Elessar Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Well, duh - You can't really progress graphically if everyone is using the same engine. Yeah, because Gears 1 and Gears 2 look exactly the same :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imran Hussain Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 EA should look at Forza 3, and then tell us if they are even as close to 'maxing out' any platform's graphics capabilities? I have yet to see something like Forza 3 on PS 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Yeah, because Gears 1 and Gears 2 look exactly the same :rolleyes: Right :wacko: I don't even know what to say, you are trying to argue that we can never compare games and see how far we've progressed in a generation if they aren't running the same engine, daftest thing I've read all week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted June 9, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted June 9, 2009 I think someone said this already, but bringing "exclusives" into this is silly. Saying the PS3 this year has "great looking, or the best looking" exclusive games graphics wise is like, I dunno how to word it other than saying it's stupid. How can you talk about those exclusives and how they look for one system if we can't get them on the other to see if they'd be any different or not? Wouldn't it be better to go with newer multiplatorm games as a true comparison? And in doing so, you see that both systems can do the same graphics just fine. I mean, one camp can toss out uncharted 2, but I can just as well toss out Alan Wake for the 360 and say that looks every bit, if not a bit better, than the others. The only people you should be listening to are game devs like epic who make their own hardware pushing game engines. They know the hardware better than anyone over at EA that's for sure. Let alone some VP who's more of a marketing and PR guy. Mulitplatform games are never going to be great indicators of hardware power, they're built to be as even as possible, not push hardware. You're going to have a budget/resources and time for a multiplatform game across two/three/or even more platforms. Exclusives have all the money/resources and time spent on them alone. The PS3 exclusives mentioned in here so far (Uncharted 2/Killzone 2) are built on proprietary engines, those engines will push hardware further than multiplatform engines. There is no "lowest common denominators" involved in a proprietary engine, you don't need to think about or even consider other platforms. Alan Wake is built on a proprietary engine I believe, so it's going to look great but we most definitely haven't seen enough of it yet. The segment played at E3 was quite short and very dark. It's easily going to end up being in the running for the best looking 360 game yet though. Without knowing if either console could run each others engines you do have a point, however you'll find people making judgements based on what they think is the best looking game(s) and then seeing what platform(s) they are on. "Maxing out" is never a good term to use from a PR standpoint, you'll have fans ripping your eyes out and it's still only 3/4 years into the consoles lifespan so there's plenty of time left to improve on game engines, but my point stands at believing the PS3 has been pushing some pretty impressive graphical results just now - Keep in mind the PS3 is also a year behind the 360 in terms of development hands on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Mulitplatform games are never going to be great indicators of hardware power, they're built to be as even as possible, not push hardware. You're going to have a budget/resources and time for a multiplatform game across two/three/or even more platforms. Exclusives have all the money/resources and time spent on them alone. Hopefully Crysis can be the exception to prove the rule :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted June 9, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hopefully Crysis can be the exception to prove the rule :) Most definitely, it's got a much better chance than the Unreal 3.0 engine.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Right :wacko: I don't even know what to say, you are trying to argue that we can never compare games and see how far we've progressed in a generation if they aren't running the same engine, daftest thing I've read all week. We're talkign about 1 developer saying they've maxed out the 360. I was simply pointing out that a proper comparison is using the same engine to see how far developers have come. Yes, Gears 2 looks better than COD2, that's expected though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 We're talkign about 1 developer saying they've maxed out the 360. I was simply pointing out that a proper comparison is using the same engine to see how far developers have come. Yes, Gears 2 looks better than COD2, that's expected though. Exactly and that will happen all across the line - Pretty much every launch title looks pretty average, the later games will slowly start to pick up and show what is really possible. It's a fair comparison, it has been used for a long time and will continue to be used. It's a great indicator of how much the graphics have moved on, despite not being the same engine or developer, because all developers do push engines as much as possible while they still perform to their standards and expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I think people read too much into this. All the VP of EA said here is that they managed to utilize Xbox 360 to the max while they still have learning to do on PS3 in order to utilize it's capabilities to the max. He didn't say that PS3 will be doing stuff Xbox 360 can't or anything of sorts. This is logical really. EA have recieved much better set of tools nad support from Microsoft for Xbox 360 and their devs have familiarized themselves with the console to the point where they know every aspect of the console. PS3 is still a tough cookie and they are obviously not max-ing out it's capabilities because they need to do things differently on it. This is all basically an argument that shows why PS3 will always be 3rd. Devs got used to completely building games to the best of it's capabilities on Xbox 360 and for their multiplatform titles, those will always utilize better features on Xbox 360 because there's more of them and are easier to work with. When they port to PS3 that's all it will be, a port and it will not tap into all functionality of PS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperHumanly Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 So, EA claims they maxed the console out. I believe Activision claimed the same thing, referring to Prototype...and they same thing was said about Modern Warfare 2, as well as Forza 3. I think all the new developers just release a new game and then tell everyone "OMG! WE MAXED OUT THE 360!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mystic MVC Posted June 9, 2009 MVC Share Posted June 9, 2009 To be fair Audio, K2 and Uncharted 2 had a leg up from the beginning. Killzone 2 has been in development for well....a while let's just say along with Uncharted (and GT5). With Uncharted's success, Naughty Dog can now refine an engine to make it sparkle. As you mentioned Alan Wake is being built on a proprietary engine which was a developers' choice, so they will reap that benefits/problems of that when the consumer sees the end result. MS choose a different strategy and got some great AAA titles out earlier than the PS3, once again they are now reaping the benefits/problems depending on how you see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad_onion Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 And... As long as the games look ok I doubt people will care, if or when Microsoft start losing market share because of "poor" graphics they'll bring out a new console. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted June 9, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted June 9, 2009 To be fair Audio, K2 and Uncharted 2 had a leg up from the beginning. Killzone 2 has been in development for well....a while let's just say along with Uncharted (and GT5). With Uncharted's success, Naughty Dog can now refine an engine to make it sparkle. As you mentioned Alan Wake is being built on a proprietary engine which was a developers' choice, so they will reap that benefits/problems of that when the consumer sees the end result. MS choose a different strategy and got some great AAA titles out earlier than the PS3, once again they are now reaping the benefits/problems depending on how you see it. Uncharted was still one of the best looking games around when it came out in 2007. Regardless of development time, results are results. The 360 had a 1 year headstart on the PS3, developers have had arguably even more time with it than they've had with the PS3. It's not really that much to do with MS, it's more to do with the developers and hardware. Although to be honest if you ask me it's more so to do with Sony's depth of internal studios. MS have relied/rely quite heavily on 3rd party devs to powerhouse results on the 360, but in doing that you're depending on 3rd party devs and a lot of the time multiplatform engines (even if the game itself is exclusive). Those devs might take longer to max out your console as they aren't working internally directly with you, or because they're using their own engines that weren't necessarily built just for the 360. In most cases it's the Unreal engine. But when you look at the good looking PS3 games it's KZ2, proprietary engine, Uncharted 1/2, proprietary engine, GoW3, proprietary engine, GT5, proprietary engine, Heavy Rain, proprietary engine. No Unreal 3 engine or anything else... This is why Forza 3 and Alan Wake will be two of the best looking titles, they're in order an internal studio/proprietary engine and a proprietary engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mystic MVC Posted June 9, 2009 MVC Share Posted June 9, 2009 Although to be honest if you ask me it's more so to do with Sony's depth of internal studios. MS have relied/rely quite heavily on 3rd party devs to powerhouse results on the 360, but in doing that you're depending on 3rd party devs and a lot of the time multiplatform engines (even if the game itself is exclusive). Exactly and that is the large overtone with the 360. Exclusives and internal studios take time and obviously MS realized this. They either go out on a limb this generation and release a couple internally provided games by their powerhouse studios or do a mix of internal/external to further extend their database. Especially coming from a console where the previous generation many companies wouldn't even touch it because they had no clue about its longevity. With the rising costs of single console development, it will definitely be interesting to see what is MS's next step after the 360. Either way, who would have guessed they would be at this point 7-8 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiWanToby Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Alan wake hopefully does not feel like a console port. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted June 9, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted June 9, 2009 Exactly and that is the large overtone with the 360. Exclusives and internal studios take time and obviously MS realized this. They either go out on a limb this generation and release a couple internally provided games by their powerhouse studios or do a mix of internal/external to further extend their database. Especially coming from a console where the previous generation many companies wouldn't even touch it because they had no clue about its longevity. With the rising costs of single console development, it will definitely be interesting to see what is MS's next step after the 360. Either way, who would have guessed they would be at this point 7-8 years ago. If you want my 2 cents MS will be investing more in 1st party studios going forward, either by buying/bringing some young pre-existing dev teams into MS' wings, or by creating some new studios from scratch. I don't think they'll chase after massive studios, that will cost too much, look at EA trying to buy Take 2. They'll go out in search of talented new devs/unheard ofs, like Sony going out and bagging Ueda (Ico/Shadow of the Colossus/Last Guardian), when absolutely no one knew who he was. If they do that, give the guy/gal their own studio then BAM you could see the next biggest unheard of turned pro. It's risky, but raw talent can easily be developed under the wings of game giants like Sony/MS. There's no better place to end up than SCE or MS Game Studios to develop your career. Also MS won't be chucking 50 million dollars at DLC next generation, heck, I don't think you'll see that again this generation. 3rd party devs are focussing much more now on maximizing profits and multiplatform games are where that is at. 3rd party devs don't get all the funding/support/resources 1st party devs do. Who do you think poured a ton of money into KZ2? It was Sony, not Guerilla as such. 3rd party devs can't really say "hey Sony/MS pay for all of this", although we know fine well there are cases when 3rd party devs are paid off... However that can often end in a timed exclusive not true exclusive and essentially a bit of a "waste" of your cash instead of pumping it into your own development teams. Just my thoughts, not fact or anything said to correct anyone, opinion only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mystic MVC Posted June 9, 2009 MVC Share Posted June 9, 2009 If you want my 2 cents MS will be investing more in 1st party studios going forward, either by buying/bringing some young pre-existing dev teams into MS' wings, or by creating some new studios from scratch. I don't think they'll chase after massive studios, that will cost too much, look at EA trying to buy Take 2.They'll go out in search of talented new devs/unheard ofs, like Sony going out and bagging Ueda (Ico/Shadow of the Colossus/Last Guardian), when absolutely no one knew who he was. If they do that, give the guy/gal their own studio then BAM you could see the next biggest unheard of turned pro. It's risky, but raw talent can easily be developed under the wings of game giants like Sony/MS. There's no better place to end up than SCE or MS Game Studios to develop your career. Also MS won't be chucking 50 million dollars at DLC next generation, heck, I don't think you'll see that again this generation. 3rd party devs are focussing much more now on maximizing profits and multiplatform games are where that is at. 3rd party devs don't get all the funding/support/resources 1st party devs do. Who do you think poured a ton of money into KZ2? It was Sony, not Guerilla as such. 3rd party devs can't really say "hey Sony/MS pay for all of this", although we know fine well there are cases when 3rd party devs are paid off... However that can often end in a timed exclusive not true exclusive and essentially a bit of a "waste" of your cash instead of pumping it into your own development teams. Just my thoughts, not fact or anything said to correct anyone, opinion only. Really great post. They can now take a sigh of relief after having quite a successful generation so far (bigger foothold even with the RRoD issues). They don't have to worry about surviving so much that I agree 100% that they will be looking into unheard of studios. You won't get a big studio to switch alliances and at most you can just make them go multiplatform (which has happened quite a lot this generation). Once again, really solid post, I could have bolded that whole last paragraph as well but I didn't want to waste anybody's time. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 So great you had to do two posts about it :p ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaik Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Ps3 Will Never beat out xbox for 2 reasons. 1 Microsoft xboxes are computers built for upgrades and not stuck in a console world and 2. Halo though getting buggier and buggier will never die and thats like the #1 game for most people playing consoles today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mystic MVC Posted June 9, 2009 MVC Share Posted June 9, 2009 So great you had to do two posts about it :p ? Neowin was giving me IPS errors for about 15 minutes but apparently yes it was that great.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slammers Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hasn't it been common knowledge for about 5-6 years now that the Cell, let alone the PS3, is one damn powerful unit? It's been rehashed over and over and over. But, until someone finds out how to truly utilize all of that power, who cares? It's like the guy who buys a Porsche and drives in automatic. You can coast along and look great doing it but someone with a little bit less under the hood can outperform you by taking control and realizing the full power potential. To me, that is what the PS3 will be known for: potential. It potentially could have been, potentially should have been, and really it won't. Perfect example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George P Global Moderator Posted June 9, 2009 Global Moderator Share Posted June 9, 2009 One big problem the Cell has is that it's been overhyped by Sony themselves. Case in point, they sold off all of their Cell fabs to Toshiba. YOu have to wonder why? Is it powerful? Yeah, it can do loads of scientific math related work for you (folding@home etc). But it turned out to be lacking for games. Not to bash or anything, but everyone should remember how the original idea from sony was to have the cell do everything but that didn't work out right. Thus the nVidia tie-in. Anyways, the batch of games coming out now are the best looking ones to date for the PS3, which is a given, after all this time. Only time will tell if they'll get any better after this. Same with the 360. But everyone knows both units will hit a high point graphics wise where games won't look any better. And that's got little to do with the disc format as well. When that time comes, and it'll probably be next year imo, for both, then we can debate this again. Still, graphics while nice and pretty, are only one element of the overall package. Nice visuals grab your attention, but it's then up to a good story and gameplay to keep you there. Lots of games have looked good, yet still aren't worth it in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted June 9, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) but everyone should remember how the original idea from sony was to have the cell do everything but that didn't work out right. Thus the nVidia tie-in. That's an interesting story everyone should look into. I heard the guys on ListenUP talk about it in some detail. The conversation actually started through them speculating in the future one chip will be able to do it all. Basically Sony were planning on having the CELL chip do everything, graphics/cpu/etc. If it had worked it would of been some pretty damn good tech, but it seems it just wasn't able to get done in time for release, hence the nVidia hack job. Even although that hack job has worked out pretty well, and the console is producing good looking games, everyone should know the initial plan for the PS3 was not to have a seperate graphics chip at all. I don't think it's a case of overhyping the cell processer, I think it's just that it was too early for this kind of combo to be pulled off for the PS3 release. I think that'll be how the PS4 goes, one chip to do it all, probably the same with the 360 as well? It'll make things a lot easier to develop, I think, I'm no developer just going on what my gut logic would tell me. edit: Tecmo jumping on the bandwagon as well - http://www.gamingunion.net/news/tecmo-play...dware--162.html Edited June 9, 2009 by Audioboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mystic MVC Posted June 9, 2009 MVC Share Posted June 9, 2009 Nvidia and Intel are both trying to push GPU/CPU platforms so they rivaling tech will be interesting to see how it ends up in the next gen consoles. In my opinion, it isn't an "if" it's "when". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 the only thing maxed out is the Sony PR dept's desperation apparently, if they send their cronies to start threads like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts