This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

are the ps3's graphics really better than the 360's?

#51a687947Posted 11/21/2012 5:23:20 PM
glory of power metal posted...
I've never seen any difference and I own both. More to the point, just about all PS3 and 360 games run at a native 720p, correct? So in that regard they're both vastly inferior to PC. I know that isn't the argument, but if they both fall short of running natively at the standard rate of HDTVs, what's the point? I do know that when I read about comparisons of multi-plat releases, it's generally agreed that the games look and run better on the 360. That's not saying the 360 has better graphics, but it's gotta count for something.


most games run at 720p but some games only run at 560p
#52_NeroZero_Posted 11/21/2012 5:46:50 PM
I watched Halo 4's first 30 minutes gameplay video (Actually just watched one total minute, to see the graphics) and I laughed at how the developers would make such good cutscenes, but gameplay graphics that could have been done on PS3 in 2008.
---
Be kind to people.They're outnumbering you from 8 billion to one.
Official Tofu of the Resident Evil 6 boards!
#53tommyfebruaryPosted 11/21/2012 6:04:20 PM
"Remember that feeling you had when playing the first 20 minutes of God of War 3 for the first time? The sensation that the developers had somehow extracted next-gen visuals from current gen hardware? While Halo 4 doesn't quite engender that feeling of hushed awe, it gets very, very close - and more importantly the game does a great job of maintaining that level of quality across the entirety of the campaign."

Source: Digital Foundry
---
Playing - Gran Turismo 5, Super Street Fighter IV
Last completion - Catherine
#54Crimson681Posted 11/21/2012 6:10:25 PM
I can make a PC game from 2006 look better than anything on the PS3/360, so there.
#55xsabrewulfPosted 11/21/2012 6:18:33 PM
I watched Halo 4's first 30 minutes gameplay video (Actually just watched one total minute, to see the graphics) and I laughed at how the developers would make such good cutscenes, but gameplay graphics that could have been done on PS3 in 2008.



LOL! Keep telling yourself that
#56SixStringHeroPosted 11/21/2012 6:23:30 PM
tommyfebruary posted...
"Remember that feeling you had when playing the first 20 minutes of God of War 3 for the first time? The sensation that the developers had somehow extracted next-gen visuals from current gen hardware? While Halo 4 doesn't quite engender that feeling of hushed awe, it gets very, very close - and more importantly the game does a great job of maintaining that level of quality across the entirety of the campaign."

Source: Digital Foundry


Add in the expansive battlefields that Halo 4 exhibits along with physics, fully controllable camera and dynamic enemy A.I. which attempts to flank, suppress and sneak up on you to God of War III, then God of War III wouldn't look nearly as good.
---
I don't care about the altitude, I just want another drink.
#57shawnmckPosted 11/21/2012 6:25:18 PM(edited)
LoL at all the people citing games like Uncharted, god of war 3, mgs4, etc....to prove that the PS3 is more powerful than the XB 360.
You people obviously have no clue about game design.

The reason why those games look so good is because they are so limited with smaller environments and a narrowly structured environments, and other game-designs that limit the game's overall scope in order to produce better visuals.
god of war 3 for example looks really good, but it has fixed camera angles and a very small & narrow path that you cannot explore much.
If the XB 360 did the same thing it would have exclusives that looked just as good.
Compare Uncharted to Gears of War and you will find that the playable character in Gears is bigger, and the levels in Gears are much bigger...therefore they take up more memory.
If Gears had smaller levels with a smaller playable character then it could be made to look just as good (if not better than) Uncharted.
Another example is Heavy Rain....that game looks phenomenal, but you have limited controls, small environments, and fixed camera angles to compensate.

The truth is that the XB 360 & PS3 are roughly equal in terms of power.
They both have their respective advantages & disadvantages that make them slightly stronger &/or weaker in certain areas.
But for all intents & purposes they are about the same.
#58RintonPosted 11/21/2012 6:27:23 PM
shawnmck posted...
LoL at all the people citing games like Uncharted, god of war 3, mgs4, etc....to prove that the PS3 is more powerful than the XB 360.
You people obviously have no clue about game design.

The reason why those games look so good is because they are so limited with smaller environments and a narrowly structured environments, and other game-designs that limit the game's overall scope in order to produce better graphics.
god of war 3 for example looks really good, but it has fixed camera angles and a very small & narrow path that you cannot explore much.
If the XB 360 did the same thing it would have exclusives that looked just as good.
Compare Uncharted to Gears of War and you will find that the playable character in Gears is bigger, and the levels in Gears are much bigger...therefore they take up more memory.
If Gears had smaller levels with a smaller playable character then it could be made to look just as good (if not better than) Uncharted.
Another example is Heavy Rain....that game looks phenomenal, but you have limited controls, small environments, and fixed camera angles to compensate.

The truth is that the XB 360 & PS3 are roughly equal in terms of power.
They both have their respective advantages & disadvantages that make them slightly stronger &/or weaker in certain areas.
But for all intents & purposes they are about the same.


You just used Gears to describe a game with a bigger scope than Uncharted? It's a tunnel. Aside from very occasional wider tunnels you're basically just stuck on a very narrow path for the entirety of the series. Metroid Prime looked beautiful too because of creative level design, but that level design didn't detract from the beauty.

Uncharted looks GREAT. GoW looks GREAT. Their ingenious level design doesn't detract from the fact that they look GREAT. The question is whether the graphics are better. They are. You can claim that the Xbox chooses not to produce games with as great graphics, but that doesn't change the fact that the PS3 has better looking games than the Xbox.
#59RintonPosted 11/21/2012 6:29:00 PM
SixStringHero posted...
tommyfebruary posted...
"Remember that feeling you had when playing the first 20 minutes of God of War 3 for the first time? The sensation that the developers had somehow extracted next-gen visuals from current gen hardware? While Halo 4 doesn't quite engender that feeling of hushed awe, it gets very, very close - and more importantly the game does a great job of maintaining that level of quality across the entirety of the campaign."

Source: Digital Foundry


Add in the expansive battlefields that Halo 4 exhibits along with physics, fully controllable camera and dynamic enemy A.I. which attempts to flank, suppress and sneak up on you to God of War III, then God of War III wouldn't look nearly as good.


How do flanking enemies affect the graphics in a video game in any way?
#60justinlynch3Posted 11/21/2012 6:29:27 PM
shawnmck posted...
LoL at all the people citing games like Uncharted, god of war 3, mgs4, etc....to prove that the PS3 is more powerful than the XB 360.
You people obviously have no clue about game design.

The reason why those games look so good is because they are so limited with smaller environments and a narrowly structured environments, and other game-designs that limit the game's overall scope in order to produce better visuals.
god of war 3 for example looks really good, but it has fixed camera angles and a very small & narrow path that you cannot explore much.
If the XB 360 did the same thing it would have exclusives that looked just as good.
Compare Uncharted to Gears of War and you will find that the playable character in Gears is bigger, and the levels in Gears are much bigger...therefore they take up more memory.
If Gears had smaller levels with a smaller playable character then it could be made to look just as good (if not better than) Uncharted.
Another example is Heavy Rain....that game looks phenomenal, but you have limited controls, small environments, and fixed camera angles to compensate.

The truth is that the XB 360 & PS3 are roughly equal in terms of power.
They both have their respective advantages & disadvantages that make them slightly stronger &/or weaker in certain areas.
But for all intents & purposes they are about the same.


So would you say Infamous is a better comparison then Uncharted?
---
Mystic Forum - http://mysticforum.forumotion.com/
NewGenerations - http://forum.newgenforums.net/topic/8090441/1/#new