with Loading thanks to the optional Install (until the 360 installs come ofcourse) graphically speaking, only thing ive noticed is some very tiny smoother edges on 360 but its so miniscule that its not worth mentioning..Visual wise, both versions are identical.

as for this game, i dont know if Compression is going to affect the 360 port, as much as PS3's unique architechture from that of the 360's very much PC one.

Because we've never fought mutants in sewers before... geez, some originality would be nice in FPS these days.

according to Carmack the issue with the 360 game is not hardware but storage, He said that they would have to use 3 dvd9's but the royaltys to be paid Msoft wouldn't make financial sense, so they will have to compress to two dvd9's.

Having the blu-ray means no compression, so ps3 and the pc blu-ray version will ship on a single disk, pc dvd9's will be 3, and unless Msoft do a deal like capcom did with sf2hd then it will ship on 2 disks for x-box

256 SPLIT memory architecture.

Thats funny as most sites have said visually the 360 version of soul takes the edge.. and the textures are noticably sharper on the GT comparrison vid. What they have said though is that darth vader is a more rounded and balanced fighter than yoda..so if you mean the ps3 version takes the edge that way then yes.

This game rage however hasnt been confirmed to be compressed to one or two dvds yet.. they're just moaning publicly to try and get Microsoft to drop the charge it costs developers to put games on 3 discs..as we all know how MS like to charge everybody for everything. Its a move that could easily backfire simular to valves public disinterest in the ps3 if it doesnt come on 3 discs though.

At the moment this is hotsauce, but if i know shit about ID it won't release for another 2 years and at that time...will it still look hot? These pics look shopped to me though.

Someone sounds pretty bitter that the PS3's getting so many superior multiplatform titles. I'd stress out too if i only had 1 console. Lulz, epic win. Longcat is looooong =)

um...looks dated now...=[ it doesnt look much better than doom 3....what gives! even resistence engine on ps3 look way better than this =]

Would you console fanboys just shut the fuck up! They are obviously shots taken from a high end PC.

Besides, why the hell are you lot bothered about shooters anyway, what with your shitty little backward joypads, dumbed down levels, heavily compressed graphics, dodgy frame rates, etc...

Need I go on?

be nice or leave.

I can't understand what kind of graphics some are waiting. This is one of the best looking games that I have seen. Doesn't look much better than Doom3? Okay Doom3 is good looking game but this looks much better.

if the old boy carmack can pull these visuals off in game, with great framerates then he truly is a genious but since the 360 can fully install games im down with 3 cds cuz my shit is the 120gb edition. i mean why do it half assed ya know fuck that 2 cd shit i dont care i want that shit at its highest quality on the 360.

http://games.tiscali.cz/previews/doom3qc2003/img4....



barely

And you're calling them fanboys? Idiot.

http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/20047

Carmack on the issue of Blu-ray v DVD and PS3 v Xbox 360.. Draw your own conclusions from it..

Mine is that if we would have a Xbox 360 with a built-in Blu-ray drive, that would be a superior gameconsole over a PS3.. Go figure.. I'm not really surprised though..

man John Carmack looks really creepy =D sorta like a zombie =O

so microsoft pretty much is screwd becouse of not having hi capacity storage disc...idiots...thats what they get for trying to be number one lol they screwed themselves.

Blu Ray can store high quality textures, but with 256mb of gddr3 ram dedicated to just the GPU, that basically makes Blu-ray obsolete right there. 256mb can't render shit, especially for this game, because you are looking at like 5-10 layers of detailed textures over the entire game. Every character, every object, and the environment. No console can do that right now, guarenteed. But both will come close. And no the PS3 will not be the one to do it better with blu-ray, but that doesn;t mean the 360 will either.

You people are forgetting about the FlexI/O bypass required for the R to be accessed for graphics.

Yeah you have lightning fast R...but it goes straight to the CPU. If the lighting fast R has to travel from one side of the asymmetrical chip to the GPU, and back, it loses bandwidth due to the fact that your data can only be as fast as the smallest pipe it travels through lets it be. Plus on top of that, your weakening the CPU in more areas than you people think. Most developers sacrifice performance using this technique, which is why nobody uses it, and which is why the PS3 is more complicated to program for than the 360.

FlexI/O is more like a bypass that is written on the spec sheet of the PS3, with all the other raw numbers that don't mean anything. Its just there to say that they could do what 360 could do if they REALLY wanted to.

The 360 however, well, we all know. Its one pool of ram dedicated however the developer wants it. So honestly, the system with the most potential in this situation, again is more than likely the 360.

That really is common sense. Now that i made my point with common sense, i will now say that you don't want me getting tech savvy with a bunch of fanboys who think a hard-drive is a sex terminology. I pwn when it comes to this shit.

Like Blim said, stfu...

Game looks good btw.

Jesus, and i left out the bit about compression.

Again, a pointless arguement created to fool people into buying into the blu-ray market.

Nobody knows what lossless compression is i guess. The 360 im pretty sure is designed to unpack, and uncompress files literally like nothing. The compression technology available today is not something to be under-estimated.

Sorry for the double post.

High odds that you would make that statement? Same guy that thinks RS2 is a bigger leap then Gears 2?

When it comes to Soul Calibur 4. They are identical. Those who agrees that the PS3 version looks better are all PS3 owners like your self that tries to justify the higher price on PS3.

Later down the road Eurogamer will try this game and find that it is in some minor bit better on 360, like all multiplattform games.

Look the RAGE video and say it again. RAGE looks much better. In RAGE there is bigger outdoor areas too. DOOM3 was mostly in tunnels and small rooms.

I am also interested to see DOOM4 (or what ever it's called) because Carmack said it's going to look even better. Target frame rate is for RAGE 60fps and for next DOOM 30fps. That's for consoles of course heh.

2nd pic LoOkS AMAZING!!!!

Its CLEARLY CLEAR that its much much better than DOOM3

I don't know why some people say its same as the old DooM3

Anyway...Getting it for x360 (my PS3 is only for exclusive games!)

lol @ console wars

Screens are okay. Nothing terribly original or amazing.

Watch this interview,lots of dirty secrets,***360 superior hardware*** and
the "real" answer to why he made DVD royalty issue public revealed in first
20 seconds

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169112

Carmack admitted that he wants hardcore id fans to help influence
Microsoft's business practices
***he believes the 360 is the better hardware over all***, because id is
having to put double the work into the PS3 port.



I asked id Software CEO Todd Hollenshead about that this morning, now that
the comment has had time to sink into gaming forums worldwide.

"Carmack has long said he thinks that the architecture of the Xbox 360 is
better"

The problem with Rage is two fold, Hollenshead tells me. First there is the
economics of spreading a game across multiple discs

***even though we feel the 360 has superior hardware***


Let me be clear, this is an open question, we have these tech issues and we
are working with Microsoft to solve them."

And the issue isn't just about the game being too big, Hollenshead says that
developers lose upwards of 2 gigs of space per a disc because of information
Microsoft requires developers to put on the discs



Ironically, early on Carmack was pretty clear on the fact that he felt the
Playstation 3's cell technology was not the boon it was made out to be to
developers.

"I know that John is pretty much brass tacks on these issues and before the
PS3 was ever released he raised the same issues then as now," Hollenshead
said. Sony "had a bunch of hardware engineers talking about theoretical
power, but (Carmack) said 'yeah, this isn't how software people work' and
they said 'yeah, this is how they should work.'"

To date, Carmack still feels the architecture of the Playstation 3 doesn't
deliver the power promised. But Hollenshead points out that there's no use
crying over spilled milk.

"Complaining about that is sort of a worthless exercise at this point," he
said. "The PS3 is what it is and it's not going to change.

http://kotaku.com/5031985/rage-and-ids-lovehate-re...



since the ***royalty charge per disc*** is actually surprisingly high, id
hopes that Microsoft will make a concession for Rage, or else the company
may actually have to sacrifice texture and asset quality to get the game to
fit on fewer than THREE discs. The cost of the 3rd DVD alone would cost
millions of dollars with the current royalty rate, says John Carmack.

When comparing the Xbox 360 to the PS3, the more spacious Blu-ray format is
the only thing Carmack likes more about Sony's console. ***Everything else
is better on the 360, he says.***

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5...