God of War3 is the new Graphics King, GEARS What? CRYSIS who?

its a FAKEBOY.... colosion

I must have been seeing nothing but fakeboys the last couple of days then, awful lot of PS3 supporters who apparently don't represent cows.

[QUOTE="LunchBox-"]

Ofcourse it doesnt touch Crysis, It Blows Crysis out of waters in terms of Scale and Lighting effects. Gow3 is in a League of its OWN

Cherokee_Jack

Someone say scale and lighting effects?

Did they?

Well then, allow me to retort

[QUOTE="colosion"]its a FAKEBOY.... AnnoyedDragon

I must have been seeing nothing but fakeboys the last couple of days then, awful lot of PS3 supporters who apparently don't represent cows.

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

tirralirra

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

sirk1264

[QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"][QUOTE="lolfaqs"]

So is the cost of a gaming rig that can play it at max settings.

lolfaqs

Just pointing it out. People say the PS3 is expensive, but at least the PS3 isn't obsolete when I bring it home from the store. And the PS3's price pales in comparison to what a high end gaming PC costs these days.

[QUOTE="colosion"]its a FAKEBOY.... AnnoyedDragon

I must have been seeing nothing but fakeboys the last couple of days then, awful lot of PS3 supporters who apparently don't represent cows.

Not only is it the most Technically superior game in the current market, It will also help sony push consoles, because GOW was one of the brands the ps2 owners recognize, and will run out to buy. by then youll see the WiiFAD slowing down and Nintendo will release their new Vii or Zii to counter.But soon those 100 million ps2 owners will be buying ps3s.

Its the Best looking game thats coming out on any system. And guess what you dont need to pay M$ or buy a 9000 dollar PC to play it either. This will end up as the Third AAAAE for the Ps3 (after MGS4 and Kz2).

Sheep, Hermits, Lems AM CRY. actually they wont have the time to cry, they will be running to buy ps3s

LunchBox-

[QUOTE="sirk1264"]

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

tirralirra

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

sirk1264

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

tirralirra

Better processor? Try to clarify what exactly you mean by better, last I heard Cell was designed for better performance in certain areas like floating point calculation at the cost of others.

Cell's single general purpose core is used as the three cores in the 360 correct? Yet I recently came across an old Capcom engine article translation that compared the 360s CPU performance to a "4 SMT threads in a dual-core Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 840 (3.2GHz)", which is rather crappy.

To put it in perspective the performance of the Pentium 4 was so bad Intel scrapped the architecture and redesigned their 1999 Pentium 3 architecture for their next processor, you know a CPU design is bad when you are better off overhauling the last one. So three of these cores are comparable to the performance of a failed CPU architecture, Cell only has one of them; and these are the type of processor cores games are highly reliant on to perform their game logic work.

So we have this crappy general purpose core acting as a manager for the SPE's, 6 being available for games to use. This is where Cell boasts the most performance to come from, the impression I get from these is they are more specialized processor cores; which may help in specific scenarios like physics or video processing work but fall behind in the broad range of calculations games demand today.

I'm not an expert in this, this is just information I happened to fall over from time to time. That said I probably have a better idea than some of the over hyped console fanboys in here, console users aren't exactly renowned for their tech knowledge. Frankly one of today's mainstream dual cores paired with GPU computing would probably do a better job in most games than Cell.

[QUOTE="tirralirra"][QUOTE="sirk1264"] PC CPU's are much better than console cpu's. A Core I7 cpu would definitely beat the cell processor. No you can't compare GOW3 with Crysis because the graphics in that trailer do not look impressive at all and saying that Crysis is a simple FPS shows you no nothing about the game.

sirk1264

I'm still not buying it. Why? it's rated M.

2-10-08

[QUOTE="sirk1264"]

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

Martin_G_N

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

AnnoyedDragon

Better processor? Try to clarify what exactly you mean by better, last I heard Cell was designed for better performance in certain areas like floating point calculation at the cost of others.

Cell's single general purpose core is used as the three cores in the 360 correct? Yet I recently came across an old Capcom engine article translation that compared the 360s CPU performance to a "4 SMT threads in a dual-core Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 840 (3.2GHz)", which is rather crappy.

To put it in perspective the performance of the Pentium 4 was so bad Intel scrapped the architecture and redesigned their 1999 Pentium 3 architecture for their next processor, you know a CPU design is bad when you are better off overhauling the last one. So three of these cores are comparable to the performance of a failed CPU architecture, Cell only has one of them; and these are the type of processor cores games are highly reliant on to perform their game logic work.

So we have this crappy general purpose core acting as a manager for the SPE's, 6 being available for games to use. This is where Cell boasts the most performance to come from, the impression I get from these is they are more specialized processor cores; which may help in specific scenarios like physics or video processing work but fall behind in the broad range of calculations games demand today.

I'm not an expert in this, this is just information I happened to fall over from time to time. That said I probably have a better idea than some of the over hyped console fanboys in here, console users aren't exactly renowned for their tech knowledge. Frankly one of today's mainstream dual cores paired with GPU computing would probably do a better job in most games than Cell.

Define high settings, i dont know many people who can run crysis on max settings. On average settings, Crysis looks, well, average.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="tirralirra"]

Hardware?

Come on then, lets talk hardware. Firstly, the ps3 runs a better processor than most of you in your pc's, but probably not a better graphics card.

That in itself should help us compare Crysis to GOW3, some how...

Crysis equal better graphics, but it's a fairly simple FPS, whereas GOW3 will be fast with plenty of things going on to utilise that cell processor.

tirralirra

Better processor? Try to clarify what exactly you mean by better, last I heard Cell was designed for better performance in certain areas like floating point calculation at the cost of others.

Cell's single general purpose core is used as the three cores in the 360 correct? Yet I recently came across an old Capcom engine article translation that compared the 360s CPU performance to a "4 SMT threads in a dual-core Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 840 (3.2GHz)", which is rather crappy.

To put it in perspective the performance of the Pentium 4 was so bad Intel scrapped the architecture and redesigned their 1999 Pentium 3 architecture for their next processor, you know a CPU design is bad when you are better off overhauling the last one. So three of these cores are comparable to the performance of a failed CPU architecture, Cell only has one of them; and these are the type of processor cores games are highly reliant on to perform their game logic work.

So we have this crappy general purpose core acting as a manager for the SPE's, 6 being available for games to use. This is where Cell boasts the most performance to come from, the impression I get from these is they are more specialized processor cores; which may help in specific scenarios like physics or video processing work but fall behind in the broad range of calculations games demand today.

I'm not an expert in this, this is just information I happened to fall over from time to time. That said I probably have a better idea than some of the over hyped console fanboys in here, console users aren't exactly renowned for their tech knowledge. Frankly one of today's mainstream dual cores paired with GPU computing would probably do a better job in most games than Cell.

:lol: "Teh powerz of teh cell" i thought this went out of fashion in 2006? :P

There has been MAJOR processor development in the last 4 years, the cell was originally commissioned in 2004 (if you have read the article about IBM's PPE and the power PC architecture you would know that the cell and the 360 CPU are actually very similar) and as has been shown countless times by multiplats and so forth the 360 is pretty much level with the ps3 in terms of graphics. Both the cell and 360 chips belong to a pre-core2 era. The core 2 Q6600 WAY outperforms both of them, hell even the E7000 series runs rings around them.

Perhaps you should do some research into PS3 and 360 R and D and see weather you frankly laughable knowlege of processors increases somewhat. The Cell is not some magical being, its just a chip. one which has some prety major programming issues. Power over latency was the route they went down.

no, the PS3 and 360 were obsolete 2 years ago.

clone01

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

Did you quote that from somewhere, sounds just like every other arguement concerning cells, i7 and cores. It's all a big mystery. i still think if devs put some thought and effort into games, they could utilise that cell and show us what it can do.

tirralirra

No I did not just cut and paste it from somewhere, maybe you yourself should actually make an argument for Cell instead of accusing others of regurgitating information you simply decide must be false.

I also see you go by the "wait and see argument", a way of attempting to end a debate without presenting any counter evidence to support your argument; or lack of argument to be more specific. You haven't actually presented anything, you have just chosen to ignore what people have said and go by faith Cell is some super computer waiting to be unleashed one day.

I've seen people throw out numbers but the numbers don't add up in its application, on paper figures are a poor representative of real world performance.

Define high settings, i dont know many people who can run crysis on max settings. On average settings, Crysis looks, well, average.

tirralirra

On average settings it looks average? Could you possibly sound anymore like an outsider to PC gaming?

I always find it cheeky when console users criticise a PC gamers ability to max a game when even on reduced settings it is beyond what they have. A person with a 1680x1050 monitor running a game at 1440x900 hasn't maxed a game on their setup, it is still a higher resolution than the 720p console users pretend is somehow a significant advancement.

I run Crysis on high with some very high settings, the game has settings above that of most of today's systems so that it ages well; a concept I imagine will be completely alien to a static system like a console. If you think Crysis looks average when it is not on max settings then you truly are a self deluded console fanboy, if these graphics were on PS3 you would be gloating on the rooftops about it, only because it is not on your platform of preference do you see it differently.

Dont use the old GOW to judge the new one. New art, new physics, new environments, new game. It's anticipated to be much different to the older ones. There's an article somewhere about how much the design has changed since the old ones. And that is why there's hype for this game.

Woah woah waoh. I'm no console gamer. I've only had a N64 and a PS3, and i only got my Ps3 last sep, and sold my N64 like 2003??? And i;ve been playing pc games since windows 2.11238739 or whatever it was. Wing commander anyone???

I have nothing to present, i'm not making these games. And the reason I say Crysis looks average on average settings is cos i run everything at max, all the time. And you're right, i dont know too much about the cell, just little snippets of comparison against other CPUs. I'm not saying consoles are going to surpass pc, cos they never will. I'm saying that the cell processor in the ps3 still has a lot to show for itself, trust me on this one. Maybe later this year, or 2010, games on ps3 should be pretty good if they utilise the cell processor more. I know this because I know a dev who says there is a lot of trouble and hassle concerning the devlopment of games on cells.

I run Crysis at higher than very high settings using my tweaked config folders and when I go back to playing the PS3 it feels like a huge stepdown with blurry graphics, low framerates and smaller levels. I was playing COD5 with my freinds and could barely see the enemy in the distnace due to the resoultion making everything blurry. 720p is actually lower res than a 720p tv that can do 1360x768. But obviously the consoles cannot handle that jump with most games barely running 720p.

It should be said that unless you have played crysis maxed out and have proof, you cannot comment on its visuals in a definitive manner. I was playing the Killzone 2 demo and I cant believe people said that it has good shadows, they are horrendous. They are very low res and blocky, if you watch your characters shadow you will see what I mean.

[QUOTE="clone01"]

no, the PS3 and 360 were obsolete 2 years ago.

LunchBox-

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

[QUOTE="clone01"]

no, the PS3 and 360 were obsolete 2 years ago.

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

[QUOTE="clone01"]

no, the PS3 and 360 were obsolete 2 years ago.

LunchBox-

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

[QUOTE="LunchBox-"]

[QUOTE="clone01"]

no, the PS3 and 360 were obsolete 2 years ago.

mitu123

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="LunchBox-"]

360 maybe, because its a cheap shoddy piece of hardware made by M$.

the ps3? outdated? dont kid yourself. it still has enough potential to out perform your 8000$ pc anyday. Once the lazy 3rd party devs figure out the way to use that power (like how Guerrilla games did) you will see ALL multiplatforms run better on the ps3. youll be buying Crysis 2 on the ps3 because your average walmart intel processor arent even in the same league as the cell.

tirralirra

I hope your not serious. For a second I thought I was gonna pee my pants. You made my day. HAHAHAHAHAHA

Not only is it the most Technically superior game in the current market, It will also help sony push consoles, because GOW was one of the brands the ps2 owners recognize, and will run out to buy. by then youll see the WiiFAD slowing down and Nintendo will release their new Vii or Zii to counter.But soon those 100 million ps2 owners will be buying ps3s.

Its the Best looking game thats coming out on any system. And guess what you dont need to pay M$ or buy a 9000 dollar PC to play it either. This will end up as the Third AAAAE for the Ps3 (after MGS4 and Kz2).

Sheep, Hermits, Lems AM CRY. actually they wont have the time to cry, they will be running to buy ps3s

LunchBox-

I hope your not serious. For a second I thought I was gonna pee my pants. You made my day. HAHAHAHAHAHA

[QUOTE="LunchBox-"]

Not only is it the most Technically superior game in the current market, It will also help sony push consoles, because GOW was one of the brands the ps2 owners recognize, and will run out to buy. by then youll see the WiiFAD slowing down and Nintendo will release their new Vii or Zii to counter.But soon those 100 million ps2 owners will be buying ps3s.

Its the Best looking game thats coming out on any system. And guess what you dont need to pay M$ or buy a 9000 dollar PC to play it either. This will end up as the Third AAAAE for the Ps3 (after MGS4 and Kz2).

Sheep, Hermits, Lems AM CRY. actually they wont have the time to cry, they will be running to buy ps3s

so youre saying god of war 3 looks better than killozone2 also? sorry from what ive seen god of war 3 graphics doesnt look that great and i doubt itll look as good as killzone 2

Do you really think that the whole world will wake up the day GOW 3 comes out, and go out to buy that system? KZ2, MGS4, Uncharted, Hevenly Sword, R&C TOD, Resistance, LBP, and all the other exclusives really hasn't pushed sales. I'll bet you that it's not gonna sale as good as you think, it's going to do good for a PS3 game, but It wont sell as much as HALO: ODST or anything else. If anything, it's going to be a best seller for that console, but GOW 3 wont scratch the surface of anything that say HALO on the case. So please keep these things to yourself, it's not worth it.

ghandi_2005

First of all killzone 2 and metal gear solid DID push sales so will god of war because the series is one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time, so of course the final game to the series is gonna sell!! and your comparing god of war 3 to halo odst?? halo odst doesnt even have master chief. and again you are wrong when you said that a ps3 game wont sell more then a game with the name HAlO on it, look at the sells of halo wars and you will know what i mean

God of War wouldn't have looked impressive if you showed me it 2 years ago. Honestly It looks like they just took dynasty warriors 6 and reskinned itunknown37

[QUOTE="unknown37"]God of War wouldn't have looked impressive if you showed me it 2 years ago. Honestly It looks like they just took dynasty warriors 6 and reskinned itclyde46

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]Do you really think that the whole world will wake up the day GOW 3 comes out, and go out to buy that system? KZ2, MGS4, Uncharted, Hevenly Sword, R&C TOD, Resistance, LBP, and all the other exclusives really hasn't pushed sales. I'll bet you that it's not gonna sale as good as you think, it's going to do good for a PS3 game, but It wont sell as much as HALO: ODST or anything else. If anything, it's going to be a best seller for that console, but GOW 3 wont scratch the surface of anything that say HALO on the case. So please keep these things to yourself, it's not worth it.

First of all killzone 2 and metal gear solid DID push sales so will god of war because the series is one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time, so of course the final game to the series is gonna sell!! and your comparing god of war 3 to halo odst?? halo odst doesnt even have master chief. and again you are wrong when you said that a ps3 game wont sell more then a game with the name HAlO on it, look at the sells of halo wars and you will know what i mean

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="unknown37"]God of War wouldn't have looked impressive if you showed me it 2 years ago. Honestly It looks like they just took dynasty warriors 6 and reskinned itunknown37

Are you blind? Did you read anything I wrote? Do you know that majority of PS3 sales are contributed to Blueray movies? Also i don't think GOW has impacted gaming culture as much as Halo. PS3 has the lowest software sales of any other system, and it doesn't matter if the next Halo wont have Master Chief, because it's the name. Halo wars is selling great by the way, and by the end of the year you will probably see that it has outsold Killzone. So so don't open your mouth, when you don't have a clue of what your talking about. Ohh yeah is the PS3 the only system you own, because if it is, that mean that statement was a bias opinion. That would mean you are a fanboy, and last i checked there is no cure for that. [QUOTE="rikansem"]

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]ghandi_2005

First of all killzone 2 and metal gear solid DID push sales so will god of war because the series is one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time, so of course the final game to the series is gonna sell!! and your comparing god of war 3 to halo odst?? halo odst doesnt even have master chief. and again you are wrong when you said that a ps3 game wont sell more then a game with the name HAlO on it, look at the sells of halo wars and you will know what i mean

i own all systems thank you, and halo may have transformed first person shooters, but hack and slash, and action adventure games owe a lot tothe god of war series. and the low software sells of the ps3 are fromthe low number of ps3's in general, it makes sense doesnt it? if there is less ps3's then there will be less games bought??

:lol:

the tc thinks this crap is graphics king?

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]Are you blind? Did you read anything I wrote? Do you know that majority of PS3 sales are contributed to Blueray movies? Also i don't think GOW has impacted gaming culture as much as Halo. PS3 has the lowest software sales of any other system, and it doesn't matter if the next Halo wont have Master Chief, because it's the name. Halo wars is selling great by the way, and by the end of the year you will probably see that it has outsold Killzone. So so don't open your mouth, when you don't have a clue of what your talking about. Ohh yeah is the PS3 the only system you own, because if it is, that mean that statement was a bias opinion. That would mean you are a fanboy, and last i checked there is no cure for that. [QUOTE="rikansem"]

First of all killzone 2 and metal gear solid DID push sales so will god of war because the series is one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time, so of course the final game to the series is gonna sell!! and your comparing god of war 3 to halo odst?? halo odst doesnt even have master chief. and again you are wrong when you said that a ps3 game wont sell more then a game with the name HAlO on it, look at the sells of halo wars and you will know what i mean

i own all systems thank you, and halo may have transformed first person shooters, but hack and slash, and action adventure games owe a lot tothe god of war series. and the low software sells of the ps3 are fromthe low number of ps3's in general, it makes sense doesnt it? if there is less ps3's then there will be less games bought??

Dude hack slash and GOW owes a lot to DMC, GOW probably would have seen the light of day if it wasn't for that series. By the way your last statement is stupid!!! [QUOTE="rikansem"]

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]ghandi_2005

i own all systems thank you, and halo may have transformed first person shooters, but hack and slash, and action adventure games owe a lot tothe god of war series. and the low software sells of the ps3 are fromthe low number of ps3's in general, it makes sense doesnt it? if there is less ps3's then there will be less games bought??

and halo owes a lot to half -life

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]Dude hack slash and GOW owes a lot to DMC, GOW probably would have seen the light of day if it wasn't for that series. By the way your last statement is stupid!!! [QUOTE="rikansem"]

i own all systems thank you, and halo may have transformed first person shooters, but hack and slash, and action adventure games owe a lot tothe god of war series. and the low software sells of the ps3 are fromthe low number of ps3's in general, it makes sense doesnt it? if there is less ps3's then there will be less games bought??

and halo owes a lot to half -life

Fact: God of War III will probably be a better production then Gears and Crysis. Fact: God of War III does not look better then Crysis. In any way.NAPK1NS

Hmmm... facts don't use the word "probably" to describe something-- thats called probability and you dont have the data!:roll:

:lol:

the tc thinks this crap is graphics king?

GTR_FX

Great Graphics depend on a number of things. Such as lighting, character models, textures, dynamic environment, animation, etc. I wouldn't judge any game to have great graphics until i've seen it myself.

what this thread deserves

You are officially king of stupid statements, Halo and half life are two completely different types of games. [QUOTE="rikansem"]

[QUOTE="ghandi_2005"]ghandi_2005

and halo owes a lot to half -life

they are both first person shooters... wow do you insult people when you are wrong?

lol god of war 3 looks better than gears of war huh?