play station 3 graphics
Top Comments
All Comments (598)
-
my channel is hoooooot !!!
-
@harper16 they cant know ir will run better, thats why there are all those graphics settings that go all the way down to ps2 graphics)
Crysis2 wasnt laughable at all. It had similar graphics but was waay easier on rhe hardware (partly because it wasnt as open as the first, part because it had a better optmized engine). And to be honest, it was way more fun. Crysis1 was only good as a benchmark
-
@GraveUypo it doesn't run current games at all, crysis 2 is laughable in the pc community. the first one was technically better on every level. not only that, consoles don't get the same demand put on them as the pc games because the PC developers KNOW that a PC will run it better, so they put more detail into it, better graphical algorithms and higher res textures mean a pc version will be 'slower', but thats because it can handle it. witcher 2 on low looks better than a console
-
(continuing...)
you can even try with a higher end hardware from q4 2005 and you'll still get crappy results.
pcs are powerful as fuck. they're just as efficient because of software and operating system related issues, like i said earlier. quit being a pretentious little fuck and go and read about it.
-
@harper16 no, consoles get mid-high end hardware from their time at best, but they're dedicated plataforms which developers can squeese every drop of performance from.
try running crysis 2 on an atlhon x4 @2.2ghz (with one of the cores disabled), 512mb of SHARED memory for ram and video with mere 20 gbps bandwidth, and a gpu that's probably a little slower than non-dual top-end geforce7-generation cards. you can't even windows 7 on such a pc. yet, as a console, it runs current games.
-
@GraveUypo when the fuck did i say current hardware? what, all of a sudden consoles get the best graphics chips and best processors that aren't available on pc for 10 years? reality check, pc sets the hardware standard for consoles, and in return we get held back by shitty ports laced with developing shortcuts like none-realtime shadows or no support for any advanced graphic algorithms. try unreal engine 3 - works on both xbox and pc, came out around that time, but is clearly superior on the pc.
-
@harper16 are you retarded or what? of course they dont compare with current hardware. they're all over 5 fucking years old AND they're consoles that have to be packed in a small container with little cooling.
but they're better than 5 years old pcs at running games. just try and any of the latest multiplataform games on a pc from 2005 or 6 and you'll see what i'm talking about. they will run, but at worse graphics and/or frame rates than console versions.
also learn about figures of speech
-
@GraveUypo firstly, when you say "orders of magnitude" you mean 10x, or 100x. secondly, 2-3x more powerful on equivalent hardware? thats bullshit and you know it. the only reason ps3 and xbox can render "good" graphics is because it's on such a low resolution that i could shit a better image out of my arse.
try making a console run anything at 1920x1200 resolution with 4x or 8x AA and hi-res textures (which was easily available at the time of their release). they just don't compare to a pc.
-
@harper16 funny thing is i do. I know exactly what im talking about and sure i know about it way more than you as im a graphic designer AND a programmer aside from a game enthusiast (as oposed to a plataform fanboy)
-
if you really want to play games you will buy a pc. xbox doesn't even render most games above 480p, it's shitstain quality that only a console fanboy would argue for
I love my PS3! Sony has so much innovation in their games today.
JSSJR90 1 year ago 3
@BudzMcgr33n go play with your shitbox
Tronnixx 1 year ago