Now thats how fucking Next Gen Games suppose to look , yeah!

AWESOME! Been waiting for any images/news on this

WHOA!

Looks awesome, where did you find those man?

I'm hearing these are fake....
I hope not!

just a wild guess.... but maybe xboxcore.com?????

These own PGR graphics..... I just wish all Xbox 360 games would look like this.

Thanks Infamous_One

Anyway, yeah I hope these aren't fake man it would be a shame.

Yup, now thats what i was expecting with this system. Just saw the perfect dark videos......NEXT. Just hope it doesnt take 2 years to play a game like Forza 2.

Theres no damn way those are real in-game screen shots. They look wayyyyyyyyyyyy to real/good. Just look at the damn tire threads! This looks miles better then anything currently displayed on next-gen consoles.

Hopefully i'll eat my words on this one............

WOW those are probley realy i mean forza was by far the best looking game on the xbox far better then most other and forza was just released its perrty fast they already have screens of next game

Those definatley look fake.

if you really look tho...
its not too far off from what were already seeing from pgr
mabe a better model
but they nailed the lighting and aa in this
forza is a M$ game and yeah you could say the same about gotham but forza is closer to M$ and no doubt will get more attention.

Its a nice render. It might be from some early work on the game design.

that is only a still shot we need to see in game footage before going bonkers over this even tho thats what i expect from next gen....i believe the 360 can generate the realism...in those pics.

It looks amazing. But I doubt that's in game. I hope it is.

the lighting affects make it look real i dont see why it wouldnt be possible to add this in real time...this looks like that post of a city and a pontiac gto can anyone post it to compare the pics...i think those grahpics are around the corner..

wedding shirt dont wet your pants....lol..do you really think gran turismo will even get close to this on ps3...i think not

be-a-utifull

Umm why don't you think GT on PS3 would even get close? As far as I am concerned, the xbox 360 will have lower Shader Models, seeing as ATI has no SM 3.0 boards yet and the x360 chip might be the first to get them. Nvidia, on the flipside, already has SM 3.0 and has for two generations of their GFX chips. They also already have HDR. Since, like you said, its just lighting effects, I think the Nvidia lighting effects will be miles ahead of anything that an ATI chip can do.

well from the looks of it you know your stuff as far as specs...i only say that comparing current gen with forza embarrasing a veteran in car sims..like gran turismo...so with news of a second title i am sure it will give them a run for the money and with that pic and the giant leap they made on xbox i dont doubt those pics one bit..

ps i heard something about the 360 having some shadding effects that means it wouldnt have to run at 60fps...

I was under the impression that after all is said and done, the r500 will be better with shaders than anything nvidia has in the pipeline.

notice i said r500, im not talking about current pc cards.

wrong impression?

oh well, r500 owns all, bow to it or die

unreal blasphemer!

Nvidia has always had much better shadowing. They have also always had better mapping. ATI only once, yes only once, made a board that had faster shaders (and only shaders) than a Nvidia counterpart. That was the r300 aka 9700pro. This chip is also known as the chip that ATI did not design. All I am saying, is that there is no doubt in my mind that the Nvidia RSX will have much better shaders. Unified shaders are only faster in theory, we will see if it is faster in real life after about a year of the console release. Based on the Xbox alone, Nvidia is the winner in my book. The effects that the xbox has are lightyears ahead of the PS2 and the Gamecube. All because of its GFX chip.

And deftech, the unreal engines are sweet, but engine alone doesnt make for a good game, I learned that one with DOOM3.


hugoboss1, yeah GT4 was crap compared to Forza, so I see where your line of thought was

engines have nothing to do with me liking Unreals, how little you know.

I will always buy any Unreal based game, and yes I liked Unreal II.

The first Unreal, and all the UT's that followed kick ass(although no UT's were as good as the 1st) I loved Unreal Champs and if Liandri conflict didnt hit so late in the lifecycle of the xbox, Id be playing it right now, the demo was excellent.

The only people I know that dislike Unreals are hardcore stubborn Quake'rs

Unreal for the win!!



r500 is king

I also hate quake, all of them. I take back what I said. Unreal Tournament 1 was great, but other than that, its just the same old shit with new GFX IMO.

I am looking forward to see the future splinter cell to see the effects on the supposed next gen's and since it will most likely be on the ps3 it will be great to compare both systems with that said the current xbox out performed the ps2 and many dissagree but its easy to tell what system was ahead...people comparing MGS4 makes no sence lets wait for a port and open the floodgates for debate..

I don't think it will be fair anyways, we all remember that horrid port of MGS2 to the xbox. What a sad day that was, the PS2 version looked better when we all know the xbox version should have.

thats why i dont trust 3rd party dev's because i wouldnt doubt they would screw up a game on purpose to make another system seem better....i think a sports game can probably show you who has better graphics who knows ..i guess like everyone says it has to come down to the game...as for me the online earns my respect..

Kojima the fugger would not take advantage of the 360 hardware so a msg 4 comparison would be futile.

good comparisons will be splinter cells, future recons, and UT 2007.

epic will max both out so itll be interesting.

any other games from any other devs and I see them liking or disliking one of the systems.

i think its entirely possible for GT on ps3 and forza to get this level. they are both powerful machines and i expect them to reach levels of realism.

also it is a fact the 360 will have technology beyond SM 3.0 it wont have all the features that SM 4.0 would have but it is far ahead SM 3.0. also i thought that ATI also had HDR lghting effects and such on there newer cards. i know Nvidia was the first out the gate with them, but if you think about how the updated source engine uses HDR and the source engine was built around ATI technology (in the same way doom 3 was built using Nvidia) it kinda makes sense to me. i dont think one will have better lighting then the other. with how powerful the cards both are lighting will be a common thing in the next gen when applied.

you cant compare the ATI technology in the gamecube to the nvidia tech. in the xbox. when the Gforce 3 was out that was clearly the superior tech. in the PC graphics card arena. many things have changed since then and ATI has not only played catch up but also surpassed nvidia for a time (the FX series couldnt keep up) now IMHO they are equal. they both reach high level of power maybe by some different techniques but still the same end result. also ,like now with the revolution, nintendo isnt willing to put the same level of money and resources in their graphics card like MS is, to them graphics arent as important.

Im just surprised a lower spec system like the gamecube (with an ATI chip installed) can produced utterly beautiful games like zelda and resident evil 4 that look better than the majority of xbox games. I guess its all about what you do with the hardware not what the hardware "can" do.........im sure the god of war devs will agree.

there's nothing on any consoles that looks better than SC: CT for the XBOX, nothing.

And Zelda? Please, windwaker is NOT very impressive, not at all. RE4 sure that's impressive, but it's just one game and it's still not as impressive as Splinter Cell: CT

Anyways, does anyone know where these shots originated? Is xboxcore saying where they got them??

Also comparing "shader power" is useless as the R500 hasn't been released, ATI is rumoured to have a new scheduling system that drastically improves shader efficiency, in addition the USA should(according to ATI) imrpove efficiency from 60-70% on traditional cards, to 95% with the USA.

Xenos > RSX
Cell > Xenon

Does anyone really give two shits anymore?

I want to know if these are fake or not!

I just hope these are real

well xbox360 uses windows longhorn technology.... which will use direct x 10...... and xbox360 uses a modified version of Direct X..... and the r500 uses unified shading, which nvidia will implement in their next geforce (8?).... the sony playstations video card is just a geforce 7 stuck in, and a little bit faster than the geforce 7 then u can buy for your pc, and the playstation 3 will use opengl. and wont use a modified version of directx .... so doesnt that cancel out some pixel shader APIs?

i dont know much of what enhancements come with each direct x version. you are right about the "RSX" GPU being nothing more then a over-clocked geforce 7. and the rendering software used for the 360 (Shader Model and Direct X) is ahead of what will be used in the ps3 so that is why i dont understand why people think that the ps3 will have better rendering quality then the 360. also, i never knew however that the ps3 used opengl.

I hope all of you do grasp that DOOM 3 was an OpenGL game, not a directx game. I might also add that it is still one of the best looking games on the computer to this date. Did I mention that it uses OpenGL.


The current directx king for the computer named Half-Life 2


And the opengl king, DOOM3

nothing says ps3 wont support DX,but nvidia has ALWAYS supported opengl and just been plain faster in the feild

and xenon>cell r500 +/- RSX in differnt areas

and remember kids cell will be doing polygon rendering while that means less power to AI thats more room for the RSX to roar

edit: deftones is right,and correct me if im wrong isnt the ureal 3 engine opengl based to


to bad i hate ps3 games and its controller

Unreal 3 engine supports both DirectX and OpenGL api's.

personally i think there is a place for each engine (source and doom3). but its hard to compare the engines because there are a few games that are using the doom3 engine and only a couple that use source. everything that is using the doom3 engine has a similar setting as doom 3 except for quakewars (which looks rather impressive) and the only other game i know to use the source engine is that crap vampire game (which looked like ass to me). to me none of it matters in the end as the number 1 engine now is the unreal3 engine and we know that the 360 pushes that engine mighty nice.

The first Nvidia cards with SM 3.0 was the 6800 series. The 7800 series is basically the same with more pipes.

While it's true that the X800 series didn't have SM 3.0, that's not the card in the 360.

The 360 uses the R520 which has BEYOND SM3.0 so your statements are inaccurate.

Further, the Fudo(R520) which will be the X1800 series of cards will be shipping in October and have full SM 3.0 support.

Did I say it was? I think not.

What statement? My statement was fully accurate. I shall recap them

"As far as I am concerned, the xbox 360 will have lower Shader Models, seeing as ATI has no SM 3.0 boards yet and the x360 chip might be the first to get them."

Did you catch that part in bold?

Thats right, the xbox 360 was already done, making it the first completed ATI chip with anything past SM2.0. Also the xbox 360 chip is the R500.

well its not entirely accurate. i get what you were trying to say but not only is the card in the 360 the first from ATI to get up to the level of SM 3.0 but its also the first from ANY card company to get beyond SM 3.0 technology.

also there is very little difference between the R500 and R520 core other then the customization that ATI put into the card going in the 360. ATI labelled them as different cores to keep the confusion down that the same card in the 360 would be the same/similar card going into the PC market. in the end no matter what ATI does the R520 core will be held back by being built for SM 3.0, where the R500 core in the 360 has been built based on tech. beyond SM 3.0. i also think that they came up with the 20 on to R520 because the PC iteration is coming out after the 360 card.

And can you explain what beyond SM 3.0 is? Last time I checked, the CineFX 4.0 engine of the 7800 series allows for an infinite amount of shader operations. What is beyond infinite? There are no harware limitations on both vertex and pixel shader instuctions sets length with the CineFX 4.0.

I feel left out so I'll chime in...

the R520 doesnt/wont have 48 shader pipes like the R500 does. That wont happen until the next iteration of Cores.

Ok I feel better

yum 48 shader pipes

im being honest when i say that of anything of graphic architecture i know the least of its SM. when i said beyond SM 3.0 i wasnt refering to the CineFX 4.0, i was talking about the technology is beyond SM 3.0, and uses some tech. from whatever MS is cooking up next. also if there is no hardware limitations with CineFX 4.0 then why did sony post their specs to have 98billion shader operations? its basically an overclocked 7800 in the ps3 so in theory wouldnt they been able to say infinite shader operations if they wanted to over-exagerate their specs even further??

hey deftones,look up articles on quality of SM 2.0B vs 3

majority show insignifigant differnences,and from my knoweldge ati has 2B in the 9800 series to....i belive

you guys have shading knowage

right now nvidia is kicking ati ass in the pc gaming market
i have a 6600 gt and the only game that runs bad is F.e.a.r.

wind waker is a cel shaded game with low poly counts its would look the same on the dreamcast

both systems are going to look great
as long as the jagges are gone forever im happy

jaggies arent gone....there reduced

Shader Operations per second and shader instruction length are two different things. Sure it can only do 98billion a second, but the length of the shader program can be infinite.

About the shader models. With 2.0 you are allowed 160 instructions for pixel shaders and 1024 instructions for vertex shaders. With 2.0B you are allowed 65,280 vertex instructions and 16 pixel shaders per rendering pass. With Nvidias second generation SM 3.0 engine (CineFX 3.0 being the first with CineFX 4.0 being the second) They allow for, like I said, infinite length shader instructions.