This is horrible news, anyone saying otherwise really isn't thinking about it, is on something or is just plain dumb...Sure, it might be enough today
but the fact is, the 360 has 16x more RAM overall than the PS2 and is now limited by its RAM.
Even if you think it will be enough in future and point out that stuff like The Last Of Us runs on the PS3, well, do you want developers to have to spend time optimizing the hell out of the game to make it run well and fit in the RAM or to spend that time adding awesome new features, making better graphics and bug fixing? It's not that they can't
make it work, it's just that the time would be much better spent elsewhere. Hell, I'm agreeing
with GrizzleBoy for once...
Originally Posted by H3avyM3tal
seriously, on which planet can a pc with 1gb of ram run win7 well? If you can even call it running.
I ran Vista on an Athlon XP 2600+ with 1GB RAM, it was faster than XP was.
Originally Posted by Phil~
Way more than enough ram.........on a 55" TV the PS3 looks bloody amazing. If 256mb looks good now, imagine more than 20 times that amount.
We really have different ideas of "amazing".
My desktop on my 55" TV? Amazing.
My 360? Not bad looking, but not really amazing, same for the PS3. You really can tell it's 720p.
Originally Posted by Avonosac
I'm trying to find out where all this CPU power is coming from where you all think more than 2 GB of addressable "system ram" would be necessary for any game engines to run.
I'll go tell Skyrim that it shouldn't be using 2GB of my system RAM then.
This is fine today
, 512MB was fine in 2005
, 512MB was not fine in 2009
let alone now, 8GB will not be fine in 2017 and game developers will be having to resort to tricks to make everything fit.