Assassin's Creed II and Batman and Dragon Age: 360 version looks washed out. PS3 is more vivid. Texture and detail seem to be equal. PS3 wins slightly. MW2: 360 seems to have better texture and detail. Probably lowered the detail slightly on PS3 for the frame rate. 360 is the clear winner with this one.. Dirt 2: Tie. Resident Evil 5: PS3 is the winner here. 360 has better texture and less jaggies, but only by a very thin margin as it's not really noticeable when both versions are in motion. The PS3 still has better, more vivid color compared to the 360's more washed out look. PS3 wins this battle for me.
I have 2 Hori made SoulCalibur IV sticks that I got from Amazon for $40 each! This stick is the best stick I've ever used outside of an arcade and the fact that I caught them at such an afordable pricing point was something that I couldn't pass up! The fact that the new MadCatz sticks are made by MadCatz makes me not want to get them at all. I'd definitely get the TE if it wouldn't cost me over $300 (I would have to get two, it just makes sense)! I could tack on a couple more hundred and buy a SFIV cabinet from a lucky US arcade who's owner is dumb enough to sell it, and that would be the best investment in a SFIV "stick" ever!
As much as it's sad to admit (because of the huge deal Sony's been making about the power of the PS3) the 360 does come out marginally ahead of the PS3 on certain games, but at least Gran Tursmo 5 will look better than any other game before it ever!
Hell yeah, athenian29! I honestly think that there is no better card out there than the GeForce 8800GT especially for the price! Mine is 512MB and is core clocked at 700 MHz, I have an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, 2 x 2GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit, Western Digital Caviar RE WD2500YS 250GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD, Windows XP, 750W power supply. You guys think I could run Crysis okay?
The only games I play on PSP are Tekken: Dark Resurrection and SFAlpha 3 Max, and they are among the shortest load times, especially Tekken! 75 and 95 respectively! Yeah! The new PSP loads much faster than the older models because of the increased internal memory (RAM).
starbead is right guys. I honestly do want AMD to stay around, because when there's no competition, that means the only place to go to is Intel, and they can charge whatever the hell they want because there's no one around to beat their prices. That's a scary thought. They could seriously very-well charge over $600 or $700 for processors released in the future that would have been at or below $500 if AMD were around.
I really hope that either the Phenom increases the clock speed and becomes better than the Q6700, if it ends up not being better than it, then I hope that Intel decreases the price of the quad-core processor. I also can't wait untill NVIDIA releases the 9 series already, I want a cheaper 8800GTX damnit (hopefully to the price that the8800 GT is now or lower). I've always been an Intel fan, but I'll change if it means better performance.
I have an Intel core 2 quad q6600 processor, 3mb of ram, an nvidia 8800 gts 640mb graphics card, and windows xp, so I think I'll be good for this game, haha. But, seriously when it comes down to a lot of these comments I'm reading, wanting to play at more than 60 frames per second is rediculous, the human eye can only see up to 60 fps anyway, playing at 70 or over is rediculous. Deal with it.
There are slightly....slightly less jaggies with vista....but vista and xp very high quality are the same essencially. xp high quality is still just simply amazing. Not only is there not that much of a difference at all, XP is also way more reliable than Vista, vista's just too dangerious, I wouldn't risk it just for some better anti-aliasing, haha!
guile_charlie's comments