GameSpot Says 360 has Better Graphics

31 Responses

1. Anuban

   December 7th, 2006 at 4:09 am

   1

   I won’t say one thing but this … I am no Sony fan but even I think that at this point the comparison is ridiculous. While it is true Sony had an extra year to get their act together, development for hardware as complex and new to developers as the cell is going to take to get the most out of. Sure there is only basically 256 MB RAM for gaming but still why not wait until next year to compare … As it is this is not altogether fair considering developers have had an extra year to get familiar with developing for the 360.

   They should have compared the 360’s launch titles to the PS3s lauch title … and though I own and love my 360 I am sure the conclusion they reached would have been very different. Fair is fair and this ain’t that.

2. greenthumb

   December 7th, 2006 at 4:57 am

   2

   yo I seen that page they are talkin about, man there is no damn difference its just more B.S to start flaming . they look the same when I saw them and I agree its very dumb to compare a console thats been out to one that just launched .They just like to keep people Flaming the only thang I say was one lighting differences which is nothin that does not prove the 360 looks better lmfao they look the same If anyone want the links I will show them

3. greenthumb

   December 7th, 2006 at 5:01 am

   3

   they looked the same but one was like a hair briter then the other lmfao which is a stupid way to judge it sounded like fanboyism to me. They make it seem like the Ps3 looks like Ps2 graphics next to the 360 but they look equall to me.

4. Flame sucks

   December 7th, 2006 at 5:08 am

   4

   Does this confirm that Gamespot loves the Xbox?

5. Anuban

   December 7th, 2006 at 5:11 am

   5

   It confirms my thoughts after the Gears and Zelda reviews that GS is not a very balanced News Reporting Site. I know there is a better way to say that but at the moment it escapes me you know what I mean. They are just a biased site whose articles should be taken with a grain of salt instead of good hard nosed non-biased reporting.

6. greenthumb

   December 7th, 2006 at 5:18 am

   6

   lmfao does is confirm ? I think it does man cause I swear I saw no difference really they both look good this is just some flame starting junk but here are the links to those screenshots .
   http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/p-1.html

7. gus

   December 7th, 2006 at 5:24 am

   7

   the only true way to really compare is to have 2 exact tvs same settings ( factory settings sounds good since theirs no calibrations) and compare lauch titles or same exact titles… side by side but at this point both ms and sony can pay and they can make it simple as switching ps3 ss to title it xbox 360 and likewise with 360 …. so one must one both units and 2 of same tvs….

8. Jim2k

   December 7th, 2006 at 10:09 am

   8

   It would be har for them to compare 360 launch games and PS3 launch games, since those exact games aren’t availble on both consoles.

   But I agree, 360 games look better now (by far), but we can’t say for sure until next year, when games like GTA 4 comes out on both platforms.

9. Anuban

   December 7th, 2006 at 10:51 am

   9

   Well you really don’t need the exact same games to make a visual comparison. I know I don’t … it is easy to see that the vast majority of the PS3s launch titles are ALL over the Xbox 360s launch title. Maybe the three exceptions would be PGR3, Condemned, and CoD2 … but other than that what 360 launch titles really looked next gen at all? I know I didn’t ask for any ones but those three … since I got the games as gifts.

   I guess NFS:Most Wanted and NBA 2K6 were decent next-gen titles though but really King Kong, Gun, PDZ, Kameo, Quake IV, Madden 06 (maybe that was decent but it can’t compare to 07 on the PS3), Ridge Racer 6, THAW, and FIFA 06 were lousy examples of Next-gen games. At least imho. If you think otherwise that is fine by me. Just remember I am an avid Xbox 360 fan and not a Sony fan at all, but I was very disappointed with the quality of the Launch titles.

10. Jim2k

    December 7th, 2006 at 12:03 pm

    10

    I disagree Anuban, Perfect Dark Zero looked better than Resistance (IMHO), PGR3 looked better than Ridge Racer 7.
    Condemned also looked amazing.

    The 2007 EA Sports and 2K sports games naturally look better this year than last year, regardless what system they’re on.

    As far as launch, I think the 360 clearly won, but as I said, lets wait and see what happens next year. Halo 3 vs. Killzone 2, can you imagine that face-off?

11. Anuban

    December 7th, 2006 at 12:38 pm

    11

    Jim2K I did say Condemned and I did say PGR3 looked good for launch titles and those were the ones that would do well against the PS3 launch titles, reread my post if you need to, but I do think we have a very very strong difference of opinion on PDZ so I will just leave it at that rather than add something that could start any type of argument at all. I will say it was the first title I bought that I almost immediately traded in for store credit.

    IMHO the PS3 clearly won the launch title visual war and again I despise Sony so for me that is saying a great deal but again we don’t agree and I respect that so we can just it at that.

    As far as the sports titles … we are talking about what is available at launch so I really can’t see what difference the year makes in this particular instance (although again I did say NBA 2K6 was a decent next gen game) but again we just have a difference of opinion. And in any event none of really matters enough to me to warrant any further discussion from me on the matter. Again these were just my own opinions.

    I’ll wait on the whole H3 vs KillZone 2 thing … I can’t say anything since I have yet to see any in game pics of either one at or near the finished state.

12. NRG753

    December 7th, 2006 at 6:00 pm

    12

    I think the PS3 wont really shine for a year or two, when Sony refine their SDK more, so that developers can create games easier and have better graphics. They pushed out a surprising amount of detail from the PS2.

    But hey, graphics arent everything, I’d rather go for a 360 because it has more games, it’s cheaper, easier to get, and easier to develop for. I remember MS saying that it wouldn’t take 2 weeks to make a PC port with the 360’s XDK. All the porting is done for you, all you really need to do is add in M+K support, and tweaks for the graphics. Point is, unlike the previous generation, we’ll be seeing more games on the MS platform instead of the Sony platform.

13. greenthumb

    December 7th, 2006 at 9:32 pm

    13

    yeah I think thats true they wont take full advantage of the Cell untill they get use to it which will be in later years . I also thank it has to do with Devs too some are better then others like on the Ps2 some games look amazin while others looked crappy. The was because some Devs are lazy while some love to push the graphics to the fullest

14. Frodos Hairy Foot

    December 7th, 2006 at 9:46 pm

    14

    LOL, Sony fanboys… ATTACK!

15. greenthumb

    December 7th, 2006 at 10:33 pm

    15

    here we go with the Fanboy talk im just not gone say sh*t about it because anyone that compares games from 1st gen to 2nd gen launch tittles is pretty much idiots and people on here have a right to dissagree with bullsh*t and not be called fanyboys I stated before I am a grown ass man dont lable me such as a term as Fanboy hell its the Truth they have not even push the Cell only an Dummy would not know that its all over the Net and really 360 games should look better ,just because people have there on opinions there “Fanboys” from the page I linked up there I saw nothin different they look the same to me 360 fanboys are blind ,Anuban is not a Fanboy he even said he is a 360 owner

16. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 2:32 am

    16

    Being a Fanboy about anything is just childish, I don’t know why people do it. I always go for the item that rates the best instead of being biased towards some brand.

    For consoles I’d choose a good balance of:
    -Performance
    -Price
    -Number of games
    -Types of games
    -Quality of games
    -Controls
    -Availability

17. Frodos Hairy Foot

    December 8th, 2006 at 2:34 am

    17

    Yay for for Fanboys… erm.. “FanMEN”… LOL

18. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 2:35 am

    18

    No, FanBOYS they’re children I tell ya!

19. greenthumb

    December 8th, 2006 at 6:59 am

    19

    people are so quick to call someone a “Fanboy” I think its a insult thats why I will fire back so I guess since I like the Ps2/Ps3 joystick over the xbox, and someone likes the xbox/360 joystick were are Fanboys ? . or say since I like platforming games ,Rpgs , Fighting games , aventure games etc . I am a fanboy because of that ? also is someone a Fanboy because they like Firt person shooters over what I stated above umm no . we have a right to like what ever the hell we like. I have no time for dumb a** insults just because I have my own opinion.

20. greenthumb

    December 8th, 2006 at 7:16 am

    20

    I think alot of people throw that childish term at someone because the dont even know what it means. A fanboy is someone that hates another console , types words like 360 blows and then leaves. They type dumb one liners , camp out stores to buy a rival console they hate and video tape themselves beatin it with bats and puttin it on fire. just because I like a certain brand give nobody a right to lable me that if you want to call me anythang call me a consumer that likes games for Sony and I shall do the same. what is funny is the fact that I like Halo also stated I want a Wii and also stated I want a 360 in recent post. So if I dont agree with somethin I have a right too without being lable a gayish term as fanboy-man or whatever. the only Fanboys I see are the ones calling everyone else Fanboys and calling people Fanboys is childish

21. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 7:29 am

    21

    Someone who is biased towards something, and won’t change their mind no matter how much better something else is, is a Fanboy.

    Take AMD and Intel for example, some people are sticking with AMD’s only because they are biased towards the brand, but really there is no reason why an Athlon 64 is better than a Core 2. Sure, some people might stick with Athlon 64’s simply because they don’t want to upgrade their motherboard and/or ram, that’s not being a fanboy, but in other cases, it is.

    Being biased towards genres is another thing, some people simply wont play an RPG, which is just stupid, because there are many many different types of RPGs out there with very different experiences. Personally I’ll play any good genre out there, every genre has a great experience.

    Being biased or being a fanboy is pointless.

22. greenthumb

    December 8th, 2006 at 8:27 am

    22

    yeah see that is were I was getting at lmfao if I was a fanboy I wouldnt have ever played Halo or would do anythang in my power to say Gears of War does not look good when the game looks amazing. I would agree if I saw a difference in those pics but I didnt im been honest. lol now if I was like 15 saying the the Ps3 pics look better then thats when you would say your a fanboy. I will state if a game looks better on another system also I even know that the 360 is haven a hell of a year it has the best games out and most library of games . the Ps3 is not even on its feet yet I would be nuts to say it is a better buy. fanboys find a way to hate on another console to not buy it like (I dont want the 360 because its white) or I dont want the Ps3 because I hate the front PLAYSTATION 3 it has the SPIDERMAN front lmao

23. Anuban

    December 8th, 2006 at 8:42 am

    23

    Umm to there is a big difference between brand loyalty and being a fanboy and by your definition — “Take AMD and Intel for example, some people are sticking with AMD’s only because they are biased towards the brand, but really there is no reason why an Athlon 64 is better than a Core 2″ –
    if you are sticking with a brand because it has been good to you and want to continue to stick with it because you trust it down the line you are still a Fanboy and I’m sorry but I just can’t agree with that. Now if a person started acting as Greenthumb said in the post before yours then they cross brand loyalty and become a fanboy. I stick with a lot of brands because they have always done right by me and not caused me any major headaches and I like them … pretty simple.

    I know for a fact that DOES NOT make me a fanboy. But as I continue to say people have their own opinions I just wanted to clarify where I stand. I have brand loyalty towards AMD for example and it has a lot to do with my experience with them and my trust in them vs the same for Intel. But I won’t bad mouth Intel though … I used their CPUs for a very long time. I am also brand loyal to Infiniti cars for example and wouldn’t consider buying to many others … so no I am no fanboy but I do have brand loyalty based on my experiences with the product.

24. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 11:17 am

    24

    I see your point of view. But these Core 2’s are just as reliable as any processor. It’s mainly bad chipsets you have to look out for, I think. When I bought my chip, which wasn’t long ago, I got it for around $500AUD, and it had much better benchmarks than AMD CPU’s that were $1300AUD upwards, you just cant beat that. Being 65nm, they’re also much more overclockable.

    I think you cant be loyal to any brand because they’ll always have their ups and downs. Intel has their big advantage for the moment, and when it comes time to upgrade my motherboard for a new socket again, I may very well just switch back to AMD. It all depends on how they’re going.

    Also, my Core 2 has been the most reliable platform I’ve had, and it’s been great. It even ran absolutely fine at room temperatures of 45C! That was a hot day. My old Athlon wasn’t usable on days like that, unless you underclocked it, and had a fan blowing directly at it. We’ll see how AMD goes when they bring out their 65nm chips, but they’re taking their time.

25. gus738

    December 8th, 2006 at 12:20 pm

    25

    NRG753 regarding the 360 being cheaper then the ps3 ? no youwr wrong why? simply cuz 400 for 360 plus 200 for hd-dvd = 600 and thats to compare true hd with the ps3 now whats missing here thats ooh yeah 40 more gb!!! so cheaper? i dont tihnk so . i have xbox 360 im trying to get ps3 so im not on either side of company….. greenthumb ps3 actually has the most or the best libarry its only a matter of time once the rest of the ppl have ps3 on their hands and start playing ps1 games ….

26. Anuban

    December 8th, 2006 at 12:26 pm

    26

    So they are taking their time … you say you see my point but then you follow immediately with how reliable the Core 2’s are and all the benchmark info you must realize I know of course. You know I research things before I speak on them. AMD could take two, three years … it doesn’t matter … Intel was way before them and yet they snatched the lead away for a very long time, which should really have never happened given the size and depth of technical expertise Intel possess’.

    So yes my brand is now AMD and I will patiently wait for their quad offering. I don’t need the fastest anyway … I’m not into bragging rights … I thought I made that clear. I like AMD hence I will stay with them until they demonstrate they can’t make really high quality products anymore. And I am certain their quad offering will be more than fast enough for all my gaming needs. Plus I truly believe that they (through the ATI purchase) will be the first too market with a high performance CPU/GPU combo chip. But like I said people have to get what they are comfortable with and if you are comfortable with Intel then more power to you.

    At this point we can agree to disagree about your feelings on brand loyality vs mine and leave this topic alone … at least between us since I DO believe you CAN be loyal to any brand you want to … it’s called picking someone and sticking with them. Much like you pick people … everyone has their up and downs and you don’t just leave them when they are in a down state … you stick it out.

27. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 12:52 pm

    27

    I meant I seen your point of view, how you were looking at it. And I wouldn’t compare technology or companies to people.

    I’m comfortable with both companies, I had AMD computers for years, and I know how great they are. I’ll never truly leave either AMD or Intel. But I never throw my money away on things, I always research on which brand is leading and what to go for. For years AMD always had the best performance for your money, but now it’s Intel’s turn. AMD will come back on top for sure, they’ve always taken turns with this.

    Also that’s one great point about that CPU/GPU combo, I’m very interested in what AMD’s going to do with ATi, and how these new chips will turn out. GPU’s are much more powerful than CPU’s, perhaps they will apply x86 instructions to them.. who knows. I’m also very interested in how that r600 will go.

    Yeah, you can be loyal to a company, but imho, there’s no point. I always like to see both sides of everything, and judge from there.

28. Anuban

    December 8th, 2006 at 1:03 pm

    28

    Okay fine … enough … we disagree … leave it at that … things between us have been fine … let’s keep it that way please.

29. NRG753

    December 8th, 2006 at 1:06 pm

    29

    Heheh, yeah

30. john

    February 10th, 2007 at 2:00 pm

    30

    one game that was launched on both was madden.and madden still looks better on the 360, there is the answer for anuban.

31. ICEMAN

    July 11th, 2007 at 5:42 am

    31

    The 360 has the best graphics cause it hs more pipelines and the launch titles look better and sharper!