Posted February 19, 2006 More like PS3 > 360 >>>> Rev spec wise and PS3 ~ 360 > Rev visually. Anything claiming that the Revolutions beats the PS3 or 360 on any point whatsoever (except efficiency) is not true. Errr...dude... The Dreamcast was "better than PS2 in some areas". I think it was Textures... So it's quite possible that the Rev will be better in some small field of graphics... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 I COuldn't give a tiny rat's to be honest. The graphics could be Spectrum style and i'd still buy it, though i would be dissapointed.. I imagine there may be some graphic part of it that may be better than '360 or ps3, but if there isn't, i wouldn't get too hung up on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 All the talk of power doesn't really bother me, it's going to be better than the cube, so who cares, personaly i am yet to see a game with better graphics and effects than on metroid prime, when the rain hits you viser, it looked so nice, and better than anything i have seen on the 360 (running on hd) so far... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 i agree with you mario114, i mean look at the zew zelda. i mean think of something 2 to 3 (if thats true)more better looking than that, i say it would look awesome. its not the numbers that makes a difference to me, its visually for me. knowing that the rev will do 2 to 3 times more powerful mean nothing to me. i want to see something before i judge it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 Errr...dude...The Dreamcast was "better than PS2 in some areas". I think it was Textures... So it's quite possible that the Rev will be better in some small field of graphics... The gap's bigger than that. The PS3 and 360 are insanely powerful and the Revolution just isn't. Sure there might be a few small things it can do better (like if it does have hardware displacement mapping) but the overall brute force the PS3 and 360 are displaying is not something I see the Revolution matching. Look, I'm not saying the Revolution has sucky graphics but these articles are building up the wrong hopes. Graphics are not the Revolution's thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 Who gives a shit about some textures or pipelines or depth or all that crap in graphics real people care about 2 things. How does it look (generally) How long does it take to load. We're not in the era of hopups that plagued racers on the PSone, textures are deep and graphical capability is peaking much like processor performance has hit 'the wall' None of us our techies really.. none of us can distinguish such frivolities.. so why are we even talking about it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 If it can display hdr-lighting on bump-mapping than everythings ok with the graphics... If you look @ games like "prey"...that´s all what makes them superior graphicswise... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 19, 2006 The gap's bigger than that. The PS3 and 360 are insanely powerful and the Revolution just isn't. Sure there might be a few small things it can do better (like if it does have hardware displacement mapping) but the overall brute force the PS3 and 360 are displaying is not something I see the Revolution matching. Actually if the graphics chips are optimised to do a certain technique, it will handle the technique just as good or even better then the more powerfull X360 and PS3. Take for example lighting and water effects: the gamecube was optimised for it and the effects demanded less power than on the PS2 and Xbox. I wonder what Splinter Cell would have looked like if it pushed the cube graphics. It could have looked as good as the Xbox version. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 DCK i disagree, the 360 isn't insanely powerful, as a reader said in last month's NGC "so microsoft's revolution isn't inside their own hardware but inside the tv's". besides. i've seen 360's in action, even on HDTV and i don't care for it, look at the way the DS has trounced the PSP. performance IS hitting a wall, and making a basketball player sweat real-looking sweat isn't gonna enhance anything for me! however, bouncing a virtual ball with the revo controller will! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 If it can display hdr-lighting on bump-mapping than everythings ok with the graphics...If you look @ games like "prey"...that´s all what makes them superior graphicswise... And THAT is the exact problem. NVIDIA + ATI announce a few new features and suddendly every game has to have those. Especially in the PC market this is quite common because that is the main reason to buy a new GFX card every 6 months for a big majority. Few years ago it started with lens flares and all of a sudden every game had those unrealistic and exagerrated circles when you looked up into the sky. NEW GPU = OLD GPU with MHz+, 2-3 "new" features, more RAM. Does anyone remember the "Voxel Engine" from Novalogic or the Game "Outcast"? It could put huge landscapes onto your monitor but without GPU support the CPU had to do it. It was a really great technical step forward but we are still stuck with "polygon accelelerators" instead of true geometry GPUS combined with conventional GPU abilities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 The revolution wont be better Triforce nooblar.. it costs less.We've gone over this already. Sorry if I'm repeating what you already went over, but doesn't a Gamecube generally cost less than a PS2? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 I definitely think Nintendo has come up with some hardware that delivers more power for less money. Not that it will be more powerfull than X360 or PS3, but i belive it will show better graphics than we expect from the raw specs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 I need the Revo more than ever!!! And Twilight Princess has been delayed to next autumn!! my Cube's kinda needing fixed soon too I think I need a hug... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 You can have a hug after changing your signature dude.. it's too big. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 20, 2006 soz dude but didnt have to have a spaz....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 21, 2006 And THAT is the exact problem. NVIDIA + ATI announce a few new features and suddendly every game has to have those. Especially in the PC market this is quite common because that is the main reason to buy a new GFX card every 6 months for a big majority.Few years ago it started with lens flares and all of a sudden every game had those unrealistic and exagerrated circles when you looked up into the sky. NEW GPU = OLD GPU with MHz+, 2-3 "new" features, more RAM. Does anyone remember the "Voxel Engine" from Novalogic or the Game "Outcast"? It could put huge landscapes onto your monitor but without GPU support the CPU had to do it. It was a really great technical step forward but we are still stuck with "polygon accelelerators" instead of true geometry GPUS combined with conventional GPU abilities. It´s because directx and other standarts...it took this way but could have been anotherone too! But massive bumpmapping really enhances the visuals of a games... outcast looked cool, but voxel-techniques are common Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 21, 2006 Actually if the graphics chips are optimised to do a certain technique, it will handle the technique just as good or even better then the more powerfull X360 and PS3. Take for example lighting and water effects: the gamecube was optimised for it and the effects demanded less power than on the PS2 and Xbox. I wonder what Splinter Cell would have looked like if it pushed the cube graphics. It could have looked as good as the Xbox version. It's great that displacement maps can be generated to on-screen quicker than it would on the 360. It'd be great if there'd be better water effects. But that doesn't mean the PS3 and 360 wouldn't be able to do it. The 360 and PS3 GPUs are capable of pushing polygons and mapping textures and do anti-aliasing much faster than the Revolution seems to be doing making the little jobs it can do well like nothing. The specialised jobs of the Revolution are only good for exclusive games and can't be used well for multiplatform titles - that's what you're seeing in Cube games, and the Revolution can't match the power of the 360 and PS3 like the Cube could in its gen. It's quite worrying for multiplatform support really. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 21, 2006 Voxel Technology is common but the problem is the calculating of it is not supported by modern GPUs! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 23, 2006 ...the Revolution can't match the power of the 360 and PS3 like the Cube could in its gen. It's quite worrying for multiplatform support really. Unless the rev becomes the standard platform and games are ported from there Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 23, 2006 we're gonna see a lot more original and exclusive games that'll sell anyway... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
