Playstation 3 improving? - Page 5

ShadowTD · 11-12-2007, 09:28

I think there's the danger that this previously balanced thread might be about to descend into the usual PS3/360 bunfight and that would be a shame.

To pick up my previous point about people not liking Sony due to their marketing fibs and initial 'over-selling' of the machine's capabilities, Damien's statement that the PS3 is 1080p whereas the Xbox 360 is 720p is a perfect case in point. The source of this statement is Sony themselves which we all now know to be a complete lie. Head over to Kotaku and have a rummage around for a post that reveals the 'native' (render) resolution for a number of different titles across both platforms. Sometimes the PS3 render res is higher, sometimes the 360 is. The advantage the 360 has is that extra 10mb of RAM to allow devs to turn on things like 4xFSAA which tends to make games look nice.

At the end of the day it should come down to the games and with the 360 as the lead platform for a number of devs I think this situation will continue through 2008. I do think we'll see some stunning results from some PS3 exclusives and I honestly think we'll still be having this discussion in 12 months time

dragon · 11-12-2007, 09:40

They Both have great games on them, although the 360 has more of them at the moment.

Get them both (if you can afford it) problem solved

Played assasins creed on 360 last night good game so far... Probably get UT3 on PS3 rather than have it run at less than optimal on my PC

Tod · 11-12-2007, 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowTD

I think there's the danger that this previously balanced thread might be about to descend into the usual PS3/360 bunfight and that would be a shame.

Nice quote before you start throwing buns yourself!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowTD

To pick up my previous point about people not liking Sony due to their marketing fibs and initial 'over-selling' of the machine's capabilities, Damien's statement that the PS3 is 1080p whereas the Xbox 360 is 720p is a perfect case in point.

The source of this statement is Sony themselves which we all now know to be a complete lie.

I think you will find that there has been confusion over the Xbox 360 and 1080p resolution because the Xbox 360 didn't support 1080p from day 1, example: http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=10494

**Stuart C** · 11-12-2007, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by shawty

For the games?

Surely there is something worth getting out of this list (with huge games to come with some just round the corner like UT3) Obviously this list is better if you dont have a 360 but still good if you do.

Motorstorm
F1 CE
Resistance
Fight Night Round 3
Lair
Heavenly Sword
Assassins Creed
Ratchet & Clank
COD4
Uncharted Drakes Fortune
PES 2008
Fifa 08
Singstar
Guitar Hero 3
Stranglehold
Blazing Angels 2
WWE Smackdown v Raw
Tony Hawks Proving Ground
Skate
Warhawk
The Eye Of Judgment
Ridge Racer 7
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Double Agent
Sega Rally
Colin Mcrae Dirt
Virtua Tennis 3
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas
Folklore
F.E.A.R.
GRAW
PAIN
GTHD Demo
Oblivion

The only game I see in that list that that I want, and isn't either out or coming out for the PC (I have a good PC) or Xbox 360 is F1. I am not spending £300 to £400 on a console to play one game.

ShadowTD · 11-12-2007, 11:49

@Tod: Yes, but they're iced buns, more passed than thrown

Tod · 11-12-2007, 12:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart C

The only game I see in that list that that I want, and isn't either out or coming out for the PC (I have a good PC) or Xbox 360 is F1. I am not spending £300 to £400 on a console to play one game.

Well maybe PS3 is not aimed at you, but it is me so I am happy!

There are a lots of games on that list I wouldn't mind having. I have Uncharted and personally I think it is the best game out there on any machine.
I also have a large blu-ray collection, and store my media and photographs on my PS3, so I am well happy with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowTD

@Tod: Yes, but they're iced buns, more passed than thrown

Cheeky!

bulkylad · 12-12-2007, 20:03

Orange box seems to have been ruined for the ps3

"The remainder of our criticisms are to blame for the discrepancy in scores between the PlayStation 3 version of the game and the 360 version (the PS3 version, after all, wasn't handled entirely by Valve). The PlayStation 3 Orange Box performs far worse, and this fact just isn't up for debate. While framerate issues aren't as problematic in Half-Life 2 and Episode One, Episode Two suffers a great deal, especially during the episode's larger battles. We regret to say that some sections border on being unplayable because of the stutters, which often cause your aim to be thrown off and timing shots to be very difficult. The problem isn't persistent throughout, but when it hits, it hits hard.

More troubling still is the difference in load times. Almost all the PS3 load times are at least five seconds more than the 360, but loading a saved game/loading after death is particularly awful. These clock in at about two to three times as long as the 360 version, which slows down the gameplay considerably. Even though the PS3 Orange Box sports a quicksave feature, any benefit of this option is lost considering the overall abundance of loading.

Even in Portal, a short title that often requires a little trial and error, this problem is massive. The 360 version takes about three seconds to load your last checkpoint if you die. The PS3 version takes seventeen. It hurts.
"

full review at http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/840/840505p1.html

icestar2 · 12-12-2007, 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulkylad

Orange box seems to have been ruined for the ps3

"The remainder of our criticisms are to blame for the discrepancy in scores between the PlayStation 3 version of the game and the 360 version (the PS3 version, after all, wasn't handled entirely by Valve). The PlayStation 3 Orange Box performs far worse, and this fact just isn't up for debate. While framerate issues aren't as problematic in Half-Life 2 and Episode One, Episode Two suffers a great deal, especially during the episode's larger battles. We regret to say that some sections border on being unplayable because of the stutters, which often cause your aim to be thrown off and timing shots to be very difficult. The problem isn't persistent throughout, but when it hits, it hits hard.

More troubling still is the difference in load times. Almost all the PS3 load times are at least five seconds more than the 360, but loading a saved game/loading after death is particularly awful. These clock in at about two to three times as long as the 360 version, which slows down the gameplay considerably. Even though the PS3 Orange Box sports a quicksave feature, any benefit of this option is lost considering the overall abundance of loading.

Even in Portal, a short title that often requires a little trial and error, this problem is massive. The 360 version takes about three seconds to load your last checkpoint if you die. The PS3 version takes seventeen. It hurts.
"

full review at http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/840/840505p1.html

Thats because the PS3 version was passed off to EA to do and EA always put half assed games together. You only have to look at the battlefeild series on pc and see the amount of patchs there have been to know EA rarely do a good job.

ShadowTD · 13-12-2007, 10:00

There are also rumours that the PS3 version isn't using any of the SPE's - just the main chip and the graphics card. If this is the case, this is utterly inexcusable behaviour and the game should have been held back. No-one is suggesting the PS3 doesn't have the power - this is just typical EA lazyness.

TheBlueRaja · 13-12-2007, 18:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowTD

There are also rumours that the PS3 version isn't using any of the SPE's - just the main chip and the graphics card. If this is the case, this is utterly inexcusable behaviour and the game should have been held back. No-one is suggesting the PS3 doesn't have the power - this is just typical EA lazyness.

When a games console sells in low numbers, there is less justification to polish a game because the returns are less.

Add to that the PS3's lack of memory causing graphical bottlenecks and as such added difficulty in optimising code and its not hard to see why this an other games suffer.

Looks like the stuffing for the aforementioned turkey has arrived if you ask me.

dragon · 13-12-2007, 19:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

When a games console sells in low numbers, there is less justification to polish a game because the returns are less.

Add to that the PS3's lack of memory causing graphical bottlenecks and as such added difficulty in optimising code and its not hard to see why this an other games suffer.

Looks like the stuffing for the aforementioned turkey has arrived if you ask me.

Doesn't matter what its on If EA made it its bound to be full of bugs and not work properly..
I can't remember the last EA game I had that didn't need some kind of fix.

icestar2 · 13-12-2007, 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

When a games console sells in low numbers, there is less justification to polish a game because the returns are less.

Add to that the PS3's lack of memory causing graphical bottlenecks and as such added difficulty in optimising code and its not hard to see why this an other games suffer.

Looks like the stuffing for the aforementioned turkey has arrived if you ask me.

TBH thats no reason at all. There have been plenty of PS3 games that have run great - uncharted is an amazing game and runs lovely. Now I know you h8 PS3 or sony or sumthin like that cause every time you make a comment on these threads its always negative to PS3. There was no1 to blame for this other than EA.

Is the PS3 perfect ? Far from it but is the 360 ? No. EA were lazy is the plain and simple truth and theres no reason to blame PS3 this time round.

Damien · 13-12-2007, 21:31

The PS3s memory, as far as i know, is fine. It's the graphic card that causes the problems. Sony cheaped out on it and went all out on the processor which is pretty powerful.

Unforunality the graphic card problem means that developers cannot take advantage of the 1080p + blu-ray discs to have really really good texures, this properly requires some tricky programming to match the 360 hence why, at the moment, a lot of games on the 360 look better.

When developers get to grips with the PS3 it will balance out. Leaving the giht between better media (PS3) and better online play (360) as the main differences between the two. They are much of a muchness now really.

---------- Post added at 21:31 ---------- Previous post was at 21:27 ----------

Btw, It is possible to dislike Sony and like the PS3. Although I would not get one for a long while, I can now see the appeal of the PS3 yet I still hate Sonys PR (i.e We're gonna wipe out Nintendo, only the PS3 is proper HD, etc etc).

shawty · 13-12-2007, 22:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

When a games console sells in low numbers, there is less justification to polish a game because the returns are less.

Add to that the PS3's lack of memory causing graphical bottlenecks and as such added difficulty in optimising code and its not hard to see why this an other games suffer.

Looks like the stuffing for the aforementioned turkey has arrived if you ask me.

What is it with you seriously?

The console is selling just as good as the 360 and PS2 did when they launched to a year after, how many times does this have to be said.

What lack of memory? You mean 10mb less than the 360? Surely one of the 256mb superfast ram in the PS3 makes up for that. Or maybe you should ask Naughty Dog (Uncharted Drakes fortune) how they did that, not enough for you? How about Infinity Ward (COD4), maybe ask them?

You do know all this was said about the PS2 dont you. Now we all know that the PS3 isnt going to reach where the PS2 is in the same time frame as the PS3 has better competion this time.

---------- Post added at 22:14 ---------- Previous post was at 22:07 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

The PS3s memory, as far as i know, is fine. It's the graphic card that causes the problems. Sony cheaped out on it and went all out on the processor which is pretty powerful.

Unforunality the graphic card problem means that developers cannot take advantage of the 1080p + blu-ray discs to have really really good texures, this properly requires some tricky programming to match the 360 hence why, at the moment, a lot of games on the 360 look better.

When developers get to grips with the PS3 it will balance out. Leaving the giht between better media (PS3) and better online play (360) as the main differences between the two. They are much of a muchness now really.

---------- Post added at 21:31 ---------- Previous post was at 21:27 ----------

Btw, It is possible to dislike Sony and like the PS3. Although I would not get one for a long while, I can now see the appeal of the PS3 yet I still hate Sonys PR (i.e We're gonna wipe out Nintendo, only the PS3 is proper HD, etc etc).

Its like fitting a sqaure shape in a circle hole. All it is, is that if games are made on the 360 and ported to the PS3 it takes time to redo everything to ptimize it for the PS3. Ive been saying this since the UK launch. There is nothing wrong with the processor, memory or the graphics card (you will find the 360's graphics card hardly any better). The same happened with the PS2, its just hard to develop for and when its done right its done beautiful like uncharted and COD4.

dragon · 13-12-2007, 22:35

Gotta remember that the 360 has been out longer than the ps3 meaning they've had longer to get used to programming for it.... Wait did i say that before