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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3 and its struggle with multiplatform FPS visuals

Zkuq on 02 June 2008

Gametrailers now has a comparison video of ETQW. I'd still like to remind you, though, that the ports are done by different teams; Nerve Software (X360) and Underground Development (PS3).

Yes, pretty irrevelant at this point. ETQW was mentioned in the OP though so I though to bring it up again. 



Around the Network
ROBOTECHHEAVEN on 02 June 2008

i think that the graphics on most multi-platform games look worse on the ps3, for example i have had cod4 on both systems and from looking very closely at the graphics the xbox 360 has better overall graphics. and from everything i have read i dont believe or will ever believe that the ps3 is that more powerfull than the xbox 360. the gpu is better on the xbox 360 and the ps3 does have a slight advantage on the cpu. like most ppl have said only with 1st party games will you see any real difference in the graphics, their are a few exclusions with that claim and those would be ff13 and mgs4, but overall i think if a 3rd party dev ever really decides to push the xbox 360 like they are with the ps3, example again mgs4 & ff13, then ppl will see hardly if much at all a difference in graphics between the 2 systems, this is my opinion on this subject. and i have both systems right now with 55 games for the xbox 360 and 18 for the ps3.



GAMERTAG IS ANIMEHEAVEN X23

PSN ID IS : ANIMEREALM 

PROUD MEMBER OF THE RPG FAN CLUB THREAD

ALL-TIME FAVORITE JRPG IS : LOST ODYSSEY

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=52882&page=1

crumas2 on 04 June 2008
disolitude said:
MikeB said:
@ disolitude

In any case, the problem with the PS3 is not the Cell...its the RSX GPU.


The main "problem" with the PS3 are the Cell's SPUs', a radically different but extremely powerful approach. The RSX is mainly a PC style GPU, this apart from how the GPU is able to potentially take advantage of the Cell. The RSX is in many ways more powerful than the Xenos, such as allowing for more shader ops/sec. The Xenos' main advantage as well as a disadvantage for the long run is its reliance upon its daughter chip approach. The PS3 has far more system bandwidth and fewer bottlenecks.

The main reasons why some 360 to PS3 ports are better on the 360 is due the 360 being better able to handle inefficiently designed game engines (but the dev approaches needed to get the most out of the Cell are beneficial to the 360 as well), the platform's one year headstart providing developers more time to get to know the system and tools which are more similar to those available for Windows PCs.

Talented developers given enough time will be able to push the PS3 much further than will be possible on the 360.

That seems to me like a very elitist point of view. "You can't make this look good therefore you are not a good programmer."

There are things like budget and time that are a factor even for the best movie directors and game programmers.

Sure, Epic games can fiddle with the game engine till it runs in circles around the 360 version. However its just not a smart business decision to do this at this point.

Steven Spelberg could have made Indiana Jones not suck as bad...but he only had 185 million to work with... :)


I have to agree with MikeB regarding the level of dedication required to tap the PS3.  But the big question is cost.  How much will it cost to get to where the PS3 hardware can really be fully tapped?  I also believe a very narrow range of games will be able to benefit from fully tapping the PS3.  Otherwise you end up with a game that is a technological showpiece for PS3 capabilities, yet doesn't really perform in gameplay, story, etc.  In other words, not every game needs a rocket engine in the back to be fun.

 



Cremator on 04 June 2008
ROBOTECHHEAVEN said:
i think that the graphics on most multi-platform games look worse on the ps3, for example i have had cod4 on both systems and from looking very closely at the graphics the xbox 360 has better overall graphics. and from everything i have read i dont believe or will ever believe that the ps3 is that more powerfull than the xbox 360. the gpu is better on the xbox 360 and the ps3 does have a slight advantage on the cpu. like most ppl have said only with 1st party games will you see any real difference in the graphics, their are a few exclusions with that claim and those would be ff13 and mgs4, but overall i think if a 3rd party dev ever really decides to push the xbox 360 like they are with the ps3, example again mgs4 & ff13, then ppl will see hardly if much at all a difference in graphics between the 2 systems, this is my opinion on this subject. and i have both systems right now with 55 games for the xbox 360 and 18 for the ps3.

 Well said. About 80-85% of all games are multiplatform and majority of them will look better on the 360 due to the costs and time limits. Even though PS3 might have better graphics that will account for a small percentage of games.