How will the PS3 fare against the Xbox 360's Halo 3 release?

cerebrex said:
Yes, optimizing is key. The argument earlier in the thread over polycount is ridiculous, theres no need for a car to be that poly intensive now that normal mapping allows for unlimited polys in the high res model. This is right up my alley as I'm working on an as of yet unannounced racing title for X360/PC - and our poly counts are no where near 100k per vehicle, and the vehicles look fantastic due to proper normal mapping/shader application.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the corroboration, sir. I work with a lot of folks involved in the design process so I know a smidgeon about it, but it's always good to hear from someone working in the field.
 
Stereophile said:
I follow what you're saying, if the graphics assets are well designed, it can look as good or superior despite there being less actual 3d objects to render. But I don't think there is any question Polyphony is pushing PS3 hardware closer to its potential than what bizarre did with PGR4. GT5 is drawing frames twice as fast and at a much higher resolution. I don't buy the argument that it's solely attributable to the art design, that GT5 can run so much smoother, just because the textures are so well made - that they're not in fact using more computational power than PGR4 utilizes on X360.

Polyphony is simply far ahead of the curve compared to other developers. Eggebrecht said they used less than half of its potential in Lair. Insomniac predicted in future PS3 titles, they'll be able to push 3 times as much data as what they accomplished in R+C Tools of Destruction. GT5 looks good because, while they're masters at efficient art design, they're also in fact getting more out of the HW than any racing game has extracted from the X360. It makes sense. They should be considering Polyphony is one of Sony's own studios. I doubt anyone has the same familiarity and finesse with the PS3 hardware. I don't think GT6 will be a huge leap. Much like GT4 wasn't a huge leap over GT3. GT5 will push the PS3 hard. X360 racing games probably have more room for improvement. Maybe in a few years, after cerebrex's game comes out, X360 will have a racing game that looks as good.
Click to expand...

The reason you don't buy the argument on the importance of Art Design is simple: You don't know anything about it. As another poster stated, using methods like Normal Mapping effectively gives you the "look" of using several MILLION polygons while only needing to actually *calculate* for a few tens of thousands. That savings translates to an ability to include better textures and more raw numbers of models (say, for instnace, crowds, or obstacles, or more detailed environments), possibly better physics, AI and so on. Memory and CPU management is critical, and a highly efficient Art design process can free resources for all kinds of other things that all contribute to making a great game. Conversely, a sloppy art design process can bring even the most efficient code on the most efficient hardware (and let's face it, neither PS3 nor 360 are terribly efficient hardware) to a performance crawl.

What you have with Polyphony are a team of good programmers and SUPERB art directors/staff. They do a whole lot with very little, as any of the GT games on PS2 should prove unequivocally.
 
InorganicMatter said:
LAWL! You do realize that MGS2 has been out literally twice as long as Halo 2, right? Since we are considering long-term (a game from 2001is, after all, a long time in technology), take a look at these numbers in a few years doing some simple math:

Halo 2 will surpass MGS2 is total sales by next year
By the year 2010, Halo 2 will have sold 13 million copies, while MGS2 will have sold 10.5 million

Yeah, you have to consider these things. ;)
Click to expand...

you have to consider sales of a software don't really matter about how long a game is out especially with a console. No one is rushing out to buy MGS2 these days and if they do, they are probably buying a used version taking away sales from Konami or some other developer. Sales don't go into the " milllions of sold" each year catagory.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
The reason you don't buy the argument on the importance of Art Design is simple
Click to expand...

Don't misquote me. I said I don't buy it's the sole reason. :rolleyes: You're a sys admin, not a graphics programmer, so get off your high horse.
Yes, their superior art technique contributes to why they can display 1080p 60 FPS, but it's also because the PS3 is performing more math and extracting more from all its computing resources than X360's racing games. It's not just an illusion. GT5 is displaying more polys than PGR4.
 
cerebrex said:
Most likely the reason why it wasn't optimized is due to time constraints
Click to expand...

The game is not released yet. We know Polyphony are perfectionists. I'll say it again. You have no way of knowing that 200k polys per car is overkill. You realize that's for exterior and interior modeling ? You can say, I know I can make a good looking car model with less, but you can't say, Polyphony could meet their criteria with far less. You don't have enough information to do that, your experience notwithstanding.
 
Psychotext said:
I'm a huge halo fan and I bought a 360 last week (as did many others I know). We'll know soon enough from the NPD numbers if it made a difference or not.
Click to expand...

4 co workers of mine just bought a 360 for Halo 3.
 
Stereophile said:
Don't misquote me. I said I don't buy it's the sole reason. :rolleyes: You're a sys admin, not a graphics programmer, so get off your high horse.
Yes, their superior art technique contributes to why they can display 1080p 60 FPS, but it's also because the PS3 is performing more math and extracting more from all its computing resources than X360's racing games. It's not just an illusion. GT5 is displaying more polys than PGR4.
Click to expand...

Systems Engineer, actually, but I also work with a lot of graphics *designers* (graphics aren't programmed, it's an artistic process, the code is a separate affair handled by dedicated programmers, most of whom have little to no artistic talent whatsoever).

What you fail to understand is that when you use a technique like Normal Mapping for example, you're using the light and shadow values from a model that has, say, several million polygons, but you're applying them to a model that has several tens of thousands of polygons instead. What you're RENDERING is the several thousands of polygons, the *millions* of polygons worth of detail that are represented in the Normal Map are pre-calculated, meaning that they are not being rendered at display time. yes, it's an ILLUSION, but a cool one and it really does help the overall experience.

Chucking endless polygons at something doesn't make it beautiful, it just makes it bloated. You NEED all those tricks and yes, ILLUSIONS, to present something as attractive as possible while still retaining enough processing power to actually run the thing at a good framerate.

PS3 and 360 have VERY similar amounts of bandwidth, so it's likely that PGR4 and GT5 actually use similar polygon counts, assuming both are coming close to using all they can of the hardware's potential. In GT they have always put a lot more actual geometry into the cars than into the environments (and it works fine thanks to their extraordinary texturing abilities), meanwhile PGR's designers have tended to balance things a bit differently. Overall polygon counts are likely to be quite similar, but the allocation is very different. It's a shame you don't understand how this works, because it's really quite the interesting blend of art and science.
 
Stereophile said:
The game is not released yet. We know Polyphony are perfectionists. I'll say it again. You have no way of knowing that 200k polys per car is overkill. You realize that's for exterior and interior modeling ? You can say, I know I can make a good looking car model with less, but you can't say, Polyphony could meet their criteria with far less. You don't have enough information to do that, your experience notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

But his experience carries more weight than your lack of it, friend.

As I mentioned before, Polyphony's trend has so far been to allocate their polygon budget to their *car* models while using far fewer on their environments, opting instead for faking it with fantastic texture work. Nobody's saying there is anything *wrong* with this approach, there certainly isn't; the point is just that in both Xbox 360 AND in PS3, where you have a similar amount of bandwidth to play with, you're going to have similar--not identical--polygon budgets to deal with, and countless ways that you can choose to spend that polygon budget. My point is that spending 200k on cars versus 100k on cars isn't necessarily better, particularly when you factor in art techniques like Normal Mapping and environmental/crowd design and levels of detail. Hey, if you can make your environment look like 5 million polygons while only spending 500k, more power to you, *go* for it. If you have other goals for those poly counts, go for those.
 
Bowhuntr11 said:
Oh noez!!! The PS3 failed because of halo 3.... Oh NOEZ!!!! :p
Click to expand...

Now, now, only the stupidest of fanboys would say that. They're generally of the same mentally retarded ilk who think that MGS4 will guarantee PS3 kills 360. Neither view is particularly in touch with reality :)
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Now, now, only the stupidest of fanboys would say that. They're generally of the same mentally retarded ilk who think that MGS4 will guarantee PS3 kills 360. Neither view is particularly in touch with reality :)
Click to expand...

:D But they do say it on both sides. Each side has the stupid fanboys.
 
diehard said:
I think underlining "is" deserves at least posting a link with some proof.
Click to expand...

GT5 isn't out. We haven't seen poly counts for either game except for the car models. If you do the math, GT5 is showing 4.5 times as many pixels per second. Averaging out, if GT5 weren't pushing more polys, it could only use 22% of PGR4's geometry per scene to meet that performance criteria. Now we do know approx poly counts for the car models in each game. And we do know GT5 can have 16 cars on screen at once vs 8 with PGR4. Taking this into consideration, everything but the cars would need a ridiculously low fraction of PGR's poly count. I'm not an expert and unlike others don't pretend to be. But I think those facts speak for themselves. I'm sure other will disagree, but that's how I see it.
 
Stereophile said:
Polyphony has stated it takes them 6 months to model one car. That sure sounds like they took their sweet time.
Click to expand...
Just to model it? You're misunderstanding what they are certainly implying. What they probably mean is each vehicle takes 6 months from image acquision, modeling, LOD modeling, normal mapping, texturing, programming, implementation - total cumulative time from the different teams.

I enjoy good debate, but I don't enjoy being disrespected. In essence you're telling me that I don't know what I'm talking about, and you do. When in reality, it's my exact profession, and you are an enthusiast. You're coming from the stance that Polyphony must obviously know what they are doing, so my contradicting thoughts must obviously be incorrect. While I don't proclaim myself to be the master of all that is CG, I do find the statistics and data you're using as examples to be very difficult to believe. Now, either you're intentially being ambiguous with your comments, or you just don't understand how game engines work. When you said each vehicle is 200k polygons that may very well be correct, however that has zero validity in the context you used it. You were comparing the frame rates, resolution, and poly count of the cars, and then showing the FPS. A vehicle's highest LOD/Interior is not rendered during a chase scene, or a drive by, etc. Effectively, those vehicles are 200k polygons when you are in the garage viewing area, it will load all high poly models and converge them all, in a game you will only see the exterior high LOD if you are right up on the car, from a chase or driveby view, you're only rendering the exterior, and also active degradation is only bringing that full high poly exterior into scene for a brief moment as it passes close to the camera, while it will still maintain the high resolution normal map throughout, the actual poly count of the model changes effective to distance. So, unless you're doing your benchmarks from the garage your statement is very misleading. Since the industry standard is a 50/50 split on polycount on interior/exterior models most likely those are 100k poly vehicles in-game. You switch to the exterior it kills the high poly interior model, you switch to the interior, it kills the high poly exterior model... hopefully that should clarify the problem I've had with your statistics.
 
Stereophile said:
Well there must be some reason why the look of GT5's car models are on another level compared to PGR4.
Click to expand...

That's assuming his statement is correct, and I don't think it is. PGR3 had 96k polys a vehicle - I hardly doubt they kept the same polycount on the sequel. But, regardless... polycount is only relative to the sillouette and collision detection, outside of that the normal map is where your detail comes from.


PGR4:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bizarrecreations/499283848/

GT5:
http://videogames.techfresh.net/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/gran-turismo-hd-ps3-4.jpg
http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_image.html?G=5970&N=23
 
Bowhuntr11 said:
:D But they do say it on both sides. Each side has the stupid fanboys.
Click to expand...

Oh shit yeah, you can't hardly escape from the fuckers either, LOL. Try telling a fanboy of ANY platform that another alternative has the *slightest* bit of validity and you're guaranteed 3 pages of flamefest bullshit.

I do have to admit though....I kind of enjoy tormenting them from time to time :D
 
cerebrex said:
Since the industry standard is a 50/50 split on polycount on interior/exterior models most likely those are 100k poly vehicles in-game.
Click to expand...

Yes I stated that several posts back. 200k is for interior and exterior.

cerebrex said:
Yes, optimizing is key. The argument earlier in the thread over polycount is ridiculous, theres no need for a car to be that poly intensive now that normal mapping allows for unlimited polys in the high res model.
Click to expand...

How can you sit there and say arguing over a 200k or 100k poly count car is ridiculous. That there is "no need" for that many polys ? Clearly Polyphony believes otherwise. The car models in GT5 are much better looking than PGR4.

My logic is sound. The fact that GT5 is pushing 4.5x as many pixels around 1080P 60FPS vs 720P 30FPS (do the math), implies GT5 is processing more information. DMA and you are argue that's not the case. That GTA5 can perform better because it's actually throwing less data around per frame. That polyphony just takes more care in their art design, trading off poly volume for quality, so it looks as good. I don't think that's the only explanation. Clearly Polyphony has more skill than 99% of other studios. I don't see why it's hard to fathom they're using Cell and the other PS3 assets to exceed what has been computationally possible, thus far, on X360.

It's proprietary information, we'll never get exact figures of average poly counts per frame. I think both of your opinions strain credulity. The whole thread was flame bait. It's good to know you're an X360 developer, thanks for disclosing your bias. I'll admit to favoring PS3 and we know DMA hates Sony's guts. :D
 
cerebrex said:
I don't enjoy being disrespected.
Click to expand...

No disrespect intended. But I'm not taking your opinion as gospel, when you've never developed on PS3 hardware (correct me if I'm wrong) and had no role in the creation of GT5's assets.
 
Stereophile said:
No disrespect intended. But I'm not taking your opinion as gospel, when you've never developed on PS3 hardware (correct me if I'm wrong) and had no role in the creation of GT5's assets.
Click to expand...

And you continue to disrespect me over and over. Basically, to summarize, you just said I don't know what I'm doing, my theory is incorrect, I don't work for Polyphony.. etc.. etc. You state GTS5 is pushing 4.5x more pixels.. etc.. etc.. you don't even understand how games are designed clearly from what you just stated.

Now, you're targeting because I said 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous and unneeded... and guess what? It is ridiculous and unneeded. See, the real problem here is you're attempting to attack me based on that exact statement - however the real issue here is how misleading you are, and how you twist and change things around. I told you 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous in a game - and do you know why it really isnt ridiculous? --because they don't use 200k for a vehicle model in game - they use about HALF of that - almost the exact same standard we use in our title as well - and the same that PGR4 uses. You overstated your stats to make it appear that the PS3 was superior, and then you're trying to save face by saying it was in fact the interior and exterior full detail models - which do not exist simultaneously in any gameplay event.

See, what you did here is you mentioned these statistics, which is what I've been arguing the entire time:

According to B3D:
GT5 = approx 200k polys per car, 1080P 60 FPS
PGR4 = approx 75k polys per car, 720P 30 FPS
Click to expand...

Now, these statistics are completely false. You did not mention this was interior/exterior models combined (which never combines in-game - in in effect, that statement would be accurate in the garage viewing mode only). You also state PGR4 has 75k polys per car. PGR3 had 96k - that's clearly also false. But, you noticed that I was going to call you out on it, so you came back in a later post and stated that it was in fact for the interior, AND the exterior - in an attempt to cover your ass against the inevitable. But, now you've changed stories, now you're arguing pixels - no mention of polygons now. You're incredibly transparent in your arguments.

The reason I'm coming after you in this post is because I am just sick and tired of the uneducated fanboys - you can talk your bullshit to all your friends, but eventually you're going to run into someone like myself that really does know what they are talking about. You read things on the internet, you divide a number by another one and you think you understand it. It's so frustrating trying to argue with someone like yourself. You don't understand how normal mapping works, you obviously have no grasp over LOD optimizing, you're just firing off shit you really don't understand at all - and it's obvious. You're attempting to belittle me because I don't design titles for the PS3, and I don't work for that company - conveniently that's the only two things out of hundreds of bits of knowledge one must have to make an educated assumption about resource optimization in relation to visuals. What the real issue here is you're pissed off that I think your full of shit, and you want to discredit me because that's your only way out. I attempted to have a fair share of ideas here with yourself, but you're not interested in that. That's not what I made this thread for, and I would rather you don't bring any more of your biases and bullshit into this thread in relation to game optimization.
I created this thread to discuss marketing strategies between the two companies, and the future of the consoles in comparison. You came in this thread to try and belittle the Xbox owners using false statistics, and when someone points them out to you, you attempt to belitte them instead of admit your mistake, that's just disrespectful and unacceptable.
Believe it or not, I'm not biased in the slightest between these systems - as I've stated in my posts I own both a PS3, and an Xbox 360. Why am I working on a title for the Xbox 360? Because, it's almost a direct port from our core engine - much easier conversion than the PS3.
 
People are saying MGS will help sell systems, comparing its overall sales to Halo sales. The PS2 has sold, what, 3-4 times as many consoles as the Xbox. Yet Halo is just barely behind in total sales. This means that MGS is nowhere near the driving factor that Halo is, it simply had a larger base to draw from to create its sales.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Oh shit yeah, you can't hardly escape from the fuckers either, LOL. Try telling a fanboy of ANY platform that another alternative has the *slightest* bit of validity and you're guaranteed 3 pages of flamefest bullshit.

I do have to admit though....I kind of enjoy tormenting them from time to time :D
Click to expand...

Since we are exiting a long span of Sony domination in the console market, there are a large amount of people that don't remember a time before Playstation. Some people either grew up with Playstations or were primarily brought into console gaming by them. Sony did such an excellent job with the PS1 (mainly due to its simplicity) and also dominated with the PS2 that people developed brand loyalty. I think its a clash between those that remember Atari, Intellivision and Colecos then Nintendo, Sega, and NEC then the clusterfuck that was the introduction of the CD based systems, 3DO, Sega, Sony, and Nintendo and Atari going rebel and sticking to cartridges, and those that aren't used to the lead dog in the console market changing. Everything has been turn on its head now since the 360 has kept growing and the Wii is just leaving everyone in the dust. It's another interesting time in the console gaming market.
 
Defective said:
Since we are exiting a long span of Sony domination in the console market, there are a large amount of people that don't remember a time before Playstation. Some people either grew up with Playstations or were primarily brought into console gaming by them. Sony did such an excellent job with the PS1 (mainly due to its simplicity) and also dominated with the PS2 that people developed brand loyalty. I think its a clash between those that remember Atari, Intellivision and Colecos then Nintendo, Sega, and NEC then the clusterfuck that was the introduction of the CD based systems, 3DO, Sega, Sony, and Nintendo and Atari going rebel and sticking to cartridges, and those that aren't used to the lead dog in the console market changing. Everything has been turn on its head now since the 360 has kept growing and the Wii is just leaving everyone in the dust. It's another interesting time in the console gaming market.
Click to expand...

That's a good point also. I did intentionally exclude the Wii from this discussion because I really don't believe it is a next gen console - it has it's neat little spin on things, but the machine polarizes itself from the PS3 and Xbox 360.
 
Lets see, the Japaneese game developers and console makers have pretty much dominated the markets since atari went away in the old days. But i didnt see western society have the same rediculous discrimination against their products. The xbox 360 is clearly the best console with the best games at this time and yet japaneese refuse to buy it. Given Sonys attitude toward the west and toward their fans It puzzles me why so many people are so hard on for playstations when they have nothing but blu-ray which is really the only thing saving them at this moment, that and the stupid moms still buying ps2 in stores. I read a article on gamespy or IGN recently that interviewed the Dev of Dead rising, a highly succesful xbox 360 game, when asked if they would be a sequeel he said he didnt know because its so hard to get aproval for a western market game. What am i trying to say with all of this ? If microsoft doesnt succeed then basically no American or UK company will stand a chance. So im dedicated to buying xbox 360 games and stuff.
 
Erasmus354 said:
People are saying MGS will help sell systems, comparing its overall sales to Halo sales. The PS2 has sold, what, 3-4 times as many consoles as the Xbox. Yet Halo is just barely behind in total sales. This means that MGS is nowhere near the driving factor that Halo is, it simply had a larger base to draw from to create its sales.
Click to expand...

MGS2 was practically a launch title for PS2.
 
Netrat33 said:
:rolleyes:
Please stop posting without any facts.

Even this site http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=3774 show MGS2 sold quite well in the u.s. Just because it's not part of your world doesn't mean it is not a popular game. Even people don't know about MGS are talking about how good MGS4 looks.

No one is stating it's gonna be Halo 3, but it's a big system seller and must have game.
Click to expand...

It sold ok in the US, but was dominated by Halo 2. Most of MGS2 sales came from Japan and Other(whatever that is) on the chart. Whereas Halo 2 sales the vast majority were from the US. H2 6.5M in the US vs 2.2M for MGS2. H2 had more US sales than MGS2 had worldwide sales, MGS3 fares even worse.

http://vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=940
 
FlyinBrian said:
Given Sonys attitude toward the west and toward their fans It puzzles me why so many people are so hard on for playstations when they have nothing but blu-ray which is really the only thing saving them at this moment.
Click to expand...

While I agree the 360 does have the much better selection of games, the sole reason I have a PS3 and not a 360 is because the games I like aren't available on the 360 (Tekken series, Final Fantasy series, and in the future Little Big World). I'm not a MGS or GT fan although those are huge exclusives for Sony.

PS3 won't just "fail" because some people love the exclusive franchises. It's the same for people who buy Xbox for the Halo series and have no interest in the PS3 exclusives.

The BlueRay, Bluetooth, mouse/keyboard/third party accessory support, wireless networking, warranty covered 3rd party hard drive upgrades/Linux install, and Folding@Home were just bonus features for me ;) I actually did get the PS3 for the games and not the other stuff.
 
Xrave said:
While I agree the 360 does have the much better selection of games, the sole reason I have a PS3 and not a 360 is because the games I like aren't available on the 360 (Tekken series, Final Fantasy series, and in the future Little Big World). I'm not a MGS or GT fan although those are huge exclusives for Sony.

PS3 won't just "fail" because some people love the exclusive franchises. It's the same for people who buy Xbox for the Halo series and have no interest in the PS3 exclusives.

The BlueRay, Bluetooth, mouse/keyboard/third party accessory support, wireless networking, warranty covered 3rd party hard drive upgrades/Linux install, and Folding@Home were just bonus features for me ;) I actually did get the PS3 for the games and not the other stuff.
Click to expand...


Well, thats a good point in respect to exclusive titles. However, I really do think the addition of blu-ray was a lose-lose marketing decision for Sony. Not only did it scare away many potential customers with it's initial price, but also, it attracted a good number of customers that are not gamers, but wanted the best blu-ray player on the market. Now, there is no way to know just how many PS3's sold were purchased as a blu-ray player only, but regardless of that it can only weaken the already weak sales of the system. The actual sales numbers are used to calculate the expected game revenue - which is really the factor in a consoles success or failure. Because of what I mentioned, this will make that figure less accurate for Sony as it is for the Xbox. The Xbox doesn't suffer from this for many reasons, it's price, HD-DVD players are cheaper than the Xbox is, the Xbox doesn't support HD-DVD natively - only with an add-on - so that makes it easy for microsoft to track who is using their system as a movie player, and who is gaming. The PS3's sales are less than half of the Xbox, yes it's been out for less time - but the pressing issue is all the Playstation fans already own one - the hype is over. Now the sales are hinging on only the game library - and the expected titles for the Playstation are not as exclusive as they once were. All of their flagship titles have an Xbox equivalent (to whichever degree). Gran Turismo is a huge seller... but it's not due out until late 2008.. that's a YEAR from now! When the PS3 was first announced, people spouted "Wait for the PS3 to be released, just wait" it took so long that a lot of people just bought an Xbox 360. Now it's been released, and it isn't selling so well, so the tone has changed to "Wait for xxx game to be released, just wait." Now, these titles are being pushed WAY back... and the flagship releases for the PS3 seem to be trailing the equivalent Xbox titles. I honestly believe that this particular console - by the errors in Sony's marketing timeline, their library, and basically their ignorance in relation to their competition will be remember as a blunder, and ultimate failure. I really wish for the best for Sony, and the PS3... but I think the console has failed to prove itself as I had hoped it would, the sales in Japan will be as strong as ever, but I firmly believe their stranglehold on the US is coming to an end.

But, I'll still play my PS3 and enjoy it as much as I always have, but it's finally come to the time where I have to be realistic about what I've seen and come to that conclusion.
 
cerebrex said:
And you continue to disrespect me over and over. Basically, to summarize, you just said I don't know what I'm doing, my theory is incorrect, I don't work for Polyphony.. etc.. etc. You state GTS5 is pushing 4.5x more pixels.. etc.. etc.. you don't even understand how games are designed clearly from what you just stated.

Now, you're targeting because I said 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous and unneeded... and guess what? It is ridiculous and unneeded. See, the real problem here is you're attempting to attack me based on that exact statement - however the real issue here is how misleading you are, and how you twist and change things around. I told you 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous in a game - and do you know why it really isnt ridiculous? --because they don't use 200k for a vehicle model in game - they use about HALF of that - almost the exact same standard we use in our title as well - and the same that PGR4 uses. You overstated your stats to make it appear that the PS3 was superior, and then you're trying to save face by saying it was in fact the interior and exterior full detail models - which do not exist simultaneously in any gameplay event.

See, what you did here is you mentioned these statistics, which is what I've been arguing the entire time:



Now, these statistics are completely false. You did not mention this was interior/exterior models combined (which never combines in-game - in in effect, that statement would be accurate in the garage viewing mode only). You also state PGR4 has 75k polys per car. PGR3 had 96k - that's clearly also false. But, you noticed that I was going to call you out on it, so you came back in a later post and stated that it was in fact for the interior, AND the exterior - in an attempt to cover your ass against the inevitable. But, now you've changed stories, now you're arguing pixels - no mention of polygons now. You're incredibly transparent in your arguments.

The reason I'm coming after you in this post is because I am just sick and tired of the uneducated fanboys - you can talk your bullshit to all your friends, but eventually you're going to run into someone like myself that really does know what they are talking about. You read things on the internet, you divide a number by another one and you think you understand it. It's so frustrating trying to argue with someone like yourself. You don't understand how normal mapping works, you obviously have no grasp over LOD optimizing, you're just firing off shit you really don't understand at all - and it's obvious. You're attempting to belittle me because I don't design titles for the PS3, and I don't work for that company - conveniently that's the only two things out of hundreds of bits of knowledge one must have to make an educated assumption about resource optimization in relation to visuals. What the real issue here is you're pissed off that I think your full of shit, and you want to discredit me because that's your only way out. I attempted to have a fair share of ideas here with yourself, but you're not interested in that. That's not what I made this thread for, and I would rather you don't bring any more of your biases and bullshit into this thread in relation to game optimization.
I created this thread to discuss marketing strategies between the two companies, and the future of the consoles in comparison. You came in this thread to try and belittle the Xbox owners using false statistics, and when someone points them out to you, you attempt to belitte them instead of admit your mistake, that's just disrespectful and unacceptable.
Believe it or not, I'm not biased in the slightest between these systems - as I've stated in my posts I own both a PS3, and an Xbox 360. Why am I working on a title for the Xbox 360? Because, it's almost a direct port from our core engine - much easier conversion than the PS3.
Click to expand...


TL;DR, Polyphony is obviously doing something right. Don't get me wrong they both look good in their own respective ways. But the facts remain PGR 4 runs at 720p 30 FPS. While GT5 runs at 1080p 60 FPS with 16 online multiplayer, opposed to PGR4's 8
 
Sixthsense said:
TL;DR, Polyphony is obviously doing something right. Don't get me wrong they both look good in their own respective ways. But the facts remain PGR 4 runs at 720p 30 FPS. While GT5 runs at 1080p 60 FPS with 16 online multiplayer, opposed to PGR4's 8
Click to expand...


Is GT5 even out?
 
All you people talking about Polygons and crap like that can't forget that a Blu-Ray disc is a ton larger than regular DVDs.

40 gigs > 8 gigs for any game that you want to really be HD. DVDs were fine for last generation, but won't be as the games get more and more detailed and larger environments.
 
cerebrex said:
And you continue to disrespect me over and over. Basically, to summarize, you just said I don't know what I'm doing, my theory is incorrect, I don't work for Polyphony.. etc.. etc. You state GTS5 is pushing 4.5x more pixels.. etc.. etc.. you don't even understand how games are designed clearly from what you just stated.

Now, you're targeting because I said 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous and unneeded... and guess what? It is ridiculous and unneeded. See, the real problem here is you're attempting to attack me based on that exact statement - however the real issue here is how misleading you are, and how you twist and change things around. I told you 200k for a vehicle model is ridiculous in a game - and do you know why it really isnt ridiculous? --because they don't use 200k for a vehicle model in game - they use about HALF of that - almost the exact same standard we use in our title as well - and the same that PGR4 uses. You overstated your stats to make it appear that the PS3 was superior, and then you're trying to save face by saying it was in fact the interior and exterior full detail models - which do not exist simultaneously in any gameplay event.

See, what you did here is you mentioned these statistics, which is what I've been arguing the entire time:



Now, these statistics are completely false. You did not mention this was interior/exterior models combined (which never combines in-game - in in effect, that statement would be accurate in the garage viewing mode only). You also state PGR4 has 75k polys per car. PGR3 had 96k - that's clearly also false. But, you noticed that I was going to call you out on it, so you came back in a later post and stated that it was in fact for the interior, AND the exterior - in an attempt to cover your ass against the inevitable. But, now you've changed stories, now you're arguing pixels - no mention of polygons now. You're incredibly transparent in your arguments.

The reason I'm coming after you in this post is because I am just sick and tired of the uneducated fanboys - you can talk your bullshit to all your friends, but eventually you're going to run into someone like myself that really does know what they are talking about. You read things on the internet, you divide a number by another one and you think you understand it. It's so frustrating trying to argue with someone like yourself. You don't understand how normal mapping works, you obviously have no grasp over LOD optimizing, you're just firing off shit you really don't understand at all - and it's obvious. You're attempting to belittle me because I don't design titles for the PS3, and I don't work for that company - conveniently that's the only two things out of hundreds of bits of knowledge one must have to make an educated assumption about resource optimization in relation to visuals. What the real issue here is you're pissed off that I think your full of shit, and you want to discredit me because that's your only way out. I attempted to have a fair share of ideas here with yourself, but you're not interested in that. That's not what I made this thread for, and I would rather you don't bring any more of your biases and bullshit into this thread in relation to game optimization.
I created this thread to discuss marketing strategies between the two companies, and the future of the consoles in comparison. You came in this thread to try and belittle the Xbox owners using false statistics, and when someone points them out to you, you attempt to belitte them instead of admit your mistake, that's just disrespectful and unacceptable.
Believe it or not, I'm not biased in the slightest between these systems - as I've stated in my posts I own both a PS3, and an Xbox 360. Why am I working on a title for the Xbox 360? Because, it's almost a direct port from our core engine - much easier conversion than the PS3.
Click to expand...

Anyone as bent as you at demanding respect from anyone, let alone anonymous people over the net, has serious serious issues. How tall are you? Short man syndrome maybe? How much do you make? Small penis?

Seriously, we all know one of those people, always talking about how everyone needs to respect them for some unknown reason. They always turn out to be the biggest douche bags.
 
Stereophile said:
Yes I stated that several posts back. 200k is for interior and exterior.



How can you sit there and say arguing over a 200k or 100k poly count car is ridiculous. That there is "no need" for that many polys ? Clearly Polyphony believes otherwise. The car models in GT5 are much better looking than PGR4.

My logic is sound. The fact that GT5 is pushing 4.5x as many pixels around 1080P 60FPS vs 720P 30FPS (do the math), implies GT5 is processing more information. DMA and you are argue that's not the case. That GTA5 can perform better because it's actually throwing less data around per frame. That polyphony just takes more care in their art design, trading off poly volume for quality, so it looks as good. I don't think that's the only explanation. Clearly Polyphony has more skill than 99% of other studios. I don't see why it's hard to fathom they're using Cell and the other PS3 assets to exceed what has been computationally possible, thus far, on X360.

It's proprietary information, we'll never get exact figures of average poly counts per frame. I think both of your opinions strain credulity. The whole thread was flame bait. It's good to know you're an X360 developer, thanks for disclosing your bias. I'll admit to favoring PS3 and we know DMA hates Sony's guts. :D
Click to expand...

Your logic would be fine if your premise wasn't rooted in ignorance about the way this works. The Cell and Xenon are almost IRRELEVANT in that both Xbox 360 and PS3 have almost identical BANDWIDTH limitations. By definition, if your BW is limited, it really doesn't matter how powerful your CPU is/isn't, you're always going to be limited in the number of polygons you can push.

Making a beautiful game is NOT--let's make this clear--NOT--about how many polygons you can chuck down the rendering pipeline. It's about the way you use the polygons you have, what kinds of tricks you can use to present the illusion of more detail than is actually present (Normal Mapping, LOD and other tricks are ALL ways to make things run smoother and scale detail as appropriate). You're clearly looking at game design as a "brute force" affair, and that simply isn't the way things are done, nor should it be.
 
Netrat33 said:
MGS2 was practically a launch title for PS2.
Click to expand...

Uh, no, MGS2 launched about a YEAR after the PS2 came out. I remember because I had jack shit worth playing until MGS2 came out, forever cementing the idea in my head that getting launch hardware is almost never, ever worth your trouble and expense. Plus, of course, the piece of crap died 3 times in the first 90 days, LOL.
 
DaRat said:
All you people talking about Polygons and crap like that can't forget that a Blu-Ray disc is a ton larger than regular DVDs.

40 gigs > 8 gigs for any game that you want to really be HD. DVDs were fine for last generation, but won't be as the games get more and more detailed and larger environments.
Click to expand...

And Bluray has nothing whatsoever to do with how many polygons the system can render at once. Nice non-sequitor though :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top