Multiplats have always been the ONLY credible way to compare console power

Even if you go back to the Atari 2600. When a new system such as the Colecovision is released, gamers compared the multiplats between it, Atari and the intellivision to judge which system was the most powerful.

This happened with the NES vs Master System, the TG-16 vs Genesis vs SNES vs Neo Geo, the Saturn vs PS1 vs N64, the PS2 vs DreamCast vs GC vs Xbox and now with the PS3 vs 360, we are supposed to believe that this method is not valid anymore because Sony marketing says so.

Most of you don't remember this but the Saturn was 'technically' more powerful than the PS1 but the problem was that it was very difficult to program for so developers never really extracted this power from the system. When multiplat games were released back then, for example Tomb Raider, the edge went clearly to the PS1. No one said it doesn't matter because the developers are lazy slobs. The problem was the system was too difficult to extract power from so it LOST.

Last gen the Xbox was an entirely different architecture than the PS2. But it was clearly more powerful and it showed in pretty much all of the multiplats. Some rare exceptions but most of the time the differences were pretty huge. The PS2 was usually the lead platform but the Xbox port always turned out much better. Because the system was more powerful.

This gen you hear stories about how the PS3 is really more powerful than the 360 even though it CANNOT EVEN MATCH the 360 in multiplats. I'm not talking about getting their multiplats to look better, i'm saying they can't even match the graphics.

Instead you get a whole bunch of excuses and made up stories about how lazy developers are.

We also get stories about how PS3 exclusives can't be done on the 360. Now I admit that some PS3 exclusives look great, but that does not translate into them not being technically possible on the 360.

It's a ridiculous argument because it is pure speculation. This is why so much ownage is dealt on this board when a PS3 exclusive goes multiplat. Because for a while the cows were saying these games were not possible on the 360. Then the multiplat is announced and on many occassions it has turned out better than the PS3 version. For example VF5 was said to look better than DOA and the cows said it was not possible on the 360. Turns out the 360 port turned out better.

The biggest one was Final Fantasy 13, the cows were raving about the superior graphics and it ended up on the 360 with a slightly inferior port. But the biggest difference was the qualify of the CG.

MGS4 almost was ported and that won GFX of the year. No one knows how that would have turned out but the cows were saying it's not possible because you need 20 disks and all of this crap. It's a safe assumption it would look just as good if not better on the 360 if ported today.

UC2 and GOW3 both look good but truthfully, every objective gamer knows both games can be ported perfect to the 360.

But my point is it is silly to argue about subjective matters such as comparing one game to a completely different game. That is why we have multiplats. So we see which console does a better job of outputting graphics on THE EXACT SAME GAME. There is nothing to speculate on, just play the game. The more powerful console will have the better version most of the time.

The 360 has the better multiplat at least 90% of the time. And sometimes the difference is HUGE such as in Bayonetta. It is clear to me that the 360 is more powerful than the PS3. 5 years of observing multiplats is enough evidence. No more waiting, the 360 wins hands down.

I know some of you will fail to understand this logic. You will be mad and say Uncharted 2 looks great. The problem with this failed logic is that your fanboy does not allow you realize that this game could be ported perfectly to the 360. The only reason to believe it can't is fanboy bias. Save these silly, subjective fanboy rants.

I want to read intelligent arguments if you want to argue that the PS3 is more powerful. No excuses about lazy devs, give me examples of performance. It's been 5 years, bs is unacceptable at this point. If excuses mattered then the Saturn was more powerful than the PS1 but back then the gaming industry suffered from the laziest developers of all time.

UC2 and GOW3 both look good but truthfully, every objective gamer knows both games can be ported perfect to the 360.alexfla

I doubt that, both God of War and Uncharted were built from the ground up to use the PlayStation architecture.

A wall of text!!:o.. ok i could care less about console comparison, i buy stuff on ma PS3!!.. yup ok thoguht i'd say that even tho i havent read a thing of that wall :P.. sorry kthnxbye

So let me get this straight...you tell cows to stop assuming things yet most of your thread is made up of...*gasp*...assumptions?

Actually, I would argue that Exclusives are still the best way to measure console power because you are able to use everything that console has to its fullest for Exclusives without worrying wether or not itll work with the other consoles archetecture. But I guess I can see where your coming from. Anyway, im starting to really question how much console power really matters. XBOX 1 was handily more powerful then PS2, yet PS2 was the one that went on to sell over 140 million units. And this isbecasue the PS2 had the games. Same thing with SNES. ALthough it was technically more powerful then Genesis, it also had the games. so I really think that if SNES wasnt more powerful, if it had the same games, it still would have beaten the genesis.

Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"ndawgdrake

360 does however get the better lookign version of a multiplatform release 9 times out of 10, so that might be saying something. But I do agree that PS3 is the graphical leader for Exclusives. But when most of your games on the console (those being multiplatform) look worse then on the other console, how much does that actually matter?

It is not like the 360 is the primary development console for most multiplats, and the PS3 often gets a copy of that, oh wait.

A pure copy can never beat the original, just get to 99.99% of it.

This assumes we care about power.

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"]Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"XboximusPrime

360 does however get the better lookign version of a multiplatform release 9 times out of 10, so that might be saying something. But I do agree that PS3 is the graphical leader for Exclusives. But when most of your games on the console (those being multiplatform) look worse then on the other console, how much does that actually matter?

[QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"]Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"ndawgdrake

360 does however get the better lookign version of a multiplatform release 9 times out of 10, so that might be saying something. But I do agree that PS3 is the graphical leader for Exclusives. But when most of your games on the console (those being multiplatform) look worse then on the other console, how much does that actually matter?

I think these two console are probaly the closest two rival consoles have ever been in terms of tech power and potential power. We always heard that X console is undoubtably technically superior to Y console, because usually they were Technically more powerful. XBOX was undoubtably more advanced then PS2, SNES was undoubtably more tech advanced then Genesis, and Im pretty sure NES was technically more powerful then the master syestem.

But with these two consoles, for every dev saying X console is better, you have another one saying that Y is better.

Those statements are all sorts of wrong. Who ever judged games by multiplats, they are designed to look the same yet they are on systems with different hardware specs. The saturn was designed with 2D gaming in mind and 3D was thrown in at the last second, that's why tomb raider looked better on the psx. But all 2D fighting games look much better than the ones on the PSX. When you take a game designed for the 360 and port it over to the PS3 that says nothing about the power of the system. Developers aren't lazy either but they arent going to build 2 of the same games from the ground up just to take advantage of each systems hardware specs.

Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"ndawgdrake

It is not like the 360 is the primary development console for most multiplats, and the PS3 often gets a copy of that, oh wait.

A pure copy can never beat the original, just get to 99.99% of it.

dercoo

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"][QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]

360 does however get the better lookign version of a multiplatform release 9 times out of 10, so that might be saying something. But I do agree that PS3 is the graphical leader for Exclusives. But when most of your games on the console (those being multiplatform) look worse then on the other console, how much does that actually matter?

XboximusPrime

I think these two console are probaly the closest two rival consoles have ever been in terms of tech power and potential power. We always heard that X console is undoubtably technically superior to Y console, because usually they were Technically more powerful. XBOX was undoubtably more advanced then PS2, SNES was undoubtably more tech advanced then Genesis, and Im pretty sure NES was technically more powerful then the master syestem.

But with these two consoles, for every dev saying X console is better, you have another one saying that Y is better.

[QUOTE="XboximusPrime"]

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"] Not trying to say the PS3 is the most powerful either. But both viewpoints are flawed.alexfla

I think these two console are probaly the closest two rival consoles have ever been in terms of tech power and potential power. We always heard that X console is undoubtably technically superior to Y console, because usually they were Technically more powerful. XBOX was undoubtably more advanced then PS2, SNES was undoubtably more tech advanced then Genesis, and Im pretty sure NES was technically more powerful then the master syestem.

But with these two consoles, for every dev saying X console is better, you have another one saying that Y is better.

hmm, if true then my mistake, I always thought NES was better. Anyway, my point still stands with SNES and XBOX.

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

Snugenz

Yeah, weve usually seen pretty substantial differences between two console versions in the past. Not so much this gen. The fact that you have to switch back and forth and look hard to find the differences is telling of this. and the fact that we need these indepth nitpicking articles (which I admit to reading alot) is also telling of that. Its not longer a gurantee that the 360 is going to get the better version anymore also. We have to take it by a game by game basis. But honestly, if Im in doubt, ill usually opt for the 360 one because I know it has the higher likely hood of being a bit better or atleast being the same. I can count on one hand the multiplatforms that were legitemetly better on PS3 compared to 360.

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

Snugenz

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

gaming25

Why's that?.

At the end of the day, if you really care about graphical differences like I do, then you have sites like Digital Foundry and Lens of Truth. Do research on the game, and get whatever its best on. Simple. And if they dont have comaprisons for that game up, you could go with the 360 version to be safe. But really, if you dont care about slightly less vibrant colors and whatnot, get it for whatever. Unlike back in the PS2/XBOX days, we have access to resources like this. so use them.

Just because it has the best looking game doesn't mean the system itself is more powerful.

Some of the best looking games last gen took a less powerful system to run than other games.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="Snugenz"]

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

Snugenz

Why's that?.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] In that case, then there is no reason for you to even be in a SW debate, no offense.gaming25

Why's that?.

My post said nothing about any exclusive looking better or not looking better than 360 games. Maybe its you who should leave if you're not open to others views?... no offence.

[QUOTE="ndawgdrake"]Console graphics king is on the PS3. Sure UC2 could be ported to the 360 and you could speculate that maybe it MIGHT even look the same or even better, but that's never going to happen and all you CAN do is speculate. The fact is the best looking PS3 game looks BETTER than the best looking 360 game, so how does that figure into your argument for the 360 winning "hands down?"alexfla

*starts slow clap* I dont care if anyone else here agrees or not, this is exactly the way I see it. Arguing with of bunch of people I dont know about it, is not going to change my mind.

If the 360 is so much better than the ps3 then why don't we see it in its exclusives?_Cadbury_

maybe because the Exclusives taht 360 have are using enginges that are probaly meant for multiplatform stuff, like UE3 and Etc. I dont know, all I know is they usually do get the better version, so I like getting them on that.

Nintendo entertainment system: NOW YOUR PLAYING WITH POWER!!!!!

[QUOTE="_Cadbury_"]If the 360 is so much better than the ps3 then why don't we see it in its exclusives?XboximusPrime

maybe because the Exclusives taht 360 have are using enginges that are probaly meant for multiplatform stuff, like UE3 and Etc. I dont know, all I know is they usually do get the better version, so I like getting them on that.

I think it's just MS not willing to invest into exclusives graphics part. Sony was at the pretty horrible position at the launce of ps3 so they try hard to redeem themselves and pump a lot of moneys into their exclusive games. In MS case exclusive games sell well anyway, great looking or not.

I lol at this assumption. Joke right?

Wall of text blinds my eyes for 1,000 damage and causes me to scroll to the bottom of your post! .princeofshapeir

Thats no wall. Its nicely paragraphed.

So let me get this straight...you tell cows to stop assuming things yet most of your thread is made up of...*gasp*...assumptions?

OneLazyAsian

The only thing multiplats prove is that there isnt a substantial gap (power wise) between the two, neither exclusives or multiplats are more credible than the other as there's tons of variables to consider.

Snugenz

This is one of the only sensible post that I've read in this thread.

they are pretty much the same in processing, except ps3 has blue-ray and bluetooth technology which give ps3 some adventage overall.

For multiplats, there are no bad consoles, only lazy programmers and cheap companies.

I wont read that wall of text but yeah, it´s pretty obvious multiplats are the only way to compare consoles.

Uncharted2 does look a bit better than Gears2 but there are too many variables to compare them (diferent teams, MS vs Sony support/money, multiplat vs exclusive engine, etc).

There are also many examples of multiplats developed first on PS3 and then ported to 360 and the results are usually the same. 360 is indeed as powerfull as PS3 and it´s sad ppl prefer to close their eyes to the facts at keep supporting that "power of the PS3" myth :?

I wont read that wall of text but yeah, it´s pretty obvious multiplats are the only way to compare consoles.

Uncharted2 does look a bit better than Gears2 but there are too many variables to compare them (diferent teams, MS vs Sony support/money, multiplat vs exclusive engine, etc).

There are also many examples of multiplats developed first on PS3 and then ported to 360 and the results are usually the same. 360 is indeed as powerfull as PS3 and it´s sad ppl prefer to close their eyes to the facts at keep supporting that "power of the PS3" myth :?

PAL360

[QUOTE="_Cadbury_"]If the 360 is so much better than the ps3 then why don't we see it in its exclusives?XboximusPrime

maybe because the Exclusives taht 360 have are using enginges that are probaly meant for multiplatform stuff, like UE3 and Etc. I dont know, all I know is they usually do get the better version, so I like getting them on that.

isn't this just as bad an excuse as "lazy developers"?

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

I wont read that wall of text but yeah, it´s pretty obvious multiplats are the only way to compare consoles.

Uncharted2 does look a bit better than Gears2 but there are too many variables to compare them (diferent teams, MS vs Sony support/money, multiplat vs exclusive engine, etc).

There are also many examples of multiplats developed first on PS3 and then ported to 360 and the results are usually the same. 360 is indeed as powerfull as PS3 and it´s sad ppl prefer to close their eyes to the facts at keep supporting that "power of the PS3" myth :?

TintedEyes

Because it´s the only way to compare the same game and engine running on both systems. Im not saying it´s the perfect way because like you said, multiplat engines never uses the full power of a console. But it´s clearly better than comparing exclusives (Sonic3 looks better than Super Mario World, still Snes >>>> Megadrive)