@ Deneidez,

Some quotes from me years before the PS3 actually launched. My perspectives back then:

"I understand that games developers may not be too fond of the idea of having to learn new ways to write their software."

"Today single CPU solutions are dominant, thus multithreading isn't really that much of a benefit. Software developers who mainly write for single processor solutions don't like doing extra (time=money) work to get the most out of multithreading for other platforms."

"It will probably take some time before developers manage to get the most out of this platform, as has for example also been the case with the classic Amiga chipsets. The early Amiga games don't compare well to the complex graphics used by for instance game like Elfmania or Lion Heart."

Blind or insightful, we will see. In any case IMO so far things have unvolved like I expected.

@ X360Rulez

The 360 had a year headstart at a lower entry pricing, but:
link

Don't you think you are calling a winner a bit early (PS3 less than 3 years on the market)?

Squilliam said: Are these games even of equal budget? Does the Forza budget equal half of the GT5 budget? Are the Killzone 2/MGS4 budgets less than twice the budget for Gears of War 2? Ditto for development times. Do these screenshots prove a more powerful machine or just one thats had a lot more money thrown at it?

 

Well Microsoft has more than enough money and they had a headstart to help 360 developers more. I don't think Halo 3 was a low budget game.

They did loose more than 6 billion USD on XBox stuff. What's spending a couple of more millions from that perspective?

 

Squilliam said: Are these games even of equal budget? Does the Forza budget equal half of the GT5 budget? Are the Killzone 2/MGS4 budgets less than twice the budget for Gears of War 2? Ditto for development times. Do these screenshots prove a more powerful machine or just one thats had a lot more money thrown at it?

 

Most of the money spent on high end PS3 games was writing a framework like Direct X on the 360. Sony did not give very good tools. The PS3 requires a new way to develop, and thus the people who forge that trail are going to spend a lot more. MGS5 will most likely take far less to make then MGS4 did. As people learn how to create very distributable code, costs will go down.

Uncharted, MGS4, and GT5:p have no equal on the 360 (although uncharted might someday be surpasses). If at least one game was on par with those, then I would say it was cost.

Also, it's worth noting that games like Mass Effect and BioShock had technical problems on the 360 (popin, frame rate issues). The three I mentioned for the PS3 have none.

TheRealMafoo said: Which one of these is better? Oh, that's right, we can't compare, they are not the same game. Also, the PS3 and the NES have no multi-plat games, so I guess we can not argue which console has the ability to produce better visuals. Darn.

First one is better. (You didn't say graphically... -.-) Take a look those pictures (X360 and PS3 games). Are there similar gap between those games as theres when you compare that ipod game to PS3 game? Also is there no difference between functionality in those games? Why I took functionality? If you use static camera with only static meshes , you can make game that looks totally incredible on both platforms(Or game where you can only push few buttons to continue, see dragon lair and heavy rain.). On the other hand, if you make game that is very open and free, you can't really make very good graphics for that game.

MikeB said: @ X360Rulez After all this years the X360 has selled better from the PS3 and it is still in the second place while their favourite Sony console is still in third place The 360 had a year headstart at a lower entry pricing, but: link Don't you think you are calling a winner a bit early (PS3 less than 3 years on the market)?

 

ok now we're off topic, but here's another of my favorite chartz

People who think that the PS3 is moving badly need to re-evaluate their position.

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS2&reg1=All&cons2=PS3&reg2=All&cons3=X360&reg3=All&weeks=96

A reason the ps2 is ahead of PS3 is the mis-alligned holiday periods in the lifecycle. perhaps PS3 will be ahead of Ps2 after Dec 08

 

~edited for clarity~

Deneidez said: TheRealMafoo said: Which one of these is better? Oh, that's right, we can't compare, they are not the same game. Also, the PS3 and the NES have no multi-plat games, so I guess we can not argue which console has the ability to produce better visuals. Darn. First one is better. (You didn't say graphically... -.-) Take a look those pictures (X360 and PS3 games). Are there similar gap between those games as theres when you compare that ipod game to PS3 game? Also is there no difference between functionality in those games? Why I took functionality? If you use static camera with only static meshes , you can make game that looks totally incredible on both platforms(Or game where you can only push few buttons to continue, see dragon lair and heavy rain.). On the other hand, if you make game that is very open and free, you can't really make very good graphics for that game.

 

Well, I have both patforms, and I have played every released game in this thread. The PS3 offerings look better.

how many times must this be done?

@ Deneidez

Yes the 360 and PS3 are close in capabilities compared to iPod and PS3....



Dragon's Lair is technically nothing like Heavy Rain though, there will be buttons sequences in heavy rain amongst other forms of gameplay, but it's all using the game engine. And yes it's easier to create good graphics with less space to move around freely, for example Gears of War felt caged to me right from the begginning, but looked better than previous 360 games yet texture pop-ins were still rather obvious.

TheRealMafoo said: Deneidez said: TheRealMafoo said: Which one of these is better? Oh, that's right, we can't compare, they are not the same game. Also, the PS3 and the NES have no multi-plat games, so I guess we can not argue which console has the ability to produce better visuals. Darn. First one is better. (You didn't say graphically... -.-) Take a look those pictures (X360 and PS3 games). Are there similar gap between those games as theres when you compare that ipod game to PS3 game? Also is there no difference between functionality in those games? Why I took functionality? If you use static camera with only static meshes , you can make game that looks totally incredible on both platforms(Or game where you can only push few buttons to continue, see dragon lair and heavy rain.). On the other hand, if you make game that is very open and free, you can't really make very good graphics for that game. Well, I have both patforms, and I have played every released game in this thread. The PS3 offerings look better.

Somehow this one came to my mind right after I did read your post.

http://kotaku.com/5041067/tell-us-dammit-have-you-ever-lied-about-playing-a-game

 

@woopah

As many times as it takes to PS3 fans to fix their broken egos. :/