ChronotriggerJM said:
Ahh but see the quality of the game isn't in question here. We were talking about "technical showpieces" or "getting the same experience for cheaper" on the other console. So far I haven't seen anything the PS3 couldn't handle that the 360 puts out, yet I have seen things that go above and beyond what the 360 can on the PS3. From a technical standpoint the PS3 has the advantage. Game ratings are one thing, but putting two consoles side by side with their showpieces is more or less what I'm talking about here. |
technical showpieces it may be, but it could easily be possible that the games themselves suffered from them. Each of these "technical showpieces" were very short (dont know how long ratchet is though....) Actually we dont know what the 360 can handle, no one is trying to push the hardware. IF gears of war does not top it you might be able to say that, so far weve only had sony developers state that its not possible on the 360.
Qaulity is not visuals, its overall the game. Qaulity is going to be everything combined it is why the quality of the 360s is higher, hence the higher scores.
If 360 were to have a showcase i would play that with you, but it doesnt. All the games are not 6-10 hours (cept halo but thats mult based) and are big time games that are not multiplatform. Games like COD look great on the 360, and im sure we can get more.
With regard to Call of Duty 4 having an ultra short single player campaign, I guess it may well have been due to the size limitations of DVD on the XBox 360, one of various limitations multi-platform game designers will have to take into consideration-Mike B
Proud supporter of all 3 console companys
Proud owner of 360wii and DS/psp
Game trailers-Halo 3 only dissapointed the people who wanted to be dissapointed.
Bet with Harvey Birdman that Lost Odyssey will sell more then Blue dragon did.






