360 vs. PS3 Loading Time

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

mikasa

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Rockstar is the only dev around? Face it, bluray is not worth it. It costs too much at this time (espcially when it wasn't available when the 360 launched). And it makes for slower load times.

But yes MS did mess up not requiring a hard drive. I've said that from day 1. It's the one thing I wish M$ had done differently.

it owns this thread validity

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

here it is again

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

gamergeekgeek

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Tony Hawk is not a port.
Vegas either
i thought cows keep saying oblivion is miles better on ps3??

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

mikasa

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Rockstar is the only dev around? Face it, bluray is not worth it. It costs too much at this time (espcially when it wasn't available when the 360 launched). And it makes for slower load times.

But yes MS did mess up not requiring a hard drive. I've said that from day 1. It's the one thing I wish M$ had done differently.

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

mestizoman

what does that link say?

[QUOTE="mestizoman"]

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

gamergeekgeek

what does that link say?

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

LuvGaming

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Tony Hawk is not a port.
Vegas either
i thought cows keep saying oblivion is miles better on ps3??

where did u hear that?

and oblivionis better on ps3, true, but 360 does have better loading time

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="mestizoman"]

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

mestizoman

what does that link say?

yes. and no it doesnt say it's faster than 360.

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="mestizoman"]

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

mestizoman

what does that link say?

When you enter these cities or dungeons, you do have to look at a loading screen, but on the PlayStation 3, the load times are thankfully brief and usually last only a few seconds

[QUOTE="mestizoman"][QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="mestizoman"]

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

gamergeekgeek

what does that link say?

yes. and no it doesnt say it's faster than 360.

When you enter these cities or dungeons, you do have to look at a loading screen, but on the PlayStation 3, the load times are thankfully brief and usually last only a few seconds

the 3609 load time was more than "a few seconds"

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="mestizoman"][QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="mestizoman"]

so we agree this link destroys the credibility?

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

/thread

mestizoman

what does that link say?

yes. and no it doesnt say it's faster than 360.

When you enter these cities or dungeons, you do have to look at a loading screen, but on the PlayStation 3, the load times are thankfully brief and usually last only a few seconds

the 3609 load time was more than "a few seconds"

it doesnt mention 360 on there :|

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

Oblivion is better on the PS3 and it also has faster load times once you cache data onto the hard drive. Read the reviews.

360 > PS3

yep the 360 wins in everything.tree-branch

Except in hardware reliability it seems. =/

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

LuvGaming

link?

Oblivion is better on the PS3 and it also has faster load times once you cache data onto the hard drive. Read the reviews.

LuvGaming

it doesnt mention 360 in the review :|

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"]

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

gamergeekgeek

link?

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"]

Oblivion is better on the PS3 and it also has faster load times once you cache data onto the hard drive. Read the reviews.

gamergeekgeek

it doesnt mention 360 in the review :|

Btw, I'm still waiting for your link that proves that R6: Vegas was built from the ground-up for the PS3's hardware and in no way is a port of the 360/PC versions of the same game.

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"]

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

LuvGaming

link?

no, that's what cows seem to be screaming about

I don't see why this is such an argument...

Cows call PS3 a supperior machine hardware wise because it has a better CPU. However, nearly everything else from Ram, GPU, and Disk Drive are all supperior on the 360.

[QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"]

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

gamergeekgeek

link?

no, that's what cows seem to be screaming about

Give me the link that states that R6: Vegas for the PS3 is NOTa Port.

I remember when "cows" said the 360's 12x DVD drive was really 8x. :lol:

I remember when "cows" said that uncompressed files load faster then compressed files from a disc. :lol:

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"]

gamergeekgeek,

R6: Vegas was built for the PC and 360 in mind. It was not built from the ground up for the PS3. I don't know where you read otherwise.

LuvGaming

link?

no, that's what cows seem to be screaming about

Give me the link that states that R6: Vegas for the PS3 is NOTa Port.

first of all, why dont you show me a link that says R6 Vegas is "built ground up for 360", since i asked first

second,i havea video in motion that proves 360 has less loading time

pwned

I don't see why this is such an argument...

Pc games use Hard Drives so they are the fastest
X360 plays from DVDs with almost twice the load time as Blu-Ray X2 drives so they are faster then Blu-Ray
PS3 plays from Blu-Ray which has incredibley low read times, hence why it is and always will be the slowest when it comes to load times. Even with copying part of the disk onto HDD, it still has longer load times.

Cows call PS3 a supperior machine hardware wise because it has a better CPU. However, nearly everything else from Ram, GPU, and Disk Drive are all supperior on the 360.

Nonam3gamer

2. The ram in the PS3 IS faster than the 360's ram.

3. 360's GPU IS superior to the PS3's GPU. Too bad it's not by much and both Cell and the PS3's GPU pwn the 360's CPU/GPU.

4. The 360's disc drive IS faster than the PS3's BUT it lacks the storage space needed for certain next-gen games. Rockstar and other devs have admitted this.

Btw, I'm no developer but I get my FACTS from developers. I have the links to backup everything that I've stated also. Do you???

[QUOTE="Nonam3gamer"]

I don't see why this is such an argument...

Pc games use Hard Drives so they are the fastest
X360 plays from DVDs with almost twice the load time as Blu-Ray X2 drives so they are faster then Blu-Ray
PS3 plays from Blu-Ray which has incredibley low read times, hence why it is and always will be the slowest when it comes to load times. Even with copying part of the disk onto HDD, it still has longer load times.

Cows call PS3 a supperior machine hardware wise because it has a better CPU. However, nearly everything else from Ram, GPU, and Disk Drive are all supperior on the 360.

LuvGaming

2. The ram in the PS3 IS faster than the 360's ram.

3. 360's GPU IS superior to the PS3's GPU. Too bad it's not by much and both Cell and the PS3's GPU pwn the 360's CPU/GPU.

4. The 360's disc drive IS faster than the PS3's BUT it lacks the storage space needed for certain next-gen games. Rockstar and other devs have admitted this.

Btw, I'm no developer but I get my FACTS from developers. I have the links to backup everything that I've stated also. Do you???

that explains why multiplats are better on 360

gamergeekgeek,

1.You stated to me that R6: Vegas was indeed NOT a port. I want your link.

2. So IGN and other sites/magazines claim that the PS3 has faster load times than the 360 versionof Oblivion but just because you can't watch a video of loading screens for both systems you think otherwise? W/e you say fanboy.

One last thing, hope you enjoy your 360, WHILE IT STILL WORKS! LoL!

I'm off to celebrate 4th of July. I have no more time to argue with fanboys. Peace!!!

gamergeekgeek,

1.You stated to me that R6: Vegas was indeed NOT a port. I want your link.

2. So IGN and other sites/magazines claim that the PS3 has faster load times than the 360 versionof Oblivion but just because you can't watch a video of loading screens for both systems you think otherwise? W/e you say fanboy.

One last thing, hope you enjoy your 360, WHILE IT STILL WORKS! LoL!

I'm off to celebrate 4th of July. I have no more time to argue with fanboys. Peace!!!

LuvGaming

luvgaming

1. you stated to me that R6 Vegas IS a port. provide me a link because I asked first

2. so the only site that supports you is IGN, way to go. please find more supported before countering my videos, to avoid embarrassing yourself

One last thing, hope you enjoying your PS3, while on the 360 I get BETTER GAMES, GRAPHICS, LOADDING TIME, FRAMERATE, AND ONLINE

[QUOTE="mikasa"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

mestizoman

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Rockstar is the only dev around? Face it, bluray is not worth it. It costs too much at this time (espcially when it wasn't available when the 360 launched). And it makes for slower load times.

But yes MS did mess up not requiring a hard drive. I've said that from day 1. It's the one thing I wish M$ had done differently.

it owns this thread validity

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

here it is again

Huh? Are you saying the PS3's version of Oblivion is equal to the 360? Better or worse?

from your link....

The PlayStation 3 version of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is every bit as impressive as the Xbox 360 and PC versions. However, this isn't necessarily the best version of the game.

[QUOTE="mestizoman"][QUOTE="mikasa"][QUOTE="LuvGaming"][QUOTE="mikasa"]

I thought M$ messed up not including a hard drive, but not nearly as bad as Sony did by putting in bluray.

mikasa

As for this thread. The TC is comparing 2nd gen 360 games to 1st gen PS3 games. Not only that, the PS3 versions are PORTS and were not fully optimized for the PS3's hardware. /whack thread.

Rockstar is the only dev around? Face it, bluray is not worth it. It costs too much at this time (espcially when it wasn't available when the 360 launched). And it makes for slower load times.

But yes MS did mess up not requiring a hard drive. I've said that from day 1. It's the one thing I wish M$ had done differently.

it owns this thread validity

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

here it is again

Huh? Are you saying the PS3's version of Oblivion is equal to the 360? Better or worse?

from your link....

The PlayStation 3 version of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is every bit as impressive as the Xbox 360 and PC versions. However, this isn't necessarily the best version of the game.

1. It's funny how you can't provide me a link that proves to me that R6: Vegas is NOT a port. Do you honestly believe UBI would create the game from the ground up for the PS3 and it's 4 million owners worldwide? Rrrrrright. Again, I want the link and stop giving me the run around.

2.There are a ton of mags and websites that claim that the PS3 version of Oblivion has faster load times once data is cached onto the hard drive but you seem to think otherwise and I even provided a link to prove you wrong. Fanboy logic ftl!

3. I'm enjoying my PS3 a ton thank you and I would be enjoying some nice 360 games if the console was not an unreliable piece of you know what.

4. You spelled the word loading, "loadding". Dee dee dee and a happy 4th of July to you too! Lmao!

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"]

R6 Vegas: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/78769.html

Tony Hawk: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/51938.html

wow, 360 clearly wins again!

"bu-but teh cell!"

EDIT:Oblivion http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/79492.html

Rhys555

Yes beause loadingtimes will stop me buying a PS3.

Blu ray is slow, cows need to face that.Taz-Bone

They should have called it "The WaitStation 3" instead, you wait for games, loading,rumble, ect.

Bu bu but teh cell!!!!!!:P

They should have called it "The WaitStation 3" instead, you wait for games, loading,rumble, ect.

Bu bu but teh cell!!!!!!:P

Art_424

some say "PotentialStation3" :lol:

yep the 360 wins in everything.tree-branch

you are right they do win in everything like in broken system[QUOTE="tree-branch"]yep the 360 wins in everything.RENE2315

Doesnt that tell you something, it has crappy hardware but ppl keep buying it more than the PS3....why??? enuff said.

because people dont know about the 3 red lights when they buy it

because people dont know about the 3 red lights when they buy it

RENE2315

oh yeah, that explains why 360 sold 150k in May while your PotentialStation3 only sold 80k...

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/52271.html

Comparisons are stupid. There are faster games and slower games. And anyway, there are extra screens for R6 vegas loading, with the Agia Physx thing, so that added a decent amount of time.

I Can't believe that fanboys are usingloading timesto claim ownage

KoreanX

Ouch, ownage approved.

Honestly, this whole debate is pointless. There are games for the Playstation 3 that won't require load times, and for a lot of games there's barely a difference.

i dont know why cows keep saying ps3 has less loading time. could they be lying? :shock:gamergeekgeek

Ever time you post you annoy me with you plane stupid fanboyism.

I'm a Sony fanboy but I never slag off the X-box 360 because it's a decent system and has good games...

And if I did I try to make a decent attement at something I know is fact.

Anyway it all comes back to developers. Just look at Oblivions load times and compare?

[QUOTE="RENE2315"]

because people dont know about the 3 red lights when they buy it

gamergeekgeek

oh yeah, that explains why 360 sold 150k in May while your PotentialStation3 only sold 80k...

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"]i dont know why cows keep saying ps3 has less loading time. could they be lying? :shock:Rob7274

Ever time you post you annoy me with you plane stupid fanboyism.

oh good...

gamergeekgeek,

Here's a new linkin regards toOblivion on the PS3 and its load times compared to the 360's, http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=78963&page=2

"One of the key improvements to the PlayStation 3 version is definitely the loading time, with the Blu-ray version ingesting its data at almost twice the speed of the 360's DVD"

if you play +100 hours of Oblivion the 360 can save you a lot of time :DTheDarkDisciple