[DeathCom]

Originally Posted by BLuFAlc0n

....ok, so in other words, the PS3 got better graphics in terms of Natural Resolution. and the 360 doesn't have as good graphics as the PS3, but could looks the same by upscaling. PS3 doesn't need to upscale to have good graphics, while 360's do, just to match up to the PS3.

In short, no. All I said was at the moment, the PS3 has the best looking 1080p games out there and that the 360 does a better job at upscaling resolutions internally.

Things you need to know. A 1080p flat panel TV ALWAYS displays 1080p. If the source is not 1080p, it scales it to 1080p. Consoles (and PCs a like) can do this scaling internally so the display device does not have to. The 360 is better at this job than the PS3 is. The 360 will scale by default to whatever you set it to, the PS3 will scale when a developer prefers it to. Sensible developers like even Namco, let your TV do the work if it can (because its likely better at it than the PS3 is). You can FORCE the PS3 to upscale everything if you disable 720p support in system settings.

Originally Posted by BLuFAlc0n

..it wasn't, Tekken 6 is based on System 357, which is based on the RSX, but I don't think it was GTX which runs Tekken 6. Whoever John Carmack is, he's just talking a lot of ****, RSX has better MHz, runs on 45nm (compared to the 65nm of Xenos), got more transistors, has better dot product, got better texel fill rate and doesn't overheat like the 360 GPU's do. The 360 does have a tad-bit more pixels, but the PS3 has the better GPU Overall, so it's not "flat-out", but it's better.

System 357 is based on a PS3. The PS3 consists of the Cell (original design for the PS3) and the RSX (rebranded 7900 series GeForce card from Nvidia designed cheaply because Nvidia had to hand over manufacturing rights to the chip (a previous issue with the original Xbox and MS)). The RSX is no slouch, but it is inferior to the ATI solution on the 360. Keep in mind that this was also a time that ATI was kicking Nvidia's ass in the PC arena too. ATI today still provides more bang for your buck (and thus apparently won the contract for the next Xbox already).

ANYWAY, there is a LOT more to consider than just the numbers game. If it were, every PS3 title would be the superior choice. But features in GPU design, pioneered in the 360 are now standard today. Namely, the unified shader architecture. The 360 sports a messily 48 shaders, a modern GPU from ATI today has some 1600 faster-clocked shaders. So you can see how far console tech is behind the curve these days. The PS3 had older style vertex and pixel shaders in its GPU. The Cell can take up the slack for some shader routines, but in the end this process takes a LOT more work to get results beyond what the 360 does easily. It can be done though, as pointed out, Uncharted 2.

So would have Tekken 6 been arcade perfect if was just on PS3? It certainly sounds reasonable. Perhaps its the power stealing OS the PS3 is forced to run that is slowing up the works. The Arcade System 357 doesn't waste time or cycles on what friends are online, or bluetooth devices. Could those subtle differences be responsible for the drop in resolution? Perhaps. The bottom line is that Namco has an excellent track record with ports from Sony arcade hardware, to Sony console hardware. This is the first release since Tekken 3 that hasnt been arcade quality. At least Tekken 3 had a major disadvantage to deal with. But we don't quite see the same here.

Oh, and BTW, John Carmack, ever play Doom? Yeah, the guy is mostly responsible for all the engines at id software. When he says some hardware is a POS or one is better than the other, don't question it.

Originally Posted by BLuFAlc0n

....let's see, the 360 has maxed out it's potential, the Wii and PS3 haven't yet. While the 360's power won't improve anymore, the Wii and PS3 still could.

The Wii? lol, seriously, who cares what can be done on a wii. Its limited to SD resolutions no matter what. Even an original Xbox can do some 720p games. I still have yet to see a Wii game that looks better than Team Ninja's best on the original Xbox. Even their own Metroid M doesnt stack up.

Honestly all the crap developers spew about how they maxed something out is a load of marketing BS. They will end up saying it again with a future release. Sure, later games will always tend to make better use of existing hardware. But its just not the same sort of jumps you use to see with PSone generations of software. 3D was just plain new then. So much was learned in the PSone days. Now its all small evolutionary steps, not the leaps once seen. This is even true with new hardware. But still, new hardware is the only way to get totally away from 720p limitations and have thrills with no slow downs or limits.

-DeathCom

[Death Metal]

DeathCom, thank you for your posts. I respect you very much and I think you are great contributor of general information to this community. Unfortunately, BluFalcon will never understand what you have to say.

I know you are a PS3 owner, but you have no problem admitting/understanding that the 360 is superior to the PS3 in some aspects - of course, it's just commom sense. Likewise, I own 360 and am very well aware and understand that the PS3 is superior to the 360 in some aspects as well. I have absolutely no issue with that - as I said, it's just common sense. In short, I would summarize the PS3 being better at core processing and media storage (bluray) and the 360 being better at GPU processing and online play/services. Both have highlights and letdowns, and I would still like to get a PS3 as well some day. But, for BluFalcon, the 360 just HAS to be inferior to the PS3 in every aspect, maybe just because the 360 is one year older than the PS3. Well, I wouldn't know his reasons.

***

Just for the record, as stated by Digital Foundry (http://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry), for some weird reason, Tekken 6 on the 360 actually shows a framebuffer resolution of 1366x768 when motion blur is turned off, with no AA at all, but the PS3 mantains 576p with 2xMSAA - which is funny, since the 360 is known for good AA capabilities. With motion blur on, both consoles output sub-res 576p with no AA.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...nition-article

@BluFalcon: last but not least, yes, the 360 is perfectly capable of outputting 1920x1080, and some games output exactly that. Why wouldn't it be?

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241