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

Forums - Gaming - Debunking the myth that the PS3 > Xbox360, The real work proves Xbox > PS3

Squilliam you ought to know that the truth does not belong on these boards. Now get rid of this thread! We don't want the truth, we want Global warming!



GOTY Contestants this year: Dead Space 2, Dark Souls, Tales of Graces f. Everything else can suck it.

Around the Network
ChronotriggerJM said:
Squilliam said:
 

Um Rockstar are a pretty good studio - they had seperate PS3/Xbox360 codepaths so they could run the game efficiently on both systems... Its as close to exclusive development you can get with multiplatform games...

 

Why would you even pick rock-star as a company to compare technical advantage? Have they EVER been known to push technology? Let alone on a console that's notoriously difficult to work with >_>?

 

Many knowledgeable people consider GTAIV to be more technically advanced than games like Uncharted and Kameo due to how well they implemented the game.

You have - Different textures, not just the same repeated.

Open world - Vs Closed world.

Excellent AI considering the complexity of the world.

Theres 3 for you.

 



Tease.

Shadowblind said:
Squilliam you ought to know that the truth does not belong on these boards. Now get rid of this thread! We don't want the truth, we want Global warming!

 



Tease.

Phendrana said:
NNN2004 said:
Phendrana said:
Do you think the 360's year head start may have something to do with this? Games always get better as consoles progress through their life cycle. Just a thought. I really have no idea.

 

like always sony fans say that as argument ... ok u want a proof that ur mistaken .. i will give u one ... ps3 & Wii launch at the same year no one year head start no nothing, both have new technologies and the developers need a time to used to it .... then why the hell Wii have more games & no delays ?? why the hell Wii make 4 or 5 games with the same time sony take it to make one game ??!! wake up Fan .. its not an argument anymore.

 

Sony fan, wtf? If anything I'm a Nintendo fan who also owns a PS3. It was an honest question. Don't be so defensive. I really couldn't care less about PS3 vs. 360 since they both play pretty much the same games. Arguing about which HD console looks better is like two twins arguing over who has the better haircut.

And your example doesn't make any sense.

@Squilliam

Thanks for answering my question reasonably.

 

 why its not making sense ?? both are new consoles and both need some time for developers to use to it so where is the non sense ?? and if u want to appear as a nintendo fan .. remove ur ps3 gamertag from ur sign.



Griffin said:

The 360 has nothing that can come close to the likes of R&C, Uncharted, GT5p or Killzone2.

 

PS3 has nothing like GOW,GOW2 , FABLE2 , FM2, PGR4, HALO3, MASS EFFECT, NG2...



Around the Network
Squilliam said:
ChronotriggerJM said:
Oyvoyvoyv said:
SamuelRSmith said:
NFGBlinkAC said:
Topic fails at an epic level

 

 Please direct me to the level at which it fails at.

 

 It uses statistics to prove a point. Lately, every thread the OP does this in is either ignored or attacked like hell.

 

The point he's trying to prove, and the fact's he's pulling from don't support the claim though -_-; The fact's he's using prove that it's easier to program for, and cheaper to program for... We already knew this. The only way you'll get to see what a system is really capable of is via exclusives. And it's almost universally accepted that PS3 exclusives push the "cutting" edge. I don't wait for the next 360 game to showcase what consoles of this gen can do graphically, I don't wait for the 360 to see how rediculous the player counts can get up to for a multi-player game, I don't wait for the 360 to do anything as far as technology is concerned >_> In my opinion it's not the console holding the deck of cards.

Because the 360 is easier to work with, it will be 100% utilized long before the PS3 is, and in my opinion it's still playing catch up.

 

Huxley was announced wayyy before MAG <-- Similar player numbers, did you ignore it? Oh... Its only special when its announced for the PS3.

Also could you disprove this " Epic - If given the motivation and budget/time of Gearbox could produce a game thats the equall or better technically as Killzone 2" Which is precisely why using exclusives can be a bad idea for comparison. (Remember they did Gears 2 in less than 2 years, where Gearbox could have been working on Killzone 2 for almost 5 years by the time its released.)

 

 

From what I've been told, Huxley wasn't even a technical "first person shooter", I've heard it was something entirely different. If that's true, why are we comparing FPS matches with MMO's?

Sure, I can disprove that. How long did it take Epic to make Unreal Tourney 3 on the PS3? From all acounts they said it was a much better performing game compared to Gears of War, and I'm sure it costed them a miniscule amount of money as well. You can nit-pick all you want from different developers, but what they achieve still stands true. The PS3 has supported higher polygon counts, has supported the furthest draw distances, the most effects on screen, locked framerates, the highest player counts, hell... just name it. I can't pull these out of nowhere, the accomplishments list on the PS3 is higher than that of the 360. By an easy hands down I might add.

I'm just saying, should Epic put the resources in, they COULD definitely out-do KZ2 on a technical scale, however, I think it would be much easier for them to do on PS3 hardware as opposed to 360 hardware. If so many other developers could out-do anything seen on the 360 with the PS3, Epic of all companies could really work it to the tooth.

 



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.

Guys! I made an incredible discovery!

I have proof that the PS3 cannot run simple Xbox360 games like Kameo - launch titles no less!

I putted the Xbox360 DVD into teh PS3 and it NOT WORKIZZLEZ

Thereforez Xobx630 is > PSTree



Tease.

@sieanr in defence of developers for the Sega Saturn, a they were givin no lead time, be there were far more than 2 cores you had to use to actually use the 2 main cores. on top of that, development systems shipped late due to internal issues at sega (the canned and competing american version of the saturn, had a much more powerfull and only one main core). sega themselves did not use them in all games. and the cost was outlandish for the time vs other consoles not using them. and as with sony really poor developer support for quite awile... i dont recall if sega ever tried to fix theirs, i know sony did. the other big problem was poor bus design that made grabbing the small amount of ram an issue between the gpu/cpus... sound familier .... also the desision to use quadrilaterals, and not triangles ... bad idea



come play minecraft @  mcg.hansrotech.com

minecraft name: hansrotec

XBL name: Goddog

Hasn't the topic of 360 having a more developer friendly architecture than the ps3 been said, done, beaten, killed, beaten, resurrected, beaten, died again, and beaten so many times???

Yes the 360 has a better architecture for better stressless development. Does anyone else remember dev's bitching about ps2 being a hell hole to develop on shortly after launch??? This shit takes time! SONY has always seemed to make huge differences with the release of each console. Huge more complex differences. Yes, 360 has a better GPU, but PS3 has a better but harder to code for CPU. They both are stuck at 512MB of RAM but 50% of the ps3's ram moves over 4X faster than 100% of the 360's Ram, while the other half moves at the same speed of the 360's.

All of this means nothin right now, wait 3 more years for dev's to tell you wich console they rather develop for to make a huge and amazing game. Assuming that the 360 doesn't get replaced by MS b4 then....



4 ≈ One

Squilliam said:
ChronotriggerJM said:
Squilliam said:

Um Rockstar are a pretty good studio - they had seperate PS3/Xbox360 codepaths so they could run the game efficiently on both systems... Its as close to exclusive development you can get with multiplatform games...

 

Why would you even pick rock-star as a company to compare technical advantage? Have they EVER been known to push technology? Let alone on a console that's notoriously difficult to work with >_>?

 

Many knowledgeable people consider GTAIV to be more technically advanced than games like Uncharted and Kameo due to how well they implemented the game.

You have - Different textures, not just the same repeated.

Open world - Vs Closed world.

Excellent AI considering the complexity of the world.

Theres 3 for you.

 

No they do push what they do really well, but I wouldn't consider them to be the "tester's" of power or performance. They do an open world, and even admitted that the space on the blu-disc would make it much easier for a big open world, they do simple A.I. algorithms... just on a larger scale... and the textures... well >_> maybe that's a 360 thing... I don't see repeated textures very often in PS3 games :/

 



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.