Print

[VariableElite]

Wedding, seriously, chill the fuck out. You're getting pretty annoying.

I'm gonna say this for the last time: graphics aren't everything. Otherwise, we'd all just be watching Toy Story and Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within over and over again.

Plus, in your constant comparisons to the Dreamcast, you forget that there are so many differences between MS right now and Sega 5-10 years ago as to make your comparisons less than moot.

You're one of those "glass is half-empty" guys. Honestly, I wonder how you ever got past your first system, seeing as how there's no point in ever upgrading because something better will be along soon.

Also, you're bragging about MGS4. Sorry, but I don't feel the urge to play as a 60-year old man whose face disturbs me and can't seem to hold a rifle properly.

Finally, I flat-out refuse to buy a console from a company that thinks that I should have to get a second job to pay for it; from a company whose motto is now "style over substance"; from a company that takes every good thing it touches and turns it into crap; from a company that thinks I am an idiot for wanting to buy an Xbox 360.

Seriously, your non-stop diatribes are perhaps evidence that you should stop posting here, as you're only making people mad -- yourself included. Regardless, one game, of which there is no evidence (despite what GameSpot says) that what is shown is anything but badly-rendered CG, proves nothing about a console.

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 16 2005, 11:08 AM)

I respectfully disagree. I remember back during E3 how shitty most of the games looked and people offered excuses saying they were running on Alpha kits.

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 16 2005, 11:46 AM)

The truth hurts.

[VariableElite]

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 16 2005, 10:46 AM)

The truth hurts.

[jaskerzada006]

QUOTE

I wouldn't know, I'm not the one that can't accept that what's shown on the 360 right now is not truly representative of what the console can handle.

Was DOA3 representative of what the xbox could "handle"??

Look, we were promised so much, but when M$ says so, you bend over willingly, and you want other to get raped with a smile on thier face just as you.  So, good luck with that.

[incognegro]

[KAGE360]

QUOTE

I have to agree with Wedding.

well thats a big surprise    real gems think alike.

i believe that doa3 was a good taste of what the xbox can do to answer your question.  what does that have to do with anything?  the architecture in the xbox was very familiar to developers but the 360 is a huge difference in architecture and NO developer has enough experience with the new architecture to show a true example of the systems power yet, so you your comparison is a mute point.

[jaskerzada006]

Yea, it's easy to justify shitty looking 360 games by saying devs don't have enough time and what not, but who's fault is that?  And then in the same breath we have to listen to these armchair devs on this board tell us how easy the 360 is to develop for.

But then comes along some ps3 media that's about 8 months away from launch and it looks better than 360 shit that launches in 2 months.

[VariableElite]

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 16 2005, 11:17 AM)

Then why do the PS3 games look so good? Do the developers have a lot of experience with that?

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 16 2005, 12:17 PM)

Then why do the PS3 games look so good? Do the developers have a lot of experience with that?

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(jaskerzada006 @ Sep 16 2005, 12:32 PM)

Yea, it's easy to justify shitty looking 360 games by saying devs don't have enough time and what not, but who's fault is that?  And then in the same breath we have to listen to these armchair devs on this board tell us how easy the 360 is to develop for.

[bluvasa]

To compare different games made by different developers on different consoles is idiotic in my opinion.  

There are thousands of other factors which contribute to a game's appearance other than the hardware itself.  The overall art style, the engine, and the coders themselves, the SDKs, etc.

The only way to really gauge a console's graphical abilities against another's is to compare games made by the same developers.  To compare MGS4 (which looks great) to PGR3 (which also looks great) is truly like comparing apples to oranges.

Only when you compare multiplatform titles like from EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, etc. can you really compare the graphical abilities of the 360 and PS3.  I won't be satisfied until I can compare identical screens of ported games under actual gameplay conditions.

As for the "free 4XAA" comments, any information coming out of E3 about a new console should have been taken with a grain of salt.  Both MS and Sony were guilty of hyping up their hardware and software.  Stats were overstated and exaggerated, but that has happened with every new release.

I will also agree with the fact that launch titles are always rushed and compromises must be made.  I am happy with MS and their type of games, so I am sticking with them in the "next generation."

Here is a question for everyone:  

Don't motion pictures run at 24fps in the theatre?  If so, does that mean that HD movies also run at 24fps?  If so, isn't 30fps for PGR3 enough so we can't even tell the difference when we are actually playing it?

[Deftech]

QUOTE(bluvasa @ Sep 16 2005, 12:57 PM)

To compare different games made by different developers on different consoles is idiotic in my opinion. 

[KAGE360]

both companies did use hype on their consoles i think that MS was more realistic though.  both consoles didnt even really exist at E3 so everything said was based on assumption and i think MS played a safer approach in that respect.  

i dont think the "free 4x MSAA" was a dream since developers can make use of it by using a technique called tiled rendering (according to beyond 3d) and it has been stated that there is around a 5%-8% performance hit for the MSAA.  i dont think MS would spend money on eDRAM (which people say is expensive, i wouldnt know) if they didnt think it would do the job especially when they are trying not to take as much of a hit with the 360 as they did with the xbox.  

i fully agree with you on the comparison deal.  thats why i was saying its stupid to compare PDZ to MGS4.  the multi-platform games will show us the real difference.  and i think its a safe bet the 360 wont be held back in the next gen like the ps2 was in the last (with games like splinter cell) when it comes to multiplatform games.

[crobar]

QUOTE

http://www.eurogamer...rticle_id=60899

Indeed, the frame rate is just about the only thing off the pace. But does it really matter?

We were there earlier. There were more cars. They wouldn't SOD OFF.

"In the next generation frame rate will become much less important," says Wilson, "because when you apply HDR and these lighting effects and run with motion blur, you can't tell the difference at 60. You don't notice that much difference because the motion blur takes a lot of it away."

honestly...i dont see the big fucking deal...
it all comes down to the game being fun right?
i still play fucking mario cart on n64 & snes...still fun no "gagillion X AAA" there
all youspecs whores can do is look and  pick...when it comes down to it graphics do not make a game any one who bases there game buying on graphics is a fucking  tool...