Originally posted by JKozzy
The human eye can't interpret anything above 87 FPS or so, so 400 FPS isn't going to make a difference if we can't see the difference. Forget where I heard that, but I'm pretty sure that's true.
FPS = first person shooter
he didnt mean frames per second... I dont think...
I like them all for at least one or two reasons, so I really have no point in choosing.
Originally posted by Fearnix
name some good X-box FPS
i don't know.... Halo... Unreal tourney... soldier of fortune 2 .... just for starters.... Doom and Starcraft ghost are to be ported to X-box to... every decent PS2 FPS, Xbox already has like Time Splitters...
most of the game companies PS2 once held are sharing with X-box now so i don't see the difference in that...
Originally posted by RaventheOnly
i don't know.... Halo... Unreal tourney... soldier of fortune 2 .... just for starters.... Doom and Starcraft ghost are to be ported to X-box to... every decent PS2 FPS, Xbox already has like Time Splitters...most of the game companies PS2 once held are sharing with X-box now so i don't see the difference in that...
Also House of the Death III, Armed and Dangerous, Silent Scope complete (which looks okay on both consoles)
Originally posted by RaventheOnly
i don't know.... Halo... Unreal tourney... soldier of fortune 2 .... just for starters.... Doom and Starcraft ghost are to be ported to X-box to... every decent PS2 FPS, Xbox already has like Time Splitters...most of the game companies PS2 once held are sharing with X-box now so i don't see the difference in that...
yeah but the same goes for x-box. Game developers for the box shift to PS2 quite often.