Print

[krazyshane]

   Anyways, I love Xbox live, and all the services that the Xbox 360 are going to offer.  However, the reason I originally chose the Xbox over the PS2 is because it was the more powerful.  It seems now that things are opposite.  I've seen many comparisons, some saying that they are very close to the same and it will all lie in the games, and others that say the PS3 is the clear superior console.
Now, I'm watching G4TV -- they seem like idiots to me btw, and very biased in PS3s favor.  I'm seeing some of the trailers that PS3 showed at E3 and they make me wonder.  I realize that the Killzone 2 trailer is a "pre-rendered representation" of what the game will look like         Therefor, that doesnt concern me too much, however, looking at things like fight night and such, where they had it running on the PS3 with camera control.  Are those pre-rendered as well?  

I think i read stuff about sony always showing much better trailers than the games actually look like.  Is this another case of that?

Shane  

[illuminati]

[enixn]

it was prerendered

[Ozy]

Plus the stuff like fight night was running on powerful workstations as the hardware for ps3 is a long way off where as the xbox demos were running on less powerful stations that are 1/3 of the xbox 360s power.

Don't expect another emotion engine with the ps3, wait for it to come out and either disappoint you or amaze everybody. Seeing as it sony I would say the first.

[82ross]

The fight night where they stop and move the camera around is real-time, so is what it would look like on the hardware they were using. Thats not to say its exactly what it would look like on a ps3 cos they havent really got a ps3 to try it on yet.

Sony can only really tout the power of the cell processer as an advantage (excluding blueray). Its difficult to say how much a game can get out of it though and this power could come at a £$ cost. Apparently cell can only take advantage of all the power for a certain type of process, some things it breezes through other it doesnt. Another thing to look at is the effiency of the complete system. So far it seems like the 360 overall works together better as a complete unit whereas the ps3 might have bottlenecks that could choke all this "superior" power. All this is purely speculative atm though. And things could easily change in the coming months.

I think they will be pretty similar with sony clinching the graphics quality by a very small margin, i think the xbox360 will have a lot more to offer than just pretty looking games (which theyll have anyway). I also think the power touted by cell (in a ps3) wont be as big as everyone thinks (one cell chip in the ps3 with its additional processing units comapred to the 3 cores in the xbox360). Im by no means an expert so i might be miles off.

As it stands ill be getting a xbox360 before a ps3.

Wait and see is exactly right. PS3 is a long way off. 360 isnt that far away. Woooo

[enixn]

[Twasi]

Even if the PS3 could produce those pre-rendered graphics it wouldn't necessarly be good, a few developers have been a little irrated with sony showing those, saying they can't possibly live up to those standards and it will make their games look like they didnt live up to what they were supposed to.  Most games on the PS3 wouldn't have graphics like that for very many games, no developer could afford to produce alot of games like that short of EA. I believe the 360 and PS3 will look almost identicle, I imagine both systems will have a few games that have almot CG like graphics but it will only be the select few, like this gen.