if the PS3 has the weaker GPU and less RAM, how can it produce such graphics??

i think it is time for all the developers to admit that the PS3 is the best choice to maximize their games, being hard to develope for isn't that major problem once you take you time and have the experience,you can even lessen the time by asking for help from the PS3 1st party developers who are doing fantastic jobs in pretty short time ( KZ2 is very exceptional in this), even wz the limitation the ppl are talking abt, the PS3 hardware overall is the best and it can produce those games wz the wow factor that is missing most of the time in the other platforms.

it is not a fanboyish thing to say that the PS3 is superior, may be slightly but no doubt it can make a difference in the good hands.

PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360.... its just allocated differently.... and the GPU is nearly identical.... yeah the 360's GPU is slightly more powerful, but "slightly" is the keyword.

PS3's CPU is very powerful, and makes up for any lack of the GPU.

They have the same RAM, just set up differently.

KILLZONE 2 is still the current Console Graphics King, so obviousy a lot can be done with it, the problem is the Devs have to work extra hard..."Is it worth it?"

i think it is time for all the developers to admit that the PS3 is the best choice to maximize their games, being hard to develope for isn't that major problem once you take you time and have the experience,you can even lessen the time by asking for help from the PS3 1st party developers who are doing fantastic jobs in pretty short time ( KZ2 is very exceptional in this), even wz the limitation the ppl are talking abt, the PS3 hardware overall is the best and it can produce those games wz the wow factor that is missing most of the time in the other platforms.

it is not a fanboyish thing to say that the PS3 is superior, may be slightly but no doubt it can make a difference in the good hands.

am not that technical but as many others said both systems have equal amount of RAM just allocated in a different way..

Apparently PS3's CPU is slightly more powerful which can aid the GPU when it comes to graphics, at least should be something like that :)

In the end it all comes down to devs and their knowlegde on how to get the most out of the hardware..

It's mostly from developer skill to be able to produce games that look as good as Killzone 2, MGS4, etc.

Sure the PS3 can produce fantastic graphics but requires alot more work and alot more money which most likely won't pay off in the end.

[QUOTE="2mrw"]

i think it is time for all the developers to admit that the PS3 is the best choice to maximize their games, being hard to develope for isn't that major problem once you take you time and have the experience,you can even lessen the time by asking for help from the PS3 1st party developers who are doing fantastic jobs in pretty short time ( KZ2 is very exceptional in this), even wz the limitation the ppl are talking abt, the PS3 hardware overall is the best and it can produce those games wz the wow factor that is missing most of the time in the other platforms.

it is not a fanboyish thing to say that the PS3 is superior, may be slightly but no doubt it can make a difference in the good hands.

Shattered007

but PS2's hardware was quite inferior compared to Gamecube & Xbox, this gen PS3 & 360 are much closer in terms of graphical capabilities..

i think it is time for all the developers to admit that the PS3 is the best choice to maximize their games, being hard to develope for isn't that major problem once you take you time and have the experience,you can even lessen the time by asking for help from the PS3 1st party developers who are doing fantastic jobs in pretty short time ( KZ2 is very exceptional in this), even wz the limitation the ppl are talking abt, the PS3 hardware overall is the best and it can produce those games wz the wow factor that is missing most of the time in the other platforms.

it is not a fanboyish thing to say that the PS3 is superior, may be slightly but no doubt it can make a difference in the good hands.

2mrw

but PS2's hardware was quite inferior compared to Gamecube & Xbox, this gen PS3 & 360 are much closer in terms of graphical capabilities..Malta_1980

[QUOTE="Malta_1980"]but PS2's hardware was quite inferior compared to Gamecube & Xbox, this gen PS3 & 360 are much closer in terms of graphical capabilities..Shattered007

Most 3rd party developers are lazy.

[QUOTE="Shattered007"][QUOTE="Malta_1980"]but PS2's hardware was quite inferior compared to Gamecube & Xbox, this gen PS3 & 360 are much closer in terms of graphical capabilities..JohnM1983

Most 3rd party developers are lazy.

sooo just how many exclusives "look" better than those of the 360?.. Killzone2 and possibly Uncharted2. Killzone 2 had soooooooooooooooooooooooooo much money thrown at it + a massive dev cycle. Uncharted2 has a team of very talented people behind it. Games like resistance, motorstorm & MGS4 show that being a ps3 exclusive does not give the best graffics and they are from teams who are not exactly idiots lol.

If you could get Uncharted2 for the 360 and it was better then i think the point would be valid. Since you cant i think it comes under the 360 just offers the devs less time to do more if you get me.

[QUOTE="JohnM1983"]

[QUOTE="Shattered007"] That's exactly what I'm saying, if the PS3 was truly a superior console, would it not make since for it to have superior mutiplats a majority of the time? Shattered007

Most 3rd party developers are lazy.

The way I see it...
Most multi platform games that do not have the PS3 as a lead platform are just rushed to all consoles and PC.
Developers try to minimize costs and to do so keep the code as generic as possible across all platforms.

Basically coding to fully utilize the PS3 is allot harder and therefore more costing.
Most developers will try to keep costs down and profits up, probably because of publishers pressure.

Even multi platform games listed as having PS3 as a lead platform don't really deviate from this. Ghost Busters is a prime example.

I think many people can agree that the 360s multi platform games look slightly better, mainly because of this reason.
Exclusives are a different story.

[QUOTE="Shattered007"][QUOTE="JohnM1983"]

Most 3rd party developers are lazy.

JohnM1983

The way I see it...
Most multi platform games that do not have the PS3 as a lead platform are just rushed to all consoles and PC.
Developers try to minimize costs and to do so keep the code as generic as possible across all platforms.

Basically coding to fully utilize the PS3 is allot harder and therefore more costing.
Most developers will try to keep costs down and profits up, probably because of publishers pressure.

Even multi platform games listed as having PS3 as a lead platform don't really deviate from this. Ghost Busters is a prime example.

I think many people can agree that the 360s multi platform games look slightly better, mainly because of this reason.
Exclusives are a different story.

Most games last gen were developed for the PS2, then ported to the Xbox. 99% of the time they still looked better on Xbox then PS2. Think about that.

The power advantage the PS3 has, if any at all is almost negligible.

If any developers were to take the time (key!) to develop an exclusive for the 360 it would look amazing as well. Think how good Gears looked at the time. Now imagine talented developers working on a 360 exclusive for 3 or 4 or even 5 years with a huge budget.

[QUOTE="Shattered007"][QUOTE="JohnM1983"]

Most 3rd party developers are lazy.

JohnM1983

The way I see it...
Most multi platform games that do not have the PS3 as a lead platform are just rushed to all consoles and PC.
Developers try to minimize costs and to do so keep the code as generic as possible across all platforms.

Basically coding to fully utilize the PS3 is allot harder and therefore more costing.
Most developers will try to keep costs down and profits up, probably because of publishers pressure.

Even multi platform games listed as having PS3 as a lead platform don't really deviate from this. Ghost Busters is a prime example.

I think many people can agree that the 360s multi platform games look slightly better, mainly because of this reason.
Exclusives are a different story.

Here's the real question. If the two consolesare so alike and produce graphics that were almost the same,then who in their right mind would pay $200 more for one of them?

Here's the real question. If the two consolesare so alike and produce graphics that were almost the same,then who in their right mind would pay $200 more for one of them?

ironwarrior2

People who like KZ2, GOW, GT5, Uncharted? Ratchet and Clank?

I go where the games I like are. Manufacturer be damned. I also have a 360, and built my PC.

[QUOTE="JohnM1983"]

[QUOTE="Shattered007"] I'm sure your video game portfilo is much better then them. So, I guess that makes you able to benchmark and judge other creators games and judge that they are lazy. :|Shattered007

The way I see it...
Most multi platform games that do not have the PS3 as a lead platform are just rushed to all consoles and PC.
Developers try to minimize costs and to do so keep the code as generic as possible across all platforms.

Basically coding to fully utilize the PS3 is allot harder and therefore more costing.
Most developers will try to keep costs down and profits up, probably because of publishers pressure.

Even multi platform games listed as having PS3 as a lead platform don't really deviate from this. Ghost Busters is a prime example.

I think many people can agree that the 360s multi platform games look slightly better, mainly because of this reason.
Exclusives are a different story.

You aren't very well informed. For Burnout there was no lead but there were seperate teams, resulting in what's probably the most equal of multiplats around. Dead Space was a 360 lead. It looks the same on both consoles but suffers from dropping framerates on the Ps3 (very common for PS3 multiplats). As for Drak Sector, it also had 360 as lead platform. The 360 version is true 720p whereas the Ps3 version is upscaled 640p. However this can hardly be seen wehn playing the game. The only minor issue the PS3 version has is occasional frame rate drops (again). Ghostbuster also was developed for 360 first and its port was atrocious.

There are some examples of games that are superior on PS3. Te only two that come to mind are Bionic commando and DiRT. Teher are some more though.

All the glaring differences between PS3 and 360 multiplats are overblown as hell. Somtimes it's a glaring difference like how Prototype looks significantly better on PS3 or Fallout for 360. The truth is if a developer used the cell and bluray to its max potential the game wouldn't be able to run on 360 at all. 360 fans should be thankful.

All the glaring differences between PS3 and 360 multiplats are overblown as hell. Somtimes it's a glaring difference like how Prototype looks significantly better on PS3 or Fallout for 360. The truth is if a developer used the cell and bluray to its max potential the game wouldn't be able to run on 360 at all. 360 fans should be thankful.

MegajerkNYC

All the glaring differences between PS3 and 360 multiplats are overblown as hell. Somtimes it's a glaring difference like how Prototype looks significantly better on PS3 or Fallout for 360. The truth is if a developer used the cell and bluray to its max potential the game wouldn't be able to run on 360 at all. 360 fans should be thankful.

MegajerkNYC

blind fanboys.

more work = more costs.

games sells slighty better on the 360 so why put more money on ps3 ??

i think it is time for all the developers to admit that the PS3 is the best choice to maximize their games, being hard to develope for isn't that major problem once you take you time and have the experience,you can even lessen the time by asking for help from the PS3 1st party developers who are doing fantastic jobs in pretty short time ( KZ2 is very exceptional in this), even wz the limitation the ppl are talking abt, the PS3 hardware overall is the best and it can produce those games wz the wow factor that is missing most of the time in the other platforms.

it is not a fanboyish thing to say that the PS3 is superior, may be slightly but no doubt it can make a difference in the good hands.

You aren't very well informed. For Burnout there was no lead but there were seperate teams, resulting in what's probably the most equal of multiplats around. Dead Space was a 360 lead. It looks the same on both consoles but suffers from dropping framerates on the Ps3 (very common for PS3 multiplats). As for Drak Sector, it also had 360 as lead platform. The 360 version is true 720p whereas the Ps3 version is upscaled 640p. However this can hardly be seen wehn playing the game. The only minor issue the PS3 version has is occasional frame rate drops (again). Ghostbuster also was developed for 360 first and its port was atrocious.

There are some examples of games that are superior on PS3. Te only two that come to mind are Bionic commando and DiRT. Teher are some more though.

NielsNL

:|

A little misinforrmed about Deadspace...

Pretty soon in a month or two we will switch and lead on the PS3.videogamer

Though the PS3 is Sector's lead platform, all versions should be nigh-identical.IGN

Page 1

Page 2

It is not secret that the PS3 was the lead platform for Burnout Paradise and the following video indicates that perhaps as a result the Xbox 360 will experience some slight slowdowns in comparison to the PS3... MAXCONSOLE

Although there is not a huge amount to pick between them, the PS3 version was the lead platform and it does show through now and then. This approach seems to have been much more successful (in terms of getting two great looking games) than it has for other developers, such as Valve with the Orange Box. For them leading with the 360 seemed to leave us with a sub-par PS3 game.PlayTM

How's not very well informed again? :|

PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360.... its just allocated differently.... and the GPU is nearly identical.... yeah the 360's GPU is slightly more powerful, but "slightly" is the keyword.

whatisazerg

[QUOTE="whatisazerg"]

PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360.... its just allocated differently.... and the GPU is nearly identical.... yeah the 360's GPU is slightly more powerful, but "slightly" is the keyword.

GiantMuffin

Yep, except the 360's GPU is not slightly more powerful.

It is more flexible.

in raw numbers the PS3's GPU is the more powerful.

[QUOTE="GiantMuffin"][QUOTE="whatisazerg"]

PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360.... its just allocated differently.... and the GPU is nearly identical.... yeah the 360's GPU is slightly more powerful, but "slightly" is the keyword.

Irick_cb

Yep, except the 360's GPU is not slightly more powerful.

It is more flexible.

in raw numbers the PS3's GPU is the more powerful.

The Cell of course :cry:TREAL_Since

Damn you beat me to it! :P

Its gotta be the cell.What other explanation is there?

e.g. Mass Effect graphics doesn't seem doable on PS3 hardware)Mystery_Writer

Page 2

[QUOTE="MAXCONSOLE"]

[QUOTE="PlayTM"] Although there is not a huge amount to pick between them, the PS3 version was the lead platform and it does show through now and then. This approach seems to have been much more successful (in terms of getting two great looking games) than it has for other developers, such as Valve with the Orange Box. For them leading with the 360 seemed to leave us with a sub-par PS3 game.Shattered007

How's not very well informed again? :|

Despite some pretty frank comments from the Dead Space developers that working with the Sony console was 'challenging', the internet has spoken and apparently the project led on PS3 for some or all of its gestation. A cursory look at the game itself reveals that although the conversion isn't bad at all, it's very clear indeed that Dead Space is first and foremost an Xbox 360 game.

Eurogamer

You're right, I misread this. But about the others I am, so 3-1 to me. Who wasn't very well informed again?

edit: maxconsole? PlayTM? I think I'd believe Eurogamer over them any day.

It's mostly from developer skill to be able to produce games that look as good as Killzone 2, MGS4, etc.

Jekken6

This.

Sony has some very talented first party developers who are well backed by Sony and given plenty of investment and time to bring great games to the system. Its Sony's backing not really the hardware.

It's likely you could see the same production values on the 360. The 48 unified shaders of the xenos are no pushover.

i find it lame when people say PS3 exclusives got the best graphics on consoles otheres say PS3 exclusives costs alot of maney to make and they are not worth it but isnt that good for us consumeres that means Sony doasnt mind paying alot of money to make great games to please PS3 owners so thats a good point in Sony why everyone look at it as a bad point.

[QUOTE="Irick_cb"]

[QUOTE="GiantMuffin"] This is the right post. The reason PS3 exclusives look better is because Sony cares more about proving their console is the best hardware-wise.ronvalencia

Yep, except the 360's GPU is not slightly more powerful.

It is more flexible.

in raw numbers the PS3's GPU is the more powerful.

Hmm...

Okay.

But it is still more powerful and the games look better so....

Point?

What a bugged out arguement it is that PS3 exclusives look better because of time and money. Last I checked Microsoft had more money and the 360 has had more time on the market. Face the facts the PS3 is simply more powerful then the 360. Always has been always will be.

i find it lame when people say PS3 exclusives got the best graphics on consoles otheres say PS3 exclusives costs alot of maney to make and they are not worth it but isnt that good for us consumeres that means Sony doasnt mind paying alot of money to make great games to please PS3 owners so thats a good point in Sony why everyone look at it as a bad point.

Kashiwaba

Hope you're not referring to me, because I very much believe Sony deserves credit for this and so do the developers such as Guerilla Games. Recognition should be given to the talent of the developers, the commitment of Sony to support them and their unflinching attitude to cater for gamers and not casuals.

Because of.... MAGIC!

You people act like the ps3 is leaps and bounds better than the 360 in the graphics department. killzone 2 yes, is a very good looking game, but gears 2 is right there with it. so, what other games do you have as proof?

You people act like the ps3 is leaps and bounds better than the 360 in the graphics department. killzone 2 yes, is a very good looking game, but gears 2 is right there with it. so, what other games do you have as proof?

h575309

Gears 2 does not look as good as KZ2, nor does it use the same graphical techniques as KZ2.

[QUOTE="Kashiwaba"]

i find it lame when people say PS3 exclusives got the best graphics on consoles otheres say PS3 exclusives costs alot of maney to make and they are not worth it but isnt that good for us consumeres that means Sony doasnt mind paying alot of money to make great games to please PS3 owners so thats a good point in Sony why everyone look at it as a bad point.

DAZZER7

Hope you're not referring to me, because I very much believe Sony deserves credit for this and so do the developers such as Guerilla Games. Recognition should be given to the talent of the developers, the commitment of Sony to support them and their unflinching attitude to cater for gamers and not casuals.

I agree.. unfortunately fanboys in here think that taking 4 yrs to finish a game and have a $25 million budget is some sort of fault... I say good job to Sony if they are committed and support its 1st party teams with huge budget + longer production time in order to get a great final product..

I find it rather stupid to believe that having a bigger budget & 2 more years to make a game, somehow make sure the final product will be of top-notch quality.. If you have a bad team working on a game no matter the time you give them or the budget you supply the final product will probably be an average game..

People always want to remind us that KZ2 in order to achieve such visuals has been in development or 4+ years with a huge budget, yet they forget that ND will release Uncharted 2 with updated visuals & added co-op/mp 2 yrs after Uncharted and probably with an inferior budget..

Through the magic of fairy dust and fanboys!............ HELL YEAH IT RHYMES!!!