Fallout 3 multiformat face off

Skyfall said:
I am actually surprised to see yet again the 360 trumping the PS3.
Click to expand...

Im not. I dont own either but after Gears of War came out on the 360 I think most people stoped thinking the PS3 would trounce the 360 in terms of graphics or performance for the time being atleast. If the devs feel its worth the effort I think in the next 12 months you might find a PS3 equivilent of Gears of War that totaly sinks the 360, but Sony concoles have never been easy to develop on so who knows.

As for PC games being better than the consoles, its not realy a suprise. Id be very disapointed if a PC game turned out to be worse than a console one.

And as for HDTV gaming im afraid for a 40" TV Id have to be able to play at 3360x2100 for it to look any where near as good as my 22"WS Monitor @ 1680x1050.
 
veggiemanuk said:
And as for HDTV gaming im afraid for a 40" TV Id have to be able to play at 3360x2100 for it to look any where near as good as my 22"WS Monitor @ 1680x1050.
Click to expand...

Looks like you don't know how resolutions work. Actually it sounds like you have pretty much no clue here. A smaller monitor at a much smaller resolution could not possibly look better. It's a technical impossibility. You realize HDTVs and PC monitors (LCD ones at least) are fundamentally the very same thing?
 
cheets64 said:
Pointless they should try comparing them with PC hardware that is 3 years old, at least make it fair.

8800GT released Nov 2007 vs Xbox 360 Released Nov 2005
Click to expand...

That would be pointless for must people as most people don't down grade their machines. It would not be a fair comparison if they did as the PC has moved on and the game was released this year not 3 years ago.
 
KNiVES said:
Looks like you don't know how resolutions work. Actually it sounds like you have pretty much no clue here. A smaller monitor at a much smaller resolution could not possibly look better. It's a technical impossibility. You realize HDTVs and PC monitors (LCD ones at least) are fundamentally the very same thing?
Click to expand...


A smaller screen at the same resolution or even lower does look better. The big 40" screens spread the pixels were as a smaller screen with the same pixel count will need to compress the pixels into a smaller area. That would give it a higher resolution. The pixels on bigger screens tend to be bigger than them of the same resolution of a smaller screen.
 
Orcish-Horde said:
A smaller screen at the same resolution or even lower does look better. The big 40" screens spread the pixels were as a smaller screen with the same pixel count will need to compress the pixels into a smaller area. That would give it a higher resolution. The pixels on bigger screens tend to be bigger than them of the same resolution of a smaller screen.
Click to expand...

the Pixels are still too small for the human eye too see any difference.
 
I think what Orcish-Horde is saying is right tbh, look at the 24" for example they are 1920x1200, i looked at some 26" screens with the same resolution so it only stands to reason the image on the 24" will look sharper as its not been stretched to fit the bigger screen.

I have a 32" lcd and me bro has a 37" they are both the same resolution and make but the image is better on my 32 as its not being stretched.
 
Well maybe you shouldn't sit so close to such a large screen then. I will take a 40" over a 22" any day. The difference is only noticeable if you're planning on using monster screens at your desk, PC-monitor style. That's not what they're made for, and can cause problems with your eyes (read the manual and see your GP for advice).

I have a Dell 2407wfp and I'd much rather use my 36" HDTV - it looks better everytime.
 
Orcish-Horde said:
That would be pointless for must people as most people don't down grade their machines. It would not be a fair comparison if they did as the PC has moved on and the game was released this year not 3 years ago.
Click to expand...

But you are comparing something that is older, its just an unfair comparison.

The developers can get so much out of the 360s hardware proves that if you spend a bit more time you can make a game thats graphically up there with pc hardware and that upgrading every 6 months is not necessary to enjoy gaming.
 
cheets64 said:
But you are comparing something that is older, its just an unfair comparison.

The developers can get so much out of the 360s hardware proves that if you spend a bit more time you can make a game thats graphically up there with pc hardware and that upgrading every 6 months is not necessary to enjoy gaming.
Click to expand...

You really are so misinformed, such a joke.

The 8800GTX has been out for 2 years, the technology is older than that and it can still max out games (such as Fallout 3) at 1920x1200/60fps, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?

Oh and that's 24 months, not 6.

No getting through to some people.

Edit: Considering an 8800GTX is indeed maxing out games still even at 1920x1200, let alone 1280x720 which is what 99% of console games run at, if you dropped the resolution down to 720P for your PC gaming then you're gonna be keeping that 8800 for even longer.
 
Last edited:
Age doesn't matter, it's the price. Right now, the 360 can be purchased for 130 quid. You can't really get a system that can run Fallout 3 PC very well for that amount.
 
KNiVES said:
Age doesn't matter, it's the price. Right now, the 360 can be purchased for 130 quid. You can't really get a system that can run Fallout 3 PC very well for that amount.
Click to expand...

Around £260 should get you an 8800GT equipped PC though, that'll easily run Fallout up to 1920x1200. (it still gets around 60fps average with 2xAA) for me anyway.
 
Nymins said:
Yikes the PS3 version looks awful. Thought they basically sorted out issues on multiplatform games by now.
Click to expand...

It will be a matter of years before we see any substantial progress in multiplatform games, but differences between platforms have never been absolutely unnoticeable since the advent of computer games several decades ago. It doesn't help that the platforms are becoming more and more complex and individual.
 
Frapple said:
Jesus christ, did they just forget about AA on the PS3?

I guess they really meant lead platform this time =/

Ah well, great game non the less. Everyone can enjoy it.

Edit, Just watched last half...where's the AF!!?
Click to expand...

Sony said it was too much of a resource hog for AA so they didn't implement it into the system. As far as I'm aware. :cool: So didn't forget, just didn't use. :p

*edit* Isn't developers having a really hard time with the ps3 due to it's architecture is so difficult to program with? It's completely different from the 360 and bethesda have used the 360's very well.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom