Am I missing something here?

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:34

Just got one of the new 360s with Reach. Fired it up for the first time and I have to say I am less than impressed.

This is my first time playing a console game since the original Xbox, so it's been a while.

I figured with all the hype surrounding this game (people saying it's amazing and what have you) I'd give it a go, but seriously what's the deal? The graphics look (IMO) pretty crap and there seems to be this weird haze over everything, as if they knew it looked rubbish so they tried to cover it up.

Yes I understand the 360 uses oldish hardware and yes I get it's only 200 quid. Is this really the best it has to offer though?

Perhaps I've become spoilt by my lovely PC

Sorry for the rant. I'm just a little disappointed. And yeah I realise this is in general discussion, but I figured if I made it in the gaming section I would just get flamed even more.

Okay enough said

Amnesia · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:41

im hungry

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:45

Amnesia said:
im hungry

Toasted bacon butty? I'm gonna make one now

franco_22 · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:45

You should have bought a PS3 or a new graphics card instead.

EdGey · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:46

I thought it was common knowledge that consoles suck unless you are cheap or plan on having freinds around to play with you.

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:47

franco_22 said:
You should have bought a PS3 or a new graphics card instead.

I have a GTX 470, my PC is fine

The PS3 is really that different?

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:52

EdGey said:
I thought it was common knowledge that consoles suck unless you are cheap or plan on having freinds around to play with you.

I've always loved consoles though. Used to have all the Nintendo ones growing up and was really in the Sega Saturn and PS

Guess my break of 4 years has changed things

skiba · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:54

The graphics will never be as good as a top-end PC obviously, it's the gameplay, convenience an playability that make consoles that much more attractive. The fact that I can sit on my couch playing RDR with a pad instead of nerding over a desk with a keyboard and mouse.

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 05:58

skiba said:
The graphics will never be as good as a top-end PC obviously, it's the gameplay, convenience an playability that make consoles that much more attractive. The fact that I can sit on my couch playing RDR with a pad instead of nerding over a desk with a keyboard and mouse.

Yeah that makes sense. I'm just a little surprised at how poor the graphics actually are. I figured that now the 360 has been out for a few years they would have optimized it to at least be some what impressive. Guess not

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 06:01

RDR looks pretty nice. Better than Reach

Raumarik · 18 Sep 2010 at 06:16

skiba said:
The graphics will never be as good as a top-end PC obviously, it's the gameplay, convenience an playability that make consoles that much more attractive. The fact that I can sit on my couch playing RDR with a pad instead of nerding over a desk with a keyboard and mouse.

Move your PC into the living room and buy a wireless controller? Never seen the problem with that - I use to play many games sitting on my sofa with a projector and wireless 360 PC controller

sunama · 18 Sep 2010 at 06:50

AdladUK said:
The graphics look (IMO) pretty crap and there seems to be this weird haze over everything, as if they knew it looked rubbish so they tried to cover it up.

Brilliant!!!

starfighter · 18 Sep 2010 at 06:51

What were you expecting. It is a 5 year old console that cost less than a PC graphics card...

A few extra features, maps, and missions is all you can expect until they bring out some new consoles.

Natal looks rubbish anyway, can't see it being good for FPS games at all. Sonys version looks better and I can imagine myself using that for Killzone, shame Halo and Gears of war are on the 360.

Either way instead of beta testing this rubbish I will just wait for the next lot of consoles. I reckon a new Xbox will be out next year.

Good thing I own a PC ,360 and PS3.

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 07:07

starfighter said:
What were you expecting. It is a 5 year old console that cost less than a PC graphics card...

You're right and I wasn't trying to flame with this thread, I guess I was just a little taken back at how bad the graphics actually were. I've been spoilt by having a sweet PC. Going back to consoles is just not gonna work, unless it's for nostalgia or chill out sessions

sunama · 18 Sep 2010 at 07:33

AdladUK said:
I've been spoilt by having a sweet PC. Going back to consoles is just not gonna work, unless it's for nostalgia or chill out sessions

I think somebody else alluded to the fact that consoles are a fraction of the cost of a mid-high end PC. Using cost as a basis of comparison, by rights, consoles shouldn't even be in the same ball park as a decent PC.

For the reasons that you stated, I would NEVER buy/use a console for gaming, as the graphics are sub-standard, especially after you have used a PC.

Obviously, if I didnt own a decent PC, then a console would be an attractive proposition for gaming purposes, as it works out cheaper to buy a new console than to go through a rigorous PC upgrade.

antijoke · 18 Sep 2010 at 07:39

Yes you are missing something.

How is it connected to your tv/monitor?

Fr0dders · 18 Sep 2010 at 08:09

looks pretty darn good to me. as above, what cable are you using ?

I'm thinking your not using HDMI as you dont get one with the xbox 360 anymore. IF you use the included cables it will run in standard definition.

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 08:26

anticonscience said:
Yes you are missing something.

How is it connected to your tv/monitor?

Yeah I'm using a HDMI cable purchased separately

Fr0dders · 18 Sep 2010 at 08:28

hmm

what TV have you got ?

AdladUK · 18 Sep 2010 at 08:30

MrLOL said:
hmm

what TV have you got ?

Right now I'm using a 23" LCD monitor which has a HDMI input. However I have a 32" Samsung arriving later today