• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

wtf new ps3

disappoint

disappoint

Lifer
Maybe I'm a nub to consoles, well yes I am. But I just got a ps3 along with MLB 10 The Show and GT5 Prologue and I'm disappointed. The graphics are no where near as good as everyone online seems to claim they are.

Dirt 2 on the PC in my sig looks about 10 times better than GT5 prologue, and MLB 10 The Show first of all is not even 1080 res unless you force it to be, and the graphics just seem so ...bland. Even GT5 is bland looking. Heck I'd even rate GRID over GT5 and that's old compared to Dirt2.

Am I doing something wrong, is there a setting I'm missing or do console gamers just have low expectations when they rave bout how GT5 looks sooo awesome?
 
> HIS Radeon HD 5850

Your video card by itself costs about the same as a PS3. The PS3 has roughly a 7800GT from 2005.

Console graphics should be compared to other console graphics, not a $1,000+ PC.

Edit: here are some suggestions for a few demos to download, titles with nice (console) graphics:
Ratchet & Clank Tools of Destruction, Valkyria Chronicles, Uncharted 1-2
 
Last edited:
Lol.
Play GT5 when it comes out and tell me it looks worse than Grid with a straight face.

And as said above.
 
DaveSimmons said:
> HIS Radeon HD 5850

Your video card by itself costs about the same as a PS3. The PS3 has roughly a 7800GT from 2005.

Console graphics should be compared to other console graphics, not a $1,000+ PC.

Edit: here are some suggestions for a few demos to download, titles with nice (console) graphics:
Ratchet & Clank Tools of Destruction, Valkyria Chronicles, Uncharted 1-2
Click to expand...

Also worth noting that Dirt 2 is a DirectX 11 game, which has some extra eye candy features that OpenGL ES and DirectX 9 don't have.
 
PC graphics are much, much better than console graphics. It's just the nature of the systems. When you talk about a console gaming "looking incredible" it's always in relation to other console games.
 
GT5 is vaporware but seriously....what the shit made you think that a console would look better than PC?

But I'm pretty sure this is just a troll thread anyway...

Oh and GG paying money for a 2 year old demo.
 
"you are disappoint" - had to be said 😛

disappoint.jpg


Anyway, as has been said, console graphics can't match a modern PC. They can be impressive compared to other console offerings and good in general (Uncharted 2 for example), but a good PC game will always be way better looking.

Even standard console ports offer higher resolution textures and more details with better framerate and high antialiasing - all adding to the general term "better graphics". Other games offer more effects in addition to the above (DX11 Dirt 2 being an example - compared to the console version)
 
bl4ckfl4g said:
GT5 is vaporware but seriously....what the shit made you think that a console would look better than PC?

But I'm pretty sure this is just a troll thread anyway...

Oh and GG paying money for a 2 year old demo.
Click to expand...

I never said a console would look better than a PC. I just expected the difference to be less than it was.
 
DaveSimmons said:
> HIS Radeon HD 5850

Your video card by itself costs about the same as a PS3. The PS3 has roughly a 7800GT from 2005.

Console graphics should be compared to other console graphics, not a $1,000+ PC.

Edit: here are some suggestions for a few demos to download, titles with nice (console) graphics:
Ratchet & Clank Tools of Destruction, Valkyria Chronicles, Uncharted 1-2
Click to expand...

True, I realized this as well, that the video card alone costs as much as the ps3. I did not know the video card equivalent was only a 7800gt though. I guess I overestimated consoles being built to do 1 thing only, that is play games, gave them an advantage over PCs which are a 'jack of all trades master of none' sort of platform.

I mainly got the PS3 for the exclusives on it. Now I wonder why more games aren't ported to PC so PC users don't need a console...oh that answers the question I guess, to sell more consoles, although the companies are different but maybe they have deals going on with Sony to keep some titles exclusive.

Anyway, thanks for the demo suggestions I will try those out.
 
You should also consider the fact that the current generation of consoles are four years into their lifespan. Once the next generation comes out they will be equal to or better than contemporary PCs, at least for the first year.
 
Last edited:
Here you go-

http://www.smashingapps.com/wp-cont...alistic-Car-Render-using-3DS-Max-and-Vray.jpg

You want some decent graphics, get rid out that utter POS 5850 and get yourself a render farm. That isn't even top tier, you'd want to get something more along the lines of Maya with something like PRRenderman if you want to see some real visuals.

Now I wonder why more games aren't ported to PC so PC users don't need a console
Click to expand...

Console gamers are shockingly more likely to pay for their games then their PC counterparts.
 
disappoint said:
True, I realized this as well, that the video card alone costs as much as the ps3. I did not know the video card equivalent was only a 7800gt though. I guess I overestimated consoles being built to do 1 thing only, that is play games, gave them an advantage over PCs which are a 'jack of all trades master of none' sort of platform.
Click to expand...

It's still somewhat true. I'm sure many PS3 games, especially exclusives, look better than any PC with even a faster 7900GT can push out. Radeon 5850 is 3 generations above that. Look what the Xbox 1 could go with a GeForce 3. It's probably better than a PC with a Ti500, but do you expect it to compare to what a PC with a 6800GT? I think Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2, if ported to PC, would not look nearly as good on GeForce 7 / Radeon X1 hardware.
 
It is true that the systems are old and the graphics card in them is equivalent to a 7800GT.

Luckily for me, my computer has a 7800GT in it and isn't HD, so my console graphics look amazing to me.
 
Are you using a HDMI cable?

When I first bought my PS3 a few months ago I was like WTF is this ____?!?!? MLB '09 looked horrible, but after switching to an HDMI cable I did a 360 in my impressions.
 
paperfist said:
Are you using a HDMI cable?

When I first bought my PS3 a few months ago I was like WTF is this ____?!?!? MLB '09 looked horrible, but after switching to an HDMI cable I did a 360 in my impressions.
Click to expand...

Wow, so your impressions did not change with the HDMI cable. That is truly mind boggling.

Back on topic.

Yes, a 4 or 5 year old console may not have graphics as good as your current PC. Who would have thunk it?
 
Well I'm starting to get used to it, and I'm liking GT5P, it's fun, could use some AA but its pretty good anyway I'm starting to get used to ignoring the jaggies. What I really like about the game is the driving physics, seems a lot more real than Grid was, although Grid was fun in its own way.
 
fantolay said:
It is true that the systems are old and the graphics card in them is equivalent to a 7800GT.

Luckily for me, my computer has a 7800GT in it and isn't HD, so my console graphics look amazing to me.
Click to expand...

LOL same here 🙂

us guys with older gaming rigs can appreciate our PS3s :awe:
 
The odd thing about the PS3 was that the graphics were never mind-blowing. I bought a PS3 on launch day, and the games that arrived with it like Motorstorm were. . . okayish I guess. . . just I wasn't wowed.

When I first played on a mate's XBox I was wowed by Project Gotham. When I got a Gamecube on launch day the graphics on Star Wars Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion were right up there with my PC at the time. XBox 360 . . . not so much - I didn't get one until Dead Rising came out so I was a bit late to that party, and I already had a reasonable PC that could run Oblivion.

It used to be that a console would be awesome when it first appeared compared to anything a PC could do. . . and now not so much. . . or did I just have a crap PC back in the XBox/Gamecube days? I recall playing GTA3/Vice City at the time which were PS2 era, so it can't have been that poor.
 
Drako said:
Wow, so your impressions did not change with the HDMI cable. That is truly mind boggling.

Back on topic.

Yes, a 4 or 5 year old console may not have graphics as good as your current PC. Who would have thunk it?
Click to expand...

360 as in my impressions made a 360 degree turn and went from I can't believe I bought this PoS PS3 to holly *bleep* this PS3 rocks!
 
You do have to re-adjust your expectations a bit in terms of graphics, but I'm happy with my console.

That being said, I know what you mean about the initial disappointment. There's all this talk about "optimization because of the unified platform making a console with 4 year old hardware rival a modern PC", which pretty much amounts to lowered resolution and disabled AA/AF.

...you just have to look past that and enjoy playing the games.
 
Last edited:
I love my PS3. I like the controller and the graphics better than the 360. But the 360 has a better online presence, so it depends on the type of game I am getting. I gave up on PC gaming years ago. I got tired of always needing to upgrade. Being limited to a computer monitor also was a downside when I have a 46" and a 50" TV in the house. With consoles, spend you $300-$400 and you are good for several years, just add in $30 for xbox live. PC's not so much.

I am a very casual gamer. When I have time to play I just want to sit down and play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top