Added: 2 years ago
From: Zonde32
Views: 5,957
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (153)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • ehm where are the other parts . I have played the story modus for like 10 hours. And of these 10 hours where 10 hours graphic highlights ! Sorry for my englisch i am from germany :;)

  • the 360 would not be able to play this. Its just to good.

  • epic music, eh?

  • well, true lol

  • why did you have a half minute entry? IT SHOULDNT BE THAT LONG!

  • @korlog699 well its a long video :)

  • I had to do a Uncharted 2 graphics highlights, it would be like 8-10 hours long, because the whole game looks amazing!

  • nice jam bra :)

  • @henryhenriquez

    Ooooh GOD would you STOP with the FLOOOOPS! Floating Point Operations Per Second is NOT the basis of production rendering! It's the basis of interactive rendering!

    In productions, or CGI as you call it, pre-rendered by others, the basis we use are raytraces. A simulation of photons, cascading physically, or aphysically correct.

    The 570 runs on GF100 BTW, not GF104 like 580. the 570 is 480 in disguise.

    Sure it renders RT great, but... there is still, no production sustem for GPUs.

  • @Allingby the 580 runs on F110. and so does the gtx570. so yea. you couldnt be more wrong.

    raytracing, global ilumination. crysis 1 and 2 have that... so yea?

  • @henryhenriquez Oh yea, that's right, 580 did get a new chip. Nevermind that. Anywho, nope, Crysis does not support any forms of raytracing, hence no reflections. And the GI? Come on, this real-time shit didn't have any form of efficient GI, hell, Crytek even compared it to a real raytraced scene, with far more detail in the lighting. The GI in Cryengine 3 is based on Bouncing with a few object normals and exaturated colorbleeding. But that's only a map at 40x40x40 resolution. Not production.

  • @henryhenriquez Actually, I give up. Entirely. You claim to have an 18-core CPU, which would mean it's at least on the LGA1366, which has a dual, or tri-channel access, meaning you would devide that in a 3x3 grid on dual, which would mean less performance than the CPU in the XBox 360, and in tri-channel, 6 dies, which is also in-existant. You claim to have less gigs of ram than you have cores and threads, which means you do not work with 3D and do not understand rendering.

  • @henryhenriquez And finally... You really do not understand the difference between production and Interactive, do ya? Interactive runs on a GPU, when you make a game in most game engines, we bake the lighting down into the texture. In unreal, this is done with a single button (Magic) in CryEngine, you can't do that shit, it's "Real-time, all the time" meaning stupidly bad performance. In a production, you ALWAYS render EVERY PIXEL, and you do it EVERY TIME.

  • @henryhenriquez So you saying "That should be enough to render any CGI" nope. It takes 5000 CPUs at quad-core power, Xeon, and it still renders at snail speeds. GPUs=Real time and unprecise, faking realism. CPUs=precise, simulating it all perfectly.

    Show me a clip of you rendering the masterfile to Toy Story 3 or Avatar (Movies, not games) in real-time, and I will lick your anus. GPU-compiled renders aren't ready for prime-time, yet. And besides, why do you even have a CPU if they suck so bad?

  • @Allingby 5000 quad core even the new i7 do only 250 terraflops.

    in contras 100 ati radeon 5870 does 275terraflops.

    one quad core only does 50gflops. 1 ati 5870 does 2780gflops. owned agian.

    and cpu dont have the graphcis pipelines needed for efficient rendering. thats why all rendering is done by a gpu.

    agian get i in your head.

    the most powerfull super computer today uses gpu.

    cpu are not meant to render

  • @henryhenriquez he is a 3d artist dude.... you should listen to him

  • @henryhenriquez This is so much fun xD Okay, mention a renderer for GPUs, production. Not interactive. FLOPS mean a lot to you, I see, but... Do you know what it is?

  • @Allingby how about the mostn powerfull super computer? and how about crysis 2? uses cgi time of day. go read up cry engine 3. realtime raytracing, global ilumination,

  • @henryhenriquez Okay, I'll jump that way xD I did, a 45-page PDF. About light propagation, but not raytracing, no... It's just SSAO and light-cache GI. CGI implies that it is done with offline rendering. If CryEngine 3 is so wonderful, why don't we make movies with it?

  • @Allingby becuase cryengin3 is not released yet? first game to fully use it will be crysis 2.

    and the original crysis decimated all console games...

    but im wondering when did this conversation go this way?

    and cryengine 3 is full realtime. you can say it its ofline rendering(it even says so in the info)

  • @henryhenriquez Thankyou, that's all I needed xD Jesus Christ :P Jeff, note that one.

  • Not gonna lie, they did a good job of pulling the PS3s power out in this game... But its not King of all game graphics. (that still goes to Crysis:warhead)

  • only reason i bought a ps3 good game.

  • Overall, GoW is more epic. It also has cooler characters and more intense battles. Also, though both are way too scripted, GoW feels less forced.

    BTW, I own both consoles.

  • @zBlacksad then you should know that Gears us a repetitive game and when ever something big happens its not very epic because its filled with ridiculous stuff. in uncharted 2 its way more significant.

  • @Zonde32 TOTALLY AGREE, GEARS OF WAR SUCKS

  • @zBlacksad WTF?

  • @zBlacksad Also, ur a fag.

  • Poor man's Gears of War

  • @zBlacksad better graphics and more diverse gameplay. how is that a poor version?

  • @zBlacksad TROLL, explain. enjoy your crappy 6GB game while uncharted uses like 25GB and more HDR and SAO. In response to your statement "RED RING AND GTFO"

  • @d1jal HDR rendering and ambient occlusion have no relationship with the storagemedium at all. Those are shader-based effects generated in real-time by the GPU. They are not saved on the disc.

  • @NewLynxChannel um never did I say that disc space and HDR etc have any relation to each other. Just cause its in the same sentence doesn't mean they relate. Geez please read comments more carefully to avoid embarassing yourself. In more detail I even used the words "and even more" which broke the relation.

  • Why the fuck so slow? Gay!

  • so far, gran turismo 5 and metal gear are the only games i know that are in full resolution display. once all ps3 games are in this resolution, things will really start blowing minds.

  • sry to say it but metal gear is not 1080p native. its upscaled. but its very well upscaled. but Super stardust HD and alot of other titles are full 1080p

  • @xemosintightsx A game doesnt need to be 1080p to look good. Killzone 3 looked very good and its only 720p and it already beats all the FPS graphics

  • @flamer41 crysis beats all ps3 games......

    sad fanboys...

    cant beat a 2007 game....

  • @henryhenriquez not really though. theres games out there that looks better with lower requirements. so ps3 wins games wins over crysis. i want to bet you cant have a titan boss battle in crysis like you can in god of war 3 for example

  • @Zonde32 yes we can a machine bigger then a carrier... and a nother one bigger then a warship.. shows how mutch you know about crysis... never played it.. so stfu. retard.

    and agian no game on the ps3 can beats crysis becuase.. the ps3 CANT beat crysis ut doesnt have the power. simple fact

  • @henryhenriquez Yes i have played those. goes to show how much you truely know about god of war 3. those does not match in scale atall. God of war 3 is soooo much bigger

  • @henryhenriquez sure crysis has good graphics but it has a boring gameplay and storyline and you have to have a really good computer to play that single game. probably costs around $1000 or more. Crysis does beats alot of games in graphics but it doesnt beat the story of any high ranking ps3 games that also has good graphics. Why, compare a console to a PC? so PC fans have somethin good to say bout themselves for buying an EPENSIVE COMPUTER WITH LACK OF EXCLUSIVE AMAZING GAMES!

  • @flamer41 whats boring about it?

    itd not a coridor shooter like ALLOT of games instead its a sandbox fps.. you choose how you do the objective instead ALWAYS go in a linear corridor like say kz2 or cod.

    ps3 exclusives sells lower then pc sales.... so who is crying? lol

    we get our own exclusives if you werent such a fanboy you would know...

  • @henryhenriquez what point about it is open world?

  • @henryhenriquez first we are talkin bout KZ3 and crysis. Second, If Quality was based on the number of times the games were sold, Mario would be the best game ever...but its not, so quantity Is not quality. 3rd, every gamer agrees that crysis had boring campaign. 3rd, the only exclusives that are worth is wow, starcraft, counter strike, crysis. every other game isnt as popular and COD servers on PC sucks. 4th, you miss out on kz mgs halo gears uncharted LBP heavyrain God of war and tons more ex

  • @flamer41 cod sercers sucks? why? they offer better ping, less lag, more players. mods. admins to ban hackers...

    are you stupid.....

    did you play amnesia? total war? any rts game?

  • @henryhenriquez dude cod servers sucks on consoles. and lately they have been limited on pc aswell with no support for dedicated servers

  • @Zonde32 there are no cod servers. cod plays on p2p on consoles... reason it sucks..

    and fyi pc ALWAYS have dedicated servers wether the game supports it or not... we will make it ^^

  • @henryhenriquez wow... you really do not know what you are talking about then. there was petitions signed and everything that cod should stay on dedicated servers on the pc version but it never passed as far as i know. not only that... it runs on a dedicated server for the ps3 version. all ps3 games that has online runs on dedicated servers

  • @Zonde32 hahahahah fail kid.

    pss3 runs on p2p just like xbox360.

    VERY little games on ps3 use dedicated servers.

    and pc HAS dedicated servers on mw2. its called alternet retard. do some proper research before stating such retarded comments.

  • @henryhenriquez the devkit doesnt allow p2p servers on the ps3. FUUUUUCK YOU FAIL

  • @Zonde32 devkit... fail. most developers use their OWN game engine.

    you fail big time.VERY few games on ps3 or xbox360 use dedicated server. and cod doesnt use dedicated on consoles so you FAILED

  • @henryhenriquez ... im giving up. you are clearly trolling.

  • @Zonde32 give yo you clearly know nothing about how games work

  • @henryhenriquez you should know that the developers has to pay a license to build games on the ps3. with the license comes the devkit. the only thing the devkit does is give the developers the chance to guide the ps3's power. the developers them selves builds the game engines and uses the devkits to make the game get power from the ps3's hardware. they just updated the ps3's devkit by adding 70 mb's of ram. seriously dude you have NO IDEAR what a devkit really is

  • @Zonde32 no they didnt add 70MB ram. they just freed up 70MB from the OS.

    and engines like frostbite, IW3/4 are made by the the developers themselves... not having anything to do with dev kits, they render via opengl2(ps3) or dx(xbox360).

    and ps3 isnt as powerfull as you think.. it cant render as mutch polygons as xbox360 becuase its gpu can only go to 275million while the xbox360 can go to 500 million and its the gpu that ALWAYS render

  • @henryhenriquez this comment here just made it clear that you dont know anything about the ps3 as a platform. i said they added 70mb to THE DEVKIT not the fucking ps3.i know the dev's make their own games but they get the performance abilities from a devkit made by SONY. i cannot believe you dont know this. THIS IS FACTUAL. and about 360 being able to render more polygons. no... just no... the ps3 carries alot of weight on the Cell processor.

  • @Zonde32 hhahahah you failed.. the cell cant render... sad for you.. it can only post proces.. agian ALL rendering are done by gpu.

    and agian each developer has its own engine.. rarely do they use the devkits.

    and agian cell isnt as powerfull as you think a sinple dual core already tears it apart...

  • @henryhenriquez id like to see a dual core that renders the same strenght as 3.2ghz x 8

  • @Zonde32 well to bad its actually 1 3.2GHz.... fail kid.

    and agian cpu never renders.. cell has no graphical pipelines. so no way to render effciently.. it will render as bad as any cpu.

    and ps3 has 6 spe avalable for gaming...... and the spe have no acces to ram. no cache. no threads... so fail agian keep trying its funy...

  • @henryhenriquez kay. i give up.. i dont need mroe of your trolling

  • @Zonde32 and in other terms you lost

  • @henryhenriquez you are clearly trolling. you are just denying what im saying. your not proving me wrong

  • @Zonde32 i alreadt proven you wrong. your lack of knowledge...

    now tell me why doesnt ps3 do 1080p.... a a dual core can?

  • @henryhenriquez the ps3 does 1080p at 60 fps and it also does 1080p in 3d at 60 fps

  • @Zonde32 hahahaha 1080p in 3d and 60 fps... what you smoking kid?

    gt5 in 3d is 720p. killzone3 in 3d is 480p.

    stardust hd in 3d is 720p... fail kid.

    and gt5 in 080p mode is not real 1080p it upscales from 1280x1080.. thats not 1920x1080.. so fail agian kid,

    keep trying the mroe you do the more you prove yourself to be a fanboy and have no knowledge of hardware or software,.... sad

  • @henryhenriquez im not saying that the ps3 does 1080p 3d atm. im just saying its capable of projecting such a picture. it has nothing to do with what games on the system is doing atm. and Super stardust hd without 3d is native 1080p along with a bunch of other psn titles. the ps3 can do 1080p at 60fps no problem

  • @Zonde32 no super dust in 3d is 720p just like wipeout hd... they are normally 1080p but in 3d it gets lowered to get the right framerates.... lol.

    sure it can do 1080p and 60 fps. explain why uncharted 2, god of war3, killzone2+3, mgs4 are ALL 720p or lower(mgs4 is not even 720p) and 30 fps... lol

  • @henryhenriquez mgs4 has horrible graphics. they didnt optimize it right atall. but that has nothing to do with what im saying dude. im just telling you what the system is able to do.

  • @Zonde32 they used the devkit that sony gave them so your argument is VOID.

    the system is a weak gpu, with only 512MB total ram, 1 core...

  • @henryhenriquez The GPU was only thrown in last minute to make deving easier, the ps3 was originally only supposed to run off the cell processor! Games like this use the cell processor aswell as the GPU, PS3s do not work the same as PCs in terms of graphics!! so its pointless mentioning ram and gpu. (unless you are talking about XMB)

  • @Zanarkke well seeing as the rsx does 342gflops alone and the celll does 178Gflops.. i say the rsx is better.

    and sine the cell has no graphics pipelines it will render graphics badly.

    why do you think they added the rsx?

    becuase even 2 cells combined wont come close to a gpu. the xbox360 would have raped it if it didnt have a a gpu.

    and all graphics are made the same. ps3 is not a exception.

    ram is always 1 mb no matter where it is at... do you even know anything?

  • @henryhenriquez who really cares, the fact is that ps3s rape 360s currently, the evidence is in the sheer scale of exclusives like uncharted 2, god of war 3. 360 exclusives cannot compete.. .do you even know anything?

  • @Zanarkke well the ps3 beats the xbox360 i know that but only in exclusives.

    but pc raped them both exclusive or not.

    and fyi ps3 barely beats the xbox360.

    both dont have 1080p games(those psn games dont count since xbixlive arcade also has some 1080p minigames).

    now do you know anything? lol

  • @henryhenriquez it doesnt just barely beat it... the ps3 still has top quality games coming out. 4 of them this year. while xbox only has 1 exclusive.

  • @Zonde32 mabe but then agian the wii has more exclusives then the ps3 all selling mroe then ps3...

    exclusives dont matter anymore its all about the multiplatforms. sicne thats where most sales come from.

    and it barely beats it.

    since xbox360 does around 300-400gflops while ps3 does a 542gflops.. both dont do 1080p instead they both do 720p and 30 fps...

    so yea.. both are far behind in graphics.

    in terms of power ps3 is behind in terms of exclusives ps3 is behind(wii)

  • @henryhenriquez nah the ps3 is ahead of the wii when it comes to top quality exclusives. name 5 top quality exclusives that are coming out next year for the wii

  • @Zonde32 what is quality?

    rating are as mutch as sales?

    just becuase a game got good rating doesnt mean its good. there have been games like that in the best that failed market wise.

    and i dont know the schedule of the wii.

    but i do know its raping both the ps3 and xbox360 combined in sales.....

    rating means nothing now.

    its all about money. blame activision. the market is oversaturated now.

    too many games. exclusives are all failing.. and exclusives cant carry a platform

  • @Zonde32 and whats special about a fps on the ps3?

    its story? since in graphics its behind. in gameplay is behind. since pc keyboard has more controls. lean etc. controls binds...

  • @henryhenriquez i do believe this was a console discussion not a pc discussion. if we are talking about pc's then even the pc's themselves are behind. you cannot argue the ps3 or anything for that matter is behind when you cant come with an example thats not behind

  • @Zonde32 how can pc be henid in hardware if they are the developing platform. that makes the cpu, gpu and ram that goes into consoles?

    the ps3 and xbox360 uses pc component.

    the ps3 gpu being a big example.

    the rsx is a gtx7800 with half the ROP disabled... basickly half a gtx7800...

    and my pc is not behind. its still is high end enough to max anygame. and has the latest. gpu,

  • @henryhenriquez and btw the ps3 cannot be behind in gameplay. no platform can be behind in gameplay

  • @Zonde32 in fps yes.. controllers dont have allot of buttons..

    try jumping aiming and crounching in scope.... cant be done on the consoles.

    and then explain why the ps3 is ahead in gameplay then? thats what you mean by better exclusives right?

    since if it really is betetr why doesnt it sell better?

  • @henryhenriquez i mean this year

  • @henryhenriquez i think you are missing the point, the technical capabillities of ps3 exclusives severely massacre 360 exclusives and multiplatform games, i could care less about sales.. A ferarri will never sell anywhere near as much as a ford, but we all know a ferrari is better.. and yes i do know something now, lol :D

  • @Zanarkke well the techncal capabilities of pc games destroy the ps3 games..

    see where im gonig with this.

    and no ps3 games barely beats the xbox360.. both games are in 720p... so yea.

    ps3 542gflops, xbox360 300-400gflops... not mutch difference.....

    if the ps3 does above 1terraflop then we can say yes it destroys xbox360 but it doesnt...

  • @henryhenriquez 356gflops vs 542gflops its a pretty big difference.

  • @Zonde32 how about 542 vs 9000?

  • @henryhenriquez what are you talking about

  • @Zonde32 542gflops of the ps3 versus like 9000gflops of a high end pc...

    now thats a huge difference

  • @henryhenriquez well the ps3 only has 542gflops programmable in reality it has 1.8 tflops. the pc doesnt have that much programmable. and i still think that we were talking about ps3 vs xbox 360. the pc cannot use all those 9 tflops if it could we would see CGI quality detail in pc games. and we all know that is not something we have achieved yet... no also you have to understand that if it has 9tflops that means it has atleast 3way sli of some of the best graphics cards

  • @Zonde32 no its 542gflops total not even close to 1,8 terraflops.

    PS3 RSX specs (of select specific interests only)

    - 500 MHz G71 based GPU on 90 nm process - 24 parallel pixel-shader ALU westly pipes - 27 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle  - 8 parallel vertex pipelines - 10 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle

    Resulting Floating Point Operations per Second: 364 Gigaflops per Second ((27*24 + 8*10)*500)

    end of discusion

    not even the gtx580 does 1,8 terraflops

  • @Zonde32 and just 2 ati 5970 does 9 terraflops.

    and crysis maxed out with reality mod is cgi quality...

    at 1600p.

    what do you think they use to make cgi?

    pc?

  • @Zonde32 the nvidia gtx580 the most powerfull nvidia card only does 1,58terraflops. and your telling the rsx a gtx7800 does 1,8 teeraflops... right...

    and even nvidia themselves saye the rsx does 364gflops...

  • @henryhenriquez 1. the ps3 has extra performance because of the cell, the ps3 can only use 542gflops of those 1.8 tflops while the that card you just talked about actually only has 1 tflop per card. it has 9 tflops but those are not use like that.

    2. Server racks are used for CGI not pc's CGI is so high quality it takes days for a super computer to render it. pc's cannot do cgi level graphics yet. Crysis with reality mode does not look cgi. it just doesnt

  • @Zonde32 no the cell only does 178gflops. so even if you ad that to the 364flops.. it doesnt even come close to 1,8 terraflops..

    so no your wrong. and the rsx in the ps3 is a gtx7800. and that card does around 200gflops. but it was at 400MHz.

    500 MHz G71 based GPU on 90 nm process - 24 parallel pixel-shader ALU westly pipes - 27 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle - 8 parallel vertex pipelines - 10 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle

    364 Gigaflops per Second ((27*24 + 8*10)*500

    facts. cannot be denied

  • @Zonde32 what is a super computer? huh?

    any high end pc like mine. or my friend.. 18 cores, 16GB ram and around 9terraflops... should be enough to render any cgi

  • @henryhenriquez your clearly trolling. you dont even know what CGI is apparently

  • @henryhenriquez Pixar has a renderfarm with more FLOP performance than NASA, and they take 71 hours PER FRAME that is fact. i really dont think your single desktop does performance like NASA

  • @Zonde32 and nasa has shitty pc...

    i want numbers. how many flops.

    dont bs me with more then 1 penta flop

  • @henryhenriquez 5000 cpu's quad core and octo threated

  • @Zonde32 thats pretty shitty..

    and cores are bad for graphics. all are bad. a quad core does like 50gflops.

    reason why supercomputers that are superior or made from gpu. fermi and xeons would own it badly..

    now tell me how many flops that 5000cpu does?

  • @henryhenriquez Okay, I've been lurking this and that was... PAAAINFUL. I don't care if you're trolling, or pretending to know something, but please, take it from a VFX guy here who knows all manual inputs of the VRay 2.0 render, and the VRay RT render, plus MentalRay 3.3 (and iray) and basic scanlines.

    There are NO renders that function on a GPU level, of which are used for final renderings, GPUs are for viewports and lighting previews. There are currently 4 renders based on GPUs.

  • @henryhenriquez Those are Vray RT GPU, which does not, I repeat DOES NOT do final rendering, second is iRay, which has 3 settings, meaning no control, it is meant for achitects to look at in-door lighting situations. Then there is I believe Maxwell, which is a hybrid GPU rendering studio. It does finals, but is so shitty and incompatible that no movie is rendered with it, whatsover. And lastly there's quicksilver, which is based on OpenGL, and as we all know, that is NOT production.

  • @henryhenriquez Lastly, Pixar's rendering engine is based on REYES, (Renders everything you ever saw) which takes ENORMOUS amounts of wattage and cycles, and has no support for ANY gpus.

    The 5k CPUs are dedicated to 5k renderbrackets, which are all working together to render their films. NO ONE renders their movies without post, except Pixar. No one. Cars was the first movie to ever use non-post.

  • @Allingby cpu sucks at rendering. reason why pc/consoles dont use cpu as a rendered. instead they render via the graphics procesing unit. and the most powerfull supercomputer right now uses fermi gpu.

    5k cpu are not very powerfull

    you know how many cell it would take to beat a 5970?

    try 40.

  • @henryhenriquez did you even read what he said?

  • @henryhenriquez Okay, you obviously have to be trolling, ignorant beyond belief, but what the hell, let's feed!

    You, sir, what do you suppose has more power, a dual-core i5 or a quadro FX 880 GPU?

  • @Allingby defend since i dont know the specs of the quadro fx 880. but i do know that my dual gtx470 beats both. and i5 are not very powerfull.

    cpu, based flops performace are getting fased out. what is the most powerfull super computer now?

  • @henryhenriquez So there, can't we just agree that you don't know anything about comute architectures, at all?

  • @Allingby Actually, the quadro FX and Geforce models are two different types of graphics card. The Geforce models is better for gaming. The quadro FX is good if a person does lots of 3D editing, after effects, 3d max, etc.

    However, the problem is it's not good for gaming.

  • @unrealriot They're about the same with a few differences, Quadro 6000 (Biggest) runs on the very same GPU as the Geforce 480, the GF100. However it sports more RAM for bigger scale scenes with higher polycount and bigger texture resolutions to fit it all at once while rendering. It also has a few helping technologies, that... I have no idea what's on them today, in the day there was vertex caching, but geforce has that too, now. But yes for DirectX gaming, you're paying 4000$ for a GTX 480.

  • haha look at just cause 2 on the 360, same graphics just about.

  • i bet the new tomb raider will top this

  • i bet it wont

  • @TheCrazzykiller I bet it wont!

  • looks just like tomb raider same type of graphics nothing special here

  • @TheCrazzykiller sumtin very special here diz iz one of the greatest games of all time

  • @TheCrazzykiller wow u havent played the game have you?

  • very beautiful

  • 6:02 LOL

  • Sorry to be annoying, but

    please could anyone tell me what the first 3 songs that play are?

    (especially first and one at 3.10)

  • Teenage Bad Girl - COCOTTE

    Ronald jenkeez - Snap

    Ronald jenkeez - Throwing fire

  • @Zonde32

    Thanks!

  • also very nice video.

  • Game of The Year!!!!!!! its so awesome. nd easier to get headshots on any game.

  • what's with the super gay music?

  • its pretty chill. and besides, ITS RONALD JENKEES BITCH!

  • haha i read hes a faker. even though his music is bomb.

  • true he is not named Ronald Jenkeez. the music and the attitude is real though

  • SUPER MARIO 64 OWNS!!!!!!!!!!

    hahahaha

  • HELL YEAH!!! GoTY

  • Game of The Year for 09 God of War 3 GOTY 2010

  • srry no

  • @ odis1232

    crapbox 360

    i like that lol

  • how bout crapbox 3shitty lol

  • maybe Shitbox shit60

  • GoTY

  • Viacom sucks.

  • nic3 video!

    5/5

  • only on PLAYSTATION 3!

  • only on GAYSTATION 3!

    only on SHITSTATION 3!

  • LOL you make me laugh!

  • your not trolling hard enough

  • why are you calling it that?

  • because he doesnt have a penis...

  • not for crapbox360

  • @odis1232 its nto crapbox its shitbox needfixie

  • @odis1232 if it was it would be like 480p and like "please insert disc 1 of 100000000000000000000000000000­0000000000000000000000" and then it red rings. DIE XBOX DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  • @xXxDarkWolfxXxz FUCK OFF U USELESS PIECE OF SHIT WASTE OF SPACE WIT NO FRIENDS GET A FUKN LIFE U PATHETIC LOSER!!!!!!!!

  • @DAV1D281 Preach it!

  • 5 stars.,

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more