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

Forums - Microsoft - The PS3 related turmoil amongst 360 users

Destroyer_of_knights on 20 June 2009
slowmo said:
MikeB said:
@ slowmo

Ghostbusters finally hit home that leading on the PS3 will not fix it's terrible dev support


I don't think Ghostbusters on the PS3 looks terrible, but IMO it's clear they lead development on the 360. One website compared an unfinished PS3 version to a more complete 360 version according to a developer, this would of course not be the case if development was lead on the PS3.

IMO a truly PS3 lead game takes full advantage of Blu-Ray and the Cell processor and when finished is then ported to other platforms (making sacrifices to fit on DVD and cut other elements to draw less CPU performance).


Or in the case of GB they couldn't implement all the textures to the quality of the 360 due to GPU and memory restrictions so they cut them back to fit on the PS3's huge Bluray disk.  Don't worry though it left plenty of room to duplicate data on that 25GB and fit some bonus videos that most users will never bother with.  Finally stop pretending the dev is telling lies, they said themselves it was lead on the PS3 and ported to the 360, also that rumour regarding it being a unfinished version has been quashed, the truth is it looks worse. 

Nice job on ignoring the 576p PAL resolution that blew your other argument away though.

if the PS3 was indeed the lead platform, then all assets, engines and textures would be designed for the PS3, which would then be easy to port over to the 360, not only that but the textures and assets at this stage would not be touched as developers want partiy in their games as to avoid this issue.

The fact that this isn't the case simply suggest that the PS3 was not the lead platform, if we look at past games, we saw how games leading on 360 ended up looking exactly like GB on the PS3 incomparison to the 360.

Now I know the developers PR said that they used the PS3 as the lead system, but whats not to say that at some stage they swapped and made the 360 the lead system?

GB on PS3 clearly suggest to me that either lead platform was swapped over to the 360 and then ported to the PS3, or that the developers ate more than they could chew and severly fucked up....I reckon it's the the former rather than the latter that happened.



Around the Network
Squilliam on 20 June 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Legend11 said:
There's really no turmoil. The only reason the whole Ghostbusters thing blew up so much was because of comments made by Terminal Reality which basically implied that the 360 couldn't keep up with the PS3. So who would have expected the 360 version of the game to end up pushing almost twice the pixels and with added effects?

Which just leaves us with: no one who cares about such things could possibly deny that Blu-Ray video/audio is a fuckton better than DVD video/audio.

Napster proved that most people were happy with 128kbit Stereo MP3s. Most people couldn't care less about the audio quality of Blu Ray.



Tease.

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 20 June 2009
slowmo said:
MikeB said:
@ slowmo

Ghostbusters finally hit home that leading on the PS3 will not fix it's terrible dev support


I don't think Ghostbusters on the PS3 looks terrible, but IMO it's clear they lead development on the 360. One website compared an unfinished PS3 version to a more complete 360 version according to a developer, this would of course not be the case if development was lead on the PS3.

IMO a truly PS3 lead game takes full advantage of Blu-Ray and the Cell processor and when finished is then ported to other platforms (making sacrifices to fit on DVD and cut other elements to draw less CPU performance).


Or in the case of GB they couldn't implement all the textures to the quality of the 360 due to GPU and memory restrictions

Right, PS3's limitations held the game to the level of those blurry screenshots.  Just about every other PS3 game says 'hi' and disproves that.



Destroyer_of_knights on 20 June 2009
Legend11 said:
There's really no turmoil. The only reason the whole Ghostbusters thing blew up so much was because of comments made by Terminal Reality which basically implied that the 360 couldn't keep up with the PS3. So who would have expected the 360 version of the game to end up pushing almost twice the pixels and with added effects?

Exactly, if TR has just kept their mouth shut in regards to what they said, then people would still be talking about it, but no where near this level, people would have simply assumed that they simply weren't talented to handle the PS3 architecture and called it a day....Useless PR FTW!!!



MikeB on 20 June 2009
Legend11 said:
The only reason the whole Ghostbusters thing blew up so much was because of comments made by Terminal Reality which basically implied that the 360 couldn't keep up with the PS3.

What they actually stated was that if Ghostbusters would have been a PS3 exclusive they could have added a lot more (real game design changing differences) to the game, than the 360 would be able to handle.

They actually implied they made sacrifices with regard to game design to better suit the 360 hardware.

If it would have been a fully PS3 lead game, they would have pushed for twice the amount of onscreen activity and worry about the porting process to other platforms afterwards looking for workarounds (this was the case for most past Arcade originals, you don't worry about c64 conversion specs when designing an arcade game in the good old days).



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network
Loud_Hot_White_Box on 20 June 2009
Squilliam said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Legend11 said:
There's really no turmoil. The only reason the whole Ghostbusters thing blew up so much was because of comments made by Terminal Reality which basically implied that the 360 couldn't keep up with the PS3. So who would have expected the 360 version of the game to end up pushing almost twice the pixels and with added effects?

Which just leaves us with: no one who cares about such things could possibly deny that Blu-Ray video/audio is a fuckton better than DVD video/audio.

Napster proved that most people were happy with 128kbit Stereo MP3s. Most people couldn't care less about the audio quality of Blu Ray.

Most people don't give a crap about graphics.  That's a quote from you in another thread.  Looks like you would never weigh in on the issues in this thread, as they're irrelevant.

Seems enough people care for you to dance a jig about Ghostbusters, though.  And to increase Blu-Ray sales quite nicely year over year during a mighty ass recession.



Squilliam on 20 June 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Squilliam said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

Which just leaves us with: no one who cares about such things could possibly deny that Blu-Ray video/audio is a fuckton better than DVD video/audio.

Napster proved that most people were happy with 128kbit Stereo MP3s. Most people couldn't care less about the audio quality of Blu Ray.

Most people don't give a crap about graphics.  That's a quote from you in another thread.  Looks like you would never weigh in on the issues in this thread, as they're irrelevant.

Seems enough people care for you to dance a jig about Ghostbusters, though.  And to increase Blu-Ray sales quite nicely year over year during a mighty ass recession.

Im getting the PS3 version of Ghostbusters... If I actually cared I would be getting it on Xbox 360 or PC since I have both a fast gaming PC and an Xbox 360 gaming console available. So how exactly am I dancing a jig?



Tease.

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 20 June 2009
Squilliam said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Squilliam said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

Which just leaves us with: no one who cares about such things could possibly deny that Blu-Ray video/audio is a fuckton better than DVD video/audio.

Napster proved that most people were happy with 128kbit Stereo MP3s. Most people couldn't care less about the audio quality of Blu Ray.

Most people don't give a crap about graphics.  That's a quote from you in another thread.  Looks like you would never weigh in on the issues in this thread, as they're irrelevant.

Seems enough people care for you to dance a jig about Ghostbusters, though.  And to increase Blu-Ray sales quite nicely year over year during a mighty ass recession.

Im getting the PS3 version of Ghostbusters... If I actually cared I would be getting it on Xbox 360 or PC since I have both a fast gaming PC and an Xbox 360 gaming console available. So how exactly am I dancing a jig?

You didn't enter the GB threads with your patented faux-friendly PS3-needling comments?  Maybe I'm thinking of other threads. 

Also, back to the point: it's seldom necessary or sufficient for "most" people to like or desire anything: the requirement for success could be 5% of consumers being interested, or 65%.  Whether 51% (most) happen to care, probably irrelevant.

Most people will never buy video game consoles.  Oh, shut down the site, most people don't care.



gergroy on 20 June 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Squilliam said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Legend11 said:
There's really no turmoil. The only reason the whole Ghostbusters thing blew up so much was because of comments made by Terminal Reality which basically implied that the 360 couldn't keep up with the PS3. So who would have expected the 360 version of the game to end up pushing almost twice the pixels and with added effects?

Which just leaves us with: no one who cares about such things could possibly deny that Blu-Ray video/audio is a fuckton better than DVD video/audio.

Napster proved that most people were happy with 128kbit Stereo MP3s. Most people couldn't care less about the audio quality of Blu Ray.

Most people don't give a crap about graphics.  That's a quote from you in another thread.  Looks like you would never weigh in on the issues in this thread, as they're irrelevant.

Seems enough people care for you to dance a jig about Ghostbusters, though.  And to increase Blu-Ray sales quite nicely year over year during a mighty ass recession.

how does that previous quote not fit into what they are saying here?



slowmo on 20 June 2009

And the trolling hit before we got to the end of page 2, congrats.

Funny MikeB but you mention contradictions and all I see from yourself and LHWB is that very same thing. Why is it you don;t trust a developers word now MikeB you throw them around like confetti enough at any and every opportunity on here. Could it be all the quotes you're providing are indeed bullshit like many people have told you before. If it's suitable for you to ignore a developers quote then I guess we can all do the same for your cherry picked offerings. Still not seeing how this thread is relevant to 360 owners in particular though and more importantly why is it in the Microsoft forum other than for you to cause trouble.

I think it's time we had some more PS3 is doomed threads to clear some of the more emotional Sony fanboys out for a month or two.