360 graphics

McBain · 18 Oct 2006 at 00:09

Hedge said:
I personally find that the 360 graphics are amazing. Ive been playing Fight Night 3 a lot recently at my friends on his Samsung high def tv and it looks fantastic.

Most normal people are stunned at the quality of the graphics

Agreed, for me FN3 is clearly the best graphics on the 360 so far.

Saints Row I will agree did have some issues with the framerate although iirc this was sorted in the final release, havn't noticed any slowdown on PD0 or motoGP although I will agree tearing is bad (However a pc can be just as bad if you don't turn v sync on)

Have to say I disagree that Saints Row framerates were resolved for the final release, still slows down quite badly in areas. Doesn't take it away from being a decent game mind.

Kainz · 18 Oct 2006 at 05:00

GuruJockStrap said:
The whole AA thing is a bit confusing.

A while ago, Microsoft touted the Xenos as being able to do X4AA for free.

What they actually meant, was that X4AA could be implemented with an extremely low performance hit if tile rendering was used by the games engine.

From what I understand, the image is broken up into tiles so that it fits into the 10MB on-GPU memory.

Ah crap. Always wondered about how AA was implemented on the 360.
So based on what you've said, we're looking at original games more or less exclusive to the 360 that will use 4xAA.

*We already know that Forza is using 4xAA and looks to be probably one of the biggest racers to ever grace the 360, visually it'll be unmatched.
*GoW will have AA.
*Condemned already has it and looks gorgeous.
*Kameo looked superb with no jaggies.
*Fright Night also used good amounts of AA since it was only on the 360 at the time.
*Lost Planet will also utilise it to some extent - well I never saw any jaggies in the demo.

McManicMan · 18 Oct 2006 at 07:19

I love my 360 BUT this framerate and lack of AA on certain games is certainly something that is making me keep an eye on the PS3 and seeing if that console suffers the same. If it doesn't i may have to get one at some stage,

JUMPURS · 18 Oct 2006 at 07:23

Caustic said:
The irony is people will **** off the developers for poor graphics/framerate one minute and then talk about the lack of original gameplay the next. Guys, you often have to prioritise, either because of time and/or money. Something like Saints Row is a great example, the graphics are good, perhaps not amazing, but the gameplay is key, and that is rather good.

JUMPURS: The lack of AA is nothing to do with poor tools (!) or documentation (!!!). Are you seriously suggesting that AA is not used because the devs haven't read that far in the docs?

Saints Row graphics suffer terrible frame rates and terrible tearing, and to make matters worse it isnt 'original gameplay' its a GTA clone, even OX360M's headline was GTA get stolen! and tbh it isnt a patch on GTA

Well its down to something, MS touted the Free AA yet nobody has done it? so what other reasons are there for games which are not cross format? Developers didnt understand what to do to get it? shouldn't MS be making that a key notice to devs?

blueshift · 18 Oct 2006 at 07:24

funny i never look for erm jaggies, and the odd bit of slowdown , never bothers me, i just try to focus on enjoying the game and story quality etc, perhaps we are becoming a bit too spoilt? of course sumptous graphics look great, but to continually nit pick seems a bit pointless to me,, just enjoy, what we have?

norm · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:18

Things like frame slowdown/tearing detracts from the gameplay, that's point.

dirtydog · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:37

Kainz said:
It took a solid year before the Xbox saw top quality titles utilising it's power. It'll be the same for the 360.

The Xbox had Halo on launch. Within its first year it had games like Project Gotham Racing, Dead or Alive 3 and Rallisport Challenge - all 60fps with no hint of frame drops or stuttering.

The 360 has been out for a year now and such shoddy games should not be acceptable.

Caustic · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:41

JUMPURS said:
Saints Row graphics suffer terrible frame rates and terrible tearing, and to make matters worse it isnt 'original gameplay' its a GTA clone, even OX360M's headline was GTA get stolen! and tbh it isnt a patch on GTA

Well its down to something, MS touted the Free AA yet nobody has done it? so what other reasons are there for games which are not cross format? Developers didnt understand what to do to get it? shouldn't MS be making that a key notice to devs?

Boy do you hate anything 360 related.

I didn't mean that the game was original, it wasn't meant to be an example of that, more an example of good gameplay. It might be a big rip off, but the gameplay is still good, and in the GTA style game, that is far more important than graphics.

dirtydog · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:44

blueshift said:
perhaps we are becoming a bit too spoilt?

What, when most games on the Dreamcast, PS2 and Xbox don't suffer these problems? Why then should we accept it on the next generation? It is a step backwards surely?

Caustic · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:44

dirtydog said:
The Xbox had Halo on launch. Within its first year it had games like Project Gotham Racing, Dead or Alive 3 and Rallisport Challenge - all 60fps with no hint of frame drops or stuttering.

The 360 has been out for a year now and such shoddy games should not be acceptable.

And it also had plenty of games without 60 fps and stuttering. It is amazing how people already have those rose tinted glasses on.

If you don't like them, don't buy them. Whats the big deal, if you find a console that never suffers from it, buy that (good luck finding one), or play PC games (oh no, wait, thats even worse).

Caustic · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:45

dirtydog said:
What, when most games on the Dreamcast, PS2 and Xbox don't suffer these problems? Why then should we accept it on the next generation? It is a step backwards surely?

Now you're digging yourself a hole. Just give up.

Mods, close the thread now

dirtydog · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:48

Caustic said:
Please stop telling the truth about the 360, it upsets me

Caustic · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:51

I'm not even denying that some 360 games suffer from slow down etc, just that it is hardly any different to pretty much every other console. I give up, best to do what others have clearly done and start ignoring the thread (and dirtydog).

dirtydog · 18 Oct 2006 at 08:54

Caustic said:
it is hardly any different to pretty much every other console.

It is though

I give up, best to do what others have clearly done and start ignoring the thread (and dirtydog).

hehehe

McManicMan · 18 Oct 2006 at 09:06

i actually agree with Dirtydog, previous consoles never suffered so badly as the 360 has done in the same time frame, don't get me wrong but with the power now available comapred to the older console's should we really be seeing worse framerates and features like AA not being implemented, then there is the cut down version of certain games. I believe we won't see what these nextgen consoles can do until the developers stop making multi-platform games for older formats that include next-gen versions of the same game. Hopefully when then PS3 gets into full flow this will happen but its a shame we have to rely on a rival format to get this happening

JUMPURS · 18 Oct 2006 at 10:00

Caustic said:
Boy do you hate anything 360 related.

I didn't mean that the game was original, it wasn't meant to be an example of that, more an example of good gameplay. It might be a big rip off, but the gameplay is still good, and in the GTA style game, that is far more important than graphics.

Nope i have had one since launch, i own a load of games for it (dont sell any i buy so have quite a few) but i dont look through the rose tinted glasses u where reggering too.

It might be more important than graphics, so why didnt the devs make it less pretty but a stead framerate?

Maybe i am greedy and want it to look pretty run smoothe and be fun for my 40 quid a game

Bernard · 18 Oct 2006 at 10:05

The X box was hardly new tech though, just PC components that were already tried and tested.

The 360 will get there, the next wave of games should hopefully improve a lot. I can probably count the games(that I own)that suffer from it on one hand

I can't remember any console that didn't have framerate issues of some sort, at some point in it's life. PS2/Xbox/GC. PS2 being the worst of my consoles for this.

Pug · 18 Oct 2006 at 11:01

well the PS2 was TERRIBLE for jaggies and shimmering, and was plagued with it for most of its life if we're being fair, but 360 should be better.

i-bert · 18 Oct 2006 at 11:06

Its amazing how many 360 threads dirtydog ends up in when he doesn't even own one.

JUMPURS · 18 Oct 2006 at 11:09

Pug said:
well the PS2 was TERRIBLE for jaggies and shimmering, and was plagued with it for most of its life if we're being fair, but 360 should be better.

Well the PS2 was last gen, didn't have any AA AFAIK, but 5 years ago it wasnt expected. Nowadays it should be assumed we do not have them. Surely there should be an improvement over the last gen in all aspects, including AA