You are absolutely correct. I played both the 360 and PS3 demos yesterday and they are virtually identical. The only visual difference is in some filtering settings it seems. You definitely cannot clearly say one is better than another.
I think the bigger effect on your DMC4 experience would be the controller, so pick whichever you prefer.
ummm, I loved gears, but I have to say that the story was just bleh, whatever. I don't think the story was important. I'm shocked they make books about it.
I'm playing Mass Effect now and man... if you want story, this is much much better. But for shooting, definitely go gears.
I don't think the game was too short. I hate it when games artificially make themselves longer by making you search for random crap or leave you hanging searching for where to go next... or worse, make you backtrack (... halo) through areas. Heavenly Sword kept you going, always seeing new areas and different scenes all the time.
I don't think The Darkness is really running at 1080p because I have both 360 and PS3 and the 360 version is definitely smoother looking. PS3 version has a lot more aliasing/jaggies.
Also although NBA 2k8 is 1080p, it doesn't look any smoother than the 360 version. I really don't know about this whole 1080p business, b/c 1080p games don't necessarily look better. They must be just upscaling lower resolutions to 1080p cuz the games do not look that great.
I don't really agree with their "state of the art" comment. They used a Geforce 7800 GTX which is by no means old, but I don't think it is state of the art anymore. The Geforce 8800's have been out for a while now.
Edit: I don't know when the paper was written, but the Geforce 7800 GTX may have been "state of the art" when the PS3 was designed.
I only skimmed through the paper, but I think the general idea is that you can use the Cell to do the same thing that the GPU would normally do for pixel processing. You could use the Cell to do this processing, freeing up the GPU to do other tasks. This might be more complicated shaders, more geometry, etc... This really makes me think that SONY may have originally intended the Cell to be the graphics processor and actually have no GPU. It's good that they didn't do that.
I posted this in the FIFA 08 comments, but did anyone else notice the jaggies on the PS3 Demo of Live 08? I mean it might run at near 60fps but it's clearly not as smooth and crisp as the 360 version. I was comparing both demos on the same TV and 360 version looks much better. PS3 version is full of jaggies. 360 has no jaggies and has a more steady framerate, less stuttering.
I doubt they would leave something like AA out so late in the process. AA does not come free and would affect the playability and framerate of the whole game. I think this is just the way the PS3 version of Live 08 will look. I'm hoping that 2K does a better job on the PS3 NBA 2k8 b/c I'll probably end up picking that up instead although Live does look great this year.
I haven't seen FIFA 08 myself, but I have downloaded both demos of NBA Live 08 on PS3 and 360 and run them both on the same LCD TV. The PS3 version definitely has a lot more aliasing issues. The 360 version is quite smooth and sharp. Even players legs at a distance look smooth. On PS3, you will see all these jaggies. Is this just what's going to happen with ALL EA Sports Titles? 360 version will be smooth and have solid framerate while PS3 looks jaggy and stutters? That really sucks. ...
Yeah... i tried the demo, and I agree that it sucked. It's the Unreal 3 engine, so it looks nice, like Gears-like graphics, but controlling the stupid vehicle is just frustrating. It's like wipeout or podracer but with better graphics and worse gameplay. The demo probably actually hurt sales of this game.
I don't really care too much about rumble. But I really hope they make the controller sturdier. The dualshocks on PS2 were very solidly built. But the PS3 sixaxis feels like it's gonna break if you squeeze or twist it too hard. I would rather it be heavier and sturdier than light and fragile.
I mean just look at the shots. They show that the PS3 and 360 are very on par in terms of graphics ability. The main differences we're seeing are subjective... some people like the 360 hdr blooming effect, while some think it looks wrong. Some people think lighting is not as bright in on PS3, but some would say it's more realistic. It's all subjective. I just think this game looks AMAZING on both platforms.
exactly... if you've played Madden 07 on 360 or PS3, it's about the same framerate as Madden 08 on PS3. They've had time to upgrade the 360 version to run faster. It would be nice to have on the PS3 but it doesn't completely destroy the gameplay like it seems everyone is making it out to be. It's still Madden. Hopefully, next year, PS3 will catch up.
was well known as being difficult to program for, but that didn't seem to hurt its sales too much. i agree it was smart of MS to get out early. They have better/more games at the moment. That will change.
quite a few people. Madden is one of if not the best selling, longest lasting game franchises in all of video history. So it's kind of a big deal when the PS3 version is somewhat gimped. It would have been nice if both versions were equally smooth, although most people will not care about the frame rate and buy it for whatever platform they have. Either way, it is a big deal b/c Madden will sell like crazy as usual every year.
360 had barely any games on it that warranted a console purchase at 8 months. It wasn't until 1 year that 360 starting getting some games (mainly Gears) that were really good. Give PS3 time. By Jan 08, if they haven't gotten some awesome titles, then you can say they're failing.
Once developers get up to par on PS3, then you'll see better games and better multiplatform games like Madden running at the same frame rate.
since I'd be paying like over $60 for it on ebay anyways, I'd rather get a remade HD PS3 version for $60. I hope the rumors are true.