Resistance: Fall of Man, next gen graphics?

[enz660hp]

I was looking at videos and screens of this ps3 game and to tell you the truth....im not all impressed with the graphics of it. Some of the textures are low resolution, and I think this game can easily be played on cards that we have today. I was expecting much more from something that claims to be twice as powerful as the xbox360. Opinions anyone?

 

[SpeedZealot369]

Gears of war drool

 

[Gomce]

xbox > ps2
xbox360 > ps3

gears of war for x360 is awe inspiring

 

[m21s]

Launch titles are always a little rough around the edges.

You wont be saying this come next year once the games are using the full potential of the PS3.


Gears of War for Xbox360 came out how long after the system released.....There you go.

Patience

 

[NYHoustonman]

The only thing I like about the engine Resistance uses is broken glass - it looks better than anything else I've seen (unless it breaks the same way every time). Other than that, it doesn't look much better than HL2.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: m21s
Launch titles are always a little rough around the edges.

You wont be saying this come next year once the games are using the full potential of the PS3.

Patience

Exactly... gears of war came out a year after the 360 debut...

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: enz660hp
I was looking at videos and screens of this ps3 game and to tell you the truth....im not all impressed with the graphics of it. Some of the textures are low resolution, and I think this game can easily be played on cards that we have today. I was expecting much more from something that claims to be twice as powerful as the xbox360. Opinions anyone?

it looks better than anything that came out for the XBOX360 launch.

 

[hans030390]

Apparently there was an interview with Phil Harrison, and he claimed the Killzone PS3 game will look as good, if not better in some cases, than the E3 trailer.

Possible? Probably. Guerilla did a good job of pushing everything out of the PS2 (though framerate would suffer at times...).

Like everyone has mentioned, it's a launch game. The graphics aren't going to be amazing, especially with how difficult it is to program for. I have heard it's still a great game, and the AI/amount of things on screen at once is impressive.

I read a recent article about Halo 3 in EGM (they played multiplayer). They said it looked just a bit better than Halo 2, but the graphics will be much better at launch. Graphically, is the game ready? Pretty much, it just won't wow anyone. If it had been a launch title, I doubt it would look much better than Halo 2.

I'm sure if Resistance had an extra year, no one would complain about graphics.

By the way, I totally won a free PS3 today at the Indiana State Youth Convention . They have to buy it though and mail it to us...sad.

 

[5150Joker]

Excuses of Resistance being a launch game for PS3 don't work here. PS3 was set to be released in early 2006 but was delayed due to a shortage of blueray diodes, not because the system wasn't ready or the software was incomplete. The devs for Resistance have had an extra year to work on the game and polish it and this is all they could pull off vs. GoW for the 360. It just goes to show the PS3 hype was b.s. as usual and thats not surprising considering the PS3's graphics card is inferior to the 360 and that it's 256 mb of vram loses 32 mb to the OS and its 256 mb of XDRAM loses 64 mb to the OS vs. 32 mb only for the 360. That means the PS3 has less memory to dedicate towards higher resolution textures and will really never surpass the 360.

 

[enz660hp]

wow ok guys...lets not start a war....

also....I HIGHLY doubt anything will come out on the ps3 that looks like the possibly pre-rendered Killzone 2 trailer that was displayed at E3.

 

[tuteja1986]

Its not douche ... Gears of War looks much better and it didn't get Awesome review either. The game is cross between Half LIfe , Call of Duty and Halo. Its looks good but not that great. The multi player is pretty good looking considering it can support 40 player without lag. Unlike BF2142 which lag like crap if you move the damn titan and Half life 2/COD 2 support 32 player. Its an alright game but 2nd round games will look much better. Also that killzone 2 trailer will take more than 2 x G80 SLI to do so i doubt that PS3 can achieve that.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Its not douche ... Gears of War looks much better and it didn't get Awesome review either. The game is cross between Half LIfe , Call of Duty and Halo. Its looks good but not that great. The multi player is pretty good looking considering it can support 40 player without lag. Unlike BF2142 which lag like crap if you move the damn titan and Half life 2/COD 2 support 32 player. Its an alright game but 2nd round games will look much better. Also that killzone 2 trailer will take more than 2 x G80 SLI to do so i doubt that PS3 can achieve that.

You're thinking along the lines of computer terms...not consoles. Consoles generally don't need amazing video cards to have great looking games. The systems aren't also dedicated to running an OS in the background like Windows.

Considering Guerilla really pushes games graphically, and also that the interview came from a Sony rep, I wouldn't call it unreasonable.

I'd imagine some things look better, and some worse.

To prevent any flame wars...developers have said that the PS3 and 360 will likely have extremely similar games (as far as graphics come) at the end of their lives. PS3 has cell, 360 has extra ram.

So that should end any comments claiming which system is better. I do trust developers more than non-developers.

 

[josh6079]

Also that killzone 2 trailer will take more than 2 x G80 SLI to do...

Link?

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: hans030390

You're thinking along the lines of computer terms...not consoles. Consoles generally don't need amazing video cards to have great looking games. The systems aren't also dedicated to running an OS in the background like Windows.

Are you still living in 1997? In fact both 360 and PS3 have operating systems that eat up resources. The PS3 OS uses 32 mb of the 256 mb of vram and 64 mb of its 256mb of system memory vs the 360 OS that eats up 32 mb of total system memory and will likely keep going up with updates. These consoles are more like PCs than consoles of old. Those old arguments about them being closed systems and having higher efficiency doesn't apply anymore either since most console games are cross platform so they're not custom tailored for any single console. Just look at the 360, it took a year before a custom tailored game like GoW could show off its potential while the rest have looked fairly mediocre.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Are you still living in 1997? In fact both 360 and PS3 have operating systems that eat up resources. The PS3 OS uses 32 mb of the 256 mb of vram and 64 mb of its 256mb of system memory vs the 360 OS that eats up 32 mb of total system memory and will likely keep going up with updates. These consoles are more like PCs than consoles of old. Those old arguments about them being closed systems and having higher efficiency doesn't apply anymore either since most console games are cross platform so they're not custom tailored for any single console. Just look at the 360, it took a year before a custom tailored game like GoW could show off its potential while the rest have looked fairly mediocre.

why would the OS use 32mb of vram?

also, can we have a link to where a dev/person from sony has said how much vram and ram the PS3 OS takes up?

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Are you still living in 1997? In fact both 360 and PS3 have operating systems that eat up resources. The PS3 OS uses 32 mb of the 256 mb of vram and 64 mb of its 256mb of system memory vs the 360 OS that eats up 32 mb of total system memory and will likely keep going up with updates. These consoles are more like PCs than consoles of old. Those old arguments about them being closed systems and having higher efficiency doesn't apply anymore either since most console games are cross platform so they're not custom tailored for any single console. Just look at the 360, it took a year before a custom tailored game like GoW could show off its potential while the rest have looked fairly mediocre.

why would the OS use 32mb of vram?

also, can we have a link to where a dev/person from sony has said how much vram and ram the PS3 OS takes up?

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=6

 

[pacho108]

i get it now

PS3 GPU > RSX > nvidia > joker: "ps3 is crap"

 

[Drayvn]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Its not douche ... Gears of War looks much better and it didn't get Awesome review either. The game is cross between Half LIfe , Call of Duty and Halo. Its looks good but not that great. The multi player is pretty good looking considering it can support 40 player without lag. Unlike BF2142 which lag like crap if you move the damn titan and Half life 2/COD 2 support 32 player. Its an alright game but 2nd round games will look much better. Also that killzone 2 trailer will take more than 2 x G80 SLI to do so i doubt that PS3 can achieve that.

Where did GoW didnt get awesome reviews????

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/928234.asp

Average score from all reviews is 95%... thats pretty damn good. And if you look at the pie chart of where the reviews came in , there is only 1 review that came in the 80% bracket and all other reviews are in the 90 and 100% bracket. And this is based on 44 reviews!

So i don't see how it some how got crappy reviews. Unless you thought no less than 100% not awesome...

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: hans030390

You're thinking along the lines of computer terms...not consoles. Consoles generally don't need amazing video cards to have great looking games. The systems aren't also dedicated to running an OS in the background like Windows.

Are you still living in 1997? In fact both 360 and PS3 have operating systems that eat up resources. The PS3 OS uses 32 mb of the 256 mb of vram and 64 mb of its 256mb of system memory vs the 360 OS that eats up 32 mb of total system memory and will likely keep going up with updates. These consoles are more like PCs than consoles of old. Those old arguments about them being closed systems and having higher efficiency doesn't apply anymore either since most console games are cross platform so they're not custom tailored for any single console. Just look at the 360, it took a year before a custom tailored game like GoW could show off its potential while the rest have looked fairly mediocre.

umm.. I think you misunderstood the term "operating system".. its nothing like windows and shouldn't need to use up resource as such because it doesn't needs them. Its a dedicated machine, not a general purpose machine as a personal computer.

 

[VIAN]

Originally posted by: enz660hp
I was looking at videos and screens of this ps3 game and to tell you the truth....im not all impressed with the graphics of it. Some of the textures are low resolution, and I think this game can easily be played on cards that we have today. I was expecting much more from something that claims to be twice as powerful as the xbox360. Opinions anyone?

I could take a ****** in a bag it tell you its twice as powerful. If you know what's behind shiny black plastic, you'll understand that Sony talks bullshit all the ****** time. Sometimes it doesn't even sound like they know what they're talking about.

You are right, this game is not too impressive. But its still a next gen game. All the developers money probably went into learning how to program the system, by the time they got to the graphics...

 

[ZimZum]

Originally posted by: pacho108
i get it now

PS3 GPU > RSX > nvidia > joker: "ps3 is crap"

CPU
PS3>Xbox360 - undoubtedly more difficult to program for but the Cell probably has an edge over the 360's CPU

GPU
XBOX360>PS3 - The PS3 is utilizing a gussied up g70, while the 360 is using a variant of the R600.

Horsepower wise I doubt one will have much if any advantage over the other. And yes Gears of War has the best graphics of any game Ive seen on the PC or console.

I think this gen its going to come down to the games and I'm not seeing much in the way upcoming titles to get me excited about the PS3.

 

[JRW]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: enz660hp
I was looking at videos and screens of this ps3 game and to tell you the truth....im not all impressed with the graphics of it. Some of the textures are low resolution, and I think this game can easily be played on cards that we have today. I was expecting much more from something that claims to be twice as powerful as the xbox360. Opinions anyone?

it looks better than anything that came out for the XBOX360 launch.

Guess you havent played Kameo , this game has amazing graphics in HD (I used it to show off my 360 to friends).

Kameo pics: Link

Shot I took via digicam: Link

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: JRW

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: enz660hp
I was looking at videos and screens of this ps3 game and to tell you the truth....im not all impressed with the graphics of it. Some of the textures are low resolution, and I think this game can easily be played on cards that we have today. I was expecting much more from something that claims to be twice as powerful as the xbox360. Opinions anyone?

it looks better than anything that came out for the XBOX360 launch.

Guess you havent played Kameo , this game has amazing graphics in HD (I used it to show off my 360 to friends).

Kameo pics: Link

Shot I took via digicam: Link

Kameo could have been an awesome game but the developer put in some gay content ;( ... Like some cut scene shouldn't have put in and they could have made a really awesome dark evil game play. Kiddy crap content screwed the game up.

 

[40sTheme]

I'm seeing low res textures abound. Probably because (same as the 360) it only has 512 mb of RAM. That's one of the reasons Oblivion looks better on the PC, if you can run it on high settings. The 360 runs the textures somewhere inbetween medium and large. The PS3 looks like it has the same issues...
RAM IS important console-makers.

 

[rstrohkirch]

I'll toss out some file sizes for texture based off the source engine compression standard


512x512 standard tga = 768k
512x512 tga compressed = 170k
512x512 tga with alpha compressed = 341k

1024x1024 standard tga = 3mb
1024x1024 tga compressed = 682k
1024x1024 tga with alpha compressed = 1.3meg

2048x2048 standard tga = 12mg
2048x2048 tga compressed = 2.7meg
2048x2048 tga with alpha compressed = 5.3meg

Generally speaking you do not want to compress your normal maps but it?s generally accepted that specular and diffuse maps are ok to compress


The source engine, like all new engines, dumps all of the resources for the level into system memory and then moves them to and from video memory based on what the client is currently rendering in the scene. So, realistically 256mb video ram is *generally* enough for the most part but system ram is a different story.

So let's say we go next gen with textures on our level and we have a scene with about 20 unique textures in it, which I would say is about average. We're going next gen so all our textures are at least 1024(we don't need no stinking 512) and a few of them are 2048. Let's just say we have 15 1024 textures each with normal maps and specular maps and 5 2048 textures each with normal maps and specular maps, none of them have alphas. This comes out to about 150 megs of texture and doesn't even include any textures from the models in the scene. An entire level by itself will probably have anywhere from 50-80 unique textures, maybe more. You add in all the textures for the models and effects, the fact that some textures have additional alphas, and the real possibility that the game uses more then just a base/spec/displacement texture set and you'll come to realize why you see those "low res" textures in games.

Retail games for the last 3 years could have easily been using high resolution textures but not all their customers at the time had 2gigs of ram amoung other things.
I still don't think you'll see all high resolution textures on these next gen consoles, they just don't have the hardware for it.