Lost Planet Using Only 60% Of Xbox 360’s Potential?

W00t, that game is awesome.

Very interesting game indeed, but I am suprised that its using 60%, but exactly how much or how many of the 3 cores are they actually using ?

don't forget to click the link and read the whole article...pretty interesting, and anyone sporting a Bruce Campbell shirt is okay in my book ;)

mm sexah. smooth. crisp. indeed. 60% plus 9 is 69&. what a Co-in-ka-dink

What that 60% means, we don't know, or, for that matter, whether it is possible to tweak every last bit of performance out of a multi-core system (Gabe Newell of Valve once remarked that multi-core programming, on a scale of one to ten for difficulty, was a 13), but even still... impressive. Lost Planet is definitely an interesting looking title.

cool

Thats pretty good for 60%, I didn't think anything of this game till I played the demo on Xbox Live, this one could be a fun one.

I am writing this post in the hopes that I will hear an intelligent response. Also, I'm hoping that the response is qualified.

I am here to basically tell you all that the Xbox 360's hardware is horrible. It runs on processors so shitty that Apple tossed them out in favor of the inferior Pentium 4 (Apple has good judgement).

Why do I say this? Because the Xbox360 is INCAPABLE of breezing through CURRENT GENERATION software. No system is a good system that can't at least provide mostly solid frame rates for higher-end graphics.

The X-Box accomplished this. The X-Box 360, however, CANNOT get a decent frame-rate in King Kong or Call of Duty 2.

How dare you, you say? Listen.

Call of Duty 2 gets a not-so-great framerate when shooting at enemies. But try this! Look down at the ground, or at a wall. Look at almost 100% pretty texture. And know that NO GEOMETRY (Thats polygons; people, buildings, vehicles, etc.) EXCEPT THAT WALL/FLOOR is being processed.

Now start shooting full auto... and watch the frame rate plummet to a crawl.

Now, I want you take note of the trend in games since the N64 days to RUIN PERFORMANCE AND DETAIL LEVEL with Anti-Aliasing.

Just like some developers scale down texture detail for always maximum frame-rate, these people pump so much anti-aliasing into their games that A, they end up having to lower the general texture detail and B, the game runs slower... THAN IT WOULD WITHOUT THE AA AND **HIGHER** DETAIL.

This is a conspiracy. An X-Box exclusive conspiracy. The company that made COD2 actually had to pay their employees money to custom fit the game for XB360. How? By making the texture detail relatively high at close range, and become depressingly inadequate at medium to long range.

Oh... and King Kong's detail levels aren't that impressive.

And now, interestingly...

Take a look at Hitman: Blood Money.

This time, the conspiracy works THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

All I have to say is that there is a serious problem with my computer, despite its $300 graphics card and 2.2 GHz processor.

And I was able to play through the demo at 1024x768 32 bit, with FULL anisotropy and anti-aliasing, with both set to HIGH level.

And the graphics in this game are mostly excellent.

What does this mean?

Hitman:Blood Money is a work of genius in using minimum texture memory for maximum graphical detail.

The version for the Xbox, which I just took a break from right now, is insanely good looking for an Xbox game.

But anyways.... Other than custom-sized games like Hitman: Blood Money (**NOT** COD2)...

you got jacked for $400.

Don't you remember Microsoft saying that this time around they were building it for the profit? And don't you even THINK that Microsoft can't negotiate business deals where they get hardware for insanely low prices.

Don't even think it for ONE SECOND. The most well-financed company in the world doesn't have enough pull to get a good deal on hardware?!!!

Yeah. Sure.

Let me break it down.

Where is the weakness in the Xbox 360?

The processor. PowerPCs are old and aren't even used in Macs anymore. Crappy, cheap IBM processors.

Perhaps the video card. Something isn't right there... either general power, or texture memory...

System Memory. Something may well not be right there, either.

Finally, the hard disk usage.

Or lack thereof.

I don't know just how much the HD helped the Xbox perform (as it didn't seem to use it for much), but it may be that the lack of hard disk usage on the XB360 is partly responsible.

.

-Asphyxium

ps. Although the frame rate is pretty bad, I was more impressed with what the Xbox did (with its hardware) with King Kong than the Xbox 360 did. I love that game. And had a sinking feeling after playing it on XB360 at a local Target.

W0rd to j0 m0mm@.

Oh... and please note.... there was significant SARCASM on that bit about Apple having good judgement.

And also, yes, I don't like Intel processors (I use AMD hardware). And yes, I do like the Xbox. Just not the 360, and crap PS2 to Xbox ports of cross-platform titles.

They do that so that the Xbox version doesn't blow the PS2 version out of the water.

Just another "theory".

(Look at Hitman: Blood Money and Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. Those were made from the TOP, down. )

-Asphyxium

conspiracy... Eh?

Do you own a 360?

"Enlightened" I believe you need to read up on your sources, reading one post and taking it with a grain of salt isn't enough. You need a wider perspective, not to mention Asp is a bit biased (though I feel hes going to deny it, but it is inexplicitly in his writing). Apple actually rejected the Ps3's cell in favor of Microsoft's triple PPC processor; this is from two different articles so I'm pretty sure I'm accurate on that. Stop trying to be a missionary to 'convert' others to your ideals, I'm only saying this becuase you exagerate conspiracies and what not, pure looney talk. Intellegent... your aiming more for the opposite.

TES4 is huge, and games that vast are bound to have glicthes (both on PC and 360). If you keep expecting too much you'll never enjoy ANY game. If you have reasonable expectations, you'll find more than you expected and find a better experience.

Want to join the Sony float becuase you're "so pissed off"? When they screw you over (semi-similar policies), what then? Asp, you seem to like to exagerate the negatives; I acutally have solid frame rates so I have no clue what you're talking about. I purchase only AAA titles and shun from the rest, KK wasn't nextgen to the least.

Fuse, explain to me this.

Why does Xbox run relatively high detail (for the time) games relatively well? Because it has more memory than most consoles, maybe because it uses a hard disk, because it has a powerful graphics card with a high amount of memory, and it has a stripped down interface from a PC (minimal operating system software).

Now know that the Xbox has a processor that's about 700 MHz (some Intel chip, I think).

I used to run a 1.2 GHz (1,200 MHz) computer with a 64 megabyte Geforce 3. The Xbox also uses a Geforce 3 with 64 megabytes, although it is more powerful because it's custom made with an additional pixel pipeline I believe.

OpenGL runs beautifully on that computer. Return to Castle Wolfenstein and Soldier of Fortune 2 run like a charm.

On the Xbox? Halo runs fine. But RTCW and SOF2 do NOT. AND, they sport significantly reduced detail levels. It was all but until Gun came out did a detail level comparable to RTCW emerge on the Xbox. (Look at the suits in the intro to RTCW on the PC, and then the suits in Gun. Minus those few extra polygons for the lip of the jackets in Gun.)

Why is this? Because Halo runs in DirectX, Microsoft's proprietary rendering system. RTCW and SOF2? The open source community's completely free OpenGL.

Also, I wish I knew why my 2.2GHz machine with a currently $300 graphics card (RadeonX1600Pro), which is at least 4 generations more advanced than the GeForce3, runs OpenGL games from 2 or maybe 3 years ago like crap.

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory (a free game made from RTCW engine, aka Quake 3 engine) runs horribly. There is no excuse for that.

And I believe that Microsoft has a hand in OpenGLs extremely violent and over-done death.

Wasn't OpenGL 2.0 supposed to come out years ago?

-Asphyxium

And, might I add, to take on Microsoft's brand new update to Direct X (7, I think?)? Which had finally become a rendering system that was ACTUALLY PLAUSABLE for development?

What happened?

-Asphyxium

Also, I have no idea what you mean by "Microsoft's triple PPC processor".

Microsoft does not manufacture processors.

The only thing I could find relating to ppc processor was an old IBM processor made for Macintosh.

PowerPC, the Xbox360's budget processor chip, is manufactured by IBM.

And since I'm posting... I just wanted to voice another conspiracy.

The bullshit notion that these consoles cost more to manufacture than they sell for.

The Nintendo Wii is less powerful or *SLIGHTLY* more powerful than an Xbox, though I don't know about the graphics card. And it is debuting at $250. Nintendo claims they will have a small loss from this.

Absolute bulls*it.

-Asphyxium

Your mama is an apple.

Er... everyone OK here?

-Asphyxium

Hi! I'm John Strass and i like your site!
Thank you!