Gamers don't want developers to use the PS3 as their main platform.

  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

Avatar image for Tylendal
Tylendal

14681

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#2 Tylendal
Member since 2006 • 14681 Posts
If graphics are the only thing going for it, you shouldn't bother with the game in the first place.
Avatar image for tranhgiang
tranhgiang

365

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 tranhgiang
Member since 2005 • 365 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

Whiner don't want developers to use the PS3 as their main platform 

Avatar image for caribo2222
caribo2222

1181

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4 caribo2222
Member since 2006 • 1181 Posts

Joke topic?

I think you will find its easier to port Ps3 games to 360 than it is the other way round. Thats why ports to Ps3 look worse because of some issue the factor five guy said.

Avatar image for gromit007
gromit007

3024

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 gromit007
Member since 2006 • 3024 Posts
I seem to have lost my flame extinguisher....good luck
Avatar image for NobuoMusicMaker
NobuoMusicMaker

6628

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 NobuoMusicMaker
Member since 2005 • 6628 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

Methinks someone rolled a horde character. 

Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#8 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts
If graphics are the only thing going for it, you shouldn't bother with the game in the first place.Tylendal
We all know that gameplay plays a big part of making a game great, but graphics are just as important in my opinion. The two compliment one another.
Avatar image for jfkunrendered
jfkunrendered

8298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#9 jfkunrendered
Member since 2005 • 8298 Posts
The PS3 has only been out for...5 months now?
Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#10 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts
:lol: bluebrad :lol:DireToad
Do I know you?:question:
Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#11 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts
[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"]

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

tranhgiang

Whiner don't want developers to use the PS3 as their main platform 

He,y if wanting the best possible game that my $60 can buy labels me a whiner, then sign me up.
Avatar image for Tylendal
Tylendal

14681

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#12 Tylendal
Member since 2006 • 14681 Posts
[QUOTE="Tylendal"]If graphics are the only thing going for it, you shouldn't bother with the game in the first place.bluebrad1974
We all know that gameplay plays a big part of making a game great, but graphics are just as important in my opinion. The two compliment one another.

When you look at games such as Link to the Past, Ogre Battle 64, Final Fantasy 7, Final Fantasy 6, Super Mario Brothers 3, and countless other games, it is clear that graphics aren't needed for a good game.  If you can't bear playing the game unless it has top of the line graphics, then you shouldn't be playing a game that bad anyway.
Avatar image for Squeek37
Squeek37

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Squeek37
Member since 2003 • 697 Posts

[QUOTE="DireToad"]:lol: bluebrad :lol:bluebrad1974
Do I know you?:question:

Probably not, but many know your ignorant fanboyism. 

Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#14 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts
[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"][QUOTE="Tylendal"]If graphics are the only thing going for it, you shouldn't bother with the game in the first place.Tylendal
We all know that gameplay plays a big part of making a game great, but graphics are just as important in my opinion. The two compliment one another.

When you look at games such as Link to the Past, Ogre Battle 64, Final Fantasy 7, Final Fantasy 6, Super Mario Brothers 3, and countless other games, it is clear that graphics aren't needed for a good game.  If you can't bear playing the game unless it has top of the line graphics, then you shouldn't be playing a game that bad anyway.

What's wrong with a game having great graphics and great gameplay?
Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#15 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts

[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"][QUOTE="DireToad"]:lol: bluebrad :lol:Squeek37

Do I know you?:question:

Probably not, but many know your ignorant fanboyism. 

I can take the fanboyism, but the ignorant part is way off.
Avatar image for too_much_eslim
too_much_eslim

10727

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 too_much_eslim
Member since 2006 • 10727 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

agreed. PS3 holds back 360 graphically, and maybe in some cases 360 hold PS3 back in disk space.

Avatar image for jsnepo
jsnepo

1593

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 jsnepo
Member since 2003 • 1593 Posts

:lol: bluebrad :lol:DireToad

Yeah! I didn't have to read his post.

Avatar image for datadyne51
datadyne51

190

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 datadyne51
Member since 2005 • 190 Posts
Joke thread it proves you now jack **** and your a 360 fanboy. Its actually the other way round lol
Avatar image for Squeek37
Squeek37

697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 Squeek37
Member since 2003 • 697 Posts
[QUOTE="Squeek37"]

[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"][QUOTE="DireToad"]:lol: bluebrad :lol:bluebrad1974

Do I know you?:question:

Probably not, but many know your ignorant fanboyism.

I can take the fanboyism, but the ignorant part is way off.

I don't think it is possible to be a fanboy and NOT be ignorant.  Such as making statements about "gamers," but really only talking about people who own just a 360.

Avatar image for Tylendal
Tylendal

14681

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#20 Tylendal
Member since 2006 • 14681 Posts
[QUOTE="Tylendal"][QUOTE="bluebrad1974"][QUOTE="Tylendal"]If graphics are the only thing going for it, you shouldn't bother with the game in the first place.bluebrad1974
We all know that gameplay plays a big part of making a game great, but graphics are just as important in my opinion. The two compliment one another.

When you look at games such as Link to the Past, Ogre Battle 64, Final Fantasy 7, Final Fantasy 6, Super Mario Brothers 3, and countless other games, it is clear that graphics aren't needed for a good game.  If you can't bear playing the game unless it has top of the line graphics, then you shouldn't be playing a game that bad anyway.

What's wrong with a game having great graphics and great gameplay?

Nothing, but there is also nothing wrong with a game having poor graphics and great gameplay, even though graphics are nice.  The Factor 5 developer actually said that it's really easy to port PS3 to 360, so it's a trade off.  There slightly weaker graphically, but you get more games.
Avatar image for DoctorBunny
DoctorBunny

2660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 DoctorBunny
Member since 2005 • 2660 Posts

Just like last gen with Playstation. Work on the weakest console, port over as it makes it extremely easy to, very little changes would need to be made.

Sony is the death of console gaming moving forward

Avatar image for MGS9150
MGS9150

2491

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 MGS9150
Member since 2004 • 2491 Posts
As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360
Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#23 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
3rd generation games vs 1st generation games often don't look the same. The PS3 hasn't even been put to full power usage yet, so why complain and think that it's the end of the world. I have a hunch that the devs know what they're doing.
Avatar image for DoctorBunny
DoctorBunny

2660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 DoctorBunny
Member since 2005 • 2660 Posts

As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360MGS9150

Actually def jam AND VT are better on 360. Oblivion shows it can look better with 1 year extra dev time, but it would be the same way with EITHER console with an extra year

 

nice try though

Avatar image for bluebrad1974
bluebrad1974

5162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#25 bluebrad1974
Member since 2005 • 5162 Posts
Joke thread it proves you now jack **** and your a 360 fanboy. Its actually the other way round lol datadyne51
Proof is in the pudding. It takes developers atleast an extra 6 monthes just to make a 3rd party PS3 game look and run EQUAL with the same 360 title. Sorry Bub, your mistaken.
Avatar image for mcxps3
mcxps3

659

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#26 mcxps3
Member since 2007 • 659 Posts
Is everyone in this forum stupid the ps3 has the best graphics of all the systems it hasn't been apparent yet because its been out ofr 5 months and most of its ports are from the 360.
Avatar image for MGS9150
MGS9150

2491

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 MGS9150
Member since 2004 • 2491 Posts

[QUOTE="MGS9150"]As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360DoctorBunny

Actually def jam AND VT are better on 360. Oblivion shows it can look better with 1 year extra dev time, but it would be the same way with EITHER console with an extra year

 

nice try though

You obviously havent seen the video comparisons. OR maybe you are just blinded by your fanboyism.

Avatar image for DoctorBunny
DoctorBunny

2660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 DoctorBunny
Member since 2005 • 2660 Posts
[QUOTE="DoctorBunny"]

[QUOTE="MGS9150"]As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360MGS9150

Actually def jam AND VT are better on 360. Oblivion shows it can look better with 1 year extra dev time, but it would be the same way with EITHER console with an extra year

 

nice try though

You obviously havent seen the video comparisons. OR maybe you are just blinded by your fanboyism.

OR you never read articles OR never played both versions yourself. have you?

 

VT, looks better at 720p (what the vast majority runs it at), and has better gameplay. ef Jam is very close but looks slightly better with identicle gameplay.

 

Oblivion had an extra year dev time, STILL doesn't look better than pc and 360 has better gameplay with an expansion pack, shivering isles, not on the ps3

 

cant say anything about AC as its been a terrible game from #1 so i passed on it.

Avatar image for boyinfridge
boyinfridge

1796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 boyinfridge
Member since 2006 • 1796 Posts
[QUOTE="DoctorBunny"]

[QUOTE="MGS9150"]As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360MGS9150

Actually def jam AND VT are better on 360. Oblivion shows it can look better with 1 year extra dev time, but it would be the same way with EITHER console with an extra year

 

nice try though

You obviously havent seen the video comparisons. OR maybe you are just blinded by your fanboyism.

Ive seen the video comparisons and I think all but oblivion looks the same pretty much identical and wont the 360 version of oblivion get an update or something to level out the graphical differences?

Avatar image for MGS9150
MGS9150

2491

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 MGS9150
Member since 2004 • 2491 Posts
[QUOTE="MGS9150"][QUOTE="DoctorBunny"]

[QUOTE="MGS9150"]As Oblivion, Armored core, Virtua tennis and Def jam have shown PS3 is more powerful than the xbox 360DoctorBunny

Actually def jam AND VT are better on 360. Oblivion shows it can look better with 1 year extra dev time, but it would be the same way with EITHER console with an extra year

 

nice try though

You obviously havent seen the video comparisons. OR maybe you are just blinded by your fanboyism.

OR you never read articles OR never played both versions yourself. have you?

 

VT, looks better at 720p (what the vast majority runs it at), and has better gameplay. ef Jam is very close but looks slightly better with identicle gameplay.

 

Oblivion had an extra year dev time, STILL doesn't look better than pc and 360 has better gameplay with an expansion pack, shivering isles, not on the ps3

 

cant say anything about AC as its been a terrible game from #1 so i passed on it.

Theres no point trying to prove something to someone if they dont listen to the truth. I'm not gonna waste my time with you. Just go to game trailers and look at the comparisons.

Avatar image for Javy03
Javy03

6886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 Javy03
Member since 2006 • 6886 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

The funny thing is your complaining about the possible 360 port having worse graphics because devs are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version but you base you opinion that the 360s graphics are superior to the PS3s using what??? ports that lazy devs did not take the time to improve the graphics on the PS3 version.

Do you see the irony??

Avatar image for Dr_DudeMan
Dr_DudeMan

2794

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#32 Dr_DudeMan
Member since 2006 • 2794 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

Most ignorant post of the day award goes to bluebard. Nonetheless, your first flaw is that of course the port will not be as good as the original which is the same reason why the ps3 version performs worse then the 360. Not because of hardware, but because ports receive far less optimization. Second, stop whining because porting to 360 is easier then porting the other way around, so this is smart of developers because they get the most out of both versions of the game. Finally, any tech geek knows that overkill in processing power CAN actually make of for gpu drawbacks. On top of that, the ps3 has an advanced physics engine. What this means is that games have the potential to have better graphics, better physics, and more intensive gaming environments. With all that potential, why would they downport to ps3 when they can make a superior version for ps3 with a slightly worse version for 360.

Judging your ridiculous post, I would have to guess, that when ps3 primaries start coming out with 360 secondaries, you won't even be able to tell a difference. With the 360 version being syphoned into ps3 ports, a lot of sacrifices were made because they did not want to port around ps3 architecture. If they work ground up on ps3, they will get better ps3 results without sacrificing the fidelity of the 360 version. Ultimately, worst case scenario, the 360 version is a little worse, but the downfalls of the 360 version will be nearly unnoticeable so it does not matter. If you are playing on an SDTV the differences will be even less noticeable, so have no fear.

PS360!

Avatar image for darthogre
darthogre

5082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 darthogre
Member since 2006 • 5082 Posts

Shouldn't a more accruate title to the post be:

"X360 players don't want developers to use the PS3 as the main development platform for Burnout 5"

Last I checked, PS3 gamers are still gamers.  Maybe Devs are finally able to program on the PS3?  The only reason why you feel right now that X360 is better graphics wise on 3rd party games is because PS3 gets quick ports.  The game was built from the ground up on the X360 and quickly ported over to PS3.....is it any wonder why X360 might look a tad better in the graphics department. 

Avatar image for _AsasN_
_AsasN_

3646

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 _AsasN_
Member since 2003 • 3646 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974


Explain how the 360 has proven time and time again that's it better? I see it in the case of Gears for sure, but that took 360 a year to get. I do happen to think that the 360 is a powerful console, but according to most developers, the PS3 is superior. I'll take their word over yours.

Oh and a quick note. Speak for yourself next time. I don't agree with you in anyway.
Avatar image for tankg11
tankg11

107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 tankg11
Member since 2005 • 107 Posts
[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"]

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

too_much_eslim

agreed. PS3 holds back 360 graphically, and maybe in some cases 360 hold PS3 back in disk space.

Where are you two getting this from

Avatar image for Mystery_Writer
Mystery_Writer

8351

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#36 Mystery_Writer
Member since 2004 • 8351 Posts

That's the business model that was practiced widely last gen. Developers target the lowest common denominator when developing their games.

Otherwise they go through a lot of difficulties trying to port a game from a superior console to an inferior one (performance wise).

Unfortunatly, just like last gen with PS2, the PS3 is the current gen's lowest common denominator (as pointed out by Factor 5 developer).

Hence multiplats will suffer a downgrade in the graphics fidelity but they'll cost developers a lot less efforts having them on multiple platforms.

Avatar image for Dr_DudeMan
Dr_DudeMan

2794

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#37 Dr_DudeMan
Member since 2006 • 2794 Posts

That's the business model that was practiced widely last gen. Developers target the lowest common denominator when developing their games.

Otherwise they go through a lot of difficulties trying to port a game from a superior console to an inferior one (performance wise).

Unfortunatly, just like last gen with PS2, the PS3 is the current gen's lowest common denominator (as pointed out by Factor 5 developer).

Hence multiplats will suffer a downgrade in the graphics fidelity but they'll cost developers a lot less efforts having them on multiple platforms.

Mystery_Writer

Wow, I should just up and leave the forum because the nonsense here is unbearable.  Clearly you do not understand the concept of lowest common denominator.  Go read a tech forum, and stop getting your info from system wars, because lowest common denominator from a developer's standpoint means the system that is most difficult to program for and which would suffer if it were to receive less attention.  The reason they compare to ps2, is because the architecture of ps2 was also the most difficult to program for.  Only a retard would thing that lowest common denominator refered to hardware, because if that were the case, I guess the next madden is using the wii for its lowest common denominator and the 360 and ps3 versions will be ports from that.  Seriously, where do you come off spreading bol like that, its an insult to the industry and all gamers for that matter.

In summary, lowest common denominator refers to the system that demands the most attention to get desired results, not the weakest system.  Welcome to programming 101.

Avatar image for Wasdie
Wasdie

53622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#38 Wasdie  Moderator
Member since 2003 • 53622 Posts
What are you talking about? The PS3 can produce the same graphic quality that the 360 can...
Avatar image for tegovoltio
tegovoltio

9280

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 tegovoltio
Member since 2004 • 9280 Posts
Nice genealization you got there.
Avatar image for SambaLele
SambaLele

5552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 SambaLele
Member since 2004 • 5552 Posts
this is a joke thread isn't it?
Avatar image for GermanShepard06
GermanShepard06

3285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 GermanShepard06
Member since 2006 • 3285 Posts

i dont want my ps3 racing games to look like this:

Forza2 on x360:

Avatar image for ragrdoll21
ragrdoll21

6048

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 ragrdoll21
Member since 2006 • 6048 Posts
:lol: bluebrad :lol:DireToad
:lol: OMG Is it REALLY him?!!!didn't he have that 360 is out selling the PS2 thread last year ?He was self owened to the max!:lol:
Avatar image for Lazy_Boy88
Lazy_Boy88

7418

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 Lazy_Boy88
Member since 2003 • 7418 Posts

360 hasn't proven to be graphically superior at all. Quick cash-in ports from Ubisoft don't mean a damned thing because Oblivion and Virtua Tennis look even better on PS3 and we've yet to see a multiplat built groud up for both. The exclusive PS3 games have looked beautiful and are easily comparable to everything on 360 but Gears.... and Lair is looking comparable to that.

It is better for the developement process of multiplats to start on PS3 because its easier to move from separate memory pools to unified than from unified to separate.... devs going from 360 to PS3 and just cutting things out instead of redesigning it for the architechture is why a lot of the ports have been stripped down crap.

Avatar image for -supercharged-
-supercharged-

5820

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#44 -supercharged-
Member since 2006 • 5820 Posts

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

bluebrad1974

You do know that the PS3 is more powerful and then the 360 right? The PS3 "can" produce quality graphics on the level of the 360 and even higher if developers wish to do so.  

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#45 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts

360 hasn't proven to be graphically superior at all. Quick cash-in ports from Ubisoft don't mean a damned thing because Oblivion and Virtua Tennis look even better on PS3 and we've yet to see a multiplat built groud up for both. The exclusive PS3 games have looked beautiful and are easily comparable to everything on 360 but Gears.... and Lair is looking comparable to that.

It is better for the developement process of multiplats to start on PS3 because its easier to move from separate memory pools to unified than from unified to separate.... devs going from 360 to PS3 and just cutting things out instead of redesigning it for the architechture is why a lot of the ports have been stripped down crap.

Lazy_Boy88

using the same logic for last gen consoles. it's also easier to port from ps2 to xbox because the xbox was more flexible and the ps2 was not. of course that would mean that they didn't take full advantage of the xbox. so why would gamers be happy with that situation. (considering there are more 360 gamers).

 

Avatar image for -Sir-Poof-
-Sir-Poof-

4544

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#46 -Sir-Poof-
Member since 2006 • 4544 Posts

(Originally posted by ATrillionaire in the PS3 forums)

Posted by a developer on another forum who has worked with both the PS3 and the Xbox360:

"Cell is, as many of you know (and if you do skip this paragraph), a combination of a dual threaded PPU with 8 SPU's. The Cell within the ps3 is limited to 7 to bring yield up and a further 1.5SPU's are used by the system itself providing the "console" programmer with access to 5.5. If the proper system is used then 5.5 can actually be used.

Given 5.5 SPU's each with 256kb of memory on chip with zero latency the programmer is capable of essentially writing a script for an spu. That script will run with little or no input from the PPU. Consider this example running on the Xenon (xbox 360).

you want to render a character in the range of 20,000 polygons. He animates, he has advanced lighting, he uses morphing for his muscles & facial expression and he's being rendered in split screen. So we have

Morph Each Vert - on the CPU
Skin (animate) Each Vert - on the CPU


Render 20,000 polys for Viewport 0's shadow - directly on the GPU
Render 20,000 polys for Viewport 0's main - directly on the GPU

Render 20,000 polys for Viewport 1's shadow - directly on the GPU
Render 20,000 polys for Viewport 1's main - directly on the GPU

so from the "systems" point of view (POV) you've passed over the entire vertex set twice with progressively more complex systems. You then send that data to the GPU four times to render shadow & main viewport for each viewport.

Now consider that the system will normally not render faces we can't see (facing away). For an average model around 50% of the faces cannot be seen. Sadly a GPU cannot tell if a face can be seen or not until its actually processed the verts themselves.

If we assume each poly uses 3 new verts then we have the following data pattern.

2x60,000 verts processed on the CPU
4x20,000 polys rendered, touching 240,000 verts in the process - on the GPU.

factoring in that we can't see 50% of the faces we have

2x60,000 verts processed on the CPU
4x20,000 polys rendered, touching 240,000 verts in the process, rendering 4x10,000 polys.

120,000 vert processes on CPU
80,000 polys rendered using 240,000 vertex accesses.

The CPU has limitations. All its memory access goes through a shared L2 cache (1MB) meaning even if we move this process off to a different thread the execution of this code WILL both affect the other threads (Slow them down) AND be affected by other threads itself. In short it will be memory access bound across the board.

Further to that the GPU has to read each element of a vertex into its local cache before it can decide to render or not. Assume each read of a parameter takes 1 cycle, most polys use at least (Position, Normal, Binrm, UV's, Cols) so conservatively we'd be seeing 5 attributes read in... 5 cycles per vertex.'

These numbers are building.... in short its not a quick process.

Now - consider leveraging a single SPU to do this work.


Morph Each Vert - on an SPU
requires the data to be DMA'd in from main memory (zero cache problems)
Skin (animate) Each Vert - on the SPU at the same time
data is already in the local spu memory, no dma required, no cache issues

now consider that the spu itself is faster at executing vector code in general so the above processing without memory concerns is already at least twice as fast as the PPU on both machines. Factor in zero memory latency and what you end up with is the same process as 360, running twice the speed with zero memory issues and having zero affect on any and all other code running on the system - its quick.

It gets better.

The spu's are great at data processing as exemplified above. Previously we would have sent all 80,000 polys to the GPU for rendering BUT the spu's can help out here. We already stated that roughly 50% of the verts can't be seen as they face the wrong way.... the spu can remove these verts VERY quickly with no issues and no affect on any other system. So at the cost of a small amount of spu time we remove all the polys we cannot see and upload to the GPU only what actually needs to render.

Using this type of setup the SPU's can be used to help out the GPU. Because the SPU's are so versatile I would predict that within a few generations of games we'll start seeing graphics more advanced on ps3 than we will on 360.

SPU's are a very under-utilised element of ps3 in current gen games and those that do use them use them in almost niave ways; we will get better."

 

Read it and weep, Xbox 360 fanboys. LMAO!

:lol:

 

Warkunt
Avatar image for -Sir-Poof-
-Sir-Poof-

4544

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#47 -Sir-Poof-
Member since 2006 • 4544 Posts
I see your online bluebrad, Im waiting for a response.
Avatar image for reginald_p
reginald_p

195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 reginald_p
Member since 2007 • 195 Posts

Agreed

Avatar image for reginald_p
reginald_p

195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 reginald_p
Member since 2007 • 195 Posts
[QUOTE="bluebrad1974"]

I just read an article stating that the PS3 will be the main development platform for Burnout 5. This is troubling. The Ps3 can't produce the graphics quality that the 360 can. Although the PS3 is close, the 360 has proven time and time again that it's superior in the graphics arena. The last thing that I want as a gamer on my 360 is a PS3 port that developers are too lazy to improve the graphics for the 360 version, and make a quick buck. I want the best graphics possible, and making the PS3 the lead platform is not how I'm going to get that on the 360.

-supercharged-

You do know that the PS3 is more powerful and then the 360 right? The PS3 "can" produce quality graphics on the level of the 360 and even higher if developers wish to do so.  

What are they waiting for then? And no I don't know what you're saying. As far as I am aware the 360 has more VRAM aailable and a better GPU.