Very well Optimized for Xbox 360.

[Enkeixpress]

According to the latest footage of Just Cause 2.. It's running extremely well, no lag or anything from what I can see which is fantastic! :)

See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWdivIUC9T8
KWdivIUC9T8

Extremely optimized,right? Must be at least 30-50 fps.. Now.. I can't say the same for the PS3 version unfortunately as no footage has been found for it.. :confused: :hmm: But umm.. I can't see why it wouldn't be any different apart from some slight lag maybe? .. I've just got a hunch that the fps will be lower, that's all. :thumb:

[gandenkris]

i really hope so much that the ps3 version is just as good.... and it is pretty great that the game which has both amazing graphics and the biggest open world (besides some random racing games) ever has no lag or anything. but maybe it will when the games released... lets hope not!

[HHDnBKing!]

I can't say the same for the PS3 version unfortunately as no footage has been found for it.

You haven't looked very hard ;)

[JakeD.Parker]

the ps3 runs call of duty modern warfare + number 2 better, and that runs at 60 frames, so i think theyll be the same :), people just like the xbox controller more so they always show off on xbox, and because micrsoft pays them 2

[GeorgeRobo]

Doesn't the PS3 have more cores in its processor anyway? So it should run better than the 360. I think the OP is being very presumptuous saying its "optimized" for the 360 when we've had no news or seven hit of this being true.

[Poor Bison]

Doesn't the PS3 have more cores in its processor anyway? So it should run better than the 360. I think the OP is being very presumptuous saying its "optimized" for the 360 when we've had no news or seven hit of this being true.Actually, its been said that the 360 is the lead development console for this game but the PS3 and PC versions are getting alot of care to ensure they run just as well as the 360 version. Each version will likely exceed the others in different ways.

More processor cores doesn't necessarily mean greater performance.

[JakeD.Parker]

Actually, its been said that the 360 is the lead development console for this game but the PS3 and PC versions are getting alot of care to ensure they run just as well as the 360 version. Each version will likely exceed the others in different ways.

More processor cores doesn't necessarily mean greater performance.

yes but it can if its used right,

[matonking]

Actually, its been said that the 360 is the lead development console for this game but the PS3 and PC versions are getting alot of care to ensure they run just as well as the 360 version. Each version will likely exceed the others in different ways.

More processor cores doesn't necessarily mean greater performance.

1. i'm about 90% posistive that i heard them say they " we've been developing the game simultaneously for the xbox, ps3 and pc. and that each the consoles will not dissapoint"

2. yes it does lol.

BUT THIS IS GOING TO TURN INTO A CONSOLE WAR... so please... lets stop this.. its already been done like 4 times already in the past 2 days... probably due to lack of news frustration...

[Poor Bison]

yes but it can if its used right,Oh absolutely, I wasn't attempting to apply it as a general term. There is no doubt that a PS3 exclusive game, developed and designed for the PS3 would run terribly on the Xbox 360.

1. i'm about 90% posistive that i heard them say they " we've been developing the game simultaneously for the xbox, ps3 and pc. and that each the consoles will not dissapoint"

2. yes it does lol.

BUT THIS IS GOING TO TURN INTO A CONSOLE WAR... so please... lets stop this.. its already been done like 4 times already in the past 2 days... probably due to lack of news frustration...1) I heard differently somewhere, however your statement rings a bell to. Either way, it really makes no difference. A few extra frames per second here-and-there aren't exactly a bold statement to determine which console is better.

2) No it doesn't.

Also, no it wont. Well, in theory, this shouldn't turn into a console war. All of my replies, at least, have attempted to remain unbiased and balanced in favour of both consoles. If they are interpreted differently, then so be it! :)

[matonking]

Oh absolutely, I wasn't attempting to apply it as a general term. There is no doubt that a PS3 exclusive game, developed and designed for the PS3 would run terribly on the Xbox 360.

1) I heard differently somewhere, however your statement rings a bell to. Either way, it really makes no difference. A few extra frames per second here-and-there aren't exactly a bold statement to determine which console is better.

2) No it doesn't.

Also, no it wont. Well, in theory, this shouldn't turn into a console war. All of my replies, at least, have attempted to remain unbiased and balanced in favour of both consoles. If they are interpreted differently, then so be it! :)

2. yes it does,

1x core = 1 core doing everything from xbox OS to lighting to physics.
8x core = 1 dedicated to ps3 operation, 7 left over.. 1 for lighting.. 1 for physics.. 1 for.. e.t.c

more cores means for smoother operation, otherwise whats the point in putting so many?
ever hear the phrase " more hands make lighter work?" :rolleyes:

3 of ps3's cpus = 1 xbox's... which is why the ps3 has 2.5 times more processing power

[GeorgeRobo]

To be honest this game is going to be amazing whatever console its played on, but it would be nice to get just a bit of PS3 footage to please us PS3 owners :P

[Poor Bison]

2. yes it does,

1x core = 1 core doing everything from xbox OS to lighting to physics.
8x core = 1 dedicated to ps3 operation, 7 left over.. 1 for lighting.. 1 for physics.. 1 for.. e.t.c

more cores means for smoother operation, otherwise whats the point in putting so many?
ever hear the phrase " more hands make lighter work?" :rolleyes:

3 of ps3's cpus = 1 xbox's... which is why the ps3 has 2.5 times more processing powerInitially you said 1x core for the Xbox 360, but you appeared to correct this later on. To clarify, the Xbox 360 has a 3.2Ghz tri-core processor. 3 symmetrical cores, running simultaneously.

The cores, as you have said, are all general purpose. As opposed to the Cell processor in the PS3 which as you mentioned are all threaded for a different purpose.

After the basic layout of facts, there appeared to be a significant gap between the number crunching and the "more cores = smoother operation" statement. We need to keep this debate in the context of the Xbox 360 vs the PS3, so we need to remember how differently these processors work (despite being based on similar architecture) and why I initially made my first comment.

So lets pretend for a moment (if we remove Just Cause 2 from the debate) that a game has been developed for the 360 utilising its Xenon processor and it is being ported to the Playstation 3. Now, obviously when developing exclusively for the Playstation 3 the developers have input from the start as to processor threading, etc, and as a result (as I previously said, a Playstation 3 exclusive would indeed beat an Xbox 360 exclusive in terms of performance and quality) the game would work far better.

However, with a game on the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 when the developers start to have a more difficult time attaining the same level of quality with the PS3's unique and more complex processor, you will commonly find that they simply take a shortcut and opt to use it like a regular processor, which will effect the performance as the PS3 is designed with a synergistic approach (Wherein, all the cores work independently towards the final goal, rather than sharing an equal load such as the Xbox 360) and may suffer as a result.

Now, I am not saying this is the case with Just Cause 2. It has become apparent that Avalanche intend to make full use of the capabilities of all consoles, however they are still unlikely to be using the full power of the PS3 due to issues with developing the PC and Xbox 360 versions concurrently. We will only truly be able to see the PS3's overall power nearing the end of its lifetime, and probably only on exclusive games.

In its current state, the PS3 performs equally or less-than-equally with the Xbox 360. I must stress, this is only because of the shared and/or ported games. Obviously, this works the other way around to. I have no preference of console, and always enjoy comparing them as long as I am out to prove an independent point, rather than proving one of the other.

Which brings me back to saying that more cores does not automatically equal greater performance. Hopefully in the context of my post, you understand my point of view :)

This is my second long post tonight. I apologise for any grammatical and/or spelling errors as I am exceptionally tired at the moment :lol:

[Peardan]

So you basically get what we do in the end. hahaha >:^D

[JakeD.Parker]

Initially you said 1x core for the Xbox 360, but you appeared to correct this later on. To clarify, the Xbox 360 has a 3.2Ghz tri-core processor. 3 symmetrical cores, running simultaneously.

The cores, as you have said, are all general purpose. As opposed to the Cell processor in the PS3 which as you mentioned are all threaded for a different purpose.

After the basic layout of facts, there appeared to be a significant gap between the number crunching and the "more cores = smoother operation" statement. We need to keep this debate in the context of the Xbox 360 vs the PS3, so we need to remember how differently these processors work (despite being based on similar architecture) and why I initially made my first comment.

So lets pretend for a moment (if we remove Just Cause 2 from the debate) that a game has been developed for the 360 utilising its Xenon processor and it is being ported to the Playstation 3. Now, obviously when developing exclusively for the Playstation 3 the developers have input from the start as to processor threading, etc, and as a result (as I previously said, a Playstation 3 exclusive would indeed beat an Xbox 360 exclusive in terms of performance and quality) the game would work far better.

However, with a game on the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 when the developers start to have a more difficult time attaining the same level of quality with the PS3's unique and more complex processor, you will commonly find that they simply take a shortcut and opt to use it like a regular processor, which will effect the performance as the PS3 is designed with a synergistic approach (Wherein, all the cores work independently towards the final goal, rather than sharing an equal load such as the Xbox 360) and may suffer as a result.

Now, I am not saying this is the case with Just Cause 2. It has become apparent that Avalanche intend to make full use of the capabilities of all consoles, however they are still unlikely to be using the full power of the PS3 due to issues with developing the PC and Xbox 360 versions concurrently. We will only truly be able to see the PS3's overall power nearing the end of its lifetime, and probably only on exclusive games.

In its current state, the PS3 performs equally or less-than-equally with the Xbox 360. I must stress, this is only because of the shared and/or ported games. Obviously, this works the other way around to. I have no preference of console, and always enjoy comparing them as long as I am out to prove an independent point, rather than proving one of the other.

Which brings me back to saying that more cores does not automatically equal greater performance. Hopefully in the context of my post, you understand my point of view :)

This is my second long post tonight. I apologise for any grammatical and/or spelling errors as I am exceptionally tired at the moment :lol:


I see what your saying, but no game on the xbox comes close to looking like killzone 2 or drakes fortune.. ? why. because ps3 has better hardware, its just easy to use 360 hardware

[NEREVAR117]

I see what your saying, but no game on the xbox comes close to looking like killzone 2 or drakes fortune.. ? why. because ps3 has better hardware, its just easy to use 360 hardware

That's highly arguable. Just so you know.

Drakes Fortune is easily already outdated and Killzone 2 isn't really as impressive as people make it out too be. I personally thought FarCry 2 and Resident Evil 5 looked better, along with possibly Gears of War 2. Oh, and Alan Wake has the best graphics on the consoles, judging by the images. But of course this is my opinion, just as anything is.

[danieltimm]

because ps3 has better hardware, its just easy to use 360 hardware

that's not correct ... the ps3 has a better prozesszor but the 360 has a better graphikcard

[JC 2]

According to the latest footage of Just Cause 2.. It's running extremely well, no lag or anything from what I can see which is fantastic! :)

See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWdivIUC9T8
KWdivIUC9T8

Extremely optimized,right? Must be at least 30-50 fps.. Now.. I can't say the same for the PS3 version unfortunately as no footage has been found for it.. :confused: :hmm: But umm.. I can't see why it wouldn't be any different apart from some slight lag maybe? .. I've just got a hunch that the fps will be lower, that's all. :thumb:

look at 2:20 is that a hot air balloon ?

[JakeD.Parker]

That's highly arguable. Just so you know.

Drakes Fortune is easily already outdated and Killzone 2 isn't really as impressive as people make it out too be. I personally thought FarCry 2 and Resident Evil 5 looked better, along with possibly Gears of War 2. Oh, and Alan Wake has the best graphics on the consoles, judging by the images. But of course this is my opinion, just as anything is.

thats true, far cry 2 did look amazing, to me though, uncharted 2 and killzone 2 are the graphically best games to come to a console, and will be i reckon until crysis 2 hits

[NEREVAR117]

thats true, far cry 2 did look amazing, to me though, uncharted 2 and killzone 2 are the graphically best games to come to a console, and will be i reckon until crysis 2 hits

I do think U2 looks gorgeous. =3

And Crysis 2 will probably look breathtaking!

[Frank the Bunny]

look at 2:20 is that a hot air balloon ?

That is the blimp that we are all dying to learn the purpose of.

[matonking]

Initially you said 1x core for the Xbox 360, but you appeared to correct this later on. To clarify, the Xbox 360 has a 3.2Ghz tri-core processor. 3 symmetrical cores, running simultaneously.

The cores, as you have said, are all general purpose. As opposed to the Cell processor in the PS3 which as you mentioned are all threaded for a different purpose.

After the basic layout of facts, there appeared to be a significant gap between the number crunching and the "more cores = smoother operation" statement. We need to keep this debate in the context of the Xbox 360 vs the PS3, so we need to remember how differently these processors work (despite being based on similar architecture) and why I initially made my first comment.

So lets pretend for a moment (if we remove Just Cause 2 from the debate) that a game has been developed for the 360 utilising its Xenon processor and it is being ported to the Playstation 3. Now, obviously when developing exclusively for the Playstation 3 the developers have input from the start as to processor threading, etc, and as a result (as I previously said, a Playstation 3 exclusive would indeed beat an Xbox 360 exclusive in terms of performance and quality) the game would work far better.

However, with a game on the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 when the developers start to have a more difficult time attaining the same level of quality with the PS3's unique and more complex processor, you will commonly find that they simply take a shortcut and opt to use it like a regular processor, which will effect the performance as the PS3 is designed with a synergistic approach (Wherein, all the cores work independently towards the final goal, rather than sharing an equal load such as the Xbox 360) and may suffer as a result.

Now, I am not saying this is the case with Just Cause 2. It has become apparent that Avalanche intend to make full use of the capabilities of all consoles, however they are still unlikely to be using the full power of the PS3 due to issues with developing the PC and Xbox 360 versions concurrently. We will only truly be able to see the PS3's overall power nearing the end of its lifetime, and probably only on exclusive games.

In its current state, the PS3 performs equally or less-than-equally with the Xbox 360. I must stress, this is only because of the shared and/or ported games. Obviously, this works the other way around to. I have no preference of console, and always enjoy comparing them as long as I am out to prove an independent point, rather than proving one of the other.

Which brings me back to saying that more cores does not automatically equal greater performance. Hopefully in the context of my post, you understand my point of view :)

This is my second long post tonight. I apologise for any grammatical and/or spelling errors as I am exceptionally tired at the moment :lol:

For someone who's tired, you jsut owned me!!:scratch:

I couldnt agree with you more.

The problem with games currently is that developers dont have the time/facility to push the ps3's full potential.

Most are, as you said, a port from xbox..

when crysis comes out for xbox, ps3 and pc.. which are currently all being built seperately and to each's full potential.. then we will see the true differences in performance!.

2-3 years from now though, i think the difference in performance will as aparent as 2-3 years ago.. pre-ps3.

really looking forward to it!

[GeorgeRobo]

that's not correct ... the ps3 has a better prozesszor but the 360 has a better graphikcard

And I have better spelling.

[matonking]

And I have better spelling.

you've never heard of prozesszors and graphikcards?? they're the new craze

[MonkeyBanana]

Why are you making this thread? To start the console wars again?

[Enkeixpress]

Why are you making this thread? To start the console wars again?

Nope.

Just look at the footage, It is of the Xbox 360 version, correct? And it looks very smooth, correct?

So then this thread was made to show that. :D

[MonkeyBanana]

Yes, ok but you also say you think PS3 version will be a bit laggy. And some peole might react to start with saying "No PS3 has way better hardware (which is true)" And then the consolewars start again...

[Enkeixpress]

Yes, ok but you also say you think PS3 version will be a bit laggy. And some peole might react to start with saying "No PS3 has way better hardware (which is true)" And then the consolewars start again...

Well.. I'm just going by what it's been like in the past with multi-platform games.. where 360 has always came out on top with the higher fps. :thumb:

[MonkeyBanana]

But you know the PS3 is better right :D I know the Xbox360 because Ive had one before but you should really try the PS3, its awesome

[Enkeixpress]

But you know the PS3 is better right :D I know the Xbox360 because Ive had one before but you should really try the PS3, its awesome

eh.. there's no true answer for that as they both have their own advantages & disadvantages but yeah, I've got a PS3 ... I like the console but I like the 360 better as it has a much more larger range of games & multiplayer support.

[Hobodealer]

If you play PS3, why would you even look at this forum anyway. It dosen't concern you. If Xboxers want to talk about it they should be able to without PS Fanboys coming in and turning into a Console War.

[Generalkillgore]

eh.. there's no true answer for that as they both have their own advantages & disadvantages but yeah, I've got a PS3 ... I like the console but I like the 360 better as it has a much more larger range of games & multiplayer support.

PS3:
Advantages:
Blu-ray drive (for games and high defintion Blu-ray DVDs)
Internet browser (this is the reason that only the PS3 has a video capture option, so it can upload recordings to YouTube through the internet browser)
Free online multiplayer (Playstation Network is free)

Disadvantages:
Not as many good games (in my opinion)
More of a media centre than a proper games console.

Xbox 360:
Advantages
Better games (in my opinion)
More of a proper games console, but still a reasonably good media centre. (Can connect directly to your PC)
Sky Player

Disadvantages:
No Blu-ray drive (just an ordinary DVD player)
No internet browser
Online multiplayer costs money (Xbox LIVE Gold subscription)

[MDVizzy]

According to the latest footage of Just Cause 2.. It's running extremely well, no lag or anything from what I can see which is fantastic! :)

See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWdivIUC9T8
KWdivIUC9T8

Extremely optimized,right? Must be at least 30-50 fps.. Now.. I can't say the same for the PS3 version unfortunately as no footage has been found for it.. :confused: :hmm: But umm.. I can't see why it wouldn't be any different apart from some slight lag maybe? .. I've just got a hunch that the fps will be lower, that's all. :thumb:
Don't have hunch's any more in the future.
In fact, you have very clever ppl here on the forum.
Not all of us are 7 year old's dying to get this game.
More processing power is available in the ps3, means more
explosions, more population, more enemy's, more everything !

all the xbox has is better lightning and in some cases better texture streaming/quality.

[JaycTwo]

Im sure whatever ports for whatever consoles will be right next to exactly the same.

[Hobodealer]

Relax everyone. MCM said they're all exiting. Equal even. Stop having Console Wars!!!!

[MDVizzy]

Im sure whatever ports for whatever consoles will be right next to exactly the same.
Yea me too, maybe a slight diffrence but not that you'll notice.
They said they had developed the game for PS3 and XBOX and PC simoultaniously, so .. no worries

[JaycTwo]

Yea me too, maybe a slight diffrence but not that you'll notice.
They said they had developed the game for PS3 and XBOX and PC simoultaniously, so .. no worries

Could you give me a source? :P
Not that I dont believe you, but anything I watched didnt give me this info so maybe I can see something new today :)

[MDVizzy]

Could you give me a source? :P
Not that I dont believe you, but anything I watched didnt give me this info so maybe I can see something new today :)

I dunno anymore where i've picked this up.
There is a point where my brain doesn't remember certain things, i.e.
i don't remember anymore how many times i went to the toilet this week :nut:

[Poor Bison]

I see what your saying, but no game on the xbox comes close to looking like killzone 2 or drakes fortune.. ? why. because ps3 has better hardware, its just easy to use 360 hardwareHmm, obviously you didn't really see what I was saying, because my post said exactly what you just did, just without giving examples of any games. :p :)

[LIGHTS]

There really is no need for a flame war debate on consoles. Really.

[Enkeixpress]

Don't have hunch's any more in the future.
In fact, you have very clever ppl here on the forum.
Not all of us are 7 year old's dying to get this game.
More processing power is available in the ps3, means more
explosions, more population, more enemy's, more everything !

all the xbox has is better lightning and in some cases better texture streaming/quality.

You should know better than to say that then, shouldn't you? :hmm:

More processing power is not always good for games.. especially not for a game like JC2.. Texture streaming is what you want & as you've said.. Xbox is good at that. :thumb:

[Poor Bison]

There really is no need for a flame war debate on consoles. Really.I hope you aren't directing this at me, I'm as neutral as you can get in regards to consoles :)

I'd like to direct anyone who is part of the 'processing power = greater awesome' debate to my previous post earlier in the thread (the long one :D).

[LIGHTS]

To those complaining; My apologies for any misunderstanding. It's just a bit childish to me that such tiny things can lead to huge fights.

[cbrookf]

The game will suffer from draw distance pop in's but it shouldn't hurt the game too much.

[jhonny cage]

if you put heavy rain near an xbox it would just blow up really:lol:

[MDVizzy]

You should know better than to say that then, shouldn't you? :hmm:

More processing power is not always good for games.. especially not for a game like JC2.. Texture streaming is what you want & as you've said.. Xbox is good at that. :thumb:

But i think they developed the game on all platforms simultaniously so i think
it wont make a big diffrence. Btw, more processing power means smoother
FPM ( Frames/Minute), so i guess that makes it up if it would be less eye candy than
the xbox version. We'll c :)

[Enkeixpress]

But i think they developed the game on all platforms simultaniously so i think
it wont make a big diffrence. Btw, more processing power means smoother
FPM ( Frames/Minute), so i guess that makes it up if it would be less eye candy than
the xbox version. We'll c :)

I'm pretty sure that FPS has to do with the GPU... Right?

[MonkeyBanana]

GPU = Graphic Processing Unit right? So I dont think it will have to do with the framerate but I dont know very much about all this technical things

[Enkeixpress]

GPU = Graphic Processing Unit right? So I dont think it will have to do with the framerate but I dont know very much about all this technical things

Hmmm... well to increase your FPS in a a game on you PC you would need to buy a better graphics card :)

[MonkeyBanana]

But a better processor (dunno if thats good English) is more important right?

[Enkeixpress]

Hmm not really.. as we are talking about 3D performance here.. it's the GPU's job to do all of that.

... unfortunately though, Sony may have changed that with their ps3 as they want to force developers to use SPUs in order to increase the graphics for their games.. which is not nice. :thumb:

[MonkeyBanana]

Ok you win, i dont no **** about all this technical stuff

[Omegatoko]

Im an xboxer, ok To Be fair the ps3 is more powerful and the xbox 360 is only a few Years away from acheiving its full potential. The Xbox was released 5 years before the ps3 so the ps3s bound to be stronger. by the time the ps3 has reached its full potential it is likely that a new xbox has been anounced or even released so the argument may flip the other way. and the funny thing is sales wise we're both losing to the wii or the wiie (lol japanese joke)

[MonkeyBanana]

5 years before the PS3? Isnt that a bit much, and who says there wont be a PS4?

[Omegatoko]

5 years before the PS3? Isnt that a bit much, and who says there wont be a PS4?

your missing the point there might well be a ps4 but a new xbox is likely to come before playstation and xbox will both keep overtaking each other

[MonkeyBanana]

Yes I get your point. But if I read your post correctly the PS is always better because the xbox needs to come with new versions all the time...

[Omegatoko]

if the current time frame stays the same the next ps will be relased after the next xbox so it may be better but the new xbox will be reigning supreme for the years between the release of the new ps. the new ps may only be better due to the possible andvances between the release of the new xbox and the new ps. but this will not happen untill the Current consoles have reched there prime which will happen later with the ps3 as it is released after the xbox

[MonkeyBanana]

Which console do you prefer by the way? For current gen my best console is PS3

[Omegatoko]

xbox but i am a bit bummed out that i cant get the last guardian the new one by the ico guys

[MonkeyBanana]

Just buy a ps3, you wont regret it

[Omegatoko]

i love all the xbox exclusives i could never give it up

[GeorgeRobo]

if the current time frame stays the same the next ps will be relased after the next xbox so it may be better but the new xbox will be reigning supreme for the years between the release of the new ps. the new ps may only be better due to the possible andvances between the release of the new xbox and the new ps. but this will not happen untill the Current consoles have reched there prime which will happen later with the ps3 as it is released after the xbox

Just because a console was released earlier doesn't mean it will be past its prime earlier than the others.
Looks at the PS3 and 360 there at the top of there game right now 5 years after launch and very level pegged.
I don't think we will see a new Sony/Microsoft console for at least 5 years - maybe even longer because Natal and PS3 motion will definitely push the consoles up a gear.
The only company who will release a refresh soon will be Nintendo.

[Omegatoko]

Just because a console was released earlier doesn't mean it will be past its prime earlier than the others.
Looks at the PS3 and 360 there at the top of there game right now 5 years after launch and very level pegged.
I don't think we will see a new Sony/Microsoft console for at least 5 years - maybe even longer because Natal and PS3 motion will definitely push the consoles up a gear.
The only company who will release a refresh soon will be Nintendo.

i agree
and im definatly getting natal

[Enkeixpress]

Oh,Look guys!!

Even more Proof that the 360 version of Just Cause 2 will perform the best..
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-bioshock2-face-off-article

Notice the higher fps on the screenshot? :)

[HHDnBKing!]

Oh,Look guys!!

Even more Proof that the 360 version of Just Cause 2 will perform the best..
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-bioshock2-face-off-article

Notice the higher fps on the screenshot? :)

Which paragraph within that 2 page article specifically says that Just Cause 2 will be visually better on Xbox 360? I can't be bothered to properly read it all..

[GeorgeRobo]

Which paragraph within that 2 page article specifically says that Just Cause 2 will be visually better on Xbox 360? I can't be bothered to properly read it all..

Don't worry it doesn't its about Bioshock which is an entirely different game therefore doesn;t have any relevance.

[Enkeixpress]

Don't worry it doesn't its about Bioshock which is an entirely different game therefore doesn;t have any relevance.

It's not the game that you should be concentrating on.. It's the performance. :)

Don't you notice that the FPS is almost always higher on the 360 than on PS3 at the most intense action parts..? ;)

[matonking]

Oh,Look guys!!

Even more Proof that the 360 version of Just Cause 2 will perform the best..
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-bioshock2-face-off-article

Notice the higher fps on the screenshot? :)

Okay first off, that is a direct port game from the 360.

secondaly, its bioshock 2, not JC2.. you cant simply compare one game to another, its not as simple as that...

thirdly, the xbox with the frame rate capper unlocked came out worse than the ps3 with 61% of the frames being teared versus ps3's 0.1%. The only real difference was a more stable framerate with a capper on in the xbox, and better rendering... however thats only due to the developer being lazy and not porting properly. As the review clearly states that other games have done it better ( killzone 2 + Resident evil 5 ).

JC2 has been developed for the xbox, ps3 and the pc. No one who has played the game on BOTH consoles has said any difference in the look/quality of the game, and infact people who have reviewed it said that they will go for the PS3 version of the game due to the recording ability and youtube ability. So the looks/graphics are of no difference between the two.

[Enkeixpress]

Well.. That remains to be seen, my friend.

And that time will come soon enough.. and comparisons will indeed be made. mwahahahaha!! :lmao: .. I know exactly which version will come on top.. :)

[matonking]

Well.. That remains to be seen, my friend.

And that time will come soon enough.. and comparisons will indeed be made. mwahahahaha!! :lmao: .. I know exactly which version will come on top.. :)

Okay.

[HHDnBKing!]

I'll be back in a sec, just going to have a 'Mr Masterbait' over FPS on other games and Shopto.net to...

[Enkeixpress]

I'll be back in a sec, just going to have a 'Mr Masterbait' over FPS on other games and Shopto.net to...

Hey you! .. Leave Shopto.net out of this.. :(

They did nothing to you. :hmm:

[HHDnBKing!]

'Hey you! .. Leave Bioshock 2 & others out of this.. :(

They have no relevance to JC2 :hmm: '

[matonking]

'Hey you! .. Leave Bioshock 2 & others out of this.. :(

They have no relevance to JC2 :hmm: '

ohhhhhh snap!!!! ...

i dont know whats worse..

i just said snap.. or i'm white and i just said snap? :eek:

[HHDnBKing!]

ohhhhhh snap!!!! ...

i dont know whats worse..

i just said snap.. or i'm white and i just said snap? :eek:

:eek:.... :lol:

[Enkeixpress]

'Hey you! .. Leave Bioshock 2 & others out of this.. :(

They have no relevance to JC2 :hmm: '

Look.. The way I see it.. Both consoles are running Bioshock 2 .. so if one's FPS is lower than that of the other console.. then it proves something.. alright?

[HHDnBKing!]

Look.. The way I see it.. Both consoles are running Bioshock 2 .. so if one's FPS is lower than that of the other console.. then it proves something.. alright?

Good for you and thanks for sharing your 'opinion'.

[Enkeixpress]

Good for you and thanks for sharing your 'opinion'.

It isn't an "opinion" though.. is it?

Both consoles are running the same game here.. and yet the game is performing better on one of 'em .. in terms of the frames per second. :)

[HHDnBKing!]

the game is performing better on one of 'em .. in terms of the frames per second. :)

OMFG, really thats :nut: FPS is better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Enkeixpress]

OMFG, really thats :nut: FPS is better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well of course.. FPS is how PC gamers compete nowadays with their gaming pcs .. via benchmarking software..

so if the FPS is higher on one system.. then it beats the other.. just as how 360 beats ps3 with Bioshock 2 here.. frame tearing has no factor in the test either. :thumb:

[HHDnBKing!]

I know, FPS is what it all boils down to whenever comparing two consoles and saying that one's better then the other.. Not .. Nice Heavy Rain there on Xbox 360.. Oh no wait... Xbox 360 has better FPS which makes it better, yet it has no Heavy Rain..

[Enkeixpress]

I know, FPS is what it all boils down to whenever comparing two consoles and saying that one's better then the other.. Not .. Nice Heavy Rain there on Xbox 360.. Oh no wait... Xbox 360 has better FPS which makes it better, yet it has no Heavy Rain..

That makes no sense..

And by the way, Heavy Rain can run on the Xbox 360.. just so you know. But it will never happen as it's exclusive. :thumb:

[HHDnBKing!]

That makes no sense..

And by the way, Heavy Rain can run on the Xbox 360.. just so you know. But it will never happen as it's exclusive. :thumb:

Makes no sense, dont worry it's called sarcasm..
So it would run at the same level on PS3 would it, just as Crysis 2 does on PS3 & PC as well?? :lol:

[Enkeixpress]

Makes no sense, dont worry then..
So it would run at the same level on PS3 would it, just as Crysis 2 does on PS3 & PC as well?? :lol:

See? .. You laugh because you go by what Sony has said & what they want you to believe.. it's not like they are just going to come out & say.. "hey, it's true.. xbox 360 can run all of our games :thumb:" .. Because they obviously won't.

I've played the Heavy Rain demo.. and I can honestly cannot believe that it can't be run on a X360.. it's impossible. It looks average at best.. graphics are average.. & look worser than Gears of War 2.. so yeah 360 should run Heavy Rain extremely well if it ever was released on the system. :thumb:

[HHDnBKing!]

See? .. You laugh because you go by what Sony has said & what they want you to believe.. it's not like they are just going to come out & say.. "hey, it's true.. xbox 360 can run all of our games :thumb:" .. Because they obviously won't.

I've played the Heavy Rain demo.. and I can honestly cannot believe that it can't be run on a X360.. it's impossible. It looks average at best.. graphics are average.. & look worser than Gears of War 2.. so yeah 360 should run Heavy Rain extremely well if it ever was released on the system. :thumb:

Notice I laugh at the Crysis 2 comment :whistle: Killzone 2 > GOW2 graphics ;)

Anyway to be perfectly honest, yeh I'm a proud PS3 owner, yes PS3 and Xbox 360 are superior in their own unique ways E.g PS3 Processing Power and Xbox 360 FPS. Why don't you just be happy with what you got and stop trying to say ones better then the other?

End of.. (Moves on)

[Enkeixpress]

Notice I laugh at the Crysis 2 comment :whistle: Killzone 2 > GOW2 graphics ;)

See..? You go only by what your eyes can see.. :lol:

You do know that Killzone 2 has extremely low-res textures & fake shadows, right?

GoW 2 has no fake stuff.. It is all in real-time with very high-quality textures & optimized frame rate.. :thumb:

[Hobodealer]

Cyrisis Engine could own any console engine. But I must say that the JC2 Engine looks awesome for a console.

[Enkeixpress]

Cyrisis Engine could own any console engine. But I must say that the JC2 Engine looks awesome for a console.

Indeed.. It's called: Avalaunche Engine 2.0 :thumb:

JC1 used the first revision of the game engine..

[brauny]

Cyrisis Engine could own any console engine. But I must say that the JC2 Engine looks awesome for a console.

but the crysis engine is gonna be used on consoles for crysis 2.......................

[GeorgeRobo]

Well of course.. FPS is how PC gamers compete nowadays with their gaming pcs .. via benchmarking software..

so if the FPS is higher on one system.. then it beats the other.. just as how 360 beats ps3 with Bioshock 2 here.. frame tearing has no factor in the test either. :thumb:

Thing is only the biggest game nerds ever notice differences in FPS. If it runs smooth, the majority of people (aka normal ones) won't notice any difference between the two consoles.

Its not as if the PS3 will be completely jumpy and unresponsive. Remember some of the previews have been shown on PS3 (though not to the public) and nobody's said it looks bad compared to the 360.

[matonking]

people forget that humans see in 25FPS, your standard CRT monitor ran in 25FPS, and you never noticed a difference between that and your fancy 200Hz tvs..

FPS means nothing unless its below 20.. which ps3 never gets to.. so whats the point in this arguement?

[nismo280zx]

That makes no sense..

And by the way, Heavy Rain can run on the Xbox 360.. just so you know. But it will never happen as it's exclusive. :thumb:

Umm technically the xbox 360 can't run heavy rain, because its not programmed in a language that it understands LOL :)

Sorry I couldn't miss that opportunity, but seriously STOP THE FLIPPIN CONSOLE WARS ON HERE, your just driving people away from the games and certain systems, therefore limiting the selling opportunities for the game makers. You are in affect eventually going to destroy the ability for a game maker to make a large enough profit to warrant waisting there time to create the new inovative games.

SO GROW UP, DROP THE CONSOLE WAR CRAP & JUST ENJOY THE GAMES.

hey ive got a ps3 and would love to have and xbox for some exclusives, and the fact that a lot of games run better on it due to the fact that they are ported from it. but i do admire the technology behind the ps3, its revolutionary, when networked with multiple units it becomes a supercomputer, as an IT professional I can appreciate that greatly, the US AirForce surely sees its potential. And i believe that it plays games, and its great in that respect too. And as far as the xbox, its a multicore computer shoved in a small box, which i can respect too, but seriously there is really no clear winner beside US the consumers that win due to the constant competition and inovation.