Hard to beleive this is what the PS3 was capable just 12 months ago. It's [url=http://www.ukresistance.co.uk/pics3/ps3tekken2.jpg]come along way[/url] since then.
I can't wait to see the radical graphical change Metal Gear Solid 4 and Assasin's Creed will take once they actually use the Ps3's power.
ITS OBVIOUSLY NOT BEING DISPLAYED ON A BLUE RAY SUPPORTED HD TV PLAYER THAT ONLY SONY MAKES TO PLAY PS3 GAMES ON AND ONLY PS3 GAMES SO YOU CANT WATCH TV ON IT.
uh, the second image looks worse than tekken 5 for ps2..
Too bad Sony hasn't shown any clips of "actual" gameplay yet. All they show is pre rendered ****.
That wasn't the point of his statement, Urkel. They have shown pre-rendered graphics, along with gameplay footage, and the PS3 looks to be beautiful. I just hope the system and controller work out well...
But you brought up the point out of nowhere. Besides, if the games are good, and the system is good, of course it will be worth the price. And, in this case, entertainment has quite a high price.
You'd figure on-par graphics and a much lower price-tag was all the 360 would need. Not to mention the **** Sony's doing to the fans.
For $600 I would hope that it would look that good.
No one here has heard that Assasins Creed so far runs only on an Xbox 360. Oh well.
As for Warhawk, I honestly think Rogue Leader looks a shitload better. They're about on par with eachother at best.
[quote=Last Fog]If I wanted an entertainment system that does everything and then plays games on the side, I'd invest in a new PC. Not waste money on a game system that has a bunch of wasted technology that wont even be put to its full potential.
A half-assed tilt sensitivity on a controller is a leg up? Well hey, it also doesnt have a rumble feature and the 360 contoller does. And maybe I prefer rumble.
...I think it's been generally decided that anti-Sony fanboyism is only cool on anti-Sony threads.
When you turn on your PS2 dosen't it say "Sony Computer Entertainment" so isn't it a computer in a way, Please don't think that I don't like sony cause the PS3 well be the first next-gen game console I'm gonna try to get.
There's nothing anti-Sony about recognising that they're acting like complete lunatics. Even Sony fanboys are wondering what the heck is going on.
Well then wtf, you mentioned the game like 60 times in this thread.
The point is that PS3 has really good graphix and it will be swell when it comes out!
That's not the point at all...
OH!!!! I am so so sorry. I got myself realy confuzzled this time. I thought the good picture was what it looks like now! I didn't realize that it was first and then the bad one last.... I'm sorry. :(
[quote=Vampiro]So? He showed a picture that looked ****ing terrible, so I said why not take a look at games like Assassin's Creed which supposedly look amazing. Who cares if it's running on a 360, that's not the point.
I thought you were using Assassin's Creed as an example of good PS3 graphics. The example is kind of invalid if it's running on a 360. :-/
lol u gais
That picture is soooo not going to be next-gen. Maybe, just maybe on the one after that, but most definitely not this one. Too much detail, too many textures, the lighting is realistically bonkers (meaning it's far too much not to cause insanity in animators), and it doesn't look like gameplay footage.
It's not such a secret for companies to promote games (or systems) with FMV footage/images. Seriously, we'll just have to wait. :/
Oh, yeah, and Vamp was right about Kojima not using FMV to promote his games. All are done with in-game graphics. Word. :cool:
[quote=Vampiro]So what? It'll be running on the PS3 soon enough. It's not like it'll all of a sudden suck complete a[COLOR=white]ss[/COLOR]. If anything, it'll look a smidge better. He was saying that the PS3's graphics were bad, or at least implying it, so I said "take a look at Assassin's Creed". Why? Because it's a great looking game. Whether it's running on a 360, GameCube or even microwave is irrelevant, because it'll eventually be on the PS3 and it'll most likely look exactly the same, if not better.
But will it, though? Can they get that level of perfomance out of a PS3? Severe doubt is cast when the best looking "exclusive" PS3 game is so far only running on it's rival.
Fate: Check out Fight Night Round 3. Realistic sweat, visible pores, amazing animation; all on 360. It's not impossible, especially for a fighting game.
The example of any game's graphics is invalid unless actual consumers, not evil game executives, have played it personally.
[quote=Vampiro]k, you're right. It's going to look pretty terrible on the PS3. :rolleyes:
You're acting as if it's stupid to think that the developers are having trouble getting those graphics out of a PS3.
HELLO? IT'S BEING DEMONSTRATED ON A 360 FOR A REASON?
As far as I heard, it was being developed on the 360 and they just didn't have enough time to port it over. Plus, I don't know about you, but I thought Heavenly Sword looked amazing. So I don't doubt that they CAN get those graphics out of the PS3. Whether it's more difficult or it takes longer, whatever. But I'm sure if Ubisoft tried their hardest and worked their little fingers to the bone, they could get it looking pretty **** good on the PS3.
And hey, if you're somehow right and it looks noticeably worse on the PS3, or they just give up and stick to the 360, then I'll never doubt you again.
I have seen FN3, Addy, and it does have amazing graphics. However, there is a huge difference in FN3 models and the picture shown in the first post, one of the most glaring things being the polycount.
Then you heard wrong, the game is supposed to be PS3 exclusive. That's the cause of all the controversy of it being demonstrated on a 360.
I don't know about you, but as far as I know Heavenly Sword is a fighting game. Fighting games have completely different processing requirements to anything else.
I'm sure they can not only match 360 graphics but (marginally) exceed them, but that's not the point. The point is Sony isn't wowing anyone, they aren't the "Next-gen 1.5" they're making themselves out to be and the graphics they do show contain disappointment after disappointment. They are in s[COLOR=lightgreen]h[/COLOR]it.
[quote=Fate][COLOR=skyblue]I have seen FN3, Addy, and it does have amazing graphics. However, there is a huge difference in FN3 models and the picture shown in the first post, one of the most glaring things being the polycount.[/COLOR]
The only way to tell polycounts in this day and age are through sillouettes, and there's not much of a sillouette in that picture to judge any kind of polygon count from.
[quote=Vampiro]I never said it would look 1.5-2 times better.
You didn't, Sony did. Please keep up.
... ugh, I know they did. But what does that have to do with my original point? Why don't YOU go back and re-read the thread. Jesus Christ.
RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDGE RACER!
Hasn't anyone made a ytmnd of that yet?
resistance, virtua fighter 5 and haze are all new ps3 games that look beautiful in gameplay.
anyway, the ps2 is my favorite current gen console, and sony has lost me and the majority of my friends for the ps3. sony's not looking too hot.
Whether or not Assasin's Creed and Metal Gear look fantastic, the point still remains that Tekken, even after the lies about it's graphics, still looks like turd. Just look at the picture. LOOK at it for ***'s sake. It's disgusting on every level. I would expect this from the Wii but not from the PS3, especially after promises of 'teh pwer'!
[quote=Vampiro]... ugh, I know they did. But what does that have to do with my original point? Why don't YOU go back and re-read the thread. Jesus Christ.
It's got nothing to do with your point. It's got plenty to do with my point, however.
[quote=Fate][COLOR=skyblue]Look at it! Can't you just tell? It's far too smooth! The detail is too meticulous.[/COLOR]
Probably, but the PS3 is definately capable of something approaching that. At the very least they should be able to get more out of it than those awful recent shots.
[quote=Vampiro]This is what you said: "I thought you were using Assassin's Creed as an example of good PS3 graphics. The example is kind of invalid if it's running on a 360. :-/"
It's ALL about my point. Yours was just the fact it wasn't actually being shown on an actual PS3 like that makes some huge difference. The point is, the ORIGINAL point, is that it's a good looking game that will be out on the PS3. It doesn't matter if Tekken looks like ****, or if certain games weren't even running on certain consoles, because eventually games like AC and MGS4 will look fantastic.
I know, and my point was that there's reason enough to cast some doubt over that.
And there's more than enough reason to over look that doubt :cookie:
...right. See, the reason I'm able to cast doubt over it in the first place is because there's nothing preventing it.
Most of the PS3 games I've seen look awful, with a select few looking like they're well within the capabilities of 360. There's one exception to that, Asassin's Creed, the only game that made me think "maybe PS3 does have some extra power. Then I found out the game is running on a 360, and my confidence in PS3 can now be found lying in a 20 foot deep crater.
There's my reason for doubt, the fact that the only good-looking PS3 game isn't a PS3 game.
Like I said, I don't expect any PS3 titles to look better than something a 360 could most likely pull off. So knowing a 360 looks to be pulling AC off quite easily (er, minus a few frame rate problems I think) makes me quite sure that the PS3 should be able to do the exact same. Not to mention it's Ubisoft that's developing it. If anyone will try and make it look as good as it can get, it'll be them.