By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Sony can wait, but Microsoft must announce a new console

Jay520 on 07 July 2012

Sony's exclusives aren't that big of a factor, so don't count on them to extend the life of the PS3. Only a few of them have graphics that are extremely top notch. And even less sell big enough numbers to be relevant.

For the PS3 exclusives that do seem to look vastly superior to every other game, I wouldn't say its because the PS3 is more powerful. It's likely because Sony first-party developers invested more energy in graphics than most developers. I recall a Naughty Dog quote saying the hardware isn't the cause for impressive graphics, its developer talent.

And some multiplats look more impressive than any PS3 exclusive imo. A game like Red Dead Redemption looks nearly as good as any PS3 exclusive even though it had a scale extremely larger. Had Red Dead Redemption been a linear game, then I firmly believe it would have looked better than any PS3 exclusive. I personally thought Red Dead Redemption looked better than Uncharted 3 even with its huge world.

Very few developers even need to use multiple discs, so Blu Ray won't be a big factor either. And for the devs that do, multiple discs are not that expensive. At least not so much that it would discourage devs from making 360 games. I doubt gamers even care about switching discs. It doesn't require much energy to so. And besides, its really not prevalent enough to be a big issue.



Around the Network
DarkTemplar on 07 July 2012

In my opinion, both have to release their consoles next year.

The Wii U is coming and it has two strong system sellers on its launch window (New Super Mario and Wii Fit) also we don't know what games Nintendo is planning for 2013 (maybe a new Wii Sports and a new Mario Kart).

If Sony and MS let the Wii U have more then a year "alone" in the market their new consoles will start a race again a Wii U with more than 15 million units ahead.



usrevenge on 07 July 2012

disk space is hardly a limiting factor for games. the thing holding consoles back atm is ram. both consoles need an upgrade, which means a new console.



S.T.A.G.E. on 07 July 2012
Mr Puggsly said:
Araknie said:

We all have seen that Sony, with exclusives, can still pull out some power from that marvelous PS3. Beyond it's the perfect example if it's true that the game runs all in real time. They can wait still at least 2 years before the PS4, there's no problem.

Microsoft has a big problem now, has still DVDs. 

You know PS3 has Blue-Ray they can reach 50gb of space if dual-layered and same Nintendo on the WiiU with their original kind of disc that works the same of Blue-Rays.

Now the developers will think twice about doing versions of big huge games like a Rage or a L.A. Noire or a Max Payne on the 360 where 2 out of 3 home consoles in the market requires only one disc. You know production costs.

I think, and i'm sure about this, that Microsoft has a console almost ready they could  show at this E3, but it will be like WiiU in 2011, they can't show a game for now.

So they wait like until they have something, they can show the next console in 3 occasions that i really hope, for them and for the market, they consider: Tokyo Game Show (because it's a chance to gain in a market never pratically considered by Japanese people), the March GDC (great for developers to see something) and E3. (well, duh)

What do you think, it's going to be real and in one of these events? Do you think too they risk to do like SEGA and force the life time of the 360 if they wait over this time?

Let me know.

These multiple discs arguments are ridiculous. Nobody worried about production costs when Sega CD, PS1, PS2, and PC were getting multi discs games. Yet for some reason its a huge issue this gen? I think PS3 fans are to blame for this new "problem."

So you feel developers are going to think twice about putting games on the 360 because of storage limitations on DVDs. But I don't think using multiple discs is a big deal, especially if the platform is great at moving software. Most of the games you mentioned have performed better on the 360 than PS3. Most multiplat games in general perform better on the 360.

Look at The Witcher 2 for example. The developers apparently wanted to focus on one platform. Safe bet they chose the 360 because it has performed significantly better at selling WRPGs and its easier to work with according to developers. Which goes to show the amount of discs used isn't the biggest factor for choosing a platform.


The 360 is easier to develop for, this is true and WRPG's sell better on it. The fact still remains that Mass Effect 3 disc swapping on the 360 was f'n annoying and the Witcher 2 would've had more extras than it had it been on Blu Ray. 



Mr Puggsly on 07 July 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Araknie said:

We all have seen that Sony, with exclusives, can still pull out some power from that marvelous PS3. Beyond it's the perfect example if it's true that the game runs all in real time. They can wait still at least 2 years before the PS4, there's no problem.

Microsoft has a big problem now, has still DVDs. 

You know PS3 has Blue-Ray they can reach 50gb of space if dual-layered and same Nintendo on the WiiU with their original kind of disc that works the same of Blue-Rays.

Now the developers will think twice about doing versions of big huge games like a Rage or a L.A. Noire or a Max Payne on the 360 where 2 out of 3 home consoles in the market requires only one disc. You know production costs.

I think, and i'm sure about this, that Microsoft has a console almost ready they could  show at this E3, but it will be like WiiU in 2011, they can't show a game for now.

So they wait like until they have something, they can show the next console in 3 occasions that i really hope, for them and for the market, they consider: Tokyo Game Show (because it's a chance to gain in a market never pratically considered by Japanese people), the March GDC (great for developers to see something) and E3. (well, duh)

What do you think, it's going to be real and in one of these events? Do you think too they risk to do like SEGA and force the life time of the 360 if they wait over this time?

Let me know.

These multiple discs arguments are ridiculous. Nobody worried about production costs when Sega CD, PS1, PS2, and PC were getting multi discs games. Yet for some reason its a huge issue this gen? I think PS3 fans are to blame for this new "problem."

So you feel developers are going to think twice about putting games on the 360 because of storage limitations on DVDs. But I don't think using multiple discs is a big deal, especially if the platform is great at moving software. Most of the games you mentioned have performed better on the 360 than PS3. Most multiplat games in general perform better on the 360.

Look at The Witcher 2 for example. The developers apparently wanted to focus on one platform. Safe bet they chose the 360 because it has performed significantly better at selling WRPGs and its easier to work with according to developers. Which goes to show the amount of discs used isn't the biggest factor for choosing a platform.


The 360 is easier to develop for, this is true and WRPG's sell better on it. The fact still remains that Mass Effect 3 disc swapping on the 360 was f'n annoying and the Witcher 2 would've had more extras than it had it been on Blu Ray. 

I agree the disc swap thing was annoying in ME2 and 3. But what bothers me most is I still have to swap discs even if both discs are installed on the hard drive. I imagine MS is mostly to blame for that.

The 360 version of Witcher 2 is the PC game with all the extras and they did it with two discs. I suppose there could have been MORE extras on a Blu Ray. But there could have also been more on the 360 if they used 3 discs I suppose. Not a very good argument.

Either way, Sony didn't prove Blu Ray was essential this gen. Worst of all, the discs have a ton of storage but the console still requires a hard drive. Which many games use for required installs.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
RedInker on 07 July 2012

The Xbox is still doing ok. With a price cut it's sales will be given a boost. Micosoft are not that desperate for a new console just yet but a new Xbox will be announced next year.



Chris Hu on 07 July 2012
Araknie said:

We all have seen that Sony, with exclusives, can still pull out some power from that marvelous PS3. Beyond it's the perfect example if it's true that the game runs all in real time. They can wait still at least 2 years before the PS4, there's no problem.

Microsoft has a big problem now, has still DVDs. 

You know PS3 has Blue-Ray they can reach 50gb of space if dual-layered and same Nintendo on the WiiU with their original kind of disc that works the same of Blue-Rays.

Now the developers will think twice about doing versions of big huge games like a Rage or a L.A. Noire or a Max Payne on the 360 where 2 out of 3 home consoles in the market requires only one disc. You know production costs.

I think, and i'm sure about this, that Microsoft has a console almost ready they could  show at this E3, but it will be like WiiU in 2011, they can't show a game for now.

So they wait like until they have something, they can show the next console in 3 occasions that i really hope, for them and for the market, they consider: Tokyo Game Show (because it's a chance to gain in a market never pratically considered by Japanese people), the March GDC (great for developers to see something) and E3. (well, duh)

What do you think, it's going to be real and in one of these events? Do you think too they risk to do like SEGA and force the life time of the 360 if they wait over this time?

Let me know.

I know English isn't your first language but the point you trying to make is pretty much lost in your bad grammar.  Anyway 3rd parties are not shying away from the 360 because some of their games use multiple discs.  Two dual layered DVD's cost about as much to make as one single layer Blu-Ray.  Also Sony and Microsoft both will show their new consoles arround the same time and they will be released arround the same time.  Neither company can afford for Nintendo to gain to much of a head start with the Wii U.



theRepublic on 07 July 2012

I think they both need a new console. Neither can afford to give a competitor a large head start on the next generation. It is a recipe for disaster.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Mobile - Yugioh Duel Links (2017)
Mobile - Super Mario Run (2017)
PC - Borderlands 2 (2012)
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

Solid-Stark on 07 July 2012

Multiple DVD's isn't a huge burden to put off publishers from making a game on the system. What matters is a healthy install base, which the 360 has. The only thing going on is that console sales are slowing down, so future support may be in question; perhaps in 2014 (in which next gen XBox will already be out).



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Adinnieken on 07 July 2012
Aielyn said:
Adinnieken said:
The Xbox 360 has not been the weaker of the two systems.  If anything it is on par with the PS3 in terms of performance.  The PS3 does have the better CPU, but that CPU is hurt by the memory architecture and GPU.  Contrast that with the Xbox 360, which offers a better GPU and unified memory and its tri-core processor with six hardware threads compares rather favorably to the PS3.

The reason the Xbox 360 is the lead platform for most third-party games is because it is the easiest of the two to program for.  Getting a game to work on the Xbox 360 is meaningless when porting it to the PS3 because in order to get the game to work on the PS3 you need to build the game so it takes advantage of the SPEs, that requires significant management of processing and resources. 

Some early 3rd-party games in the PS3 life-cycle were direct ports of the Xbox 360 version and they were horrible.  Instead of taking advantage of the SPEs, the games used the sole PowerPC core (PPE) for all the work.  The Cell isn't like a Intel processor with 8 cores or the Xbox 360s Xenon with 3 cores.  They would be symmetrical processors.  No, the Cell is a parallel processor that uses the PPE to manage the code running in the SPEs.  There is a lot more work involved in getting code to run on the PS3, which is why some games are led with the PS3 rather than the Xbox 360.

Your logic doesn't make sense - one wouldn't develop a game for the easier-to-develop-for platform first, because it would mean more additional effort to make it work on the other console afterwards. The only reason to do that is if you're willing to drop support for the harder one, which evidence shows didn't happen - pretty much all of the big titles that weren't first-party or second-party were put on both systems.

Just as you don't make a game for the higher-power system first, because then you have to do extra work to get it working on the weaker system.

The PS3 was harder to develop for, sure, but the reason why it wasn't the lead platform was because it would be harder to port to the 360 from the PS3 than vice versa. And that means that there were power considerations, because there really wasn't anything else to distinguish between them.

It's 6 of one, a half a dozen of another. 

The benefit to leading with the Xbox 360 is that you release a game to retail sooner for at least one platform.  The problem with leading on the Xbox 360 is that you can set performance levels that aren't obtainable on the PS3.

The benefit to leading with the PS3 is that you get all of your problems out of the way first, but you may end up with longer development time.

Most games where the Xbox 360 has been the lead have looked reasonably as good on both platforms and played as well on both platforms.  One notable exception is Bayonetta, which lead on the Xbox 360 but had significant performance issues on the PS3.  Whereas most games where the PS3 has been the lead have looked good on the PS3, but have looked poor on the Xbox 360.  Final Fantasy XIII and L.A. Noire being the most notable, which graphically looked significantly worse than their PS3 counterparts.

The PS3 is not the more powerful system.  The Cell may be the more powerful CPU but only marginally, especially when constrained by the memory architecture and GPU.  The only thing the PS3 offers is the opportunity to utilize Blu-Ray, which means uncompressed textures, full-motion video, and other graphical elements.  The Xbox 360's GPU runs rings around the PS3.  Only within the past few years has MSAA given PS3 developers a respectable means of AA at the cost of a softer/blurrier, image.

http://www.pvcmuseum.com/games/vs/ps3-vs-xbox-360-gpu-specs.htm

The GPU specs for the PS3 actually are reduced, if you read through you'll see where they talk about the GPU clock speed and memory throughput.