Print

[richie579]

But these games are made from different developers right?....why would they have the same issue?...I call bull ish.....probably some of that sony propaganda that killed the dreamcast

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(anonim1979 @ Nov 13 2006, 10:49 PM)

Screenshots See here PS3 vs. Xbox 360 Comparison HD [1280x720]:

See first 2 X trees on PS3

http://i138.photobuc...im1979/tw-1.jpg
http://i138.photobuc...im1979/tw-2.jpg

water trail missing - the rest is the same
http://i138.photobuc...1979/thp8-1.jpg
http://i138.photobuc...1979/thp8-2.jpg
http://i138.photobuc...1979/thp8-3.jpg

those might have been great comparison shots but you can't see jack with all the Jpeg compression going on.  

[BigFerg]

What most of you guys are forgetting is that developers are not going to go to all the effort of creating two seperate games for each system so they had to dull it down for the PS3.  Not the Xbox 360's fault that developers don't have the time or money to create stuff all over again for the 360.  PS3 sucks.

[rasstar]

I am not sure what you are talking about but the version for the Wii had to be downgraded because of the lack of power on wii. Less enemies and lower textures.

[Kazaki]

QUOTE(BigFerg @ Nov 14 2006, 12:26 AM)

What most of you guys are forgetting is that developers are not going to go to all the effort of creating two seperate games for each system so they had to dull it down for the PS3.  Not the Xbox 360's fault that developers don't have the time or money to create stuff all over again for the 360.  PS3 sucks.

Much like how Double Agent wasn't completely different on most versions.

[IntestineMan]

QUOTE(gerzand @ Nov 14 2006, 03:11 AM)

I can second this article. I was playing COD3 on 4 player split screen on a 120'' wall projected image on a  720P native Sanyo Z3 Home Theatre Projector and it looked like crap. I mean, it was about as hard to see what u were doing as playing halo2 on a 13'' tv back in the day. And belive me this projector rocks on every other game, so it wasnt its fault.

[speedy_g]

hmm... I see we have a bunch of retards here.... correct me if I'm wrong but even PGR 3 resolution had to reduced to get the framerate solid... it's less than the two mentioned but anyway so it's old news....

[grim_d]

petty stuff. who actually notices and more to the point who cares.

[jizmo]

I realize that the developers are still learning the ins and outs of the system to get the games running with a decent speed, but it's still very apparent that neither of the next-gen consoles are super-computers they were advertised to be. If they were, you could easily throw any of this normal stuff at them and run it on 720p 60fps.

Reality seems to be entirely another thing. It seems that even the big developers are struggling hard to get games running at even at 30fps and in the end have to cheat by lowering the resolution.

Saints Row for example was supposed to look like its ace-looking interludes, but the frame rate was so appalling they had to cut a lots of things from the final build, even after taking extra six months for development. Don't get me wrong - Saint's Row looks good, but it could've looked much, much better if the developers would've had it their way and didn't have any problems with running all their stuff on the hardware.

Splinter Cell is playable when sneaking around, but if you start running around and gunning down the enemies for fun, the framerate will drop to downright unplayable. Also in SC: DA the multiplayer mode has been watered down and stripped from most of the effects to keep the framerate up.

PGR3, COD3 and THP8 all have lowered resolutions to keep up. Crytek says they're cannot put Crysis on NG consoles without compromises.

Unless they are running stuff with just one core now, or if the development tools are dragging behind really badly, I'd say forget about 60fps on x360. Let's see if normal developers can some day do even 720p 30fps without struggling and having to pour money into endless optimizations.

[felang]

I am getting so tired of all this 360 vs PS3 crap.  Maybe I should stop visiting the forums for a couple of months.  I already spent a whole lot of money on my 360 and have no plans to buy anything else.  Truth be told, most people buy game consoles for the games, who cares if the textures are a little more detailed on ps3 version or 360 version of same game... if the game sucks who cares.  People should just start enjoying their $500 consoles and $60 games.  I think halo 2 is still a lot of fun to play (split screen multiplayer especially) and of course it definitely looks like crap compared to new games.  If developers have to lower resolution to give be able to give more stable fps and more advanced eyecandy then I say go for it.  For example most people can't even tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can if I look close but the difference isn't noticeable enough to justify the price difference between the two, especially if you're sort of close to the screen anyway... I don't know anyone that plays video games from the distance required for it to actually make a difference.  COD3 is a great game and it looks awesome, better than most crappy games that do run at 720p so who cares...

[SpaceBuddha]

Epic Games managed to get Gears of War to run perfect in 1280x720...

Activision's developers are either lazy, rushed or ignorant.

[Zero420]

First Off i would like to tip my hat to microsoft for atleast making the best consoles on the market people can boo me all they want but i bet they still have a modded xbox sitting at home using it for media or games and the things they can do are out of this world for a CONSOLE. They werent designed to be computers, now saying that what would you rather have TRUE 720P and a game that runs like shit, or a sub - 720 p that can run the game at a descent frame rate without having to strip it down and loose content.  Its not like u can say, Ohh Crap its all choppy let me goto the store and jack in some more ram.  these are consoles and they do a good job.  Im running it on a 2005 56" Sony wega wide screen at 1080i and trust me 4 player runs F-ING perfect.  As for everyone hoping the PS3 will be better It could be but I doubt it,  We have some article stating flaws but the console has been fully publicy tested not to much a System that has HALF the ram (256) probably wont be able to even keep up the framerate the xbox360 has produced not to mention the PROCESSER itself was designed by the same company good old IBM.  But for those people who are complaing , Go screw your sleves and spend 10grand building a super computer and if it chops or runs sub par then u can complain until then.  Jus play the damn game.  

ZerO420
Great beginnings are not as important as the way one finishes.

[deadparrot]

QUOTE(grim_d @ Nov 14 2006, 05:54 AM)

petty stuff. who actually notices and more to the point who cares.

Exactly.  My TV has a nativ res of 1024x768, but it has the world's most awesome scaler, so everything looks brilliant, even SD looks decent.

[TheIceman72]

QUOTE(felang @ Nov 14 2006, 02:56 AM)

I am getting so tired of all this 360 vs PS3 crap.  Maybe I should stop visiting the forums for a couple of months.  I already spent a whole lot of money on my 360 and have no plans to buy anything else.  Truth be told, most people buy game consoles for the games, who cares if the textures are a little more detailed on ps3 version or 360 version of same game... if the game sucks who cares.  People should just start enjoying their $500 consoles and $60 games.  I think halo 2 is still a lot of fun to play (split screen multiplayer especially) and of course it definitely looks like crap compared to new games.  If developers have to lower resolution to give be able to give more stable fps and more advanced eyecandy then I say go for it.  For example most people can't even tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can if I look close but the difference isn't noticeable enough to justify the price difference between the two, especially if you're sort of close to the screen anyway... I don't know anyone that plays video games from the distance required for it to actually make a difference.  COD3 is a great game and it looks awesome, better than most crappy games that do run at 720p so who cares...

Damn totally agreed. All I want is a fun game that does not bore me to sleep after one hour of play. That has some really good gfx. I don't care if it is 684,720,1080, or 900000. As long as it looks good on my TV who gives a rats? People are so cough up on gfx they forget how good the game is. In my opinion there just has always been better fun games on Saturn, Dreamcast, Xbox and the 360. Sony products dont do it for me, no matter how much Sony hypes them up to be.

[maxlifo]

Back to the original post.  Where is M_hael when you need him?