Rein: PS3 *DOES NOT* have enough resources for all UT3 maps

[QUOTE="kevy619"]How long before we get the "Epic are lazy devs because they cant program for the ps3" threads?Robot_Slough

No i think this is the one that Cows will give up and not fight. They know this was the PS3 flagship and now the PS3 is ahh Struggling. They want to leave this alone i bet. Becuase if the 360 version comes out and is better it's XX2 OWNAGE on the Cows. So they will run from this one and hope it is sweep under the rug

Cows will stay in the barn on this one.

Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="rdo"]

i have been saying that since the beginning. the ps3 has severe ram limitations. i knew it would come into play heavily is user made content. that the ps3 cant even handel the content on the pc dvd9 retail disk is a bit worse than i expected tho. what really suprised me was the last paragraph. the cows have been bragging about being able to play user made maps and mods just like the pc. while i knew it would be like the pc because they would be able to play damned few of them, i didn't know they were going to have to pay for them. they have to buy what is free on the pc.

"Rein even told us that there were plans to allow for players to release mods for sale on the Playstation Network and that the most popular mods and maps would be compiled and sold in an updated Unreal Tournament 3 package later down the line. We'll have much more on Unreal Tournament 3 as its holiday release date draws closer."

by the way that "updated package down the line" would be the 360 version. the content will be free on the pc and 360 it seems while the cows get milked.

Eopoo

What are you talking about? They always sold the top mods in a compilation pack. dont try to talk about something you don't know about. A pc can have a lot more ram than a xbox 360 and a ps3. I have 4gbs of ram on my pc my xbox 360 only has 512...its not gonna be able to run a lot of mods either smart guy.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.jimbob9999

well last i heard they had not started on the 360 version yet so i would assume just the PS3 version....for now at least.

I'm not going to care about UT3 with Halo 3, Mass Effect, and Crysis (if it is able to run on anybody's computer) Eurobacca

unreal owns man

[QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

You do know hes talking about those 32 or 64 player maps?

Dreams-Visions

In the article it says some UT3 maps willl not be included on the PS3 version. Seriously do you really think EPIC will iclude the 64 player maps for the PS3 when they know PS3 doesnt support? Simple Logic.

I'm asking you where you read that it was the 64-player maps that they're not including. You are specific in your accusation that it's the 64-player maps. Where did you read that? It doesn't say that in the article.

Furthermore, yes it is reasonable to include even large-scale maps. Have you ever played a UT game? rooms are almost NEVER full. Doesn't make any maps less playable; just makes them roomier. :)

16 player match on a 64 player map?LOL

Roomier in FPS games. Oh please...

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.jimbob9999

Both. They both only have 512 ram. Thats not enough. High end pcs have 4gbs. Atleast all ps3s have hdds.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

You do know hes talking about those 32 or 64 player maps?

Tamarind_Face

In the article it says some UT3 maps willl not be included on the PS3 version. Seriously do you really think EPIC will iclude the 64 player maps for the PS3 when they know PS3 doesnt support? Simple Logic.

I'm asking you where you read that it was the 64-player maps that they're not including. You are specific in your accusation that it's the 64-player maps. Where did you read that? It doesn't say that in the article.

Furthermore, yes it is reasonable to include even large-scale maps. Have you ever played a UT game? rooms are almost NEVER full. Doesn't make any maps less playable; just makes them roomier. :)

16 player match on a 64 player map?LOL

Roomier in FPS games. Oh please...

even if the map is designed for 64 on pc, on 360 if they have enough memory they will port it.

[QUOTE="Eurobacca"]I'm not going to care about UT3 with Halo 3, Mass Effect, and Crysis (if it is able to run on anybody's computer) ps3rulezzggdff

unreal owns man

UT3 doesn't look half as good as Halo 3

Bungie > Epic

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

You do know hes talking about those 32 or 64 player maps?

The_Crucible

Dreams Visions, I'm disappointed in you. First, you post an article without a direct quote from the dev. Does it make it false, not exactly. But it sure doesn't put a whole lot a validity in it either. Second, you post this article without knowing any of the details. What's being left out? Why?

Come on, dude. You know better than this.

:lol: you can be disappointed if you want to. my care level is exceedingly low. I posted an article for dicsussion. if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

If you think people are supposed to know everything about a subject before presenting it for discussion, then there would be nothing to talk about.

That being said, if YOU have a link that sheds light on his claim, feel free to post. Otherwise, you can relax. I've not taken any side in this thread and a read-through would show that. I'm just interested in seeing where this thread goes.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

You do know hes talking about those 32 or 64 player maps?

Tamarind_Face

In the article it says some UT3 maps willl not be included on the PS3 version. Seriously do you really think EPIC will iclude the 64 player maps for the PS3 when they know PS3 doesnt support? Simple Logic.

I'm asking you where you read that it was the 64-player maps that they're not including. You are specific in your accusation that it's the 64-player maps. Where did you read that? It doesn't say that in the article.

Furthermore, yes it is reasonable to include even large-scale maps. Have you ever played a UT game? rooms are almost NEVER full. Doesn't make any maps less playable; just makes them roomier. :)

16 player match on a 64 player map?LOL

Roomier in FPS games. Oh please...

Why would you mention 16 players, as if the PS3 version is limited to 16 players when it's not? :|

Again, I'd like to see the information behind your assertion that these are 64-player maps in question in the first place.

[QUOTE="Eopoo"][QUOTE="rdo"]

i have been saying that since the beginning. the ps3 has severe ram limitations. i knew it would come into play heavily is user made content. that the ps3 cant even handel the content on the pc dvd9 retail disk is a bit worse than i expected tho. what really suprised me was the last paragraph. the cows have been bragging about being able to play user made maps and mods just like the pc. while i knew it would be like the pc because they would be able to play damned few of them, i didn't know they were going to have to pay for them. they have to buy what is free on the pc.

"Rein even told us that there were plans to allow for players to release mods for sale on the Playstation Network and that the most popular mods and maps would be compiled and sold in an updated Unreal Tournament 3 package later down the line. We'll have much more on Unreal Tournament 3 as its holiday release date draws closer."

by the way that "updated package down the line" would be the 360 version. the content will be free on the pc and 360 it seems while the cows get milked.

rdo

What are you talking about? They always sold the top mods in a compilation pack. dont try to talk about something you don't know about. A pc can have a lot more ram than a xbox 360 and a ps3. I have 4gbs of ram on my pc my xbox 360 only has 512...its not gonna be able to run a lot of mods either smart guy.

Now you are contradicting yourself. If you get everything free before the goty comes out ps3 owners will have it either before or right when the 360 version comes out. How are they getting milked?

Wasn't it Epic that pushed Microsoft to have more Ram in the 360? I think it's quite safe to say UE3 is better on the 360.AdolescentDon

It was Epic. But could this be an issue other than ram? Just trying to think outside the box. If it's a RAM issue, I'd presume this will affect all consoles.

Epic is bad. They have made 1 good game, GOW.

(that ive played)

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"]

[QUOTE="Eurobacca"]I'm not going to care about UT3 with Halo 3, Mass Effect, and Crysis (if it is able to run on anybody's computer) Eurobacca

unreal owns man

UT3 doesn't look half as good as Halo 3

Bungie > Epic

You'll have to define the word "look". Do you mean:

Graphics?

Gameplay?

Overall concept?

Overall look (art direction + graphics)?

Overall feel (speed + graphics)?

Something else?

I can't really agree or disagree without some clarification.

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

Dreams-Visions

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

Epic is bad. They have made 1 good game, GOW.

(that ive played)

AscendancyTR

You should play more of Epic's games, then. They are one of the best if not THE best developer in operation today. Ignorance is not an excuse for saying something like "Epic is bad".

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

The_Crucible

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a quote taken from a developer on an unquestionable website. This isn't The Inquirer or SDF; this is from IGN. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

[QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

16 player match on a 64 player map?LOL

Roomier in FPS games. Oh please...

ps3rulezzggdff

even if the map is designed for 64 on pc, on 360 if they have enough memory they will port it.

Why would you port something that isnt supported? its just waste of manpower and money.

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"][QUOTE="Tamarind_Face"]

16 player match on a 64 player map?LOL

Roomier in FPS games. Oh please...

Tamarind_Face

even if the map is designed for 64 on pc, on 360 if they have enough memory they will port it.

Why would you port something that isnt supported? its just waste of manpower and money.

You have obviously NEVER played a UT game. You should just stop now. No, seriously. Stop. You've exposed yourself as someone who has never played a UT game. Come back when you have a clue about UT games, UT maps and numbers of players.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

Dreams-Visions

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a developer quote. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

I understand that if someone says its due to number of players, they need to prove it. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN US A REASON ON WHY? Nor did you give us a direct dev quote. Are you kidding? Read your article again. Read your original post again. Its NOT a direct quote.

What in the hell is the point of this news without knowing why? You brought it up, why? To prove a point that the PS3 can't do something, right? But what in the hell is that something?

You haven't a clue.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

The_Crucible

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a developer quote. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

I understand that if someone says its due to number of players, they need to prove it. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN US A REASON ON WHY? Nor did you give us a direct dev quote. Are you kidding? Read your article again. Read your original post again. Its NOT a direct quote.

What in the hell is the point of this news without knowing why? You brought it up, why? To prove a point that the PS3 can't do something, right? But what in the hell is that something?

You haven't a clue.

1.) Did I ever say it was due to a number of players? Go back in the thread and research that.

2.) Mark Rein gave you a reason: The PS3 does not have enough resources.

3.) The reason why this is here: For discussion. Like everything else in this forum.

I see you're a bit sensitive about this issue. Maybe you should take a time out and gather yourself. In case you hadn't noticed, people here post information and discuss it. The day when the statement "Mark Rein said..." is no longer a quote (direct or indirect) is the day you need not discuss things here.

you just don't get it, do you? As lemmings, we've accepted that there would be a few games where the DVD9 limitation would deliver a serious blow to SOME developers. Cows on the other hand refuse to believe that there could be ANYTHING that could be considered a limitation with the PS3. This is MASSIVE COW OWNAGE and only the cows will deny it. This is just the begining of games having to be downgraded for the PS3 simply because Sony didn't give devs enough RAM to work with. Nedemis

First of all, I own a 360 and that's it. I prefer it over all the other consoles and for me it ties with pc for first place.
thing is, i'm a tiny bit sick of rabid fanboys going ape**** over nothing. UE3 was always a guaranteed best
on the pc, and that's the comparison we're given in this, oh so vague interview.
Could memory be the reason the maps are removed? quite possibly. but fanboys have absolutely ZERO
proof that the 360 won't have exactly the same limitations compared with the pc, or even if memory is the real issue.
yet this thread is choke full of ownage confirmation and other fanboy unsubstantiated BS.

grabs popcorn. plz go on. :lol:istreakforfood

Best on PC.

Truth.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

The_Crucible

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a developer quote. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

I understand that if someone says its due to number of players, they need to prove it. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN US A REASON ON WHY? Nor did you give us a direct dev quote. Are you kidding? Read your article again. Read your original post again. Its NOT a direct quote.

What in the hell is the point of this news without knowing why? You brought it up, why? To prove a point that the PS3 can't do something, right? But what in the hell is that something?

You haven't a clue.

Firstly, I do not see anything that remotely implies that resources = more RAM. The statement from Rein is very ambigous and hence people here should stop assuming it's RAM.

Secondly, I do not see where in the article it says the PS3 cannot handle 64 player maps. No mention of any kind regarding support of number of players is seen.

Lastly,this is an weak attempt by Dreams to induce another flame war between the lems and the cows as he knows full well that there is SO much ambiguity in Rein's words. This is pretty pathetic actually.

[QUOTE="Nedemis"]you just don't get it, do you? As lemmings, we've accepted that there would be a few games where the DVD9 limitation would deliver a serious blow to SOME developers. Cows on the other hand refuse to believe that there could be ANYTHING that could be considered a limitation with the PS3. This is MASSIVE COW OWNAGE and only the cows will deny it. This is just the begining of games having to be downgraded for the PS3 simply because Sony didn't give devs enough RAM to work with. shivaskunk9mm

First of all, I own a 360 and that's it. I prefer it over all the other consoles and for me it ties with pc for first place.
thing is, i'm a tiny bit sick of rabid fanboys going ape**** over nothing. UE3 was always a guaranteed best
on the pc, and that's the comparison we're given in this, oh so vague interview.
Could memory be the reason the maps are removed? quite possibly. but fanboys have absolutely ZERO
proof that the 360 won't have exactly the same limitations compared with the pc, or even if memory is the real issue.
yet this thread is choke full of ownage confirmation and other fanboy unsubstantiated BS.

fanboys will be fanboys. it is expected. more rational people have suggested the issue may plague both consoles and have reminded people that the PC version will be best.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

oceansandearth

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a developer quote. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

I understand that if someone says its due to number of players, they need to prove it. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN US A REASON ON WHY? Nor did you give us a direct dev quote. Are you kidding? Read your article again. Read your original post again. Its NOT a direct quote.

What in the hell is the point of this news without knowing why? You brought it up, why? To prove a point that the PS3 can't do something, right? But what in the hell is that something?

You haven't a clue.

Firstly, I do not see anything that remotely implies that resources = more RAM. The statement from Rein is very ambigous and hence people here should stop assuming it's RAM.

Secondly, I do not see where in the article it says the PS3 cannot handle 64 player maps. No mention of any kind regarding support of number of players is seen.

Lastly, the this is an weak attempt by Dreams to induce another flame war between the lems and the cows as he knows full well there is SO much ambiguity in Rein's words. This is pretty pathetic actually.

I didn't have any expectations in this thread. it certainly could have been filled with hermits coming in and saying "Best on PC".

But this thread is yet young. We might see more comedy before it's done. ;)

1.) Did I ever say it was due to a number of players? Go back in the thread and research that.

2.) Mark Rein gave you a reason: The PS3 does not have enough resources.

3.) The reason why this is here: For discussion. Like everything else in this forum.

Dreams-Visions

What a joke.

1. I never said you said that it was due to number of players. I was agreeing with you that someone who made that claim should prove it. Just like you need to prove your claim.

2. Thats no reason. What does that mean? Ram, CPU, Storage space, install base, non-standard keyboard, what? Shoot, we don't even know what features we're talking about.

3. The reason why? How can anyone give a reason why without knowing whats missing?

This thread's a joke.

Firstly, I do not see anything that remotely implies that resources = more RAM. The statement from Rein is very ambigous and hence people here should stop assuming it's RAM.

Secondly, I do not see where in the article it says the PS3 cannot handle 64 player maps. No mention of any kind regarding support of number of players is seen.

Lastly,this is an weak attempt by Dreams to induce another flame war between the lems and the cows as he knows full well that there is SO much ambiguity in Rein's words. This is pretty pathetic actually.

oceansandearth

Thank you, sir. At least ONE other person sees all of the many holes Dreams Visions has left with this thread.

[QUOTE="jimbob9999"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.Eopoo

Both. They both only have 512 ram. Thats not enough. High end pcs have 4gbs. Atleast all ps3s have hdds.

dvd9 content must be deleted from the ps3 because it just cant handel it. so much for bluray. you calim you have a high end pc. mind telling us th gpu, cpu and sound card? who made it? what os? you accuse others of not knowing, but you fail to realize 4 gigs was the limit for single core 32 bit systems. what mother board do you have?

you dont have to answer, its all retorical. just some advice, when acusing others of being clueless be careful. you are a noob so illl give you a break, but be prepared to have your bluffs called. dont try to make it up as you go along. that 4 gigs you mentioned as the pc limit, thats systems memory, unified like the 360. some vid cards have a gig. that makes even the total 32 bit limit 5 gigs. dont try to play a hermit when you are a cow. you'll become infamouse and imortalized in self ownage quotes and siged to hell and back.

[QUOTE="Eopoo"]

[QUOTE="jimbob9999"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.rdo

Both. They both only have 512 ram. Thats not enough. High end pcs have 4gbs. Atleast all ps3s have hdds.

dvd9 content must be deleted from the ps3 because it just cant handel it. so much for bluray. you calim you have a high end pc. mind telling us th gpu, cpu and sound card? who made it? what os? you accuse others of not knowing, but you fail to realize 4 gigs was the limit for single core 32 bit systems. what mother board do you have?

you dont have to answer, its all retorical. just some advice, when acusing others of being clueless be careful. you are a noob so illl give you a break, but be prepared to have your bluffs called. dont try to make it up as you go along. that 4 gigs you mentioned as the pc limit, thats systems memory, unified like the 360. some vid cards have a gig. that makes even the total 32 bit limit 5 gigs. dont try to play a hermit when you are a cow. you'll become infamouse and imortalized in self ownage quotes and siged to hell and back.

Nice job on taking the Cow to the Wood Shed using ye ole Branding Iron. :o

[QUOTE="Eopoo"]

[QUOTE="jimbob9999"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.rdo

Both. They both only have 512 ram. Thats not enough. High end pcs have 4gbs. Atleast all ps3s have hdds.

dvd9 content must be deleted from the ps3 because it just cant handel it. so much for bluray. you calim you have a high end pc. mind telling us th gpu, cpu and sound card? who made it? what os? you accuse others of not knowing, but you fail to realize 4 gigs was the limit for single core 32 bit systems. what mother board do you have?

you dont have to answer, its all retorical. just some advice, when acusing others of being clueless be careful. you are a noob so illl give you a break, but be prepared to have your bluffs called. dont try to make it up as you go along. that 4 gigs you mentioned as the pc limit, thats systems memory, unified like the 360. some vid cards have a gig. that makes even the total 32 bit limit 5 gigs. dont try to play a hermit when you are a cow. you'll become infamouse and imortalized in self ownage quotes and siged to hell and back.

the memory footprint of the PS3 OS is only 52mb. at least be up-to-date if your're going to go on a speal.

the GPU on the PS3 can use the XDR RAM from the CPU'spool. they can allocate more than 256 to the RSX.

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"]

[QUOTE="Eurobacca"]I'm not going to care about UT3 with Halo 3, Mass Effect, and Crysis (if it is able to run on anybody's computer) Eurobacca

unreal owns man

UT3 doesn't look half as good as Halo 3

Bungie > Epic

[QUOTE="rdo"][QUOTE="Eopoo"]

[QUOTE="jimbob9999"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Yet again consoles prove they don't work as PC's. I don't even know why developers waste time porting PC games to consoles anyways.Mordred19

Both. They both only have 512 ram. Thats not enough. High end pcs have 4gbs. Atleast all ps3s have hdds.

dvd9 content must be deleted from the ps3 because it just cant handel it. so much for bluray. you calim you have a high end pc. mind telling us th gpu, cpu and sound card? who made it? what os? you accuse others of not knowing, but you fail to realize 4 gigs was the limit for single core 32 bit systems. what mother board do you have?

you dont have to answer, its all retorical. just some advice, when acusing others of being clueless be careful. you are a noob so illl give you a break, but be prepared to have your bluffs called. dont try to make it up as you go along. that 4 gigs you mentioned as the pc limit, thats systems memory, unified like the 360. some vid cards have a gig. that makes even the total 32 bit limit 5 gigs. dont try to play a hermit when you are a cow. you'll become infamouse and imortalized in self ownage quotes and siged to hell and back.

the memory footprint of the PS3 OS is only 52mb. at least be up-to-date if your're going to go on a speal.

the GPU on the PS3 can use the XDR RAM from the CPU'spool. they can allocate more than 256 to the RSX.

Actually the PS3 OS footprint itself is 52 MB and it further uses another 32 MB for graphics memory making it a total of 84 MB whereas the 360 memory takes up 32 MB overall for all applications.

http://ps3-pros.com/archives/4357

Search by:

PS3 Memory Footprint in OS v1.60

This is of course of v1.60. As of now no one has a clear idea on the memory utilisation for v1.93. If you do have a link, please share with us.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

if someone else knows more details, it's up to them to provide support for their claims.

The_Crucible

No, sir. Its up to you to prove your claim. You started the thread without the facts. Its YOU who needs to proveyour thread has any validity. Otherwise its just a mediocre, non-direct quote, without any facts.

Why? Is the start, middle, and end to this thread. You have yet to get us started.

:lol: what?

I provided a link to a developer quote. I don't have to prove anything. I just provided the statement. It's people like you who are trying to suggest it has something to do with 64-player maps. Those claims are all heresay until we see some proof. I am under no obligation at all to find links for you or anyone else. You're not THAT new here, are you?

If you want to counter a claim, you do your own due dilligence, find your own link and post for everyone to see.

You're resisting because no link exists and he was speculating. So how about you find a link or drop this vein of conversation. Fair? Good.

I understand that if someone says its due to number of players, they need to prove it. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN US A REASON ON WHY? Nor did you give us a direct dev quote. Are you kidding? Read your article again. Read your original post again. Its NOT a direct quote.

What in the hell is the point of this news without knowing why? You brought it up, why? To prove a point that the PS3 can't do something, right? But what in the hell is that something?

You haven't a clue.

Crucible you must be new here. I know me and you have exchanged posts, but Dreams does a lot of these posts and quite frankly they are my favorite here on SW. He is not taking sides or trying to prove a point. He finds interesting tidbits , posts them (usually with an awesome gif- a Dreams trademark 8) ), and then asks us to discuss. Relax man.

If the ps3 doesn't have enough resources, neither will the 360, end of discussion. Ownage would only apply if ps3 could not handle 360 maps.rarsi123