Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'Playstation Consoles' started by driftking3, Dec 28, 2007.
is ps3's graphics better than xbox 360 or wii
and how good is online play?
Yes, the PS3's graphic potential [1080p] is greater than that of the Xbox 360 [720p] or the Nintendo Wii [480p].
The PS3's online system is free, but don't expect it to be as user-friendly as Xbox Live.
the online is free and by the sounds of things not to bad. atleast better thans wii's friend code BS.
Actually 360 can go up to 1080p as well
I was pondering that because I had heard someone mention it before. Then what makes the PS3 unanimously thought as having better graphics?
No idea lol
Maybe the thought of it costing more = better graphics. But im pretty sure there around the same.
probably all that blue ray talk...and people saying big words and stuff about its specs....
i don't think blu-ray helps the grpahics kuz blu-ray discs don't they hold like 100gb memory or somethin?
The ps3 does have better graphics because it has cell proccer.The online is great but not as good as the 360,but what can you expect for free.To be honest I owned Ps3 and 360 and i enjoy my PS3 more.
Let me first say that BD (Blueray) doesn't factor in +directly+.
Without getting into a complex technical discussion, let me see if I can answer this. When you say "graphics" there are several components of this that affect the overall graphic presentation.
When you're running around in a 3D world (like Halo or Assassin's Creed) there are several things that affect what you experience:
This is how fast the world is rendered - if everything slows down when there are more characters on screen, or when you enter an area with complex graphics (like lanterns, buildings, flags blowing, etc.) the experience (that's being simulated) is lessened.
The higher the resolution the more details can be rendered into the images/frames - higher resolution also reduces the "jaggies" on hard edges. The concept of anti-aliasing allows the system to blend the hard edges using gradual color changes so the effect is reduced! Anti-aliasing costs some performance.
This is a complex section that I sort of just combined for brevity - basically this is the final visual presentation of the rendered world you see - simple 3D models are shaded and finalized using something called texture maps. Think of like the old computer graphics where every surface is a solid color - that's without texture mapping. In the real world (and modern videogames) the surface of something like your arm (or your character's arm) has lots of varied color and material and things like hair and different level of reflection (your watch is might be super reflective, your arm dull).
Think of how light works in the real world - it reflects off of water, it partially shows through sheer materials. Same thing for something like smoke or snow which is thousands of small particles. How each of those react in a computer simulated world with wind, light, gravity, etc., changes the depth of your experience.
Whew! OK, how a videogame console is able to deal with those various elements is sort of what we call collectively "graphics".
So when people say something very broad like "the PS3 has better graphics" - what they're suggesting is the PS3 can handle one or more of the following better: effects, physics, framerate, textures, etc.
If a system can generate more effects and physics and texture detail while* sustaining 1080p @ 60 frames-per-second - we say the graphics are better.
Hope that helps (and I didn't get too technical!)
ps3 is the best graffics and online is free unlike 360 with is 100$ for online
go look at any video game website that reviews games. You will find that multiplatform games will be reviewed higher for the 360. Also, xbox live cost $50 a year i dont know where you got 100. And, to me at aroud what 15 cents a days for online play thats well worth it. If your serious about gaming i think youll be able to shell out 50 bucks for a year for gaming. When games cost 60 you can just subtract a game off of your list and your set.
im getting a ps3
ps3 has more potential, unfortunately for some reason multiplatform games tend to look nicer on the 360.
Pretty sure it's actually the fact that the processors are far better on ps3. 360 and ps3 have a fairly similar graphics chip in terms of quality. The 360's chip has amazing graphic architecture, which puts it on par with the ps3's chip. The reason that some multi-platform games have smoother graphics on the 360, is because it's alot easier to make games for.
In about a year or two, we'll see far better graphics on the ps3, solely because developers haven't had enough experience with the ps3 yet. It's just a matter of working out the system.
@ Busterbry: Can I have a link to an ign article where a multi-platform game has been rated higher on 360 than ps3? Something related to graphics.
ya ill go find one
so far madden got a 7.7 for ps3 and a 8.7 on 360
nhl 08 got a 8.6 on ps3 and 8.8 on 360
both got 9.4 on cod
oblivion = 9.2 ps3 9.3 360
orange box= 8.4 ps3 9.5 for the 360
do you want the links?
As others have said, the PS3 has more potential, but developers are lazy, and blinded by waves of money coming from MS, so they go for the console that isn't quite good (hardware wise) and later port the game to the PS3 without bothering to optimize it for the better hardware, which leads to the 360 games often looking better.
The online on the PS3 is nearly as good as Live, my only complaint is that there isn't a unified friends list, but I can live with that to save $50 a year.
Let me guess, you're getting those figures from GameSpot? *cough*bias*cough*
How can Oblivion be rated higher on the 360? They took time to improve the graphics for the PS3 version, so it looks a lot better, not to mention it comes with the expansion. I know Madden deserves the better rating on the 360 because it has double the framerate, (another show of laziness) but the Oblivion rating is ****ed, and I don't know about the Orange Box, or NHL 08 I haven't played them.
BTW I have both consoles, (PSWii60 FTW) and love them both. (not the Wii) Consider that before you go ranting off and accusing me of fanboyism. (it happens every time -_- )
Were they rated higher for their graphics being better, or for live? Because I doubt they were rated higher on 360 for the graphical quality, deffinately wouldn't go down like that on ign. The reason Orange box was rated so low, was because of technical issues... EA are responsible for their lazy work. I have Oblivion on ps3, it looks so much better than the 360 version. Again, framerates were the problem in both the sports games... a result of sloppy work.
Developers wont go that extra mile in multi-platform games, the extra mile being framerate... nothing more.
Sorry had to edit our your color setting - it was making me have seizures.
I'd clarify that "waves of money coming from MS" isn't as much some covert operation, as it is a simple (logical) business decision on the part of publishers: choosing the platform with a higher sales (would you rather sell into 50% of the 360 market or PS3 market?).
Also 360 development is quicker/easier - the MS SDK is better out-of-the-box and they've been able to leverage a huge community of PC based developers who know things like DX and the PC-a-like X360 architecture really well.
re: The underlined section - very true! Since I believe the 360 is the preferred development target (regardless of whether this is financially or technically motivated) games that originate on the 360 and are quickly ported to the PS3 are going to be lackluster. (when you start dealing with optimizing multi-processor code and even the multiple piplines of a GPU I can easily see how ported code would be incredibly de-optimized).