I Perdict said: TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360? wouldnt that be the directx?

NO! HD DVD!

 

TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive  No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360?

 Wow, this thread turned into a Sony fanboy fest fast.

I give that post a 9.2. 

@ FJ-Warez

Because I think that's they key of this whole discussion. I think MGS4 with huge sacrifices in 480p could even be done for the Wii. For example Crysis needs an uber PC to enjoy it in full quality, it runs and looks far less interesting on a medium specced PCs, could the game be redesigned to run on a low end yesteryear PC? IMO absolutely, but with sacrifices and maybe some game engine optimizations for low-end hardware here and there.

FJ-Warez said: TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive  No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360?  For a moment I thought you were talking about leo-j and the PS3-Crysis thing, but the I saw the 360 word... But I'm going to point out that nobody here has claimed that the game can be made without any kind of sacrifices or work arounds like split the game on a number of DL-DVDs, compression to other media, etc... in fact all this is on the OP, so did you bother to read the thread???

I read it. Ok, sacrifice stuff, sure. If you want to sacrifice stuff, it can be done on the Wii.

The Cell allows you the ability to do things you simply can't do without it. It's why Uncharted could not be done on the 360, Ratchet and Clank could not be done on the 360, and MGS4 can not be done on the 360.

If you write a game that takes 100% advantage of the 360, you would be hard pressed to match it on the PS3, and vise versa.

They each have there strengths, and when a developer has the freedom to use them (meaning not multi-plat), they end up making a game that can not be ported. The speed of floating point calculations in the PS3 has made the above games un-portable, and 512 meg of shared memory in the 360 has made games like Gears un-portable. (They used a lot more for game memory then video memory).

It would just not be the same game. 

Profcrab said: TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360? Wow, this thread turned into a Sony fanboy fest fast. I give that post a 9.2.

I don't think so, it's just a pointless thread, first because the chance of MGS4 on the 360 is like 1 in a trillion, and the OP had no facts, simply opinions.

 

TheRealMafoo said: FJ-Warez said: TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360? For a moment I thought you were talking about leo-j and the PS3-Crysis thing, but the I saw the 360 word... But I'm going to point out that nobody here has claimed that the game can be made without any kind of sacrifices or work arounds like split the game on a number of DL-DVDs, compression to other media, etc... in fact all this is on the OP, so did you bother to read the thread??? I read it. Ok, sacrifice stuff, sure. If you want to sacrifice stuff, it can be done on the Wii. The Cell allows you the ability to do things you simply can't do without it. It's why Uncharted could not be done on the 360, Ratchet and Clank could not be done on the 360, and MGS4 can not be done on the 360. If you write a game that takes 100% advantage of the 360, you would be hard pressed to match it on the PS3, and vise versa. They each have there strengths, and when a developer has the freedom to use them (meaning not multi-plat), they end up making a game that can not be ported. The speed of floating point calculations in the PS3 has made the above games un-portable, and 512 meg of shared memory in the 360 has made games like Gears un-portable. (They used a lot more for game memory then video memory). It would just not be the same game.

I disagree, the only reason why you'd be "hard pressed" to match a 360 game on the PS3 is money, because as you stated, the two have their strengths, and it would take alot of money to convert it the PS3, and is the reason why so many ports look worse on the PS3.

 

Username2324 said: TheRealMafoo said: If you write a game that takes 100% advantage of the 360, you would be hard pressed to match it on the PS3, and vise versa. I disagree, the only reason why you'd be "hard pressed" to match a 360 game on the PS3 is money, because as you stated, the two have their strengths, and it would take alot of money to convert it the PS3, and is the reason why so many ports look worse on the PS3.

If I wrote a puzzle game on the 360 that needed 400 meg of system ram, and 112 meg of video memory, you could not duplicate that game on the PS3.

The 360 has 512 meg of ram to share across either system or video (meaning I can divvy that up any way I want). The PS3 has 256 fixed for each. 

Username2324 said: Profcrab said: Wow, this thread turned into a Sony fanboy fest fast. I give that post a 9.2. I don't think so, it's just a pointless thread, first because the chance of MGS4 on the 360 is like 1 in a trillion, and the OP had no facts, simply opinions.

 I agree with that.  As I posted earlier.  I think there is about a 5% chance you will see MGS4 on the 360.  I think it would either take Microsoft cash or Konami would have to think they would make a ton by the port.  In the very unlikely event they do port it, it will be at least another year from not or more.  By then, it won't even be that big of a deal (kinda like the Bioshock port to the PS3).  There are a few posters on here though that almost slip on their own drool when they see a post that allows them to say negative things about the 360.

 I give that post a 9.7. 

The only technical limitation floated by anyone in MGS4's dev team for why MGS4 couldn't be done as is on the Xbox 360 is the capacity of the Blu-Ray disk.

Therefore, the only sacrifice we know would have to be made is that anyone playing MGS4 on the Xbox 360 would have to stand up 1, or possible 2 times over the course of the 35 hour game to change the disks.

I've played a small part of MGS4, it looks great. It's not the best looking game on either console, even if it does come close. There is not an insane amount of stuff going on in any one scene according to the OP, and this tallies with what I've seen in videos.

Essentially, the only thing that would stop a one-to-one port is how much money Konami would be willing to spend on the port, and the fact that the title would be longer, as it would add the word "Substance."

TheRealMafoo said: FJ-Warez said: TheRealMafoo said: MikeB said: I think the key word here is sacrifices and workarounds, MGS4 can be done on the 360 with sacrifices. IMO any kind of games on the PS3 can be done on the 360 and vice versa. With regard to pushing better unsacrificed experience the PS3 is simply much better specced. Some keywords: 1) Cell processor 2) Blu-Ray drive 3) system bandwidth 4) default harddrive  No mike, your wrong. They love the 360, so by god, it can do anything. No matter it's limitations! It's the powers of the... umm... something... quick, what's powerful in a 360?  For a moment I thought you were talking about leo-j and the PS3-Crysis thing, but the I saw the 360 word... But I'm going to point out that nobody here has claimed that the game can be made without any kind of sacrifices or work arounds like split the game on a number of DL-DVDs, compression to other media, etc... in fact all this is on the OP, so did you bother to read the thread??? I read it. Ok, sacrifice stuff, sure. If you want to sacrifice stuff, it can be done on the Wii. The Cell allows you the ability to do things you simply can't do without it. It's why Uncharted could not be done on the 360, Ratchet and Clank could not be done on the 360, and MGS4 can not be done on the 360. If you write a game that takes 100% advantage of the 360, you would be hard pressed to match it on the PS3, and vise versa. They each have there strengths, and when a developer has the freedom to use them (meaning not multi-plat), they end up making a game that can not be ported. The speed of floating point calculations in the PS3 has made the above games un-portable, and 512 meg of shared memory in the 360 has made games like Gears un-portable. (They used a lot more for game memory then video memory). It would just not be the same game.

 I thought that the reason was that those games are supposed to be exclusives...and that has nothing to do with the cell...