Comments with -5 or lower "thumbs" are removed from display.

• 
  -2 thumbs!

  Sereph | March 14, 2008
  Oh come on, get a real gaming console dumbass.
• 
  7 thumbs!

  Xenctuary | March 14, 2008
  Ah, but where's the inherent online play, ubiquitious voice chat, active friend lists, built-in leaderboards, downloadable content, achievements system and custom soundtracks? And that's not to mention the high-definition graphics and purposely confusing Microsoft Points purchase model! Uh, actually, scratch that last one!
  
  
  
  Otherwise fair comments made by Nintendo there. Shame that developer had to break professionalism, though.
  • 
    1 thumbs!

    Storm | March 14, 2008
    True, but that's not XBLA, it's XBL. On the matter of XBLA, they do bring out some decent titles like Puzzle Fighter, Uno, Bomberman, and some others, whilst Nintendo has the classic Nintendo games from the past, such as Mario, Zelda, etc.. Sure the Wii brings out more titles to choose from, but with XBL, there's more online interaction(three games I mentioned for XBLA can go on live to play others).
  • 
    0 thumbs!

    CRUNK JUICE | March 14, 2008
    NOt all of 360's games run in High-Definition
    • 
      1 thumbs!

      Xenctuary | March 14, 2008
      They actually all do, but, similar to the PlayStation 3, very few of them are rendered natively at 1080p.
      • 
        0 thumbs!

        CRUNK JUICE | March 14, 2008
        Actually no. Fair enough not all games are full HD on the PS3 but not all 360 games run in atleast 720p, if they did the devs would have to take graphical short cuts and not be able to do some affects like full Anisotropic Filtering and stuff like that
      • 
        0 thumbs!

        Cdemon | March 14, 2008
        You have no idea what you're talking about.
        
        What X360 game doesn't run at 720p?
      • 
        2 thumbs!

        Guticb | March 15, 2008
        They don't all run NATIVE 720p, but they do still run 720p. Halo 3 is an example of this. It natively runs at 640p, BUT it's upscaled to 720p, so technically, it is running HD.
  • 
    2 thumbs!

    BANDITO ATTACK | March 14, 2008
    i like this reply. you are a good man.
  • 
    0 thumbs!

    Sonic Flash | March 15, 2008
    I agree with Xenc. XBLA is some good stuff.
• 
  -1 thumbs!

  CRUNK JUICE | March 15, 2008
  Cdemon, no they dont. Most 360 games, even Halo 3, is rendered at 640p and then upscaled to 720p, they could render it at 720p but the game will look shit.
  • 
    -2 thumbs!

    Cdemon | March 15, 2008
    You still haven't given me a list. Halo 3 isn't rendered at your typical 640p, so don't even throw that shit out there.
    
    Since you're so knowledgeable, CRUNK JUICE (so hard to take you serious with that name) give me some examples.
    • 
      1 thumbs!

      Guticb | March 15, 2008
      It's been proven that Halo 3 runs at 640p natively. It's simply upscaled to 720p.
      
      Either way, it runs at 720p, but not natively.
      • 
        0 thumbs!

        Cdemon | March 15, 2008
        "Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers - both of which render at 1152x640 pixels. The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see - lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible - so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image. This ability to display a full range of HDR ... gives our scenes ... a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels."
        
        -Bungie
      • 
        1 thumbs!

        Guticb | March 15, 2008
        Your point? It's still 640p.
        
        Also, your lovely little quote does nothing but admit that the 360 wasn't capable of 720p natively
      • 
        -1 thumbs!

        Cdemon | March 16, 2008
        Like I said, it's not your typical 640p. It's two frame buffers used simultaneously to create one image.
        
        GG.
        
        And I love that list, Crunk Juice.
      • 
        1 thumbs!

        VeGiTAX2 | March 16, 2008
        Er I'm just wondering why I keep seeing the dropping of two frame buffers in this thing.
        
        Split alternate frame rendering isn't new, it's a method dating way back to the mid/late 90's I'd say it seems that by splitting the video memory as such that Bungie capped themselves on how high they could go. There are many solutions to HDR rendering, although with MS on their backs maybe they didn't have enough time to really explore all the different methods out there to accomplish the same effect without the sacrifice.
        
        Regardless doing SAFR on a single GPU is a bit odd of a choice and almost overkill to accomplish something that could have been tackled with more invested time.
        
        In the end I have no direct information on what methods they wanted to explore if they were just trying to use a median luminance, what their histogram threshold was, how they dealt with bright pixels in regard to tone mapping results and so on. But from what other developers have published in the field, it's possible without going out on the limb to force it together over two buffers. There was no need to go the excess step on the GPU and force it to do yet another pass to clean up the LDR before going out. Regardless of "well we weren't satisfied" there are other options that work but just like anything they need invested time.
        
        In the end, all this "not your typical 640p" stating means nothing. Of course it's not your typical HDR, it's using an excess pass to render again while reducing the memory overhead in the process as a sacrifice to make up for either a lack of time to properly correct the HDR or just to cut a corner. It doesn't make it better, it's not like the 360 was using a hidden secondary GPU to do it.
        
        A note for those going on about how incapable the 360 is, many companies have already adjusted for the linear sRGB curve and this year there have been publications released to the public so that future devs can release games with proper dynamic range lighting with a fraction of the hassle involved for the console. It's not a case of a system being incapable, it's developers not spending enough time learning the hardware and how to adjust for it. No hardware is perfect, even the PS3 needs special consideration in multi-threading because of the 256kb cache on the SPU's.
• 
  3 thumbs!

  Gamesta100 | March 15, 2008
  I don't even own a 360 and I think this guy is full of crap.
• 
  3 thumbs!

  Seeker X | March 15, 2008
  According to the article, this is really relating to Designers being under constant pressure when they make games for Arcade, so it's not the system itself, it's the behind the scenes bullshit.
  • 
    2 thumbs!

    VeGiTAX2 | March 16, 2008
    Generally always ends up that way, usually we hear about the publishers themselves being the ones that impose the heart-ache on developers not usually the service provider itself.
• 
  0 thumbs!

  CRUNK JUICE | March 17, 2008
  I love the list to Cdemon...
  
  Tony Hawk's Project 8 - 1040×585 (with 4XAA)
  Perfect Dark Zero - 1152×640
  Halo 3 - 1152×640
  Call of Duty 3 - 1120×630
  Project Gotham Racing 3 - 1024×600 (2xMSAA)
  Tomb Raider Legend - 1024×600 (2xMSAA)
  Tony Hawk's Proving Ground - 1280×720
  Skate - 1280×720 (4x AA)
  The Darkness - 1280×720
  Call of Duty 4 - 1024×600 (2x AA)
  Elder Scrolls: Oblivion - 1024×600
  Virtua Fighter 5 - 1024×1024
  
  And that quote you gave from Bungie just really shows how incapable the 360 is.
  • 
    0 thumbs!

    VeGiTAX2 | March 17, 2008
    Tony Hawk's Proving Ground - 1280x720
    The Darkness - 1280x720
    Skate - 1280x720 (4x AA)
    
    1280x720 is 720P... your point apparently is titles that aren't native 720 or 1080.
    
    The resolution lists are quite easy to access. (Beyond3D was nice enough of a source this time)
    
    PS3:
    Army of Two = 685p
    Call of Duty 3 (screenshot) ~ 1088x624 (2x AA)
    Call of Duty 4 = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Conan (demo) = 1024x576 (no AA)
    Def Jam Icon (screenshot) = 1152x648 (no AA)
    GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1280x1080 (2x AA)
    Guitar Hero 3 = 1040x585 (no AA)
    Jericho (demo) = 996x560 (2x AA)
    MX vs ATV (demo) = 1024x576 (no AA)
    Pirates des Caraibes (screenshot) = 768x1080 (no AA)
    Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction = 1280x704 (2xAA, centered on 720p output)
    The Darkness (demo) = 1024x576 (no AA)
    Tony Hawk's Proving Ground (demo) = 1024x576 (no AA)
    Transformers (screenshot) = 960x1080 (no AA)
    Virtua Fighter 5 (screenshot) = 1024x1024 (no AA)
    WWE 08 (screenshot) = ? 640x720 ? (2x AA)
    
    Xbox 360:
    Call of Duty 3 (screenshot) = 1040x624 (2x AA)
    Call of Duty 4 (screenshot) = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Conan (demo) = 1024x576 (no AA)
    Fifa 2006 (demo) = 1024x576 (2x AA)
    Fifa 2007 (demo) = 1200x675 (no AA)
    Halo 3 = 1152x640 (no AA)
    MotoGP 2006 (screenshot) = 1280x1024 (framebuffer grab from AVS Forum member)
    NCAA Football 08 (demo) = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Oblivion (screenshot) = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Perfect Dark Zero (demo) = 1152x640 (no AA)
    Pro Evolution Soccer 6 (demo) = 1024x576 (2x AA)
    Project Gotham Racing 3 (demo) = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Ridge Racer 6 (demo) = 1440x810 (no AA)
    Tomb Raider Legend (demo) = 1024x600 (2x AA)
    Tony Hawk's Project 8 (screenshot) = 1040x585 (2x AA)
    Virtua Figther 5 (demo) = 1024x1024 (4x AA)
    
    Amazing, they share a remarkable amount of titles not meeting official spec. D:
    
    Please show both sides next time around.
• 
  0 thumbs!

  CRUNK JUICE | March 17, 2008
  Okay fair enough, but bar the GT demo it seems as if its only the multi-platform PS3 games that have been scaled up. Showing either poor porting due to lazy devs and/or the 360 being the lowest common denominator which they have to develop for first. Games that are PS3 exsclusive or had been delayed to make use of PS3 such as DiRT or GRAW2 are running in atleast 720p native. But the fact of the matter is, the 360 is just such as a under whelming piece of kit.
  • 
    0 thumbs!

    VeGiTAX2 | March 17, 2008
    GRAW2 is laughable as a title to use. If the game is running on the UE3 engine it should run on either platform with at least 720P by default. There's no custom coding to make it run better on any system because the SDK compiles specifically per system.
    
    Odd, 1 vs 3 1st party titles. Doesn't seem like much to get your undies in a twist over given that 2 of the titles are launch titles from 2005. Again, show both sides.
    
    Had I a clue about what DiRT was running I'd try to dump insight but I don't follow the series much anymore.
    
    I'd suggest actually researching tech documents from developers on the systems before boiling off and making claims about a system being under-whelming. The 360 has a linear sRGB curve but it's nothing that ends up being the end of the world. The fact that most developers have adjusted for this for quite some time and that tech papers are out about it for free use seems to indicate that the problem has been addressed in bringing titles over that have been built on the PC as opposed to through the SDK. Until you actually have something to back that up with, I'd suggest avoiding those statements. My prior statements on the 640P Halo 3 Double Frame buffer are merely about the shortcomings of a developer, not of a system nor are they about the hardware inside.