Another day another one of these

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12840...And they do say one picture is worth a thousand words







[/quote]

Namco isn't the company i would really bother with compaing xbox36/ps3 titles.
Huge sony fan.

7 looks like crap.

i prefer the sharpness of the 360 version

but to be honest, they HAVE had longer to work on the PS3 version, i mean if they DID look the same i would be rather disapointed, bet both my balls that ridge racer 8 will look the same on both machine.

find it strange though that 360 version looks better...

Is RR6 Region Free ???

Wow the 360 version looks better, I didn't expect that at all.

I got the RR6 yesterday having a load of fun with it, i forgot how enjoyable RR can be.I fail to see how that is a negative, first thing i did, was options voices off.

Jolli did u get it from that same Canadian website ? might as well order it with Viva Pinata.

No Alimo i got it second hand, I should have Viva Pinata in the next couple of days hopefully :)

Ok thx ;)

This is a great disappointment to say the least. To know this is nothing more than a $60 rehash of a year old $20 X360 game - Namco, this new disappointment is a new low even for you.

Maybe it would not have been such a disappointment if they did not name the game Ridge Racer 7 (which it is clearly not) and had named it Ridge Racer 6 Extreme Edition or Director's Cut or something, allowing the player to know before hand that it is a remake. but to imply this game is the next full iteration in the Ridge Racer franchise is a slap in the face to fans - I actually know people who are purchasing the PS3 over this game. They are going to be sorely depressed when they find out it is nothing more than a remake of last year's RR6 for Xbox 360 - a game that can be had for a mere $20 brand new at any retailer.

Anyway, looking at the pics, it is obvious that some things worked better on the X360 and some things worked better on the PS3. I am disappointed however, that considering the amount of time that Namco has had with the core game code (all the tracks, AI, collision, voice overs, model designs, etc. were finished a year ago when they released RR6 to X360), that the PS3 version does not show a significant graphical and auditory upgrade over the X360 version. Most games given an extra years worth of time to work on a project, and you start getting night and day examples of what is possible with the same program.

But then the way I figure things, the graphical quality of the game had to stay low as no doubt getting the game to run at 1080p was more important (especially to Sony, who needed at least one game that ran at 1080p) than actually making any real improvements on the game. As we all know by now, rendering at 1080p provides more than double the amount of on-screen pixels than the same render at 720p. Unfortunately, the laws of physics state that you have the same amount of time per screen refresh to render more than double the pixels. In videogaming, this refresh is usually timed in 1/30th or 1/60th of a second, depending on what frame rate you are shooting for. RR7, just like RR6 was no doubt shooting for 60fps. When you do the math, to hit that internal frame rate, but do it with more than double the pixels, you wind up with only half the amount of time to render, texture and apply special effects (normal maps, lighting, shaders, etc.) to each pixel. Under 1080p, with less than half the time to work on each pixel as under 720p, the sacrifice is going to be in graphic quality. Whereas (for example) in a 720p environment a programmer may be able to render 20 seperate effects per pixel, under a 1080p environment, the developer only has time enough to render just 10 of those 20 effects. This is one of the reasons that Insomniac had to create Resistance: Fall of Man at 720p and not at the promised 1080p. The graphics in Resistance are about on par with a game like Call of Duty 3 (actually, I think that CoD3 is a bit more detailed), and even at that level of graphic quality, trying to shoehorn all those textures and effects into a 1080p environment is murder - and I will not even get into the RAM requirements from proper rendering a highly detailed graphics at 1080p. Let's just say that neither X360 or PS3 have it in them, and leave it at that.

Ridge Racer 6/7 made the perfect poster child for this endeavor. Even on the Xbox 360, the game's texturing was nothing to right home about - sitting side by side with other launch titles like Kameo or Call of Duty 2 or Condemned made RR6's graphics look already dated. But that is fine as later with some marginal graphical tweaks, Namco would be able to rerelease the same game running at 1080p on PS3 and pretend the game was RR7. And of course Sony talked up this game, as it was the only guaranteed 1080p game coming to PS3 (or any system this gen).

Anyway, I am disappointed with Namco over RR7. But I guess I should have seen this coming. RR6 did not sale well on 360 (hence the reason the game can be purchased brand new for only $20) and I guess Namco had to make the money up somewhere. They just should not have called it RR7. That's just plain mean, and unfair to fans of the series.

Now I have to go and break it to my friend that RR7 and RR6 are the same game. As this was the only game he was really looking forward to, maybe he'll do like me and just sell his PS3 on eBay now.

Supposedly RR6 runs natively at 1080p/60 also.

Has anyone tried it out ?

Well i have heard DOA4 and RR6 both run natively at 1080p (i took it with a pinch of salt)

I remember Itagaki talking in an interview saying that DOA4 was developed with 1080i in mind, so maybe that means it's actually rendered in 1080p. (could explain why it's not much of a jump graphically over DOA3 :P)

I can't see DOA4 running in 1080p somehow, but who knows.

My dreams keep coming true, I couldnt be any happier:)

Wow, ummm kind of sad really.

Yah well 720p looks good enough for me. I'd rather have better graphics than slightly better image quality.

They both look like crap to me.

LOL