Quote :

"those pics are nice and all, but what nvidia releases as promo pics and what games actually look like is quite different."

Crysis running in a DX9/DX10 hybrid (DX10 Native)







(Note these are in game screens)

Show me a PS3 or 360 game that can match.

11/14/2006 4:23:16 PM

some in game bioshock and GoW screens look pretty close. you also must remember that plenty of ppl playing games on their pc's wont be able to run the max graphics and still have a decent frame rate.

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 4:37 PM. Reason : in game final fantasy pics for ps3 look pretty damn nice too]

11/14/2006 4:36:55 PM

Quote :

"I'll be buying a Wii because Nintendo has offered me something that my computer can't do, and has said that they aren't going to go after the same market that Sony and Microsucks live in. The Wii will be both fun and cost effective."

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 4:41 PM. Reason : .]

11/14/2006 4:40:41 PM

Quote :

"some in game bioshock and GoW screens look pretty close. you also must remember that plenty of ppl playing games on their pc's wont be able to run the max graphics and still have a decent frame rate."

Well no shit sherlock, when has everyone been able to run any new game being released on PC? This is like saying, well not everyone can afford a corvette, no shit. However Crysis is running on the new FarCry engine and it is very scalable. Supposedly people with decently old computers (2-3 years) will be able to play Crysis.

2nd you are comparing a fully released game like GoW to a game in development and the game in development still looks much better. Not to mention the game isnt being run in DX10 yet so all those goodies are yet to be seen. GoW cant hold a candle to Crysis in any dept. Ask any gamer who knows computer gaming about Crysis. This is THE game coming.

Here are some Quake Wars:ET in game shots







-note this game is fucking huge, way bigger than BF2. To have graphics like that and be that size of a game could only be done recently.

11/14/2006 5:10:00 PM

Anti Aliasing please

11/14/2006 5:14:11 PM

^ what are you talking about. Point me out jaggies. I cant find one in any of the screens.

11/14/2006 5:19:41 PM

are we looking at the same aircraft carrier?

I watched top gun last night, im pretty sure thats what that is

11/14/2006 5:30:02 PM

Quote :

"^ what are you talking about. Point me out jaggies. I cant find one in any of the screens."

The entire aircraft carrier.

11/14/2006 5:48:14 PM

Oh, the crysis screens. Those were scaled down from a higher res and lost quality. Somewhere there is pictures in full resolution.

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 5:58 PM. Reason : .]

11/14/2006 5:53:45 PM

Quote :

"Well no shit sherlock, when has everyone been able to run any new game being released on PC? This is like saying, well not everyone can afford a corvette, no shit. However Crysis is running on the new FarCry engine and it is very scalable. Supposedly people with decently old computers (2-3 years) will be able to play Crysis. 2nd you are comparing a fully released game like GoW to a game in development and the game in development still looks much better. Not to mention the game isnt being run in DX10 yet so all those goodies are yet to be seen. GoW cant hold a candle to Crysis in any dept. Ask any gamer who knows computer gaming about Crysis. This is THE game coming."

well when we are comparing systems i think my points are worth mentioning. sure it'll look good if you pay out the ass or wait 3 years to get the specs at a cheaper rate, but what about right now. i dont want to have to rebuild my machine every 3 months to make sure i can keep up with these games that are "soooo much better looking" than a console. id say a better comparison is us talking vettes and then you saying that a 500k car runs 20-30mph faster than a vette. they're all gonna look very nice.

as far as development is concerned, ps3's arent out and 360's are still in the early stages. did you ever think it was plenty possible that those games will look better in the future as well?

11/14/2006 6:08:51 PM

Cryion do you not understand that that majority of gamers dont own high end systems? You can build a computer that will perform close to its brother who is a grand more for almost no difference in graphics to the human eye. You argument of spending thousands is ridiculous, less than probably 10% of gamers spend that much money. I could build you a hell of a computer for under 700 bucks that would spank a PS3, especially with the falling price of computer hardware due to Core Duos and DX10.

But I def understand your argument for consoles but you wont argue the graphics are better or on the same level. They arent, if they were why would anyone want to be in PC Gaming?

11/14/2006 6:19:21 PM

^ i agree for the most part, im just saying that your argument for computers somewhat goes with consoles as well. you could buy a nice comp for 700 or a 360 for about half the price. the 360 will still look very nice, relatively close on the ports id say.

and people would still buy pc games for 1) the control scheme, 2) free online capabilities, 3) mod capabilities, and 4) lack of a decent tv/stereo/etc

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 6:27 PM. Reason : .]

11/14/2006 6:27:00 PM

Quote :

"Oh, the crysis screens. Those were scaled down from a higher res and lost quality. Somewhere there is pictures in full resolution. "

So if 1915x1077 wasnt enough pixels, what was?

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 7:45 PM. Reason : 131391839123p]

11/14/2006 7:45:10 PM

The 360 is a PC.

Saying one is better for gaming is retarded. The only difference is that your PC's capabilities are limited by cost, not by hardware.
I doubt microsoft wont release dx10 for the 360 in a future patch. It would be stupid not to.

As for windows disapearing as a gaming platform, thats retarded. The success of the 360 could only bring more game developers into microsoft's corner. And that means directx. MMORPGsand RTSs are pretty impractical on consoles without adding extra hardware. Not to mention that FPSs are still way way more enjoyable on the PC. Im sure multiplayer GoW is pretty fun, but I doubt it could compare to the experience of tribes or TFC back in the day. So when you say hurr durr durr halo is awesome, halo 2 is awesome, GoW is awesome, I look at them and say hey yea i already played better versions of those games.

I mean when Call of Duty 2 came out people thought it was fucking awesome. Its the fucking quake 3 engine. The entire game consisted of hold the trigger down and run at naxis. I did this back in 1992.

Innovation in the realm of the straight up FPS has already been done to the limit on PC. The xbox1 and 360 finally caught up because they were developed with a pc mindset. RTS's wont work on a console. And although MMORPGs have been done on console, they cant be done as good as on PC.

The things consoles do well is arcade and party games. Thats why the gamecube was the best system of last generation. It had a small selection of very good games. Whereas the ps2 had a huge smattering of shit and the xbox had 1 or 2 good exclusives.

Innovation in consoles will come through better online integration. Microsoft knows this and this is why they beat Sony. Live is fantastic and the opportunities for the games platform they have for 360 and PC are pretty big. They already demo'ed a Vista user inviting a 360 user to play a game. If this game were a simple FPS the console guy is gonna get slaughtered, but it leaves the room open for things like hybrid games. I mean how fucking cool would it be to have a PC user commanding combined pc/360 troops into battle. The idea of seperate game types existing in the same online world has been talked about in the past on pc. But i dont think its been until recent that its really been technically possible.

11/14/2006 8:04:56 PM

hm

[Edited on November 14, 2006 at 9:15 PM. Reason : m]

11/14/2006 9:13:16 PM

one of, if not THE largest selling video game of all time (neglecting the old school mario games, and The Sims expansion packs), and largest currently played game (by a big margin) is a PC game (world of warcraft). the PC market isnt going to die.

i enjoy games on both consoles and the PC. i enjoy FPS games a lot more on the PC, and MMOs like WoW do not translate well at all to a console.

they both have reasons for being around

11/15/2006 1:08:22 AM

No

Actually

Anyone thinking Windows will continue as a gaming platform has no ability to see into the future.

The PC is going to eventually resemble what the Xbox360/PS3 are now.

They've BEEN trying to do that for the better part of a decade and failed miserably.

Don't be an idiot. You know windows gaming is coming to an end, especially when the console gaming market is where the real money lies.

All thats needed now is for blizzard to release some stupid shit that all of Korea can play and make a cult out of and nobody will be left on the PC.



Edit:

By the way, WoW is being credited with actually causing the dearth of development for the PC. I challenge you to find anything non fps/mmo/rpg/rts on the pc. I challenge you further to find one that doesn't have a Console port.

Thats right. Game set match, with the exception of WoW and EvE which are pretty much the only thing anyone would really want to play on a PC.

But thats ok, spend another 1k on a video card thats got its own power connector. Its totally worth it.

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 1:30 AM. Reason : >.<]

11/15/2006 1:28:35 AM

Quote :

"No Actually Anyone thinking Windows will continue as a gaming platform has no ability to see into the future. The PC is going to eventually resemble what the Xbox360/PS3 are now. They've BEEN trying to do that for the better part of a decade and failed miserably. Don't be an idiot. You know windows gaming is coming to an end, especially when the console gaming market is where the real money lies. All thats needed now is for blizzard to release some stupid shit that all of Korea can play and make a cult out of and nobody will be left on the PC. "

This is the dumbest fucking shit I have ever read. Sorry, nothing in that entire thing makes any sense. You cant just say Windows OS is going away from gaming and expect that to be the truth. Fucking XBox has been around what? 5 years? Woopity Fucking Doo, Windows has been the streamline gaming OS since 95. I mean if you want to type spam just type it.

11/15/2006 1:46:53 AM

Quote :

" But thats ok, spend another 1k on a video card thats got its own power connector. Its totally worth it. "

i spent 200 bucks on my card last Christmas when it was very close to the the best card on the market (7800GTX). i was building a new computer anyways. part of it was for gaming, but the nice thing about building a computer that happens to be good for gaming is that it also happens to be an extremely nice computer for running all kinds of other programs such as my video editing software and 3-D solid renderings....something that consoles do not do yet.

and while the PC gaming market is not as fresh as it once was, i dont see your point. there is still a big market for RTS, PC biased FPSs, and MMOs (which eat up a big share of all gaming atm). I dont play consoles AS much because nearly every game i would like on a console i can get for my computer.

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 1:58 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 2:18 AM. Reason : ]

11/15/2006 1:55:24 AM

The transition to DX10 is going to be very rough for the PC market. DX10 is Vista only, and the hardware requirements of a DX10 system are high - it's not exactly friendly to older systems. Plus there's that whole steaming pile of crap about upgrading to Vista.

Meanwhile, I'm happy with my 360, containing ATI's first unified architecture card - it'll do DX10 just fine and is cheap compared to the system I would have to build to run the same games. I'm a longtime PC gamer, but I'll be damned if I'm spending 800-1000 on a new PC when the good games are all on consoles these days anyway.

edit: also, dead-on about wow being the end of pc gaming. I think I've bought all of 2 PC games (FEAR and NWN2) since WoW came out. My PC is for coding and wow - UT2007 is the only thing that might actually make me want to game on PC again.

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 2:35 AM. Reason : zz]

11/15/2006 2:33:05 AM

HAHAHAHA the console fanbois are making me ROFLMAOLOLMAOLOLOLOLOLROFLROFLOLOLOMAOMAOLOLOLOLOL

11/15/2006 2:39:13 AM

Quote :

"Thats right. Game set match, with the exception of WoW and EvE which are pretty much the only thing anyone would really want to play on a PC."

Came out today BTW

Don't have it yet, will probably get it tomorrow

11/15/2006 2:47:59 AM

gotta be honest w all the arguments b/t PC and console...

yall are gettin bent out of shape about a lot of things that are nothing but a matter of personal opinion and wants.

i love console games. i love pc games. in my own situation though, it was always easier for me to buy a console and play games on it. i never had the pc hardware to run the games that i really wanted to play. i'd kill to be able to play some of the pc games that are out there on my comp. the one i have now will finally run some of them at decent rates. before then, a console was just plain cheaper and less likely to mess up; most of the time, it was stick the game in, press the button, and play.

that said, im an FPS fanboy. i love the mess. i have addiction problems with halo and halo 2, and probably will with halo 3. if i could i'd run them on my computer, but chances are i won't be able to run 2 or 3. maybe. using a mouse and keyboard are great for a lot of things in fps, but at the same time sometimes it's a much better thing to have a couple of joysticks and triggers.

but for the actual subject:
PS3 360
Hardware 1 0
Games toss up
Online Play 0 1
Prices 0 1
i'd have to go with 360. granted if i had the money to throw away, i'd probably get a ps3 is well. i won't hate on something i think is an awesome piece of hardware, i'd love to have one... but other things considered i'd much rather have a 360 (which, i do)

11/15/2006 3:01:38 AM

Quote :

"i spent 200 bucks on my card last Christmas when it was very close to the the best card on the market (7800GTX)."

Slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow




I think its pretty obvious someone who posts aliased as fuck near 1080p images shouldnt be allowed to promote directx 10. Blackdog do any of those new cards run data at 2.4ghz? I need to make sure before i place it near the EMI machine.

11/15/2006 8:39:44 AM

All I want to say is that I'm going to wait for a PS3. Too many bugs, no Guitar Hero, and not enough units. Plus, $600. I want an XBOX 360, but since I've bought so many PS2 games the last few months, I'll just pass until March or April of 2007. That's all.

11/15/2006 9:12:12 AM

i also love PC and console gaming, but i'd never really thought about it much till now. i havent bought a new pc game in 3 years i think if you exclude MMO's. it just seemed like so much more came out when i was in highschool. console games havent really spiked for the most part, but they have remained steady in providing a decent bit of good and decent games.

11/15/2006 9:20:06 AM

Quote :

"i agree for the most part, im just saying that your argument for computers somewhat goes with consoles as well. you could buy a nice comp for 700 or a 360 for about half the price. the 360 will still look very nice, relatively close on the ports id say."

Anytime I compare the cost of a console v. the cost of a PC I always factor in the fact that I use a PC for more than just gaming. A decent enough computer to handle games may run you $700 but you'd probably buy a $400-500 computer anyway, so the cost of a gaming rig is really only $200-300 more than you would have spent - which puts you at roughly the same price as a console.

11/15/2006 10:33:46 AM

I had actually written a nice long essay making a lot of you look stupid but then I realized this is like me arguing with another man on why my God is better then his.

To each is own.

11/15/2006 10:52:46 AM

How did this thread go from a console battle thread to a console vs. PC thread?





We're talking about consoles man. Not PCs. We're talking about consoles, man.

11/15/2006 11:00:36 AM

hopefully this is a little better, though the dashes may be annoying

this thread is way off topic. Anyone with common sense realizes that PCs have the advantage hardware wise. At least until consoles become upgradeable (will they still be consoles at that point?)

here are the hardware specs for both the ps3 and 360

so here are the specs for each:
----------------PS3------------------Xbox 360
Processor: 3.2GHz Cell w/ 7 SPEs--------- - 3.2GHz G5 w/ 3 Cores
--------------2.0 TFLOPS------------- -1.0 TFLOPS

Memory:---256MB XDR @ 3.2GHz-------256MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz
-------------512MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz -------10MB Embedded DRAM

GPU:--------550MHz NVIDIA------------500MHz ATi
Best Display:---1080p Standard---------1080i Optional
----------------Dual Screen Output-------Single Screen Output

Network:--1000BASE-T Ethernet--------100BASE-TX Ethernet
------------Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g--------------Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g

Audio:-------5.1 Digital----------------5.1 Digital
Wireless:----x7 on Bluetooth 2.0----------x4 on 2.4GHz RF
Storage:---------HDD*-------------Removable HDD*
---------------20/60GB(SATA)-----------20GB (SATA 5400RPM)
drives:-------Blu-ray------------------DVD-9 (optional HD-DVD for $199.99)
Dimensions: About 13.5" x 3.25"--------About 10.25" x 2.5"
cables:---composite (hdmi capable)----component/composite for the core system
games at launch:--17-----------------18 (don't know how many now)
misc:-----plug n play keyboard/mouse--------?
----------------capable


things to consider: a blu-ray player on it's own costs close to $1000, of course if you don't have an HDTV then blu-ray really isn't a big selling point (i think there are @200 titles available on blu-ray) . Also as far as blu-ray and hd-dvd go there is no guarantee either is going to catch on for a long period of time. Some people have been bitching about the PS3 not shipping with an HDMI cable, but then again why would Sony spend millions to include a cable that only a small % of the users would be able to use. XBOX live is not new and people know it works well and there are new features. PS3 will have online play but how good will it be? I'm not sure which, but I think one of them, if not both, will allow you to download game data so that load times will be decreased. Factors like which games are available on the systems are going to play a role in personal preference. Also there will certainly be bugs in the first batch of PS3s shipped, XBOX has already fixed some of the problems with their initial shipment.

*- It think the 360 drives actually slide out like a laptop, you can change out the ps3 drive but you have to open it, thus voiding the warranty.

This is stuff i've found on the internet lately so some of it may be wrong (don't hold me to it) and feel free to add.

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 11:24 AM. Reason : better ?]

11/15/2006 11:02:52 AM

The 360 doesn't come with WiFi. The adapter costs $100.

11/15/2006 11:19:04 AM

^ good to know, also on the ps3 WiFi is only built in on the premium system

11/15/2006 11:23:07 AM

Quote :

"----------------PS3------------------Xbox 360 Processor: 3.2GHz Cell w/ 7 SPEs--------- - 3.2GHz G5 w/ 3 Cores --------------2.0 TFLOPS------------- -1.0 TFLOPS Memory:---256MB XDR @ 3.2GHz-------256MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz -------------512MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz -------10MB Embedded DRAM GPU:--------550MHz NVIDIA------------500MHz ATi Best Display:---1080p Standard---------1080i Optional ----------------Dual Screen Output-------Single Screen Output"

Damn I thought the specs were better than that. At least the PS3 has 512 GDDR3.

My question is what the hell is this? "256MB XDR @ 3.2GHz"

Is that claiming the memory operates at 3.2ghz? That has to be wrong

11/15/2006 11:30:30 AM

http://www.processor.com/Editorial/article.asp?article=articles/p2534/34p34/34p34.asp&guid=

Quote :

" XDR RAM will initially run at 3.2GHz and eventually ramp up to 6.4GHz and beyond. Rambus hopes the PC market will embrace the technology as new systems and applications continue to push the envelope for memory bandwidth. Both Toshiba and Elpida (a joint venture between NEC and Hitachi) will begin XDR RAM production in 2004 and ramp up to commercial production volumes in 2005. "

11/15/2006 11:36:34 AM

Quote :

"PS3 backward compatibility marred Sony's PlayStation 3 is encountering problems playing approximately 200 PlayStation, PlayStation 2 games; software updates expected. By Tim Surette, Emma Boyes, GameSpot Posted Nov 14, 2006 10:20 am PT When Microsoft's Xbox 360 was released almost a year ago, one of the knocks on the system was that it wasn't fully backward compatible with original Xbox games. The 360, which uses a different CPU and GPU from the original Xbox, can play some Xbox games through software emulation. However, the emulation has so far only been applied to a few hundred titles. Sony, too, had planned to go the backward-compatibility route. To avoid the emulation pitfalls encountered by Microsoft, the company put PlayStation and PlayStation 2 hardware inside the PlayStation 3. However, it appears that even this approach to backward compatibility is having its problems. On its Japanese Web site, the electronics giant has said that some issues are arising when attempting to run certain PlayStation and PS2 games on the PS3, according to Bloomberg. Sony has not stated how many games are being affected, but Reuters claims approximately 200 games in the PS and PS2 catalog have some issues. A Sony spokesperson told GameSpot, "We are aware that a select number of titles have compatibility issues but these problems will be fixed with a software upgrade that will be available in the near future." A Web site has been set up for Japanese users to see which games have compatibility issues and which may not work due to other problems. Titles with problems include Final Fantasy XI, Silent Hill 2, Onimusha: Dawn of Dreams, and Tekken 5. The console was released in Japan on November 11 and promptly sold out. Sony will have approximately 400,000 PS3s available for the system's North American launch this Friday, and the company expects the backward-compatibility issue to also affect those units. "

11/15/2006 11:38:12 AM

^^ well thats cool

[Edited on November 15, 2006 at 11:39 AM. Reason : ^^]

11/15/2006 11:39:20 AM

Quote :

"The PC is going to eventually resemble what the Xbox360/PS3 are now. "

otherway around

11/15/2006 12:08:49 PM

Quote :

"Memory:---256MB XDR @ 3.2GHz-------256MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz -------------512MB GDDR3 @ 700MHz -------10MB Embedded DRAM"

I don't know where the hell you got this, because the 360 has 512mb of memory. What the fuck are they even talking about 10MB of DRAM?

11/15/2006 12:19:44 PM

Quote :

"huge smattering of shit"

I giggled.


I'm gonna use that one.

11/15/2006 12:26:48 PM

Quote :

"I don't know where the hell you got this, because the 360 has 512mb of memory. What the fuck are they even talking about 10MB of DRAM?"

Right; the 360 has 512 MB of unified memory (equally accessible to both the GPU and CPU). But the 10MB of DRAM is talking about the 10MB of EDRAM that the 360 also has. It holds the frame buffer and various back buffers depending on how you've set them up. The EDRAM can do MSAA on an HD 1280x720 frame buffer "for free." Though 10MB isn't enough to hold an AA HDR 1280x720 scene, so most renderers resort to predicated tiling.

It's also important to note in your comparisons that the PS3s memory is split (half to GPU, half to CPU and not unified like the 360s) and also that the 360s processr is symmetric (SMT) while PS3s Cell is assymetric (ASMT) with respect to multithreading. That TFLOPS comparison is also peak *theoretical* power... The Cell is more architected towards DSP type processing rather than general purpose processing.

11/15/2006 12:54:16 PM

....



yeah.....



what he said.

11/15/2006 12:57:20 PM

Quote :

"I don't know where the hell you got this, because the 360 has 512mb of memory"

you're right, the 360 has 512 and the ps3 has 256 (i put them in the wrong place)

11/15/2006 1:26:46 PM

Quote :

"Slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow"

? the card was still a very nice card when i got it. and it still runs anything i need in very high FPS. my board is SLI as well and i room to expand it for a cheaper price than i initially bought hte card, im happy

11/15/2006 1:42:47 PM

^ he is just being a dumbass

7800GTX was/is a great card.

11/15/2006 1:47:26 PM

Quote :

" Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped, as G80 is truly a beast."

11/15/2006 1:54:32 PM

I'm not sure how a thread entitled PS3 vs. 360 turned into a PC vs. console war, but yeah, PC gaming isn't going anywhere. There are just certain genres that will never translate well to a console and others that will always be superior on a PC. FPS's, RTS's, MMORPG's, turn based strategy games, RPGs like Neverwinter Nights that are really nothing but toolsets for making your own games, simulators, and on and on. The only way to put those games on consoles would be, as someone said, make consoles more like PCs, not the other way around. I mean, look at the 360. Here is a console that lets you patch games, download demos, access to an online matching system, plays movies, and has a built in dashboard that lets you configure damn near anything about it. Things that were considered groundbreaking in the console market, PCs have been able to do forever. Consoles will always be playing catchup to PCs, not the other way around.

11/15/2006 2:56:02 PM

Um, what was even the point of posting that?

I'm pretty sure we all know about the difference between technology and manufacturing, as well as Moore's Law.

I think all of this shit is retarded. Why don't they stop making games better looking and start making better games.

11/15/2006 2:56:39 PM

Quote :

"Why don't they stop making games better looking and start making better games."

Because many people consider the latter impossible without the former.

11/15/2006 3:19:08 PM

too bad sports game blow on the pc

11/15/2006 3:32:50 PM

People really don't realize that there's absolutely nothing stopping a console from having an RTS and MMO game (they already of better RPG and a good amount of FPS) is that nobody has really tried to make an awesome one.

Thats why I say console are better. They already are computers with the advantage being that kids like Smoothcrim can't send 5A to their processors in an effort to jiggarig an overclock.

I mean the more people argue strongly for PC gaming the dumber they look.

11/15/2006 4:08:08 PM