Even if the PS3 is more powerful than the 360, what difference will it make?

[mojovonious]

http://media.teamxbox.com/games/ss/1298/full-res/1137542153.jpg

If that's a 360 image, I don't see how the PS3 version will look better enough to be able to look at 2 screens and tell the difference. I know this has been discussed to death, but don't get me wrong, I don't want to start a flame war on what system is more powerful.

What I'm curious about is the technology availabe.

To elaborate, to my recollection, the main reason why Xbox games look better than PS2 games was because of its ability to do bump-mapping easily, as well as some other features. It could have been because it was just easier to get these effects out, I don't know, but I know those graphical effects were the real difference bewteen the 2.

But not, we're kind of in a stalemate in terms of new graphical techniques. Both consoles will be able to do everything, the PS3 might do it better (which I don't understand either), but will you really be able to tell any sort of difference?

I'm curious as to how much exclusives and other details will play in this generation, now that graphics don't seem to be a factor. Will online be the determening factor this time?

I might be wrong about everything, since I really don't know much about the RSX, and it might blow the 360 out of the water, but with the sources availabe, I don't see a big difference between the 2.

 

[liverkick]

This is a question no one really has a solid answer for (and usually devolves into over generalizations and/or petty flamebaiting), unless you have a time machine. All we know is there are two seperate systems, one coming out later than the other and both containing some pretty unique architecture. They'll certainly have different strengths and weaknesses when its all said and done. The differences between the two systems will bear themselves out to the end user within the next 2 to 3 years, whatever they may be. From a hardware standpoint it'll always be exclusives tuned to the platform that show what a respective system can really do, not multi-platform games that have their resources spread across.

In the end specs dont matter, online doesnt matter, blu-ray doesnt matter. Features and bullet-points on the side of the box dont really matter at all. The only thing that matters is the quality and amount of talent working on the games. and the caliber of content and IP on a given platform.

 

[pixelbox]

I think the difference will be in physics and animation since cell has alot of GPU-like functions. Also cell could boost polygon counts, which could leave ps3 games looking more organic versus 360's plasic-like normal mapped surfaces. This polygon boost could also lead to, as you know, very intricate, long draw distance environments. With more buildings, NPC's and all and all more objects on the screen at once, the anwser to your question is starting to surface. Maybe a developer could awnser the tech side of things.

 

[liverkick]

And to reiterate the point about multi-platform development more often than not being the base, can you discern any major difference between these two captures?

If anything we should be stoked an EA studio is cranking out this quality so early on.

 

[Nicked]

Better lighting, better models, better textures, better AI....who knows. If its more powerful, then a difference will probably manifest itself.

I think your choice of games to back up your point is poor, btw. Not only does that look a bit better in 8months since its intial tech demo (IMO), its on the record that the PS3 rev of FN3 will be "more like a FN4" (due to later release), so it'll almost certainly look a bit better again.

What do we see here? Development time has an effect on how a game will look.

So will budget and talent. We can re-examine this after more is known about PS3 capabilities, more media is available and both systems have been released for a year or more.

 

[Bad_Boy]

And to reiterate the point about multi-platform development more often than not being the base, can you discern any major difference between these two captures?

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2005/037/reviews/920768_20040207_screen004.jpg[-IMG]
[IMG]http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2005/059/reviews/925401_20050301_screen026.jpg[-IMG]

If anything we should be stoked an EA studio is cranking out this quality so early on.[/QUOTE]
Dont you think it would be a better comparison if it were the same character?

 

[mojovonious]

so the whole idea of the PS3 and 360 being a lot alike in terms of power has changed?

 

[SentinelQW]

In real game performance, Xbox 360 will outperform PS3. The Xbox 360 has better designed hardware architecture and better software development tools.

 

[mojovonious]

In real game performance, Xbox 360 will outperform PS3. The Xbox 360 has better designed hardware architecture and better software development tools.

But that's debatable. Even if it does, its up to developers to make games look good.

But what I'm asking is, does the PS3 have enough advantage to really look next gen over the 360?

 

[Nicked]

so the whole idea of the PS3 and 360 being a lot alike in terms of power has changed?

We just don't know. Most developers on and off the record have said PS3 is anywhere from slightly to significantly more powerful, but both architectures are new, bias is a very real thing...we don't know. Its almost certain that PS3 will not be significantly less powerful though

 

[nelg]

And to reiterate the point about multi-platform development more often than not being the base, can you discern any major difference between these two captures?

Yep. The guy on the bottom looks like he will win the fight.

 

[mojovonious]

Well, I just hope sony shows some real stuff at E3. If I'm impressed with what they show, i'll pre-order as soon as possible.

next gen DMC

 

[Bobbler]

It doesn't matter to me... I was 100% happy with playing PS2 vs playing on Xbox this gen.

It's all about the games and developer support. Every game I care about is on the PS3... that's what matters to me.

In real game performance, Xbox 360 will outperform PS3. The Xbox 360 has better designed hardware architecture and better software development tools.

That's an curious statement.

 

[liverkick]

Dont you think it would be a better comparison if it were the same character?

I tried but this was the quickest "same camera angle" I could find. I think it more than qualifies the point though.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

That they will be remotely close (which is better is irrelevant) is a gigantic advantage for Sony this gen versus last, when they were CLEARLY the weakest hardware by a very large margin.

That said, I fully expect the PS3 to be slightly more powerful, and I expect this to show fairly early as it will be getting the most developer support and the best dev teams period. By the end of the generation I think the differences will be exaggerated due to this as well... just look what people are doing with the PS2 now, which is by virtually all accounts more difficult to work with, relatively.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

Real game performance

In real game performance, Xbox 360 will outperform PS3. The Xbox 360 has better designed hardware architecture and better software development tools.

We cannot compare and be sure because real PS3 games are not available and Xbox360 games are still not full-efficiency to show full Xenos capability (my opinion, I cannot prove, sorry) but I feel best real-time cut-scenes shown is for PS3. Even London demo with only CELL is very very impressive my friend. If you see this video and I feel you will also be verry impressed.

 

[borntosoul]

one deloper said already that the gap betweeen the 360 vs ps3 will be closer than the gap between xbox vs ps2, if thats any indication i guess it will be (mostly always the case anyway) down to games and the money spent on devolping them.

so i say its not really the hardware but the talent and budget on the software side thats really gonna set these machines appart if anything.

edit: and time hehe, looks like ps3 1st gen titles might have that advantage.

 

[cbarcus]

Better architecture?

In real game performance, Xbox 360 will outperform PS3. The Xbox 360 has better designed hardware architecture and better software development tools.

What is this opinion based on? I recommend looking at this thread:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27391

One very important aspect of modern consoles is the processing of tons of data. Which architecture is better from that perspective? Which console is more likely to be memory bound? Having more bandwidth will facilitate a more dynamic and vibrant simulated world. That could mean more animation, more detailed environments, more visual effects, etc.

Looking at cross-platform games on Xbox and PS2 revealed some of the differences to be anti-aliasing, higher resolution textures, and better lighting. That was largely the result of more bandwidth, twice the memory, and a substantially more powerful GPU.

If the performance differences are significant (two or more times), the exclusive AAA games will likely show that.

 

[efxonly1]

Wasn't there a time when people were saying that the FN3 demo shown for the PS3 couldn't possibly be accomplished on the x360?

 

[Davew49]

Better lighting, better models, better textures, better AI....who knows. If its more powerful, then a difference will probably manifest itself.

Perhaps, I'm thinking the that most of what you listed will be pretty even amongst the two consoles, it's the physics and other "things" that a developer might be able to accomplish with the cell processor that could be the manifestation. Will it be enough to get a casual or say "common" gamer to notice a huge difference? I guess that will depend on the developer.

I think your choice of games to back up your point is poor, btw. Not only does that look a bit better in 8months since its intial tech demo (IMO), its on the record that the PS3 rev of FN3 will be "more like a FN4" (due to later release), so it'll almost certainly look a bit better again.

How do you justify that? It could simply mean that the game will be a different version of Fight Night for the PS3, not necessarily a better game. As far as looking better, again we are not certain of that either are we? Unless the developer stated as much. If the game is being designe from the ground up then I suppose that could be implied. Do we know if FN3 is ground up desinged for the X360? It does use renderware correct? IMO, the two next-gen version could "look" more similar than not.

What do we see here? Development time has an effect on how a game will look.

Yes it sure does. But I am wondering at what point do we reach a point of diminshing returns? At least from the graphical standpoint. Just for numbers sake will we be able to distinguish game X running on X360 at 200mio pps, version the same game on PS3 running 275mio pps? Maybe some here could, but I'm thinking they could easily look on par to most people.

So will budget and talent. We can re-examine this after more is known about PS3 capabilities, more media is available and both systems have been released for a year or more.

Amen.