Xbox360 has the more powerful Graphic chip

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

gamerking178

Killzone 2 took 5.gamerking178

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

gamerking178

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

NinjaMunkey01

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

Yes the graphic chip on the Xbox 360 is better then the one in the PS3. The PS3 has the Cell chip to help with the graphics so in terms of raw power the PS3 edges out the 360 slightly.

It takes about four years to make a great looking PS3 game. ;)

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"]Killzone 2 took 5.Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"][QUOTE="gamerking178"]Killzone 2 took 5.II_Seraphim_II

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"][QUOTE="gamerking178"]Killzone 2 took 5.II_Seraphim_II

And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.Aljosa23

[QUOTE="speedsix"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

NinjaMunkey01

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

I wasn't trying to prove anything, in fact quite the opposite. You're the one who's claiming K2's visuals are conclusive proof of the PS3 hardware superiority. I say there is no proof exclusives can't be done on the opposing platform, none at all.

In response to your 'proof', answer me this, why would Microsoft pump the resources Sony did with Killzone into their exclusives when they can release games like Gears which look at worst, almost as good, for a fraction of the development costs and which will probably sell more?

Sony are throwing massive amounts of money at their exclusives because they have something to prove.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.gamerking178

I could care less but all the technical mumbo jumbo because from I have seen, KZ2 is the best looking console game. Am I right, or amirite?

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.Aljosa23

I could care less but all the technical mumbo jumbo because from I have seen, KZ2 is the best looking console game. Am I right, or amirite?

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.gamerking178

Yea, Gears 2 and it's extremely bright colors don't hide anything!

Also, you haven't played KZ2, so please don't act like you know.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.Chutebox

Yea, Gears 2 and it's extremely bright colors don't hide anything!

Also, you haven't played KZ2, so please don't act like you know.

KZ2 uses dark colours to mould out bad textures. It also doesn't use generic Organic items because as if they do, FPS drop + it would look horrible. Thats why.gamerking178

I could care less but all the technical mumbo jumbo because from I have seen, KZ2 is the best looking console game. Am I right, or amirite?

[QUOTE="Chutebox"]

[QUOTE="gamerking178"] KZ2 uses dark colours to mould out bad textures. It also doesn't use generic Organic items because as if they do, FPS drop + it would look horrible. Thats why.gamerking178

Yea, Gears 2 and it's extremely bright colors don't hide anything!

Also, you haven't played KZ2, so please don't act like you know.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]The PS3 isn't a PC equipped with a GTX295 and an i7. :|

I could care less but all the technical mumbo jumbo because from I have seen, KZ2 is the best looking console game. Am I right, or amirite?

GreyFoXX4

[QUOTE="Chutebox"] Oh, we're switching the subject to gameplay since you're wrong?gamerking178

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

gamerking178

The first freaking post you made....Holy Lord....

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

gamerking178

Err, the GPU in the 360 is more like aRadeonX1800XT/X1900XT not a HD2900.

And the GPU in the PS3 is somewhere like a GeForce 7800GTX/7900GTX.

They are very similar GPUs in performance.

The Cell may have a slight edge over the 360's CPU though.

But in this case the difference is really down to the developer.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="Chutebox"] Who brought up Gears of war 2? You or me? I replyed, you cryed? What you want me to do next time?Chutebox

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

gamerking178

The first freaking post you made....Holy Lord....

360 also has TERRIBLE hardware problems. WHile it does have the best library of games, best online and my fav controller, the hardware problems are simply unacceptable. Over 50% of people on my xboxlive friends list have gotten at least 1 rrod at most peopl have had 2.

I love your library of games this gen MS but this is un-acceptable! I enjoyed the xbox last gen and it never broke on me, but ive had three 360's break on me. hands down the most unreliable console this gen.

SO yes it might ahve the better graphics chip, but its also ALOT more unreliable then the Wii or the ps3 (although imo the library of games is not nearly as good).

MS really dissapoitned me with these hardware problems, as i take great care of my systems and electronics, but yet the 360 has still had alot of problems for me and many others.

No im not a xbox hater, i love the first xbox and the library of games for the 360 is one of the best lineups ever. But i might stop supporting MS after this gen unfortunatly (unless they can make a much more reliable console next gen).

Im serious.... there is something wrong with a systems reliablility when everyone in my extrended family has had 2 xbox 360s break on them! (4 cousins and one uncle and my dad, all have had em break aswell).

SO whats better? Powerful graphics and a system that breaks down 3 times in one generation? Ive owned nearly every system since atari/nes and ive never ever had a system breka on my 3 times (ps1 is the only other console that broke on me and it was just one time).

360 also has TERRIBLE hardware problems. WHile it does have the best library of games, best online and my fav controller, the hardware problems are simply unacceptable. Over 50% of people on my xboxlive friends list have gotten at least 1 rrod at most peopl have had 2.

I love your library of games this gen MS but this is un-acceptable! I enjoyed the xbox last gen and it never broke on me, but ive had three 360's break on me. hands down the most unreliable console this gen.

SO yes it might ahve the better graphics chip, but its also ALOT more unreliable then the Wii or the ps3 (although imo the library of games is not nearly as good).

MS really dissapoitned me with these hardware problems, as i take great care of my systems and electronics, but yet the 360 has still had alot of problems for me and many others.

No im not a xbox hater, i love the first xbox and the library of games for the 360 is one of the best lineups ever. But i might stop supporting MS after this gen unfortunatly (unless they can make a much more reliable console next gen).

Im serious.... there is something wrong with a systems reliablility when everyone in my extrended family has had 2 xbox 360s break on them! (4 cousins and one uncle and my dad, all have had em break aswell).

kozzy1234

Yes in how long it took to make? In other posts I refer to GeoW1 Graphics. Not GeoW2 Graphics. Yet you bring it up.gamerking178

Yikes, this is too much lol.

Also, GeoW 2 graphics > GeoW

I don't know where you're going with this...

Thats hows I feel about your first post. Its like you checked in your common sense before you entered the thread.

Reading your OP, you are suggesting that its a feat for a game that is based on a pre-existing engine to be completed in a shorter time than a game that has its own custom engine created for it. Do you not see the utter lack of logic in your claim? When it came to creating the UE3 engine, epic had far less work to do than GG had with its engine. Epic already had a base to work from. All they had to do was update it. On the other hand, GG was starting with nothing. All the work that epic had done over the decades, they had to do at once. So how are the dev times even remotely comparable?

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

360 also has TERRIBLE hardware problems. WHile it does have the best library of games, best online and my fav controller, the hardware problems are simply unacceptable. Over 50% of people on my xboxlive friends list have gotten at least 1 rrod at most peopl have had 2.

I love your library of games this gen MS but this is un-acceptable! I enjoyed the xbox last gen and it never broke on me, but ive had three 360's break on me. hands down the most unreliable console this gen.

SO yes it might ahve the better graphics chip, but its also ALOT more unreliable then the Wii or the ps3 (although imo the library of games is not nearly as good).

MS really dissapoitned me with these hardware problems, as i take great care of my systems and electronics, but yet the 360 has still had alot of problems for me and many others.

No im not a xbox hater, i love the first xbox and the library of games for the 360 is one of the best lineups ever. But i might stop supporting MS after this gen unfortunatly (unless they can make a much more reliable console next gen).

Im serious.... there is something wrong with a systems reliablility when everyone in my extrended family has had 2 xbox 360s break on them! (4 cousins and one uncle and my dad, all have had em break aswell).

gamerking178

SOMETIMES it can be fixed in 30mins, other times it cant.

Ive fixed 3 xbox 360's for friends already that have ben working for close to a year still, but ive had others where it doesnt work and also my 360 i couldnt fix either.

3 friends 360s i fixed but i couldnt get mine or one other friends working. So 3 outta 5 aint bad.

Point is we shouldnt have to be fixing our consoles like this in the first place.

Thats hows I feel about your first post. Its like you checked in your common sense before you entered the thread.

Reading your OP, you are suggesting that its a feat for a game that is based on a pre-existing engine to be completed in a shorter time than a game that has its own custom engine created for it. Do you not see the utter lack of logic in your claim? When it came to creating the UE3 engine, epic had far less work to do than GG had with its engine. Epic already had a base to work from. All they had to do was update it. On the other hand, GG was starting with nothing. All the work that epic had done over the decades, they had to do at once. So how are the dev times even remotely comparable?

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]And yet KZ2 looks better than anything on the 360, funny how that works.Aljosa23

I could care less but all the technical mumbo jumbo because from I have seen, KZ2 is the best looking console game. Am I right, or amirite?

Thats hows I feel about your first post. Its like you checked in your common sense before you entered the thread.

Reading your OP, you are suggesting that its a feat for a game that is based on a pre-existing engine to be completed in a shorter time than a game that has its own custom engine created for it. Do you not see the utter lack of logic in your claim? When it came to creating the UE3 engine, epic had far less work to do than GG had with its engine. Epic already had a base to work from. All they had to do was update it. On the other hand, GG was starting with nothing. All the work that epic had done over the decades, they had to do at once. So how are the dev times even remotely comparable?

What are you talking about? They are not comparable at all. Let me give you an example. You and I are having a race to see who can build a car the fastest. You start with an engine and I have to build my own. Is this a fair race? Obviously not, because I have to spend my time building the most complex aspect of the entire car while you start with yours already made. Same applies here, they are not comparable at all. :?

As for epic taking risks blah blah blah...have you actually thought this through? Where does Killzone 2 take place? Helghast. Helghast is an arid hell-hole with a toxic atmosphere. It would be pretty idiotic and counter prodcutive if in this toxic atmosphere there were sprawling jungles with beautiful waterfalls and trees everywhere. This has nothing to do with wimping out, and everything with being logical. Killzone's biggest thing is immersion and a beautiful forest would definitely kill that. And as for wimping out, have you seen the lighting in Killzone 2? the attention to detail in the game world? So is it fair to say Epic "wimped out" in that regard? How about 32 player multiplayer? Did Epic wimp out on that too because it obviously wasnt a design choice, it was clearly their lack of talent that made it so :roll:

Lastly, Crysis 2 has been announced or released, so Im assuming you are referring to Crysis. Crysis had massive amount of hype regarding it graphics and it delivered. The reason KZ2's graphics are so greatly talked about is because they do what many people thought impossible, they come close and at times surpass the 2005 E3 demo. Thats why they are talked about. When this game was first announced with the infamous video, the graphics were the main hype point and the stunning animations and hectic nature of battle. The video was thought to display the impossible on current gen systems. Now that KZ2 is close to release and it does indeed come very close to the source material, it only makes sense that people talk about the graphics :?

[QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"][QUOTE="speedsix"]

Just checking you realise that's pure speculation and just your opinion. My opinion is, given the 'usual' amount of development time the PS3 simply cannot compete with the 360 and Killzone looks good purely because of the massive resource/time budget bestowed on it.

This is backed up by multiplats, where the same game performs better on the 360. There is absolutely zero proof an exlusive game cannot be done to the same level on the other platform.

gamerking178

Just look at the evidence mate. The 360 has been out for a year longer than the ps3, its supposedly easier to develop for, yet which console has the bets looking game...

Oh snap :o

I can't understand the point lemmings are making these days.

They are saying that KZ2 doesn't prove that the PS3 is more powerful. They bring the dev time of the game and the investment as excuses.

But this game comes when the 360 is already going for it's fourth year on the market. We're talking about the easier of both consoles to develop, so it's obviously the most tapped out console. Which means they can't really argue that there's "potential to be realeased" from the console. Instead, PS3 is both harder to program and newer on the market.

So, to keep it short and based on what i said above, the only way for the 360 to really convince now that it's more powerful is by actually releasing a game that dethrones KZ2, since the argument of the potential and/or better hardware can't make up for the gap anymore.

I can't understand the point lemmings are making these days.

They are saying that KZ2 doesn't prove that the PS3 is more powerful. They bring the dev time of the game and the investment as excuses.

But this game comes when the 360 is already going for it's fourth year on the market. We're talking about the easier of both consoles to develop, so it's obviously the most tapped out console. Which means they can't really argue that there's "potential to be realeased" from the console. Instead, PS3 is both harder to program and newer on the market.

So, to keep it short and based on what i said above, the only way for the 360 to really convince now that it's more powerful is by actually releasing a game that dethrones KZ2, since the argument of the potential and/or better hardware can't make up for the gap anymore.

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

NinjaMunkey01

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

*sigh*

Fanboys on both sides are just going to have to accept the fact that neither the X360 or PS3 will ever truly outshine the other. Both consoles have 500MB of RAM. Both have a 3.2GHz CPU. Both have a 500MHz GPU.

Wow what a dumb topic!!!!

First he says that PS3 is technically inferior from XBOX 360 based on some false assumptions and information about the graphics card.

In the next line he mentiones that KZ2 looks better. WOW:shock:

And to explain why it looks better he mentiones that it needed 4 years to develop. Tell me have you any idea how games or for that matter any software/applications are developed?

Forget I asked.......;)