360 multi-plats not only look better but...

Yea dont notice the difference in most games. I guess if you had the equipment and look real hard then you can find it,but whats the point really. I will admit there are night and day games like bayonetta and orange box.

I agree with it being entirely the developers fault and not with the system. As we have seen exclusives look better on the PS3 than the 360. We know it is easier to develop for the 360 than the PS3, but I don't think the gap is as big as it once was. The biggest reason is the porting. You develop for a system like the 360, the code can be easily ported to run on the PS3 PPE, which is a similar chip to the 350 xenon chips. So code ports, some changes are made to get it to run. Now comes performance testing, one sure fire way to get more performance out of a system with little change anywhere else, change the textures, compress them more, make them smaller, do anything that will reduce their size of the file and therefore the length of time loading it. If a company is going to put the effort into making multi-plat games, we know they can be the same on each platform. So it isn't about the ability of the system, it is the money and time the devs have to making the game the same, and often, if they have put the time into making sure the game is right on the 360 and they are releasing a PS3 version but only care about getting it out the door working then THIS is why you see inferior products on the PS3 than the 360 and not the machines ability.mike_on_mic

I don't doubt the machine capability at all. I never suggested that. I'm doubting sony's ability to convince developers to create a quality port. When I say "convince", i mean sony's ability to prove to developers that games will sell just as good or better then the competition (360) and or reasonable to develop for. Due to the "success" of the ps3 of early (its sarcasm), sony was unable to do that. Sony should not have gone with the cell processor. I think that this is the sole reason why ps3 ports are harder to create and this is entirely sony's fault.

Personally, im going to try and not worry about it so much. Am I really going to notice the 360 version being better if I dont have it side by side? Anyway, I think I am going to start buying my multiplats on 360, I just hope later on down the line when i wanna paly them again, my 360 still works. Or the new XBOX is Backwards comaptible with 360 stuff, which it should be.

Fully with you on this thread. I'm guessing most are ports from the 360 version since most developers wouldnt have the money to spend the time and effort on the difficult PS3 development. I own all 3 consoles this gen and its almost funny how the PS3 was supposed to be so dominate, the price was so high but "the power of PS3 would pay off!" and it really hasnt except for a few games. I'd feel horribly burned if I was a PS3 only owner from day one. Imagine the poor kid who tried justify the $599 to mom and dad instead of getting a 360, only to have his parents see that they almost immediately dropped the price. At this point you might as well get a PS3 at the price, but I'd never recommend one to a friend unless they already had a 360.

Its really not much of a issue any more. Multiplats these days are almost identical. If all developers took the time to make the PS3 versions make use of its harware, the PS3 versions of every multiplat would look alot better than the 360 versions. Most 3rd party games dont even use SPU's.djsifer01

Joke post right. The 360 GPU is waay more powerful than the GPU in the PS3 and the cell can't make up for that. GTA4 ran in subHD on PS3 also while it ran at 720P on 360. RDR runs at 720p on 360 and subHD on PS3 while the PS3 version also has worse framerate, less objects on the scene and lower quality textures and lets not forget the lower quality QAA versus MSAA on 360. Also R* are using the SPU's to do QAA and who knows what else they are doing with the SPU's so don't try to act as devs are not using the SPU's because thats a false statement these days (that excuse was used on 1st gen games). Games like UC2 look great but have small draw distances and NO splitscreen mode. Same thing with KZ2, short draw distances no splitscreen mode. GOW3 has static camera angles on very strict paths. The more going on in the scene the more you are going to see the 360 version of a game look better than the PS3 version because its GPU has unified shader architecture while PS3's GPU does not. Also if devs took the extra time they would put into PS3 games and put them into 360 games those 360 games would look even better. Why should Devs put more time, money and effort into a PS3 version of a game then a 360 version?? Both games should be given equal dev love period.

The difference is tiny, and for the people buying all their multiplats on the 360 when they also have a PS3, I'm going to lol hard at you when in a year or 2 or even 5, you go back to play some of those games and BAM, discs are all scratched, or BAM, Live isn't payed for, or BAM RROD, or BAM E74... :lol: Buying multiplats for the 360 when you have a PS3/PC is just lol worthy, noone in their right mind would do such a thing.

N00bTuber

The difference is NOT tiny. Higher framerate, Resolution and more detail in the enviroment is not a tiny difference. Also RROD has already been solved and my 360 has never scratched a game.

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

The difference is tiny, and for the people buying all their multiplats on the 360 when they also have a PS3, I'm going to lol hard at you when in a year or 2 or even 5, you go back to play some of those games and BAM, discs are all scratched, or BAM, Live isn't payed for, or BAM RROD, or BAM E74... :lol: Buying multiplats for the 360 when you have a PS3/PC is just lol worthy, noone in their right mind would do such a thing.

EG101

The difference is NOT tiny. Higher framerate, Resolution and more detail in the enviroment is not a tiny difference. Also RROD has already been solved and my 360 has never scratched a game.

That's why I own both, the 360 is for multiplats, pc titles and online and the ps3 is for... ummm, blu ray movies and ... ummm.... ummmm, waiting for gt5???

[QUOTE="EG101"]

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

The difference is tiny, and for the people buying all their multiplats on the 360 when they also have a PS3, I'm going to lol hard at you when in a year or 2 or even 5, you go back to play some of those games and BAM, discs are all scratched, or BAM, Live isn't payed for, or BAM RROD, or BAM E74... :lol: Buying multiplats for the 360 when you have a PS3/PC is just lol worthy, noone in their right mind would do such a thing.

N00bTuber

The difference is NOT tiny. Higher framerate, Resolution and more detail in the enviroment is not a tiny difference. Also RROD has already been solved and my 360 has never scratched a game.

He's a known troll. It's better to just ignore him.

I say devs should stop making multiplats for the PS3 unless they make them look as good or better than what 360 offers, I don't see the point in being inferior besides teh moneyz! What a bunch of lazy, money hungry...

And besides, PS3 is best for exclusives anyways, LOL at using multiplats as an advantage when over 80% are better on 360.

mitu123

That's exactly one of the main reasons why I have a 360 instead of a PS3, because there are better multiplats that run, look, & play better on it most of the time. Thank Sony for making their platform very difficult to develop games for. If it were to be more easy like the 360 & PC, then most of the multiplats would've been the exact same between each other.

Plus people have to understand this, because believe it or not, the PS3 is NOT a dedicated game machine, whereas the XBox 360 is. The sum of all the PS3's parts (no matter how revolutionary) do not equate to a "superior" piece of hardware. The XB360 doesn't have all this new hardware, but what it has is proven technology designed specifically for gaming purposes.

Don't get me wrong either, as the PS3 is a great console with some epic exclusives, but it is more like the Frankenstein monster of consoles (with different tech just thrown in together hap-hazardly)...but it works well & is a lot more reliable. However, being the newer tech it shouldn't be similar to, or lag behind the XBox 360 in some instances, but it does...but like I mentioned, it is because the XB 360 was designed specifically for games. It's CPU isn't as revolutionary as the PS3's Cell, but at least it was designed for gaming purposes...and the XB 360's RAM architecture is ideal for games, whereas the PS3's RAM architecture isn't, and is more suited for movies & streaming video (a la blu-ray).

The difference is tiny,

N00bTuber

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

The difference is tiny,

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

The difference is tiny,

N00bTuber

I say devs should stop making multiplats for the PS3 unless they make them look as good or better than what 360 offers, I don't see the point in being inferior besides teh moneyz! What a bunch of lazy, money hungry...

And besides, PS3 is best for exclusives anyways, LOL at using multiplats as an advantage when over 80% are better on 360.

mitu123

Why would i want to deny myself of this? It looks damn good. You guys argue over some of the dumbest things. why not go play the game and enjoy it (my personal game of the year!!) but oh i guess arguing over a small texture is more fun?

come on? srsly if developers wasnt lazy they could make the same port for X360 on PS3, look at GTA IV? people didnt see any difference between PS3 and X360 and RDR is the same, and no PS3 version doesnt havepop up textures or distance **** you talked about.... and H2H is just for people who cant get a normal life, people take H2H so seriously. And must of them are actually fanboys :S look at lensoftruth... its just bs! if people just cant accept the system they have why not sell it or buy another system?

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] Not really, or else PS3 would be equal to 360 in multiplats.

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

I say devs should stop making multiplats for the PS3 unless they make them look as good or better than what 360 offers, I don't see the point in being inferior besides teh moneyz! What a bunch of lazy, money hungry...

And besides, PS3 is best for exclusives anyways, LOL at using multiplats as an advantage when over 80% are better on 360.

Midnightshade29

Why would i want to deny myself of this? It looks damn good. You guys argue over some of the dumbest things. why not go play the game and enjoy it (my personal game of the year!!) but oh i guess arguing over a small texture is more fun?

I say devs should stop making multiplats for the PS3 unless they make them look as good or better than what 360 offers, I don't see the point in being inferior besides teh moneyz! What a bunch of lazy, money hungry...

And besides, PS3 is best for exclusives anyways, LOL at using multiplats as an advantage when over 80% are better on 360.

mitu123

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] Not really, or else PS3 would be equal to 360 in multiplats.

mitu123

why was the H2H RDR on PS3 so blurry on lensoftruth?, and i hope many of you guys know that you will see many differences if you use different TV's right?

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"] LOOL what a completly irrelevant link :lol: How does the difference disprove that the difference is tiny? they need special tech and special conditions to be able to distinguish the differences :lol: This isn't anywhere near relevant.. Way to justify the 360's existence.

N00bTuber

Since when is difference in textures, resolution, lighting, framerate, character models, anti-aliasing, shadows, etc. tiny?;)mitu123

[QUOTE="mike_on_mic"]I agree with it being entirely the developers fault and not with the system. As we have seen exclusives look better on the PS3 than the 360. We know it is easier to develop for the 360 than the PS3, but I don't think the gap is as big as it once was. The biggest reason is the porting. You develop for a system like the 360, the code can be easily ported to run on the PS3 PPE, which is a similar chip to the 350 xenon chips. So code ports, some changes are made to get it to run. Now comes performance testing, one sure fire way to get more performance out of a system with little change anywhere else, change the textures, compress them more, make them smaller, do anything that will reduce their size of the file and therefore the length of time loading it. If a company is going to put the effort into making multi-plat games, we know they can be the same on each platform. So it isn't about the ability of the system, it is the money and time the devs have to making the game the same, and often, if they have put the time into making sure the game is right on the 360 and they are releasing a PS3 version but only care about getting it out the door working then THIS is why you see inferior products on the PS3 than the 360 and not the machines ability.hysam20241

I don't doubt the machine capability at all. I never suggested that. I'm doubting sony's ability to convince developers to create a quality port. When I say "convince", i mean sony's ability to prove to developers that games will sell just as good or better then the competition (360) and or reasonable to develop for. Due to the "success" of the ps3 of early (its sarcasm), sony was unable to do that. Sony should not have gone with the cell processor. I think that this is the sole reason why ps3 ports are harder to create and this is entirely sony's fault.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"] LOOL what a completly irrelevant link :lol: How does the difference disprove that the difference is tiny? they need special tech and special conditions to be able to distinguish the differences :lol: This isn't anywhere near relevant.. Way to justify the 360's existence.

Midnightshade29

[QUOTE="mitu123"]Since when is difference in textures, resolution, lighting, framerate, character models, anti-aliasing, shadows, etc. tiny?;)Giancar

It's funny how people care more about graphics in exclusives than multiplats. I don't mind exclusives, but to ignore multiplats is odd, even if they don't count here, they still count in other areas.

[QUOTE="Giancar"][QUOTE="mitu123"]Since when is difference in textures, resolution, lighting, framerate, character models, anti-aliasing, shadows, etc. tiny?;)mitu123

It's funny how people care more about graphics in exclusives than multiplats. I don't mind exclusives, but to ignore multiplats is odd, even if they don't count here, they still count in other areas.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="Giancar"] the only recent multiplat having this problem is Bayonetta...and even it scored great what other had significant differences?Midnightshade29

It's funny how people care more about graphics in exclusives than multiplats. I don't mind exclusives, but to ignore multiplats is odd, even if they don't count here, they still count in other areas.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="Giancar"] the only recent multiplat having this problem is Bayonetta...and even it scored great what other had significant differences?Midnightshade29

It's funny how people care more about graphics in exclusives than multiplats. I don't mind exclusives, but to ignore multiplats is odd, even if they don't count here, they still count in other areas.

I agree with the TC about some multiplats being generally 'better' on the Xbox 360. He is not trying to bash the PS3 as you people are implying. However, I do not agree that the differences in RDR are huge as most of you are making it out to be. Sure there are some differences here and there in each version, but it apparently wasn't that big enough to the reviewers to rate each version differently or even mention it. Every review site gave the game the same score throughout. Some people will prefer the PS3, some the 360, so its a win, win really.

I agree with the TC about some multiplats being generally 'better' on the Xbox 360. He is not trying to bash the PS3 as you people are implying. However, I do not agree that the differences in RDR are huge as most of you are making it out to be. Sure there are some differences here and there in each version, but it apparently wasn't that big enough to the reviewers to rate each version differently or even mention it. Every review site gave the game the same score throughout. Some people will prefer the PS3, some the 360, so its a win, win really.

Adamantium4k2

Aren't they developing the new Medal of Honour on the ps3 first then porting to the 360?

lets just say they are; and it does look better or the same on the ps3. will lems stop going on about 'slightly' inferior ports on the ps3.

if you tried to port games like uncharted 2 on to the 360 it will be inferior. but with the proper developers and time gears of war could be ported on the ps3 and even improved. fact is the ps3 can produce better graphics. but the 360 is the developers choice and as long as the game is fun and enjoyable who cares about a patch of grass missing or slightly blurred sign it will not change the way you play the game in any way.

Wasnt FF13 better on PS3? Goes to show with the PS3 being the main platform it can be equal if not better.

The fact that there are multiplats that are better on PS3 proves that its the devs fault, just look at what can be done with a bit of effort (Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, GoW3) Sony has given devs alot of power to work with but if they dont want to put the effort into it then why should Sony be at fault.

360 is easier to develop for but the difference wouldnt be so much that it forces developers to do a half assed port on PS3, devs have had enough time to work out the PS3.

and nothings changed from last gen, the PS2 was apparently the hardest to develop for. It all comes down to making a quick dollar and that is with the 360 because of a higher attach rate and more consoles sold, also helps being the first next gen system released and having similar power to the PS3. I bet if Sony was a couple of million ahead of M$ and released a year earlier then the PS3 would be the lead platform.

Well I will toss in my two cents. Oblivion got released like 8 months later on ps3, although it was never even announced that they were gonna port it to ps3 till after the 360 version was released. But they ported it and it looked better, ran smoother on ps3. Burnout Paradise was created for the ps3 hardware and ported to 360, and obviously the ps3 version looked better. But they didn't whine or complain. IGN has stated that GTAIV looked better and ran smoother on ps3. Weird how Rockstar initially complained about trying to make the game on 360, but few get it mixed up and state that it was the ps3 GTAIV they were having issues with. Weird how Sony and devs like Naughty Dog have offered help to any devs that need help developing for ps3 and have released packages to help them code and make better use of the hardware on the ps3. Hmm... guess not many people have their facts straight round here. What do you expect... this is gamefaqs.

Wasnt FF13 better on PS3? Goes to show with the PS3 being the main platform it can be equal if not better.dachase

That's because it took them 5 years for them to do while the 360 version only has gotten something like a 6 month development port.

The fact that there are multiplats that are better on PS3 proves that its the devs fault, just look at what can be done with a bit of effort (Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, GoW3) Sony has given devs alot of power to work with but if they dont want to put the effort into it then why should Sony be at fault.

360 is easier to develop for but the difference wouldnt be so much that it forces developers to do a half assed port on PS3, devs have had enough time to work out the PS3.

and nothings changed from last gen, the PS2 was apparently the hardest to develop for. It all comes down to making a quick dollar and that is with the 360 because of a higher attach rate and more consoles sold, also helps being the first next gen system released and having similar power to the PS3. I bet if Sony was a couple of million ahead of M$ and released a year earlier then the PS3 would be the lead platform.

dachase

It would only be for first party, but most 3rd party developers aren't going to put in the effort, time, & money just to make PS3 versions of games very equal to 360 versions of games or even better than the 360 versions, at that. Even if the PS3 was the lead platform, it still wouldn't work out, because it takes more money, time, & effort like I said earlier, just to push out greater graphics than the rival consoles. Not to mention that they'll still come out looking better on 360 (such as Assassin's Creed 1 & Ghostbusters). It's not that simple.

IGN has stated that GTAIV looked better and ran smoother on ps3. Weird how Rockstar initially complained about trying to make the game on 360, but few get it mixed up and state that it was the ps3 GTAIV they were having issues with. Weird how Sony and devs like Naughty Dog have offered help to any devs that need help developing for ps3 and have released packages to help them code and make better use of the hardware on the ps3. Hmm... guess not many people have their facts straight round here.

contracts420

IGN's credibility went down the drain when they first said that the PS3 version of GTA IV were much better than PS3, only come to find out later on that it was better on 360 from many sources. Plus like I said to dachase, 3rd party developers aren't going to waste more time, energy, & resources to make the PS3 versions of games a lot better than 360 versions. Just imagine if the same thing will occur within PS4, while there's also XBox 720, & Wii HD. A LOT of them would just be focusing on developing their games for the latter two consoles, because they're much easier to develop for while the PS4 would be left out in the dust mostly, because it would be incredibly difficult to develop for, especially when development costs are skyrocketing (& it most certainly will next generation).

Ah SW always caring about stuff that aren't worth caring for.

Some multiplats look better on the ps3, some look better on the 360. I can live with that.

FF13 was horrible on the 360.

Multiplats look better on PC. C'mon TC, learn that already;)

Some multiplats look better on the ps3, some look better on the 360. I can live with that.

FF13 was horrible on the 360.

lucky_star

No it wasnt.

No worse than the comparison between RDR PS3 and RDR 360.

Some multiplats look better on the ps3, some look better on the 360. I can live with that.

FF13 was horrible on the 360.

lucky_star

[QUOTE="lucky_star"]

Some multiplats look better on the ps3, some look better on the 360. I can live with that.

FF13 was horrible on the 360.

Anjunaddict

[QUOTE="lucky_star"]

Some multiplats look better on the ps3, some look better on the 360. I can live with that.

FF13 was horrible on the 360.

Snugenz

No it wasnt.

No worse than the comparison between RDR PS3 and RDR 360.

Yet people overexadruate that too. If something is a bayonetta difference I can see why people would complain,but a FF13 or RDR difference isint big as some people tend to make it be.

they also (in general) run better than the ps3 version of the same game.

First of all I want to say that im comparing the average 360/ps3 multiplatform game, not necessarily games like bayonatte/fallout 3/orange box (which were absolutely terrible ports). From what I realized, most multiplatform games look at least slightly worse on the ps3 (possible due to a lower resolution, bland textures, etc), in addition to running at a lower frame rate which, in some cases, greatly impacts the gaming experience.

The most recent multiplatform game released for the ps3/360 is red dead redemption and most would claim that it is at least a pretty average port to the ps3. Compared to the 360 version of this game, the ps3 version has a lower resolution, lower draw distance, a smaller amount of objects on the screen (trees, grass, etc), less particle effects (such as dust blowing in the wind), more texture pop-ins and more bugs, all while having a lower (average) frame rate. Is the ps3 version still a good game? of course, but the 360 version is clearly the Superior version. Other popular multiplatform game are effect by this such as the call of duty games, assasssin's creed I & II, and so on.

I hate that people only use graphics as the only means to compare a multiplatform game because it is not.

I am a pc/ps3 owner and regret selling my 360 because of these reasons.

hysam20241

Im a PC and PS3 owner...

Has it ever occured to you to get multiplats on your PC?(PC version is WIN)and plus there are some games where ps3versions looks better than 360's (Dragon Age,FF13 etc.). My PS3 is usually for exclusives. I mean 360 games are usually on PC also so i guess trading your 360 for a ps3 is a good choice.

they also (in general) run better than the ps3 version of the same game.

First of all I want to say that im comparing the average 360/ps3 multiplatform game, not necessarily games like bayonatte/fallout 3/orange box (which were absolutely terrible ports). From what I realized, most multiplatform games look at least slightly worse on the ps3 (possible due to a lower resolution, bland textures, etc), in addition to running at a lower frame rate which, in some cases, greatly impacts the gaming experience.

The most recent multiplatform game released for the ps3/360 is red dead redemption and most would claim that it is at least a pretty average port to the ps3. Compared to the 360 version of this game, the ps3 version has a lower resolution, lower draw distance, a smaller amount of objects on the screen (trees, grass, etc), less particle effects (such as dust blowing in the wind), more texture pop-ins and more bugs, all while having a lower (average) frame rate. Is the ps3 version still a good game? of course, but the 360 version is clearly the Superior version. Other popular multiplatform game are effect by this such as the call of duty games, assasssin's creed I & II, and so on.

I hate that people only use graphics as the only means to compare a multiplatform game because it is not.

I am a pc/ps3 owner and regret selling my 360 because of these reasons.

hysam20241

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="N00bTuber"] LOOL what a completly irrelevant link :lol: How does the difference disprove that the difference is tiny? they need special tech and special conditions to be able to distinguish the differences :lol: This isn't anywhere near relevant.. Way to justify the 360's existence.

Midnightshade29

The fact PS3 version runs and looks great doesnt change the fact 360 looks and runs better. Halo3 "plays fine, has no framerate problems, draw distance is fine and textures are fine". Does it look as good as Uncharted2? Of course not.

It's not either system's fault. tman93