Top
400°

Xbox 720 not needed, Battlefield 3 HD proof of that

With just two days to go until the release of Battlefield 3, the number of PC Vs. Xbox 360 Vs. PS3 have now been done to death. Okay, so we already know that the PC version if far superior, but you have to remember that Microsoft’s console is now five years old. There has been much speculation that the Xbox 720 will soon be with us, but looking at a screenshot of Battlefield 3 on the 360 with its HD install pack makes us wonder if there’s any rush?

Read Full Story >>
inentertainment.co.uk
The story is too old to be commented.
wwm0nkey2192d ago

A new console generation will be needed in 2 years time, we are now hitting the point where more and more games on the PC are taking advantage of things like DX11, PhysX and Tessellation.

With all the rumors piling up it seems we will see the new generation of Xbox in 2013 anyways.

da_2pacalypse2192d ago

Yes, and while BF3 is a good proof that this generation has some wind in it, Dice has said time and time again that they've basically maxed out anything they can do with this generation of consoles.

gamingdroid2192d ago

Any gain you get in software optimization can likely be outdone by brute force within 18-months. Computing power doubles roughly every 18-months.

Why over-invest? Let's have shorter cycles! On average you will pay less, but get the best performance!

cannon88002192d ago

lol at the title. That's like saying "oh I'll be totally fine going against top fuel dragsters with my honda civic."

rabidpancakeburglar2192d ago

A consoles visuals are proof of nothing. The 360 is on it's last legs, anyone can see that and the 720(or whatever it will be called) will be needed sooner rather than later. That said, I've only had my 360 for about 5 months and don't want to be spending money on another console, so I'm happy for the 360 to stick around for a while.

gamingdroid2192d ago

I think all consoles are all on past their last leg. They are exceeding their normal console cycle, and PC is making it glaringly obvious.

Too bad I prefer gaming on consoles....

WitWolfy2192d ago

not wanting to sound like a troll but, its not our fault you decided to buy an Xbox NOW when the rest of us feel its time for next gen to wow us again.

ECM0NEY2192d ago ShowReplies(3)
Theyellowflash302192d ago

BS! Graphics are NOT EVERYTHING! What about framerate. BF3 is still locked at 30 FPS with 32 players online while the PC has better graphics, double the framerate, and double the players online. We do need new consoles. I want 60 frames per a second standard for EVERY game on the Xbox 720, Wii U (ground up games for Wii U), and PS4.

DarkSymbiote2192d ago

No thanks, 60 FPS makes cutscenes very weird.

Pandamobile2192d ago

They can still cap cutscenes at 30 FPS if it really makes a difference.

I prefer the fluidity that 60 FPS offers, even for cutscenes.

kcuthbertson2192d ago

You're thinking 120Hz broadcast television.

Pandamobile2192d ago

"BF3 is still locked at 30 FPS with 32 players online while the PC has better graphics, double the framerate, and double the players online. "

24 players*

And PC framerates are variable depending on hardware. If you have enough horse power you can run the game at way more than 60 FPS.

Shadowaste2192d ago (Edited 2192d ago )

it only has 24 players online for consoles, 12v12,
and the framerate goes down to 20 sometimes, and it isn't even hd, it's sub-hd 704p on both consoles.
Not to mention the total lack of anti aliasing and the screen tearing and covered in jaggies!

I'd say to the author of this article, BF3 proves we needed new consoles this year.

Pc gamers will be playing in 1080p, 1200p, 1440p, 1600p, or even Eyefinity 7680x1600p at 60-300 frames, with 64-127 other people all on one server!

Dice has come out and said publically the console versions are equal to the pc version running at the LOWEST possible settings.

Not medium, not high, not very high, not ultra.

The pc version of this game is TWO generations ahead of the console version.

When new consoles come out the will NOT run a game like BF3 in 1600p with 8x anti aliasing at 60 frames in DX11!!

Laxman2192d ago

People dont seem to understand something though. While I completely agree with you, the human eye is only capable of seeing ~25 'Frames' per second. So 30 FPS is still more than the human eye is capable of in real life.

Theyellowflash302192d ago

While that might be true... what I know is I've seen games run in 60 FPS like Bayonetta (x360), Ninja Gaiden, COD, DMC 4 and Ive seen games that run in 30 FPS like Battlefield, Enslaved, Castlevainia Lords of Shadow, Uncharted ect and their is a clear different to game speed and fluidity.

STONEY42191d ago

That statistic is such BS. I can pretty much determine my framerate with my eyes, don't even need an FPS monitor for it like Fraps. There's a HUGE difference between 25 and 30 and 60.

Laxman2191d ago

Stoney, how is it in any way 'BS'? Dont get me wrong, I understand that you can tell the difference between 125, 30 and 60 FPS, its pretty obvious, but it doesnt change the fact that the human eye is only around 25 'frames' per second. Thats a biological fact, not my opinion or a statistic.

lategamer2192d ago

Consoles actually have 24 players online.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2191d ago
Show all comments (60)
The story is too old to be commented.