Well, he doesn't know much when it comes to the PS3 because he is a PC programmer so the 360 will be easy for him but the PS3 will be hard since it is new tech and as ssj12 said he just needs time with it. Then he may find it a great system as well as 360 when he understands it better and stops bitching about it, but again as ssj12 said at least he tries.

Lol, he's one of the best in the world at what he does. I wouldn't worry about the ps3 version, it'll probably be improved upon release.

lmao. Epic win bro. Epic win.

Anyway, maybe we'll finally get the Sony fans to stop flaming every developer because they chose to develop multiplat instead of PS3 exclusive.

Games from ground up for PS3 run fine, and look good. The console just isn't very scalable. That's why some companies make the PS3 their main platform. The 360 and PC are very scalable.

It's the PC developers who have the biggest problem. They'll never make their main development platform a console, and so they'll never make a game that's better on PS3.

I'm excited to see how Dragons Age performs on the console.

Doom 3 came out around the time FarCry came out.  Crysis came out 3 or 4 years later, so of course it looked better.  But lets not forget that when it came out it ran like crap.  Shortly before I gave up on PC gaming, I built a brand new computer especially for Crysis.  Intel Core 2 Quad, 2 GB of DDR2, overclocked Nvidia 8800GTS, and an nForce 4 motherboard (the nicest Nvidia model out at the time).  According to Crytek and all the previews and stories I had read on the game, I was pretty much ready to play me some Crysis.  When I got the game, I was disappointed to find out that it ran like garbage.  To get smooth framerates with no stutter or lag, I pretty much had to run everything on medium.  PLUS, even Crytek admitted that the game came out too soon and that they had a lot of optimizing left to do, especially toward the end of the game. That's just my little aside about Crytek.  Crysis, for me, was my first step toward realizing that PC gaming was starting to become a pain in the ass.  I still have the PC I mentioned above.  I'm typing on it right now.  But I don't use it for much gaming anymore.  It still runs pretty much any game I throw at it just fine, but I only use it for that when my wife won't let me have the HDTV to play Xbox 360.

All that said, Carmack is NOT NOT NOT a lazy developer.  Guys, just because a developer says that the PS3 is harder to code for does not mean they're lazy, stupid, or inept.  Sometimes it just means that the PS3 is harder to develop for.  If iD was lazy, they probably would just release Rage right now.  Some of you guys case on some of these developers like Valve and iD as if you have no idea of their history.  The two houses I just named are two of the biggest influences in gaming.  If you have been playing only consoles all these years, you probably had no idea.  But if you ever paid any attention to the PC (which you should) you would know that these guys have earned their due respect.  Just because they aren't particularly fond of your favorite console does not mean that they are lazy.  You should really think of it more like if Gabe Newell and John Carmack can't optimize for the PS3 very well, there probably aren't that many people out there who CAN. 

And in conclusion, stfu about the 4 discs.  It's only 2.

Oh no, was one of the greatest development minds of all time mean to the PS3?

I know, lets make fun of his physical appearance and call him names.

That is what fair and balanced gamers do.

Anyway, one thing this means is that it is very unlikely the PS3 multiplat "problem" will ever dissapear. It seems like every week there is another relatively big game that performs worse on the PS3, and every week, it's the developers fault.

They must be all lazy, and this must be the biggest coincidence of all time.

Weird.  Well it worked with my Lost Odyssey.  I downloaded all discs to my hard drive and just kept disc one in every time I needed to play.

Carmack confirmed what I've been saying forever on these forums and MikeB keeps disputing: the RSX is much slower than the Xbox 360's GPU. Carmack says it is a bit slower, but it is actually significantly slower.

This is not the first evidence of that. We've seen lots of cross platform games have fewer lighting effects, etc, on the PS3 version to reduce the number of necessary passes. And still the PS3 versions run slower.

Let's not overstate our hands here sir. There are many problems inherant to PC gaming that are far more annoying than not having AA up to snuff.

1. Initial Price

2. Barriers to entry

3. Non-uniformity of hardware

4. Stability issues

5. Comfort vs Convinience

6. Preformance obsession

7. Ease of Installation v Plug and Play

8. Compatibility

9. DRM

10. Lack of a first party

Not all gamers are computer geeks. Not anymore.

I am though. MY PC is epic...however, PC gaming is not all it's cracked up to be anymore. There are more important things than nude mods and graphics in my book. Without porn, my PC would be a poor substitute for a console for strictly gaming, despite its epicness in the realm of gaming. I speak of exclusives, and ease of repair or replacement. Simplicity and comfort out of the box, all for 199. Conformity and uniformity in performance and no worrying required. Fallout 3 looks spectacular on my sammy via PC. I still gotta pay for the DLC though.

None of those problems effect you, you say? Well, that's a huge change of subject, now isn't it. We were talking about problems with PC gaming, not your specific problems with it.

Sure, it's fine to tout performance in a thread like this one, but let's not fall into stereotypes of PC elitism. It's a completely unfounded and childish stereotype, and it really has no place in a modern gaming culture. That elite club went mainstream along with the Oregon Trail.

Can't people just be content with the console they have?

Good thing thats not important then.

...