's obvious that Devs will not patch/fix playstation 3 games once releasing the port. Bioshock did get a patch, that gave it much better graphics than before the patch.. but this patch wasn't big enough to completly change the game. With the fact that developers do not fix issues with porting, all graphics comparisons seem irrelevant. The graphics shown are Xbox... and ported/glitched/blurred xbox...
TIE 24 Amazing post, thanks for that :) Regarding the video RAM, The PS3 should be able to pump out textures that definatley rival that of the Xbox, but due to porting this get disotrted and blurred, this is why most textures are bad on the PS3. Your point on HD is pretty much what I was talking about, a game needs to be made with detail, then put into the resolution. The resolution doesn't designate the amount of POTENTIAL detail in a game, its however detailed the Developers make it. As you said, Xbox is really doing well with the graphics, as shown in this comparison. But if you were to show a texture say, from Uncharted, like a Rock texture, or a building texture, then put htat up against a leading Xbox game using the same sort of thing (i'm thinking Gears 2 building textures) The PS3 would look much better, this is because the textures in question are built to be powered by the playstations hardware and stored using blu-ray.
@ bigelf72 The games are made obviously made with a PC... but they're not made to PCs power. theyre made to Xboxs power needs. Then just pretty much 'copied and pasted' into PS3.
contacts420, I was just about to say that, seriously i was just about to type pretty much teh same thing. Games these days are made to Xbox standards, then ported to the PS3, this causes distortion, glitches and blurring in textures. This is why the Graphics comparissons are terrible, because they show everything to an Xbox standard, and the distorted image for the PS3, As stated before, only an exclusives graphics comparison could solve anything... But thats impossible, becuase no game would be the same. I've said before on many forums, every game that gets ported to the PS3 should get a mandatory patch.. something that provides the game with the power it needs for the PS3, to bring it up to standards. But a patch would need to be about 15gb... which is wayyy too much, which is why developers should make the patch and install it into the game before release on PS3. Think about it, a game on Xbox takes 5gb... Then it gets ported to PS3... That blu-ray disk, 25gb of storage, is only using 5gb, if this were patched to take up much more storage... Much better things could be done. Things like super texture re-vamps, effectivley blowing the Xbox version out of the water.
jhunte99 You're talking about HD... HD is all about the resolution.. and stuff like that. I'm talking about a part of HD, the Blu-ray part. With blu-rays disc space, its possible to create texture and sound files much more detailed, this is displayed within the resolution, not part of it. I agree with your point about PC gaming.
-DarkPhoenix-'s comments