PS3 exclusives greatly benefit from Blu-ray, but what about multiplats?

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="mems_1224"]uncharted is probably as big as gears. but ps3 doesnt have anything that touches haloGamerwillzPS

Oh dear, wrong again. Uncharted series has sold over 17 million units in total.

Get your facts straight, dude.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]:lol: whatever helps you sleep at night dudemems_1224

Actually, he is right. Think about the limited capacity of the DVD and a Xbox 360 SKU lacking a hard drive.

Again, get your logic straight, you little irritating fanboy.

God, when will you understand this?

PC is different from consoles. Games can go to PC with multiple discs, and it's acceptable because they have to be installed in the hard drive. Or games can be received through digital distribution.

Consoles must use 1 disc.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]:lol: whatever helps you sleep at night dudemems_1224

Actually, he is right. Think about the limited capacity of the DVD and a Xbox 360 SKU lacking a hard drive.

Again, get your logic straight, you little irritating fanboy.

It's like I'm a broken record having to repeat the same thing over and over again.

You obviously don't own a PC, so why are you talking about something that you know nothing about?

Every PC has a harddrive, and consoles are different from PC in the sense that once you install the discs onto a PC, you never need to use the discs again. On a console like Xbox 360, even after you install the game, you need to have every disc on hand for every applicable portion of the game.

Take for example,

"The real disappointment with the 360 version is Bioware's decision to slice its content across two DVDs, awkwardly forcing a divide between the main story and the side-missions. For a completist, this will doubtless result in multiple disc-swaps between its 50-plus missions. Meanwhile, the PS3 version naturally sidesteps the issue altogether by brute force of the Blu-ray disc's higher capacity, allowing you to dive into the optional content seamlessly from the main quest."

The PC and Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 3 both come on a DVD, but do you see PC users having to change discs to go from main mission quests to side mission quests? No.

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

Cows are still mad over last gen when PS2 got all the crappy ports and its still happening this gen to them.JohnnyCageMK

Answer this question, and please be honest.

Do you own a PS3?

I can't wait for the Heat to take home the title tonight.

arkephonic

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"]Cows are still mad over last gen when PS2 got all the crappy ports and its still happening this gen to them.GamerwillzPS

Answer this question, and please be honest.

Do you own a PS3?

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Actually, he is right. Think about the limited capacity of the DVD and a Xbox 360 SKU lacking a hard drive.

Again, get your logic straight, you little irritating fanboy.

It's like I'm a broken record having to repeat the same thing over and over again.

You obviously don't own a PC, so why are you talking about something that you know nothing about?

Every PC has a harddrive, and consoles are different from PC in the sense that once you install the discs onto a PC, you never need to use the discs again. On a console like Xbox 360, even after you install the game, you need to have every disc on hand for every applicable portion of the game.

Take for example,

"The real disappointment with the 360 version is Bioware's decision to slice its content across two DVDs, awkwardly forcing a divide between the main story and the side-missions. For a completist, this will doubtless result in multiple disc-swaps between its 50-plus missions. Meanwhile, the PS3 version naturally sidesteps the issue altogether by brute force of the Blu-ray disc's higher capacity, allowing you to dive into the optional content seamlessly from the main quest."

The PC and Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 3 both come on a DVD, but do you see PC users having to change discs to go from main mission quests to side mission quests? No.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

I can't wait for the Heat to take home the title tonight.

blackace

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

ZombieKiller7

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"]Cows are still mad over last gen when PS2 got all the crappy ports and its still happening this gen to them.JohnnyCageMK

Answer this question, and please be honest.

Do you own a PS3?

Lol, no you don't. Prove it, take a picture of it and put your name on a piece of paper on top of it. Plus, what's your PSN so someone can add you.

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

ZombieKiller7

Sony allowed the PS3 to use upgradeable hard drive for a reason! It makes it up for Blu-ray's slow speed. That doesn't make the PS3 a failure.

Use logic. You can even put 1TB hard drive in your PS3, and you will not have a problem with storage at all.

When I read over "it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii" - I stopped reading there. Not true.

Use logic.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"]Cows are still mad over last gen when PS2 got all the crappy ports and its still happening this gen to them.JohnnyCageMK

Answer this question, and please be honest.

Do you own a PS3?

Prove it. Take a picture of your PS3 with your username in front of it.

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Answer this question, and please be honest.

Do you own a PS3?

arkephonic

Lol, no you don't. Prove it, take a picture of it and put your name on a piece of paper on top of it. Plus, what's your PSN so someone can add you.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] why doesnt pc suffer then? it destroys both consoles.mems_1224

It's like I'm a broken record having to repeat the same thing over and over again.

You obviously don't own a PC, so why are you talking about something that you know nothing about?

Every PC has a harddrive, and consoles are different from PC in the sense that once you install the discs onto a PC, you never need to use the discs again. On a console like Xbox 360, even after you install the game, you need to have every disc on hand for every applicable portion of the game.

Take for example,

"The real disappointment with the 360 version is Bioware's decision to slice its content across two DVDs, awkwardly forcing a divide between the main story and the side-missions. For a completist, this will doubtless result in multiple disc-swaps between its 50-plus missions. Meanwhile, the PS3 version naturally sidesteps the issue altogether by brute force of the Blu-ray disc's higher capacity, allowing you to dive into the optional content seamlessly from the main quest."

The PC and Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 3 both come on a DVD, but do you see PC users having to change discs to go from main mission quests to side mission quests? No.

You know so little about how things work that it's not even worth discussing things with you. What you need to do is go educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about. Here you are confusing a storage medium with programming for a specific type of processor which literally have nothing to do with each other. Then you bring up games like Left 4 Dead and Witcher 2 which aren't on PS3 due to licensing issues and contracts, neither of which have anything to do with technical specifications at all.

Talk about knowing nothing about nothing, kinda surprising considering how much time you spend on a video game forum.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] Yes.JohnnyCageMK

Lol, no you don't. Prove it, take a picture of it and put your name on a piece of paper on top of it. Plus, what's your PSN so someone can add you.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] Yes.JohnnyCageMK

Lol, no you don't. Prove it, take a picture of it and put your name on a piece of paper on top of it. Plus, what's your PSN so someone can add you.

Blu-ray is obsolete.DaBrainz

Yay, another dumbass.

Blu-ray is obsolete.DaBrainz

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

It's like I'm a broken record having to repeat the same thing over and over again.

You obviously don't own a PC, so why are you talking about something that you know nothing about?

Every PC has a harddrive, and consoles are different from PC in the sense that once you install the discs onto a PC, you never need to use the discs again. On a console like Xbox 360, even after you install the game, you need to have every disc on hand for every applicable portion of the game.

Take for example,

"The real disappointment with the 360 version is Bioware's decision to slice its content across two DVDs, awkwardly forcing a divide between the main story and the side-missions. For a completist, this will doubtless result in multiple disc-swaps between its 50-plus missions. Meanwhile, the PS3 version naturally sidesteps the issue altogether by brute force of the Blu-ray disc's higher capacity, allowing you to dive into the optional content seamlessly from the main quest."

The PC and Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 3 both come on a DVD, but do you see PC users having to change discs to go from main mission quests to side mission quests? No.

You know so little about how things work that it's not even worth discussing things with you. What you need to do is go educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about. Here you are confusing a storage medium with programming for a specific type of processor which literally have nothing to do with each other. Then you bring up games like Left 4 Dead and Witcher 2 which aren't on PS3 due to licensing issues and contracts, neither of which have anything to do with technical specifications at all.

Talk about knowing nothing about nothing, kinda surprising considering how much time you spend on a video game forum.

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Blu-ray is obsolete.JohnnyCageMK

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Blu-ray is obsolete.GamerwillzPS

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Blu-ray is obsolete.GamerwillzPS

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] All that space and all Sony makes are 8 hour games.mems_1224

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

You two are the cancer of System Wars.

Stupidest people I've ever seen. How can someone in the right mind think like you two?

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] well if ps3 was so much easier to develop for why does it always get crappy ports? wheres the ps3 version of witcher 2 or left 4 dead? since its so much easier to make better games on ps3 why does it miss out on so many?mems_1224

You know so little about how things work that it's not even worth discussing things with you. What you need to do is go educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about. Here you are confusing a storage medium with programming for a specific type of processor which literally have nothing to do with each other. Then you bring up games like Left 4 Dead and Witcher 2 which aren't on PS3 due to licensing issues and contracts, neither of which have anything to do with technical specifications at all.

Talk about knowing nothing about nothing, kinda surprising considering how much time you spend on a video game forum.

Who cares about an installation that takes place before a game even starts? Are you saying you don't install your Xbox 360 games? When I first got my Xbox 360 4gb, I didn't even play it until I had gotten a 320gb harddrive because the disc drive was so loud that I thought it was hurting my system. I now have 2 Xbox 360 Slims, the other one with a 250gb harddrive, and the disc drive sounds the exact same. It's just that the disc drive on the Xbox 360 Slim is insanely loud. I've heard my friends' Xbox 360 fat and the disc drive is like 5 times as loud as the Slim. When you install a game to the harddrive on the 360, the disc drive isn't even used. It's beyond me how anyone could play an Xbox 360 game without installing it to the harddrive first.

But my main point was, who cares about doing something like an installation before the game even starts? What's annoying is having to stop and do something like change discs multiple times for the Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect 3 when you're right in the middle of playing the game, the point in time where you're supposed to be immersed and into the game. You're not immersed or into the game when installing it, before you even start it or even access the main menu.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] All that space and all Sony makes are 8 hour games.JohnnyCageMK

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

I can officially confirm that you don't own a PS3 then.

GTFO. Stop talking garbage and go back to your Crapbox. Make sure you don't mistake the disc tray as a coffee stand.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Quit talking garbage and go and grab a camera and prove that you are a PS3 owner.

GamerwillzPS

You two are the cancer of System Wars.

Stupidest people I've ever seen. How can someone in the right mind think like you two?

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] he has a point. :lol:JohnnyCageMK

You two are the cancer of System Wars.

Stupidest people I've ever seen. How can someone in the right mind think like you two?

You are extremely amusing.

Stupidity at its finest.

I suggest you to open up your posting history and take a hard look at what you've said.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

arkephonic

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

Exclusives by definition are exclusive to the platform and very hard to guage what could potentially be done with the same talent on another platform, I mean what if Naughty Dog was a 360 first-party dev, would Uncharted have been better or worse on a more powerful GPU?

It's hard to reconcile the idea that having more powerful hardware is ever a bad thing.

Blu-Ray does not affect the quality of games beyond cutscenes.

Inferiority of multiplats on PS3 is a function of :

1. Inferior GPU

2. Pre-existing game engines made for DirectX not running well under OpenGL

3. Less RAM available

4. Unorthodox architecture

5. Lack of AA hardware and upscaler on PS3

6. Crummy devkit

7. Lack of developer support in general

BD won the format war against HD-DVD, not against DVD9

DVD9 is still ubiquitous and probably will carry us all the way to full Digital Online distribution.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

ZombieKiller7

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

Exclusives by definition are exclusive to the platform and very hard to guage what could potentially be done with the same talent on another platform, I mean what if Naughty Dog was a 360 first-party dev, would Uncharted have been better or worse on a more powerful GPU?

It's hard to reconcile the idea that having more powerful hardware is ever a bad thing.

Blu-Ray does not affect the quality of games beyond cutscenes.

Inferiority of multiplats on PS3 is a function of :

1. Inferior GPU

2. Pre-existing game engines made for DirectX not running well under OpenGL

3. Less RAM available

4. Unorthodox architecture

5. Lack of AA hardware and upscaler on PS3

6. Crummy devkit

7. Lack of developer support in general

BD won the format war against HD-DVD, not against DVD9

DVD9 is still ubiquitous and probably will carry us all the way to full Digital Online distribution.

I suggest you to take a look at PS3 exclusives, come back and try saying that again.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

GamerwillzPS

Exclusives by definition are exclusive to the platform and very hard to guage what could potentially be done with the same talent on another platform, I mean what if Naughty Dog was a 360 first-party dev, would Uncharted have been better or worse on a more powerful GPU?

It's hard to reconcile the idea that having more powerful hardware is ever a bad thing.

Blu-Ray does not affect the quality of games beyond cutscenes.

Inferiority of multiplats on PS3 is a function of :

1. Inferior GPU

2. Pre-existing game engines made for DirectX not running well under OpenGL

3. Less RAM available

4. Unorthodox architecture

5. Lack of AA hardware and upscaler on PS3

6. Crummy devkit

7. Lack of developer support in general

BD won the format war against HD-DVD, not against DVD9

DVD9 is still ubiquitous and probably will carry us all the way to full Digital Online distribution.

I suggest you to take a look at PS3 exclusives, come back and try saying that again.

I addressed that in the first paragraph.

Personally I'm not sure 5-10 good exclusives (the ones that I like) are worth owning a platform for, when there's a constant torrent of multiplats that just plain look and play better on my 360.

I've played almost all PS3 exclusives.

The ones I liked were Killzone, MAG, Motorstorm Apoc, Infamous and I'm thinking of getting Move just for Fight Night.

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

p>

I suggest you to take a look at PS3 exclusives, come back and try saying that again.

GamerwillzPS

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

Plagueless

[QUOTE="Plagueless"]

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

JohnnyCageMK

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Blue-Ray by itself is useful, more storage is always good.

But when you have to downgrade the specs on the console to make it fit into $600, Blu-Ray was not a good choice early in the gen, it was expensive and ate up alot of the PS3 spec budget, so they had to use inferior specs.

As the format gets cheaper and better, it's a good choice to use instead of DVD9.

The mistake was using it in 2006 when it was still expensive.

What they ended up doing was gimping the PS3, sacrificing more powerful specs for Blu-Ray, no matter what devs do and how much energy they devote to the PS3, it's always going to have an inferior GPU.

Nothing short of new hardware is going to change that.

You can code until you're blue in the face, a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU is a schitty GPU.

I commend Sony for taking risks but pertaining to the PS3 those risks did not pay off and it is ultimately not as strong a product as the 360 or Wii.

Sony however are veterans and did a good job recovering from a disastrous launch that probably would have sunk any other company.

The slim helped the platform survive, MLAA strengthened it, first parties like Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog, really helped the PS3 pull thru as a platform.

Today I consider the 360 and PS3 equal, but Sony had to bust their ass to be in that position.

I think barring something really stupid, the PS4 is going to dominate next gen.

ZombieKiller7

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

Exclusives by definition are exclusive to the platform and very hard to guage what could potentially be done with the same talent on another platform, I mean what if Naughty Dog was a 360 first-party dev, would Uncharted have been better or worse on a more powerful GPU?

It's hard to reconcile the idea that having more powerful hardware is ever a bad thing.

Blu-Ray does not affect the quality of games beyond cutscenes.

Inferiority of multiplats on PS3 is a function of :

1. Inferior GPU

2. Pre-existing game engines made for DirectX not running well under OpenGL

3. Less RAM available

4. Unorthodox architecture

5. Lack of AA hardware and upscaler on PS3

6. Crummy devkit

7. Lack of developer support in general

BD won the format war against HD-DVD, not against DVD9

DVD9 is still ubiquitous and probably will carry us all the way to full Digital Online distribution.

Nice off topic rant. Now we're talking about GPU's. The PS3 has a better processor than the 360, does that mean Gears of War would be better on PS3? What if EPIC Games had 50 gigs to work with for uncompressed audio, video and a larger amount of assets like high resolution textures, animations, 3d models and cutscenes? These are the sorts of things that take up space. Notice how Gears of War has about 10 animations and Uncharted has thousands? People are quick to judge a game's graphics on a single screen shot, but look at the variety in level design in a game like Uncharted. That's due to the larger capacity storage for a higher number of different models and textures.

DVD9 could very well carry the PC because PC isn't reliant on physical media, but consoles are.

I can't repeat this enough times to get it through your guys' brains.

PC isn't reliant on physical media, consoles are.

Like I've said a hundred times, you install the DVDs on a PC and throw the discs away if you want. With consoles, you have to keep every single disc just to play through the game, you can't even use disc 1 to get through it, you need to change to disc 2 and disc 3. It's much different.

There's a reason why every next gen console will have a higher capacity storage medium than DVD-9 and PC won't.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]p>

I suggest you to take a look at PS3 exclusives, come back and try saying that again.

DaBrainz

Are you telling me to compare the PS3 with PC?

They are two different species.

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]p>

I suggest you to take a look at PS3 exclusives, come back and try saying that again.

GamerwillzPS

Are you telling me to compare the PS3 with PC?

They are two different species.

[QUOTE="Plagueless"]

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

JohnnyCageMK

You said negative things about Blu-ray, and then you agreed with him?

You fail.

Nice off topic rant. Now we're talking about GPU's. The PS3 has a better processor than the 360, does that mean Gears of War would be better on PS3? What if EPIC Games had 50 gigs to work with for uncompressed audio, video and a larger amount of assets like high resolution textures, animations, 3d models and cutscenes? These are the sorts of things that take up space. Notice how Gears of War has about 10 animations and Uncharted has thousands? People are quick to judge a game's graphics on a single screen shot, but look at the variety in level design in a game like Uncharted. That's due to the larger capacity storage for a higher number of different models and textures.

DVD9 could very well carry the PC because PC isn't reliant on physical media, but consoles are.

I can't repeat this enough times to get it through your guys' brains.

PC isn't reliant on physical media, consoles are.

Like I've said a hundred times, you install the DVDs on a PC and throw the discs away if you want. With consoles, you have to keep every single disc just to play through the game, you can't even use disc 1 to get through it, you need to change to disc 2 and disc 3. It's much different.

There's a reason why every next gen console will have a higher capacity storage medium than DVD-9 and PC won't.

This proves how incredibly ignorant you are. You have no clue about the game.

The only advantage Blu-Ray has brought to the table is uncompressed audio and cutscenes,

In actual gameplay, there is nothing that can't be done on the 360. The PS3 might have a more powerful processor, but the 360 has a more powerful GPU, and a lot of the Cell's power is wasted supporting the GPU. The 360 also has slightly more RAM, which if you knew anything about hardware at all you would know that RAM is the most important thing pertaining to limits on a game. The 360 and PS3 both are horribly outdated in RAM capacity, which is why neither can run games like Crysis without cutting the world smaller. RAM is why Minecraft has limited size on the 360. RAM is why so many games are sub-HD on the 360 & PS3. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Blu-Ray and it's big storage capacity.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"] I suggest you look at PC and QQ. All the games are either DD or CD-ROM. PS3 is no trailblazer.JohnnyCageMK

Are you telling me to compare the PS3 with PC?

They are two different species.

You overestimated their insanity.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Couple things. You say the PS3 sacrificed powerful specs, but why do the PS3 exclusives look so good then? Plus, if they had included a more powerful GPU, multiplats wouldn't even benefit from it. Xbox 360 was lead platform for a lot of multiplats, and that's why blu ray wasn't always taken advantage of, and a better GPU wouldn't be taken advantage of either. The specs on the PS3 are fine, it has the best looking exclusives for console released this generation in games like Killzone, God of War and Uncharted, and the multiplats released wouldn't have looked any better from an increase in specs. Any multiplat that ever had a problem on the PS3 was due to programming issues with the cell processor, not because of a lack of GPU power.

Secondly, you say that using blu ray in the PS3 was a risk that didn't pay off, but did you forget that blu ray won the format war? In large part because of the PS3? It was a huge risk, because if HD-DVD had won the format war, the PS3 would have been a dead system, but instead it aided in the victory of the format war.

arkephonic

Exclusives by definition are exclusive to the platform and very hard to guage what could potentially be done with the same talent on another platform, I mean what if Naughty Dog was a 360 first-party dev, would Uncharted have been better or worse on a more powerful GPU?

It's hard to reconcile the idea that having more powerful hardware is ever a bad thing.

Blu-Ray does not affect the quality of games beyond cutscenes.

Inferiority of multiplats on PS3 is a function of :

1. Inferior GPU

2. Pre-existing game engines made for DirectX not running well under OpenGL

3. Less RAM available

4. Unorthodox architecture

5. Lack of AA hardware and upscaler on PS3

6. Crummy devkit

7. Lack of developer support in general

BD won the format war against HD-DVD, not against DVD9

DVD9 is still ubiquitous and probably will carry us all the way to full Digital Online distribution.

Nice off topic rant. Now we're talking about GPU's. The PS3 has a better processor than the 360, does that mean Gears of War would be better on PS3? What if EPIC Games had 50 gigs to work with for uncompressed audio, video and a larger amount of assets like high resolution textures, animations, 3d models and cutscenes? These are the sorts of things that take up space. Notice how Gears of War has about 10 animations and Uncharted has thousands? People are quick to judge a game's graphics on a single screen shot, but look at the variety in level design in a game like Uncharted. That's due to the larger capacity storage for a higher number of different models and textures.

DVD9 could very well carry the PC because PC isn't reliant on physical media, but consoles are.

I can't repeat this enough times to get it through your guys' brains.

PC isn't reliant on physical media, consoles are.

Like I've said a hundred times, you install the DVDs on a PC and throw the discs away if you want. With consoles, you have to keep every single disc just to play through the game, you can't even use disc 1 to get through it, you need to change to disc 2 and disc 3. It's much different.

There's a reason why every next gen console will have a higher capacity storage medium than DVD-9 and PC won't.

Gimmick.

You don't need BD to have alot of assets, you can put them across multiple DVD's.

The only difference is you have to go change the disk in the middle of the game.

Gears schits all over Uncharted.

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="Plagueless"]

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

GamerwillzPS

You said negative things about Blu-ray, and then you agreed with him?

You fail.

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"][QUOTE="Plagueless"]

What I can't wait for is next-gen, when the Xbox has Blu-Ray and actually puts it to good use for Halo, making Forge mode more incredible than ever.

No console game can compare to the flexiblility of Halo.

GamerwillzPS

You said negative things about Blu-ray, and then you agreed with him?

You fail.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] Agreed. Gonna be cool to see what they do with Forza too.Plagueless

You said negative things about Blu-ray, and then you agreed with him?

You fail.

Blu-ray drives in next-gen consoles will definitely be faster. No doubt about that. I hope that will change JohnnyCageMK's deluded mind. He always has been a fool since he signed up.

The one in PS3 is an early-stage drive. But it's necessary for this generation. The hard drive is helping it by having games data installed in it.

You don't have to say the last sentence. It's obvious! Everybody knows that.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="JohnnyCageMK"] Agreed. Gonna be cool to see what they do with Forza too.JohnnyCageMK

You said negative things about Blu-ray, and then you agreed with him?

You fail.

They do.

But it's necessary for this generation.

GamerwillzPS

You have a strange definition of necessary.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

But it's necessary for this generation.

Kickinurass

You have a strange definition of necessary.

Google is your friend.

Good luck with your research.