im wondering, are the graphics on xbox 360 going to get better? we already have slowdowns and such in most games, although i have no doubt that current graphics could be run at a constant fps with enough optimization, what im thinking is will they get any better? i mean the xbox is so simular to pc that surely the dev's have a pretty good idea of how to get the most from it from the word go, unlike the ps2 for example wich just kept getting better as the dev's adapted to its hardware. saints row for example, runs like sh!t. and i dont care what anybody says about it only being a demo, theres no way we are goign to see a constant fps in that game when its released. I cant really remember seing any huge improvement in xbox 1 games as time went by, but i do remember their fps getting to a point of being just plane shocking, will the xbox 360 go the same way?

you don't remember any improvement in xbox graphics as time went by? did you play halo and halo2? while those might be the most overused examples of all time, thats an excellent example of a game that came out near the beginning of the systems life and near the end, and there is a major visual differance.

also, the 360 is less like your common PC then the xbox was. it uses an entirely differant architecture. the xbox used a customized pentium chip, and this isn't the case with the 360, that (if you ignore the differant GPU as that also complicates things) is why the emulation isn't perfect on the 360.

bottom line, the games will definately get better once the dev's get used to programming for the 3-core processor of the 360 and learn how to take full advantage of the ATI GPU.

Sorry, but that is a crap example. Halo 1 had better lighting and didn't have those stupid pop-up graphics that made GTA III look great compared halo 2.

Now Halo vs Ninja gaiden, that is how graphic have improved on the xbox and that is 100% stable fps.

i think halo2 looked much better then the first halo, and i used it as an example because its the same series, same characters, so its easier to see the differance in how the graphics are improved as opposed to how the developers style is differant.

not argueing with you though, ninja gaiden was an awesome game from a gameplay perspective and it was damn impressive graphically as well.

I think a great example of graphic improvement would be a launch game such as Halo or Bloodwake or some other game, and then one of the best looking games such as Ninja Giaden or Riddick.

Black and the Burnout series.

No it is not a crap example and you are dead wrong in your facts. this may be your opinion which is fine but the fact is that halo 2 incorporated a more accurate lighting system as apposed to halo's mostly prerendered lighting model. and yes while the pop-up was distracting at times, at a whole, the graphics of halo2 creamed those of part 1 and to compare them to GTA3 is just sad and shows how biased you really are.

halo vs NG is a stupid comparison because you are talking about two totally different game types and art styles. while both graphically beautiful and uses the xbox to serve their own purpose, there is nothing really more you can compare them by.

if you want a REALLY good comparison to the graphical evolution of the xbox just look at the splinter cell series. each entry in the series was a graphical knockout at its release and SC:CT was as close to next gen as we got in the last generation and still can hold its own to this day. just look at how vastly improved splinter cell chaos theory looks over splinter cell one.

[Splinter Cell 1]

[Splinter Cell Chaos Theory]


however even though that is a good example i would expect 360 games to improve much more then that. you have to remember that we are dealing with vastly different architecture that has just now caught on in the gaming scene. yes while multi-core workstations have been around for a while, developers have never really hard-coded their systems to run on these architectures which explains why multi-core coding is still in its infancy. Not to mention techniques like precederal synthesis which is used to such a minimal extent that its almost non-existent, then there is to consider that the 360 has unified shaders which i am sure developers will learn more and more of especially when unified shader engines becomes the standard in the coming years because of Vista.

i would imagine this generation of all systems (not just the 360) to be like the 32-bit generation where we will be seeing games that we would never imagine on these systems. so yes games will improve dramatically, to compare pre-release developments (like saints row) to a game that will come out next year and you will see them as night and day. just look at how far CoD3 looks over CoD2 with just a year's difference

Lets just hope that is as fun as CoD2 (with infinity ward not developing it has me worried). And i am still not convinced that the graphics are better. I hope they will be.

Halo 2 had overall better graphics then halo 1 did, but hal 1's textures were much better then halo 2's, and most all other xbox games. Which one was more fun? Now that's entirely subjective and off topic, and you all already know my opinion on that.

yes they will get alot better

Splinter Cell is an execlent example... so is PGR to PGR2... Burnout and Burnout Revenge.

Compairing two games from different franchises don't make good examples simply because too many people can't understand the difference between graphical improvements and art direction...

The Xbox 360 has more developer support and more complex hardware. I can almost guarantee you'll see more dramatic improvements in the graphics throughout it's lifespan then we saw on the Xbox 1.

i find it hard to see how the graphics are not MUCH better. looking at the texture detail, particle effects, smoke, destructive environment, character detail, and so much more makes me VERY excited for CoD3.




if i wasnt at work i would be able to find better pics of both, but you get the idea

See, that CoD3 screenshot does not look all that good to me, and CoD2 looks much better on my display then the MP CoD2 screenie you posted (and i understand that was just a quick screenshot you could find at work); textures look horrid compaired to what they actually look like for me. That looks like, or worse then an xbox 1 game. That screenshot is just a bad all around representation of what CoD2 actually looks like in 720p.

Here's a better screenshot:




If CoD3 looks even a bit better i'll be happy, but as of yet (i've seen all the screenshots and movies) i'm not convinced. It also could be that i don't fully trust screenshots anymore. A screenshot often times looks better then what a game actually looks lik in motion, and visa versa. In CoD2 case, it looks much better in motion then what the screenshots protray.

what was that suposedly super fps that i saw a movie of? was running on some beasty system on pc, was like in the jungle, everything was destructable..... what was it called :S

is it coming to xbox

Crysis?

PGR - PGR2 = great example, first was early in consoles life (wasn't it?) and to be fair looked balls in comparison to the second. (first handled better though )

Yeah that first COD2 screenshot is massively unfair on the game. When I saw COD3 I did think it whooped the shite out of COD2 (despite a lack of an actual game to compare it to) - but the more you play the second game, the more you realise and notice its beauty. Its f*cking sick - FAR more fun than halo (and I used to be a massive fan of that - tho i think i share foe-hammers opinion......) I get a nasty feeling Im going to be pissed off with COD3.....

Just look at some of the games coming out and compare graphically to others in the genre - PDO to crysis/BIA/R6 vegas ---- and those are coming out soon. Or even one of the (supposedly.....) best looking games currently - GRAW - VS gears...

Nick
ps - think that King knew it was crysis, but damn thats a nice pic.... Now if only there was a gun and display there too - thats not ingame is it? Ingame that iv seen looks nice, but not that nice (maybe it was the shit quality video.....)

yes thats in game. i would also expect the game to look better then this when its released as it will be one of the first games to take advantage of directX10 features.

jesu...... that would be nice. Is it officially announced? last time I looked it wasn't; but then again it makes sense for it to be released (much like ut2k7 but more so )

btw, when people say the 360 only supports some direct x10 features - is the difference major, or just the ability to produce various effects *like* HDR? Don't know much about it at all - Directx was just another one of those bastards I had to install to play a game on my piece of shit pc back in the day....

could direct X be upgraded through live?
im not sure of the extent M$ can update the system via live

needless to say far cry never played well for me...the game was jsut...idunno ....lame?
it just didnt challenge me or engage me enough to keep my attention...it looked nice but thats not enough

well from what i understand the 360 does not run on an actual "DirectX#" but the architecture of the GPU is "way beyond shader model 3.0 and directX9" as MS would put it.

basically this means that they incorporated all of the features that they could from shader model 4.0 and direct X10 but did not have them fully developed enough to include all of the features in the 360. also to further help the compatibility, directX10, through Vista, is pushing unified shaders in a huge way so that it will become the next standard. unified shaders is something the 360 does which again would help.

so knowing all of this, i would suspect it would be far easier to port crysis (or any other directX10/Vista game) to the 360 rather then the ps3.

I thought I read that crysis was definately coming on ps3 (most likely absolute balls, but i remember thinking that it was an odd announcement given that it was a vista game) but i couldn't find reference to a 360 version.

oh well, ill stop being lazy and look it up in a sec... cheers for the explanation though