Two Worlds 2's developer: PC and PS3 have a little bit more power

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

A "Community director" said this.

Didn't someone with a similar job title say Alan Wake was definitely HD?

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

kozzy1234

they are...odd last I checked the 360 had more games then the ps3, and still has more A, AA, and equal in AAA games...WilliamRLBaker

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"]funny thing is people thinking a community manager can't know anything at all :lol:TintedEyes

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]So the PS3 is more powerful because they got the game to look but not run better on it? I guess that makes sense, as we all know the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, it's just more difficult to develop for. Not sure why this is news.TintedEyes

Well, according to reality, they are.

Anyway, would you enjoy less your console knowing that there is another console that has equally good looking games?

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

TintedEyes

Coming from anyone who made TWO WORLDS, I dont care anything they say, that game was beyond garbage.

Carmack didnt work on Two Worlds did he? He has been with great games, not the worst game and worst rpg of this generation.

Im sorry but anythign anyone from Two Worlds has to say I take with a grain of salt.

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]they are...odd last I checked the 360 had more games then the ps3, and still has more A, AA, and equal in AAA games...JohnF111

Oh dude, this percentage talk doesnt make any sense. You do know that a console with only 1 AAA game has a higher percentage of AAAs than a console with 5 AAAs and 1 AA right?

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

TintedEyes

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/carmack-ps3-performance-lags-behind-360

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

Riverwolf007

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/carmack-ps3-performance-lags-behind-360

Damn man! Now Carnack is not a cool guy again :P

wow, some people are really naive to think that id release differing quality versions like that, it amazes how much people seem to think they know about game development

heres a question for you, if the disparity is what you guys make it out to be, which its not, WHOS GOING TO LICENSE ID TECH 5???

anyways, go pick up the new playstation official magazine whos cover story happens to be Rage where you can read all about its "terrible" framerate

Meh, PC is where its out.

I don't deal in Technical aspects, becasue going by what's on paper, the 360 superior GPU, and easy to work with tech suppose to allow the 360 to have superior looking games both exclusive and multiplat, but that isn't the case. I go by action, and going by actions, the ps3 have the better looking exclusives, while the 360 have the better looking multiplats most of the time.

ermacness

funny thing is people thinking a community manager can't know anything at all :lol:TintedEyes

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

TintedEyes

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

Riverwolf007

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/carmack-ps3-performance-lags-behind-360

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Who cares what this guy says, Two Worlds was the worst RPG ive ever played, period.

Ravensmash

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]So the PS3 is more powerful because they got the game to look but not run better on it? I guess that makes sense, as we all know the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, it's just more difficult to develop for. Not sure why this is news.PAL360

Well, according to reality, they are.

Anyway, would you enjoy less your console knowing that there is another console that has equally good looking games?

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"] he agrees with john carmack, do you care what he says?TintedEyes

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/carmack-ps3-performance-lags-behind-360

according to SONY PAID devs they arent TintedEyes

Fixed. :)

But there again, no one takes what SONY EMPLOYERS say about a SONY PRODUCT.

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]lulz, yeah bring carmack into it. good thinking.

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/carmack-ps3-performance-lags-behind-360

Ravensmash

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]according to SONY PAID devs they arent The_RedLion

and carmack :)TintedEyes

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]and carmack :)The_RedLion

and ps3 has more peak performance :)TintedEyes

"Processing wise, the main CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's where a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3."

From Carmack himself.

Carmack in May 2010

"In a recent interview in G4tv, John Carmack, coding genius of id software has made some statements regarding the issue of PS3 and Xbox 360. Although this is only the opinion of a developer of high-profile, his opinion should be much more valid than the millions of posts in the Forum on the topic.

Basically, says that the PS3 is more powerful, but the 360 has better development tools and is its console preferred to develop for.

"Do little nitpicky decisions on say, well, I prefer the symmetric approach that MS has on asymmetric Cell approach, but you can make great games in any of the and take fundamental decisions based on the depth of the documentation, and development tools that Microsoft has been higher in," added.

Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations".

"But according to Carmack is more important to have the best tools of development.""When you look in these development cycles that stretch for years and years, being 20 % more easily develop is much more important that be 20 % more powerful", said Carmack.

However, if we had asked Kojima if PS3 development tools are lower than those available for the 360, we would probably have a different answer."

Took about 6 seconds to find with this marvellous invention. PS3- more powerful. 360- more efficient/easier to work with. So...what we've all known for years.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"]and carmack :)TintedEyes

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]and ps3 has more peak performance :)The_RedLion

"Processing wise, the main CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's where a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3."

From Carmack himself.

check floppys quote :)TintedEyes

Carmack in May 2010

"In a recent interview in G4tv, John Carmack, coding genius of id software has made some statements regarding the issue of PS3 and Xbox 360. Although this is only the opinion of a developer of high-profile, his opinion should be much more valid than the millions of posts in the Forum on the topic.

Basically, says that the PS3 is more powerful, but the 360 has better development tools and is its console preferred to develop for.

"Do little nitpicky decisions on say, well, I prefer the symmetric approach that MS has on asymmetric Cell approach, but you can make great games in any of the and take fundamental decisions based on the depth of the documentation, and development tools that Microsoft has been higher in," added.

Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations".

"But according to Carmack is more important to have the best tools of development.""When you look in these development cycles that stretch for years and years, being 20 % more easily develop is much more important that be 20 % more powerful", said Carmack.

However, if we had asked Kojima if PS3 development tools are lower than those available for the 360, we would probably have a different answer."

Took about 6 seconds to find with this marvellous invention. PS3- more powerful. 360- more efficient/easier to work with. So...what we've all known for years.

Floppy_Jim

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]check floppys quote :)The_RedLion

Here's how I interpret the Carmack quote- the 360 is the well rounded Apprentice. The PS3 is the Jedi Master with only one leg. I think this makes perfect sense.

and ps3 is more powerful, what i have been saying all along :)TintedEyes

Carmack in May 2010

"In a recent interview in G4tv, John Carmack, coding genius of id software has made some statements regarding the issue of PS3 and Xbox 360. Although this is only the opinion of a developer of high-profile, his opinion should be much more valid than the millions of posts in the Forum on the topic.

Basically, says that the PS3 is more powerful, but the 360 has better development tools and is its console preferred to develop for.

"Do little nitpicky decisions on say, well, I prefer the symmetric approach that MS has on asymmetric Cell approach, but you can make great games in any of the and take fundamental decisions based on the depth of the documentation, and development tools that Microsoft has been higher in," added.

Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations".

"But according to Carmack is more important to have the best tools of development.""When you look in these development cycles that stretch for years and years, being 20 % more easily develop is much more important that be 20 % more powerful", said Carmack.

However, if we had asked Kojima if PS3 development tools are lower than those available for the 360, we would probably have a different answer."

Took about 6 seconds to find with this marvellous invention. PS3- more powerful. 360- more efficient/easier to work with. So...what we've all known for years.

Floppy_Jim

"You can see the game itself is a little tailored towards each platform, obviously," he said. "For example, the PC and the PS3, just based on the nature of the machines, have a little bit more power when it comes to graphical fidelity and things like that. So we're able to ramp it up a little higher."

dragonboot

I read this and only one thing came to mind:

Who ya gonna call?

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]and ps3 is more powerful, what i have been saying all along :)The_RedLion

[QUOTE="Floppy_Jim"]

Carmack in May 2010

"In a recent interview in G4tv, John Carmack, coding genius of id software has made some statements regarding the issue of PS3 and Xbox 360. Although this is only the opinion of a developer of high-profile, his opinion should be much more valid than the millions of posts in the Forum on the topic.

Basically, says that the PS3 is more powerful, but the 360 has better development tools and is its console preferred to develop for.

"Do little nitpicky decisions on say, well, I prefer the symmetric approach that MS has on asymmetric Cell approach, but you can make great games in any of the and take fundamental decisions based on the depth of the documentation, and development tools that Microsoft has been higher in," added.

Speaking of power hardware Carmack said that "the hardware is comparable", but said that "PS3 is probably marginally more powerful in terms of raw flops and graphics operations".

"But according to Carmack is more important to have the best tools of development.""When you look in these development cycles that stretch for years and years, being 20 % more easily develop is much more important that be 20 % more powerful", said Carmack.

However, if we had asked Kojima if PS3 development tools are lower than those available for the 360, we would probably have a different answer."

Took about 6 seconds to find with this marvellous invention. PS3- more powerful. 360- more efficient/easier to work with. So...what we've all known for years.

Ravensmash

Yes, I've always believed it to be marginal anyway. Anyone saying "The PS3 is more powerful" is right. It's a fact. But it's not worth boasting about.

but still more powerful whether you find it relevant or notTintedEyes

http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/ReclusiveSpirit/john-carmack-unplugged-xbox-360-ps3-98107.phtml

I think this says the best...

"Yeah, I mean that's our position that it's almost unequivocal across the board that the 360 is a better platform to develop for. When you get down into actual comparisons on the hardware performance characteristics, it's not quite an apples to apples comparison. On almost anything on the strictly graphical side, in terms of pushing vertexes and triangles on there, the 360 hardware is superior to the PS3"

"...the only thing Sony has going for them over the 360, is the data storage on the blu-ray..." And about a minute and a half later, just in case we didn't quite hear him correctly the first time, he said, "...the only real advantage that the PS3 has over the 360, from our point of view, is the extra space."

Ofcourse Cell has more theoretical power but as many said(including Carmack) when you actually start to develop game you have to dedicate alot of Cell resources for what RSX SHOULD do and then theoretical means jack... :)

Crytek...

"I mean essentially the game we run is about the same. Probably one's stronger on the GPU side, one's stronger on the CPU side, so depending on what you're doing where, the PS3 does perform here sometimes better, the 360 performs other things better, but overall by the time the game ships it'll be absolutely the same."

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]check floppys quote :)TintedEyes

Definition of marginal - –adjective

1. pertaining to a margin.

2. situated on the border or edge.

3. at the outer or lower limits; minimal for requirements; almost insufficient: marginal subsistence; marginal ability.

4. written or printed in the margin of a page: a marginal note.

5. Sociology . marked by contact with disparate cultures, and acquiring some but not all the traits or values common to any one of them.

6. Economics . a. selling goods at a price that just equals the additional cost of producing the last unit supplied. b. of or pertaining to goods produced and marketed at margin: marginal profits.

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]but still more powerful whether you find it relevant or notThe_RedLion

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"]and ps3 is more powerful, what i have been saying all along :)TintedEyes

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] Floppy quotesays the 360 is better for programmers :o

Ravensmash

Definition of marginal - –adjective

1. pertaining to a margin.

2. situated on the border or edge.

3. at the outer or lower limits; minimal for requirements; almost insufficient: marginal subsistence; marginal ability.

4. written or printed in the margin of a page: a marginal note.

5. Sociology . marked by contact with disparate cultures, and acquiring some but not all the traits or values common to any one of them.

6. Economics . a. selling goods at a price that just equals the additional cost of producing the last unit supplied. b. of or pertaining to goods produced and marketed at margin: marginal profits.

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"] and ps3 is more powerful, what i have been saying all along :)TintedEyes

Definition of marginal - –adjective

1. pertaining to a margin.

2. situated on the border or edge.

3. at the outer or lower limits; minimal for requirements; almost insufficient: marginal subsistence; marginal ability.

4. written or printed in the margin of a page: a marginal note.

5. Sociology . marked by contact with disparate cultures, and acquiring some but not all the traits or values common to any one of them.

6. Economics . a. selling goods at a price that just equals the additional cost of producing the last unit supplied. b. of or pertaining to goods produced and marketed at margin: marginal profits.