Ok cows, I've heard enough, let's end this!

When talking about the popular saying among cows "must be lazy devs" I heard from numerous users that "it must be lazy devs because just look at Uncharted and COD4, they're amazing!"

So with this logic any game that doesn't rival said games like Uncharted in any department, whether it be graphics or gameplay, it is because it is solely the developers being lazy and not because the PS3 can be hard to develop on.

So the only developers out there right now that are actually put hard work into their games are IW and Naughty Dog? So I guess the people that made Heavenly sword were lazy because it didn't stand up to the graphics of Uncharted and Warhawks developers really must have dropped the ball because it wasn't as good gameplay-wise as COD4.

Can we all agree that these statements usually said by cows are ignorant and untruthful? For the love of God please! The stupidity of these statements are causing me serious headaches.

Frostbite24

your analogy is way off.....

nobodyis questioning the quality or gameplay of either COD4 or Heavenly sword.

when PS3 fans speak of lazy devs.....they are referring to developers who choose to not work through technical issues due to profit and time consrtraints.

for example. HL2 orange box. the game has a choppy framerate, possibly game ruing(depending on who you ask).
so is this an inherant trait for the PS3 games? bad framrate? no

look to R&C,uncharted, UT3, etc etc as examples that if you are willing to put in the effort you will see great glitch free games. and remember these games ive mentioned werent titles that sat in dev limbo for 5 years....R&C was only in development for over 2 years....and average development cycle.

so if we want to be honest and void of politics, yes, devs who render less than 360 quality games on the PS3 are most assuredly lazy.

What are you talking about? I say the thing about the Orange box was proving if anything that some of the developers had already taking sides among the consoles. How the the original guy pass the torch to EA and said it is a wasted effort to make the game for the PS3 proves that. I do not want a 360 because they made a better game for the 360 just for the reason that someone dislikes the PS3. But the developers are not lazy just some show prejudice against certain consoles.

according to cows, there is only 1, 2, maybe 3 hard working developers out there

the rest are lazy

The point we're making is that we ALL knew that the game would be crap (in the case of Orange Box) because the original devs didn't want to mess with it and they sold it off to EA, known for atrocious ports. Our point is: What's your point in telling us its inferior when we already knew it would be.

You keep making these threads geared towards PS3 inabilities. When, in fact, it has NOTHING to do with its abilities at all. And that's why games like Uncharted, Cod4, and R7C are pointed at. they show what the PS3 abilities are NOW.

If you want to make a point about PS3 architecture being more difficult and how that hurts them on some titles, fine. I'll give you that. Its a fact that the PS3 architecture does have some disadvantages when trying to put that knowledge learned into use on another platform.

But don't act like all of this is due to PS3 being impossible to dev for. That PS3's hardware couldn't possible match that of 360's. Cause that's what you've been doing. And it has ZERO merit.

The_Crucible

I am beginning to believe that the great games for Ps3 are those where the developer has spent great resources, time, money, and developed their own engines for the PS3. For example, recently Sony announced an exclusive agreement with EPIC at E3 2007 to improve the UE3 for PS3 and make UT3 timed exclusive. So, to get UT3 to perform as smooth as it does on PS3, and its a great title on PS3, EPIC had to stop the X360 version, pull resources together and focus on the PS3 version for the last 5 months to get it finished. Even at that the mouse support does not work right, splitscreen (a standard feature) is missing, and the mod features are not working yet.

In summary, the PS3 hardware is great with nice potential, but Sony development tools seem to suck, which is causing problems with many developers.

according to cows, there is only 1, 2, maybe 3 hard working developers out there

the rest are lazy

JB730

According to lemmings, ALL devs are awesome at making games and give the same effort on all platforms.

See what i did there?!?!

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"][QUOTE="aznfool07"][QUOTE="wallywest"]

[QUOTE="aznfool07"]What are you talking about. Cows are talking about the PS3 getting the inferior version of the game. If other games can play on the PS3 without slowdowns or stuttering, why can't half life? With your logic, Mass Effect slows down and stutters because of the 360 hardware.Udsen

Thats correct, Mass Effect studders and has frequent graphical glitches because of the 360 hardware. The developers put too much into it and the 360 has a hard tme catching up.

Dev's fault for not knowing the limit and changing it. They just gave us a rushed game.

Why doesn't Heavenly sword look as good as Uncharted, with your logic it is because of laziness and ineptitude on the developers part. Is that what you're saying?

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

ProtossRushX

What are you talking about. Cows are talking about the PS3 getting the inferior version of the game. If other games can play on the PS3 without slowdowns or stuttering, why can't half life? With your logic, Mass Effect slows down and stutters because of the 360 hardware.aznfool07

You obviously don't understand how the PS3 works or how programming works. PS3 has a very good excuse for it's first games not doing too well. You have to program different processes to the different processors. People are just now figuring that out. Look at COD4, Uncharted, GT5, MGS4 and FF13 for the proof of how strong this system is. You can't just port the code from the X360 version and hope it works. PS3 WORKS DIFFERENT.

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

ProtossRushX

lol i dont see any Ps3 exclusive with AAA man XD sure thing OHH DBZ FAN i forgot the Dbz fans are fans of ps3 xD

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

ProtossRushX

recent ps3 exclusives show that(and this has been said by many other people) more storage does not equal longer games, due to the fact that more time and therefore money is needed to develop the game.

When talking about the popular saying among cows "must be lazy devs" I heard from numerous users that "it must be lazy devs because just look at Uncharted and COD4, they're amazing!"

So with this logic any game that doesn't rival said games like Uncharted in any department, whether it be graphics or gameplay, it is because it is solely the developers being lazy and not because the PS3 can be hard to develop on.

So the only developers out there right now that are actually put hard work into their games are IW and Naughty Dog? So I guess the people that made Heavenly sword were lazy because it didn't stand up to the graphics of Uncharted and Warhawks developers really must have dropped the ball because it wasn't as good gameplay-wise as COD4.

Can we all agree that these statements usually said by cows are ignorant and untruthful? For the love of God please! The stupidity of these statements are causing me serious headaches.

Frostbite24

there talking about framerate problems, bugs and downgraded ports....jeez

[QUOTE="aznfool07"]What are you talking about. Cows are talking about the PS3 getting the inferior version of the game. If other games can play on the PS3 without slowdowns or stuttering, why can't half life? With your logic, Mass Effect slows down and stutters because of the 360 hardware.mrxdemix

You obviously don't understand how the PS3 works or how programming works. PS3 has a very good excuse for it's first games not doing too well. You have to program different processes to the different processors. People are just now figuring that out. Look at COD4, Uncharted, GT5, MGS4 and FF13 for the proof of how strong this system is. You can't just port the code from the X360 version and hope it works. PS3 WORKS DIFFERENT.

Exactly the devs r getting better and understanding how to dev the ps3 easier faster and better

its really complicated developing on the ps3 because its like a future console with all the blue ray and the cell and all of that but they r starting to get the hang of it

mrxdemix has actually stated it like it is

TC, Simple answer, it is obvious in everybody's mind.

When someone see the same game is superior on the other console, what your mind say to you?

Are the developers lazy? ofcourse, if not, then they would make it identical.

Are the console hard to develop for? yes, it is new and it is bit complex, but again, does that mean they don't have a solution? does that mean they can make a whole game, but they can't make minor tweaks for the port? no, it means they are lazy.

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

When talking about the popular saying among cows "must be lazy devs" I heard from numerous users that "it must be lazy devs because just look at Uncharted and COD4, they're amazing!"

So with this logic any game that doesn't rival said games like Uncharted in any department, whether it be graphics or gameplay, it is because it is solely the developers being lazy and not because the PS3 can be hard to develop on.

So the only developers out there right now that are actually put hard work into their games are IW and Naughty Dog? So I guess the people that made Heavenly sword were lazy because it didn't stand up to the graphics of Uncharted and Warhawks developers really must have dropped the ball because it wasn't as good gameplay-wise as COD4.

Can we all agree that these statements usually said by cows are ignorant and untruthful? For the love of God please! The stupidity of these statements are causing me serious headaches.

Arjdagr8

there talking about framerate problems, bugs and downgraded ports....jeez

which can easily be fixed on the ps3but devs dont want to spend time on it

[QUOTE="Udsen"][QUOTE="Frostbite24"][QUOTE="aznfool07"][QUOTE="wallywest"]

[QUOTE="aznfool07"]What are you talking about. Cows are talking about the PS3 getting the inferior version of the game. If other games can play on the PS3 without slowdowns or stuttering, why can't half life? With your logic, Mass Effect slows down and stutters because of the 360 hardware.snyper1982

Thats correct, Mass Effect studders and has frequent graphical glitches because of the 360 hardware. The developers put too much into it and the 360 has a hard tme catching up.

Dev's fault for not knowing the limit and changing it. They just gave us a rushed game.

Why doesn't Heavenly sword look as good as Uncharted, with your logic it is because of laziness and ineptitude on the developers part. Is that what you're saying?

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

ProtossRushX

So you would argue that the machine that can render the best graphics is the best console?

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="Udsen"]

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Udsen

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

Not according to Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales.

yes your right! Devs should just stop making games for the PS3 because its too hard to develop for.

Don't play hard games because you will waste your time and money at trying to beat them.

[QUOTE="Udsen"][QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="Udsen"]

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Element00216

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

Not according to Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales.

Nope all your sources agree, and uhm even bungie admited that Halo 3 comes in 640p, KZ2 and GT5 look better than Uncharted, and Uncharted is better than Gears.

[QUOTE="Element00216"][QUOTE="Udsen"][QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="Udsen"]

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Adrian_Cloud

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

Not according to Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales.

Nope all your sources agree, and uhm even bungie admited that Halo 3 comes in 640p, KZ2 and GT5 look better than Uncharted, and Uncharted is better than Gears.

...

I was refering to him saying Uncharted is better than Gears. Unless you mean graphics, which is subjective without knowing the technical details, my above references [Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales] say otherwise.

What would sales, gamerankings, or metacritic have to do with Halo 3 being 640p? Besides it not changing the fact that it's a AAA title and better than any PS3 exclusive, I guess.

[QUOTE="Element00216"][QUOTE="Udsen"][QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="Udsen"]

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

Adrian_Cloud

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

Not according to Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales.

Nope all your sources agree, and uhm even bungie admited that Halo 3 comes in 640p, KZ2 and GT5 look better than Uncharted, and Uncharted is better than Gears.

I really wish cows would stop using games that AREN'T even OUT yet to prove graphical superiority.

Uncharted is shiny and bright but saying it looks better than Gears is only YOUR opinion and NOT a fact. Just because you like the pretty colors doesn't mean it looks better.

Learn the difference between OPINION and FACT.

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

ProtossRushX

buhh, buhh, teh cell!!! lol :lol:

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"][QUOTE="Element00216"][QUOTE="Udsen"][QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="Udsen"]

Heavenly Sword came out before Uncharted, and generally speaking, they are unlocking the potential of the system. "Working out the kinks" if you will. Whereas games that came a year after Gears on 360 don't even match up graphically.

kingtito

Games that came out a year after gears still don't match up on the PS3 either. There are VERY few games that are graphically superior to gears, period. Gears set a VERY high bar graphically that has only just recently been clearly outdone, and it wasn't uncharted that did this like cows would like you to believe, but crysis.

Okay dude. Lets compare.

360 got gears...Halo 3 comes in at 640p

PS3 gets uncharted...Killzone 2 and GT5 will surpass it, they already look better

And, have you played Uncharted? Uncharted >>>>>>>>> GEARS.

Not according to Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales.

Nope all your sources agree, and uhm even bungie admited that Halo 3 comes in 640p, KZ2 and GT5 look better than Uncharted, and Uncharted is better than Gears.

I really wish cows would stop using games that AREN'T even OUT yet to prove graphical superiority.

Uncharted is shiny and bright but saying it looks better than Gears is only YOUR opinion and NOT a fact. Just because you like the pretty colors doesn't mean it looks better.

Learn the difference between OPINION and FACT.

PLUS, lets not forget Gears is a year old if not older! its a benchmark in the history of kick-ass graphics. I bet next year people wont be saying "looks good, but it ain't no uncharted" do you?

The PS3 is more difficult to program for.....any developer or videogame person has said this.

It is widely know that (and they even talk about this on the latest "Bonus Round" on gametrailers) that games should be developed for the PS3 and then moved to the 360 because of the complexity to work with the PS3.

What are you talking about. Cows are talking about the PS3 getting the inferior version of the game. If other games can play on the PS3 without slowdowns or stuttering, why can't half life? With your logic, Mass Effect slows down and stutters because of the 360 hardware.aznfool07

I agreed...TC has no idea wtf he's talking about.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="ProtossRushX"]

mass effect would have ran much better on the ps3 cuz of the cell processing chip that can encode textures at much faster rates then the 360

mass effect also coulda been a much longer game with blu-ray storage an they wouldn't hve to had encoded so much data an it woulda dran much smoother

the ps3 is the ultimate gamin machine its just sad that gamin developers r havin to be held back by the 360 hardware czu microsoft is publishin an wont let the games be developed for the ps3 mainly cuz man these games coulda been triple A as ps3 exclusives

Pariah_001

Mass Effect wasn't AAA. Try again.

And yes, the PS exclusives have worked swimmingly on the PS3. Without actually getting into the gameplay of the individual games, they've all worked as wellas, if not better, than 360 exclusives.

how would you know? i don't see on 360 game rated on ur profile...just PS games. ur just trying to win the arguemnt aren't u?

Mass Effect wasn't AAA.

But neither is a single PS3 exclusive. Mass Effect is equal to or better than every single PS3 exclusive. Critisizing Mass Effect is essentially bashing the entire PS3 exclusives library.

Do you even understand the concept of SW? I understand people not getting the hype system, flops, etc. Thats fine but people here use the terminology. If someone says something daft using that terminology they will get called for it. If you don't like it fine, but you're going to have to put up with it. I'm sorry if YOU think every PS3 game is awesome and most professional reviewers don't agree with you and that irks you but thats the way SW works.

Just because you like a game doesn't=general consensus.

EDIT and if you'd bothered to read my previous post you'd have seen exactly howit was pointing out how his thinking was flawed, but I guess you didn't did you? You just read what you wanted.blue_hazy_basic

I understand system wars just fine. It's an inconsistent mass of gamers who play fast and loose with the rules they made for themselves. Like you, no one's going to consider Mass Effect AA and so they outsource ratings from other sites. Please don't try to tell me that I'm the one being inconsistent when I've already repeatedly stated that I no longer listen to Gamespot's scores. In the end, I'm simply pointing out that you're a zombie who only thinks in terms of ratings rather than game quality and feels that the reviewer is what makes up the "general consensus."

how would you know? i don't see on 360 game rated on ur profile...just PS games. ur just trying to win the arguemnt aren't u?wetspot96

Me and my 360 owning friend have an arrangement: When we get new exclusives, we both let the other play them on their respective system. This way I can still see what people saying I'm "missing" and not have to waste my money on crappy Microsoft products.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]Do you even understand the concept of SW? I understand people not getting the hype system, flops, etc. Thats fine but people here use the terminology. If someone says something daft using that terminology they will get called for it. If you don't like it fine, but you're going to have to put up with it. I'm sorry if YOU think every PS3 game is awesome and most professional reviewers don't agree with you and that irks you but thats the way SW works.

Just because you like a game doesn't=general consensus.

EDIT and if you'd bothered to read my previous post you'd have seen exactly howit was pointing out how his thinking was flawed, but I guess you didn't did you? You just read what you wanted.Pariah_001

I understand system wars just fine. It's an inconsistent mass of gamers who play fast and loose with the rules they made for themselves. Like you, no one's going to consider Mass Effect AA and so they outsource ratings from other sites. Please don't try to tell me that I'm the one being inconsistent when I've already repeatedly stated that I no longer listen to Gamespot's scores. In the end, I'm simply pointing out that you're a zombie who only thinks in terms of ratings rather than game quality and feels that the reviewer is what makes up the "general consensus."

Mass Effect wasn't AAA. Try again. Pariah_001

So before you insult someone by calling them a "zombie" maybe you should consider what YOU wrote. I never at any point referenced gamespot, gamerankings or any other site. I was simply pointing out his hypocrisy, which much like your own, is ridiculous.

...

I was refering to him saying Uncharted is better than Gears. Unless you mean graphics, which is subjective without knowing the technical details, my above references [Gamespot, Gamerankings, Metacritic, and Sales] say otherwise.

What would sales, gamerankings, or metacritic have to do with Halo 3 being 640p? Besides it not changing the fact that it's a AAA title and better than any PS3 exclusive, I guess.

Element00216

Uncharted is better than Gears. How foolish of you to use the word subjective and then say Halo 3 is better than any PS3 exclusive. Now that, sir, is subjective. I don't care how high the score was, is, or will be, ever. IMO Halo 3 sucks big time. See, subjective.

PS. Obviously I was talking about graphics in Uncharted...

It was YOU that said ME is not AAAblue_hazy_basic

So as to use your own standards against you and show you how ridiculous your response to him was.

I, personally, believe that Mass Effect deserves AAA. You, on the other hand, believes it deserved the svore it got because you think GS is God. And I'm pointing out how stupid that mindset is.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]It was YOU that said ME is not AAAPariah_001

So as to use your own standards against you and show you how ridiculous your response to him was.

I, personally, believe that Mass Effect deserves AAA. You, on the other hand, believes it deserved the svore it got because you think GS is God. And I'm pointing out how stupid that mindset is.

Why do you keep saying that? When did I ever say GS is god? Like everything else you've just made it up! And you continue to flame me, you're lucky I'm not of a more sensitive mindset.blue_hazy_basic

You don't need to bring up GS directly for someone to figure out what you're about. You've already tried to fend me off by saying System Wars is purely about GS standards of ratings.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]Why do you keep saying that? When did I ever say GS is god? Like everything else you've just made it up! And you continue to flame me, you're lucky I'm not of a more sensitive mindset.Pariah_001

You don't need to bring up GS directly for someone to figure out what you're about. You've already tried to fend me off by saying System Wars is purely about GS standards of ratings.

Wait, see what I did there. I won't be replying because you neither pay attention to what i say or are able to comprehend it. You can just sit and stew in your tent of hate.