• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Xbox 360 Will Have 512Mb Memory

Gek54 said:
What PC game in 1999 could stand up against Soul Calibur or even SSX in 2000.
Click to expand...
IMO, pretty much most of them really. Especially when you consider the higher resolution, color, and superior displays of PC's and how they made the games appear so much better, even if technically they weren't. But I'm not going to look up a bunch of titles though, if that's what you want. That's too much subjectivity to argue over. I can tell you, as a sort of litmus, neither I nor any of my PC gaming friends weren't even close to "wow'ed" graphically when this gen of console games came out, due to our PC's. Where'as I believe I will be floored this next gen due to the considerably superior hardware they will have.

Anyhow, some of you seem to be missing the point; which is, this gen of consoles hardware was not that much more advanced, if at all, when they came out, than what we already had on PC's. Ok, if you want to get anal, maybe it was just slightly for a very short amount of time, but even then, it's a stretch. Whereas next gen, I believe it will be a substantially larger gap for a lot longer time. Single core, single processor 32bit x86 CPU's just aren't going to be able to keep up to the amazing dual/triple processor multiple core 64bit CPU's that the consoles will have. Sure PC's are eventually switching to better 64bit CPU's, but I believe the adoption rate will be pretty slow; and even then, they will mostly likely be single processor systems and will need a new operating system and new software to take advantage of them.
 
shpankey said:
IMO, pretty much most of them really. Especially when you consider the higher resolution, color, and superior displays of PC's and how they made the games appear so much better, even if technically they weren't. But I'm not going to look up a bunch of titles though, if that's what you want. That's too much subjectivity to argue over. I can tell you, as a sort of litmus, neither I nor any of my PC gaming friends weren't even close to "wow'ed" graphically when this gen of console games came out, due to our PC's. Where'as I believe I will be floored this next gen due to the considerably superior hardware they will have.

Anyhow, some of you seem to be missing the point; which is, this gen of consoles hardware was not that much more advanced, if at all, when they came out, than what we already had on PC's. Ok, if you want to get anal, maybe it was just slightly for a very short amount of time, but even then, it's a stretch. Whereas next gen, I believe it will be a substantially larger gap for a lot longer time. Single core, single processor 32bit x86 CPU's just aren't going to be able to keep up to the amazing dual/triple processor multiple core 64bit CPU's that the consoles will have. Sure PC's are eventually switching to better 64bit CPU's, but I believe the adoption rate will be pretty slow; and even then, they will mostly likely be single processor systems and will need a new operating system and new software to take advantage of them.
Click to expand...
Um...no. Maybe against SSX or something like that, but that's questionable. But take Madden for example. At the PS2's launch, the only thing the PC version had on the PS2 one was textures and resolution. But then you consider that no computer at the time could really run at that setting with any comfortable framerate, and you see that the PC could only do it concept. In general, consoles are better than PCs when they launch. They are then quickly overtaken again, in like 1-2 years. This gen, it might be even quicker...might. PEACE.
 
Ristamar said:
I don't believe Madden is typically used as a showcase for PC graphical prowess.
Click to expand...
How many other direct head-to-head comparisons are there? The PC games at the time didn't match up to the PS2 except in the obvious textures and resolution. But for geometry, animation, lighting and effects, the only thing on the PC you'd find on the level of the PS2/Xbox/GC at the time was a demo (ie. 3DMark). No actual games ever looked that good. PEACE.
 
teaser picture of Xbox 360 ??

1113525152tvr_t350t-4.jpg
 
Pimpwerx said:
How many other direct head-to-head comparisons are there? The PC games at the time didn't match up to the PS2 except in the obvious textures and resolution. But for geometry, animation, lighting and effects, the only thing on the PC you'd find on the level of the PS2/Xbox/GC at the time was a demo (ie. 3DMark). No actual games ever looked that good.
Click to expand...


Head-to-head, as in available on both platforms and released relatively close to each other? Morrowind. Max Payne. Max Payne 2. Red Faction. There are plenty of others.

Besides, I already listed a handful of games off the top of my head that were released in 1998, 1999, and 2000 that arguably looked as good, if not better, than SSX or Soul Calibur.

I still prefer consoles, but I'm not blind...
 
Maybe its being a decoy, by them saying its a decoy, therefore we dont really think its the Xbox2, when it is infact, that it done its job at being a decoy even though it really was it.... :P
 
well since the controller is reflecting light in the same spots on the controller as the other pics.... fake.
 
Head-to-head, as in available on both platforms and released relatively close to each other? Morrowind. Max Payne. Max Payne 2. Red Faction. There are plenty of others.
Click to expand...
True, there's plenty others.
SH2, MGS2, TopSpin, Spiderman2, NFS:HP2... :P
 
sscrew said:
Maybe its being a decoy, by them saying its a decoy, therefore we dont really think its the Xbox2, when it is infact, that it done its job at being a decoy even though it really was it.... :P
Click to expand...


Yikes.
 
i may be wrong, but i just don't see the pc side of things catching and passing them too fast due to the limit of x86 processors. the real strength of this next generation of consoles are their incredible CPU's. PC's will first have to switch to 64 bit cpu's (which they have started but imo is gonna be hella slow) just to even catch up; and even then they will be combating multiple cpu, multiple core console systems with all the advantages of locked in hardware. add to that the HDTV high resolution for consoles, thereby eliminating one of PC gaming's biggest advantages graphically, and remembering that PC games must account for lowest common denominator, i actually think that console gaming will probably stay ahead of PC gaming for most of, if not all of next generation (5 year cycle). maybe only getting passed near the end, if even then.
Click to expand...
I'll tell you, people keep saying that same thing every five years when new consoles are announced, but that never really holds true. PC tech advances too fast, that's just the state of the things. If not games, then demos like 3D mark and such usually blow away anything on consoles, at least technically. Can't say I care either way, because to me console games often look better due to level of polish, superior art direction and complexity of production and attention to detail. That's what matters to me a lot more, and it's why I prefer console gaming.

Half-Life. UT. Quake 3. Deus Ex. Sacrifice. Grim Fandango.
Click to expand...
None of those games looked as good as Shenmue, if you ask me. Grim Fandango btw, had pre-rendered backgrounds and super-simplistic character objects, so scratch that without arguing.
 
sscrew said:
Maybe its being a decoy, by them saying its a decoy, therefore we dont really think its the Xbox2, when it is infact, that it done its job at being a decoy even though it really was it.... :P
Click to expand...

Jesus...my head hurts after readin that one!
 
Fafalada said:
True, there's plenty others.
SH2, MGS2, TopSpin, Spiderman2, NFS:HP2... :P
Click to expand...


Spider-Man 2 isn't even remotely the same game on the PC, Top Spin didn't even see a PC release in the US, and the PC Hot Pursuit 2 was the port of the gimped XBox/GC versions (only god knows why they didn't use the PS2 version).

Substance and Silent Hill 2 were straight no frills ports (SH2 came out well over a year after the PS2 release, yet wasn't even tweaked), but graphically look about as good as their console counterparts, AFAIK... maybe not quite as good because of the filters used on the console versions, though I guess it depends on your tastes.

I'm not saying you'd want to play games like MGS2 or SH2 on your PC, but in terms of graphics you wouldn't be getting screwed at the very least. Personally, I never thought head-to-head comparisons were appropriate, but it was brought into the discussion. A "cream of the crop" comparison is far more relevant. Obviously the PC is not always the best choice for every game, strictly graphically speaking, but that fact alone doesn't substantiate a console's pure graphical superiority.
 
Marconelly said:
None of those games looked as good as Shenmue, if you ask me. Grim Fandango btw, had pre-rendered backgrounds and super-simplistic character objects, so scratch that without arguing.
Click to expand...

I figured Grim Fandango would get called out. :lol Oh well...

I'd say Quake 3 w/ the highest settings looks far better than Shenmue or any other console game from 2000... not that I even remotely like the look of Quake 3, but it was technically impressive. UT was much more pleasing to the eye for me, as well.

I'll tell you, people keep saying that same thing every five years when new consoles are announced, but that never really holds true. PC tech advances too fast, that's just the state of the things. If not games, then demos like 3D mark and such usually blow away anything on consoles, at least technically. Can't say I care either way, because to me console games often look better due to level of polish, superior art direction and complexity of production and attention to detail. That's what matters to me a lot more, and it's why I prefer console gaming.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree wholeheartedly.
 
Marconelly said:
I'll tell you, people keep saying that same thing every five years when new consoles are announced, but that never really holds true.
Click to expand...
well, i'm gonna disagree. i seem to remember the opposite in fact. at least when xbox came out. people were already complaining that the xbox had been passed by the pc before it ever even hit; mostly because it's cpu and gpu were already passed by the pc when it came out. and that i don't think will happen by this fall with xbox 360.
 
what's the deal ^^ with those? that real or someone's mock up? and what do you mean close enough? you seen the real xbox 360 yourself or sumfin?
 
shpankey said:
what's the deal ^^ with those? that real or someone's mock up? and what do you mean close enough? you seen the real xbox 360 yourself or sumfin?
Click to expand...

It's just a mock-up, but lets hope it looks at least that good. And, no, I haven't seen the Xbox 360, unfortunately.
 
ahhh.

anyhow, from that pic, I sure hope it has a slot loading drive. that would rock... especially for loading a game when it's standing on it's side.
 
Jonnyram said:
Are you absolutely sure it was confirmed to be a decoy? :lol
Click to expand...

If it wasn't, someone was, or will be, fired. It wouldn't be terribly difficult to narrow down who took the picture, especially in a meeting like that.

I'm all for the decoy theory, it looks more "Army surplus" than "home electronics."
 
shpankey said:
well, i'm gonna disagree. i seem to remember the opposite in fact. at least when xbox came out. people were already complaining that the xbox had been passed by the pc before it ever even hit; mostly because it's cpu and gpu were already passed by the pc when it came out. and that i don't think will happen by this fall with xbox 360.
Click to expand...

But then you are back to silly specs. Even though Xbox had a 'slower' processor and a 'current' graphics chip, it produced graphics better than PCs at the time due to its closed architecture, limitations of PC buses, lowest common denominator development on PC blah blah.


I think the multicore stuff on the new consoles has the potential to really up the ante Vs PCs. In response, they have PCI express which might finally show its potential, and multicore in a couple of years.

but then you will still have coding for lowest-common-denominator PCs, and a variety of chipsets, so you will never get the most out of a PC.

I think next-gen consoles will blow away current PCs, and PCs *may* catch up, but it'll take a good 2-3 years and even then only a few developers will manage it.
 
mrklaw said:
I think next-gen consoles will blow away current PCs, and PCs *may* catch up
Click to expand...

No question, they WILL, it's just a matter of time. The hardware will catch up quciker than the software, though, yes.
 
mostly because it's cpu and gpu were already passed by the pc when it came out. and that i don't think will happen by this fall with xbox 360.
Click to expand...
Xbox definitely had the most advanced GPU at the time of it's (US) release. It had something between GF3 and GF4, while the best there was on the PC market at the time was GF3. GF4 came out several months after the Xbox release.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PS5 Outsells Xbox 360 Lifetime Sales
News Business Sales-Age  2 3
131
298
Artistic replied
The 20 best-selling Xbox 360 games in the US
37
790
PlayStaytion replied
Xbox 2025 wrap-up is not here - the Xbox team doesn’t have a budget for it
2 3
116
303
OLED_Gamer replied
[NateDrake] “There exists a hope to make legacy Xbox (OG and Xbox 360) games BC on ROG and Windows.”
2
75
316
RedC replied
Modern Vintage Gamer - 20 Years of Xbox 360 - Most Memorable Games
18
315
xenosys replied
Top Bottom