Heavy Rain not on the PC

[RanD00M]

It's not on the PC !?!?!?! OH MY GOSH....

*sarcasm*

OP what rock were you living under to not know that it is a PS3 exclusive?

 

[Julianking93]

The game was always to be a PS3 exclusive, so no.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Considering I have no interest in the game, not at all. I don't quite understand what's supposed to be good about it.

It's just that Fahrenheit was a wonderful game (or, at least, for some people).
I actually know people who want to buy a PS3 to play this. (Actually, I kinda bought a PS3 to play this).
What's supposed to be good? Well, the storyline, the little features, the voice acting, the characters, the range of possibilities which is especially impressive since this game will clearly be an interactive movie.
I hope that covers it.

 

[jboking]

snip

I'm just responding to the portion below for right now, because it's late, late, late, but i want to get this out there. I'll respond to the rest in a PM later on. or something

Here's the thing. The gaming industry already understands how to implement choices and maturity within games. I can show you one example of a choice that provides you a choice that is neither baby eating or mother Teresa and actually causes you to think.

Spoiler: Fallout 3: The Pitt spoilers

Towards the end of Fallout 3: The Pitt you are given a choice. You stand in the house of an oppressive king. In the house is the cure to a terrible disease, however, the cure is a small child(the oppressive kings daughter). The resistance wants you to kidnap the kid and bring it back to them where they will try to get the cure to spread to everyone. The choice seems pretty clear there doesn't it? Hold on though, because while talking to the king you get a different view of who he is. The king fully intends to use his daughter to create the cure and give it to everyone, however, he wants to do the tests himself(well, let his wife do it, but that's beside the point) to ensure the childs safety. The king tells you that after the people are cured and things start turning for the better he will stop oppressing and make all of the citizens of the Pitt equal in an attempt to try and make the Pitt back into the great city it once was.

So along comes the conundrum. Neither choice is morally wrong, and how you go about implementing the choice is completely up to you, you can even avoid the choice all together and just run away. The Fallout series has numerous instances of this kind of action(that's the entire fallout series, so we knew how to do this in 1997. I think what you should really be asking is why developers don't want to constantly do this, maybe it's too hard or daunting on the player.)

and of course, all of Fallout is practice in your choices either biting you in the ass or helping you, or simply providing a new dialogue tree.

I understand that all of these choices are measured and very "(A, B, or C) + after effects" styled, but that's all I can imagine Heavy Rain will do anyway.

To throw something out there, I'm likely going to buy this game(timing of it's release and exclusivity makes me want it) I'm just taking a look at the more boring aspects of the game so I'm ready for them when they hit.

Let me ask you, what karma bonus did you get in either situation? If you gave the child to the resistance/let the king experiment on her, did you get good or negative karma? That's a huge part that I think you're missing out, since regardless of what you do you will be judged positively or negatively, indicating that there is somehow a "right" answer when there really shouldn't be. And really, was it a tough moral choice because you cared what the resistance wanted? Or was it hard to choose because you didn't know exactly what you were getting at the end? I find that once you go on the fallout Wiki, those choices become so much easier

You don't get a karma nudge in either direction for your choice. Your choice in this instance is not judged by the computer. Also, the end results(what you get from both sides) is pretty much the same. If you stick with the Tyrant, you get the ability to smelt bullets and get some armor if you find the materials. If you go with the Resistance, you get the ability to smelt bullets(literally the exact same benefit preformed in the exact same way), as well as the King's power armor and all of the slavers armor, as you or the resistance members will probably kill them. Either way, your looking at some armor and ammo smelting. There is no significant benefit from either side. It is entirely up to you what you do and the game wont punish you in either way.

The only real difference is how the people around the Pitt treat you when you try to talk to them. Which I have to admit, no matter which path you take, there will be someone who will hate you and make you feel like shit for you choice.

And for every example you give me, I can give 10 counter-examples (okay, exaggeration, but you get what I mean.) To be perfectly honest, that is a classic example of those cheap "save the girl, or DON'T!" situations that aren't good situations for "choices". InFamous has a Karma bar, touting choice to help morph the city into what you want, but it hardly did anything except add a red tone to the sky when you're bad (it was a great game overall, just commenting on the karma system). You never really connected with the citizens of Empire City as regardless you got experience for however you wanted to play.

Wait, did we play the same game? I played InFamous and made sure I was the most evil mother fucker there ever was. You know what happened? The citizens started to try and attack and kill me! It's not like they're that much of a threat, but I'd call them trying to kill me an unintended side effect, the likes of which you reference in Heavy Rain. I wanted them to fear me and run away at the sight of me, in fact, that's what the game made it seem like would happen. Instead they gang up on me and try to take me out. I also played it once through on good and ended up with the citizens on the sides of the road cheering me on as I beat up the different gang guys. Not to mention that there are two story lines that changed in bits if you were good or bad, but personally that wasn't quite as big of a deal for me as the citizens were.

Similarly, I was playing Far Cry 2, and I suddenly got a mission where I could go to Mike's Bar to save my friends in crime or go to the Pala church and save the minister. There was nothing to show that the event was leading up, just a badly voice-acted guy who talked too fast saying "The enemy is at Mike's Bar, lining your friends up to shoot them, but also at the church in Pala, I suppose it is your choice of what you want to do, good luck, I need to get the hell out of here, it is not safe here," in the most monotone voice ever...yeah, I really care what happens to anyone now...

So a voice actor ruined what should have been you choosing between two allies, something that should be praised as free choice in the game. That's....sad. I can't see how something that small ruined the mission for you. Don't get me wrong, I didn't like Far Cry 2(mostly because of the bullshit malaria). However, that game is the single biggest "Your choice of what to do." They basically said, "Here is the beginning, here is the end, everything in between is up to you. Don't want to make friends, don't it's entirely up to you." I would argue that Heavy Rain will be completely unable to keep up with the level of free choice interactivity that Far Cry 2 had. Far Cry 2 left you with about a thousand ways to approach any mission or any action. I can't see how Heavy Rain's "Choose your own adventure - Chips or apple" style could even keep up with Far Cry 2.

Though I suppose I'm trailing off, what I'm mostly talking about now is poor implementation of characters and whatnot, though hopefully I'm getting my point across.

Well, kind of. You got across that other games don't due it too well. However, you did not prove that Heavy Rain could do it better with it's mechanic. You provide no examples, no solid ideas that can't be rebutted.

If your claim was that characterization in video games is off - fine.

If your claim is that Heavy Rain will solve that problem or move the industry towards solving that problem - No dice.

 

[Ekonk]

I'm glad it's not raining on my PC

har har har...

/facepalm

 

[Kermi]

For some reason, I do believe that this game will be BETTER on a console, anyway.

Well, it's designed around Dualshock3 QTE's. I personally don't know how well the controls will work, but I'm hoping the story will be engaging. I'm approaching this game as a visual choose-your-own adventure novel.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

Jumpilion, stop bitching people out. Not one person is blaming anyone for there problems, just instead using an internet for cathartic purposes. Maybe you want people with AIDs to also harden the fuck up and deal with it.

Heavy Rain is heavily grounded in reality (hopefully it will stay that way, from what I've read about Fahrenhiet in the last half)

It isn't, I have yet to see one real event.

Same thing with Kratos, he's him, not you. As badass as Kratos is, you aren't him, you just control him in a sense that all you can do with him is dismember centaurs

And all you do in Heavy Rain is give snacks to children. Don't use gross oversimplification.

With Heavy Rain, every little thing brings you closer to the character, so much so that you actually become them. With one of the characters, you choose to give your kid an apple instead of chips for a snack, not because it said "Give him the apple...OR THE CHIPS!" but because you felt the need to give him something healthy. Impose your own sense of parental discipline on him, let him watch TV or force him to go to bed early.

Every game does this when you're not in a cutscene or a completely railroaded quick time event, though usually in a totally different situation.

These choices, these minute choices, build up the character more and more until the end where everything you've done up to that point will have the ultimate effect. Maybe by not brushing your teeth, your boss thinks "P.U, you smell" and that in turn has a butterfly effect on the future. Who knows what could happen? Heavy Rain also experiments in that effect, that one action can lead to 10 more consequences, good or bad.

Which means little when you realize that there are an uncountable number of consequences for an action in every other game.

It's very hard to really do that with Kratos, as the most choice you really have with him is "Do I upgrade the Blades first, or the Cestus'?" and "Disembowel or not Disembowel?" I'm not saying it's not possible, though from the situations in Half-Life and God of War, it's extremely unlikely.

There isn't more choice in Heavy Rain than a traditional game by a long shot. In chess you would need a computer to count all the possible choices that can be made, in a simple rts you can easily multiply that by billions. If you're arguing about the importance of the choices then I can see your point since maybe forgeting to flush will have some really important unforseen consequence. Although according to David Cage there are no consequences since you always win. So what we have is arbitrary consequences, like character appearance in an RPG.

But, as I said before, those games make you care about the characters in a different way. And I don't like the way you said "while still letting me have fun," as you haven't played Heavy Rain to really tell if it's "fun" or not. Granted, I haven't played Heavy Rain either, and I could be completely wrong about it, but at least keep an open mind in it.

We care about characters in the same way if we go by a pure gaming standard. "How can I use this person," and "how will this person antagonise me?"

I'm going to go all philosophical here and say "What really constitutes as a 'game'"?

Easy, games are problems made to be solved for entertainment. The line is fuzzy with Heavy Rain because it is possible to make games out of something that is not a game. Forge mode in Halo is not a game but you can decide to use forge to build the tallest tower you can. David Cage says Heavy Rain is movie where you write the script so I agree with him about the "game" not being a game. You can still make a game out of it though, like "catch the killer."

What's the real problem with having a game gravitate towards a "movie" than a "game"?

You answered your own question. All games are movies anyway, I asume that you meant movie conventions as opposed to game conventions.

I don't see any other game provide this much interactivity, "movie" or not, within the confines of it being defined as a "game".

It has much less interactivity and it also isn't a game.

I don't know how Heavy Rain will turn out, I could be completely wrong about it and it could suck donkey nuts, who knows. But at least try to keep an open mind when looking into Heavy Rain. It's not for everyone, of course, but damnit not everyone has to be against it just because you brush your teeth in it.

I think you've noticed that were talking about the quality of concept not the execution, though the viability of the execution is a detriment to the concept.

"It could totally work on 360 if you basically strip it down to a worse game"

The logical conclusion of this is that many games on the PS3 should not exist. Particularly Dragon Age. It's a pretty good argument against Valve working on PS3 games as well.

Since I'm done responding to you I might as well adress my own problems with the game. If Heavy Rain is truly a nongame without win conditions or lose conditions that makes it the little brother of The Sims and its logical conclusion is Gmod or even microsoft paint. Even in it own style of play HR is highly restricted. I think calling the amount of choice you get in one of the QTE esque scenes limited would be generous at any one time you might have up to four choices at once. You might point out that you can move freely most of the time but even then the number of objects to interact with and what you can do with them. It isn't a sandbox enviorment that your in, you can't tell your character to have sweet lesbian sex with a hooker unless you get a prompt. Why even make combat scenes in this game, giving you an extremely watered down and simplistic version of what you do in nearly every action game. At least giving you the chance to brush your teeth is something you usually don't do in games not called "The Sims."

 

[jamesworkshop]

"It's a PS3 exclusive that is said to have revolutionary graphics for a console."

Note that phrase, "For a Console", by the standards of upto date Pc graphics that is not exactly revolutionary.

Fuck that, I'd rather that they be honest and not do a PC version than give us a shit port. Single platform exclusives? fine. I don't mind. PC has S.T.A.L.K.E.R, remember?

This is true

Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow anymore. Heavy Rain character motion is still top notch, as well as the facial graphics - far better than anything on PC such as Crysis and STALKER: CoP, which has nice lighting, but it stops at that.
It's because of the Cell the PS3 can still have very sweet graphics, as even the i7 sucks at rendering, whereas the Cell can do field of depth effects as well as many other processes at any given time (Uncharted 2 for example).

While not trying to pick a fight (it is Chrismtas), and I agree that Heavy Rain looks good (well more so, I'm a Fahrenheit fanboy so...), if you start your sentence with "Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow any more", I am convinced that this is a fight you will lose, especially considering the PS3 is a closed system.

Well PC CPUs can't render anything better than PS1 graphics, and even that's a push whereas the cell can render many advanced effects such as field of depth, not to mention the PS3 is still capable of procedural geometry creation even though the GPU is based on the 7950. Plus, no realistic PC can actually play games like STALKER: CS or Crysis at 60 FPS, and I doubt many PC's could play Wipeout HD at 1080p at a constant 60 FPS, considering that some multiplatform games aren't even played at an average 60 fps on PC's. Granted, PC's do ASF and AA better, but end of the day, if a game uses more efficient techniques for the same effect e.g. Killzone 2, what's the difference? So basically, yes there are PC games which could/will look ace, but not until there are cards able to play the games (The 5800 range is good...but a disappointing in terms of FPS), whereas the PS3 produces wow graphics out the box.

oh please my 9800GTX gets faster frame rates at higher resolutions in every multiplatfrom game out there
UT3
Devil may cry 4 (close to 3 times the framerate)
Batman AA
resident evil 5
street fighter 4
dead space
Mirrors edge (even with PhysX)
modern warfare 2
Borderlands
Dragon age origins
Fallout 3
Prototype

 

[tristow]

Considering I have no interest in the game, not at all. I don't quite understand what's supposed to be good about it.

same here

 

[jamesworkshop]

"It's a PS3 exclusive that is said to have revolutionary graphics for a console."

Note that phrase, "For a Console", by the standards of upto date Pc graphics that is not exactly revolutionary.

Fuck that, I'd rather that they be honest and not do a PC version than give us a shit port. Single platform exclusives? fine. I don't mind. PC has S.T.A.L.K.E.R, remember?

This is true

Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow anymore. Heavy Rain character motion is still top notch, as well as the facial graphics - far better than anything on PC such as Crysis and STALKER: CoP, which has nice lighting, but it stops at that.
It's because of the Cell the PS3 can still have very sweet graphics, as even the i7 sucks at rendering, whereas the Cell can do field of depth effects as well as many other processes at any given time (Uncharted 2 for example).

While not trying to pick a fight (it is Chrismtas), and I agree that Heavy Rain looks good (well more so, I'm a Fahrenheit fanboy so...), if you start your sentence with "Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow any more", I am convinced that this is a fight you will lose, especially considering the PS3 is a closed system.

Well PC CPUs can't render anything better than PS1 graphics, and even that's a push whereas the cell can render many advanced effects such as field of depth, not to mention the PS3 is still capable of procedural geometry creation even though the GPU is based on the 7950. Plus, no realistic PC can actually play games like STALKER: CS or Crysis at 60 FPS, and I doubt many PC's could play Wipeout HD at 1080p at a constant 60 FPS, considering that some multiplatform games aren't even played at an average 60 fps on PC's. Granted, PC's do ASF and AA better, but end of the day, if a game uses more efficient techniques for the same effect e.g. Killzone 2, what's the difference? So basically, yes there are PC games which could/will look ace, but not until there are cards able to play the games (The 5800 range is good...but a disappointing in terms of FPS), whereas the PS3 produces wow graphics out the box.

oh please my 9800GTX gets faster frame rates at higher resolutions in every multiplatfrom game out there
UT3
Devil may cry 4 (close to 3 times the framerate)
Batman AA
resident evil 5
street fighter 4
dead space
Mirrors edge (even with PhysX)
modern warfare 2
Borderlands
Dragon age origins
Fallout 3
Prototype

None of those games though are graphically heavy games, which means any comparison is pointless as they are played flawlessly on the PS3.
How's your card hold up with Far Cry 2, Crysis: Warhead, and STALKER: Clear Skies?
Yeah, not very well. I mean, it can't even play Call of Juarez at 1900 x 1200 at 60 FPS with AA. http://lly316.blogspot.com/2008/04/geforce-9800gtx-review-call-of-juarez.html
Unless you can chuck on a high resolution, AA and AAF, the PC hasn't got an advantage over PS3 graphics. At the moment, only the more expensive 200 series cards and the 5800 range can deal with large amounts of AA and AAF while at high resolutions. But then, performance vs. cost makes it ridiculous.
Plus, you aren't getting 60 FPS anywhere near all the time with games like CoD 5 or Fallout 3 - just check out the benchmarks.

30fps at 720p isn't flawless all of those game will play at a higher res and higher than 30fps
so far the PS3 runs no multiplatform game faster or with better graphics half the time it loses to the 360 anyway.
My card can handle crysis happily and farcry 2 no problem

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_4_5.gif
GTS 250 is basically the same card as a 9800gtx and 2560x1600 is double the resolution of 1080P

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_6_1.gif
1680x1050 not to far off 1080P still 8XAA CS for an £80 graphics card

 

[jamesworkshop]

"It's a PS3 exclusive that is said to have revolutionary graphics for a console."

Note that phrase, "For a Console", by the standards of upto date Pc graphics that is not exactly revolutionary.

Fuck that, I'd rather that they be honest and not do a PC version than give us a shit port. Single platform exclusives? fine. I don't mind. PC has S.T.A.L.K.E.R, remember?

This is true

Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow anymore. Heavy Rain character motion is still top notch, as well as the facial graphics - far better than anything on PC such as Crysis and STALKER: CoP, which has nice lighting, but it stops at that.
It's because of the Cell the PS3 can still have very sweet graphics, as even the i7 sucks at rendering, whereas the Cell can do field of depth effects as well as many other processes at any given time (Uncharted 2 for example).

While not trying to pick a fight (it is Chrismtas), and I agree that Heavy Rain looks good (well more so, I'm a Fahrenheit fanboy so...), if you start your sentence with "Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow any more", I am convinced that this is a fight you will lose, especially considering the PS3 is a closed system.

Well PC CPUs can't render anything better than PS1 graphics, and even that's a push whereas the cell can render many advanced effects such as field of depth, not to mention the PS3 is still capable of procedural geometry creation even though the GPU is based on the 7950. Plus, no realistic PC can actually play games like STALKER: CS or Crysis at 60 FPS, and I doubt many PC's could play Wipeout HD at 1080p at a constant 60 FPS, considering that some multiplatform games aren't even played at an average 60 fps on PC's. Granted, PC's do ASF and AA better, but end of the day, if a game uses more efficient techniques for the same effect e.g. Killzone 2, what's the difference? So basically, yes there are PC games which could/will look ace, but not until there are cards able to play the games (The 5800 range is good...but a disappointing in terms of FPS), whereas the PS3 produces wow graphics out the box.

oh please my 9800GTX gets faster frame rates at higher resolutions in every multiplatfrom game out there
UT3
Devil may cry 4 (close to 3 times the framerate)
Batman AA
resident evil 5
street fighter 4
dead space
Mirrors edge (even with PhysX)
modern warfare 2
Borderlands
Dragon age origins
Fallout 3
Prototype

None of those games though are graphically heavy games, which means any comparison is pointless as they are played flawlessly on the PS3.
How's your card hold up with Far Cry 2, Crysis: Warhead, and STALKER: Clear Skies?
Yeah, not very well. I mean, it can't even play Call of Juarez at 1900 x 1200 at 60 FPS with AA. http://lly316.blogspot.com/2008/04/geforce-9800gtx-review-call-of-juarez.html
Unless you can chuck on a high resolution, AA and AAF, the PC hasn't got an advantage over PS3 graphics. At the moment, only the more expensive 200 series cards and the 5800 range can deal with large amounts of AA and AAF while at high resolutions. But then, performance vs. cost makes it ridiculous.
Plus, you aren't getting 60 FPS anywhere near all the time with games like CoD 5 or Fallout 3 - just check out the benchmarks.

30fps at 720p isn't flawless all of those game will play at a higher res and higher than 30fps
so far the PS3 runs no multiplatform game faster or with better graphics half the time it loses to the 360 anyway.
My card can handle crysis happily and farcry 2 no problem

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_4_5.gif
GTS 250 is basically the same card as a 9800gtx and 2560x1600 is double the resolution of 1080P

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_6_1.gif
1680x1050 not to far off 1080P still 8XAA CS for an £80 graphics card

Multiplatform games are a poor way of comparing power as devs optimise the games for x86 CPUs. Playing games in anything less than DX10 is also retarded as DX9 is a little sh*t.
The reason I bring up Crysis, Far Cry 2 and STALKER: Clear Skies is because they are really the only games with the possible "Wow, that's far better than what any console game offers" effect. So far, there are only a few cards which can actually play those games at a respectable frame rate, meaning that all the "PCs are WAAAY better than PS3" talk is bull, because realistically, no one is going to have a PC capable of actually showing those kind of graphics off. Whereas a PS3 still manages to bring out amazing graphics which everyone can play, assuming you have a PS3.

true multiplat isn't a great display of power mainly due to the skill level of the coders but the point is that in the real world rather than theoritical power the the highest level of graphical fideltiy always ends up going to the PC.
Not all PC's are created equal their is a vast difference between what the average person has even compard to what i would consider low end equipment like say a 9800GTX it isn't the fastest card available but much more powerfull than a X800.
I have a PS3 and it does excatly what it is desinged to do and it does it well but it isn't the ultimate machine the cell is crazy powerfull but 512MB of ram split between framebuffer and CPU cache chokes it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhbIAlRqcLE&hd=1
Thats about the highest level of graphics i can get with my system

 

[Jumplion]

condense

Bleh bleh, I think we can stop here, that's enough of this right now. I'm glad we actually had a civilized debate on this, so we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll admit, I sort of trailed off into other topics instead of focusing on one, I tend to do that sometimes.

Jumpilion, stop bitching people out. Not one person is blaming anyone for there problems, just instead using an internet for cathartic purposes. Maybe you want people with AIDs to also harden the fuck up and deal with it.

....what? You're taking my debate too seriously, I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone, just posting my opinion on the subject. Someone provided a counter-point, I provided a counter-counter-point, simple as that. I don't know why you think I'm going around, cursing people off for not agreeing with me, I'm just having a friendly debate with jboking.

I would reply to your whole post, but I don't want to clutter up the thread any more. If you want to continue this conversation, just PM me and we'll continue it from there (to both jboking and Halo Fanboy).

 

[Zildjin81]

I'm glad it's not raining on my PC

har har har...

/facepalm

I was trying to be corny... in case you were wondering.

 

[Cthulus MailMan]

"It's a PS3 exclusive that is said to have revolutionary graphics for a console."

Note that phrase, "For a Console", by the standards of upto date Pc graphics that is not exactly revolutionary.

Fuck that, I'd rather that they be honest and not do a PC version than give us a shit port. Single platform exclusives? fine. I don't mind. PC has S.T.A.L.K.E.R, remember?

This is true

Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow anymore. Heavy Rain character motion is still top notch, as well as the facial graphics - far better than anything on PC such as Crysis and STALKER: CoP, which has nice lighting, but it stops at that.
It's because of the Cell the PS3 can still have very sweet graphics, as even the i7 sucks at rendering, whereas the Cell can do field of depth effects as well as many other processes at any given time (Uncharted 2 for example).

While not trying to pick a fight (it is Chrismtas), and I agree that Heavy Rain looks good (well more so, I'm a Fahrenheit fanboy so...), if you start your sentence with "Actually, PC graphics aren't all that wow any more", I am convinced that this is a fight you will lose, especially considering the PS3 is a closed system.

Well PC CPUs can't render anything better than PS1 graphics, and even that's a push whereas the cell can render many advanced effects such as field of depth, not to mention the PS3 is still capable of procedural geometry creation even though the GPU is based on the 7950. Plus, no realistic PC can actually play games like STALKER: CS or Crysis at 60 FPS, and I doubt many PC's could play Wipeout HD at 1080p at a constant 60 FPS, considering that some multiplatform games aren't even played at an average 60 fps on PC's. Granted, PC's do ASF and AA better, but end of the day, if a game uses more efficient techniques for the same effect e.g. Killzone 2, what's the difference? So basically, yes there are PC games which could/will look ace, but not until there are cards able to play the games (The 5800 range is good...but a disappointing in terms of FPS), whereas the PS3 produces wow graphics out the box.

oh please my 9800GTX gets faster frame rates at higher resolutions in every multiplatfrom game out there
UT3
Devil may cry 4 (close to 3 times the framerate)
Batman AA
resident evil 5
street fighter 4
dead space
Mirrors edge (even with PhysX)
modern warfare 2
Borderlands
Dragon age origins
Fallout 3
Prototype

None of those games though are graphically heavy games, which means any comparison is pointless as they are played flawlessly on the PS3.
How's your card hold up with Far Cry 2, Crysis: Warhead, and STALKER: Clear Skies?
Yeah, not very well. I mean, it can't even play Call of Juarez at 1900 x 1200 at 60 FPS with AA. http://lly316.blogspot.com/2008/04/geforce-9800gtx-review-call-of-juarez.html
Unless you can chuck on a high resolution, AA and AAF, the PC hasn't got an advantage over PS3 graphics. At the moment, only the more expensive 200 series cards and the 5800 range can deal with large amounts of AA and AAF while at high resolutions. But then, performance vs. cost makes it ridiculous.
Plus, you aren't getting 60 FPS anywhere near all the time with games like CoD 5 or Fallout 3 - just check out the benchmarks.

30fps at 720p isn't flawless all of those game will play at a higher res and higher than 30fps
so far the PS3 runs no multiplatform game faster or with better graphics half the time it loses to the 360 anyway.
My card can handle crysis happily and farcry 2 no problem

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_4_5.gif
GTS 250 is basically the same card as a 9800gtx and 2560x1600 is double the resolution of 1080P

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1261535527nw0lFGVCHH_6_1.gif
1680x1050 not to far off 1080P still 8XAA CS for an £80 graphics card

Multiplatform games are a poor way of comparing power as devs optimise the games for x86 CPUs. Playing games in anything less than DX10 is also retarded as DX9 is a little sh*t.
The reason I bring up Crysis, Far Cry 2 and STALKER: Clear Skies is because they are really the only games with the possible "Wow, that's far better than what any console game offers" effect. So far, there are only a few cards which can actually play those games at a respectable frame rate, meaning that all the "PCs are WAAAY better than PS3" talk is bull, because realistically, no one is going to have a PC capable of actually showing those kind of graphics off. Whereas a PS3 still manages to bring out amazing graphics which everyone can play, assuming you have a PS3.

true multiplat isn't a great display of power mainly due to the skill level of the coders but the point is that in the real world rather than theoritical power the the highest level of graphical fideltiy always ends up going to the PC.
Not all PC's are created equal their is a vast difference between what the average person has even compard to what i would consider low end equipment like say a 9800GTX it isn't the fastest card available but much more powerfull than a X800.
I have a PS3 and it does excatly what it is desinged to do and it does it well but it isn't the ultimate machine the cell is crazy powerfull but 512MB of ram split between framebuffer and CPU cache chokes it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhbIAlRqcLE&hd=1
Thats about the highest level of graphics i can get with my system

Yeah a PS3 isn't the ultimate machine, as a PC with say the 5890 or two would out perform it easily. However, cost vs power, the PS3 is a better deal, plus if PC's were running the Cell, they'd be much better as it's a much better CPU design then anything AMD or Intel offer at the moment.

Can you two quit arguing over this. It all depends on your PCs setup and system, if its good its good, where as the Ps3 has a limit of graphics an visual design that stops it from being too pretty. A pc can be modified without the need of buying a whole new system. Both sides have flaws and both have good points, you cant compare a Ps3 to a PC its like trying to compare a machete to a kitchen knife, sure they can serve the same base function but a machete is larger and more encumbersome but a kitchen knife is small but the reach isnt as far (Dont try to point out my spelling mistakes and grammar issues, cause sometimes you need to get something out there and its best said messily)

 

[jboking]

condense

Bleh bleh, I think we can stop here, that's enough of this right now. I'm glad we actually had a civilized debate on this, so we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll admit, I sort of trailed off into other topics instead of focusing on one, I tend to do that sometimes.

It's cool, I like tangent arguments and rather enjoyed the discussion either way.

Jumpilion, stop bitching people out. Not one person is blaming anyone for there problems, just instead using an internet for cathartic purposes. Maybe you want people with AIDs to also harden the fuck up and deal with it. (Strawman...sorry, couldn't help myself - Jboking)

Most of what you quoted of Jumplion in your post was his responses to one of my posts, so I feel like it should be said: I didn't feel like he was bitching at me, rather that we were having an in depth conversation about the concept Heavy Rain is said to implement and whether or not that mechanic would advance the styles of character identification in video games.

also strawman(again), because strawman.