What the CELL is going on?

Blu-ray. The Cell Processor. The RSX graphics chip. The PS3 was supposed to be the most insanely advanced gaming machine ever created. It was supposed to be able to deliver visuals well beyond anything capable on console or PC. According to Sony, the next generation wasn't supposed to begin until PS3 arrived.

So why is it, then, that all these PS3 games look just the same as they do on the Xbox 360?

When the PS2 first launched, Sony demanded that all games on the system be enhanced visually over their rival platform counterparts. The PS2 represented the next generation of gaming, and software was required to support this notion. With the PS3, Sony seemingly has no such requirements, offering us only that it "expects and encourages publishers working on PS3 titles to take full advantage of the technology and features that PS3 provides." Well, encouraging may not be enough. And promises for better looking games in the future don't really cut it. The PS3 is here now, it costs an extra $200 (at minimum), and the visual difference is questionable.

Don't believe us? We put the PS3 lineup to the test. We captured images and video of several games and their Xbox 360 counterparts - using the same exact capture device, with same type of connection cables, running at the same exact resolutions. Now you tell us, are we just missing something or was the next generation here all along?

That is a pretty good pun wraggy. The Ninja Turtles actually put it better when they say, "What the Shell?!"

PS3 has about as much processing power as Xbox 360. The only difference is Xbox had so many good qualityies they didnt have to extremely expound on the fact that they had great graphics.

I really don't expect graphics to get noticibly better for a while. These days are not like what they used to be; when PS2 came to market there was N64, Dreamcast and PS1. There was graphics to improve upon.

Now, what is there left? FEAR and Oblivion have pushed the graphical envelope, probably too far. Granted games will get better graphically, but I think we're nearing the end of the road for graphics improvements. Maybe I am wrong, but part of me hopes I am not; companies spend way too much time on graphics than they do on story and content.

Yet more ignorant journalism.. anyone with a shred of intelligence realises the extra money has gone on the Blu Ray drive, the larger HDD and possibly the HDMI output. Developers have been saying for the last year that both machines are about equal so all of a sudden gaming journalists don't know all of this? Whether people actually want a Blu Ray player is another matter.

If they are so "equal" then why is the ps3 a year behind?

i honestly am not caring about graphics because right now most games are really short, gameplay is crap, and sequels sequels sequels. I want to see more originality, and less bugs ffs Oblivion runs like crap because its too high quality wtf is with that....

launch. titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irongiant

Yet more ignorant journalism.. anyone with a shred of intelligence realises the extra money has gone on the Blu Ray drive, the larger HDD and possibly the HDMI output. Developers have been saying for the last year that both machines are about equal so all of a sudden gaming journalists don't know all of this? Whether people actually want a Blu Ray player is another matter.

---

Here comes irongiant, the sony propaganda machine to slate the sony nay-sayers!!
Methinks, he is working for sony!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeDX

If they are so "equal" then why is the ps3 a year behind?

---

Exactly, the PS3 is a nearly a year behind, yet already where the 360 is.

I'm sick of hearing negative bullshit over and over and over without ANY thought.

I passed on a ps2 at launch because I was busy with my Dreamcast. I didn't really see it being that much better looking. I still to this day stand by my Dreamcast. At least the DC could do anti-aliasing, and has more video ram. Some games look even better on the DC than ps2. It's really no different than the new 360 and ps3 debackle. Now it may change in the future and game devs will be able to figure out the sony's machine better. As of right now none of the systems are really next gen. There just doesn't seem to be that big of a leap. When I first bought my DC and poped Sonic Adventure in for the first time I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Talk about a step up from my Saturn and PSX. I'll give the ps3 time. In the next two years I feel the ps3 will eventually surpass the 360. I really don't care either way though.

I thought graphics didnt matter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makaveli777

I thought graphics didnt matter

---

They don't when we're talking about the Wii/DS, PS3/360 graphical failures, ugly PS3/360 games.