PS3 or XBOX360?

[Shiver]

CGI

Originally Posted by Shiver

CGI

thats every Xbox360 fanboy response to the killzone 2 trailer

[rainbeaukid2]

Originally Posted by hardhitz56

360

I think they will be relatively the same, I dont care what everyone has said about the PS3. 8)

agreed here, i think that they will both be close to the same with only minor differences. they have the same graphics, they have some of the same games, there really is no big difference.

[Shiver]

You are a moron if you think that Killzone trailer is real time gameplay.

Originally Posted by Shiver

You are a moron if you think that Killzone trailer is real time gameplay.

it will be proven when the system and the game is released

[Shiver]

It's already been proven wrong. If you honestly believe that Guerilla Games made a game that is 5x as good looking than every other game out there in 6 months of work on development hardware. Then you are not thinking objectively.

They didn't even show up at E3 2006. Of course it would be even more of a travesty, considering other examples of "real time" videos such as Motorstorm were shown as o fraudulent.

[draftguru151]

Originally Posted by stingray19

it will be proven when the system and the game is released

You are a moron, everyone knows that wasn't gameplay.

[DHVF]

Originally Posted by stingray19

it will be proven when the system and the game is released

It'll be about as real as the initial Madden 06 video was.

[SeanTaylorRIP]

Madden on the 360 this year was horrible, less features than like Madden 98.

[draftguru151]

Originally Posted by ghettosermon

Madden on the 360 this year was horrible, less features than like Madden 98.

It was a stripped down version of the game. They wanted to save all the new things for 07. The gameplay and graphics are amazing in 360.

[P-L]

I would never buy a 360, but I'm not spending $600 for a system either. I'll wait until PS4 is out and then pick up my PS3. The only reason I want it is for MGS4.

[SeanTaylorRIP]

I'm happy with my PS2 cause Madden is the only game I play, I got that 24 game but it wasn't that good.

[S4L]

XBOX 360 Premium System - $400
Nintendo Wii System (probable price) - $200
_____________________________________

360 and Wii - $600
PS3 Premium - $600

Making fanboys cry - Priceless

[SeanTaylorRIP]

The Wii seems childish.

Originally Posted by stingray19

Killzone 2

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/killzone2/media.html

check the video

Wow, something that has already been proven as not real. Yay! :roll:

As for graphics, how many times do I have to say this, the 360 will have JUST AS GOOD OR BETTER GRAPHICS. The PS3 has a more powerful GPU, but graphics wise, the only advantage that the PS3 has is in broadcasting at 1080p... which very very few TV's receive. In a few years these tv's will become more common, which is why people say in a few years PS3 will have better graphics. However, if you were playing the same game on the same tv for both systems, 360 would be equal to or better than PS3.

Just to further prove that the Killzone 2 video was NOT realtime...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05...s_6126204.html

http://ps3.gamedaily.com/game/featur...&id=887&page=2

Most people will agree that the Killzone 2 trailer was the best looking PlayStation 3 tech demo (aside from possibly Metal Gear Solid 4). This was the teaser shown at E3 that completely floored gamers worldwide. While the teaser has since been confirmed to be CG and not real-time.

[slightlyaraiderfan]

This console war stuff rocks! Keep up the good work guys, this is very entertaining.

Originally Posted by stillaraiderfan

This console war stuff rocks! Keep up the good work guys, this is very entertaining.

Honestly, I wanted the PS3 originally, but they've lied and BS'd waaaay to damn much for the past 2 years. I feel cheated as a possible costumer. Perhaps it has made me an XBox/Nintendo fanboy. Perhaps.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by frogstomp

As for graphics, how many times do I have to say this, the 360 will have JUST AS GOOD OR BETTER GRAPHICS. The PS3 has a more powerful GPU, but graphics wise, the only advantage that the PS3 has is in broadcasting at 1080p.

i could not disagree more. i mean, you say it yourself, that the GPU will be more powerful, and granted, HD is HD. but if you think that by March the PS designers won't have figured out how to properly take full advantage of the GPU, you're insane.

and, before anyone says something obnoxious: no, i don't care about graphcis only. in fact, i think the relative ease of upgrade on GPU's in PCs has led to the downfall of gaming in general, as it's become VERY inexpensive to have MUCH better graphics, so no one pays attention to storylines anymore.

but, i do find it odd that anyone (not specifically frogstomp who said nothing of the kind) would believe that the 360 would have a technological advantage despite being released nearly a year sooner. that's just insane.

Originally Posted by njx9

i could not disagree more. i mean, you say it yourself, that the GPU will be more powerful, and granted, HD is HD. but if you think that by March the PS designers won't have figured out how to properly take full advantage of the GPU, you're insane.

and, before anyone says something obnoxious: no, i don't care about graphcis only. in fact, i think the relative ease of upgrade on GPU's in PCs has led to the downfall of gaming in general, as it's become VERY inexpensive to have MUCH better graphics, so no one pays attention to storylines anymore.

but, i do find it odd that anyone (not specifically frogstomp who said nothing of the kind) would believe that the 360 would have a technological advantage despite being released nearly a year sooner. that's just insane.

A) The XBOX uses a custom ATI processor with 48 graphics pipelines and the PS3 has a custom NVIDA graphics processor with an estimated 24 pipelines. Now, the numbers are misleading because the PS3 piplines are more powerful than the XBOX pipelines. In the end the two different graphics processors will deliver about the same amount of power.

B) If the PS3 had been delayed because they wanted to simply make it better, and not because of problems, I'd believe you. However, it was delayed because it wasn't ready. In fact, they're rushing to get it ready now. Final Dev kits aren't ready, things are being added/taken off, it's a jumble. They simply do not have that much time to do all these extra improvements.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by frogstomp

A) The XBOX uses a custom ATI processor with 48 graphics pipelines and the PS3 has a custom NVIDA graphics processor with an estimated 24 pipelines. Now, the numbers are misleading because the PS3 piplines are more powerful than the XBOX pipelines. In the end the two different graphics processors will deliver about the same amount of power.

B) If the PS3 had been delayed because they wanted to simply make it better, and not because of problems, I'd believe you. However, it was delayed because it wasn't ready. In fact, they're rushing to get it ready now. Final Dev kits aren't ready, things are being added/taken off, it's a jumble. They simply do not have that much time to do all these extra improvements.

*shrug* i think you're overestimating raw hardware vs. firmware updates as well. i mean, new BIOSes get released nearly monthly (depending on what market the mobo is aimed at) because sometimes, tiny instruction changes can give MASSIVE performance benefits. i'd believe this to be the case given the processors on each unit, and moreso, because neither has really ever been used for mainstream gaming before. at initial release, both probably would've been roughly equivalent, however, i think the added time the hardware development team (who at this point should have next to nothing to do) will allow them to properly code the hardware to take more advantage of the horsepower.

again, this isn't something that would on, say, a computer, make much difference, because they're very easy to upgrade. on a console system however, it becomes much more complicated, especially given that the average user has a) no network connection b) no idea what "firmware" is c) no desire to upgrade it d) any combination of a, b and c.

lastly, iirc, this is ATI's first foray into a console market. meanwhile, nVidia was responsible for the original Xbox. this gives nVidia a significant edge in designing the hardware, given that it has a prior track record. if they'd been doing this for the last twenty years i could give credibility to a "comfort" argument against them, but since this is only their second build, i think they're still trying to "prove" themselves, in a way.

*shrug*

then again, maybe the ps3 gets released in 2009 and all of this is moot.

[Shiver]

John Carmack summed it up best. The PS3 has more theoretical power, but it's so asymetrically designed, it will be a long time before developers takes advantage of the power. He also said that they are both "in the same ballpark" performance-wise.

Basically you will not be able to tell a difference between PS3/X360, until late in the lifespan of the console wars.

njx, two things:

1. ATi made the GPU for the Gamecube.
2. The only reason the PS3 is coming a year after Xbox 360 is not because of more powerful hardware. It is because Sony pushing Blu-Ray, they had to delay it in order to implement it into the system.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by Shiver

njx, two things:

1. ATi made the GPU for the Gamecube.

forgive me for not being impressed by something that could play cartoons effectively. outside of computers (where ATi has actually held an advantage for roughly half of the last few years), they don't have the same experience, imo, in the arena of pure console graphics. PC graphics are and always will be a completely separate beast, and my snarky comments about gamecube notwithstanding, i don't think the gamecube pushed technology anywhere near as far as the original xbox or ps2.

2. The only reason the PS3 is coming a year after Xbox 360 is not because of more powerful hardware. It is because Sony pushing Blu-Ray, they had to delay it in order to implement it into the system.

again, technology is not simply defined as "hardware". further, blu-ray IS far more advanced than the CD drive the 360 shipped with. the only question now is whether Sony is able to make it the de facto standard (in which case it's an absolutely extraordinary boost to the ps3) or not (in which case the 360 either gains an advantage or not, depending on how you view purchasing add-on hardware for al already extremely expensive device as morally questionable or not).

[njx9]

and in terms of taking advantage of the hardware in place: as is typical of any system, you will not see the true benefits until at least a year into the lifespan of that system. it's partially why i think anyone who buys the hardware at full retail on release day is absolutely insane. but, i do think that because of the delays related to blu-ray, sony's developers will be better equipped to take advantage, as the changes they have to deal with for release will likely be smaller. most have also already been coding for the xbox processing structure, which, while completely unlike the powerpc cel cores, is still a parallel processing architecture (as always, iirc). because this is also a new development for PC gaming (even now, few games take any advantage of dual-core chips), i think sony developers will be able to get up to speed MUCH faster than they otherwise would have, simply having had the extra year to figure it out.

[Shiver]

Originally Posted by njx9

forgive me for not being impressed by something that could play cartoons effectively.

Gamecube was vastly superior to the PS2 in graphics. Now you are just showing your ignorance, in this regard.

again, technology is not simply defined as "hardware". further, blu-ray IS far more advanced than the CD drive the 360 shipped with. the only question now is whether Sony is able to make it the de facto standard (in which case it's an absolutely extraordinary boost to the ps3) or not (in which case the 360 either gains an advantage or not, depending on how you view purchasing add-on hardware for al already extremely expensive device as morally questionable or not).

It has not been proven to be an advantage in software, and it may never. GTA IV used to be the poster child (from Sony fans) as to why Blu-Ray was superior, saying "it will never be on 360 because of DVD." They were wrong. Also it has been reported that Microsoft will sell the HD-DVD add-on, so that buying it and a 360 will be equal or lesser than a PS3.