[QUOTE="gsx1100"]OMG 360 cant even handle GUN!!1mcdonaldsfdfd
even though it's a playstation 2 port, it still runs and looks better on 360 than ps2.
Well duh. We're talking same generation here.
ps3 cant even handle sonic
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Well duh. We're talking same generation here.
tim sweeney actually hands on experience making unreal engine 3.0 work on ps3 saying it's easy>>>>john carmacks word saying it's hard where's john carmacks game on ps3? who do you believe someone with hands on experience or reading paper specs like john? lol
tim sweeney>john carmack lol.
ps3 is easier than 360.
[QUOTE="F-Minus"]Somehow the video isn't working to me. But seams reasonable that knowledge is aplicable to code for the Cell, which doesn't mean it's easy or easier.
However her's the Carmack interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PFUw29U4J8
mcdonaldsfdfd
carmack isnt making ps3 game, tim has more experience so his word saying ps3 is easy>>>john carmacks word.
And how do you know that if I may ask? Id haven't released any information of their upcoming game developed in-house. And afaik id software is toying with every machine on the market and they even get kits of every console before it's even released as any major developer.
So I'm pretty sure Carmack has check the PS3 in and out and is maybe in fact even now as we speak coding for a multi-plat game which will be available for all systems.
But when it comes to programming, Carmack is the guy who puts Sweeney to sahadows with the knowledge and the past work. He makes things never seen before with every engine he makes, while the rest follows and and adds it later. There is no doubt that the next id engine will be better as UE3.0 or any engine for the fact. It's just the way it works. He's a rare genius, Sweeney is just a really really really hardcore programmer and that's the difference.
no no,definitly not..tim sweeney is definitly a better graphics engine coder..compare?
unreal engine 1 to quake 2 engine, unreal engine blow it away, quake 3 vs unreal engine 2.0 blew it away.. unreal engine 3.0 blows away doom3 engine.
duke nukem forever developer 3drealms dropped the quake 2 engine original engine game was to be released on for unreal engine.. so that tells you something.
[QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="F-Minus"]Somehow the video isn't working to me. But seams reasonable that knowledge is aplicable to code for the Cell, which doesn't mean it's easy or easier.
However her's the Carmack interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PFUw29U4J8
F-Minus
carmack isnt making ps3 game, tim has more experience so his word saying ps3 is easy>>>john carmacks word.
And how do you know that if I may ask? Id haven't released any information of their upcoming game developed in-house. And afaik id software is toying with every machine on the market and they even get kits of every console before it's even released as any major developer.
So I'm pretty sure Carmack has check the PS3 in and out and is maybe in fact even now as we speak coding for a multi-plat game which will be available for all systems.
But when it comes to programming, Carmack is the guy who puts Sweeney to sahadows with the knowledge and the past work. He makes things never seen before with every engine he makes, while the rest follows and and adds it later. There is no doubt that the next id engine will be better as UE3.0 or any engine for the fact. It's just the way it works. He's a rare genius, Sweeney is just a really really really hardcore programmer and that's the difference.
next unreal engine will pwn next idsoftware engine.
no no,definitly not..tim sweeney is definitly a better graphics engine coder..compare?
unreal engine 1 to quake 2 engine, unreal engine blow it away, quake 3 vs unreal engine 2.0 blew it away.. unreal engine 3.0 blows away doom3 engine.
duke nukem forever developer 3drealms dropped the quake 2 engine original engine game was to be released on for unreal engine.. so that tells you something.
mcdonaldsfdfd
Certainly not. What has sweeney done that is worht mentioning. In fact he uses most carmack methods like most of the programmers because Carmack pioneered them.
Just let me list something:
   * In 1999, Carmack appeared as number 10 in TIME's list of the 50 most influential people in technology.
   * On March 22, 2001, Carmack became the fourth person to be inducted into the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences' Hall of Fame, an honor bestowed upon those who have made revolutionary and innovative achievements in the video and computer game industry.
   * In 2003, Carmack was one of the subjects of the book Masters of Doom, a chronicle of id Software and its founders.
   * In 2005, the film Doom featured a character named Dr. Carmack, in recognition of Carmack who co-created the original game.
   * In March 2006, Carmack was added to the Walk of Game, an event that recognizes the developers and games with the most impact on the industry.
   * In January of 2007 in Las Vegas, Nevada, John Carmack and id software were awarded with two Emmy Awards. The Science, Engineering & Technology for Broadcast Television, which includes broadcast, cable and satellite distribution, and secondly, Science, Engineering and Technology for Broadband and Personal Television, encompassing interactive television, gaming technology, and for the first time, the Internet, cell phones, private networks, and personal media players. id Software is the very first independent game developer to be awarded an Emmy since the Academy began honoring technology innovation in 1948.
Now show me something alike for Sweeney. Carmack as said is a genius, think he's even in Mensa, sweeney is a good programmer.
Unreal 1 was crap compared to Quake 2 engine. Check how UT or Unreal 1 for that matter look compared to Quake 2. UT2003 looked better as Q3 becasue it was released 3 years later. Doom 3 again overshadowed any epic engine. UE3.0 looks great, but the next id one will look better and be pioneering something again almost granted.
unreal 1 graphically blows away quake 2, and quake 2 is my favorite game of all time, everytime tim makes engine it's always graphically better than john carmacks i mean look at doom3 the character models are more blocky than unreal tournament 2003.mcdonaldsfdfd
You're delusional at best :)
[QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]unreal 1 graphically blows away quake 2, and quake 2 is my favorite game of all time, everytime tim makes engine it's always graphically better than john carmacks i mean look at doom3 the character models are more blocky than unreal tournament 2003.F-Minus
You're delusional at best :)
no, doom3 people dont even have 5 individual fingers...ut2003 they do.
i own ut2003 and doom3 , character models look better on ut2003...the lighting's better on doom3 though, textures better on ut2k3 though.
[QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="TekkenMaster606"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]sega knows ps3 hardware better than 360 and it still runs/look better on 360 lol.
mcdonaldsfdfd
Can you prove that with some linkage?
hmmm, RSX is based on 6800 and arcade vf5 uses a geforce 6800 .
plus sega have closer relations to sony than microsoft, that's why fifth phantom saga was announced for ps3 before sega announced any 360 game so that means they been working with cell before 360.
The RSX is based on geforce 7800's... fact is, it is harder to develop for the PS3 then the 360.
sega knows sony's dev tools better than microsoft's and btw. the 7900 gtx is based on 7800 GTX is based on 6800 ultra architecture it's all same architecture just improved over the years more pixel/vertex pipelines added and die shrinks.
Stop saying that Sega knows PS3 dev tools better, cause that can't be proven. In fact, I can say that Sega knows the 360's architecture better then that of the PS3. Due to the fact that it was better on the 360.
sega knows how to program for ps3 than xbox 360, and no ps3 is not harder to develop for, because it has a standard pc like architecture even epicgames said ps3 has pc like architecture and said it was easy., while xbox 360 isnt like pc epicgames never mentioned 360 being easier than ps3. plus i think people use ps3 harder to dev for to make up for ps3 ram limitation flaws.
no, sonic was better on xbox 360 because ps3 has ram limitations cell processor cpu can only access 256 mb ram, this less ram=downgraded graphics and framerates.
Dude stop being a fanboy. it is widely known that Sony's consoles are always notoriously hard to develop for. This was the case for PS1, PS2 and now PS3. I really don't care what Epic says. Epic must be the greatest developers on the planet then because all other developers say that PS3 is very hard to develop for. That was one of the biggest complaints about the PS2, and PS3 is no different. PS3 is actually probably harder to develop for than PS2 because of all the fancy new hardware.
Can you explain how you know that Sega knows how to develop for PS3 better than 360? Where did Sega say that? 360 is basically a PC, and MS systems are liked by Devs because of the ease of programming. Its also why you get better results in graphics from games sooner in their lives than Sony consoles.
How much is MS and Epic paying you?
[QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="TekkenMaster606"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]sega knows ps3 hardware better than 360 and it still runs/look better on 360 lol.
mazdero
Can you prove that with some linkage?
hmmm, RSX is based on 6800 and arcade vf5 uses a geforce 6800 .
plus sega have closer relations to sony than microsoft, that's why fifth phantom saga was announced for ps3 before sega announced any 360 game so that means they been working with cell before 360.
The RSX is based on geforce 7800's... fact is, it is harder to develop for the PS3 then the 360.
sega knows sony's dev tools better than microsoft's and btw. the 7900 gtx is based on 7800 GTX is based on 6800 ultra architecture it's all same architecture just improved over the years more pixel/vertex pipelines added and die shrinks.
Stop saying that Sega knows PS3 dev tools better, cause that can't be proven. In fact, I can say that Sega knows the 360's architecture better then that of the PS3. Due to the fact that it was better on the 360.
sega knows how to program for ps3 than xbox 360, and no ps3 is not harder to develop for, because it has a standard pc like architecture even epicgames said ps3 has pc like architecture and said it was easy., while xbox 360 isnt like pc epicgames never mentioned 360 being easier than ps3. plus i think people use ps3 harder to dev for to make up for ps3 ram limitation flaws.
no, sonic was better on xbox 360 because ps3 has ram limitations cell processor cpu can only access 256 mb ram, this less ram=downgraded graphics and framerates.
Dude stop being a fanboy. it is widely known that Sony's consoles are always notoriously hard to develop for. This was the case for PS1, PS2 and now PS3. I really don't care what Epic says. Epic must be the greatest developers on the planet then because all other developers say that PS3 is very hard to develop for. That was one of the biggest complaints about the PS2, and PS3 is no different. PS3 is actually probably harder to develop for than PS2 because of all the fancy new hardware.
Can you explain how you know that Sega knows how to develop for PS3 better than 360? Where did Sega say that? 360 is basically a PC, and MS systems are liked by Devs because of the ease of programming. Its also why you get better results in graphics from games sooner in their lives than Sony consoles.
How much is MS and Epic paying you?
no, ps3 uses pc graphics chip and pc api application programming interface and open gl es, and split system memory.
xbox 360 is more unlike pc's than ps3..no pc's have unified memory architecture, or edram and custom api.
epicgames has more experience with sony developer kits, unreal tournament 1999 on ps2 proves it.
if there's anyone to believe it's epicgames.
[QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="TekkenMaster606"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]sega knows ps3 hardware better than 360 and it still runs/look better on 360 lol.
mazdero
Can you prove that with some linkage?
hmmm, RSX is based on 6800 and arcade vf5 uses a geforce 6800 .
plus sega have closer relations to sony than microsoft, that's why fifth phantom saga was announced for ps3 before sega announced any 360 game so that means they been working with cell before 360.
The RSX is based on geforce 7800's... fact is, it is harder to develop for the PS3 then the 360.
sega knows sony's dev tools better than microsoft's and btw. the 7900 gtx is based on 7800 GTX is based on 6800 ultra architecture it's all same architecture just improved over the years more pixel/vertex pipelines added and die shrinks.
Stop saying that Sega knows PS3 dev tools better, cause that can't be proven. In fact, I can say that Sega knows the 360's architecture better then that of the PS3. Due to the fact that it was better on the 360.
sega knows how to program for ps3 than xbox 360, and no ps3 is not harder to develop for, because it has a standard pc like architecture even epicgames said ps3 has pc like architecture and said it was easy., while xbox 360 isnt like pc epicgames never mentioned 360 being easier than ps3. plus i think people use ps3 harder to dev for to make up for ps3 ram limitation flaws.
no, sonic was better on xbox 360 because ps3 has ram limitations cell processor cpu can only access 256 mb ram, this less ram=downgraded graphics and framerates.
Dude stop being a fanboy. it is widely known that Sony's consoles are always notoriously hard to develop for. This was the case for PS1, PS2 and now PS3. I really don't care what Epic says. Epic must be the greatest developers on the planet then because all other developers say that PS3 is very hard to develop for. That was one of the biggest complaints about the PS2, and PS3 is no different. PS3 is actually probably harder to develop for than PS2 because of all the fancy new hardware.
Can you explain how you know that Sega knows how to develop for PS3 better than 360? Where did Sega say that? 360 is basically a PC, and MS systems are liked by Devs because of the ease of programming. Its also why you get better results in graphics from games sooner in their lives than Sony consoles.
How much is MS and Epic paying you?
show me anywhere tim sweeney says xbox 360 is easy, or they got unreal engine 3.0 working on 360 in only 2 months. ..ps3 is more pc like architecture than xbox 360.
.
[QUOTE="mazdero"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="bsin94"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"][QUOTE="TekkenMaster606"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]sega knows ps3 hardware better than 360 and it still runs/look better on 360 lol.
mcdonaldsfdfd
Can you prove that with some linkage?
hmmm, RSX is based on 6800 and arcade vf5 uses a geforce 6800 .
plus sega have closer relations to sony than microsoft, that's why fifth phantom saga was announced for ps3 before sega announced any 360 game so that means they been working with cell before 360.
The RSX is based on geforce 7800's... fact is, it is harder to develop for the PS3 then the 360.
sega knows sony's dev tools better than microsoft's and btw. the 7900 gtx is based on 7800 GTX is based on 6800 ultra architecture it's all same architecture just improved over the years more pixel/vertex pipelines added and die shrinks.
Stop saying that Sega knows PS3 dev tools better, cause that can't be proven. In fact, I can say that Sega knows the 360's architecture better then that of the PS3. Due to the fact that it was better on the 360.
sega knows how to program for ps3 than xbox 360, and no ps3 is not harder to develop for, because it has a standard pc like architecture even epicgames said ps3 has pc like architecture and said it was easy., while xbox 360 isnt like pc epicgames never mentioned 360 being easier than ps3. plus i think people use ps3 harder to dev for to make up for ps3 ram limitation flaws.
no, sonic was better on xbox 360 because ps3 has ram limitations cell processor cpu can only access 256 mb ram, this less ram=downgraded graphics and framerates.
Dude stop being a fanboy. it is widely known that Sony's consoles are always notoriously hard to develop for. This was the case for PS1, PS2 and now PS3. I really don't care what Epic says. Epic must be the greatest developers on the planet then because all other developers say that PS3 is very hard to develop for. That was one of the biggest complaints about the PS2, and PS3 is no different. PS3 is actually probably harder to develop for than PS2 because of all the fancy new hardware.
Can you explain how you know that Sega knows how to develop for PS3 better than 360? Where did Sega say that? 360 is basically a PC, and MS systems are liked by Devs because of the ease of programming. Its also why you get better results in graphics from games sooner in their lives than Sony consoles.
How much is MS and Epic paying you?
show me anywhere tim sweeney says xbox 360 is easy, or they got unreal engine 3.0 working on 360 in only 2 months. ..ps3 is more pc like architecture than xbox 360.
.
Dude, stop giving Tim Sweeney reach arounds. You act like he is GOD. So you're telling me if everyone in the world says PS3 is hard to develop for but Tim Sweeney, then the rest of the world is wrong and Tim is right? Get serious man. Prove to me other than what Tim Sweeney says that the PS3 is easy to develop for? You=Super Fanboy
....
Well on the bright side, all the lemmings can say Sonic was superior on the 360. TCHBO. :lol:
Sonic and the Secret Rings looks awesome however.
Don't blame it on the ps3. Sega really has been very bad on making sonic. Maybe Sonic for wii will do better because of the controller.Unfortunately, the very next level drops the psychic hedgehog into a nondescript forest setting that doesn't look any better than Sonic's ugly town, and it goes on from there. Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation
http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/sonicthehedgehog/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/sonicthehedgehog/index.html?q=sonic
no mention of framerate problems on xbox 360.
remember sega said sonic would be better on ps3? ALL pr BS lol.
mcdonaldsfdfd
Sonic died years ago.
it's not the developer it's ps3, why is oblivion downgraded? why is splinter cell downgraded? the darkness? f.e.a.r? tony hawk? call of duty 3? hmm because ps3 hardware less powerful than xbox 360 and devs did the best they can with weak ps3 hardware they could.sega is more of a sony fan than microsoft anyway and still sucks lol.mcdonaldsfdfd
Very true. The PS3 is significantly weaker than the 360.
[QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]it's not the developer it's ps3, why is oblivion downgraded? why is splinter cell downgraded? the darkness? f.e.a.r? tony hawk? call of duty 3? hmm because ps3 hardware less powerful than xbox 360 and devs did the best they can with weak ps3 hardware they could.sega is more of a sony fan than microsoft anyway and still sucks lol.viper7721
Very true. The PS3 is significantly weaker than the 360.
You're a fanboy as well. PS3 and 360 are almost equal, with the nod going to PS3.Look in the PS3 forum and read the article from IGN and see if oblivion is downgraded. How can you make that claim with ZERO proof to back it up. when you develope game for both systems, then you can talk.
[QUOTE="viper7721"][QUOTE="mcdonaldsfdfd"]it's not the developer it's ps3, why is oblivion downgraded? why is splinter cell downgraded? the darkness? f.e.a.r? tony hawk? call of duty 3? hmm because ps3 hardware less powerful than xbox 360 and devs did the best they can with weak ps3 hardware they could.sega is more of a sony fan than microsoft anyway and still sucks lol.mazdero
Very true. The PS3 is significantly weaker than the 360.
You're a fanboy as well. PS3 and 360 are almost equal, with the nod going to PS3.Look in the PS3 forum and read the article from IGN and see if oblivion is downgraded. How can you make that claim with ZERO proof to back it up. when you develope game for both systems, then you can talk.
360 and PS3 are not equal. The 360 is significantly more powerful than the PS3. Look at how all the multiplat games look better on the 360. Look at how GeOW looks better than any PS3 game. Look at how Kameo (a launch 360 game) looks better than any PS3 game. The 360 is just a more powerful system.
umm, look at how much longer 360 has been out. Look at how much easier 360 is to program for. You have no concrete facts to prove your claims. You are spouting fanboy nonsense. The systems are close in power. but IMO PS3 is a little bit more powerful. And before your fanboy defense mechanism's kick in, I don't even own a PS3, I own a 360. Once devs get the hang of the PS3, the graphics are going to take a leap forward. I'm taking this from the history of Sony consoles. The Graphics are always mediocre at launch, and then once devs get the feel for it, the graphics drastically improve, like night and day difference. If you own a PS2(I really don't think you do) look at 1st and 2nd tier games compared to 2004 games, or now. Its a HUGE difference. I think I'm wasting time here. It's impossible to talk rationally with a fanboy.
oh, and I'm sorry to tell you this, but Kameo's Graphics are meant to fool you into thinking they are great with all that shine they put into it. Everything looks like it was waxed to the extreme. I don't think its that impressive.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment