Topic: Quake 4 On X360 Worse Than Pc Version! (Read 798 times)

brooksie48 · « **on:** September 17, 2005, 02:57:00 PM »

*sigh*

thax · « **Reply #1 on:** September 17, 2005, 03:09:00 PM »

Wedding-shirt, what happened to you? You use to be rational and level headed, now you seem bitter, mean and jaded.

Moleman · « **Reply #2 on:** September 17, 2005, 03:11:00 PM »

He has eaten Andy's tainted Sony

.

thax · « **Reply #3 on:** September 17, 2005, 03:30:00 PM »

Well for everyone's benefit I will attempt to dispel some of the misconceptions here.

1. The game is running in 32bit colour on the x360, if you could run a higher colour depth I don't understand why you would want to because the eye can't really perceive the higher depth, in addition most display devices and video cards don't support a higher colour depth. The error was most likely made because of a miscalibrated display device.

2. The higher textures simply may not fit into the 512 MiB of memory available in the console. 512 for a console is an excellent amount of memory. Please keep in mind that the 10 MiB of eDRAM isn't used to store, cache or filter textures. The GPU is responsible for the bilinear filtering of textures and applying them to polygons.

3. The game on the x360 isn't finished yet, but because the hardware is fixed you can be assured the developer is configuring all settings to make optimal use of available resources. For 300 US dollars the x360 is a very impressive system, it may be possible to get a well equipped PC that can outperform the x360, but the cost of the system will be several times higher.

Wedding-shirt · « **Reply #4 on:** September 17, 2005, 03:38:00 PM »

QUOTE(thax @ Sep 17 2005, 05:41 PM)

Well for everyone's benefit I will attempt to dispel some of the misconceptions here.

Mjkthirdeye · « **Reply #5 on:** September 17, 2005, 03:39:00 PM »

QUOTE(thax @ Sep 17 2005, 04:41 PM)

Well for everyone's benefit I will attempt to dispel some of the misconceptions here.

Mjkthirdeye · « **Reply #6 on:** September 17, 2005, 04:11:00 PM »

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 17 2005, 05:07 PM)

The PS3 will have an RSX which is rumored to be a higher clocked 7800 GTX.

aepuppetmaster · « **Reply #7 on:** September 17, 2005, 04:18:00 PM »

there are a lot of things wrong with yor statment wedding-shirt. First of comparing consoles and computers is like, dare i say comparing apples to oranges. the simple nature of tvs makes them require a lot less to look just as good. think of it the resolution of a standard deffinintion tv is the lowest seeting on your monitor and looks like crap on that, whille it look rediiculously good on a tv. secondly, its not a true cut and dry port, but in some sense it is. it was designed for the pc and then adaptied to the xbox, which while a crap load more powerful in terms of processing power, lacks the same amount of memory that a computer has. and wtf do u mean that it will run beter on the ps3, it wil run the same, there will only be slight diffrences, but not insanly higher textures and the like, just look at curent gen consoles. u could argue that the xbox is more power (it is), but most people don't notice the differnece in none exclusive titles. this is gunna look great no mater how u cut it, and ur arguments are are flawed. i won't notice the small color details, just lik i won't notica game at 61 fps vs one at 60fps. this is how i see the development so far, pc's are like ferraries, and the 360 is like a meclaren. so the meclaren is faster, but the devs are used to driving the ferrari, so when they get the meclaren for the first little bit they just got to get used to it. once they get used to using the power and not the memory we'll be in busness.

KAGE360 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 17, 2005, 04:21:00 PM »

dont get worked up over him, Mjkthirdeye, thats what he wants. his ignorance is getting old with me too but i find his comments sad more then agrivating. he understands so little that we should all pitty the poor fool.

the doom 3 engine was built with nvidia technology so of course its going to run more easily on nvidia hardware.

also i dont think its that big of a deal about the texture res because there are other games in development that are still not using high res textures but will (PGR3's building textures for example) so just because their not high res now doesnt mean they wont be when it ships.

im sorry but your an idiot if you dont believe the fact that ANY next gen system could probably run the doom 3 engine standing on its head. the engine is what almost 2 years old already and in the world of technology that is old. i would go as far to say that even the U3engine doesnt give us the full picture to how powerful these next gen systems are. when newer engines start to surface the games will continue to get better.

Mjkthirdeye · « **Reply #9 on:** September 17, 2005, 04:31:00 PM »

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Sep 17 2005, 05:32 PM)

im sorry but your an idiot if you dont believe the fact that ANY next gen system could probably run the doom 3 engine standing on its head. the engine is what almost 2 years old already and in the world of technology that is old. i would go as far to say that even the U3engine doesnt give us the full picture to how powerful these next gen systems are. when newer engines start to surface the games will continue to get better.

brooksie48 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 17, 2005, 05:27:00 PM »

Wedding-shirt their are plenty of games for xbox 360 that blow quake 4 for pc out of the water. Thats all I'm going to say, think about it.

brooksie48 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 17, 2005, 05:35:00 PM »

OK now were finding common ground. The dev team has everything to do with it, and I guess they couldn't/or haven't had enough time to exploit the 360's power.

VariableElite · « **Reply #12 on:** September 17, 2005, 05:37:00 PM »

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 17 2005, 06:41 PM)

I agree with you. I thought the COD 2 video looked very good. A lot better than Quake 4. I was expecting it to look like shit because it's another PC port but i'm impressed with it.

thax · « **Reply #13 on:** September 17, 2005, 06:38:00 PM »

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Sep 17 2005, 11:49 PM)

There is absolutely no excuse for the X360 not to run that game flawlessly. If a 9800 pro can run Doom 3 pretty good and a 6800 GT can toy with it, there's no reason in the world the X360 should have to tone down the textures and color depth.

If you read my post the color depth is not toned down, it runs at full 32bit color. There is at least one excuse why the x360 can't run the game flawlessly, the game isn't finished yet.

QUOTE

This system doesn't really compete with the PS3.
...
P.S. I bet the PS3 can run Quake 4 perfectly.

There isn't any way to know yet. The GPU in the x360 is slightly more powerful than the PS3. Carmack himself states that he prefers the x360 over the PS3. I don't understand your line of reasoning and your rebuttle statements are blind conjecture.

http://www.joystiq.c...34000040054627/
"Hes gone on the record at the recent QuakeCon with a killer quote that the Xbox 360 is the best development environment hes seen for a console."

"According to Carmack, the Xbox 360 has the best architecture and development tools so the game devs can do their jobs better. In contrast he thinks the PS3 will be harder to develop for with inital games being disappointing as a result."

This would indicate that the PS3 may not run Carmacks games as well.

Deftech · « **Reply #14 on:** September 17, 2005, 09:55:00 PM »

QUOTE(thax @ Sep 17 2005, 08:49 PM)

If you read my post the color depth is not toned down, it runs at full 32bit color. There is at least one excuse why the x360 can't run the game flawlessly, the game isn't finished yet.

Author Topic: Quake 4 On X360 Worse Than Pc Version! (Read 798 times)