Nice GOW/MGS4 Compare
- Thread starter onetimeposter
- Start date
SGX-1 said:
... then ask your own brain and look at the facts.
Ok no you are right, MS makes the cheaper console with cheaper components out of the garbage that's left from the CELL deal, launches a year or so before the other console, but is on par with it, yeah. History taught something else iirc.
Nemo80 said:... then ask your own brain and look at the facts.
Ok no you are right, MS makes the cheaper console with cheaper components out of the garbage that's left from the CELL deal, launches a year or so before the other console, but is on par with it, yeah. History taught something else iirc.
I'll just quote Qroach:
Qroach said:
SGX-1 said:
well that sentence perfectly applies to both of you, evdence lies here all over... you really make me laugh.
Well then, you seem to be the only one claiming that GoW looks so great, comparable with MGS. I cannot remember such "hype" when GoW was first shown to the public because it's just another UE3 game, the PC can do it, the PS3 can do it - it's nothing special, doesn't look superb and was never hyped that much like it is done now with MGS because it is absolutely not comparable!
Just about every site now speaks about MGS as the best looking thing so far, especially people that really saw the full quality 1080p trailer live there and not that kind of low res shit that's available right now.
Nemo80 said:
I want to see this 1080p trailer that will make MGS4 gods among men....
Just face it guys...Hideo Kojima's Baby will most likely be even better than the TGS one shown...but games like that with that much detail will take time to create..and we probley won't hear anything until E3 2006, so lets just wait and see before claiming anything "better" than the other....
-Josh378
therealskywolf
Regular
mckmas8808 said:Nice little added touch that Kojima and Co. decided to add. Check out the licking of the lips before he sticks his head out to take a peak around the corner. And again nice sweat.
Now I know that's a lie. Ken Kutarugi said he was shocked in a nice way himself. All coders should think this is special being that it surpasses any thing even Carmack has done.
That's not sweat. He has the face like that in more than 1 part in the movie, those are scars.
Josh378 said:
Shut up, for you everything is biased when it's good for MS. Look at Titanio for christ sakes, the guy must be crying because people don't think MGS4 looks better than GOW, downright rediculous resourting to arguements like "He wears a Battle armor instead of Latex because of teh hardware limitations" get the f outthere, lol.
Actually, looking at GOW and MGs4 and not being able to tell wich one looks better only prooves that Epic is working with some sick Tech, because GOW is an Action game.
My take? MGs4 can only be compared to Splinter Cell.
I'm not even wanting to say wich one looks better, i don't care, they both look awesome, and i will be getting my Xbox 360 this december and Ps3 whenever it launches here in Europe. When i 1st saw MGs4 my thoughts were "Looks awesome, man this game is gonna rock" but then i started checking some serious retarded threads about this whole MGs4 vs Xbox 360.....and i can't believe the ammount of blindness that goes on, goes to the point of people saying it looks better than Killzone.
Nemo80 said:... then ask your own brain and look at the facts.
Ok no you are right, MS makes the cheaper console with cheaper components out of the garbage that's left from the CELL deal, launches a year or so before the other console, but is on par with it, yeah. History taught something else iirc.
5 months. Only costs more because of Bu Ray.
xbox came 2 years after - had Pixel shading support and DOUBLE THE RAM, ps2 came 2 years after Dreamcast too. So...history taught what? Short memory i see.
But i allways have a choice right? From now on, i don't care, i'll judge when the games are with me.
edit: I'm only replying here because some of the replys....botherline Gaming AGe level of ******s, i've been checking those foruns since TGS started...omg...ubelieavable the ammount of ******s.
Last edited by a moderator:
Qroach said:
No dude GOW din't run on alpha kits,in fact in and enterview with epic they say that they refuse to show GOW on Alpha kits they took it as a joke on MS part.
It was on 2 6800 ultra in SLI and the game was running like at 20 FPS,the alpha kist used X850 XT,imagine how bad it would have run.
In fact is not out of this world 2 6800 ultra in SLI have more power than a single X850 XT,the game was build over a higher standar than other Xbox 360 games,is not out of this world in any way,using hardware that have more power.
In the end i don't see where you try to get by saying the screens are from E3,cuz the PS3 run UE 3.0 just fine.
If you want to believe me or not is up to you,but the fact is there Nvidia was the card maker powering GOW from the star even when it was nothing more than a UE 3.0 demo,and other games on Xbox 360 look far from it.
therealskywolf said:
What i heard from you: bla...bla...bla....
I'm not biased......bla...bla...bla...
Whatever.....
Right now, I'm enjoying TGS and I think it's been a hella of a show right now...GoW looks awesome and MGS4's trailer is just stunning....Revolution is my show of the year...innovative controller and great ideas...hopefully the software will follow it...but this comparison cannot be made, even if the poster's means were justtified...too many ******s and idiots who want to start wars and flame on...
THis is my new home for Hardware/software news. This is the last place of peace on the internet to go without having an exclusive forum to Developers ONLY...
It's fun here...but these comparisons and and outright wars are annoying...and helping this "war" to continue doesn't help anybody here...I don't want this forum to be closed again...
So please keep the comparisons out...let them keep it on their own post and stay there...If I want a Comparison of console war(s), go here:
http://forum.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=63615
-Josh378
Last edited by a moderator:
I can see many in here pushing their posting privileges, I suggest reading the following as a reminder:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22121
reptile:
Since you agree that Beyond3d is a technical site, how about backing up your statement a little more than labeling it as pretty clear - because as far as I'm concerned, it really isnt (pretty much for the reasons Titanio has pointed out, which you undoubtedly have read also). GOW might be very close detail-wise on a few occasions (and perhaps surpass MGS4 in a very few instances) like i.e. textures, it seems to fall very far behind when one starts to compare the complexity in both character models. This even extends further once you look at the big picture - and that isn't even factoring in framerate and animation differences which are not even in the same league. What about the post-processing effects, the details, the wind-effects that are there as well (can't really see those in the screens). Just because there's a nice screen of GOW that shows how good it looks in one still doesn't mean there isn't a whole lot more to it.
This is as logical as comparing a square milimeter of two screens where one looks as good as the other, while ignoring the rest of the picture in which everything points to the direct opposite.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22121
reptile:
reptile said:
Since you agree that Beyond3d is a technical site, how about backing up your statement a little more than labeling it as pretty clear - because as far as I'm concerned, it really isnt (pretty much for the reasons Titanio has pointed out, which you undoubtedly have read also). GOW might be very close detail-wise on a few occasions (and perhaps surpass MGS4 in a very few instances) like i.e. textures, it seems to fall very far behind when one starts to compare the complexity in both character models. This even extends further once you look at the big picture - and that isn't even factoring in framerate and animation differences which are not even in the same league. What about the post-processing effects, the details, the wind-effects that are there as well (can't really see those in the screens). Just because there's a nice screen of GOW that shows how good it looks in one still doesn't mean there isn't a whole lot more to it.
This is as logical as comparing a square milimeter of two screens where one looks as good as the other, while ignoring the rest of the picture in which everything points to the direct opposite.
Nemo80 said:
Until we get a much better understanding of RSX, Xenos is currently arguably the most advanced graphics chip ever designed (beyond 7800GTX even except for speed). The effects it is theoretically able to produce either havent been done realtime or yet or just havent been done period. Its not hardware thats making the difference here, its style.
PS3 fans are simply a larger fanbase, based primarily on hype with more money in the market hence more media hype.
Nemo80 said:
Could not have say it any better,people complaining about fan boys and don't look at them self,GOW in the end is as possible PC and PS3 as it is on Xbox 360.
There is no point in devating GOW when we all know is possible on PS3 and PC.
NOBODY said GOW wasn't possible on the PS3! Dammit what's with some of you people??? you completly miss teh argument and then jump in quoting somebody else who hasn't been following the argument.
1. nobody said PS3 couldn't handle GOW
2. Everybody that argued otherwise has said that GOW is comparable to MGS4 graphics.
3. half the crowd here are saying that PS3 and Xbxo 360 asre similar in the graphics department. Far more similar than xbox and PS2.
4. GOW has ALWAYS been running on a xbox 360 devkit. It was running on alpha's, but epic chose to not show it on that first!
people need to really follow what other say in teh thread in stead of posting all this fan-ish crap.
1. nobody said PS3 couldn't handle GOW
2. Everybody that argued otherwise has said that GOW is comparable to MGS4 graphics.
3. half the crowd here are saying that PS3 and Xbxo 360 asre similar in the graphics department. Far more similar than xbox and PS2.
4. GOW has ALWAYS been running on a xbox 360 devkit. It was running on alpha's, but epic chose to not show it on that first!
people need to really follow what other say in teh thread in stead of posting all this fan-ish crap.
Last edited by a moderator:
wco81 said:
is this a joke? why people can't stop seeing UE3 like the second Coming ? it's not. it's middleware toolset.Not really efficient and general ,but an integrated production pipeline.
kojima' s team wouldn't even bother tweaking it to their goals.they'll do better from scratch and apparently have allready started.
I hope you werent talking about me, i dont see how i pushed any of these rules.Phil said:
Artistic differences aside, i fail to see the big difference between those two pictures. High-poly characters, normal mapped details. Since perception is subjective (by its very definition) i take the "pretty clear" part back.Phil said:
I still dont see the character complexity difference. At least, not to be "very far behind". It's like, i could say that texture-wise mgs4 is very far behind (look at the tank normalmaps - very bad), but i dont think it is. I think they both have their advantages and disadvantages, but neither is far behind the other. Is it really that difficult to accept an opinion that is not favoring one over the other?Phil said:
I dont know about the framerate. It could be 60 or 30. No evidence yet for either. Not to mention, that the HD pictures you can find online are obviously scaled up from a 640 resolution.Phil said:
(Honestly i'm hoping for a 60, but since mgs3, im not holding my breath)
The post-processing is pretty much standard now. MGS has it, GOW has it, everyone's doing it. Admittedly, we're doing narrow-scope comparison here. MGS is a killer as far as direction and animation goes, and the gow trailer had some very impressive, detailed shots of urban architecture. I'll repeat myself: i like both, personally i prefer MGS, but technically speaking i dont see the big difference.Phil said:
The rest of the picture is, as i mentioned about a zillion times before, that mgs is a better trailer as a whole. Better animation, direction. Technically, i stand by my opinion, it's not better. If you're interested in details, ask awayPhil said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
- Sticky