@ RAZurrection

Mutliplatform devs admit having done quick and dirty 360 ports to the PS3. These devs also stated their 3rd party 360 games will become better by leading on the PS3. If you understand the technical differences it's easy to understand the porting difficulties and the advantages of leading development on the PS3.

MikeB said:   Gears of War was considered to be the first 3rd generation 360 game, this game like Bioshock is based on this engine. GTA IV and Gears 2 should be about as good as it gets on the 360. Some 3rd generation exclusive games available for christmas should really showcase the technical gap between 360 and PS3

 Gears of War isn't a 3rd generation game, it came out within 1 year of the consoles launch, it's still first generation software, full campaign co-op in split-screen with 16 players on screen and no slowdown or screen-tearing. Even the PS3 version of UT3 doesn't run as well a year later.
 Bioshock uses an updated version of Unreal Engine 2.5, not UE3.  Ah, blind faith - how you amuse me, it'd be a lot easier for people to believe PS3 was capaable of more if  A: All multiplatform games weren't downgraded, even games like DMC4 designed for the PS3B: It's best looking game wasn't multi-platform 
2 years on an it hasn't sunk in yet, the force is strong in this one.

 

The one with the bigger install base will see the bigger sales, and thats that.

The 360 will outsell the PS3 version of the game by almost 2 to 1, I expect the PS3 version to make it up to near 1M first week sales.

PS3 owners will get it for the PS3, ps360 OWNERS will get it for 360, and 360 owners will get it for 360.

The Xbox has a clear advantage over the PS3 with GTA 4.

RAZurrection said: MikeB said:   Gears of War was considered to be the first 3rd generation 360 game, this game like Bioshock is based on this engine. GTA IV and Gears 2 should be about as good as it gets on the 360. Some 3rd generation exclusive games available for christmas should really showcase the technical gap between 360 and PS3 Gears of War isn't a 3rd generation game, it came out within 1 year of the consoles launch, it's still first generation software, full campaign co-op in split-screen with 16 players on screen and no slowdown or screen-tearing. Even the PS3 version of UT3 doesn't run as well a year later. Bioshock uses an updated version of Unreal Engine 2.5, not UE3. Ah, blind faith - how you amuse me, it'd be a lot easier for people to believe PS3 was capaable of more if A: All multiplatform games weren't downgraded, even games like DMC4 designed for the PS3B: It's best looking game wasn't multi-platform 2 years on an it hasn't sunk in yet, the force is strong in this one.

UT3 runs better on the PS3 than Gears did on the 360, Epic admits this, look at my sig.

UT3 is really fast paced compared to Gears this while offering much bigger environments and better graphics.

MikeB said: @ RAZurrection 1)Mutliplatform devs admit having done quick and dirty 360 ports to the PS3. 2)These devs also stated 360 their 3rd party games will become by leading on the PS3. If you understand the technical differences it's easy to understand the porting difficulties and the advantages of leading development on the PS3.

1) Keep on drumming little drummer boy, truth of the matter is - bar a year late port of oblivion with most of the effects turned off - every single multi-platform game is better on 360 in regards to performance, visuals, effects, thats not even mentioning base-line standards like friends lists, custom soundtracks...and output resolution, there's no worries running a game in 1080p on 360 - TRUEHD according to Sony, it's a shame PS3 can't output all of its games in TRUEHD like 360 can, feels like PS2.5.

Oh but lets not forget about both DMC4 and Burnout Paradise, the thin veil of hope you cling to, yeah i'll take them. 2 games for every 100 superior 360 versions sounds good to me.

 2) Oh whoopee for these devs, yes I understand the advantages of leading on PS3 far more then you

A) It has less memory

B) It has slower disc read access

C) It's harder to reach target frame rates

D) Because of C, that means big downgrades or big slowdown

Wait a minute, these aren't advantages this is 'GIMPING', if it runs OK on PS3, then it runs awesome on Xbox 360, like making Crysis for 'medium spec' PC's.

Jeez, on that logic you'd think everyone would make games for Wii because PS3 and 360 could handle them perfectly.

Spare me, if I wanted an intermediary console i'd buy a PS3. I'm just glad some very important third parties still lead on Xbox because they don't want to make lesser games.

 

MikeB said: UT3 runs better on the PS3 than Gears did on the 360, Epic admits this, look at my sig. UT3 is really fast paced compared to Gears this while offering much bigger environments and better graphics.

Where's Unreal Tournament III's split-screen? Oh right, they didn't even bother because PS3 has a real problem with whats called 'finished' games.

UT3's a bunch of fishbowel maps vs' Gears of Wars zero loads 2 hour long levels. Highly embaressing for a year old game to outclass their oft delayed opus.

 

RAZurrection said: MikeB said: UT3 runs better on the PS3 than Gears did on the 360, Epic admits this, look at my sig. UT3 is really fast paced compared to Gears this while offering much bigger environments and better graphics. Where's Unreal Tournament III's split-screen? Oh right, they didn't even bother because PS3 has a real problem with whats called 'finished' games. UT3's a bunch of fishbowel maps vs' Gears of Wars zero loads 2 hour long levels. Highly embaressing for a year old game to outclass their oft delayed opus.

I don't think any Unreal game ever had splitscreen, also not UT3 on the PC. It's all about user against user online play, like Quake Arena and similar games.

MikeB said: RAZurrection said: MikeB said: UT3 runs better on the PS3 than Gears did on the 360, Epic admits this, look at my sig. UT3 is really fast paced compared to Gears this while offering much bigger environments and better graphics. Where's Unreal Tournament III's 360? Oh right, they didn't even bother because MS has a real problem with whats called 'user generated content' for games. UT3's a bunch of fishbowel maps vs' Gears of Wars zero loads 2 hour long levels. Highly embaressing for a year old game to outclass their oft delayed opus.   I don't think any Unreal game ever had splitscreen, also not UT3 on the PC. It's all about user against user online play, like Quake Arena and similar games.

let the troll be please. he doesn't know what hes alking about.

@ RAZurrection

What do you mean? Graphically it's mostly longer draw distances, higher rendering resolution and smoother overall experience, effects are the same if you patch the 360 version or so I heard. Oblivion was considered to be a game which truly pushed the 360 (Oblivion is really a PC orientated game, due to development similarities a 360 port should have been easier), but according to Bethesda they are only scratching the surface of what's possible on the PS3.

I am happy for the extra development, I wouldn't have liked a direct effortless 360 port, I rather wait some more for a better game.



1080p requires more performance, for simple games that's easy, for complex games a lot of legacy game engine code needs to be ported to the Cell's SPUs to achieve acceptable framerates. 2D and semi 3D games => easy, small environment sports games => relatively easy, more open world games => very hard (needs the Cell's SPUs and good RSX optimization).

For the rest, let's reserve our technical discussions for christmas.

MikeB said: @ RAZurrection oblivion with most of the effects turned off 1) What do you mean? Graphically it's mostly longer draw distances, higher rendering resolution and smoother overall experience, effects are the same if you patch the 360 version or so I heard. Oblivion was considered to be a game which truly pushed the 360 (Oblivion is really a PC orientated game, due to development similarities a 360 port should have been easier), but according to Bethesda they are only scratching the surface of what's possible on the PS3. 2) I am happy for the extra development, I wouldn't have liked a direct effortless 360 port, I rather wait some more for a better game. and output resolution, there's no worries running a game in 1080p on 360 - TRUEHD according to Sony, it's a shame PS3 can't output all of its games in TRUEHD like 360 can, feels like PS2.5. 3)1080p requires more performance, for simple games that's easy, for complex games a lot of legacy game engine code needs to be ported to the Cell's SPUs to achieve acceptable framerates. 2D and semi 3D games => easy, small environment sports games => relatively easy, more open world games => very hard (needs the Cell's SPUs and good RSX optimization). 4)For the rest, let's reserve our technical discussions for christmas.

1) Anti-aliasing is turned off, so is the HDR.

2) I imagine you only own DMC4, Burnout Paradise and Oblivion for your PS3 multi-plats then

3) It does? All my 360 games run at 1080p the resolution Sony claimed was only way to experiece trueHD, imagine my surprise when I hear that only a handful of PS3 games support 1080p output, according to Sony, this is not next-gen.

4)  Why? I could beat the crap out of in a real technical discussion on framebuffers, bandwidth, truncated floating points, suitable SPE work and so forth. I hope you're not inferring that the crappy versions of real next gen games are going to go away...because they're not - I am amazed that 18 months on they're still present and people like you still have unwavering faith in a console designed by monkeys - and that Sony is somehow going to turn Resistance 2 into something that doesn't look like Resistance 1 (which it does), or INfamous isn't going almost exactly like Prototype or that GT5P looks worse than GRID, any hopes of that not being true are going out the window.

And the fact that it still hasn't sunk in yet....that's blind faith you can't buy and its sad.

 

Alternatively you could just be obtuse for obtusity's sake...but two can play at that game.