Oblivion, Better Graphics on the 360 than the PC.

Might want to get your facts strait before you start talking shit.

Morrowind probably wont be on the 360. Oblivion isn't Morrowind 2. Morrowind is the third game in the Elder Scrolls series. Oblivion is the 4th. As for it looking better on the 360... maybe for 3 months at most.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Might want to get your facts strait before you start talking shit.

Morrowind probably wont be on the 360. Oblivion isn't Morrowind 2. Morrowind is the third game in the Elder Scrolls series. Oblivion is the 4th. As for it looking better on the 360... maybe for 3 months at most.[/QUOTE]


O, I'm sorry, all fixed so you can feel better. I didn't say permanently either there, thats just something proving its power.
 
[quote name='redgopher']No console will ever be more powerful than a gaming PC.[/QUOTE]

Not for a long time, anyways.. meaning time frame, as in the console may be more powerful one day, but give it.. two months tops and the PC will beat it.
 
Actually, the chipsets are much farther along then what's out there now. Being utilized for graphics, that is. I'm not talking Quadro's or the developers' cards. LOL
But,... just like the CELL, they will be using the tech either before or after the initial launches.
$ony says it'll be in PC's before the PS3 hits,... and the whopping 48 pipelines on the 360 isn't gonna be so special by Spring time.

Nonetheless,... these consoles are much more advanced then the previous iterations. The thing with PC's is, they are totally flexible. If you say you hate keyboards and mice, there's always an adapter out there.
People just like the fad of a console. I know I do. They are pretty, cheap, and noncomplex. Perhaps not anymore though.
:)
:O
 
[quote name='drone8888']Actually, the chipsets are much farther along then what's out there now. Being utilized for graphics, that is.[/QUOTE]

If I went out and bought a GeForce 7800 GTX, I'd have a machine more powerful than a PS3.
 
[quote name='redgopher']If I went out and bought a GeForce 7800 GTX, I'd have a machine more powerful than a PS3.[/QUOTE]

You could go the SLI route and get two of them. :bouncy::bouncy::bouncy:
 
[quote name='redgopher']No console will ever be more powerful than a gaming PC.[/QUOTE]

Your right, no console will ever be more powerful than a gaming PC but guess what... no console will ever be as expensive as a gaming PC or as frusterating to play as a gaming PC. Sorry but I'm not really into computer crashes and loads of gliches. But thats just me.
 
At least I can fix a DRE (In the rare even my drive dies) myself without 1- voiding a warrenty, 2- shipping off my pc or 3- needing to pay $80.

My $80 8X DVDR drive did just crap out a bit ago. I replaced it for $60 shipped and got a Dual Layer, dual format, DVDRW 16X.

PC components get better and cheaper whereas console parts stay the same speed and price and are a bitch to get ahold of.
 
Thats retarded. One main reason PC will always be the higher graphics.... and why a graphics card cost 500 and an xbox cost 200... RESOLUTION.

Tv's see at a rez of something like 240 x 320.... and even the 1080i Tv's dont see anywhere near a rez of 1280 x 1024.

THe PC will always be stronger... thats a fact.
 
[quote name='momadaboo']Your right, no console will ever be more powerful than a gaming PC but guess what... no console will ever be as expensive as a gaming PC or as frusterating to play as a gaming PC. Sorry but I'm not really into computer crashes and loads of gliches. But thats just me.[/QUOTE]

Its because you're too stupid to have a computer that doesnt crash. My computer never crashes.

And Expencive is what you pay when you want to buy the top of the gaming world.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Tv's see at a rez of something like 240 x 320...[/quote]
I digress, but I just wanted to point out that it's more than twice that. 720 vertical lines (by 480, I think, usually).
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Its because you're too stupid to have a computer that doesnt crash. My computer never crashes.

And Expencive is what you pay when you want to buy the top of the gaming world.[/QUOTE]

Please don't call me stupid. You don't know me. I'm not going to spend thousands and thousands of dollars so I can buy "the top of the gaming world". Sorry but FOR ME I'd rather be relaxing on my sofa with my big screen TV when playing my games then sitting on a chair playing on my computer. I can put up with the minor graphical differences. It's just my preference, but please don't call me stupid because you don't agree with me.
 
[quote name='momadaboo']Please don't call me stupid. You don't know me. I'm not going to spend thousands and thousands of dollars so I can buy "the top of the gaming world". Sorry but FOR ME I'd rather be relaxing on my sofa with my big screen TV when playing my games then sitting on a chair playing on my computer. I can put up with the minor graphical differences. It's just my preference, but please don't call me stupid because you don't agree with me.[/QUOTE]

This guy does have a point. Why is it whenever someone thinks console gaming is better, it always follows a hailstorm of shit? It's his opinion, his option, and maybe for him it is better.
I have a decent PC, Athlon 64 1gig ram Radeon 9800 Pro (yeah, it's old, but still a good card) 19 inch monitor, but even it's overkill since I mainly only play WoW on it. I spend most of my gaming money on consoles for the reason he mentions, I enjoy sitting on the couch and playing on a bigger screen with a sound system behind it.

What's better is up to interpretation of the player, I personally think Halo and Half Life are overrated, and I actually liked Dragon's Lair 3d....see what I mean? :)
Hard specs and paper calculations mean exactly jack shit when it comes to what you enjoy personally.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']I digress, but I just wanted to point out that it's more than twice that. 720 vertical lines (by 480, I think, usually).[/QUOTE]

Ah, but I regress... Thats a HD tv. Standard TV resolution is about 525 x 480. The broadcast can be higher, but that doesn't mean a standard TV will reflect that. You also have to take into account that TV is interlaced and has about 50 lines of just black. So it draws about 280 lines of a picture with 25ish black lines and then it draws the other half with more black lines.

A PC monitor can have a resolution of 2000x1600 and up non interlaced with no black lines.
 
I was under the impression this was about which was more powerful, which is a matter of fact as opposed to better, which is opinion.


[quote name='howlinmad']This guy does have a point. Why is it whenever someone thinks console gaming is better, it always follows a hailstorm of shit? It's his opinion, his option, and maybe for him it is better.
I have a decent PC, Athlon 64 1gig ram Radeon 9800 Pro (yeah, it's old, but still a good card) 19 inch monitor, but even it's overkill since I mainly only play WoW on it. I spend most of my gaming money on consoles for the reason he mentions, I enjoy sitting on the couch and playing on a bigger screen with a sound system behind it.

What's better is up to interpretation of the player, I personally think Halo and Half Life are overrated, and I actually liked Dragon's Lair 3d....see what I mean? :)
Hard specs and paper calculations mean exactly jack shit when it comes to what you enjoy personally.[/QUOTE]
 
I don't understand why so many people care about these minor graphical difference. Sure the GC was more powerful then the PS2... noticeably so? Hardly. The difference between a Xbox 360 and a top of the line gaming PC is the same thing.
 
Theres a few Design flaws in the xbox360
first xbox360
3 imbpowered CPUs @ 3.0GHZ
Multi-thearding is not here NO game uses it, Plus everyone knows what happen to saturn, Sega tired the same thing but failed(Sales wise), So your going to be seeing alot of off power being wasted. plus Northbrigdes slow down data flow alot(should have gone the way of the A64).
GDDR3
high speeds comes with latency issues. Great you allow developers to change amount of ram per comment great BUT theres a huge perfomce hit cause the GPU,Sound processor, CPU are all trying to access data, with only 2 entances, and a gate that has high latency.
 
[quote name='Animefalcon']Theres a few Design flaws in the xbox360
first xbox360
3 imbpowered CPUs @ 3.0GHZ
Multi-thearding is not here NO game uses it, Plus everyone knows what happen to saturn, Sega tired the same thing but failed(Sales wise), So your going to be seeing alot of off power being wasted. plus Northbrigdes slow down data flow alot(should have gone the way of the A64).
GDDR3
high speeds comes with latency issues. Great you allow developers to change amount of ram per comment great BUT theres a huge perfomce hit cause the GPU,Sound processor, CPU are all trying to access data, with only 2 entances, and a gate that has high latency.[/QUOTE]

Wow, how old are you, 12? First you need to get a decent education before you start to talk about the 'few design flaws in the xbox360'.
 
I fix PCs for a living
and do alot of programing on my spare time(in 16bit real mode)
Also from Memory address A000 to FFFFF is used for bios and 0 to 9FFFF is conventional memory (which isn't used at these's days), 100000 to 110000 is high memory. only 110001 and higher is being used today's programs
 
[quote name='Animefalcon']Theres a few Design flaws in the xbox360
first xbox360
3 imbpowered CPUs @ 3.0GHZ
Multi-thearding is not here NO game uses it, Plus everyone knows what happen to saturn, Sega tired the same thing but failed(Sales wise), So your going to be seeing alot of off power being wasted. plus Northbrigdes slow down data flow alot(should have gone the way of the A64).
GDDR3
high speeds comes with latency issues. Great you allow developers to change amount of ram per comment great BUT theres a huge perfomce hit cause the GPU,Sound processor, CPU are all trying to access data, with only 2 entances, and a gate that has high latency.[/QUOTE]

No offense dude but wow... just wow. Don't list "design flaws" unless you really know what your talking about. LOL... Thats all I'm going to say.
 
[quote name='Animefalcon']I fix PCs for a living
and do alot of programing on my spare time(in 16bit real mode)
Also from Memory address A000 to FFFFF is used for bios and 0 to 9FFFF is conventional memory (which isn't used at these's days), 100000 to 110000 is high memory. only 110001 and higher is being used today's programs[/QUOTE]

Congratulations. You have a basic understanding of a PCs ram layout. That has exactly dick to do with a) The subject at hand and b) how the 360 will access ram. Throwing in random bits of useless info to give the impression you know what you're talking about only makes you look like a jack ass- doubly so when it has no real relavence to the subject matter.

As for multi threading, you are correct in that a lot of games don't take advantage of it. However, thats only when talking about PCs. Multi threading is fairly new and only a handful of PC games are coded to take advantage of it. The amount of PC games that support multi threading are sure to increase because Intel and AMD are moving to multiple core per chip and it will become standard soon.

As far as, "Multi-thearding is not here NO game uses it," this statement only serves to make you look like an idiot for two reasons. Reason 1- composition alone sets of redflags about your intelligence. Reason 2- These games are beiong designed to work on the 360 system. Meaning, they will most likely support multi threading seeing how I doubt MS would spend money to put 3 dual core chips into a machine that would only utilize 1.

Again, congratulations on being a 'pc tech' (*note* geek squad doesn't mean you're a tech), however, I must inform you that that in no way makes you any sort of authority on the 360.
 
Yeah don't act like you know what your talking about when your really not very familar with the subject. It just makes you look like an @$$.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top