Crunchy20XX
Banned
It's been said already, but I think Gears 3 looks incredible. Forza 3 and 4 are amazing. Multi-platform games typically run better on 360 (specifically Call of Duty).
why so few graphically outstanding games on 360?
- Thread starter Shadow of the BEAST
- Start date
bgassassin
Member
Because it doesn't have 8GB of memory.
PS3 games really aren't that much more impressive. Every game that looks amazing this gen is lacking in other areas. Uncharted 3 and Killzone 2 may look amazing but overall they're really shallow experiences.
Give me more games practical art styles that actually help make the game better in the end, like an Infamous 2 or Deus Ex, over cinematic showcase games like the 2 above.
Give me more games practical art styles that actually help make the game better in the end, like an Infamous 2 or Deus Ex, over cinematic showcase games like the 2 above.
Any unreal engine 3 software, especially stuff made by epic or published through them in some way- gears of war trilogy, bulletstorm ,etc.
Even a fair amount of other publishers unreal engine stuff looks pretty damn nice- all 3 of the mass effect games have some stunning moments , the new mortal kombat is quite impressive.
I suppose if you're looking for stuff that is ONLY FOR 360 though, it may be a bit harder to find something of "god tier" status. I'd say halo reach looked pretty impressive at points(the stage with all the armies driving around at the start, the level in the ruined city, the space stage) There's also the newest forza which looks as good if not better then GT5 does.
Any game RARE made in the last few years was, if nothing else, graphically stunning. Even Kameo, a launch game reworked for 3 different pieces of hardware looks pretty damn good.
I'd say the overall quality bar is just flat out higher on average then it was last generation, the bottom and middle tier game budgets have all but disapeared as well as most games using middleware engines such as unreal tech or even the modified quake 3 engine found in call of duty. Much harder for good looking games, on console to really stand out from the pack because everything pretty much looks good. If you want "stunning" visuals nowadays you pretty much have to go buy a new gaming pc.
Even a fair amount of other publishers unreal engine stuff looks pretty damn nice- all 3 of the mass effect games have some stunning moments , the new mortal kombat is quite impressive.
I suppose if you're looking for stuff that is ONLY FOR 360 though, it may be a bit harder to find something of "god tier" status. I'd say halo reach looked pretty impressive at points(the stage with all the armies driving around at the start, the level in the ruined city, the space stage) There's also the newest forza which looks as good if not better then GT5 does.
Any game RARE made in the last few years was, if nothing else, graphically stunning. Even Kameo, a launch game reworked for 3 different pieces of hardware looks pretty damn good.
I'd say the overall quality bar is just flat out higher on average then it was last generation, the bottom and middle tier game budgets have all but disapeared as well as most games using middleware engines such as unreal tech or even the modified quake 3 engine found in call of duty. Much harder for good looking games, on console to really stand out from the pack because everything pretty much looks good. If you want "stunning" visuals nowadays you pretty much have to go buy a new gaming pc.
Wolfgang Jr
Banned
I can totally understand where the OP is coming from; it's just a little hard to work properly.
The game not so much, but Dead Space's 'pop-up' HUD has been the only thing this gen that has made be thought: 'Wow, now we're heading in the right direction'.
Everything else has just been a slow evolution with higher resolution. Nothing shocking.
The game not so much, but Dead Space's 'pop-up' HUD has been the only thing this gen that has made be thought: 'Wow, now we're heading in the right direction'.
Everything else has just been a slow evolution with higher resolution. Nothing shocking.
SUPARSTARX
Member
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
some of you poeple are fucking idiots.
the thread isnt about the general power of 360. or how powerful 360 is compared to ps3.
No this thread is about 360 games compared to other 360 games. And how relatively few 360 games truly stand out to other 360 games.
like god of war did on ps2 or riddick did on xbox.
the thread isnt about the general power of 360. or how powerful 360 is compared to ps3.
No this thread is about 360 games compared to other 360 games. And how relatively few 360 games truly stand out to other 360 games.
like god of war did on ps2 or riddick did on xbox.
3 random quick ones...
And with some color too.
EDIT:
And a bonus, because I really liked this game too:
And this also:
***
Of course, it's one of those "eyes of the beholder" things; so...
Heck, Halo (Reach in this pic); always holds a special place..to me; even when it's no "standout" (according to some)
And with some color too.
EDIT:
And a bonus, because I really liked this game too:
And this also:
***
Of course, it's one of those "eyes of the beholder" things; so...
Heck, Halo (Reach in this pic); always holds a special place..to me; even when it's no "standout" (according to some)
There is 1 game that stands out as such to me: Resident Evil 5. Not necessarily the gameplay portions, but the cutscenes. I'm still not sure how the 360 manages those...I've always thought that maybe they're a mix of CG and real-time elements.
On the PS3 side of things, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, and God of War 3 would be the standouts.
all real-time cutscenes cuz you can change costumes and they're all wearing them in the cutscenes. RE5 was gorgeous.
HYDE
Member
Yeah, I mean that keys me in that they have to be real-time. They just don't seem possible to me...the lighting makes them seem pre-rendered. However they manage those cutscenes, I applaud Capcom for it.
As for people mentioning Gears of War 3...I will never know why. No anti-aliasing is an automatic disqualifier in my books.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Your OP doesn't explicitly restrict the comparisons to games on the same platform so you might want to make that more clear before you start calling people idiots.
And even then, it's blatantly obvious that there are standouts. Some games clearly have a bigger budget for graphics and it shows.
Monumental
Banned
The 360 is much easier to developer for. No one game specifically stands out because so many developers are adept at developing for it.
The PS3 on the hand has been a pain, and developing for it needs unconventional methods to utilize its power. That's why only a handful of developers (all first party devs who've been specifically assisted by a core Sony software team) have been able to utilize the PS3's full power.
Also, note that the 4 main Sony games that people consider to be standouts (GT5, Killzone, Uncharted, God of War 3) have been realistic (relatively) looking games.
Whereas Microsoft has only really commissioned Gears to be the realistic looking game. You could argue Halo as well, but Halo has always been a technical powerhouse in numerous other ways (large encounters with much more dynamic AI, all being recorded for Theatre mode). Games like Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Fable, Banjo, Viva Pinata, Perfect Dark, Kameo, Crackdown, have used more stylized aesthetics so even thought they're technically proficient, people don't latch on them as much as the Sony crowd.
The PS3 on the hand has been a pain, and developing for it needs unconventional methods to utilize its power. That's why only a handful of developers (all first party devs who've been specifically assisted by a core Sony software team) have been able to utilize the PS3's full power.
Also, note that the 4 main Sony games that people consider to be standouts (GT5, Killzone, Uncharted, God of War 3) have been realistic (relatively) looking games.
Whereas Microsoft has only really commissioned Gears to be the realistic looking game. You could argue Halo as well, but Halo has always been a technical powerhouse in numerous other ways (large encounters with much more dynamic AI, all being recorded for Theatre mode). Games like Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Fable, Banjo, Viva Pinata, Perfect Dark, Kameo, Crackdown, have used more stylized aesthetics so even thought they're technically proficient, people don't latch on them as much as the Sony crowd.
StoppedInTracks
Member
IMO because of UE3.0.
More 360 games should run on own, exclusive engines like Halo, God of War, Uncharted.
UE3.0 while looking very good [on consoles] is not top-tier.
More 360 games should run on own, exclusive engines like Halo, God of War, Uncharted.
UE3.0 while looking very good [on consoles] is not top-tier.
AltogetherAndrews
Banned
Shame they forgot to get art directors involved.
Sorry, we were looking for graphically exceptional, not middle of the pack.
Although PGR4 is pretty good looking. I can see a case for that.
You are talking a bunch of shit that has nothing to do with the thread in order to bash some great games. Keep digging.
Seraphinianus
Banned
True. After a year of pretty bad looking games aside from Gears 1 and some others, there has been a pretty gradual increase in graphics quality each year.
it's not like the wii where most everything looks so bad that Nintendo first party titles and the few third party titles with a half decent effort easily trounce the rest.
HYDE
Member
my favorite new junior... i luvs u.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
why is it so taboo to just say one system is more powerful than the other?
I mean, the Xbox which released a year after the PS2...was more powerful....I think games like Splinter Cell, Ninja Gaiden, and others proved that.
it wasn't so much of a taboo to say it last gen....so why is it now?
I mean that didn't mean the PS2 didn't have games that held their own to certain Xbox games.....but that also didn't mean it had to be that big of a deal to accept that the system that released a year later, that was targeting the same generation...was going to be more powerful. It is expected to be, and usually is.
I mean, the Xbox which released a year after the PS2...was more powerful....I think games like Splinter Cell, Ninja Gaiden, and others proved that.
it wasn't so much of a taboo to say it last gen....so why is it now?
I mean that didn't mean the PS2 didn't have games that held their own to certain Xbox games.....but that also didn't mean it had to be that big of a deal to accept that the system that released a year later, that was targeting the same generation...was going to be more powerful. It is expected to be, and usually is.
bgassassin
Member
So your issue is that there were only a few on 360, yet you've only listed a few for other consoles? Seems like a consistent trend across consoles to me.
but Doom3 destroys Riddick. Otogi looks way better than Ninja Gaiden. God of War was crud next to Ghost Hunter.
FateBreaker
Member
Yeah, I really consider Gears of War 3 one of the best looking games ever, on any platform.
IrishNinja
Member
rayman origins > gears 3
ya'll heard it here first
inclined to agree, but aren't you ruling out most console games that way?
ya'll heard it here first
inclined to agree, but aren't you ruling out most console games that way?
StoppedInTracks
Member
It's like with scene demos. You can us DirectX or OpenGL and have a fantastic, fabulous demo. This is the UE3 engine.
Or you can code to the metal with ASM and have "WHAT?!? HOW IS THAT FUCKING POSSIBLE?" demo. This is a specific, tailored only for 360 and only for one game engine.
Or you can code to the metal with ASM and have "WHAT?!? HOW IS THAT FUCKING POSSIBLE?" demo. This is a specific, tailored only for 360 and only for one game engine.
Phonomezer
Banned
Gears series
Crysis 2
Resident Evil 5
Red Dead Redemption
Alan Wake
PRG4
Banjo
all look exceptional imo
Crysis 2
Resident Evil 5
Red Dead Redemption
Alan Wake
PRG4
Banjo
all look exceptional imo
Agreed on both counts
actually, there was more than a few on the PS2. From various genres.
from Ace Combat series to GT3 & 4. Shadow of the Colossus....to Ghost Hunter....or Primal. and there are more.
Heavy Rain looks so good at times it's crazy. of course there are also times where you see jeans made out of cardboard tubes so....
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
Let's say OP's premise is true...
On the PS3 there are standouts because first party/exclusive games take full advantage of the hardware while multiplat/3rd party stuff usually doesn't.
The 360 is easier to develop for, so there is a smaller difference between exclusive and multiplat games, resulting in fewer visual standouts.
On the PS3 there are standouts because first party/exclusive games take full advantage of the hardware while multiplat/3rd party stuff usually doesn't.
The 360 is easier to develop for, so there is a smaller difference between exclusive and multiplat games, resulting in fewer visual standouts.
bgassassin
Member
Actually I think the more accurate thing I noticed especially with whitehawk's post is that it boiled down to exclusives. These are games specifically designed with the hardware in mind. 360 doesn't have many in comparison.
EDIT: Beaten
lol, you do know the game was built on the unreal engine right? there are maybe 30 other unreal engine games which proves the opposite. your logic is baffling, thats like saying the colts were the best team last year because they won 2 games... guess what they lost the other 14.
you're not even accurate to point out alice MR because the only thing the ps3 did better in alice was anti aliasing, the ps3 version has worse textures, lower resolution effects, slightly worse framerate.
its clear as day if you want to dispute my claims go ahead and take a read.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-alice-madness-returns-face-off
edit: LOL fuck me, misread post
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
there have been plenty of console that where easy to work with, that saw tremendous achievements. Like genesis, psone, hell even the original xbox, which is a pc in a box.
i think its something else.
Isn't that exactly what he said?
He said Alice disproves that PS3 > 360 for multiplat. And it does, according to your comparison shot. I don't see what you're disagreeing about.
More teams that focuses on making games that pushes the hardwares on the playstation, and some of them aren't really big open world games, they focuses on a smaller staged areas than something like halo and alan wake where the levels are kind of bigger.
I think RDR is the best you can get interms of graphics this generation on consoles.
Then there are a lot of devs that just don't focus on graphics and animations, so we have games like dragon age, etc, Skyrim still looks great/better on the 360 but the budget aren't too high in the animations area, then there are the multiplatform games that still looks really good like RDR.
There are a few series on playstation that looks outstanding because that's one of their primary focuses along with heavy focus on animations, but it's not really a large number still.
I think RDR is the best you can get interms of graphics this generation on consoles.
Then there are a lot of devs that just don't focus on graphics and animations, so we have games like dragon age, etc, Skyrim still looks great/better on the 360 but the budget aren't too high in the animations area, then there are the multiplatform games that still looks really good like RDR.
There are a few series on playstation that looks outstanding because that's one of their primary focuses along with heavy focus on animations, but it's not really a large number still.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
I think you might be as confused as he is.
He's saying Alice is better on 360. He's confused in that he's saying that somehow runs counter to the norm for multiplatform games. But you're responding as though he said the PS3 version was superior.
Or maybe I'm the one who is confused, because I can't make sense of his post and your response to it.
Indeed I am...but my standouts all look great and have AA (U2, KZ2, GoW3, RE5).
herzogzwei1989
Banned
April Fools?
again, IBL
Windom Earle
Member
OP has a point, but I think there are a few. Funny enough, most of them are multiplatform games which kind of answers the OP's question. MS 1st party studios suck. Also it's easy to get the performance out of the hardware, so devs just do that but don't go the extra mile. Alan Wake should have been that game, but we all know how that turned out.
I thought that was the 360's main selling point for years. Exclusives. Yes there were alot of 3rd party ones, but Microsoft owned more studios during those times, well at least compared to now. But back then they only had to worry about working on the 360.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
When you say "tremendous achievements" do you mean one console greatly surpassing everything on another console, or one game on a console surpassing everything else on that same console?
The ease of development wasn't really the point of my argument. The 360 is the lead platform for most games, right? So third party games look their best on 360. They aren't being held back by PS3 development. On the other hand, PS3 ports are not optimized for the PS3, so in a sense they are being held back by the 360. This results in PS3 exclusives often looking better than the best 360 exclusives, and also looking way better than most 3rd party games on the PS3. In other words, PS3 exclusives stand out. The 360 has a higher average graphical quality across all games, so the range from worst looking to best looking is reduced. Hence fewer standouts.
I really think it's just that a lot of devs don't care because it would cost a lot and increases the budget