Valve on HL2 differences between the 360 and PS3

[Kasz216]

ChichiriMuyo said:

Kasz216 said:

AllAll said:

Wojtas said:

AllAll said:
mistrerd, it does not matter what article he would link, you know damn well the thread would be trolled derailed and like always would become a big flame war.

As far as power they aren't even using the SPUs!!! you think there not much juice left in the PS3 LOL. Alot of you seem to miss that little fact.

Why did a thread about potential console capability go right in to the typical PS3 hater fanboy response of "ohh well PS3 is hard to develop for"

If the article does not prove PS3 power why are they countering Killzone3s point with ohh well its hard to develop for. Why not explain why it does not mean much as far as their power is concerned. Shiet not every one is a computer nerd, dude sees 360 almost maxed out while PS3 version not even using SPUs the things touted as the Cell power. Well you get his view point ?

Dude, read the rest of the interview. The dev said it himself that the PS3 is much more difficult to develope for. He took a few shots at the cell architecture as well. We're pointing out what Killzone3 oh so accidently missed out on during posting this thread.

 

 And WTF does that have to do with his PS3 power point of view ?

He did not even talk crap or anything just posted something good about the PS3, but thats not allowed.

I think the point was it the quote was more a backhanded complement then an actual complement.

It wasn't a "Nobody knows the power of the PS3 because our scanning devices explode like in DBZ."

It was a "Nobody knows the power of the PS3 because it's a pain to program and until Sony or someone else can tell us exactly how much power the cell has you can't expect a development company to improve much further for fear of hitting a border we can't see."

It should be easy for a developer to know the limits of a well designed system i think was the implication of that statement.

 It'd be if the 360 was 10 by 10 foot room with spikes on all the walls and the PS3 was a room with spikes in the walls that you know is bigger then the 360 room... but that's about all you know as it's pitch black past the 10 by 10 foot center of the room.  Thanks to the pitch blackness all that extra space isn't of any use to you because you don't want to risk getting impaled by the spikes.

That is a very bold claim to make (so I bolded it).  But are you sure that's what they meant?  It's certainly not what they said, after all.  So to put owrds into their mouth like that is a a dangerous propostion.  The only thing they really said is that the Xbox 360 can only just barely handle the game and that the PS3 is hard to program for.  The two statements can't even be compared, as they are rated on two different scales.  Maybe the PS3 is harder to program than the PCs they are used to, but that doesn't mean they couldn't learn how to do it or that it will always be harder to work with for every developer.  It just means they don't want to because they like the way they used to it, as per the comments of the company's most important man when he said he still prefers PC

They are just set in their old ways and don't want to adapt to changes they don't initiate on their own (which is human nature).  Valve would rather stay PC-oriented, but the market tells them that there isn't a great future in that and they simply can't accept their fate without complaint. It only takes a quick read to learn that some important people in the company don't like anything but PCs, so of course they would complain about anything that doesn't mirror what they already trust and love.

The PS3 is harder to work with, but it apparently is capble of giving better results to the people who are willing to work with it.  As a consumer I see the trade as a good one.  If developers are willing to put in the work they seem to be able to put out a better product (though we have no idea by how much) and that will in turn entice a number of customers to "vote" with their money.

How is that at dangerous claim?   It seems pretty tame since it's perposterous to say that a programmer can't tell you the limits of a piece of hardware.  The hardware was made so it's limits should be well known, it's not like the PS3 is a piece of alien technology that has never befoer seen.  The only way you would know otherwise would be either because it was designed poorly or you know nothing about how it works.  So perhaps the debunking of this is infact true.  If not however.

If you had no idea of the PS3's capabilties beyond "It's better then the 360." would you really develop games that tried to push the PS3's limits?  Limits you don't know?  If so you're likely to develop yourself off a cliff then be forced to go back and downscale everything.  That's a fools proposition.

Instead a developer I imagine would wait for Sony to make games that push the PS3 past the 360.  However that means it will take years to get 3rd party developers to get to that level because they're current projects will already be designed for "slightly better then 360" level and only new ones will be on that higher level.