Graphical Comparison PS3 v. 360..The Clear Winner? [Archive]

ThaMaskedGamer

12-14-2006, 06:32 AM

Xboxster

12-14-2006, 06:47 AM

360 IS CLEERLY THE WINER!!!! lET ME HIT YO WITH SOME KNOLEGE! 360 > THEN 3 (ps3). gRAHICAL POWER TIMES 360, THAT'S XBOX! PLAYWITHYOURSELFSTATION IS AT LEEST 3 TIMES LES POWERFEL THAN 360. 360 DOES BLOOD AND FIRE MUCH BETTER. FOOTBALL HUGE BETTER.

LONG LIVE XXXBOX!!!!!

DrunkenThumbmaster

12-14-2006, 07:10 AM

Many of us have made comments and read comments about how these machines appear to perform. But still not many of us have played both machines side by side with the same games, so even though we had an inkling of which was doing better, it wasn't confirmed. Well now Gamespot has put together a lil' comparison between the two machines across several <b>common</b>. The clear winner was the XBOX 360.

Gamespot felt <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html">the 360 is better </a> in most of these games in graphical quality, graphical effects especially HDRLighting, and framerates! Not only this, but the article of course doesn't mention GOW v. RFOM which several others have said is no comparison whatsoever.

In fact, i just bought the HD-DVD player, yup I did what I said I wasn't gonna do. But I'll post about that later. Anyway, I bought it from K-mart, and some young kid was the clerk. He said, "your gonna love this player." So he goes on to tell me he not only has 360, the HD-DVD player, but also a PS3, and one LCD and one plasma TV. I'm blown away cause I didn't think anybody could afford all of this on a Kmart salary! But that's the power of credit I guess. But he said he bought his PS3 from a friend who worked at EB for $800, not bad considering some people were getting hammered for worse on Ebay. But he said as he got it home it didn't work!! He said it would not read any disc lol. But the good thing was Sony dropped him a replacement in ONE day!! Good job Sony! He said the 360 is just way better than PS3 right now and GOW blows away RFOM. But he doesn't regret the purchase because he was always a pro-Sony guy and believes when MGS4 et al arrive he will be vindicated. But for now he freely admits the 360 is way better.

Some other comments he made were surprising. He said his PS3 does NOT get hot!! I was definitely surprised by that can anybody else corroborate that? He also said the very same day, yesterday, I was in Kmart to buy my HD-DVD player, they had received a random shipment of PS3s!!!!! I asked him did they have any left, he said, NOPE! He said they moved out pretty quickly once customers in the store got word. He said stores all over are now getting random shipments. The surprising thing is that this Kmart was a po-dunk ran down piece of crap store, I didn't even plan on buying the HD-DVD player there, I just happened to see it and saved myself a trip to Circuit City. Anyway, if Sony is re-upping a crap store like that other more prominent stores in my area must also be getting units. So those of you still wishing to get a PS3 before XMAS get out there to these stores early over the next few days, you might get luckly!

I'm so on the verge of picking up the HD DVD drive it's not funny. I was against it at first because it took the Price of the 360 up. But damn that I already have the console and the thought of getting the drive for 200 bones is really starting to look appealling.

PapaSmurf

12-14-2006, 07:25 AM

Many of us have made comments and read comments about how these machines appear to perform. But still not many of us have played both machines side by side with the same games, so even though we had an inkling of which was doing better, it wasn't confirmed. Well now Gamespot has put together a lil' comparison between the two machines across several common. The clear winner was the XBOX 360.

Gamespot felt the 360 is better (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html) in most of these games in graphical quality, graphical effects especially HDRLighting, and framerates! Not only this, but the article of course doesn't mention GOW v. RFOM which several others have said is no comparison whatsoever.

In fact, i just bought the HD-DVD player, yup I did what I said I wasn't gonna do. But I'll post about that later. Anyway, I bought it from K-mart, and some young kid was the clerk. He said, "your gonna love this player." So he goes on to tell me he not only has 360, the HD-DVD player, but also a PS3, and one LCD and one plasma TV. I'm blown away cause I didn't think anybody could afford all of this on a Kmart salary! But that's the power of credit I guess. But he said he bought his PS3 from a friend who worked at EB for $800, not bad considering some people were getting hammered for worse on Ebay. But he said as he got it home it didn't work!! He said it would not read any disc lol. But the good thing was Sony dropped him a replacement in ONE day!! Good job Sony! He said the 360 is just way better than PS3 right now and GOW blows away RFOM. But he doesn't regret the purchase because he was always a pro-Sony guy and believes when MGS4 et al arrive he will be vindicated. But for now he freely admits the 360 is way better.

Some other comments he made were surprising. He said his PS3 does NOT get hot!! I was definitely surprised by that can anybody else corroborate that? He also said the very same day, yesterday, I was in Kmart to buy my HD-DVD player, they had received a random shipment of PS3s!!!!! I asked him did they have any left, he said, NOPE! He said they moved out pretty quickly once customers in the store got word. He said stores all over are now getting random shipments. The surprising thing is that this Kmart was a po-dunk ran down piece of crap store, I didn't even plan on buying the HD-DVD player there, I just happened to see it and saved myself a trip to Circuit City. Anyway, if Sony is re-upping a crap store like that other more prominent stores in my area must also be getting units. So those of you still wishing to get a PS3 before XMAS get out there to these stores early over the next few days, you might get luckly!

As for the graphics arguement, I'll save the one for later, like next year.

The rest of your post couldn't be anymore true though. I remember when the PS2 came out and I was just in middle school I asked my dad for one for xmas. I knew there was no way he could get it, but I just had my hopes up (my dad ain't buyin overpriced **** on ebay). Well xmas day came and I was shocked as hell to see a brand spankin new PS2 under the tree. I asked my dad how he got it, and it was pretty funny. Masked, you talk about these random shipments. What I love about the random shipments is the stores never tell anyone. My dad just happened to be in EB one day and some old lady was haslin around with the clerk over something. My dad was curious and wondered what was up. Turns out the lady was wonderin or not if she should get a PS2 for her grandson. My dad than quietly asked if they had anymore in the back and wala. Dad comes out with the big blue coveted PS2 on just a curiousity whim. Next thing you know, big ole line out of EB.

The funny thing to me about that was again, my dad didn't wait in any lines, didn't pay anything extra or any of that crap yet the majority of people did. Lesson learned. So yea I totally think there are random shipments happening and really it's just the luck of the draw if you're in the right place at the right time.

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 07:35 AM

damned interesting post TMG.

Is your HD-DvD player stand-alone, or the 360 ad-on? How are you enjoying it? Give us a review!

ThaMaskedGamer

12-14-2006, 08:38 AM

I found out some interesting stuff while doing research before I bought the ADD-On Gaddy. I'm gonna post some of that stuff, and some of the sites I was looking at. HD-DVD is on fire! And PS3 is NOT gonna save Bluray. Right now the only thing that can save Bluray is if the manufacturers bring the prices down REAL fast and REAL low, like about $500! That really is not gonna happen. Of course, when people buy a PS3 the drive is included, which means people may or may not buy Bluray movies. The 360 HD-DVD player has been a big boost to HD-DVD sales, which were already murdering Bluray sales.

If MS or Toshiba really really want to slam the door on Bluray all they need to do is release an HDMI cable for the HD-DVD add-on. So many people feel like they need 1080P in movies, even though it is not a big deal for movies, so MS really needs to get that cable out there. Other than that I like the fact the HD-DVD add-on integrates into the 360. If you buy a stand-alone player of course it doesn't, and of course their foot print is much bigger. They always picture the Add-on positioned vertically, but when layed flat across the 360, assuming you position your 360 horizontally, then the thing practically takes up no extra-space and is not an eye-sore at all.

Now i'm not gonna say it wouldn't be better if it was internal, cause it would. But given the fact HD-DVD and Bluray weren't ready last year, in some respects Bluray still ain't ready, MS had to release without and this is a real close next best thing. And right now HD-DVD is the lead pony in the format war, things could change, but if they don't all of Hollywood, aside from Sony Movies I guess, will have no choice but to put their movies on HD-DVD, if that happens, Bluray dies, and the PS3 will be severely hamstrung.

folken001

12-14-2006, 09:07 AM

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 09:29 AM

If MS or Toshiba really really want to slam the door on Bluray all they need to do is release an HDMI cable for the HD-DVD add-on. So many people feel like they need 1080P in movies, even though it is not a big deal for movies, so MS really needs to get that cable out there.

Now i'm not gonna say it wouldn't be better if it was internal, cause it would.

Curious, will the 360 HD-DvD play at 1080i with its current cabling? Also, do you know if it includes upscaling technology for regular DvDs?

What would be really cool is MS put out a premium-priced 360 with the HD-DvD built in. With HDMI and Wi-fi.

One thing I'm wondering and haven't looked at at all is how you connect multiple HDMI devices to the one HDMI input on your set. Are there receivers with multiple HDMI inputs in back, and are they hella expensive?

Wan-Fu

12-14-2006, 09:34 AM

What TMG left out to say is that gamespot also acknowledged that these PS3 games are first gen launch games in the conclusion of the comparison. Gamespot also mentioned Xbox360 also experienced the same when it first came out, therefore it is giving PS3 the same benefit of doubt they gave to Xbox360. Wow, TMG just happened to leave that unsaid. How convenient? TMG is not reasonably biased against Sony? Not in this life. This thread is the best proof.

PS3 gets warm. I haven't felt that it gets HOT thus far. And, RFOM looks amazing. But, in the end, GoW looks more polished. In my opinion though, RFOM is more fun because RFOM definitely provided more chatoic situations and story is a lot more interesting.

As far as Blu-Ray vs HDDVD goes, nothing is going to be concluded anytime soon. Not when both media are still pricing that much more over their DVD counterparts. I find it funny how you were whining about any Add ons that came from Sony yet you embrace HDDVD so fast. Yeah, HDDVD is hot if you go to pro-HDDVD websites. So far, I would say they both are equal. But, Blu-Ray is likely to win at the end. Because, only tech junk heads would get this add on or a standalone hddvd player right now. Sony is kicking Blu-ray to the fundamental of mainstream through the sales of ps3. And Blu-Ray movies are about the same price as HDDVD movies, why would you want to pay the same for HDDVD but for less storage?

I think this whole "launch game excuse" is just that. After sony did not launch last spring, developers had an extra 6 months, with final kits, to work on these titles. Fall of man was in production for a full two or more years. If my memory serves me correctly, the devs behind PDO, Kameo, and damn near everybody who had 360 launch games had final kits for only two, three or maybe four moths before they had to get their games out of the door.
And Kameo is still a graphical masterpiece. The gameplay is wonky at times, but most people have not seen this game in its hi-def glory. It is really, really beautiful, and even now, is in the same league with anything I have seen on the ps3. Motorstorm, Lair or Warhawk may blow it away, but the similarly beautiful, if not fatally flawed Genji, does not.

I know I love my trey-sexy, but man I can't wait to see what the ps3 can REALLY DO. I just wonder who is going to squeeze every ounce of juice out of the ps3.

folken001

12-14-2006, 09:38 AM

I think this whole "launch game excuse" is just that. After sony did not launch last spring, developers had an extra 6 months, with final kits, to work on these titles. Fall of man was in production for a full two or more years. If my memory serves me correctly, the devs behind PDO, Kameo, and damn near everybody who had 360 launch games had final kits for only two, three or maybe four moths before they had to get their games out of the door.
And Kameo is still a graphical masterpiece. The gameplay is wonky at times, but most people have not seen this game in its hi-def glory. It is really, really beautiful, and even now, is in the same league with anything I have seen on the ps3. Motorstorm, Lair or Warhawk may blow it away, but the similarly beautiful, if not fatally flawed Genji, does not.

I know I love my trey-sexy, but man I can't wait to see what the ps3 can REALLY DO. I just wonder who is going to squeeze every ounce of juice out of the ps3.
PS3 didn't launch last spring and its hardware wasn't finalized until much later either. You are trying to use ports to say PS3 is inferior? I beg to differ.

I have been playing RFOM. From what I have seen so far, I think PS3's future is definitely on the bright side. My only complaint would be that Sony should really have more games put out there. Even though playing through Resistance with my friends and online will do the job for now, but I dont' see anything particularly interesting on the horizon in the next 2-3 months. The next game I am going to get is probably Virtual Fighter 5. That new chinese martial artist girl looks interesting.

Wan-Fu

12-14-2006, 09:53 AM

PS3 didn't launch last spring and its hardware wasn't finalized until much later either. You are trying to use ports to say PS3 is inferior? I beg to differ.

I have been playing RFOM. From what I have seen so far, I think PS3's future is definitely on the bright side. My only complaint would be that Sony should really have more games put out there. Even though playing through Resistance with my friends and online will do the job for now, but I dont' see anything particularly interesting on the horizon in the next 2-3 months. The next game I am going to get is probably Virtual Fighter 5. That new chinese martial artist girl looks interesting.

I am way too lazy to look up exactly when final kits were shipped, but I am pretty sure Insomniac had final dev kits a hell of a lot longer than Rare. With the six month delay, they had to have them a lot longer.

I am not saying its inferior, but it sure as hell is inferior NOW. The ports look worse, and their exclusives look worse. You can't be more expensive, and less good looking. There's a reason high-class escort girls get paid more than hookers, they are better looking! There isn't any reason to think the problem won't be recitified though.

Eventually, someone is going to tap the power of the ps3 and lay it down. But with a high price, a lower attach rate, and fewer systems out there, Folken my man, you gotta wonder why third parties would go through the extra hassle and cost to harness the cell. If you were a third party developer, what would you do to maximize your profits? Wouldn't the 360 look better to you for at least the next year?

slade

12-14-2006, 09:56 AM

folken001

12-14-2006, 10:03 AM

I am way too lazy to look up exactly when final kits were shipped, but I am pretty sure Insomniac had final dev kits a hell of a lot longer than Rare. With the six month delay, they had to have them a lot longer.

I am not saying its inferior, but it sure as hell is inferior NOW. The ports look worse, and their exclusives look worse. You can't be more expensive, and less good looking. There's a reason high-class escort girls get paid more than hookers, they are better looking! There isn't any reason to think the problem won't be recitified though.

Eventually, someone is going to tap the power of the ps3 and lay it down. But with a high price, a lower attach rate, and fewer systems out there, Folken my man, you gotta wonder why third parties would go through the extra hassle and cost to harness the cell. If you were a third party developer, what would you do to maximize your profits? Wouldn't the 360 look better to you for at least the next year?
Geez, the difference between PS3 and Xbox360 isn't like top escort girl and a hookers. RTOM looks just as good as Xbox360 games if not better. I've been saying that over and over. The reason as why PS3's ports look inferior should be clear to you. I don't think EA tried to make the game better for PS3. They probably just found a way to translate the codes in PS3's language and that's pretty much it. However, if you actually look at the gamespot comparison yourself, you would find that the difference isn't huge at all.

folken001

12-14-2006, 10:07 AM

Wan-Fu

12-14-2006, 10:09 AM

This is pretty much like DC vs. PS2 all over again. Sony's first gen games always underutilize the system. In year two and three, we start to see some really good stuff and in year four, we are blown away by what the system is really capable of. It'll be the same with PS3. The question now is whether the 360 will markedly improve over the graphics we have already seen. This is where a system that is easy to program for is at its weakest. Developers fall into preconceived pradigms and we get left with marginal improvement on stuff we saw within the first year of the system.

Not so sure slade. The original xbox was also far easier to program than the ps2. However, I will maintain that Chaos Theory is the best looking video game released last gen bar none. The progress from the first splinter cell to Chaos theory is breath taking. Now that you have a 360, you can pick it up for like 8 bucks used. The lighting, shading, and bump mapping is absolutely sick. Chaos Theory almost looks next gen. If you haven't tried splinter cell at all, it is the best in the series (IMO).

I am curious to see how god of war II looks though, but I wish it could have come out on the ps3. I bet Jaffe would have really shook things up with a ps3 version of GOW.

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 10:23 AM

I am way too lazy to look up exactly when final kits were shipped, but I am pretty sure Insomniac had final dev kits a hell of a lot longer than Rare. With the six month delay, they had to have them a lot longer. To be fair, regardless of when the final kits were ready, Rare had been working on Kameo since before the GC launched. I still have my GC box, and there it is, Kameo screen shots right on the GC box.

I am not saying its inferior, but it sure as hell is inferior NOW. The ports look worse, and their exclusives look worse. You can't be more expensive, and less good looking. There's a reason high-class escort girls get paid more than hookers, they are better looking! There isn't any reason to think the problem won't be recitified though.

Even if the Ps3 eventually looks better than it does now--and it should--won't the 360 games continue to increase in graphical complexity? I was under the impression that the 360 is a multi-core system and developers are new to multi-core programming.

It still seems like the biggest advantage the Ps3 has technically is a larger storage medium for more res-textures, uncompressed sound, larger levels, etc. As far as raw horsepower, is the Ps3 enough more powerful for the average person looking at demo kiosks to notice?

Wan-Fu

12-14-2006, 10:27 AM

Geez, the difference between PS3 and Xbox360 isn't like top escort girl and a hookers. RTOM looks just as good as Xbox360 games if not better. I've been saying that over and over. The reason as why PS3's ports look inferior should be clear to you. I don't think EA tried to make the game better for PS3. They probably just found a way to translate the codes in PS3's language and that's pretty much it. However, if you actually look at the gamespot comparison yourself, you would find that the difference isn't huge at all.

Its not about whether or not resistance tops gears, or whether these ports look better on the 360 or ps3, its about the fact that we are even having to have the conversation in the first place. That is where the problem is. We shouldnt even be asking what looks better with a machine that has all the vaunted power of the cell+reality synthesizer. If you have to ask, its too late. Not to mention that after asking the question, the 360 comes out smellin like roses with ports, and so far exclusives......

Again, I want to see what the ps3 can do, but I dont understand why the xbox delivered the goods on day 1 and never looked back, and with the ps3- well, hardly, I have been thinking recently about what would happen if sony falters, and "loses" the next-gen race. Microsoft in the drivers seat kinda scares me, to tell you the truth.

One of the most annoying aspects of sys wars in the previous generation was the myth of ps2's "untapped power". I hope we dont go through that again. Somebody's gotta show me the money

Fivespot

12-14-2006, 11:53 AM

Curious, will the 360 HD-DvD play at 1080i with its current cabling? Also, do you know if it includes upscaling technology for regular DvDs?

What would be really cool is MS put out a premium-priced 360 with the HD-DvD built in. With HDMI and Wi-fi.

One thing I'm wondering and haven't looked at at all is how you connect multiple HDMI devices to the one HDMI input on your set. Are there receivers with multiple HDMI inputs in back, and are they hella expensive?

Yes, the 360 plays at 1080i with normal/component cables. It also supports the other formats like 720p, 480p and so on.

You do not need the HD DVD add-on to take advantage of the console's upscaling (upconversion) capabilities. You do need to use the VGA cables however (it won't upscale through component).

And yes there are receivers with HDMI inputs and yes they're hella expensive (just started coming out).

NEO-360

12-14-2006, 12:08 PM

Eventually, someone is going to tap the power of the ps3 and lay it down. But with a high price, a lower attach rate, and fewer systems out there, Folken my man, you gotta wonder why third parties would go through the extra hassle and cost to harness the cell. If you were a third party developer, what would you do to maximize your profits? Wouldn't the 360 look better to you for at least the next year?

The main reason why there wont be many exclusives for the PS3 in the near future. Overall Wan-Fu you've delivered some great great posts.:thumbsup:

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 12:11 PM

Yes, the 360 plays at 1080i with normal/component cables. It also supports the other formats like 720p, 480p and so on.

You do not need the HD DVD add-on to take advantage of the console's upscaling (upconversion) capabilities. You do need to use the VGA cables however (it won't upscale through component).

And yes there are receivers with HDMI inputs and yes they're hella expensive (just started coming out).

Thanks for the info, Fiver. One question more: what's a VGA cable? I've only seen composite, component and HDMI. Sorry to be a tech-illiterate, but if the foo sh!ts and all.

So you're saying the 360 itself upscales/simulates regular 480p DvD's to 720p/1080i? I bought a specialized DvD player to do that, so its encouraging if 360 put that kind of tech in standard for something as mundane as DvD movie playback. With that upscaling, does it upscale the b/c Xbox games too? It must, huh, because they surely wouldn't have included movie-only upscaling.

Cuddly Knife

12-14-2006, 12:25 PM

VGA cable is what I'm using to play my 360 on my PC monitor. I don;t know if it's used for anything else.

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 12:33 PM

VGA cable is what I'm using to play my 360 on my PC monitor. I don;t know if it's used for anything else.

Doh! My computer cable. There is a VGA input on my TV, too, but I don't see what that has to do with whether or not 360 has an upscaling chip. But maybe something. What's weird is that you can get 1080i through component cables on my cable box, but with my upscaling dvd-player, it won't send the simulated 1080i through anything but an HDMI.

Why is that?

folken001

12-14-2006, 01:45 PM

Its not about whether or not resistance tops gears, or whether these ports look better on the 360 or ps3, its about the fact that we are even having to have the conversation in the first place. That is where the problem is. We shouldnt even be asking what looks better with a machine that has all the vaunted power of the cell+reality synthesizer. If you have to ask, its too late. Not to mention that after asking the question, the 360 comes out smellin like roses with ports, and so far exclusives......

Again, I want to see what the ps3 can do, but I dont understand why the xbox delivered the goods on day 1 and never looked back, and with the ps3- well, hardly, I have been thinking recently about what would happen if sony falters, and "loses" the next-gen race. Microsoft in the drivers seat kinda scares me, to tell you the truth.

One of the most annoying aspects of sys wars in the previous generation was the myth of ps2's "untapped power". I hope we dont go through that again. Somebody's gotta show me the money

That is if everyone agrees that Xbox360 delivered what it promised on day 1. That is not so, is it? It had hardware problems, the shortages, only one decent title ( just like PS3) and so on. What did Xbox360 deliver on day 1? Nothing? Even until today, Xbox360 hasn't delivered much in my eyes. GoW is probably the only worthy title I've seen so far in Xbox360's short one year life. Halo 2 didn't even impress me at all. Like I said, PS3's problem is that there wasn't enough games at launch, but if you check the history of past consoles, PS3 isn't the only one with that problem. In fact, the few launch titles PS3 had have gotten decent averages from the critics. (I hate using that as a support though). So what's really the problem? PS3's first gen games look almost as good as Xbox360's 2nd gen. I think that's rather impressive considering all the problems PS3 had pre-production. (late hardware finalizations, late distribution of development kits)

If you want to know what PS2's untapped power is, just compare The Bouncer to FFXII. Can you honestly say you don't see the difference?

NEO-360

12-14-2006, 02:34 PM

That is if everyone agrees that Xbox360 delivered what it promised on day 1. That is not so, is it? It had hardware problems, the shortages, only one decent title ( just like PS3) and so on. What did Xbox360 deliver on day 1? Nothing? Even until today, Xbox360 hasn't delivered much in my eyes. GoW is probably the only worthy title I've seen so far in Xbox360's short one year life. Halo 2 didn't even impress me at all. Like I said, PS3's problem is that there wasn't enough games at launch, but if you check the history of past consoles, PS3 isn't the only one with that problem. In fact, the few launch titles PS3 had have gotten decent averages from the critics. (I hate using that as a support though). So what's really the problem? PS3's first gen games look almost as good as Xbox360's 2nd gen. I think that's rather impressive considering all the problems PS3 had pre-production. (late hardware finalizations, late distribution of development kits)

If you want to know what PS2's untapped power is, just compare The Bouncer to FFXII. Can you honestly say you don't see the difference?

How can you even say the name of the shortest most crappiest game in PS2's history"The Bouncer"? The so called"Streets Of Rage" killer? LOL!! What a joke that game was. So games like Dead Rising didnt get great reviews for the 360? What about Elder Scrolls IV:Oblivion? Or Saint's Row? Apparently in your biased eyes there isnt any good games on the 360 001.(Only if its on a Sony console) GOW being the only title worthy of mentioning? Yeah righhht.

The PS3's first gen games looks almost as good as Xbox 360's 2nd gen in your eyes? Cant tell by the review comparisons though. Resistance is good but its no Gears Of War.

The PS3 didnt deliver on day one and neither did the Xbox 360. But one year later the Xbox 360 is balling while the PS3 has only one title to talk about and thats Resistance. And the sad part is the PS2 has a better line up of games for the next 4 months than the PS3 does. Dodge that bullet Capt.:mad2:

Fivespot

12-14-2006, 02:50 PM

Thanks for the info, Fiver. One question more: what's a VGA cable? I've only seen composite, component and HDMI. Sorry to be a tech-illiterate, but if the foo sh!ts and all.

So you're saying the 360 itself upscales/simulates regular 480p DvD's to 720p/1080i? I bought a specialized DvD player to do that, so its encouraging if 360 put that kind of tech in standard for something as mundane as DvD movie playback. With that upscaling, does it upscale the b/c Xbox games too? It must, huh, because they surely wouldn't have included movie-only upscaling.

I think you and CK already figured it out- it's a special cable you can buy for the 360 that allows you to hook up the console via the VGA input on either a television or computer monitor. Why does the upscaling require use of the VGA accessory cable? It's a long winded technical explanation that I don't fully comprehend but I can direct you to it if you're interested. Long story short, it wasn't an intended out of the box function but rather came through one of the dashboard updates at a later time. I know from experience that it won't upconvert using component cables as I have used both with the console.

Yes, it upscales b/c XBOX games as well.

Cuddly Knife

12-14-2006, 03:01 PM

Yeah, Ninja Gaiden looks awesome on my monitor compared to my old tube. I'm playing it right now actually. And with the soon-to-be release of the next b/c update featuring games like Psychonauts, Shenmue 2, and others that are 480p and higher are great news for those who consider b/c important, and enjoy the benefits of high-def gaming. I'm keeping my hopes up for PDO and Otogi 2(there's no hope for Stranger's Wrath, I'm guessing), but now I can whip out some old-school action like I've been meaning to.

trebor

12-14-2006, 03:02 PM

I think you and CK already figured it out- it's a special cable you can buy for the 360 that allows you to hook up the console via the VGA input on either a television or computer monitor. Why does the upscaling require use of the VGA accessory cable? It's a long winded technical explanation that I don't fully comprehend but I can direct you to it if you're interested. Long story short, it wasn't an intended out of the box function but rather came through one of the dashboard updates at a later time. I know from experience that it won't upconvert using component cables as I have used both with the console.

Yes, it upscales b/c XBOX games as well.

Wait, so the 360 won't upscale videogames without VGA or just DVDs? I just bought a HDTV and honestly the 360 was starting to look attractive because of that.

It will still output 720p/1080i via component cables for 360 games, right?

Fivespot

12-14-2006, 03:09 PM

Wait, so the 360 won't upscale videogames without VGA or just DVDs? I just bought a HDTV and honestly the 360 was starting to look attractive because of that.

It will still output 720p/1080i via component cables for 360 games, right?

Sorry, didn't mean to confuse things.

Just DVD's on the VGA side of things. Can you 360 owners help? I honestly don't play b/c games on my 360 but I've read and heard many times it upscales to 720p via component and VGA. The DVD upscaling and HD DVD stuff are the only items I understand you need the VGA cables to utilize.

Yes, all games are 720p or 1080i via component.

Gadfly2317

12-14-2006, 05:03 PM

Wait, so the 360 won't upscale videogames without VGA or just DVDs? I just bought a HDTV and honestly the 360 was starting to look attractive because of that.

It will still output 720p/1080i via component cables for 360 games, right?

A lot of HDTV's have a VGA input though. That would actually be cool, since VGA is an open input on my TV, and nearly all the other inputs are taken. . .one of the two composites, both components, and the HDMI.

Fivespot, can you post that link you were talking about? I don't understand Hi-def at all. Why can 1080i come through component cables on my cable box, but my upscaling DvD player won't send an upconverted signal across on anything but HDMI? And why does 360 require VGA output for upscaled games and movies--is the VGA functioning sort of like an alternative to HDMI? Are you SURE it upscales movies btw?

And how do I get sound with the VGA hookup on my TV? My PC used to be hooked up to my TV for awhile, but my PC had speakers. The 360, I'd want its sound to come out of the TV, but I'm thinking that's not possible. I really just wish the 360 had an HDMI output. . . if it does upscaling for movies, I'd probably just replace my DvD player with it.

the 360 continues to look more and more tempting everyday, though. If it had solid b/c on Strangers Wrath and Panzer Dragoon, it would probably already be a done deal. Next year, with games like Alan Wake and Mass Effect. . .and still, XBLA is one of the things I find most tempting. And I actually really enjoy mainstream puke like Grand Theft Auto, which is why Wan Fu's analysis in the other thread makes so much sense. If I haven't picked one up, next holiday with games like that and a console that's over $200 less than Ps3, the 360 is going to be one extremely tempting console. I keep saying "Lair, Lair, motorstorm, heavenly sword, Lair" but when I'm ready for my post-Wii console, it's gonna be the system with the most games, and Ps3 has some big time catching up.

Jaa Phaanom

12-14-2006, 05:33 PM

A lot of HDTV's have a VGA input though. That would actually be cool, since VGA is an open input on my TV, and nearly all the other inputs are taken. . .one of the two composites, both components, and the HDMI.

Fivespot, can you post that link you were talking about? I don't understand Hi-def at all. Why can 1080i come through component cables on my cable box, but my upscaling DvD player won't send an upconverted signal across on anything but HDMI? And why does 360 require VGA output for upscaled games and movies--is the VGA functioning sort of like an alternative to HDMI? Are you SURE it upscales movies btw?

And how do I get sound with the VGA hookup on my TV? My PC used to be hooked up to my TV for awhile, but my PC had speakers. The 360, I'd want its sound to come out of the TV, but I'm thinking that's not possible. I really just wish the 360 had an HDMI output. . . if it does upscaling for movies, I'd probably just replace my DvD player with it.
.

Technically, a player can upconvert via component cable (you can find some non brand name players that do. There are websites that tell how you to "hack" certain players). the reason a lot of players don't offer upconversion via component is due to HDCP. I thought HDCP applied to DVI and HDMI so I'm not sure how MS gets away with upconverting through VGA.

I didn't realize that the 360 upconverted DVDs through VGA until I read Fiveski's post. I have a 360 VGA cable lying around so I went ahead and hooked it up to test it. I can confirm that it upconverts DVDs to 720p on my TV. doesn't your TV have audio inputs for you VGA input? Mine does. You might want to check again just to make sure.

I downloaded a HD movie over Xbox Live a few days ago (V for Vendetta). The picture quality was just as good as the HD-DVDs I have seen. Now this makes me sort of curious because the download was 5.2 GB (only took 5 hours BTW). It seems to me that they could have put HD movie on a DVD-9. Maybe minus some extra features.

You're right, all this HD stuff has become really confusing.

Cuddly Knife

12-14-2006, 08:08 PM

About the sound for VGA, it comes with the red and white cables to connect to a stereo or whatever sound system you have.

Fivespot

12-14-2006, 08:50 PM

Fivespot, can you post that link you were talking about? I don't understand Hi-def at all.

I believe I got most of the detail in this podcast.

http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2006/07/16/Show-183-The-one-about-HD-DVD.aspx

And this one.

http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2006/08/06/Show-186-The-one-about-the-HD-DVD-player.aspx

Fivespot

12-14-2006, 09:01 PM

Info on all the different resolutions:

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/showthread.php?t=398

VGV

12-18-2006, 06:05 AM

Many of us have made comments and read comments about how these machines appear to perform. But still not many of us have played both machines side by side with the same games, so even though we had an inkling of which was doing better, it wasn't confirmed. Well now Gamespot has put together a lil' comparison between the two machines across several <b>common</b>. The clear winner was the XBOX 360.

Gamespot felt <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html">the 360 is better </a> in most of these games in graphical quality, graphical effects especially HDRLighting, and framerates! Not only this, but the article of course doesn't mention GOW v. RFOM which several others have said is no comparison whatsoever.

In fact, i just bought the HD-DVD player, yup I did what I said I wasn't gonna do. But I'll post about that later. Anyway, I bought it from K-mart, and some young kid was the clerk. He said, "your gonna love this player." So he goes on to tell me he not only has 360, the HD-DVD player, but also a PS3, and one LCD and one plasma TV. I'm blown away cause I didn't think anybody could afford all of this on a Kmart salary! But that's the power of credit I guess. But he said he bought his PS3 from a friend who worked at EB for $800, not bad considering some people were getting hammered for worse on Ebay. But he said as he got it home it didn't work!! He said it would not read any disc lol. But the good thing was Sony dropped him a replacement in ONE day!! Good job Sony! He said the 360 is just way better than PS3 right now and GOW blows away RFOM. But he doesn't regret the purchase because he was always a pro-Sony guy and believes when MGS4 et al arrive he will be vindicated. But for now he freely admits the 360 is way better.

Some other comments he made were surprising. He said his PS3 does NOT get hot!! I was definitely surprised by that can anybody else corroborate that? He also said the very same day, yesterday, I was in Kmart to buy my HD-DVD player, they had received a random shipment of PS3s!!!!! I asked him did they have any left, he said, NOPE! He said they moved out pretty quickly once customers in the store got word. He said stores all over are now getting random shipments. The surprising thing is that this Kmart was a po-dunk ran down piece of crap store, I didn't even plan on buying the HD-DVD player there, I just happened to see it and saved myself a trip to Circuit City. Anyway, if Sony is re-upping a crap store like that other more prominent stores in my area must also be getting units. So those of you still wishing to get a PS3 before XMAS get out there to these stores early over the next few days, you might get luckly!

Um, hate to burst your bubble there but ... these are all multi-plat tiltles. If I remember this correctly in the Xbox vs PS2 era multi-plats on the much more powerful Xbox didn't look any better than their PS2 counterparts.

Gadfly2317

12-18-2006, 06:16 AM

Um, hate to burst your bubble there but ... these are all multi-plat tiltles. If I remember this correctly in the Xbox vs PS2 era multi-plats on the much more powerful Xbox didn't look any better than their PS2 counterparts.

No, multiplats generally looked better on Xbox.

VGV

12-18-2006, 06:52 AM

No, multiplats generally looked better on Xbox.

Marginal difference Gaddy. Compare Xbox multi-plats against Xbox exclusives like The Chronicles of Riddick and you catch my drift.

thelastword

12-18-2006, 07:12 AM

I think PS3 multiplats will look much better than the minimalistic differences we saw between PS2 and Xbox multiplats. The difference between PS2 and XBOX multiplats were so narrow IMO, in quite a few cases, the PS2 efforts were a bit better especially the titles from Criterion. So when I saw an XBOX multiplat against that of a PS2 all I saw was perhaps a slightly smoother looking game due to AA but that was it for the most part. Having such an argument though, control of these titles should be factored into "the which muliplat is superior on which platform". Frankly, how many here would rather play Fifa, SSX, Winning 11,Soul Calibur, Nba Live, Madden etc.. with an xbox controller over the dual shock? In many instances the xbox controller just paled in terms of button options and control configurations.

Mochan

12-18-2006, 08:25 AM

You're right, all this HD stuff has become really confusing.

Okay, now you guys have me laughing, whatever happened to console convenience and simplicity and ease of play?

/end PC jerkitude

Oh and the real multiplats that looked best were the PC multiplats. Riddick on the PC looked leagues ahead of Riddick on the Xbox.

Gadfly2317

12-18-2006, 09:02 AM

control of these titles should be factored into "the which muliplat is superior on which platform". Frankly, how many here would rather play Fifa, SSX, Winning 11,Soul Calibur, Nba Live, Madden etc.. with an xbox controller over the dual shock? In many instances the xbox controller just paled in terms of button options and control configurations.

Dude, they're all gonna answer 360, not Dual Shock. The 360 controller is extremely comfortable and it is not like force feedback. In fact, there is no more Dual Shock: it has been replaced by the six-axis tilty-thing last minute ripoff of Nintendo---it just looks and feels like the ergonomically whacked Dual Shock with the shock removed.

VGV

12-18-2006, 09:15 AM

Point is and remains ... multi-plats on the most advanced console platform generally pale in comparison to exclusives that tap into the machine's full potential. So gamespot's findings really shouldn't surprise anyone that there's no difference to speak of between the 360 and PS3 platform, when it comes to multi-platform titles.

Mochan

12-18-2006, 09:52 AM

I liked the Dual Shock design. The XBox controller design I had some issues with ... I did not like the black and white buttons. Swapping the Dpad with the L-Stick was probably nice but I didn't really like it better than the symmetric design of the Dual Shock.

thelastword

12-18-2006, 04:10 PM

Dude, they're all gonna answer 360, not Dual Shock. The 360 controller is extremely comfortable and it is not like force feedback. In fact, there is no more Dual Shock: it has been replaced by the six-axis tilty-thing last minute ripoff of Nintendo---it just looks and feels like the ergonomically whacked Dual Shock with the shock removed. Dude, I was referring to the Xbox1 and PS2, get a clue. I mentioned Xbox and PS2 so many times and yet you still missed it. Anyway, the point remains that the majority of EA's multiplats, if not all, were better controlled on the PS2. I never denied that xbox1's controller was better for fps, but for fighters and sports games it was below par.

As for the 360's controller, I won't deny it's ease of use, as for the xbox controller being superior for console fps, that's no longer the case, resistance controls like a dream, some say the (sexaxis) feels better than the 360 controller even in that genre, but let's say they're even for fairness. As for the sixaxis's implementation of motion control in multiplats, we've only scratched the surface here, we'll see whether rumble overrides motion control in the future, we know it will with the exclusives, but Ea et al are actually devving with the PS3 in mind now, the future will reveal all.

DrunkenThumbmaster

12-20-2006, 08:45 AM

Dude, I was referring to the Xbox1 and PS2, get a clue. I mentioned Xbox and PS2 so many times and yet you still missed it. Anyway, the point remains that the majority of EA's multiplats, if not all, were better controlled on the PS2. I never denied that xbox1's controller was better for fps, but for fighters and sports games it was below par.

As for the 360's controller, I won't deny it's ease of use, as for the xbox controller being superior for console fps, that's no longer the case, resistance controls like a dream, some say the (sexaxis) feels better than the 360 controller even in that genre, but let's say they're even for fairness. As for the sixaxis's implementation of motion control in multiplats, we've only scratched the surface here, we'll see whether rumble overrides motion control in the future, we know it will with the exclusives, but Ea et al are actually devving with the PS3 in mind now, the future will reveal all.

I used to go crazy when people said that PS2 multiplats looked nearly as good as the Xbox versions. Then I realized a lot of people hear game on standard definition TV's and that makes a hell of a difference.I can't play a PS2 game on HDTV without getting a headache Madden looks like jacksh!t on HDSET on the PS2, the crawling jaggies are unbearbalbe. But even with out HD Black and Burnout Revenge looks significantly better on the Xbox lastword I'm starting to think you have never even seen a Xbox game much less a 360.

thelastword

12-20-2006, 12:09 PM

I used to go crazy when people said that PS2 multiplats looked nearly as good as the Xbox versions. Then I realized a lot of people hear game on standard definition TV's and that makes a hell of a difference.I can't play a PS2 game on HDTV without getting a headache Madden looks like jacksh!t on HDSET on the PS2, the crawling jaggies are unbearbalbe. But even with out HD Black and Burnout Revenge looks significantly better on the Xbox lastword I'm starting to think you have never even seen a Xbox game much less a 360.Honestly you can believe whatever you want and it's quite obvious what you will believe from the outset, so what's the point. You are the guy coming over here saying how you've played so many games and I'm not saying I don't believe you, but it's so apparent that 99.9% of the Playstation games you've played are overhyped and just not so good. Hell, you are the guy saying blabbing your drunkened mouth on how there's no Ai in Resistance, so how the eff do you expect to be taken seriously. If RFOM has no AI then Gears has (-)10000000 Ai, it's just normal BS drunkenness from you as usual.

Black and the Burnout series was superior on the PS2 system, hell even Criterion said they preferred the playstation. The particle effects were superior on the PS2 including lighting. Black was a bit closer, but there was better sound and a grittier look with slightly better particle effects on the PS2, Hell, Black on the PS2 looks better if not as good as 95% of xbox games and It's not even the best looking PS2 game IMO. You pretend that xbox was the only console to provide prog scan output in games as if 480i was the only way to play on PS2, GTFO. Have you played Tekken5 and VF4 evolution at 480P, how about VP2 and SC3, how about GOW and SOTC. Back in the day around the 360's launch I was watching SC3 and DOA4 being played side by side and I was like wow, SC3 is really impressive, so I'm not about knocking games out of spite and fanboy bias, I call it like I see it.

If I trash Kotor it's not because of any hatred towards MS but because of hyped games whick lack basic effing polish, that's why their sequels are not consistently rated in the 90's like FF and MGS etc. Hell even Gears on first entry is a glitch-a-fon, with the arms of dead locusts sticking in Marcus's bag and with the legs of locusts stretching across levels, how about where you get stuck pushing the car in ACT II which actually impedes effing progress, how about when running up to doors sometimes they turn black impeding progress, so you got to suicide and reset, how about the problems with texture loads and that they's didn't always pop in right away, how about dead enemies that levitate on certain levels, I could go on and on, but this just proves how biased some of you guys are. As much as you guys hate Japanese devs, this is not something that they churn out and 99.9% of playstation exclusives are free of this. GOW is perhaps one of the most polished games last gen and Resistance is one of the most polished for this new gen.

After playing a game like Silent Hill 3, I just could not be as floored with the lighting and texture work in Splinter Cell on the XBOX, Hell I'll gladly give Splinter Cell some props and of course NG, that was a day one purchase for me, but apart from these titles I'm not sure what else I can give a graphical vote. I never played Conker and never got to Stranger's Wrath which I heard are impressive and really don't doubt that, but to me Primal at 480P is a game to behold, the environs, the character detail, the sbtle lighting. Ghosthunter at 480P has texture work that eclipses RE4 in many parts and amazing lighting of course both of these title came from Sony Cambridge in London. At least play the darn games before thinking that the xbox was that impressive visually. Transformers on the PS2 kicks ass to this day especially with the scope involved the huge bosses and the massive levels, amazing detail, lush looking environs etc..As for SOTC, I believe that if this game was simply upscaled to 1080P with a framerate fix or patch it will many a next gen game look like utter crap.

DrunkenThumbmaster

12-20-2006, 01:05 PM

Honestly you can believe whatever you want and it's quite obvious what you will believe from the outset, so what's the point. You are the guy coming over here saying how you've played so many games and I'm not saying I don't believe you, but it's so apparent that 99.9% of the Playstation games you've played are overhyped and just not so good. Hell, you are the guy saying blabbing your drunkened mouth on how there's no Ai in Resistance, so how the eff do you expect to be taken seriously. If RFOM has no AI then Gears has (-)10000000 Ai, it's just normal BS drunkenness from you as usual.

I've never once downed a game just because the platform it was on. I've said I thought RE4 (GC) may have been the best looking game last gen. How much of Resistance have you played. Not doubting that you've played it but if you haven't I can't argue with you because you are just spewing vomit.

Black and the Burnout series was superior on the PS2 system, hell even Criterion said they preferred the playstation. The particle effects were superior on the PS2 including lighting. Black was a bit closer, but there was better sound and a grittier look with slightly better particle effects on the PS2, Hell, Black on the PS2 looks better if not as good as 95% of xbox games and It's not even the best looking PS2 game IMO. You pretend that xbox was the only console to provide prog scan output in games as if 480i was the only way to play on PS2, GTFO. Have you played Tekken5 and VF4 evolution at 480P, how about VP2 and SC3, how about GOW and SOTC. Back in the day around the 360's launch I was watching SC3 and DOA4 being played side by side and I was like wow, SC3 is really impressive, so I'm not about knocking games out of spite and fanboy bias, I call it like I see it.

First Burnout 3 was better on the PS2 more particles and the online actually worked. If you could go back to when the game was released and look up posts I said I owned Burnout on the PS2. Revenge from most reports most noteably IGN head to head performed better on the Xbox. Black was a lot better on the Xbox according to Ign's head to head. I'm using them because I can't think of any other source that regulary compares multiplat consoles. Where are you getting your "facts" from?

I've never said PS2 games didn't do Progressive scan the game I mentioned didn't. But guess what? Some xbox games did full 720p NBA2k and Incredible Hulk Ultimate Destruction. You call it like you see it. You are full of Sony propagandafied Bullchips. You don't know Sh!t for games. You are a marketing parrot forever quoting dev's opnions and previews yet fail to ever mention anything that's actually factual from your own experiences.

If I trash Kotor it's not because of any hatred towards MS but because of hyped games whick lack basic effing polish, that's why their sequels are not consistently rated in the 90's like FF and MGS etc. Hell even Gears on first entry is a glitch-a-fon, with the arms of dead locusts sticking in Marcus's bag and with the legs of locusts stretching across levels, how about where you get stuck pushing the car in ACT II which actually impedes effing progress, how about when running up to doors sometimes they turn black impeding progress, so you got to suicide and reset, how about the problems with texture loads and that they's didn't always pop in right away, how about dead enemies that levitate on certain levels, I could go on and on, but this just proves how biased some of you guys are. As much as you guys hate Japanese devs, this is not something that they churn out and 99.9% of playstation exclusives are free of this. GOW is perhaps one of the most polished games last gen and Resistance is one of the most polished for this new gen.

The game has some issues but most of the stuff you are naming I haven't heard of or seen. And I don't hold back when dogging a buggy game on any platform. My hate for Morrowind on the xbox is a prime example. Don't get me started on all the A.I. Gaffs in Resistance.

After playing a game like Silent Hill 3, I just could not be as floored with the lighting and texture work in Splinter Cell on the XBOX, Hell I'll gladly give Splinter Cell some props and of course NG, that was a day one purchase for me, but apart from these titles I'm not sure what else I can give a graphical vote. I never played Conker and never got to Stranger's Wrath which I heard are impressive and really don't doubt that, but to me Primal at 480P is a game to behold, the environs, the character detail, the sbtle lighting. Ghosthunter at 480P has texture work that eclipses RE4 in many parts and amazing lighting of course both of these title came from Sony Cambridge in London. At least play the darn games before thinking that the xbox was that impressive visually. Transformers on the PS2 kicks ass to this day especially with the scope involved the huge bosses and the massive levels, amazing detail, lush looking environs etc..As for SOTC, I believe that if this game was simply upscaled to 1080P with a framerate fix or patch it will many a next gen game look like utter crap.

You are going on record saying the lighting in Silent Hill 3 is better than Splinter Cell, Really what about Silent Hill 4 (oh that was on Xbox so that don't count). And I thought I was Drunk for the record MGS3 has the best and most advance lighting system I've seen on the console Sweet bloom and HDR (they probably faked it but it still looks good). All the Xbox games released you can't think of any but those 3 that deserve a graphical note? I'm finished with you. Your head is so far up the cows head there is no reasoning with you. You don't even attempt to have a factual basis for you opinions. When you do I'll holla back.:cornut:

Mochan

12-20-2006, 01:34 PM

I used to go crazy when people said that PS2 multiplats looked nearly as good as the Xbox versions. Then I realized a lot of people hear game on standard definition TV's and that makes a hell of a difference.

I still go ballistic when someone says an Xbox game looks as good as its PC version. But really all this "the games looked like crap on standard def TV" baloohey makes me laugh because all you console gamers (Xbots in particular were so proud of how beautiful their games looked) were playing substandard crap while I was gaming away on HD six years ago.

As for SOTC, I believe that if this game was simply upscaled to 1080P with a framerate fix or patch it will many a next gen game look like utter crap.

That's too much. SOTC had really bad textures and no shader map effects whatsoever.

DrunkenThumbmaster

12-20-2006, 01:45 PM

I still go ballistic when someone says an Xbox game looks as good as its PC version. But really all this "the games looked like crap on standard def TV" baloohey makes me laugh because all you console gamers (Xbots in particular were so proud of how beautiful their games looked) were playing substandard crap while I was gaming away on HD six years ago.

.

I never really liked the PC to console graphical comparsion. The PC bar moves so fast. I upgraded to a Geforce 3 just before I bought my original Xbox and I clearly remember at that time that Xbox games looked better. About a year or so or right around the time the first Ghost Recon was released on the PC . I thought PC games had made a substantial jump.

The arument has always been that the Xbox could run the PC games.

thelastword

12-20-2006, 03:40 PM

That's too much. SOTC had really bad textures and no shader map effects whatsoever. I happen to believe that SOTC is a really, really good looking game, there's so much detail on the colossi, the fur shading is quite impressive and the lighting is amazing, granted the framerate had some hiccups but the animation was out of this world. For what Fumito Ueda was able to do on the PS2 it's quite astonishing and it will be remembered as an aesthetic/technical masterpiece last gen.

Shader effects last gen was not all the rage to me personally, I played the **** out of sega gt, it had bump mapped roads and it still paled to GT3 graphically. I look at Pgr2 and Forza and there's no doubt to me that GT4 is the better looking racer. Hell Jak2 and 3 made use of so many effects on the PS2 and of course they are some of the better looking games on any system last gen. I think results are more important than checkmarks, the PS2 GPU was not PC based, you may not want to call what they pulled off in certain games "shader effects", but you can't deny that they made use of alot of amazing graphical effects in their games. Hell as the guys got more to terms with the hardware, they made use of bumpmapping in the path of Neo as well, officially. I think this gen, since the GPU's are basically NVIDIA against ATI then we can talk shaders all day, but to me, last gen these shader effects did not guarantee that a game was better looking.

thelastword

12-20-2006, 04:04 PM

You are going on record saying the lighting in Silent Hill 3 is better than Splinter Cell, Really what about Silent Hill 4 (oh that was on Xbox so that don't count). Silent Hill 3 was built straight up for the PS2, SH3 is more impressive than silent Hill 4 firstly in terms of visuals and finally in terms of gameplay. Multiplats sometimes suffer on the graphical side when all the consoles are involved, SC3 looks better than SC2 for e.g.

When I say that PS2's burnout series is superior to the xbox version it 's because of the superior lighting and sparks. I'm not even sure how much these guys played the different versions to make a valid comparison. I can tell you this, G4 said that the xbox version of B3 was slightly smoother too, I'm thinking AA as usual, but the next day they showed videos showing the sparks missing from the xbox version against that of the PS2 and asked why they were denied, there are videos showing the differences, but this is the new gen, HD videos can't lie in the PS3 vs 360 head to head which we will all make ourselves, no more *****footing and media bias.

Gadfly2317

12-20-2006, 08:30 PM

I happen to believe that SOTC is a really, really good looking game, there's so much detail on the colossi, the fur shading is quite impressive and the lighting is amazing, granted the framerate had some hiccups but the animation was out of this world. For what Fumito Ueda was able to do on the PS2 it's quite astonishing and it will be remembered as an aesthetic/technical masterpiece last gen.

Aesthetically it was great looking.

This whole thing is annoying, because ultimately I much prefer the Ps2 because of the games, but I just have to say, this whole thing is ridiculous. First you were talking about the multiplats, and now you are citing exclusives like SOTC. That's not consistent.

And second, multiplats or exclusives, the best of the Xbox looked a lot better than the Ps2. Why are you even bothering to argue this point unless you're just such a Sony pole-smoker that you have to defend every aspect of the console. . . even those areas in which it didn't excel?

I played a lot of games on both consoles, on a hi-def TV and also on a regular old TV, and Xbox looked a lot better. And this is pretty much universally accepted. It seems bizarre that you're going back to last gen to fight an argument that I think everyone thought was settled, over and done. Even the best looking games on Ps2 have that weird crawly thing going on, and I'm talking Gran Turismo 4 even, which supported 1080i, which is what I was playing it at.

ilnadmy

12-20-2006, 10:29 PM

I played DMC3 on a standard def TV, and the jaggies were a main reason why I couldn't keep playing the game. It was ridiculous (that and the save system where you have to restart the level if you die). I got past the twin bosses, but I just stopped playing after that. Now this is one of the last AAA games to come out for the PS2, and I think it's pretty clear that Xbox trumps PS2 in terms of graphics. Of course, there is the random game like God of War that really shows what the PS2 is capable of (MGS3 also comes to mind), but in general Xbox can push better graphics.

Of course, Mochan does have a point that PC is the ultimate in terms of graphics. Sure you guys are getting Bioshock too, but guess which version will look better. :thumbsup:

thelastword

12-21-2006, 02:33 AM

DrunkenThumbmaster

12-21-2006, 07:43 AM

Hey! there's no doubt that the xbox had the better GPU, there was a little more oomph there no doubt, I'm not denying that at all, but great graphics is more than bump mapping and general shader effects IMO, especially last gen. NG is a great looking game and so is Chaos theory but the far and away talk is lost on me as it's simply not true. It's not the first time I've mentioned the games from Sony Cambridge, but this can rest now, this new gen has greater possibilities anyway and it has begun.

You don't know what the hell your are talking about the PS2 doesn't even have a GPU it has a CPU with two vector units. Basically the same design as the cell.

Silent Hill 3 was built straight up for the PS2, SH3 is more impressive than silent Hill 4 firstly in terms of visuals and finally in terms of gameplay. Multiplats sometimes suffer on the graphical side when all the consoles are involved, SC3 looks better than SC2 for e.g.

When I say that PS2's burnout series is superior to the xbox version it 's because of the superior lighting and sparks. I'm not even sure how much these guys played the different versions to make a valid comparison. I can tell you this, G4 said that the xbox version of B3 was slightly smoother too, I'm thinking AA as usual, but the next day they showed videos showing the sparks missing from the xbox version against that of the PS2 and asked why they were denied, there are videos showing the differences, but this is the new gen, HD videos can't lie in the PS3 vs 360 head to head which we will all make ourselves, no more *****footing and media bias.

Silent Hill 3 was buit for the ground up but Silent Hill 4 wasn't? Where do you get this from? If anything the Xbox version was the port. especially since Konami didn't even release it on the Xbox in Japan. Can you back this up? Just pulling more nonsense out your azz.

I said the Burnout 3 on the PS2 was better But Revenge and Burnout 2 (which came out months after the PS2 version) were better on the xbox.

Ok so now you are saying comparsions can't lie this gen and whatever. But how do you explain the fact that the 360 is technically outperforming the PS3 in the majority of multiplats. It's all media bias right since MS is so loved by the media?