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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Myth of Metal Gear Solid 4 being too much for xbox 360 to handle...

Username2324 on 16 June 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
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.

You're correct, you could not duplicate that game in that configuration, but you could rewrite the game to play to the PS3's strengths, but as I said, it would be very costly.

 



Around the Network
TheRealMafoo on 16 June 2008
starcraft said:

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. 

 Then you have not seen Act 3. Come back when you have. MGS4 is, without question, the best looking game ever to grace a console. You don't need to be a PS3 fan to see that.



Lone_Canis_Lupus on 16 June 2008
Username2324 said:
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.

 


 Three words: Triple core processor. The PS3 has the advantage of the other cores for floating point calculations...but they can't be used for general purposes entirely whereas with the 360 you have the triple core processor where you can use all 3 of them for general purpose processes. Meaning the 360 could process more at once than the PS3 can...even if the PS3 can be faster with the processes it can handle.

The thing is both systems are very different hardware wise. Close in power, but very different. If you develop a game solely for ones hardware, it would be really hard porting it to the other.



PSN: Lone_Canis_Lupus

TheRealMafoo on 16 June 2008
Username2324 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
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.

You're correct, you could not duplicate that game in that configuration, but you could rewrite the game to play to the PS3's strengths, but as I said, it would be very costly.

 


You can't throw money at the PS3, and magically get more ram. It doesn't work that way :) If the game needs 400 meg, it needs 400 meg. If you could rewrite it to use less, then it didn't need 400 meg :p.

There are scenarios where a game on the 360 can not be done on the PS3. Just like MGS4 can not be done on the 360.



starcraft on 16 June 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
starcraft said:

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.

Then you have not seen Act 3. Come back when you have. MGS4 is, without question, the best looking game ever to grace a console. You don't need to be a PS3 fan to see that.

Wasn't it like two days ago we established its impossible to meet a consensus on an issue like this unless there is a clear differentiation between games? 

And given there is no clear differentiation between MGS4, Mass Effect, R&C, Uncharted, Gears and Lost Odyssey, I think its safe to say you cannot substantiate that claim. 

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
Feylic on 16 June 2008

Producer Ryan Payton says that mgs4 is using almost all the space on a dual layer disc in this interview, at about 3:30

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/35170.html . Just to clear it up.



starcraft on 16 June 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
 

You can't throw money at the PS3, and magically get more ram. It doesn't work that way :) If the game needs 400 meg, it needs 400 meg. If you could rewrite it to use less, then it didn't need 400 meg :p.

There are scenarios where a game on the 360 can not be done on the PS3. Just like MGS4 can not be done on the 360.

Lets examine that point for a moment.  Assuming for a moment that game couldn't possibly be rewritten to use less than 400 meg of RAM using technology avaliable now or by the end of the generation by even the world's most talented programers, then yes, it could not be done on the PS3.

What exact specification do you believe prevents MGS4 from being reproduced to a quality close enough that it cannot be reasonably picked up by the human eye on the Xbox 360?

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

TheRealMafoo on 16 June 2008
Lone_Canis_Lupus said:

 Three words: Triple core processor. The PS3 has the advantage of the other cores for floating point calculations...but they can't be used for general purposes entirely whereas with the 360 you have the triple core processor where you can use all 3 of them for general purpose processes. Meaning the 360 could process more at once than the PS3 can...even if the PS3 can be faster with the processes it can handle.

The thing is both systems are very different hardware wise. Close in power, but very different. If you develop a game solely for ones hardware, it would be really hard porting it to the other.


 You and I are basically saying the same thing. So for example, when R&C was being made, the developers looked at the tools in front of them and said "ok, we have this insane about of floating point math, what should we do with it?" They used it to manage character animations, and lighting (things the CELL is VERY good at). What they ended up with, is a visual asset that can not be duplicated on the 360, thus the game could never be done there.

The 360 is better at AI, so it could have games with a level of intelligence that could not be matched on the PS3.

So, all that being said, MGS4 was written for the PS3, in a way that takes advantage of all it's assets, and thus can not be ported (without sacrifices) to another console. Not until one comes out that has as much capability on all areas as the PS3 anyway. 



JOKA_ on 16 June 2008
twesterm said:
Deviation59 said:

Umm, it's been confirmed for many months now that it's actually a 50gb dual-layer Blu-ray Disc and all of the cutscenes are generated in real-time by the game's engine. The audio is only available in standard Dolby Digital so you can't claim the space is wasted by uncompressed audio either.

Complete and utter FAIL.


I don't really want to get involved in the whole pointless MGS4 on 360 argument because it's, well, pointless but I will say this: the cut scenes use in game assetts and are done in engine but they are not real time. They are actual movies and it's pretty easy to tell from when it's playing a movie of in game assetts running in the engine and actually running everything real time.

So no, not complete and utter fail.


 I don't quite understand this, during the cutscenes if you shake the sixaxis controller Snake's camo will revert back to its normal state in real time during the cutscene...wouldn't that make it a real time cutscene, or am I mistaken?



Platinums: Red Dead Redemption, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, Terminator Salvation, Uncharted 1, inFamous Second Son, Rocket League

Lone_Canis_Lupus on 16 June 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
Username2324 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
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.

You're correct, you could not duplicate that game in that configuration, but you could rewrite the game to play to the PS3's strengths, but as I said, it would be very costly.

 


You can't throw money at the PS3, and magically get more ram. It doesn't work that way :) If the game needs 400 meg, it needs 400 meg. If you could rewrite it to use less, then it didn't need 400 meg :p.

There are scenarios where a game on the 360 can not be done on the PS3. Just like MGS4 can not be done on the 360.


 Developers could sacrifice speed greatly by using the extra memory needed from the hard drive. Isn't that to main purpose of RAM, to be a quick way to access memory? I'm no programmer, but you could probably work around the RAM by using the hard drive....at the cost of speed of course.



PSN: Lone_Canis_Lupus