HERE (http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=14217)

Sega has announced that the Xbox 360 port of their upcoming sports game Virtua Tennis 3 will be the first game for Microsoft's console to natively support 1080p screen resolution. The press release also mentioned the online multiplayer support for the game via Xbox Live. Gamasutra is reporting that PS3 owners will also get 1080p resolution they will not be getting any online multiplayer features for that version. The PS3 port will include support for the motion sensing controller.Sega is getting lamer and lamer as far as offering full PS3 support is concerned.

Oh well

What really bugs me is that Sega will probably charge the same price for the PS3 and 360 versions of the game even though the PS3 version will essentially have a piece of it missing.

Very lame on Sega's part. Aside from a few hits here and there they really have been a mere shadow of what they used to be.

Very lame on Sega's part. Aside from a few hits here and there they really have been a mere shadow of what they used to be.

Can't blame them... the MS does have a head start on the online play.

(I own all 3 current platforms and I'm not a MS fanboy. I'm just stating the fact)

Can't blame them... the MS does have a head start on the online play.

(I own all 3 current platforms and I'm not a MS fanboy. I'm just stating the fact)

This is an issue that could quickly be resolved. Currently, game developers can just give Microsoft their server code and Microsoft runs/maintains everything. If the developers don't want to, they never have to think about it again.

What Sony needs is a company which does the same thing. I'm sure developers would like to outsource server maintenance so they can focus on games. However, since the Playstation network is free, it would cost them money to outsource it.

Can't blame them... the MS does have a head start on the online play.

(I own all 3 current platforms and I'm not a MS fanboy. I'm just stating the fact)


I can and I do. Other company's get games running great online on the PS3.

Bad news for PS3. Online play should be standard issue in a game like this.

I can and I do. Other company's get games running great online on the PS3.


There is some truth behind that. It's not that they are lazy, they just want to save money.

Sure they may save money and have figured the money saved would be great than the potential lost customers for not having online. Frankly I don't know there financial reasonings. Regardless they are the ones to blame.

Even if it's exactly the same game, that plays exactly the same way as the 360 version, without the online component, priced the same, would I really want to buy it? I'm not sure...

I so wanted this game too. It was among my favorites on my Dreamcast, and first Sonic and now this...

this really sucks... i was looking forward to this game and now i don't think i'll buy it.

360 gets full online support with spectator mode and ps3 gets tilt?? what kind of dumb exclusive is that!?

making me consider a 360 when stuff like this happens

This one is a no brainer if you own both a 360 and a PS3. When the 360 version wasn't 1080P native, you had a tradeoff, now the PS3 version is officially "gimped". Shame really, the online tournaments + VT:TV (the spectator mode where you can watch possible opponents matches) sound pretty cool. Will pick this up once it hits the $19.99 bargain bin but no way in hell i'm paying anywhere near full price for it.

As for blame, it falls on Sega. The PS3 version was done by the original JP team (AM3), while the 360 version was done by a US team (Sumo Digital). This is the one place i think JP dev teams fall really behind since they've got such little experience with online support.

FYI,

I think both groups of fanboys should take this as proof that port != worse automatically because it is a "port".

Are the games graphically identical?

What did everybody expect? This sort of thing is the price of "free" online play.

C'mon, Sony, I want a premium online experience, especially since I've got 60GB of hard drive space to fill.

Broke my heart when I heard this.......uhh yeah. :rolleyes:

how you gone have a sports game with no online mode....

this was one of my most anticipated ps3 games out of all of them...and now i wont even buy it...

Bad move. They have "Top Spin" and it's success as a model. Online play was very popular. I don't know exactly how this ended up shaking out or the reasons behind it but it's something I'd take a look at if I were Sony.

i just dont think there are enough ps3 users at this time that will buy that game and play it online.

They need to know there is a dedicated base before they start hosting the games, its not cheap to host a server

i just dont think there are enough ps3 users at this time that will buy that game and play it online.

They need to know there is a dedicated base before they start hosting the games, its not cheap to host a server

True, but they may as well start small. Tennis is the kind of game where you truly need online. In my experience, tennis games(top spin 1 and 2) are pretty easy to master when playing the computer. Once you master that, the next step is to go online and get your butt kicked.(at least for me)

Are the games graphically identical?

They should be now that they're both running 1080P native. Won't really know till they're released though.

i just dont think there are enough ps3 users at this time that will buy that game and play it online.

They need to know there is a dedicated base before they start hosting the games, its not cheap to host a server

I agree but the cost would be well spent since it'd be working on changing the stigma of how poor the Sony online experience is. In the long run the graphic's issues will iron themselves out and the top end exclusives on both systems will be equally impressive. However, the way things are going though the 360 will always blow the doors off of the PS3 when it comes to online. Stuff like this just adds to the perception that if playing online is important to you, you need a 360.

how you gone have a sports game with no online mode....

this was one of my most anticipated ps3 games out of all of them...and now i wont even buy it...

I won't buy it now either. The article said it would have "six-axis" support instead of on line play. Sorry but no thanks, I expect both of them or I will not buy it.

What really bugs me is that Sega will probably charge the same price for the PS3 and 360 versions of the game even though the PS3 version will essentially have a piece of it missing.
The PS3 version will be on a Blu-Ray disc which is more expensive then a DVD so, think of that way.

i just dont think virtual tennis is a big enough draw game.

Resistance has a great server for online games, yet no one's jumping onto the ps3 online wagon (developers at least)

This announcement almost made me want to sell the PS3 and get a 360.

They can flush this game down the toilet now for all I care.

wow i didn't know there were people that would buy a system for virtua tennis.

or throw it away if it didn't have online play o_O.

I think for a game like Tennis, its better to have no online play than laggy play. Too often Xbox sports games are ruined by lag.

from my own personal laggy experience, madden 07, nba live 07, nba 2k7. Oddly enough its just sports games that lag.

and since tennis is such a high twitch game, i dont know if you'd want that

Very sad to hear as I love this game, and as a PS fanboy what starting to seem the norm just another major blow to the PS3.

I never planned on buying this game, but see this as a problem for Sony. They need to succeed online this generation. I am also suprised that many people care about a tennis game. I just don't get it, its tennis...

Well playing against the CPU in a sports game is something we shouldn't have to do this generation (unless we want to). Hopefully none of this is confirmed or set in stone and both versions will have online play.

The PS3 version will be on a Blu-Ray disc which is more expensive then a DVD so, think of that way.BS. There will be PS3 games on DVD as well as BD.

BS. There will be PS3 games on DVD as well as BD.

Do you have any confirmation of this? This is the first time that I heard that PS3 games will be offered on DVD.

Wrong. PS3 games are only on BD. Sony is not allowing PS3 games on DVD.

BS. There will be PS3 games on DVD as well as BD.

was your source
www.iamaliar.com ?

Bad news for PS3. Online play should be standard issue in a game like this.
IMO, all games should have online play.

IMO, all games should have online play.

Would online play work all that well in Final Fantasy?

If I'm mistaken I be the first to admit I am wrong, just point me to the source that shows where Sony says that all PS3 games have to be on BD, but please do not drag down the level of this thread to one which causes it to be locked.

I am just suprised that PS3 games cannot be on DVD. There's no technical reason why they can't. It must be a piracy issue.

Would online play work all that well in Final Fantasy?
I dont really play that game but I am pretty sure it is a game that can be played online.

If I'm mistaken I be the first to admit I am wrong, just point me to the source that shows where Sony says that all PS3 games have to be on BD, but please do not drag down the level of this thread to one which causes it to be locked.

I am just suprised that PS3 games cannot be on DVD. There's no technical reason why they can't.

There is no reason for Sony to push the Blu-Ray format and then release PS3 games on DVD. I think Sony will disavow the video game business before releasing PS3 games on DVD.

If I'm mistaken I be the first to admit I am wrong, just point me to the source that shows where Sony says that all PS3 games have to be on BD, but please do not drag down the level of this thread to one which causes it to be locked.

I am just suprised that PS3 games cannot be on DVD. There's no technical reason why they can't. It must be a piracy issue.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/696/696057p1.html

If I'm mistaken I be the first to admit I am wrong, just point me to the source that shows where Sony says that all PS3 games have to be on BD, but please do not drag down the level of this thread to one which causes it to be locked.

I am just suprised that PS3 games cannot be on DVD. There's no technical reason why they can't. It must be a piracy issue.

i have a question for you in response then.

why are our pc games on CD/DVD's? Why can't they be put on floppy disks? there's no technical reason why they can't! It must be a piracy issue!

i have a question for you in response then.

why are our pc games on CD/DVD's? Why can't they be put on floppy disks? there's no technical reason why they can't! It must be a piracy issue!Now that's just silly. Sony is trying to discourage piracy because the cost is negligable to copy BD discs. There is no reason size-wise why certain games like Virtua-Tennis 3 couldn't be fit on a standard 9GB dual-layer DVD. It seems to be a direct 360 port with no HD video or anything requiring the extra space the BD supplies.

There are good and bad elements to that policy. I like the fact that software publishers are being encouraged to use the format, but dislike they are being forced, and we are being made to pay the extra cost, especially if there is no benefit to it.

Because Sony is trying to win a format war.

I guess they insist on BD because it makes things more costly and difficult for pirates.

also cause you can fit more stuff on there!!!! GAHHHHHHHHHHHHh

There are good and bad elements to that policy. I like the fact that software publishers are being encouraged to use the format, but dislike they are being forced, and we are being made to pay the extra cost, especially if there is no benefit to it.

New PS3 and 360 games are both $60. If you are angry that Blu Ray is driving up the cost of games, you should be even more angry that MS is charging $60 for games on DVD.

Back to the topic at hand...

I guess there are trade-offs. Okay, so the SIXAXIS bites us again on VT3 because Sega traded online capability for SIXAXIS capability, and the 360 version of VT3 might be a "better" gaming experience because it has online. Fair enough.

However, what about games like Oblivion? Developers specifically reworked the game for the Cell to have better graphics and resolve most, if not all, framerate slowdowns. Although it is not out yet, I would speculate that PS3 owners will have the better gaming experience.

Two cents.

Ill skip this one,online play would be the only reason I would get tennis

i just dont think there are enough ps3 users at this time that will buy that game and play it online.

They need to know there is a dedicated base before they start hosting the games, its not cheap to host a server


The option for online capability need's to be there. Sony need's to get off of their high horse and realize that ms has a damn good online service, then maybe copy it a little and add their own little bells and whistles.

To sum it up: Xbox live: $50 a year(great)
ps3 online: free(sucks)


Sometimes free isn't better.

ps3 online doesn't really suck... i haven't had any major issues with resistance or gthd

developers just need to implement the damn thing

Back to the topic at hand...

I guess there are trade-offs. Okay, so the SIXAXIS bites us again on VT3 because Sega traded online capability for SIXAXIS capability, and the 360 version of VT3 might be a "better" gaming experience because it has online. Fair enough.

However, what about games like Oblivion? Developers specifically reworked the game for the Cell to have better graphics and resolve most, if not all, framerate slowdowns. Although it is not out yet, I would speculate that PS3 owners will have the better gaming experience.

Two cents.


Common sense would say yes to the fact that it will be a an extra year to do it so. Not much speculation needed to do that. What is speculation is whether it will sale more PS3's.

The option for online capability need's to be there. Sony need's to get off of their high horse and realize that ms has a damn good online service, then maybe copy it a little and add their own little bells and whistles.

To sum it up: Xbox live: $50 a year(great)
ps3 online: free(sucks)


Sometimes free isn't better.


No way they are going to start charging $50 or whatever for the online service for the PS3. Hell if they did all hell would break loose with direct comparison of what you get even now with the service compared to the 360. Or someone will point out the PS3 cost $600 plus x amount of dollars for the service. Mainly the complaints would be the service comparison to Live.

if they ever charge a fee they'll need to make something superior to XBOX live.

dont think tha'ts happening, the Japanese just aren't into Online gaming. You gotta remember Sony is a Japanese company first and foremost

Sorry Sega but no sale, next time put a little more effort into a game that you're going to be charging $60 for. I guess I can dust off my Dreamcast (lamest console ever) and play Virtua Tennis on that since this is the same game but with better graphics. No thanks.

Sorry Sega but no sale, next time put a little more effort into a game that you're going to be charging $60 for. I guess I can dust off my Dreamcast (lamest console ever) and play Virtua Tennis on that since this is the same game but with better graphics. No thanks.

The 360 version is $49.00 the PS3 version might be aswell.

BS. There will be PS3 games on DVD as well as BD.


I so wanted this game too. It was among my favorites on my Dreamcast, and first Sonic and now this...

if you ever played DOA online, you would understand why its not included..
DOA was lag filled

if you ever played DOA online, you would understand why its not included..
DOA was lag filled

some games were horribly laggy same games weren't.

the worst thing was trying to play in those 4-5 player rooms gah horrible.

wow i didn't know there were people that would buy a system for virtua tennis.

or throw it away if it didn't have online play o_O.

I think for a game like Tennis, its better to have no online play than laggy play. Too often Xbox sports games are ruined by lag.

from my own personal laggy experience, madden 07, nba live 07, nba 2k7. Oddly enough its just sports games that lag.

and since tennis is such a high twitch game, i dont know if you'd want that

I don't think that it's necessarily Virtua Tennis, but more the bad trend that this is setting for the PS3. This won't be the last game to be "gimped" for the PS3.

The PS3 will end up in a distant third place if we keep seeing more disappointments like this.

On another note, this is just another nail in Sega's coffin - can they do anything right these days? They should just sell all of their IP's to companies that aren't crippled/lazy, and close down shop before soiling their reputation more than they already have.....they certainly aren't the Sega I used to know in the 90's...

I won't buy it now either. The article said it would have "six-axis" support instead of on line play. Sorry but no thanks, I expect both of them or I will not buy it.
exactly... I wont buy it and I will laugh when SEGA complains about low sales in PS3 software...

I don't think that it's necessarily Virtua Tennis, but more the bad trend that this is setting for the PS3. This won't be the last game to be "gimped" for the PS3.

The PS3 will end up in a distant third place if we keep seeing more disappointments like this.

On another note, this is just another nail in Sega's coffin - can they do anything right these days? They should just sell all of their IP's to companies that aren't crippled/lazy, and close down shop before soiling their reputation more than they already have.....they certainly aren't the Sega I used to know in the 90's...

Agreed on Sega not being what they once were :(

That said, some games are actually better on the PS3 as well, it's not a one way street. ES:IV (coming soon) and Fight Night 3 (already out) for example.

There have been more crappy ports than not though. It is lame when dev's cator to the lowest common denominator, it happened last gen as well with xbox games being less than what they could be due to the PS2. The roles are simply reversed this time.

The 360 version is $49.00 the PS3 version might be aswell.

It is.
http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2609868&cp=&sr=1&f=Taxonomy%2FTRUS%2F2254197&origkw=virtual+tennis&kw=virtual+tennis&parentPage=search

Ill still buy the game despite its lack of online play. I mean it does support two players right ?
Bring a friend over and give him some aces !

It is lame when dev's cator to the lowest common denominator, it happened last gen as well with xbox games being less than what they could be due to the PS2. The roles are simply reversed this time.

I'm puzzled here brian.

Last gen games were coded for the lowest common denominator and yet were usually "better" on XBox.

This gen games are coded for (In your humble opinion of course) the lowest common denominator (360) and yet they generally turn out better on 360.

If the roles were reversed most games would turn out better on PS3 would they not?

Seems last gen the XBox coming out a year after the PS2 was sufficiently superior to exceed the PS2 despite the PS2 being the system games were first developed on and now we have the PS3 coming out a year after the 360 but to the exact opposite... games not turning out as well.

I am wondering when people will stop using the 360 as a crutch. If you are not pleased with the games blame the system whos fault it is: The pS3

The XBox showed that you can get "ports" (I truly hate that word but its been adopted here) from another system to turn out "better" in many ways than the original. So stop crying "PORTS ARE EVIL!"

I'm puzzled here brian.

Last gen games were coded for the lowest common denominator and yet were usually "better" on XBox.

This gen games are coded for (In your humble opinion of course) the lowest common denominator (360) and yet they generally turn out better on 360.

If the roles were reversed most games would turn out better on PS3 would they not?

Seems last gen the XBox coming out a year after the PS2 was sufficiently superior to exceed the PS2 despite the PS2 being the system games were first developed on and now we have the PS3 coming out a year after the 360 but to the exact opposite... games not turning out as well.

I am wondering when people will stop using the 360 as a crutch. If you are not pleased with the games blame the system whos fault it is: The pS3

The XBox showed that you can get "ports" (I truly hate that word but its been adopted here) from another system to turn out "better" in many ways than the original. So stop crying "PORTS ARE EVIL!"


I pointed the very same thing out in another thread last week. I also said that games that originally started on the xbox like splinter cell were not as good as good on the PS2 graphic wise. How come just about every multi platform game that was released it always was Xbox, PS2, Gamecube(GC) or it would be Xbox, GC, PS2. Look at IGN and 1up they were famous showing side comparisions and Xbox was majority of the time the best version out of the 3.

I pointed the very same thing out in another thread last week. I also said that games that originally started on the xbox like splinter cell were not as good as good on the PS2 graphic wise. How come just about every multi platform game that was released it always was Xbox, PS2, Gamecube(GC) or it would be Xbox, GC, PS2. Look at IGN and 1up they were famous showing side comparisions and Xbox was majority of the time the best version out of the 3.

Amazing how the system has been out for less than three months and we've already figured out how ports are going to be for the next five years. Why are you guys using launch title ports as an indicator of how ports will be? Need we look back at the 360 launch and use that as an example of how things will be? If that's the case, the 360 can't even handle Quake 4.

What Brian said was not that the games didn't look better on the Xbox but that they were held back to what they could have been if the developers were not catering to the lead platform which in this case was the weaker system. There's a HUGE difference in what he said and what you claimed he said. To make it more clear since you guys like to misinterpret things, here's an example.

If the PS2 is capable of reaching to a level of 5, and the Xbox is capable of reaching to level 10 as measure of performance of the hardware and the PS2 version is a level 5 and the Xbox version is a level 6, clearly the Xbox version is better, but it could have been a level 10 if it wasn't for the PS2. That is what Brian is saying.

Having worked on all four of the platforms we're talking about here and dealing with ports across platforms, I can say that you guys really don't understand how different and how not different the games are. PS2 to Xbox ports where the PS2 was the lead platform typically had all the efforts put on the PS2 with the Xbox secondary. The enhancements you saw typically were only from a couple factors and not additional effort. For starters Xbox games used a full frame buffer so that most games could be displayed in 480p. Second, there was a slight filtering in the output that gave a sort of anti-aliasing effect with smoothed things out so you wouldn't see as many jaggies compared to the PS2 which had a much harder edge look. This was a free thing that was just a bi-product of the video output on the system. Those two factors is how different most of the ports were with no additional effort. Yet those small things, and really they are small, made enough of a difference for some of you. They aren't "enhanced" versions by the developers, they just had a slightly cleaner look because of the nature of the platform. That's not even taking advantage of the hardware or extra memory.

In some cases the Xbox filtering actually makes things look worse. Check out 2D games and do a side by side comparison. The great 2D sprite artwork will look soft in comparison to the PS2 version which is why I prefer 2D games on the PS2. So that free filter effect that works fine in 3D games actually hurts the Xbox when it comes to 2D. Also look at games like Burnout 3 which is actually better on the PS2.

Having experience on all four platforms and dealing with ports makes you understand what really goes on when a game is moved from one platform to another. If planned on, you can guarentee they will make sure the game is possible on both platforms and make sure that minimal changes will be needed in order to get that to work. It cuts down on development time, it cuts down on costs, and most importantly, it cuts down on the headaches to us developers. If there's time, maybe a couple people will add small things that take very little time to take advantage of the platform they're on but it's really minor in the scope of things.

This news suck balls. Even the PSP version is going to support online. I thought I could avoid buying a 360, but this is one of my favorite games and I must have online play. Sony/Sega...WTF?????

Amazing how the system has been out for less than three months and we've already figured out how ports are going to be for the next five years. Why are you guys using launch title ports as an indicator of how ports will be? Need we look back at the 360 launch and use that as an example of how things will be? If that's the case, the 360 can't even handle Quake 4.

What Brian said was not that the games didn't look better on the Xbox but that they were held back to what they could have been if the developers were not catering to the lead platform which in this case was the weaker system. There's a HUGE difference in what he said and what you claimed he said. To make it more clear since you guys like to misinterpret things, here's an example.

If the PS2 is capable of reaching to a level of 5, and the Xbox is capable of reaching to level 10 as measure of performance of the hardware and the PS2 version is a level 5 and the Xbox version is a level 6, clearly the Xbox version is better, but it could have been a level 10 if it wasn't for the PS2. That is what Brian is saying.

Having worked on all four of the platforms we're talking about here and dealing with ports across platforms, I can say that you guys really don't understand how different and how not different the games are. PS2 to Xbox ports where the PS2 was the lead platform typically had all the efforts put on the PS2 with the Xbox secondary. The enhancements you saw typically were only from a couple factors and not additional effort. For starters Xbox games used a full frame buffer so that most games could be displayed in 480p. Second, there was a slight filtering in the output that gave a sort of anti-aliasing effect with smoothed things out so you wouldn't see as many jaggies compared to the PS2 which had a much harder edge look. This was a free thing that was just a bi-product of the video output on the system. Those two factors is how different most of the ports were with no additional effort. Yet those small things, and really they are small, made enough of a difference for some of you. They aren't "enhanced" versions by the developers, they just had a slightly cleaner look because of the nature of the platform. That's not even taking advantage of the hardware or extra memory.

In some cases the Xbox filtering actually makes things look worse. Check out 2D games and do a side by side comparison. The great 2D sprite artwork will look soft in comparison to the PS2 version which is why I prefer 2D games on the PS2. So that free filter effect that works fine in 3D games actually hurts the Xbox when it comes to 2D. Also look at games like Burnout 3 which is actually better on the PS2.

Having experience on all four platforms and dealing with ports makes you understand what really goes on when a game is moved from one platform to another. If planned on, you can guarentee they will make sure the game is possible on both platforms and make sure that minimal changes will be needed in order to get that to work. It cuts down on development time, it cuts down on costs, and most importantly, it cuts down on the headaches to us developers. If there's time, maybe a couple people will add small things that take very little time to take advantage of the platform they're on but it's really minor in the scope of things.

My apologies for misinterpreting your point Brian. Thanks for explaining DK. I never said I believed this is how it will be for the next 5 years. Maybe you were pointing that to more then just me as that is how some people on here do talk. I believe things will get better for both systems. It is what it is right now