[QUOTE=ManningQB18;29557824]C'mon man, everyone knows that the Xbox 360 is the best option for any sort of true gaming. Your Pro PC attitude will get you nowhere in Hardware and Software.[/QUOTE]
PS3 or gtfo
This is such an important issue, I don't know how nobody brought it up before
Oh wait
[QUOTE=deloc;29557674]odd considering that most cod games are based on the quake 3 engine.[/QUOTE]
Here's a little readup on that engine. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IW_engine[/url]
It is indeed based on ID Tech 3.
IGN called it one of the best engines.
:what:
...OH IGN, YOU SURE KNOW HOW TO PLAY A GOOD JOKE.
Games that were made for pc dominate the ports in both performance and visuals.
Sadly not many games these days are made with pc in mind.
[QUOTE=Bonta-mokyu;29557153]Micro[B]$[/B]oft[/QUOTE]
Don't do this.
:downswords:
I don't really care that much about graphics. As long as the gameplay is incredible, and the story is great, I can love it even if it's fugly.
That being said, I'm not biased toward PC gaming OR consoles. They both have their positives and negatives and I like them equally.
i actually hate graphics, i prefer to play games using smell
Is this one of those "ITT it's 2000" threads where we post as if we're in 2000 and don't know shit?
[quote]PS3: 960x544 with 2xMSAA at "60" fps, dropping all the time.
XB360: 1040x600 with 2xMSAA at close to 60 fps.[/quote]
You're wrong, it's 30fps.
It's jokeable when you turn on 3D, the framerate is barely above 20fps.
[QUOTE=DrKoeniginator;29559872]You're wrong, it's 30fps.
It's jokeable when you turn on 3D, the framerate is barely above 20fps.[/QUOTE]
nah, I know for a fact that Call of Duty 4, MW2, and Black Ops generally ran at 60fps on the xbox/PS3
3D is irrelevant because it kills framerates regardless of platform
[QUOTE=DrKoeniginator;29559872]You're wrong, it's 30fps.
It's jokeable when you turn on 3D, the framerate is barely above 20fps.[/QUOTE]
The CoD games ran at 60 fps.
They just had to cut corners like mad to make sure the frame rate stays stable.
i just skimmed over the ram part and i know you are retarded
[QUOTE=Demache;29560259]The CoD games ran at 60 fps.
They just had to cut corners like mad to make sure the frame rate stays stable.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I think the CoD games don't even run at 720p any more, which is a bit weird since they're not exactly demanding games to run. Though I do think I've seen choppy framerates in the console version of portal 2, a game running on an engine that's over 6 years old, so I guess I overestimated the power of the consoles.
[editline]2nd May 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;29559537]i actually hate graphics, i prefer to play games using smell[/QUOTE]
what about taste, it would certainly make rapelay an interesting experience
Well actually, I remember a while ago trying to play HL2 with 256mb of Ram and a 1.6Ghz Celeron processor. I don't even remember what graphics card I had, but those loading time were fucking [b]long[/b].
[QUOTE=Evil Policeman;29560741]Well actually, I remember a while ago trying to play HL2 with 256mb of Ram and a 1.6Ghz Celeron processor. I don't even remember what graphics card I had, but those loading time were fucking [b]long[/b].[/QUOTE]
They did feel like forever when I had 512 MB.
But as long as my Pentium III could outperform my Core 2 Duo in Source games I was good.
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;29560570]Though I do think I've seen choppy framerates in the console version of portal 2, a game running on an engine that's over 6 years old, so I guess I overestimated the power of the consoles.[/QUOTE]
You say that like they haven't upgraded it since its release. The Source Engine now is a bit more advanced than the Source Engine then.
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;29560570]Though I do think I've seen choppy framerates in the console version of portal 2, a game running on an engine that's over 6 years old, so I guess I overestimated the power of the consoles.[/QUOTE]
I've been playing Portal 2 on the PS3 and the FPS is locked at 30 and it hasn't dropped as far as I can tell
I prefer the PC for the simple things.
Steam, PC Community, slight improvements to games, mods.
Plus we usually get our DLC for free.
Not to say consoles aren't bad they have some amazing exclusives.
I wish to one day get a PS3 to play the games on their such as Heavy Rain, Uncharted, Kill Zone and MGS 4.
Consoles BAAA! everytime i heard that word it makes me puke
[QUOTE=lkhrizl;29562761]Consoles BAAA! everytime i heard that word it makes me puke[/QUOTE]
Totally not biased at all.
Who cares, people who do this is as annoying as the twelve-year olds bashing PC.
When I was like 12, my dad got a PS3 for free with a new car purchase, and me, being an ignorant twelve year old told him to sell it when he asked me If I wanted it.
I regret that so much :(
[QUOTE=TheChantzGuy;29569102]When I was like 12, my dad got a PS3 for free with a new car purchase, and me, being an ignorant twelve year old told him to sell it when he asked me If I wanted it.
I regret that so much :([/QUOTE]
Why?
Because the PS3 has some p fun games.
[QUOTE=Macktastic;29560001]nah, I know for a fact that Call of Duty 4, MW2, and Black Ops generally ran at 60fps on the xbox/PS3
3D is irrelevant because it kills framerates regardless of platform[/QUOTE]
CoD on consoles really runs at 60fps?
I guess I underestimated the CoD engine.
You learn something new everyday.
Hopefully the next generation will have a stronger emphasis on 60fps.
edit:
Do you know if the Wii versions of CoD run at 60fps?
Hehe, well I could've done worse, It was my first post after all. Those boxes look so cute anyway.
When I was at a LAN, there was this guy playing Mass Effect, which apparently doesn't feature anti-aliasing. He had tried to force it through drivers, but it didn't work. When I told him that, he just said "Really? I can't really tell.". I was like "OMG ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?! THERE'S FUCKING STAIRCASES ALL OVER THE SCREEN!!!!!!!!!!111ONEONE!!!".
Apparently not everyone's equally sensitive to aliasing. I've heard people saying that in the graphics debate all the time, but I never really understood it until that time. Well, sucks for me, I guess. Feels like I'm a piano prodigy who can hear if the piano is even slightly out of tune.
Anyway, how sensitive are you to anti-aliasing? I can clearly see a difference between 4x and 16x, especially when the screen is moving (shimmering, popping, etc).
I use it if it means I can still run >40FPS with all other settings max and native resolution
Usually this is not the case
[QUOTE=Bonta-mokyu;29571038]Hehe, well I could've done worse, It was my first post after all. Those boxes look so cute anyway.
When I was at a LAN, there was this guy playing Mass Effect, which apparently doesn't feature anti-aliasing. He had tried to force it through drivers, but it didn't work. When I told him that, he just said "Really? I can't really tell.". I was like "OMG ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?! THERE'S FUCKING STAIRCASES ALL OVER THE SCREEN!!!!!!!!!!111ONEONE!!!".
Apparently not everyone's equally sensitive to aliasing. I've heard people saying that in the graphics debate all the time, but I never really understood it until that time. Well, sucks for me, I guess. Feels like I'm a piano prodigy who can hear if the piano is even slightly out of tune.
Anyway, how sensitive are you to anti-aliasing? I can clearly see a difference between 4x and 16x, especially when the screen is moving (shimmering, popping, etc).[/QUOTE]
I can notice the difference between anti-alias on and off, but it doesn't bother me much, as long as I'm running native resolution
I always put anisotropic filter to at least 8x though, that bothers me more than aliased edges
[QUOTE=Bonta-mokyu;29571038]Hehe, well I could've done worse, It was my first post after all. Those boxes look so cute anyway.
When I was at a LAN, there was this guy playing Mass Effect, which apparently doesn't feature anti-aliasing. He had tried to force it through drivers, but it didn't work. When I told him that, he just said "Really? I can't really tell.". I was like "OMG ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?! THERE'S FUCKING STAIRCASES ALL OVER THE SCREEN!!!!!!!!!!111ONEONE!!!".
Apparently not everyone's equally sensitive to aliasing. I've heard people saying that in the graphics debate all the time, but I never really understood it until that time. Well, sucks for me, I guess. Feels like I'm a piano prodigy who can hear if the piano is even slightly out of tune.
Anyway, how sensitive are you to anti-aliasing? I can clearly see a difference between 4x and 16x, especially when the screen is moving (shimmering, popping, etc).[/QUOTE]
Actually you can force AA in Mass Effect, it definitely worked for me, although the framerate does take a huge hit when you do.
As for my sensitivity to aliasing, in some games that plain don't support it, it bothers me a lot at first, but then I kind of get used to it after a while. 4x AA looks pretty smooth most of the time, that's the minimum I use if the game runs well enough. 8x looks almost perfectly smooth though. I have an ATI card, so the most I use is 8x. (There's custom filtering modes up to 24x, but they also take samples from neighbouring pixels and therefore introduce some blur to the image, I don't really like that.) 2x AA is basically pointless, it doesn't do much and if your computer can't handle more than that you might as well turn it off and increase the framerate a bit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.