DMC4

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3159152


GTAIV

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3159145


Again making games to the lowest common denominator. The 360. At least these won't be rushed ports.

DMC4 and GTA IV, PS3 will get the shaft again


Good.

And no Im not a 360 fanboi, I own all 3 current consoles.

DMC4

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3159152


GTAIV

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3159145


Again making games to the lowest common denominator. The 360. At least these won't be rushed ports.

Thank goodness you actually read the links:

Rockstar Creative VP Dan Houser:
"To be honest with you we haven't solved all those riddles yet," he remarked, but didn't exclude PS3 from the conversation, as "both have enormous challenges ... [and] their own particular pleasures and pains."

Did I read the same links as you, Chicken Little? :confused:

Thank goodness you actually read the links:

Rockstar Creative VP Dan Houser:

Ya I did

Lack of guaranteed hard drive, large disc format an issue.

This means that they have to make the game "work" with what the 360 has to offer as opposed to being able to "do it right" with what the PS3 has to offer because the certainly aren't going to take the time and make one version better.


DMC IV

"As far as the Xbox and PS3 are concerned, the capabilities and features in the game we expect will be the same. Our plan is to make them pretty much identical," said Kobayashi. "You may be able to use some of the functionality in the PS3 as like a switch, but nothing spectacular [that would make] a difference in the gameplay."

I guess we will have to leave it up to first and second party developers to actually make the PS3 they will third party developers should but won't.

The instant I found out both of those games were multiplatform my interest in both plummetted. If a game is coded exclusively for one platform it's almost universally better than one that has to make design comprimises because of the weaknesses/strengths of both. There's a reason that almost all AAA, must-own titles are exclusive to one system.

DMC4 I'll be getting for PC, because neither the 360 nor PS3 will be able to compete with my 8800GTX SLI setup, and I might just skip GTA4 altogether. The GTA series has grown progressively more boring for me and I never even finished San Andreas.

That any developer would have to cripple the overall design because the 360 lacks a hard drive, or because the PS3's Blu-Ray drive streams level data slightly slower, means I'm much less likely to buy a game from that developer. I know they need to maximise their profits this early in the console lifecycle, but with so many games out there and with a good number of exclusive, first and second party titles, I just skip multiplatform compromised games.

Wow some of you act like you just started gaming on consoles :rolleyes:

Virtual Fighter 5 for the 360 looks identical to the PS3.

Whats funny is wasn't DMC4 announced and developed orginally for the PS3. I remember how they talked about DMC4 on new sites and in these forums about how it pwned the 360 and that the 360 couldn't do it. Check the history and see for yourself. Just funny to me how things evolve.

That's what happens when the developer has to account for the 360's shortcomings as a next-gen console. Maybe all 360 core owners should bend over and let M$ ram a $100 20GB hard drive up their shaft so they can play these games like they were intended.

Ya I did



This means that they have to make the game "work" with what the 360 has to offer as opposed to being able to "do it right" with what the PS3 has to offer because the certainly aren't going to take the time and make one version better.


DMC IV



I guess we will have to leave it up to first and second party developers to actually make the PS3 they will third party developers should but won't.


Dude if you don't want to play it just don't buy it. I own all the systems and I know they are identical as far as their capabilities go. You should just try and stop gripping and you can actually enjoy your hobby!

Wow some of you act like you just started gaming on consoles :rolleyes:

Virtual Fighter 5 for the 360 looks identical to the PS3.

Whats funny is wasn't DMC4 announced and developed orginally for the PS3. I remember how they talked about DMC4 on new sites and in these forums about how it pwned the 360 and that the 360 couldn't do it. Check the history and see for yourself. Just funny to me how things evolve.

Basically what they were saying is that a game designed to take advantage of the PS3's system it would naturally own the xbox 1.50 and even the recently released xbox 1.51. A multiplat game is going to be cut and snipped and stuffed into a DVD9, audio will suffer too most likely.

Dude if you don't want to play it just don't buy it. I own all the systems and I know they are identical as far as their capabilities go. You should just try and stop gripping and you can actually enjoy your hobby!

SWEET!!! so the Wii and xbox can play games on HD discs?!?!? How big is the Hard drive on the core system? How motion sensative is the xbox controller? What is the max resolution of the Wii?

Equally fun = sure
Equally capable = Huh?

If any version of GTA IV is going to be holding back the other, it's going to be the PS3 version holding back the 360 version. I read that complete article, and Dan Houser made it extremely clear that both consoles had their issues. We all know that the PS3 is extremely difficult to program for, at least now it is. Maybe by 2009 developers will get to grips with the PS3, and it will be the opposite way around, but right now the 360 is the lead platform. Rockstar is showing the 360 build of GTA IV to the gaming press for a reason. It looks better, and it plays better. Why? Because Rockstar probably received their 360 development kits 18 months prior to receiving their PS3 dev kits. It's only natural to think that Rockstar would be much further along in development with the 360 version, and would feel much more at ease with 360 development. They did test the R.A.G.E. engine with Rockstar Table Tennis on the 360. This is their second crack at the 360 hardware, and their very first crack at the PS3 hardware.

Everybody seems to think because the PS3 is using Blu Ray disks and the 360 is using DVD-9's that the PS3 version is going to be held back because of the 360's smaller storage medium, but if we look at Oblivion, it's pretty obvious that huge games can fit on both media just fine.

I own all 3 major consoles, and I can really care less who ultimately wins this console war, but I have to say that I would be very suprised if the PS3 version of GTA IV is the better version. Why would I think that? Simply because right now, the development environment is better on the 360. The 360 is the easier platform to work on. I think GTA IV will run smoother on 360. The PS3 version could have some other advantages, but ultimately, I think the 360 version will be the better version to have. But I guess time will tell.

http://www.baby-clipart.net/pics/crying_baby.gif

Sorry...couldn't resist.

Wow some of you act like you just started gaming on consoles :rolleyes:

Virtual Fighter 5 for the 360 looks identical to the PS3.

Whats funny is wasn't DMC4 announced and developed orginally for the PS3. I remember how they talked about DMC4 on new sites and in these forums about how it pwned the 360 and that the 360 couldn't do it. Check the history and see for yourself. Just funny to me how things evolve.


We're talking about GTA4, not Virtua Fighter 5. One game features massive levels with next to no in-game load times as areas constantly stream from the disc, and the other is a closed-environment fighter that loads each level into memory once. The fact devs have to account for the 360's lack of hard drive to assist with streaming affects the overall game design far more than Virtua Fighter 5.

If they need more than 8 gigs of disk space I hope they just put the 360 version on more than one disk instead of limiting the game to 8 gigs. No big deal to do that and many 360 owners have already stated hear that they don't mind swapping disks.

That's what happens when the developer has to account for the 360's shortcomings as a next-gen console. Maybe all 360 core owners should bend over and let M$ ram a $100 20GB hard drive up their shaft so they can play these games like they were intended.


Like us PS3 owners are bending over and taking the shaft with this whole 1080i/720p debabcle that Sony forced on us, if you have a 1080i HDTV your screwed on 720p games and if you own a 720p HDTV your screwed on Blu-ray playback. Pretty pathetic that one of the biggest names in home theater couldn't release an console that actually offered features an $100 Chinese DVD player offers.

Good.

And no Im not a 360 fanboi, I own all 3 current consoles.

Yea right. Go watch a BR and troll elsewhere. That is the only reason you bought the PS3. Do you even own a game...........mate?

As far as GTA IV and DMC? Everyone suffers (especially PS3 owners) because they have to be developed based on the lowest common denominator: The CORE SYSTEM 360 ( No hard drive an DVD9).

The almightly dollar prevails again over quality. Until the PS3 gains steam in sales, plan on alot of dumb-downed 360 ports. ;)

I own all 3 major consoles, and I can really care less who ultimately wins this console war, but I have to say that I would be very suprised if the PS3 version of GTA IV is the better version. Why would I think that? Simply because right now, the development environment is better on the 360. The 360 is the easier platform to work on. I think GTA IV will run smoother on 360. The PS3 version could have some other advantages, but ultimately, I think the 360 version will be the better version to have. But I guess time will tell.I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.

I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.

Amen. QFT.

Dude if you don't want to play it just don't buy it. I own all the systems and I know they are identical as far as their capabilities go. You should just try and stop gripping and you can actually enjoy your hobby!

I do want to play them and I do want to own them. I just wish they could be the best that they could be and I've realized that will never happen during this generation on any multi-platform games that I'm used to being exclusive to playstation.

I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.


Exactly.

Man, how did Grand Theft Auto ever become fun to play in the first place? I mean, it was developed on an inferior console and still managed to be a breakthrough hit? Gosh, maybe it's not so bad.

Would it be better as just a PS3 game? No one knows, but armchair QBs around here will surely take their guesses.

Did you miss this part:


but didn't exclude PS3 from the conversation, as "both have enormous challenges ... [and] their own particular pleasures and pains."

The 360 has its challenges but its not like the PS3 without its own.

Lets be honest, first off DMC4 started from the ground up on the PS3 and wasn't even impressive looking back when it was shown on just the PS3, and is in no way the type of game that needs HDD support so I doubt its been impacted at all. Truth be said, because of the fact that its using the same engine as Dead Rising and Lost Planet by a team that has more experiance on the XB360 hardware, DMC4 is probably being helped by going multi-platform and will be a better game for it.

And GTA4, come on guys, Rockstar has never used an console to its fullest potential and they have none nothing but release buggy, glitchy games with shoddy graphics, so I doubt going PS3 only would in any way make GTA4 an better product. RS couln't even use DVD to its fullest potential, so really what makes you think they would with BD? And this stupidty that some how using the XB360 as the main platform will negatively impact PS3 ports is just unreal, a good dev will use the PS3 to its fullest regardless, and if the PS3 is better the games will show that. Look at the Xbox, it had many ports of PS2 games where the Xbox versions were clearly better because the devs used the Xbox hardware to its fullest.

And seriously, when even games that were created from the ground-up on the PS3 like Armored Core 4 and ported to the XB360 are superior on the XB360, its really hard to say who is holding who back. Looking at the majority of crap ports out there, its clear that the XB360 isn't the issue when said game on it like COD3, MUA, Splinter Cell, FEAR, etc are visually better and more stable than the PS3 version. Its clear that the PS3 has its own issues holding it back, because honestly if it was more powerful than the XB360, these games would at least be as good as the XB360 versions. Every one wants to point fingers at the XB360 when it comes to PS3 games, but do we really want third parties trying to develop from the ground up on the PS3, when they cannot even handle porting from the XB360 on it yet? At least with them developing on the XB360 and then porting the game to the PS3, we can at least be guranteed a better chance that at least one version is worth buying.

There are things the 360 can do that the PS3 can't. It's not solely an issue of the 360 holding back the PS3 version. That door swings both ways.


In the end, so what. If the game is good, buy it. If it's not, don't.

Man, how did Grand Theft Auto ever become fun to play in the first place? I mean, it was developed on an inferior console and still managed to be a breakthrough hit? Gosh, maybe it's not so bad. Would it be better as just a PS3 game? No one knows, but armchair QBs around here will surely take their guesses.
Yes but GTA3 probably would have been even better if it had been developed for the Xbox first. There's no doubt in my mind GTA4 will be amazing but it's only natural to wonder what it could be like with virtually unlimited disc space and a standard harddrive. Of course they may end up taking advantage of them in some way, who knows at this point.

Cross platform games mean look at the weakest specs between the 360 and PS3 and that is the system they are programming it for. I think it needs it's own word for simplicity's sake around here to quickly describe what we are discussing. I submit PS360, these are PS360 games, like a Celeron version of a Pentium, good but not quite the best.

So you could have a 360 game and PS3 game or a PS360 game. I dunno...

Like us PS3 owners are bending over and taking the shaft with this whole 1080i/720p debabcle that Sony forced on us, if you have a 1080i HDTV your screwed on 720p games and if you own a 720p HDTV your screwed on Blu-ray playback. Pretty pathetic that one of the biggest names in home theater couldn't release an console that actually offered features an $100 Chinese DVD player offers.
You're not screwed with Blu-ray playback at all if you own a 720p HDTV. I know. I own one. Maybe you should get your facts straight and stop the rampant Sony bashing that you almost always do whenever you post on here.

Care to show me this so called rampart PS3 bashing I supposely do, better yet here is my PSN tag, methos75, you can send me a message on my PS3. Fact is that many are screwed by the lack of scaling on the PS3, one quick look at any gamesite makes that clear. Its nice that your HDTV can scale an 1080i image into 720p, many cannot, and the fact that Sony did not include that ability is an huge oversight. Pointing out obivous flaws isn't bashing, its telling the truth.

I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.

Its a dissapointment Sony created a product overfilled with so much technology and priced so highly out of the average gamers budget that is has attained such little acceptance on a worldwide stage.

The problem with the PS3 is itself.. not the 360. Because the PS3 was introduced at TWICE the price of the PS1 and PS2 before it.. it cannot possibly command the market share it needs to attract or retain exclusive titles and earn the man hours necessary it would take to develop the high calibur multiplatform titles that offer MORE features in the PS3 version.

Companies understand a high calibur PS3 title needs to sell 500,000 copies OR more to even turn a profit. Developing for the 360 or Wii for that matter is much cheaper and deemed not as risky.

Has anybody checked the latest sales numbers.. Resistance is currently OUTSELLING Motorstorm which is just a month old itself and has been carrying hype for the past 3 years. Even worse Oblivion on the 360 sold pretty much evenly with the PS3 version.

6 months ago after the PS3 was launched.. the excuse used on this forum for PS3 games looking the same or worse as titles on the 360 was that developers didnt have enough TIME to work with the PS3.

I can already see the NEW excuse being used for games looking the same or worse on the PS3 is because the 360 somehow is crippling developers man hours to tweak games for the PS3.

Whatever excuse you choose to blame it on.. the "night" and "day" difference between games on the PS3 and 360 continue to be non-existent.

Care to show me this so called rampart PS3 bashing I supposely do, better yet here is my PSN tag, methos75, you can send me a message on my PS3. Fact is that many are screwed by the lack of scaling on the PS3, one quick look at any gamesite makes that clear. Its nice that your HDTV can scale an 1080i image into 720p, many cannot, and the fact that Sony did not include that ability is an huge oversight. Pointing out obivous flaws isn't bashing, its telling the truth.

May I ask what 720p HDTV out there can't scale into 1080i?

It's bashing when I know what kind of poster you are. I've seen you on GameFAQs, you contribute to the problem, not to the solution.

I don't care that you have a PS3, it's irrelevant.

Its a dissapointment Sony created a product overfilled with so much technology and priced so highly out of the average gamers budget that is has attained such little acceptance on a worldwide stage.

The problem with the PS3 is itself.. not the 360. Because the PS3 was introduced at TWICE the price of the PS1 and PS2 before it.. it cannot possibly command the market share it needs to attract or retain exclusive titles and earn the man hours necessary it would take to develop the high calibur multiplatform titles that offer MORE features in the PS3 version.

Companies understand a high calibur PS3 title needs to sell 500,000 copies OR more to even turn a profit. Developing for the 360 or Wii for that matter is much cheaper and deemed not as risky.

Has anybody checked the latest sales numbers.. Resistance is currently OUTSELLING Motorstorm which is just a month old itself and has been carrying hype for the past 3 years. Even worse Oblivion on the 360 sold pretty much evenly with the PS3 version.

6 months ago after the PS3 was launched.. the excuse used on this forum for PS3 games looking the same or worse as titles on the 360 was that developers didnt have enough TIME to work with the PS3.

I can already see the NEW excuse being used for games looking the same or worse on the PS3 is because the 360 somehow is crippling developers man hours to tweak games for the PS3.

Whatever excuse you choose to blame it on.. the "night" and "day" difference between games on the PS3 and 360 continue to be non-existent.

Uh gee, I wonder if it's the 10 million to 3 million console difference that has something to do with it.

The PS3 has can't use as complicated of shaders as the 360, doesn't allow the flexablity of a unified shader architecture or unified memory, and it's OS uses multiple times more system memory than the 360. OMG, DMC4 and GTAIV are being held back by the PS3! :rolleyes:

I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.

i agree with you, but the developers can't bankrupt themselves making an exclusive, no matter how much we would like them to. i mean, a lot of the ps3s sold are being used only for bluray, as the best value player on the market... so you can't factor the whole 3 million into potential game buyers. you just look at the sales numbers for the platforms, and that's basically it... until the ps3 gets a good foothold, this will be how it is.

i just got a ps3, i have a 360, and i'm just underwhelmed by the games. i like resistance, it performs really well, but it's just another shooter. it does some innovative stuff, i love how the life meter works, but it just doesn't grab you like some (not all) of the shooters out there do. motorstorm is fun as well, but it's just not grabbing my interest long term.

i want to like the ps3 for its games. i had a 1 and a 2, never had an xbox 1, and i really loved a lot of the games on there. i have had some crap games for the 360, and there are a lot out there, but still a core of ~20 really good games. the ps3 is just not at the level 1 or 2 was. i played through the NG Sigma demo last night, and it was fun, and looked cool, but it just didn't suck me in.

i have a few BR also, and those are amazing. unfortunately, at this point, if it's multiplatform, i'm going with the 360. i've rented a few ps3 games that i have on the 360 to compare, and (as someone mentioned earlier in this thread) in almost all cases they look/run better on the 360... plus the 360, being the leader right now, will have better DLC, availble sooner.

*sigh*. i don't, however, agree that the ps3 is wholly more powerful. they went in different directions, both made huge jumps. calling the xbox 360 the xbox 1.5 is just being silly.

we'll have to see how the long term holds up for the ps3.

If you know me from Gamefaqs, then you know that I am even handed in my post andf I point out the negatives on all three consoles, that said, right now it is the PS3 that has the most negative items released for it and closing your ears and eyes to that doesn't hid the fact that right now the PS3 is in need of serious help. And since your so keen on Gamefaqs, you have to be aware of just how many there have serious compabilty issues with BD's on 720p HDTVs and games on 1080i only HDTVs, which is pretty much any HDTV released before 2003.

And I love how guys like you are quick to call others bashers, yet continue to post such no sense as developing games on the XB360 will impact PS3 games, when any one with half an brain and a little programming knowledge knows this is not the case at all unless the Devs are just terribly inept or lazy. And I find it funny that you all are the same guys that had no issues last gen when all games were programmed on the least common donimator, the PS2, and then ported to the Xbox. But then again, unlike the PS3, the ports to the Xbox from the Ps2 were actually superior to the ones created on the lesser console.

Fact is I have an PS3 that I paid $600 on the assumption that it would have vastly superior games to what the XB360 offered, and I have ever right to be angry that so far it has been an complete letdown. I have an standalone BD player, so I didn't spend the cash to watch casino Royale, I expected good games. The fact that so far only one true AAA game has been released, and that almost all other games are shoddy ports of XB360 games is not acceptable and rather you think this is bashing is irrevelant to me, because it was my money that went down the drain.

This whole give it time junk is seriously on my nerves as well, I have been gaming for nearly 28 years, and not once have I had to wait an year for good games. Even the freaking Atari Jaguar had more AAA games like Tempest, AVP, DOOM, Raiden, etc released in its first seven months than the PS3 has, now that is simply pathetic. Keep living in fantasy world if you want, that doesn't change the fact that the PS3 is quickly following in the path of the 3D0, Dreamcast, and other flash in the pan consoles.

Uh gee, I wonder if it's the 10 million to 3 million console difference that has something to do with it.

Thats one valid way to look at it but you should also consider that there is a far greater selection of titles to buy on the 360. There is very little competition for titles on the PS3.

Care to show me this so called rampart PS3 bashing I supposely do, better yet here is my PSN tag, methos75, you can send me a message on my PS3. Fact is that many are screwed by the lack of scaling on the PS3, one quick look at any gamesite makes that clear. Its nice that your HDTV can scale an 1080i image into 720p, many cannot, and the fact that Sony did not include that ability is an huge oversight. Pointing out obivous flaws isn't bashing, its telling the truth.

Are there really a lot of 720p sets that can't accept 1080i? An oversight for sure, but I don't think this problem affects very many people at all.

[QUOTE=methos75]If you know me from Gamefaqs, QUOTE]

I used to post on gamefaqs back in the day, still lurk on occassion but it is a pretty crappy site now. I always got the impression that you hated sony products. I do recall you being harsh on the other consoles but always much more harsh to the PS2. I remember you bashing blu-ray a while back to for quite some time until something seemed to change you mind.

There are things the 360 can do that the PS3 can't. It's not solely an issue of the 360 holding back the PS3 version. That door swings both ways.


In the end, so what. If the game is good, buy it. If it's not, don't.

Thats exactly the point... no matter which system it is, the game is written to the low points of both systems. If it were a 360 exclusive, it would have been better than multiplat. If it were a ps3 exclusive, it would have been better than multiplat.

Both consoles are in the same boat. So far, multiplat is starting to mean that everyone gets screwed, not just one side or the other...

I like the fact that everyone gets to play the same games, but its hard to reconcile that with the facts of knowing the game could be a lot better if only one system got it...

This seems to be a major major issue to be hashed out this generation, because this hurts the hardcore audiences that keep franchises afloat.

Are there really a lot of 720p sets that can't accept 1080i? An oversight for sure, but I don't think this problem affects very many people at all.

7 to 8 years ago there were certain brands that I avoided due to the 720p issues. It is the sets fault however if it doesn't take that resolution.

Thats exactly the point... no matter which system it is, the game is written to the low points of both systems. If it were a 360 exclusive, it would have been better than multiplat. If it were a ps3 exclusive, it would have been better than multiplat.

Both consoles are in the same boat. So far, multiplat is starting to mean that everyone gets screwed, not just one side or the other...

I like the fact that everyone gets to play the same games, but its hard to reconcile that with the facts of knowing the game could be a lot better if only one system got it...

This seems to be a major major issue to be hashed out this generation, because this hurts the hardcore audiences that keep franchises afloat.

Very good points

"I used to post on gamefaqs back in the day, still lurk on occassion but it is a pretty crappy site now. I always got the impression that you hated sony products. I do recall you being harsh on the other consoles but always much more harsh to the PS2. I remember you bashing blu-ray a while back to for quite some time until something seemed to change you mind."

I wouldn't say I hate Sony products, but I have been severally burned by them enough that I don't extactly trust them. Little things like them making the HDD incomptiable with the Slim PS2 have left me extrembly leery of them, people like to point fingers at MS, but moves like that shows Sony is no better. But like you said, I am hard on all the consoles, and I will tear them all apart when they do stupid things.

As far as BD goes, I fell for the HD-DVD hype at first and the early shoddy BD reviews didn't help. But since getting the Sony player and watching stuff like Casino Royale, Open season, The Prestige, etc on BD, I am now an believer and support both formats. I have no problems admiting when I am wrong, and I was defintely wrong about BD.

7 to 8 years ago there were certain brands that I avoided due to the 720p issues. It is the sets fault however if it doesn't take that resolution.

Sets that took 720p were the exception even five years ago, and almost all of those that did were DLP sets that had wretched black levels and colors compared to the beautiful 1080i RPTVs.

Every high-def consumer component be it cable box, satellite box, d-vhs, and standalone blu-ray/hd-dvd players can convert 720p sources to 1080i. There is no excusing Sony for releasing a game system that could not even play most games in high-def on many of their own high-def sets.

Sure, many older HDTVs can't take 720p signals, but this is nonsense:
Its nice that your HDTV can scale an 1080i image into 720p, many cannot, and the fact that Sony did not include that ability is an huge oversight. Pointing out obivous flaws isn't bashing,.
720p displays can accept 1080i signals.

Sets that took 720p were the exception even five years ago, and almost all of those that did were DLP sets that had wretched black levels and colors compared to the beautiful 1080i RPTVs.

Every high-def consumer component be it cable box, satellite box, d-vhs, and standalone blu-ray/hd-dvd players can convert 720p sources to 1080i. There is no excusing Sony for releasing a game system that could not even play most games in high-def on many of their own high-def sets.

Maybe it was longer than that but I don't think so. I was talking mostly about CRT displays not DLP's. As most took in 720p but there were some that didn't like many Panasonic models. I made sure my first 53" CRT 4:3 :o CRT took 720p as well as 1080i.

Granted, I do think it would be better if all games took advantage of being able to display at every major resolution.

720p displays can accept 1080i signals.
True. Though they sometimes do a poor job of it, and it will be nice when they get the Blu-Ray scaling rolled out.

We're talking about GTA4, not Virtua Fighter 5. One game features massive levels with next to no in-game load times as areas constantly stream from the disc, and the other is a closed-environment fighter that loads each level into memory once. The fact devs have to account for the 360's lack of hard drive to assist with streaming affects the overall game design far more than Virtua Fighter 5.


Funny how you seem to just assume it is all about the hard drive but no mention(keep in mind that you and I don't have all the facts even with this article) on what the limitations and issues are but you don't bother to mention the dev kit issues developers have for the PS3. But you can go ahead and stick with your hard drive theory if you like.

....

I wouldn't say I hate Sony products, but I have been severally burned by them enough that I don't extactly trust them. Little things like them making the HDD incomptiable with the Slim PS2 have left me extrembly leery of them, people like to point fingers at MS, but moves like that shows Sony is no better. But like you said, I am hard on all the consoles, and I will tear them all apart when they do stupid things.

As far as BD goes, I fell for the HD-DVD hype at first and the early shoddy BD reviews didn't help. But since getting the Sony player and watching stuff like Casino Royale, Open season, The Prestige, etc on BD, I am now an believer and support both formats. I have no problems admiting when I am wrong, and I was defintely wrong about BD.

Gotcha

True. Though they sometimes do a poor job of it, and it will be nice when they get the Blu-Ray scaling rolled out.
Are they even planing to? I don't see much reason for it as anyone who buys a TV that doesn't handle deinterlacing and scaling 1080i signals well obviously isn't conserned with image quality.

Yea right. Go watch a BR and troll elsewhere. That is the only reason you bought the PS3. Do you even own a game...........mate?


Would you like a pic of my setup troll? Why dont you "add me" to your friend list (Hydrology) and we can discuss it further? I bought a PS3 more so for BR, that much is true, but to assume I dont intend to play games on my PS3, well bollox to you son. Expect sales to increase when Sony have a quality online gaming service available. Not before. And those dumb down games Im hearing for the 360? Would that be games like Virtua Tennis 3, that is crippled on the PS3 (no online)?

Next!

I don't see much reason for it as anyone who buys a TV that doesn't handle deinterlacing and scaling 1080i signals well obviously isn't conserned with image quality.

Or they just didn't understand the issue when they bought their set, and/or they really aren't affected yet because their cable/satellite box does a good job of scaling.

It really amazes me how many people want Sony to do a lousy job or will at least defend them for it. The PS3 has plenty of power to do good scaling of Blu-Ray and there's no reason for them not to.

Would that be games like Virtua Tennis 3, that is crippled on the PS3 (no online)?

And games like Double Agent that have major graphical downgrades on the PS3. I'm so glad that we aren't seeing a lot of 360 games dumbed down to match the PS3 versions.

I think thats the point of this whole argument though. That if GTA IV was made just for the PS3 it would be a better product. Not a better product then what would be on the XBOX, but just a better product in general. This is because the game would be fitted to what the ps3 does best. It would also take advantage of the sixaxis controller and the huge hard drive that comes with each system.

This isnt a PS3 vs XBOX war. Its a dissapointement that the devleopers arent going to give us a game that is specificaly taylor for the machine that we decided to buy.

Well written.

Either way, I will enjoy it when it comes out on the PS3. Is it possible if it was developed solely for the PS3 that is would be better (or the 360 version solely for the 360)? Yes. However, will I recognize the difference while playing and think to myself that the game is not fun because it was multi-platform? No.

You're not screwed with Blu-ray playback at all if you own a 720p HDTV. I know. I own one. Maybe you should get your facts straight and stop the rampant Sony bashing that you almost always do whenever you post on here.

Most 720p sets will not convert the 1080i film image correctly, costing you about half the resolution of the image.

Gary Merson reported on this in October: http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1106hook/

Some sets are ok, and I don't know the status of sets released since (there aren't that many), but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot still had issues.

Or they just didn't understand the issue when they bought their set, and/or they really aren't affected yet because their cable/satellite box does a good job of scaling.

It really amazes me how many people want Sony to do a lousy job or will at least defend them for it. The PS3 has plenty of power to do good scaling of Blu-Ray and there's no reason for them not to.
I figure the hardware is plenty capable of downsampling Blu-ray movies to 720p, I just haven't seen Sony say they would support it, and I don't see much reason for them to invest the time in implementing scaling to improve the image quality on displays which have such a blatant flaw as to not handle 1080i signals well. I'd much rather Sony focus their efforts on on things like 1080p/24 support for those of us who do take image quality seriously.

Is it really true that Oblivion sold evenly between the 360 and PS3?

I find that really odd if true. Most 360 owners dont care for it?

Long live the PC for games, then. If theres no games like this, theres no console "war". How many games that are top ten "FPS" types on the 360?

I figure the hardware is plenty capable of downsampling Blu-ray movies to 720p, I just haven't seen Sony say they would support it, and I don't see much reason for them to invest the time in implementing scaling to improve the image quality on displays which have such a blatant flaw as to not handle 1080i signals well.

Half of the 720p sets on the market have these 'blatant flaws'. Including a whole bunch of Sony ones.

http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1106hook/

If Sony is going to sell crap TVs, maybe they should at least provide good scaling in their PS3, eh? Of course, all the stand alone BD players, including the ones from Sony, do provide the scaling. Maybe they don't care about having the PS3 provide even the basic functionality that their own standalone players provide. Personally I don't think that the PS3 should look halfassed when compared to the standalones.

Very few people have sets that can display 24p (my Pioneer plasma does, but how many people have them?). Many more people would be affected by the 720p scaling issue, so actually it makes a lot more sense for them to work on that and say the heck with 24p.

None of your arguments really stand up.

ES4 sold about 1.5 million copies on the XB360, so i doubt it sold evenly with the PS3 version considering that is almost what its installed base is at the time it was released.

Half of the 720p sets on the market have these 'blatant flaws'. Including a whole bunch of Sony ones.

Actually 80% of them, because the 3:2 telecine flaw will show up on any movie as well. Only half of them don't deinterlace properly.

Actually 80% of them, because the 3:2 telecine flaw will show up on any movie as well. Only half of them don't deinterlace properly.

I'm sure this is why all the standalone players make sure to include proper scaling to 720p. The PS3 should do no less.

Just because the versions are identical does it really mean the developers won't utilize the hard drive on the ps3.

I remember reading numerous reviews against ps2 and xbox and many of them stated how one would load faster than the other and utilize the hard drive more.

I think they could do the same here.

Also, until there is a game on the PS3 that is hands down better than what the 360 can offer, I don't see where the attitude of 'it would be better if designed only for the ps3' came from. Disk size obviously isn't a limitation, neither is a non existent hard drive. (at least not yet)

Just because the versions are identical does it really mean the developers won't utilize the hard drive on the ps3.

I remember reading numerous reviews against ps2 and xbox and many of them stated how one would load faster than the other and utilize the hard drive more.

I think they could do the same here.

Also, until there is a game on the PS3 that is hands down better than what the 360 can offer, I don't see where the attitude of 'it would be better if designed only for the ps3' came from. Disk size obviously isn't a limitation, neither is a non existent hard drive. (at least not yet)

Not sure. The PS3 version of ES:IV loads significantly faster than the 360 version even with the HDD attached and the developers said they'd use the HDD on the 360 if it was there. Of course there are other improvements such as better framerates, etc.

ES4 also had an extra year of development so issues could be ironed out, if you look back, even in Oct bethseda was saying that the use of BD was making the game slower to load on the PS3 so its obivous that unlike say Ubi Soft they actually tried to improve the port.

IMO, both consoles have about equal power.

1. The 360's GPU is far more capable than what the PS3 is using.
2. The 360's DVD-ROM is much faster than the PS3's BD drive, so it can capably stream data off the disc, while the PS3 NEEDS the hard drive for preloading. That's why games like Oblivion and Gears work fine with no hard drive caching, although Oblivion is smoother with a HDD installed. The downside to this for 360 owners is a louder system, however.
3. The 360 has double the RAM of the PS3, which helps the hard drive situation AND allows higher resolution textures, which is why a game like Gears of War would be compromised on a PS3.

I think the whole "PS3 is more powerful" schtick is the wishful thinking of someone who paid a 30% premium for a system with far inferior games. Just IMHO.

ES4 also had an extra year of development so issues could be ironed out, if you look back, even in Oct bethseda was saying that the use of BD was making the game slower to load on the PS3 so its obivous that unlike say Ubi Soft they actually tried to improve the port.

I wouldn't say an extra year, but they started working on the PS3 port after the 360 version was released. The game started out 4 years before it was released on the PC/360. It is not really known how long of that period was spent getting it fine tooned on the 360 or how it would be on the PS3 if it was built from ground up for the system.

ES4 also had an extra year of development so issues could be ironed out, if you look back, even in Oct bethseda was saying that the use of BD was making the game slower to load on the PS3 so its obivous that unlike say Ubi Soft they actually tried to improve the port.

To be honest, I dont think the devs spend much time working on these type of "afterthought" ports. They're designed to generate a buck, not to produce mind-blowing sales. You add that to the fact that the ps3 is harder to develop for leads you to shittty ports. That being said, I don't doubt that beth. spent more time on their ps3 port than some of the other devs, but I really doubt it they were working on it for a year. That would mean they started dev in 2/06 and didn't stop till 2/07? Anyways, it should be something they should be commended for.

True true, but the main point I was trying to convey is that Bethseda had known issues while developing the game, and instead of just rushing it and releasing as is, they actually worked on it till the issue was resolved. same others like Ubi Soft are not as proud of their games, and give them equal treatment.

To be honest, I dont think the devs spend much time working on these type of "afterthought" ports. They're designed to generate a buck, not to produce mind-blowing sales. You add that to the fact that the ps3 is harder to develop for leads you to shittty ports. That being said, I don't doubt that beth. spent more time on their ps3 port than some of the other devs, but I really doubt it they were working on it for a year. That would mean they started dev in 2/06 and didn't stop till 2/07? Anyways, it should be something they should be commended for.

Definitely. Its good to see a non-crap port for a change. FNR3 was another that was surprising to see an improved port. Sadly these have been in the minority.

Very few people have sets that can display 24p (my Pioneer plasma does, but how many people have them?). Many more people would be affected by the 720p scaling issue, so actually it makes a lot more sense for them to work on that and say the heck with 24p.

None of your arguments really stand up.
From where I'm standing it looks like most PS3 owners are still running 480i on the included composite input, our using HDMI at 1080p, and with 24hz support becoming more common. I'd wager the potion of the market that could benefit from 720p Blu-ray output is fairly small, and the potion that would acutally make use of it would be no bigger than those of us that would benefit from 24hz support.

I wasn't meaning to argue anything here and I'm not suggesting it would be bad for them to support the option, I simply haven't heard any thing from Sony claiming they would and was explaining the reasoning behind my surprise of your suggestion to the contrary. Were you just speculating that it is bound to come eventually or have you acutally head Sony say they are working on it?

2. The 360's DVD-ROM is much faster than the PS3's BD drive, so it can capably stream data off the disc, while the PS3 NEEDS the hard drive for preloading. That's why games like Oblivion and Gears work fine with no hard drive caching, although Oblivion is smoother with a HDD installed. The downside to this for 360 owners is a louder system, however.
3. The 360 has double the RAM of the PS3, which helps the hard drive situation AND allows higher resolution textures, which is why a game like Gears of War would be compromised on a PS3.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought these 2 points were proven to be false.

2) The DVD-ROM is not "much faster" than the BD-ROM drive, because the BD runs at a set speed, where as the DVD-ROM runs faster closer to the center of the disc, but is slower when reaching the outside of the disc. Thus, the average read speed of the DVD-ROM was almost equal to the BD-ROM.

I thought someone on AVSForum also made a post that the BD-ROM speed was actually faster than a 12x DVD-ROM. Couldn't find the post though...not sure where it went.

3) The 360 does not have double the RAM. It has a combined 512mb shared RAM (I find it unlikely that all 512 of RAM would be used JUST for video or system memory). Where as the PS3 has 256mb for video, and 256 for the system. However, isn't the PS3 able to tap into each other's pool (albeit at a slower access rate)?

From where I'm standing it looks like most PS3 owners are still running 480i on the included composite input, our using HDMI at 1080p

You really think that more PS3 owners are running at 1080p than 720p or 1080i? The 1080p install base is tiny at this point (because of how new the sets are where we have almost a decade of 1080i/720p set sales). I'll bet even at AVS a majority of PS3 owners aren't running 1080p.

And out of all the 1080p sets out there, how many have a 24p mode?

From my time at gamefaqs, I can say that many PS3 owners are clueless about HD, hell many think that you can get HD and surround over S-Video there.

It's not like anyone is actually utilizing the PS3 processors anyway.

From my time at gamefaqs, I can say that many PS3 owners are clueless about HD, hell many think that you can get HD and surround over S-Video there.

I'd say that was true about all systems though and not single the PS3 owners out. Half the time I was there was mostly involved in educating people on crap and helping them with audio video stuff.

Granted this gen people seem to be more educated as a whole then a few years back but that makes sense considering where technology has been going.

True true, but I hang out on the PS3 boards more than I do the other two so I don't pay much attention to them. But I am proud to say that many of them know better than to spend $100 on a HDMI cable there, and go for the monoprice ones instead

3) The 360 does not have double the RAM. It has a combined 512mb shared RAM (I find it unlikely that all 512 of RAM would be used JUST for video or system memory). Where as the PS3 has 256mb for video, and 256 for the system. However, isn't the PS3 able to tap into each other's pool (albeit at a slower access rate)?

Nah, this is just another rumor that won't go away, mainly to people being too lazy to find the truth.

The 360 has a shared pool of 512mb of RAM shared between the video card and cpu. There will never be an instance where the video or cpu will ever have access to all 512 of that. The cpu constantly needs some of it to simply run a basic app, and the video will always need some if it is running any kind of graphic. There are times where one or the other might have more than 256mb, but never 512mb, never even close.

The PS3 has 256mb XDR dedicated to the cpu (which is faster than the memory on the 360) and 256 dedicated to the RSX. The cpu will never have access to the memory for the RSX, however, the RSX does have access to the main cpu memory, but it has to travel through a bridge to get it. It would be slightly slower, but it is still possible if it absolutely needs it.

So only the RSX actually has access to both the pools of memory, unlike how in the 360, both cpu and video have access to (all) 512mb.

Both systems have a total of 512mb memory to work with, not including their cache (and dedicated SIMD memory for the PS3)

Originally Posted by pernar
2. The 360's DVD-ROM is much faster than the PS3's BD drive, so it can capably stream data off the disc, while the PS3 NEEDS the hard drive for preloading. That's why games like Oblivion and Gears work fine with no hard drive caching, although Oblivion is smoother with a HDD installed. The downside to this for 360 owners is a louder system, however.
This is not correct! How many times do we need to post the BD and DVD specs here before these anti-BD for gaming rumors stop? Do a search and educate yourself....

IMO, both consoles have about equal power.

1. The 360's GPU is far more capable than what the PS3 is using.
2. The 360's DVD-ROM is much faster than the PS3's BD drive, so it can capably stream data off the disc, while the PS3 NEEDS the hard drive for preloading. That's why games like Oblivion and Gears work fine with no hard drive caching, although Oblivion is smoother with a HDD installed. The downside to this for 360 owners is a louder system, however.
3. The 360 has double the RAM of the PS3, which helps the hard drive situation AND allows higher resolution textures, which is why a game like Gears of War would be compromised on a PS3.

I think the whole "PS3 is more powerful" schtick is the wishful thinking of someone who paid a 30% premium for a system with far inferior games. Just IMHO.


I disagree with all you said. LAIR is not possible on X360 since each level is 4.5GB in size.[ Which is not the case here BTW ] DVD ROM might have faster speed, but are the transfer rates the same?

@ 2x BD RoM moves equal amount of data compared to a 16 DVD Drive.

Who told about double the ram? Do you understand how these systems are designed? 256MB @ 3.2GHZ RDRAM ( not DDR ) which is clousley coupled to the CELL trough the DMA controller, and 256MB DDR700MHZ Ram dedicated for the RSX which is equivalant to a dual 6800 hundreds and carries the feature set of a 79xx card.

So I don't hold anything you said valid. On top of that, lets not forget that both Video Cards are about equal in terms of performance. With the ATI always having better texture capabilites just like in the PC world.

NVIDIA - RAW PERFORMANCE

ATI - Feature Set/ Usually more vivid.

Now I know for a fact, that if DMC 4 was designed for PS3 ground up, it can actually take advantage of the PHSYSICS the PS3 is capable of due to the CPU POWER.

In reality to the avarage consume - Both will be equal in terms of graphical capabilities.

Bethesda proved to us that proper coding ( no half assed porting ) can delive great results. Thus PS3 version oblivion still looks/runs better than the Xbox 360 version even after the X360 getting the latest shader patch.

how did this get turned into a *vs* thread???? so much for the good topic that got buried along the way :(

This thread's gonna be locked.

It wasn't hard to see that it was going to turn into a VS thread.

DMC 4 has the potential to be great on both machines, and for once the XBOX fanboys can enjoy, not diss the original platform where DMC became what it is today.

Nah, this is just another rumor that won't go away, mainly to people being too lazy to find the truth.

The 360 has a shared pool of 512mb of RAM shared between the video card and cpu. There will never be an instance where the video or cpu will ever have access to all 512 of that. The cpu constantly needs some of it to simply run a basic app, and the video will always need some if it is running any kind of graphic. There are times where one or the other might have more than 256mb, but never 512mb, never even close.

The PS3 has 256mb XDR dedicated to the cpu (which is faster than the memory on the 360) and 256 dedicated to the RSX. The cpu will never have access to the memory for the RSX, however, the RSX does have access to the main cpu memory, but it has to travel through a bridge to get it. It would be slightly slower, but it is still possible if it absolutely needs it.

So only the RSX actually has access to both the pools of memory, unlike how in the 360, both cpu and video have access to (all) 512mb.

Both systems have a total of 512mb memory to work with, not including their cache (and dedicated SIMD memory for the PS3)


Bro just let the fool think whatever he wants. Don't educate him, at least he is not willing to learn.

To be honest, I think that multiplat games do result in lower quality games. I don't have proof. But I realize that multiplat 3rd party games are almost a given for this generation of gaming.

Wasn't DMC 2 on the xbox & DMC 3 on the pc? So I can't understand why such a big deal was being made over DMC exclusivity or not. For the past 2 titles, they weren't exclusive, so it kinda implies that the 4th wont be either.

I probably wont pick it up. I played partways through the 1st, got bored with it. Never tried the 2nd or 3rd. I guess not my cup-o-tea.

So I don't hold anything you said valid. On top of that, lets not forget that both Video Cards are about equal in terms of performance.

Not really.


Now I know for a fact, that if DMC 4 was designed for PS3 ground up, it can actually take advantage of the PHSYSICS the PS3 is capable of due to the CPU POWER.

What magical physcis is it going to produce that can't already be done? HL2 ran an an Xbox just fine, ya know.


In reality to the avarage consume - Both will be equal in terms of graphical capabilities.

I wholehartedly agree.


Bethesda proved to us that proper coding ( no half assed porting ) can delive great results. Thus PS3 version oblivion still looks/runs better than the Xbox 360 version even after the X360 getting the latest shader patch.

Well, for one, since they disn't have to worry about a performance hit from AA (since the PS3 couldn't do AA unless they dropped HDR), they could enable other things to improve visuals. I don't know if it really had anything to do with "proper coding".

So far, every PS3 port that has improvements over the 360 version ends up having to sacrifice a few minor things for those improvements.

The PS3 drive reads BD disks at a constant speed of 72 Megabits per second, while the 360 drive reads DVD9 disks at a variable speed of about 54 to 85 Megabits per second (depending on where the information is stored on the disk). So on average about the same speed.

^ Say what?

My man, have you heard/seen/read about the Havok engine re-designed specifically for the PS3? If so, then that is what I am talking about. It is taking advantage of the SPU's so no further comments on this.

Don't belive me - go dig it up.

It is completely different from the SDK on the DX, XBOX platforms. However, it still adapts the main code.

Oh and on another note, don't ever forget that developers did go trough the same thing with XBOX360 during the learning curve.

Not saying that they are the same, just implying that XBOX to XBOX360 was not that big of a transition during its initial days.

Just to add something off topic, the guys who will truly push PS3 are the ones that will stay exclusive, and SONY WORLD WIDE STUDIOS is as big as UBI and EA when it comes to publishing power.

This is where I expect the software to really shine. Check out what F1 brought, rain... ( Some sick ass RAIN ) MS brought some Intense crashes, to axle - bearing detail. And then we have Resistance showing off 40 Enemies on screen!!!

So going back to the original post, will the PS3 get a shaft of this great port, I doubt it. After all the game has been in development from ground up on the console. In the end, it will be to the user.

They should equally be enjoyable.

Edit: Forgot to mention Oblivion. If winer is determined who runs SandBox type of game engine enviorments ( OPEN ENDED ) the best, then I can rest assured that PS3 is capable of doing the task.

^
I'm looking forward to games developed by "2nd party" studios. Smaller studios but published by Sony. Some of the great titles that we recognize today got their start on the ps & ps2 this way.

I've seen an article somewhere (I'd appreciate it if someone knows where to find it) that stated that Sony is the 2nd largest developer of games. I think EA games was #1.

One developers perspective.


http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=111770


VF5 developers "begged" for Xbox 360 version
by GamePro Staff | 05/03/2007 | 10:21:07 AM PST print comments [ 44 ] digg this! Share on Facebook A recent interview with the minds behind Virtua Fighter 5 reveals the game's development history, the reason behind its switch to multi-platform, and an interesting perspective on the present state of the fighting game industry.
By Eugene Huang

Interestingly enough, the Xbox 360 version of Virtua Fighter 5 has not yet been announced for the Japanese market, despite the fact that the series is often considered the undisputed champion of fighting games in Japan. Yet, although a Japanese release may have potentially drummed up some badly-needed Xbox 360 sales for Microsoft Japan, AM2, the game's developers, have something else in mind -- namely, the immense popularity the 360 currently holds in America and Europe.

AM2 developers Tohru Murayama and Yoshihiro Tsuzuku recently spoke with GamesRadar in reference to the Xbox 360 version of VF5, which is slated for release sometime in the third quarter of 2007. And from what they've stated, releasing it for the 360 was completely their decision and something they wanted very, very much.

"After the experience of making the PS3 version, the team really wanted the chance to try making the game for the 360 as well," Tsuzuku said. "We wanted to give VF5 a broad availability on next-gen consoles. We really begged the company to let us go ahead with it."

The developers state they "are sure" that the Xbox 360 version will surpass the broad Virtua Fighter user base previously expanded by the versions on the PS2. Or, at least they "hope" that will be the case, they later clarify.

Developer support

Assuredly, one of the questions at the top of console fanboy lists is, "Which version was easier to develop?" After working extensively with both consoles, the developers had this to say:

"[I]t took us about the same amount of time to produce both versions," Murayama revealed. "I say they were both about equally challenging to develop."

"In some ways, I think developing for the 360 was easier," Tsuzuku later adds. "Microsoft software development kits, for example, were very well put together and they were also very helpful in responding to our requests and in supporting the team. From a developer perspective, that made things a lot easier. The development tools they provided were also a big help in measuring game performance as we went along."

But the developers later state that the game will not undergo many changes in transition from PS3 to 360. Due to time constraints, as well as the burden of learning to program for brand new hardware, Murayama claims that play modes such as Quest Mode will remain virtually unchanged.

Tsuzuku also admits that there hasn't been much added to Quest Mode since Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution for the PS2, but promises that the next installment of the series will provide more significant upgrades.

Today's fighters

Midway through, the interviewers broadened the conversation by steering the topic over to the state of the modern fighting game. While the team concurs that there are less fighters on the market these days, Tsuzuku attributes that to "survival of the fittest." Each series that has outlasted the trial by fire of the fighting game crucible has given their own unique take on the genre and offers something that others can't match, whether it's balance, characters, story, or just "sheer entertainment value".

But the interviewer then asks, why can't Western development houses make good fighting games? Neither Murayama nor Tsuzuku think that's necessarily the case.




"How about Fight Night?" Tsuzuku asks.

"I'm a fan of Mortal Kombat and the Def Jam fighting series, personally," Murayama comments. "I feel these aren't games Japanese developers are capable of making. I'd rather see games like this come from America than something that just tried to imitate the style of Japanese fighting games

ES4 also had an extra year of development so issues could be ironed out, if you look back, even in Oct bethseda was saying that the use of BD was making the game slower to load on the PS3 so its obivous that unlike say Ubi Soft they actually tried to improve the port.
they did not have an extra year... they had a total of a year to optimize/port it to the ps3.

You really think that more PS3 owners are running at 1080p than 720p or 1080i?
I think most are running 480i, and along with the few using 1080p who also wouldn't benift from an option for Blu-ray output at 720p, they make up the vast majorty of the userbase.

I think most are running 480i, and along with the few using 1080p who also wouldn't benift from an option for Blu-ray output at 720p, they make up the vast majorty of the userbase.
i think the majority of ps3 owners are using HDMI/component on 720p native sets. most ps3 owners probably own HDTV's and probably a small fraction of them own 1080p sets. for anyone who owns an HDTV set, surely they're at least using component cables.

i HIGHLY doubt that 480i/1080p users make up for the majority of the userbase.

Interestingly enough, the Xbox 360 version of Virtua Fighter 5 has not yet been announced for the Japanese market, despite the fact that the series is often considered the undisputed champion of fighting games in Japan. Yet, although a Japanese release may have potentially drummed up some badly-needed Xbox 360 sales for Microsoft Japan, AM2, the game's developers, have something else in mind -- namely, the immense popularity the 360 currently holds in America and Europe.

Just how is VF5 suppose to be a system seller for the 360 in Japan when the game is already available for the PS3.:rolleyes:

Just how is VF5 suppose to be a system seller for the 360 in Japan when the game is already available for the PS3.:rolleyes:
Not to mention that the dev kits they had for the PS3 were not the newer kits that they have now (which there are claims that the newest version of the dev kits are much easier to work with?).

And, really, the article title is a bit misleading. It seemed like the developers were more interested in increasing their user base beyond the Playstation because they want more money. Not because of the Xbox360's hardware. They just want the user base. Not too big of a surprise.

Just how is VF5 suppose to be a system seller for the 360 in Japan when the game is already available for the PS3.:rolleyes:

$399 vs. $599?


And while GW-SMOkeY is quite amusing and rabid in his fanboyism, Havok has not redesigned their physics engine for any specific console. If that was the case than Havok wouldn't have been part of Crackdown either. Or the fact that Havok engine is going to be used in Fable 2.

My man, have you heard/seen/read about the Havok engine re-designed specifically for the PS3? If so, then that is what I am talking about. It is taking advantage of the SPU's so no further comments on this.

Don't belive me - go dig it up.

Ummmmmm. Not exactly as you're making it out to be.

Now, perhaps he was talking about Havok 4.5, which the company themselves states:

http://www.havok.com/content/blogcategory/3/53/

"San Francisco, Calif., Jan. 23, 2007 – Havok announces today the official release of Havok 4.5, the latest update to its modular suite of artist tools and run-time technology. Fully optimized for Sony PLAYSTATION®3, as well as Microsoft Xbox360 and Nintendo Wii, Havok 4.5 dramatically accelerates the development of cross-platform, cutting edge electronic games, meeting the needs of the world’s top developers and producers. Havok 4.5 allows game developers to scale game content to thousands of dynamically-driven game objects and characters, harnessing the full power and speed of next generation architectures."

Close, but no cigar. The new Havok engine was designed to take advantage of all three console's strengths.

I also found this comical:

Just to add something off topic, the guys who will truly push PS3 are the ones that will stay exclusive, and SONY WORLD WIDE STUDIOS is as big as UBI and EA when it comes to publishing power.

Riiiiiiight.

Just how is VF5 suppose to be a system seller for the 360 in Japan when the game is already available for the PS3.:rolleyes:


The same thing can be asked about games that came on the 360 going to the PS3.

The same thing can be asked about games that came on the 360 going to the PS3.
But, is any (reasonable) person claiming multi-platform games will be a system seller for the PS3?

I believe William Mapstone was pointing to the particular quote from the author that they expect Virtua Fighter 5 could potentially help save the Xbox360 sales in Japan.

At the risk of being flamed....
It is just proof both systems really are equal in the grand scheme of things.
The "ease of development" of platform X or the "more advanced hardware" of platform Y.
The differences in the platforms is truly amounting to a hill of beans. Frankly I am glad, it should quiet down several fanboy types. As for games being crippled, that is BS. The worst looking game on 360 is still way better looking than anything on PS2/Xbox, if all your concerned about is looks. Be glad both are HD.

Originally posted by mboojigga
The same thing can be asked about games that came on the 360 going to the PS3.
Uh, who has ever claimed that a multi-platform game would be a system seller for the PS3.:confused:

But, is any (reasonable) person claiming multi-platform games will be a system seller for the PS3?

I believe William Mapstone was pointing to the particular quote from the author that they expect Virtua Fighter 5 could potentially help save the Xbox360 sales in Japan.

That's not what the article said, really. It was in past tense- it simply implied if it had released on 360 in japan when it did on PS3, it might have sold a few consoles. Never does it say anything about saving it's sales.

That's what happens when the developer has to account for the 360's shortcomings as a next-gen console. Maybe all 360 core owners should bend over and let M$ ram a $100 20GB hard drive up their shaft so they can play these games like they were intended.
They do that everyday...

$399 vs. $599?


And while GW-SMOkeY is quite amusing and rabid in his fanboyism, Havok has not redesigned their physics engine for any specific console. If that was the case than Havok wouldn't have been part of Crackdown either. Or the fact that Havok engine is going to be used in Fable 2.



Ummmmmm. Not exactly as you're making it out to be.

Now, perhaps he was talking about Havok 4.5, which the company themselves states:

http://www.havok.com/content/blogcategory/3/53/

"San Francisco, Calif., Jan. 23, 2007 – Havok announces today the official release of Havok 4.5, the latest update to its modular suite of artist tools and run-time technology. Fully optimized for Sony PLAYSTATION®3, as well as Microsoft Xbox360 and Nintendo Wii, Havok 4.5 dramatically accelerates the development of cross-platform, cutting edge electronic games, meeting the needs of the world’s top developers and producers. Havok 4.5 allows game developers to scale game content to thousands of dynamically-driven game objects and characters, harnessing the full power and speed of next generation architectures."

Close, but no cigar. The new Havok engine was designed to take advantage of all three console's strengths.

I also found this comical:



Riiiiiiight.


It is designed to take advantage of the SPU's I didnt say that they made one specific for PS3 only - so why put words in my mouth?

So next time you critize me, make sure you backup your ****!


"http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20070416/sheffield_01.shtml"


"GS: How much are the next-gen consoles changing that memory usage?

JY: It's changing for sure. I think the PS3 has great potential, but it's a very different kind of architecture. If people build their games with an understanding of what their challenges are going to be with porting between consoles, we can do a lot. In some cases, though, we're seeing people start with a 360 SKU and defer thinking about the PS3 port later. That can have some pretty dire consequences for how you process your art. We try to advise people that if they're thinking about moving to PS3 eventually, that they need to talk to us at the start so we can get things sorted out. I think that's going to be a very big challenge for everybody for awhile, because this idea of many, many cores with smaller local memories will present a lot of challenges in many different directions.

GS: At this stage, I've heard some people say that when starting with an Xbox 360 version, they have trouble getting the PS3 version to look as good later on. It's interesting, because the PS3 is potentially more powerful.

JY: I think a lot of it has to do with slicing and dicing the task and moving it to each of the smaller processors. Those processors are really powerful, but you have to plan for it. We've spent the last two years re-architecturing our software so that you can have one interface that, when used appropriately, can get maximum use out of the SPUs. You do need to plan for that, and if you have one massive world presented as one object, it's a little more challenging. It takes preparation.

GS: Do you have any existing support to split things across those SPUs?

JY: Yes. We can take that stuff and automatically split it. But as with anything, there are pathological cases where if everything is piled all together all in one place at the same time, you can get performance spikes. Most of the gameplay situations we see feature lots of activity spread out over a variety of quadrants. Those situations efficiently use up the cycles that are there.

GS: It's interesting to see how things are progressing, since people aren't even maximizing the usage of the Xbox 360's cores yet.

JY: Yeah, and I'm hoping that just means that there will be more cycles for us once people start plugging stuff in the right way. There might be lots of cycles we could suck up, which would be cool.

GS: What troubles specifically have people had with moving from 360 to PS3?

JY: There are certain things that are proprietary and need to be walked around carefully, but I would say that you don't have to go back, for example, and redo the art, but you may need to re-export or reprocess the art to chunk it up differently. For our stuff, it may be to store the right amount of information locally, so that when information is passed around the system, it has everything it needs to do its job.

GS: I suppose it's because you can use bigger chunks on 360, whereas on PS3, you have to chop it up a lot more?

JY: Yeah, you have a more unified memory architecture on 360 and PC in general. I think that there are merits to both, though. If you can move the world over to many processors and structure the game so that you can dice stuff up, there's a lot of leading-edge technology out there that seems to be going in that direction. That might just be one of those paradigm shifts that the software development component of the game industry goes through over the next five or ten years."

----

Oh and you quoting me on the SWWS - is also missleading. Dig up the article for your self.

Time line - with the company publishing power - It goes EA, SONY, UBI! Then everyone else...

Under SWWS = Guriella Studios, Zipper Interactive, Liverpool, Soho, Team Ninja, Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, SOE, and etc. So you telling me that these companies wont push the PS3 to its limit? - I have to say that I do disagree all the way!

Oh I do agree with you on HaVOK 4.5 which was designed with the PS3 in mind...

What I could of done better is, word it better. I wanted to say that the new Havok system was optimized with the PS3 in mind.

Originally posted by Tenkaipalm
That's not what the article said, really. It was in past tense- it simply implied if it had released on 360 in japan when it did on PS3, it might have sold a few consoles. Never does it say anything about saving it's sales.

Interestingly enough, the Xbox 360 version of Virtua Fighter 5 has not yet been announced for the Japanese market, despite the fact that the series is often considered the undisputed champion of fighting games in Japan. Yet, although a Japanese release may have potentially drummed up some badly-needed Xbox 360 sales for Microsoft Japan, AM2, the game's developers, have something else in mind -- namely, the immense popularity the 360 currently holds in America and Europe.

I am not reading it the same way you are...

I don't have any data or anything to back this up, but this is how I personally see it:


In 2007 and 2008, 7 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on Xbox 360. This will primarily have to do with the "lead sku theory", as well as the ease of development on the Xbox 360 and the development support that Microsoft is quick to provide.

In 2009, 2010 and 2011, 8 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on the PS3. By this time, developers will have had enough hands on experience with the PS3, that they will finally start to really tap into it's capabilities. Also, the price of the PS3 will be much lower, which will of course mean a greater installed base, and it's very possible that the 360 will lose it's "lead sku" status at this point. I also think Microsoft will probably have a followup to the 360 ready for release in 4th quarter 2010, so it could be very similar to the Sega Genesis/Super Nintendo scenario in which Sega basically abandoned the 16-bit market too early, while Super Nintendo stayed in the 16-bit market and really cleaned up from a profit standpoint while Sega was more interested in rushing their next gen to market (Sega 32X/ Sega Saturn). I see a very similar situation happening during this generation. Microsoft will see the writing on the wall, and will want to kick start another generation much earlier than Sony will.


Anyway, this is just total and complete speculation on my part, and I could very well end up 100 percent incorrect on these predictions.

I am not reading it the same way you are...


I am not sure how you don't even it it wasn't spelled out they are not gearing towards Japan. Hell whats funny is both PS3 and 360 are not doing well in Japan. They are looking towards U.S and Europe for the sales. Some of us never expected before the 360 release that popularity would jump in that region. What is some what of a shock is the PS3 isn't doing what alot of news sites and forum members here expected it to do. Japan was supposed to be the hot spot for both Wii and PS3 and it is just Wii at this point.

Where is Emotop by the way?

I don't have any data or anything to back this up, but this is how I personally see it:


In 2007 and 2008, 7 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on Xbox 360. This will primarily have to do with the "lead sku theory", as well as the ease of development on the Xbox 360 and the development support that Microsoft is quick to provide.

In 2009, 2010 and 2011, 8 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on the PS3. By this time, developers will have had enough hands on experience with the PS3, that they will finally start to really tap into it's capabilities. Also, the price of the PS3 will be much lower, which will of course mean a greater installed base, and it's very possible that the 360 will lose it's "lead sku" status at this point. I also think Microsoft will probably have a followup to the 360 ready for release in 4th quarter 2010, so it could be very similar to the Sega Genesis/Super Nintendo scenario in which Sega basically abandoned the 16-bit market too early, while Super Nintendo stayed in the 16-bit market and really cleaned up from a profit standpoint while Sega was more interested in rushing their next gen to market (Sega 32X/ Sega Saturn). I see a very similar situation happening during this generation. Microsoft will see the writing on the wall, and will want to kick start another generation much earlier than Sony will.


Anyway, this is just total and complete speculation on my part, and I could very well end up 100 percent incorrect on these predictions.


With the reports of a PS4-15 by this time that theory might have to change up. :D I kid I kid

Can you believe we actually let this stuff get us so riled up?

I do it too, Im not trying to make myself any better than anyone else.

Sometimes, It just kind of boggles my mind though...

In 2007 and 2008, 7 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on Xbox 360.

In 2009, 2010 and 2011, 8 out of 10 multiplatform games will be superior on the PS3.

Your guesses may have merit. However that doesn't put Sony in a good position (given that the next gen systems will start to ship likely in 2010 or so). I think we will see some things on a the PS3 (in the future) that the 360 can't do. I don't think we will see anything this year on the PS3 that can't be effectively accomplished (albeit in a different way) on the 360.

Addition: 360 Hindering GTAIV?

Rockstar says Microsoft's console is limiting the game's progress.


http://ps3.ign.com/articles/785/785344p1.html


"Lately we've seen several examples of publishers and developers favoring the Xbox 360 over the PlayStation 3. Some developers have complained that the PS3 is difficult to develop for, and top publishers have been making previously Sony-exclusive games available on Microsoft's console, where the install base is much higher. But one high-profile developer is sticking up for the PS3."



My take on this? If Rockstar does not take advantage of key features PS3 offers, then I don't know what to tell ya.

HDD will imprve loading, especially for this type of game engine, and the BD will offer impressive amount of content, textures, extras, etc.

I think the people that post the most here are the ones who own systems without enough games to play. Time to add more systems.

I think the people that post the most here are the ones who own systems without enough games to play. Time to add more systems.

I always thought most posted while they were at work or multi-tasking, posting and watching TV, etc.

So the point of this thread is to now blame the 360 for all the bad software that may or may not come out on the PS3? Just to be sure we've covered all our bases:

1) If a game is multiplatform, and sucks on the PS3....its the 360's fault because clearly the developers had to port it from the 360 version which they made first.

2) If a game is exclusive to the PS3, and it sucks, its the developers fault for not taking advantage of the uber-power of the system and not understanding how to tame the beast.

3) If the game comes directly from Sony, and sucks, it'll be blamed on a rush to market to combat something that the 360 is doing, or it'll be universally praised as the most amazing thing ever (See: Nintendo Fanboy playing Mario 14 or Mario Kart 28 or..)

I think people cried the same river with the "Superior 64bit Atari Jaguar" and the "Mind-Numbingly Awesome 32 bit 3DO" too....incredibly amazing uber-hardware that was expensive but didn't necessarily live up to the claims of its creators.

The only one to blame here, as always, is Sony. They made a system that requires much more development time to pull power out of (basically a slap in the face to developers who would otherwise determine the success or failure of the platform), and then priced the thing out of the reach of most average and even some hard-core gamers (another slap in the face.....hard to program for AND a fairly small installed user-base, wow what an incredibly tempting offer to a game developer!).

!?!? Wheres the confusion here people............its all Sony.

you forgot number 4

4.) If a game is supposed to be released on the 360 and the PS3 at the same time and the game sucks on the PS3 it is the 360's fault because the developers want the game to be the identical when the PS3 has more options open to making the game better(HDD for quicker load times and extra data, BD has more capacity for levels and lossless sound.)

!?!? Wheres the confusion here people............its all Sony.

Absolutely. Look at all of the cross-platform titles last gen? Over 90% of the time they were visibly superior and loaded faster on the Xbox. None of this crying, because it was a powerful, developer-friendly system. FYI, developer-friendly is good thing. Will the whining of single-console PS3 owners ever stop this generation?

I always thought most posted while they were at work or multi-tasking, posting and watching TV, etc.


Um, don't tell my boss :o

you forgot number 4

4.) If a game is supposed to be released on the 360 and the PS3 at the same time and the game sucks on the PS3 it is the 360's fault because the developers want the game to be the identical when the PS3 has more options open to making the game better(HDD for quicker load times and extra data, BD has more capacity for levels and lossless sound.)

Thats kinda the same arguement as above....blame the 360 as the lowest common denominator. Only....thats never been the case. Older releases on last-gen consoles usually catered to the strengths of the hardware. Its just that so far, on the PS3 side of things, I think the "porting" process is much more daunting than we want to believe it is.

RE: The HD...the only way to make a game load quicker with a HD is to install data from the optical drive to the disc. The BD drive is very slow, the HD is very fast. So after the inital slow "install/copy" process, accessing the HD is faster.

But one BD disc holds what...25gigs potentially? And the base level PS3 has a 20 gig HD right? So Developers know there will be a HD there, do they check for space first? ARe they only allowed to use XX amount of space like an overwritable cache, in which case the bigger HD's wouldn't really come into play at all. Or would they write a routine to cache as much as the disc will allow? And if so, how could they load-balance the game and assure the game was great for some people, but not terrible for others..and if its not terrible for others, then whats the benefit of having seperate install options (HD, no HD).

Sony needs the HD more than the 360 does thanks to the speed discrepancy of its drives, something to keep in mind.

Even if the 360 didn't exist, this is something developers would have to wrestle with.

i'm sure if they wanted to the guys at rockstar could throw in some sort of driving gimmick for the sixaxis, thats all the controller is anyways. they should have just gone with a wireless dual-shock.

also to all of the idiots that talk about the devs having to work around the lack of hard drive, thats not an issue. there is a hard drive cache that assists with loading on most games, it says so right on the box.

Bro just let the fool think whatever he wants. Don't educate him, at least he is not willing to learn.

Was that really necessary? I'm willing to acknowledge when I'm wrong. This is still the "AVS" Forum, not forums.fanboy.com.

If the Blu Ray drive in the PS3 is really as fast as the 360's drive, why do PS3 titles have hard drive requirements on the back? Oblivion, if I recall correctly, requires around 5 gigs. In fact, the PS3 Spiderman 3 which just came out today requires 2.6 gigs, and STILL somehow runs smoother on a HDD-less XBox 360.

I've seen the PS3's specs many times, but somehow I missed that the PS3 did have 512 total megs of RAM, just split between the system and GPU. Mea culpa.

To directly address the OP, as long as the XBox 360 continues to grossly outsell the PS3 in this generation, it will always be the lead platform. However, once the PS3 dev tools mature, I don't think you'll see as big a disparity as you're seeing today. After all, the PS2 was the lead platform of the last generation, and MANY, if not most multiplatform XBox games were still better.

This is where I expect the software to really shine. Check out what F1 brought, rain... ( Some sick ass RAIN )

This is totally off topic and I apologize, but there is a level in Gears of War that has the best rain and water effects I have ever seen in a game. It is just mind blowing. I've seen the rain effect in F1 and it IS very nice, but nowhere near Gears'.

I may come across as something of a XBox cheerleader in some of my posts, but honestly I'm just a huge fan of games in general. I owned two PS1s and a PS2. I was just grossly let down by Sony with the PS3, so I tend to come across as overly negative in regard to that system.

Back on topic, I'm *really* looking forward to seeing how the PS3 version of Unreal Tournament 3 compares with the 360 version. I think that is the debut of the Unreal Engine 3 on the PS3, so I think we'll get a pretty good feel for if the PS3 is capable of surpassing a 360 on a multiplatform game developed concurrently. Especially since the PS3 was the lead platform for that game as well.

also to all of the idiots that talk about the devs having to work around the lack of hard drive, thats not an issue. there is a hard drive cache that assists with loading on most games, it says so right on the box.
Those people you are calling "idiots" simply understand a fact that you apparently don't; the hard drive can be used for a lot more than just a simple cache to simply assist in loading games when the games are built for a system that always has a hard drive.

Those people you are calling "idiots" simply understand a fact that you apparently don't; the hard drive can be used for a lot more than just a simple cache to simply assist in loading games when the games are built for a system that always has a hard drive.
right like putting a portion of the game onto the hard drive, but that doesn't really seem to help all that much or enhance the games in any real way does it. sure you shave off a couple of seconds for a bigger load screen for oblivion but the game still turns choppy riding a horse across the landscape.

the fact of the matter is, the disc still has to be used with the ps3 so the hdd is basically used as a larger cache. the only way to make a real difference would be to put the entire game onto the hard drive, but then it becomes too easy to pirate.

You are missing my point. Without a standard hard drive games have to be designed around the bandwidth avalable from the optical disk, while having a standard hard allows developers a second source for streaming data and hence overcome the optical disk's bandwidth limitation to build games that simply wouldn't be able to stream fast enough to work without a hard drive.

If the Blu Ray drive in the PS3 is really as fast as the 360's drive, why do PS3 titles have hard drive requirements on the back? Oblivion, if I recall correctly, requires around 5 gigs. In fact, the PS3 Spiderman 3 which just came out today requires 2.6 gigs, and STILL somehow runs smoother on a HDD-less XBox 360.

I've seen the PS3's specs many times, but somehow I missed that the PS3 did have 512 total megs of RAM, just split between the system and GPU. Mea culpa.

To directly address the OP, as long as the XBox 360 continues to grossly outsell the PS3 in this generation, it will always be the lead platform. However, once the PS3 dev tools mature, I don't think you'll see as big a disparity as you're seeing today. After all, the PS2 was the lead platform of the last generation, and MANY, if not most multiplatform XBox games were still better.
Isn't HDD usage optional? I thought it was an option to install part of the game onto the HDD to boost load times. It's not necessary, but for the people who complain about waiting 20 seconds for something to load can be appeased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3 (under Game Development).

Some games have an option to install data to the HDD to speed up load games, but the PS3 also reserves space on the HDD which isn't optional, but rather kept free for any game to use.

Why woudl anyone mention Spidey 3? I mean that team dead a piss poor job for either console. Its not even optimized, before you make such claims, I would recomend consulting with the actuall review;

So the point of this thread is to now blame the 360 for all the bad software that may or may not come out on the PS3? Just to be sure we've covered all our bases:

1) If a game is multiplatform, and sucks on the PS3....its the 360's fault because clearly the developers had to port it from the 360 version which they made first.

2) If a game is exclusive to the PS3, and it sucks, its the developers fault for not taking advantage of the uber-power of the system and not understanding how to tame the beast.

3) If the game comes directly from Sony, and sucks, it'll be blamed on a rush to market to combat something that the 360 is doing, or it'll be universally praised as the most amazing thing ever (See: Nintendo Fanboy playing Mario 14 or Mario Kart 28 or..)

I think people cried the same river with the "Superior 64bit Atari Jaguar" and the "Mind-Numbingly Awesome 32 bit 3DO" too....incredibly amazing uber-hardware that was expensive but didn't necessarily live up to the claims of its creators.

The only one to blame here, as always, is Sony. They made a system that requires much more development time to pull power out of (basically a slap in the face to developers who would otherwise determine the success or failure of the platform), and then priced the thing out of the reach of most average and even some hard-core gamers (another slap in the face.....hard to program for AND a fairly small installed user-base, wow what an incredibly tempting offer to a game developer!).

!?!? Wheres the confusion here people............its all Sony.


Ha! You're the last guy that does not even own the PS3 - yet Mr. Expert is that your take on it? I love how you bring some JAGUAR crap that does not have anything to do with PS. PS is a world wide brand, not some new **** that has been cooked up over night. Why I dont understand is how can you make your clams valid.

Yeah sure if you belive in your 1.2.3? Belive your own created lie?

I dont hear any of the Exclusive studios complain, I dont hear alot of other 3rd party publisher that like to complain. I only hear peopel complain that find it an excuse.

Bethesda proved that point. Now, in what way do you consider it a slap in the face.

The system is barley 6 months old and has Shipped 4+ Mill with a user base of at least 3.5 - You telling me this is not good? Even at 600 a pop? The bigest challenge SONY faces its the price.

However you can belive whatever you want.

Edit: Just to refresh your memory

"JY: It's changing for sure. I think the PS3 has great potential, but it's a very different kind of architecture. If people build their games with an understanding of what their challenges are going to be with porting between consoles, we can do a lot. In some cases, though, we're seeing people start with a 360 SKU and defer thinking about the PS3 port later. That can have some pretty dire consequences for how you process your art. We try to advise people that if they're thinking about moving to PS3 eventually, that they need to talk to us at the start so we can get things sorted out. I think that's going to be a very big challenge for everybody for awhile, because this idea of many, many cores with smaller local memories will present a lot of challenges in many different directions."

PS You might want to go back a few pages, click on the link I provided, and who knows you might learn a thing or two.

Why woudl anyone mention Spidey 3? I mean that team dead a piss poor job for either console. Its not even optimized, before you make such claims, I would recomend consulting with the actuall review;


SM3 is a joke. If it was decent, I would have bought it.

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/785/785713/spider-man-3-20070504032237938-000.jpg

If you go too high, the city textures go on vacation.


This picture & comment from IGN regarding the wii version made me rofl.

Thats kinda the same arguement as above....blame the 360 as the lowest common denominator. Only....thats never been the case. Older releases on last-gen consoles usually catered to the strengths of the hardware. Its just that so far, on the PS3 side of things, I think the "porting" process is much more daunting than we want to believe it is.

RE: The HD...the only way to make a game load quicker with a HD is to install data from the optical drive to the disc. The BD drive is very slow, the HD is very fast. So after the inital slow "install/copy" process, accessing the HD is faster.

But one BD disc holds what...25gigs potentially? And the base level PS3 has a 20 gig HD right? So Developers know there will be a HD there, do they check for space first? ARe they only allowed to use XX amount of space like an overwritable cache, in which case the bigger HD's wouldn't really come into play at all. Or would they write a routine to cache as much as the disc will allow? And if so, how could they load-balance the game and assure the game was great for some people, but not terrible for others..and if its not terrible for others, then whats the benefit of having seperate install options (HD, no HD).

Sony needs the HD more than the 360 does thanks to the speed discrepancy of its drives, something to keep in mind.

Even if the 360 didn't exist, this is something developers would have to wrestle with.


NOT TRUE! Bethesda says otherwise.

And to top it off, BD actually has a consistant transfer rate off 74mb/s.

So please elaborate.

SM3 is a joke. If it was decent, I would have bought it.

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/785/785713/spider-man-3-20070504032237938-000.jpg

If you go too high, the city textures go on vacation.


This picture & comment from IGN regarding the wii version made me rofl.


Indeed! Not accaptible at all IMO at least not for 60-70 bucks. Both systems... Including the PC.

*
NickG1215 - If you think that having a HDD is a bad thing, then my friend no further comments. Even if you think its not, then again sorry that you feel that way.

Anyway, after reading few of my post - I came to realize what is the point of this thread? Someone who got the title wrong, and etc. People that dont even on a PS3 usually come here, to share their "So exper knowladge"

Ha! You're the last guy that does not even own the PS3 - yet Mr. Expert is that your take on it?

My PS3 is about 8 feet away from me right now...what in the hell are you talking about. ???


I dont hear any of the Exclusive studios complain, I dont hear alot of other 3rd party publisher that like to complain. I only hear peopel complain that find it an excuse.


An excuse?


Bethesda proved that point. Now, in what way do you consider it a slap in the face.

What point did they prove...


The system is barley 6 months old and has Shipped 4+ Mill with a user base of at least 3.5 - You telling me this is not good? Even at 600 a pop? The bigest challenge SONY faces its the price.


No, the biggest challenge Sony faces is games that are coming out for it now are either a year old already, or are really bad Ports. Sony needs software, period.

lot. In some cases, though, we're seeing people start with a 360 SKU and defer thinking about the PS3 port later. That can have some pretty dire consequences for how you process your art. We try to advise people that if they're thinking about moving to PS3 eventually, that they need to talk to us at the start so we can get things sorted out. I think that's going to be a very big challenge for everybody for awhile, because this idea of many, many cores with smaller local memories will present a lot of challenges in many different directions."


Sure....what is this supposed to be telling me?

My PS3 is about 8 feet away from me right now...what in the hell are you talking about. ???



An excuse?


What point did they prove...



No, the biggest challenge Sony faces is games that are coming out for it now are either a year old already, or are really bad Ports. Sony needs software, period.



Sure....what is this supposed to be telling me?
For sure! Well my friend than I appologize, and take all I said. I couldn't agree more with you on the "Sony, nees software" and "Year old Ports". I couldn't put that better my self.

Seriously, I appologize for the missunderstanding on my part.

"Some pretty negative comments about the PS3 made by the devs. They state the fact that they are exclusive to the 360 allows them to do much more than if they were multiplatform, but they also state they doubt they would be able to achieve what they're doing with the game on the 360 on the ps3 even if it was ps3 exclusive."

Comments by Ubisoft regarding their up coming Xbox 360 exclusive Splinter Cell: Conviction

link to article (http://www.mygen.com.au/article.php?page_id=96960179110181074&se_id=29&format=2)

Explains all the medicore ports Ubi brought - listen I am keeping close to them and RS6 release and Creed. If it does not delive with those two key titles, and including GRAW2 I will not support them at all. It is an excuse that I don't understand.

Originally posted by HeadRusch
Sony needs the HD more than the 360 does thanks to the speed discrepancy of its drives, something to keep in mind.


The PS3 drive reads BD disks at a constant speed of 72 Megabits per second, while the 360 drive reads DVD9 disks at a variable speed of about 54 to 85 Megabits per second (depending on where the information is stored on the disk). So on average about the same speed.
So you don't agree with these specs?

"Some pretty negative comments about the PS3 made by the devs. They state the fact that they are exclusive to the 360 allows them to do much more than if they were multiplatform, but they also state they doubt they would be able to achieve what they're doing with the game on the 360 on the ps3 even if it was ps3 exclusive."

Comments by Ubisoft regarding their up coming Xbox 360 exclusive Splinter Cell: Conviction

link to article (http://www.mygen.com.au/article.php?page_id=96960179110181074&se_id=29&format=2)
i wouldn't expect much from any upcoming Ubisoft title for the ps3. they obviously prefer working on the 360. from the looks of it, they just aren't very good at working on the ps3 hardware, and it seems like they're not really willing to put any effort into learning either.

^ Yep, it sure looks like it. We will see, GRAW2, RS6 Vegas, and Creed will either brake it or make it. If they suck! Then the hell with UBI and their medicore crap. I still belive in them though...

^ Yep, it sure looks like it. We will see, GRAW2, RS6 Vegas, and Creed will either brake it or make it. If they suck! Then the hell with UBI and their medicore crap. I still belive in them though...


Wow, this coming from a supposed up and coming developer everybody :rolleyes:

Jigga, I am not even going to bother to remove you from the ignore list. I know its a comment towards me, but who cares. If you beleive that UBI should give us medicore ports then thats your take on it. I know they can do a lot better. At least they put an effort with PS2.

What does my profession have to do with UBISOFT bringing medicore ports?

I have great faith in them, so I hope they delive, which I belive they will.

Oh wait, I forget you can care less since you don't own a PS3.

Now, hows that Dodge with 22's? Does it look like a HORSE WAGON? Sure makes it faster right?

Jigga, I am not even going to bother to remove you from the ignore list. I know its a comment towards me, but who cares. If you beleive that UBI should give us medicore ports then thats your take on it. I know they can do a lot better. At least they put an effort with PS2.

What does my profession have to do with UBISOFT bringing medicore ports?

I have great faith in them, so I hope they delive, which I belive they will.

Oh wait, I forget you can care less since you don't own a PS3.

Now, hows that Dodge with 22's? Does it look like a HORSE WAGON? Sure makes it faster right?


You know you love pulling that angle about who has an actual PS3 and who doesn't. Also if I am on your ignore list then you shouldn't care what I say whether it is towards u or not.

:D Get it right man I don't have a Dodge but I will correct you it is a 07 Chrysler 300C on 22's just so you can correctly insult it or whatever floats your boat Sparky. You must be thinking of the Dodge Magnum which I think are nice too but that is yours and my opinion. I love defending this country for the freedoms to say whatever we want. :)

LOL GOOD ONE! But see we need this kind of retention to make us better :P No offense taken, you insult me I insult you etc. :)

Hey but I ment to say C300 :) HEHE!

Anyway, no hard feelings taken. Do you like the Power though? HEMI right?

You mentioned red right? Do you like the car?

Dude if you don't want to play it just don't buy it. I own all the systems and I know they are identical as far as their capabilities go. You should just try and stop gripping and you can actually enjoy your hobby!
Seriously, when did gaming become some imaginary pissing contest and not about just having fun playing games??? O_o??

LOL GOOD ONE! But see we need this kind of retention to make us better :P No offense taken, you insult me I insult you etc. :)

Hey but I ment to say C300 :) HEHE!

Anyway, no hard feelings taken. Do you like the Power though? HEMI right?

You mentioned red right? Do you like the car?


Dang Smokey 300C not C300 sounds like somthing from Star Trek :D(no disrespect to anyone that enjoys Star Trek.

Yes I got the Hemi 340HP, it was built and delivered in Jan before I got back from Iraq. Been loving it since day 1

Nice, fully loaded right? Got any performance parts on it? Does it come factory with Brembo brakes? How about the exaust and suspension components?

Nice, fully loaded right? Got any performance parts on it? Does it come factory with Brembo brakes? How about the exaust and suspension components?


Fully loaded but I am a single parent with a son and daughter not really concerned with more power then what it already has I put the 22's on and the next thing is my sound I am adding from my 2002 GT Eclipse. Around 1 June metallic mirror tint

^^^I am glad someone else knows that, I am tired of people thinking that the fact that HDD is standard with the PS3 is somehow going to make games load faster, when the reality is that the way they are using it now does little to help. On another interesting note, Bethseda in an interview stated that ES4 on the PS3 is technically only a 4.5GB game, but in order to get the quicker load times that they have in the game, they had to copy some files up to 9X on the BD disc because of how slow its seek times are. They stated that if they didn't have multiple copies of the game on the disc, it would be almost unplayable because of load times. seems to me that BD doesn't offer much space capacity to Devs, if they have to fill each disc with redundant files just to get decent load times.

So you don't agree with these specs?

I guess I can't argue with the numbers, I was under the impression that the BD drive was slow in reading data.....<shrug>

^^^I am glad someone else knows that, I am tired of people thinking that the fact that HDD is standard with the PS3 is somehow going to make games load faster, when the reality is that the way they are using it now does little to help. On another interesting note, Bethseda in an interview stated that ES4 on the PS3 is technically only a 4.5GB game, but in order to get the quicker load times that they have in the game, they had to copy some files up to 9X on the BD disc because of how slow its seek times are. They stated that if they didn't have multiple copies of the game on the disc, it would be almost unplayable because of load times. seems to me that BD doesn't offer much space capacity to Devs, if they have to fill each disc with redundant files just to get decent load times.Decent load times? From my understanding it's much quicker than the 360 version. According to most Xbox fans all that space will never be needed for extra content so if it can be used to give load times a big boost over the 360 it's still a nice advantage.

I have both versions, its quicker on the PS3 but it isn't that much quicker, and loading screens still pop-up on it more than any game deserves. But like I said, ES4 is probably one of the best looking and running games on the PS3 right now, and if it only got that way by the Devs having to put nine copies of the game on disc, it kinda of kills the capacity arguement for BD if all its being used for is getting decent performance by putting 10 copies of the same game on a disc. The Use of BD and HDD should be used to give us superior games to what the XB360 can offer, instead its doing nothing but allowing PS3 games to either perform right at if not lower than the level of the XB360 versions, or in ES4's case slightly above it.

Seriously, when did gaming become some imaginary pissing contest and not about just having fun playing games??? O_o??

As far as I can tell, some time around the launch of the 360.

Fully loaded but I am a single parent with a son and daughter not really concerned with more power then what it already has I put the 22's on and the next thing is my sound I am adding from my 2002 GT Eclipse. Around 1 June metallic mirror tint

Wait, you're an adult with two children and have one of those gangster looking cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaginavomit
Seriously, when did gaming become some imaginary pissing contest and not about just having fun playing games??? O_o??



As far as I can tell, some time around the launch of the 360. [QUOTE=jkoch6599]

Its obivous neither of you are old school gamers, gaming has always been a huge pissing contest, look at all the fanboy tactics used during the 16 bit era. Hell even the companies got into it back then, with Nintendo throwing dirt on Sega every chance it got during the senete hearings. IMO the fanboyism you see now isn't even close to matching what I saw in the 16 bit era and during the PSone vs. N64 era.

Wait, you're an adult with two children and have one of those gangster looking cars?!


Yes but it doesn't look gangsta to me it looks like a Chrysler 300C. Why does it matter me being a single parent with that car. I got it because it is a tight whip and that I got more space then I had with my Eclipse and Mustang. Plus I am older so I needed to stop with the sports cars even though I have a sports sedan.


"I got a 300 because it looks like a Phantom"

"No fool it looks like a Chrysler 300"

Kat Williams Pimp Chronicles 2006 HBO :D

Nice car, but seriously Chrylser is good now that Diamler bought them out. The 300C does look nice, and preforms nice in crash/perfomance.

I am an american car fan my self. Like the big Loud V8's and lots of muscle. LOL think of it this way, your a cool dad that can roast them if he wants to :D

I drive a PONY and I cant ever go back to something below 8. I would actually consider picking something up. the 300C looks closes to a one fine luxury car. I am so glad they ditched the front drive V6 for a nice V8.

Its obivous neither of you are old school gamers, gaming has always been a huge pissing contest, look at all the fanboy tactics used during the 16 bit era. Hell even the companies got into it back then, with Nintendo throwing dirt on Sega every chance it got during the senete hearings. IMO the fanboyism you see now isn't even close to matching what I saw in the 16 bit era and during the PSone vs. N64 era.

No, I'm 30 years old and have been playing games since the Atari 2600. I never remember arguing with friends that had a Sega Genesis that my SNES was better. When I'd go to their houses and play Sega it was fun. When they'd play SNES at my house we had fun. Same thing with N64 and PS1 when I was in my late teens.

Of course the companies always bicker. That's the nature of competition.

Why does it matter me being a single parent with that car.

I've just never seen a "grown-up" driving a car with those big rims, tinted windows, loud stereo, etc. I do live in a rural area though.

No, I'm 30 years old and have been playing games since the Atari 2600. I never remember arguing with friends that had a Sega Genesis that my SNES was better. When I'd go to their houses and play Sega it was fun. When they'd play SNES at my house we had fun. Same thing with N64 and PS1 when I was in my late teens.

Of course the companies always bicker. That's the nature of competition.


Your lucky then, because I saw tons of it.

I've just never seen a "grown-up" driving a car with those big rims, tinted windows, loud stereo, etc. I do live in a rural area though.


Understood. Check this out and see where all the owners come from www.300cforums.com (http://www.300cforums.com)

I can't believe this thread is still opened.

No, I'm 30 years old and have been playing games since the Atari 2600. I never remember arguing with friends that had a Sega Genesis that my SNES was better. When I'd go to their houses and play Sega it was fun. When they'd play SNES at my house we had fun. Same thing with N64 and PS1 when I was in my late teens.

Of course the companies always bicker. That's the nature of competition.


Same here everyone was too busy playing. Maybe it was being on an Airforce installation. We were all at one anothers house in and out playing those games.