Soldato
According to Carmack, even he says that the PS3s design will be hard to get the best out of.daz said:
If he's doubting it, other developers havnt got a chance in hell!
PS3 Impressions and Opinions Thread **Now includes pricing information**
- Thread starter pinkacidbootson
- Start date
If he's doubting it, other developers havnt got a chance in hell!
Soldato
BoomAM said:According to Carmack, even he says that the PS3s design will be hard to get the best out of.
If he's doubting it, other developers havnt got a chance in hell!
But everyone said the PS2 was hard to program for and i think the best looking game of the last gen was on PS2, and that was MGS2, the only game i think that could compete (to me at least) was ninja gaiden.
Some folk still think GT4 looks better than PGR2, Forza and some say GT4 in 1080i mode looks even better than PGR3!
Soldato
well with a project 10year lifespan of the ps3 to recoup costs and to try to start a blue-ray user base i can see MS bringing out the xbox720 or whatever its gonna be called half way through the ps3's lifespan and totally destroying the ps3, so all this talk will be pointless
Soldato
You must be joking. The PS2 having the best looking game of the last generation? Theres a laugh.JUMPURS said:
A substandard GC or Xbox games looks better than the PS2's best.
The best looking games of last gen were Res4 on GC (PS2 version looks nothing like the GC version) or Halo2 on Xbox. Arguably others. But nothing on PS2.
deSade said:
Yup, either he hasn't played any substandard GC/XBOX games or he's never played MGS2/3, GT4, PES5 etc.
I'm not of the opinion that the PS2 had the best looking last gen games, but it was certainly better than a lot of people made out, and the difference between PS2 and XBOX wasn't as big as the specifications would suggest.
Associate
JUMPURS said:
thats cos it does
yeah even i was staggered, but i completed pgr3 a few months back on the 360, currently playing gt4 on 1080i, and its way ahead of its time...the graphics are so sharp, almost photo realistic in many places, unlike pgr3's 'cartoon' like presentation.
bruce said:thats cos it does
yeah even i was staggered, but i completed pgr3 a few months back on the 360, currently playing gt4 on 1080i, and its way ahead of its time...the graphics are so sharp, almost photo realistic in many places, unlike pgr3's 'cartoon' like presentation.
Any chance of getting some photos of ingame to compare between the two? I've never seen GT4 @ 1080i.
Soldato
BoomAM said:
Halo 2 looked terrible, Halo was better, the amount of Pop ins in halo 2 where laughable.
And i like how you compair a game made for the GC and then a poor ports. Look at MGS2 and PS2 and MGS2 on xbox, PS2 blows it away.
Out of all the games i have played over the last gen, MGS2 looks fantastic to me.
And i think i may be being mis quoted, i dont think it had the best graphics overall, but i do think MGS2 is quite probably the best looking game of the last console war. And to say any substandard xbox or gc game looked better than a PS2 game at is best to quote you
BoomAM said:
And as i also said a lot of people are of the opinion that GT4 in 1080i mode looks superior to any counter part on the xbox.
Soldato
Because?deSade said:
Ive played all those games and visually, compared to stuff on GC & Xbox, they are very lacking. GT4 does look good, and its probably the best looking PS2 game, but, its not exactly impressive compared to some GC & Xbox titles.Phil99 said:
But, and you can quote this, car games genereally look good anyway. A car doesnt exactely have a lot of polygons in it. And 9/10 the backgrounds in the games are nothing but sprites, apart from the 'stands'. Relativly low poly/geometry games.
Try comparing something with organic objects in it.
And then run a PS2 game at 1080i.
I make the comparison because its a valid one. Res4 is one of the better looking games on the GC, it was ported to PS2, the developers tryed to get the gfx as good as they could, and it wasnt anywhere near the GC version!
The fact that all you lot seem to think that the PS2 is capible of graphics that are as impressive as you make out is frankly laughable.
The PS2 isnt capible of rendering that level of gfx.
Stop defending your console so blindly. Its borderline fanboyism.
Last edited:
Soldato
BoomAM said:
So us lot are all fanboys??
I think that your blanket excuse to write off every PS2 game as it 'isnt capable of running it' is just a load of old tosh, sorry.
And before DirtyDog gets in, least the PS2 outputted Low Poly racing games in 60fps
MGS2 was a bit of a poor port to the xbox, when i see it it had some framerate issues. And MGS3, the gameplay was a bit funky with all the secenery, although it can look rather lush
Look at Baines Screenshots, PS2 is a terrible console it sucks! its really bad! oh wait its running 1080i at 60fps? whats PGR3 running, ohh yeah 720i at 30fps. good going for a try core all singing all dancing machine up against a 6 year old heap eh?
Soldato
Heres a comparison. If the PS2 is as 'powerful', as you lot make out, why cant it render these scenes, with the same effects, at the same resolution, like the GC version.
PS2
GC
Notice significantly lower detail, no lighting, and lower poly models used in the PS2 version.
Now see the difference between these:
PS2
GC
Smaller, bad, looking trees. Less trees. Washed out colours. Hair looks like a upsidedown bowl. Less detail on everything. Almost no Foilage.
More here: http://ruliweb3.dreamwiz.com/rulibo..._con&page=1&num=8547&find=&ftext=&left=h&time
Why am i using this as a comparison? Because its a common comparison in a game that has been developed by a company that have tryed their hardest to use both systems at their full potential in both games.
PS2
GC
Notice significantly lower detail, no lighting, and lower poly models used in the PS2 version.
Now see the difference between these:
PS2
GC
Smaller, bad, looking trees. Less trees. Washed out colours. Hair looks like a upsidedown bowl. Less detail on everything. Almost no Foilage.
More here: http://ruliweb3.dreamwiz.com/rulibo..._con&page=1&num=8547&find=&ftext=&left=h&time
Why am i using this as a comparison? Because its a common comparison in a game that has been developed by a company that have tryed their hardest to use both systems at their full potential in both games.
Soldato
Explain why its so capible then! Go on. Lets hear it?JUMPURS said:
'Tosh' it is not. Fact it is. The hardware in the PS2 isnt capible of what you are claiming.
Yes some games look good, yes some output at 1080i, (which afaik, cant do 60fps at that, its actually 30fps because its interlaced), but rendering organic objects, with more geometry than a car and the occasional object off track, then the PS2 is lacking compared to the other two. Its not something thats open for debate, i know you like to think that it is though.
Its borderline fanboyism im afraid. The fact that you cannot accept that the PS2 didnt have games on it that were 'the best looking this generation' is frankly showing nothing but extreme bias and a close minded viewpoint.
BoomAM said:
BoomAM said:
Compare GT4 to the worse (from a purely graphical aspect) games on the XBOX/GC....GT4 is better, I don't think anyone can deny that, I don't care how many polys there are, how many organic objects there are, it just looks better. Same with Burnout Revenge, it may not look better than the XBOX version, but it's still certainly better than the worse looking XBOX games!
(XBOX as in original XBOX, not 360)
I'm not trying to say the PS2 is more powerful than any of the last gen consoles, but some of the visuals they're getting out of it now are impressive, despite not being better than their direct counterpart on the XBOX.
Your statement that all PS2 games are no better than the substandard games on the XBOX is quite frankly incorrect.
