though there's still plenty of power left in the Xbox 360.

You mean PS3

Sigh, if so then consoles will probably hold back the computing world :(

Or the computing world will leave consoles in the dust.

The fact the PS3 is still so expensive will override and potential spangly graphics it has to offer......

The fact u can pick up a 360 arcade for 100 quid these days is still M$'s biggest trump card...

Yer but the 360 is old (so is the ps3 for that matter).
I suspect in a year or less we will have the xbox 7, which is basicly a microsoft gaming/media PC for the living room that combines tech from natal, surface and 7. There will be an emphasis on having a windows server machine for it to connect to in the home to stream your moves/music/games to a variety of other MS devices.

I think Sonys 'long term view' that had them playing catch up is going to backfire because as soon as they make significant gains MS will just ditch the current tech and bring out something 'good enough'.

That means Microsoft will bring out a new console? Xbox 720 or something?

EA may have reach there limit, but the new features that are in the latest version of the unreal 3 engine just seem to be pushing the 360 forward.

many EA need to get better internal developers

MS will definitely bring out a new Xbox, the only question is when.

As for the PS3 not being maxed out: Possible. I hate my 360 for lagging every now and then and it might show the 360 reaching the limit of its abilities, or developers' fail.

Only time will tell what will happen with these and Sony's predictions but I just don't think Sony's being realistic. £300 for a console that is 2.5 years old? As if I'd pay that much.

Originally Posted by PT88
The fact the PS3 is still so expensive will override and potential spangly graphics it has to offer......

The fact u can pick up a 360 arcade for 100 quid these days is still M$'s biggest trump card...

This is true, but for that £100 you are getting a really unreliable, noisy and technically limited console that doesn't have a hard disk or wifi so you need to spend more on it. Even at the PS3's initial price of £400, it's 10 year life and reliability makes it a better long-term bet, just as the PS2 is still reasonably healthy 10 years on. We've already seen announcements that some 360 games are going to arrive on 2 discs.

Think of the costs of that £100 Xbox over 10 years...
Console - £100
Hard disk - £45
Wifi - £50
10 years of xbox live gold - £350
Lost income waiting for UPS to collect your latest RROD victim...???

The 360 is hardly maxed out. Take a look at God of War II for the PS2. That was released 7 years after the PS2s original launch and was the best looking game for the system. EA pumps out games as fast as they can. It may be maxed out for them because they don't take the proper time to develop really great games. But real developers will still find ways to push the system to its actual limits.

I don't completely hate EA. there are some good games they put out. Of their many devs, DICE and BioWare are probably the only 2 I have any interest in.

Originally Posted by TreeDude
The 360 is hardly maxed out. Take a look at God of War II for the PS2. That was released 7 years after the PS2s original launch and was the best looking game for the system. EA pumps out games as fast as they can. It may be maxed out for them because they don't take the proper time to develop really great games. But real developers will still find ways to push the system to its actual limits.

I don't completely hate EA. there are some good games they put out. Of their many devs, DICE and BioWare are probably the only 2 I have any interest in.

The reason games keep looking better years into the lifetime of Sony consoles is that Sony has a habit of releasing extremely capable architectures that are extremely difficult to code for. The learning curve is much steeper for the developers, so it takes them much longer to fully utilize the hardware.

As for the 360, I have no problem at all believing that developers are using it to its full potential today, considering the fact that it's simply using a PowerPC CPU and ATI GPU. PowerPC has been around for a long time and is a well understood architecture and the 360 uses DirectX for the graphics API, and we all know how prolific DirectX is. The developers know exactly how to program for this hardware, while the Cell B.E. is a completely new beast.

*Ninja edit* Maybe I shouldn't say that the Cell B.E. is "a completely new beast" since it's technically just a PowerPC CPU, too, but its design is certainly new to developers (the whole SPE/PPE thing).

Originally Posted by gavomatic57
This is true, but for that £100 you are getting a really unreliable, noisy and technically limited console that doesn't have a hard disk or wifi so you need to spend more on it. Even at the PS3's initial price of £400, it's 10 year life and reliability makes it a better long-term bet, just as the PS2 is still reasonably healthy 10 years on. We've already seen announcements that some 360 games are going to arrive on 2 discs.

Think of the costs of that £100 Xbox over 10 years...
Console - £100
Hard disk - £45
Wifi - £50
10 years of xbox live gold - £350
Lost income waiting for UPS to collect your latest RROD victim...???

10 years? Most people will not be using a 360 in 10 years, it will be the new thing long before then.

I mean how many people still play on their ps1? Which was about the same age 10 years ago as the 360 is now.

Originally Posted by gavomatic57
This is true, but for that £100 you are getting a really unreliable, noisy and technically limited console that doesn't have a hard disk or wifi so you need to spend more on it. Even at the PS3's initial price of £400, it's 10 year life and reliability makes it a better long-term bet, just as the PS2 is still reasonably healthy 10 years on. We've already seen announcements that some 360 games are going to arrive on 2 discs.

Think of the costs of that £100 Xbox over 10 years...
Console - £100
Hard disk - £45
Wifi - £50
10 years of xbox live gold - £350
Lost income waiting for UPS to collect your latest RROD victim...???

"Need" is a subjective term there - Not everyone uses wifi. It's common, yes, but not by any means the standard network interface. You don't 'need' to buy the wireless adapter, it's down to this thing known as 'choice'.

HDD is also not 100% required. Sure, for some of the DLC, but by no means a requirement.

XBL Gold is also a choice thing. I know a number of people who have 360's who do not have XBL Gold.

The UPS reference is assuming that the consoles are all going to fail - massively false assumption. I've had 5 of the ******* things, and only two have had an error. One was my fault, the other was sorted inside a week.

Originally Posted by Vimesey
10 years? Most people will not be using a 360 in 10 years, it will be the new thing long before then.

I mean how many people still play on their ps1? Which was about the same age 10 years ago as the 360 is now.

I still play my PS1. MGS doesn't like my Ps3. Neither does FFIX :(

If the PS3 still has plenty of potential, then why in the world is it only marginally better looking then the Wii on the majority of games I've seen it run compared to the 360 versions of the same game?



And also.. PS3's 2009/2010 line-up consists mainly of multi-plat titles..

Originally Posted by liratheal

The UPS reference is assuming that the consoles are all going to fail - massively false assumption. I've had 5 of the ******* things, and only two have had an error. One was my fault, the other was sorted inside a week.

I went through two of them in 18 months. Never again.

Originally Posted by liratheal
...it's down to this thing known as 'choice'.

Choice only exists outside of the world of fanboy-ism.

i find it hard to believe that one of EAs many clones have pushed the boundaries of anything

Originally Posted by gavomatic57
I went through two of them in 18 months. Never again.

Then, in all good heartedness - Sucks to be you!

Originally Posted by perplekks45
Choice only exists outside of the world of fanboy-ism.

I always forget that one!

Originally Posted by shigllgetcha
i find it hard to believe that one of EAs many clones have pushed the boundaries of anything

I dunno. Repetition? Taste? :B

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
If the PS3 still has plenty of potential, then why in the world is it only marginally better looking then the Wii on the majority of games I've seen it run compared to the 360 versions of the same game?

... because you're blind?

=P

Originally Posted by shigllgetcha
i find it hard to believe that one of EAs many clones have pushed the boundaries of anything

Same here.

Look at EA's Need For Speed Pro Street running at 30 fps on console compared to 'Codemasters' Race Driver : GRID running at 30 fps on consoles. EA developers don't push boundaries at all.

Another thing, if we look at facts, then the PS3 will reach graphical potential before the 360, as the 360 is just a fraction more powerful.

When developers talk about the advanced power in the PS3 they are usually refering to the Central Processor (Cell). But the problem is that most games are not CPU intensive, but instead heavily graphics intensive. So most of this cpu 'potential' will probably go to waste. The PS3's GPU is slightly less powerful than the 360's, which partly explains why most multiplatform games look slightly better on 360.

It worries me to think that Sony are seriously looking at a 10-year life cycle for the PS3. Do they realize how ancient the PS3 will look by then? They won't be able use bluray as a selling point like in the past, because most people will have more advanced bluray RECORDERS and most PCs will have relatively cheap bluray playing drives and recorders.

Either graphical advancement in the games industry will stagnate and PC games will suffer by being held back for the next 8 years, or developers will scale the PC versions of multiplatform games to look many times more advanced than the PS3. To be honest, I cannot imagine Sony or Microsoft not releasing another console within the next few years. Graphically they have both, more or less, already reached their potential. Imagine being stuck with the same level for 10 years.

[QUOTE=DarkLord7854]If the PS3 still has plenty of potential, then why in the world is it only marginally better looking then the Wii on the majority of games I've seen it run compared to the 360 versions of the same game?/QUOTE]

Huh? Marginally better looking than the Wii? The 360 and PS3 versions of games usually look nearly identical. Sometimes there is a bit of a contrast difference, or a texture or 2 being of different resolutions, but unnoticeable while playing. I don't know what games you are looking at, but if you really think that the PS3 versions are close looking to the Wiis, I would put up some proof.

I have yet to see a PS3 exclusive that graphically looks better than a 360 game of the same caliber and timeframe. Now content wise, the 360 is getting limited because of the size of DVDs. But considering how many PS3 games require you to install a good portion of the game content to the HD (because the Blu-Ray drives are so damn slow), I think having a second install DVD (like Oblivian) isn't a big deal.

The Orange Box and RE5 for PS3 come to mind (or w/e the latest resident evil is) games, both suffer from quite a few graphical issues.

What, you mean the 360 cant handle the annual minor upgrades to sports games, movie tie-ins and sequels to games made using the same engine as the previous one?
Maybe EA should spend more time developing games rather than just marketing and securing exclusive rights to sports and movie tie-ins.

Originally Posted by I-E-D
That means Microsoft will bring out a new console? Xbox 720 or something?

I believe MS have been planning their next console for some time (as has Sony). The 360 4 years old this year so it's not really that surprising that the 360 is reaching it's limit, I believe they stated it was going to be 5 years before they release another console so I imagine they'll be releasing one the end of next year or the year after that, or at least announcing it. I hope they don't completely kill of support for it like they did with the xbox.

They said, at E3, the product life for the 360 is 10 years, and that Natal would come at roughly year 5.

Originally Posted by Vimesey


10 years? Most people will not be using a 360 in 10 years, it will be the new thing long before then.

I mean how many people still play on their ps1? Which was about the same age 10 years ago as the 360 is now.

I still play psx occasionally - old school fun. still works fine, 10 years on. Sony tech is well built. Ive seen many a friend's xbox (incl original and 360) fail badly. Never had a failure with a sony product. I'm not a fan-boy - I wouldn't touch sony products outside of consoles.

I've definitely seen lag in some of the higher-end games, which I've always just attributed to the 360 actually hitting capacity on the quality of the scenery and such. Also, we now see more and more games that allow only 2 players per 360 in multiplayer etc, something I read they had to do to keep the graphics work down or risk overworking the system.

While consoles have taken huge leaps over time, their games have taken huge leaps too (more recently), and I expect consoles will have to be updated more and more often to follow the public's insatiable appetite for high quality video games. Not sure how they're going to keep prices down, however.

To EA: sorry but lard assed software doesn't count.

[Note, I have no idea if their Xbox software is truly lard assed, but I can't let an opportunity like this to slag on EA go by unused.]

If they do make a 720 anytime in the next 3 years, I hope for 1 thing:

No more X-Clamps!!.

for the PS4:

Lower price. + Cooler components.

Originally Posted by tron

When developers talk about the advanced power in the PS3 they are usually refering to the Central Processor (Cell). But the problem is that most games are not CPU intensive, but instead heavily graphics intensive. So most of this cpu 'potential' will probably go to waste. The PS3's GPU is slightly less powerful than the 360's, which partly explains why most multiplatform games look slightly better on 360.

The Cell can offload shading and lighting work as well as post processing effects, which can really hamper the GPUs fill rates and bandwidth, luckily the Xenos in the 360, has nearly unlimited memory bandwidth and AA/frame buffer comes for "free" due to the daughter die. In reality, there's almost no difference between them, except for the 360 multiplatform games will most likely have AA due to the daughter die.

Also, the main reason of multiplatforms looking between on the 360, than the PS3, would simply be how they pool the RAM, which is easier to access and 360 OS and overheard RAM takes FAR less than the PS3's OS, especially since the PS3's RAM isn't in a pool.

Originally Posted by TreeDude

I have yet to see a PS3 exclusive that graphically looks better than a 360 game of the same caliber and timeframe. Now content wise, the 360 is getting limited because of the size of DVDs. But considering how many PS3 games require you to install a good portion of the game content to the HD (because the Blu-Ray drives are so damn slow), I think having a second install DVD (like Oblivian) isn't a big deal.

I would say Uncharted, from an artistic and technical point of view looks better than Gears of War, both the first and second, as well Heavenly Sword.

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
The Orange Box and RE5 for PS3 come to mind (or w/e the latest resident evil is) games, both suffer from quite a few graphical issues.

And both would look vastly superior to the same game if released on the Wii. Given your point was about how a majority of cross platform games look (and not play) I still think you need to either explain what you mean or realise it doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854


And also.. PS3's 2009/2010 line-up consists mainly of multi-plat titles..

Here the PS3 exclusives that seem to be most popular.

Gran Turismo 5
inFamous
Killzone 2
MAG
Ratchet & Clank: A Crack in Time
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
Agent
God of War III
Heavy Rain
The Last Guardian
ModNation Racers
The Agency (PS3/PC)[U][/U]

Here the X360 exclusives that seem to be most popular.

Forza 3
Halo 3:ODST
Halo Wars
Left 4 Dead 2
Splinter Cell: Conviction
Alan Wake
Crackdown 2
Halo: Reach
Mass Effect 2
APB


There are more for both but I just posted the ones that are most popular for both consoles as far as I know. On PS3 one game is also on PC. I'm not sure how many for 360 are also on PC.

For my personal preference PS3 has a much stronger lineup of exclusives. Though APB looks real good.

What?

Xbox has a way better games lineup althought I guess that's a matter of opinion.

Also in terms of RRoD they fixed the issue a while ago so If you buy one now you're unlikely to get it plus all you need to do is drop the box off at your local UPS depot which can't be more than a hour's drive wherever you live. Mine came back within two weeks and was a brand new console with 1 month of XBL for my troubles. Yes it's annoying but the support is good and it's no longer than waiting for an RMA on a vital computer part which go wrong just as often.

Originally Posted by Ending Credits
What?

Xbox has a way better games lineup althought I guess that's a matter of opinion.

Also in terms of RRoD they fixed the issue a while ago so If you buy one now you're unlikely to get it plus all you need to do is drop the box off at your local UPS depot which can't be more than a hour's drive wherever you live. Mine came back within two weeks and was a brand new console with 1 month of XBL for my troubles. Yes it's annoying but the support is good and it's no longer than waiting for an RMA on a vital computer part which go wrong just as often.

Given that Forza 2 made me want to sell my console, Alan Wake sounds like it is following Duke Nukem and Left4Dead was awful, the only thing I fancy on the 360 is Crackdown 2.

Originally Posted by xaser04
And both would look vastly superior to the same game if released on the Wii. Given your point was about how a majority of cross platform games look (and not play) I still think you need to either explain what you mean or realise it doesn't make sense.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UuUWBvWbfI

http://www.google.com/search?q=ps3+and+xbox+graphic+comparison&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS304US305

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UuUWBvWbfI

http://www.google.com/search?q=ps3+and+xbox+graphic+comparison&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS304US305

I would go to euro gamer for better comparisons, just google euro game face off round 19 and it has all the links.

Yea, there's lots and lots and lots of comparisons showing how graphically underwhelming the PS3 is compared to 360 on the same titles on the net, Google's your friend :)

All of the comparisons I've looked at have come out pretty much identical, save for a slight variation in contrast, which can be fixed using the TV's settings. When my 360 wasn't broken (rare occurrence), the graphics of any of the two dozen games I played on it never really blew me away.

Might wanna get your vision checked out then..

Originally Posted by gavomatic57
All of the comparisons I've looked at have come out pretty much identical, save for a slight variation in contrast, which can be fixed using the TV's settings. When my 360 wasn't broken (rare occurrence), the graphics of any of the two dozen games I played on it never really blew me away.

One of the most blatant things I have noticed on most ps3 versions of games is the lack of AA. Need For Speed Carbon was Horrible on PS3 ! Unfortunately, unlike on a PC, there's nothing you can do about it. You can't just change TV contrast.

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
Yea, there's lots and lots and lots of comparisons showing how graphically underwhelming the PS3 is compared to 360 on the same titles on the net, Google's your friend :)

Yea, multi platforms usually favour the 360, but the PS3's exclusives usually blow away 360 exclusives, graphically anyways, game play wise anyways, which can be argued which is better.

Originally Posted by tron
One of the most blatant things I have noticed on most ps3 versions of games is the lack of AA. Need For Speed Carbon was Horrible on PS3 ! Unfortunately, unlike on a PC, there's nothing you can do about it. You can't just change TV contrast.

True, but there's no AA on a Xbox 360 either...

Originally Posted by CardJoe
True, but there's no AA on a Xbox 360 either...

Very true, no AA in Forza 2, Ridge Racer, Crackdown. No AA in Gears of War either, but I was expecting that because of the Unreal 3 engine.

Originally Posted by CardJoe
True, but there's no AA on a Xbox 360 either...

Er.. quite a few games on the xbox have AA.. like Fallout 3..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware#Graphics_processing_unit


And

http://techreport.com/articles.x/8342/2

Thanks to the daughter die, the Xenos can do 4x FSAA, z-buffering, and alpha blending with no appreciable performance penalty on the GPU

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/f/forzamotorsport2/default.htm

With true next-generation features made possible by the power of Xbox 360, Forza Motorsport 2 burns rubber at 60 fps with 2x full-screen anti-aliasing, and high-dynamic-range lighting in crisp 720p high-definition glory

Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
Er.. quite a few games on the xbox have AA.. like Fallout 3..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware#Graphics_processing_unit


And

http://techreport.com/articles.x/8342/2





http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/f/forzamotorsport2/default.htm

GT5:P is 1080p (1280x1080 actually) and 60fps and has much greater detail than Forza 2.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/criterion-nobodys-maxed-out-ps3-360

Burnout Paradise developer Criterion reckons that developers who talk about maxing out the potential of a games console are being a bit silly.

"That's proof that you're not the best," technical director Richard Parr told Eurogamer's Digital Foundry channel. "It means you're out of ideas."

"You always find new ways to do things, the constraints lift. Not just with a new console generation but with every game you do," senior engineer Alex Fry added. "Whether it's a sequel or whether it's a new game, you learn to do things differently... better. The constraints go away because you learn. While it's nice to say you've maxed something out, there's not really any point."

Fry and Parr were speaking to Digital Foundry for today's Burnout Paradise tech retrospective, which explores the origins and processes behind one of the current generation's most respectable game engines.

Fry and Parr explain how the team set about constructing a world that performs equally well on PS3, Xbox 360 and latterly PC despite the difficulties experienced by their colleagues at other studios.

if the power of the ps3 hasn't been maxed out yet then I wonder wtf Konami were doing when they made MGS4 because even the cinematics were laggy as hell

More objectively though, I think 3 years and a half to max out a console is quite decent. Pretty much the same thing happened in the past and sometimes it took even longer

snes - yoshi's island 1995 - 4 years
genesis - Vectorman 1995 - 4 years
N64 - Perfect Dark 2000 - 4 years
PS2 - GT4/GoW2 2005 - 4 years
Gamecube - RE4 2004- 4 years

Those are all approximate numbers but they're example that came to my mind and I think the 360 seems to be following a similar pattern

Originally Posted by Ghys
if the power of the ps3 hasn't been maxed out yet then I wonder wtf Konami were doing when they made MGS4 because even the cinematics were laggy as hell

More objectively though, I think 3 years and a half to max out a console is quite decent. Pretty much the same thing happened in the past and sometimes it took even longer

snes - yoshi's island 1995 - 4 years
genesis - Vectorman 1995 - 4 years
N64 - Perfect Dark 2000 - 4 years
PS2 - GT4/GoW2 2005 - 4 years
Gamecube - RE4 2004- 4 years

Those are all approximate numbers but they're example that came to my mind and I think the 360 seems to be following a similar pattern

On my PS3 the cinematics were absolutely perfect and steady fps in MGS4. Possibly your PS3 was too hot?

That's a good question as it wasn't mine (I actually don't own one.. yet). I am extremely severe however when it comes to framerate so maybe you didn't even notice the drops on your setup or just didn't really pay attention

It's okay though, i've seen much worse on the NES :D

Originally Posted by Ghys
That's a good question as it wasn't mine (I actually don't own one.. yet). I am extremely severe however when it comes to framerate so maybe you didn't even notice the drops on your setup or just didn't really pay attention

It's okay though, i've seen much worse on the NES :D

I would notice it. :D I notice things easy.

have you noticed we're only 3-4 posts apart ? :D

No reason to spam. :p

I still don't get frame rate issues on consoles though. I mean how hard is it to make games work when you have just one set of hardware to max out? :|

I guess optimization takes time and time is money, therefore it goes down the drain and the game gets released as soon as it 'looks' ready