T3H C3LL is too much to handle for id? :O

I'm still sceptic about this game until I see some gameplay instead of cutscenes.

4 DVD's for 360!? So you need to switch the DVD everytime you move to the next area?

And that's footage from 2008... the game can only look better.

OT: I find the article odd, considering the game was supposed to take 4dvds. Also Carmack seemed like he wanted to make an engine that ran the same on each console... and would even compress the textures to fit the X360, and have equivalent compression on the PS3 so that the console versions were similar. It could be possible that the article said that the PS3 version would take up an eqivalent 4 dvds, but they compressed it to 2 for X360, which would mean less compressed textures vs. higher FPS?  

PC version doesn't count since that's variable depending on your set-up anyway...

Rage will ship on 2 DVD's for PC and 360. That article has it horribly wrong.
As for Carmack. Well. He is just asying what most other developers have been saying. It is that much more difficult to get equavilant results on the PS3. I'm sure IW and co also had a hard time on the PS3. But the good news is that they are learning it and alll future titles should be a lot easier.

Ok but you are being very hostile today.
That could lead someone to question your motives.

You don't seem to stand up to this in the countless MS threads which get deliberately hijacked with similar comments.
Not saying you have to everytime but once in a while. You wont have to wait long and will have many examples to pick from.

I'm pretty pro id and Carmack, but Doom 3 tech was nothing like Crysis.  It was great, but designed around relatively small levels that were essentially corridor crawls and a small number of foes with amazing lighting.  Crysis was designed around vast, open world levels with many foes, and pretty amazing lighting too.  As engines go in terms of design goals, they were pretty different.

OT regarding performance, I hope to see this improve, because of id's original comments, but it seems to me, if this holds true, that they have struggled to produce a single engine which is capable of equally supporting each console.  Looking at the evidence I'm pretty much of a mind that to get the best out of each you need at least a console specific version - i.e. not two fully seperate engines, but certainly two cuts of code where certain elements are different to exploit the very different PS3/360 architectures.

No matter what, I will buy this game for PS3 only is it reaches a minimum frame-rate of 30fps...

I think isn´t worth now buying a X360... or is???

He said the CPU is about the same....., I stopped reading at that point (not really). The cell is way more powerful than what can be found in the 360. The only reason I can fathom for the PS3 to be lagging behind like that, is because the developer isn't familiar with the architecture (Like the developer Valve, which prefers and are more acclimated to PC development). They can't fully wrap their heads around the complexity of the Cell architecture. Can't blame them though this will be their first NEXT-GEN game.

I don't know i'm usually pretty iffy about PC developers on the PS3 guess we'll have to wait and see. Also when is game due out I haven't seen any gameplay from it.

Yes, as far  as the different designs go they were extremely different. Crysis had more locales and foliage, etc. then Doom 3. That wasn't my point. When I said Doom 3 was like the Crysis of its day, I meant it was by far, no question the best looking thing for its time, as was(is) Crysis today.

The PS3 is still really powerful, but the framerate has always been it's weakest link.