Who do you trust in Maximizing the PS3? Crytek, Id Software, Sony first party

Who do you trust when it comes to pushing the PS3 to it's edge?

.

-Geurilla Games said they are making steam come out of the PS3 with their latest Graphical marvel, Killzone 3. And Killzone 2 still reigns best FPS graphics on consoles.

-Crytek said that with Crysis 2, they've already pushed the PS3 about 50% more than what other devs say were possible. And they are the devs of Crysis, the only graphics King to date. But can do do the same with a 5 year old hardware?

-Id Software created Doom 3 which set the bar for Graphics back then?

-Naughty Dog was the first to utilize 100% of the PS3's 7 core SPU?

Sony, they don't have to worry about multiplatform woes. They focus all their time on optimizing it for the PS3 where as all the others have to optimize it for multiple systems and equalize it.

Valve.ferret-gamer

Sony's exclusive game devs would most likey maximize the PS3 gaming experience.

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

Sony first party obviously. They've been pushing out the best looking console games recently. Maybe Epic can do it as well. SilverChimera

microsoft

The Force

Epic claims they know the secret to developing for the PS3. but we'll never know because they only help with Bulletstorm, and Gears will never be on PS3

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

lostfan132

You didn't come here just to post a sarcastic answer to the poll, and then follow with a really irrelevant remark did you? ok then...

Anyways, I reckon naughty dog will push the machine farthest towards its limit with its next installment of uncharted.

Valve.ferret-gamer

...is probably what I'd consider to be the only wrong answer to this question.

The OB wasn't impressive.

Valve.ferret-gamer

microsoft

MK-Professor

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

You know what I dont get? Crytek said that "the 360 and PS3 are equally as powerfull" BUT then they say" the PS3 version of Crisis 2 is the lowest denominator", does that make any sense? IF they are equal in power, why cant your game the same for both platforms? Crytek is just going to take the easy way out and give us a bad port. Yeah I get it, the PS3 is harder to develop, but isnt Crytek like the best at maxing out anything and going in deep in tech?J-WOW

[QUOTE="J-WOW"]You know what I dont get? Crytek said that "the 360 and PS3 are equally as powerfull" BUT then they say" the PS3 version of Crisis 2 is the lowest denominator", does that make any sense? IF they are equal in power, why cant your game the same for both platforms? Crytek is just going to take the easy way out and give us a bad port. Yeah I get it, the PS3 is harder to develop, but isnt Crytek like the best at maxing out anything and going in deep in tech?johny300

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

You know what I dont get? Crytek said that "the 360 and PS3 are equally as powerfull" BUT then they say" the PS3 version of Crisis 2 is the lowest denominator", does that make any sense? IF they are equal in power, why cant your game the same for both platforms? Crytek is just going to take the easy way out and give us a bad port. Yeah I get it, the PS3 is harder to develop, but isnt Crytek like the best at maxing out anything and going in deep in tech?J-WOW

[QUOTE="lostfan132"]

treyarch going by their amazing effort with black ops on ps3:|

jk they pretty much released the worst port of all time (horrible graphics and framerate problems all over the plays, the game is unplayable right now)

J-WOW

well the game in general has crappy graphics, but have you played it on ps3? the framerate problems online are terrible. and its not lag its framertate problems in all maps and more prevalent on a few (firing range, jungle, and some others). i havent played the xbox version but i hear at least it runs smoothe. trust me ive tested this, i have 4 bar connection ,verizon vios, i run an ethernet cable to my ps3, every other game i have runs perfect. i even started a lan game by myself disconnected from the psn and theres framerate issues.

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="J-WOW"]You know what I dont get? Crytek said that "the 360 and PS3 are equally as powerfull" BUT then they say" the PS3 version of Crisis 2 is the lowest denominator", does that make any sense? IF they are equal in power, why cant your game the same for both platforms? Crytek is just going to take the easy way out and give us a bad port. Yeah I get it, the PS3 is harder to develop, but isnt Crytek like the best at maxing out anything and going in deep in tech?ferret-gamer

I'm going to go with Sony's first party. They don't have to divide their resources amongst multiple platforms and can focus 100% on the PS3. I Think when Naughty Dog announces Uncharted 3 and shows some gameplay we will see the pinnacle of graphics for this gen of consoles.

If not them, than i'd go with Crytek

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="J-WOW"]You know what I dont get? Crytek said that "the 360 and PS3 are equally as powerfull" BUT then they say" the PS3 version of Crisis 2 is the lowest denominator", does that make any sense? IF they are equal in power, why cant your game the same for both platforms? Crytek is just going to take the easy way out and give us a bad port. Yeah I get it, the PS3 is harder to develop, but isnt Crytek like the best at maxing out anything and going in deep in tech?ferret-gamer

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"][QUOTE="johny300"] Good question.J-WOW

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="johny300"] Good question.johny300

I don't think we should consider the expression "lowest common denominatior" in sole terms of hardware power in this context. What works well with some architectures, works like ass with others.

I'm not going to argue over which console has more power, because that horse has been flogged to well past redundancy by now, but I don't think any multiplat will truly "maximize" any console. As long as the code is made to work on two different platforms, there's something that could have been made to work better.

[QUOTE="J-WOW"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] PS3 requires more coding work to achieve the same level of fidelity.ferret-gamer

I'm going to go with Sony's first party. They don't have to divide their resources amongst multiple platforms and can focus 100% on the PS3. I Think when Naughty Dog announces Uncharted 3 and shows some gameplay we will see the pinnacle of graphics for this gen of consoles.

If not them, than i'd go with Crytek

BPoole96

This is what I was going to say. You nailed it, all the time is spent on one console. Same for any developer for any console.

Also, if we go by recent console graphic examples :

The amazing looking KZ2,

The Fantastic looking GOWIII, and

The Award Winning, 100 GOTY+ Uncharted 2...the PS3 1st Party seems to be maximizing the PS3 for sure.

We'll see how 1st Party Gran Turismo 5 does next week.

It seems to me, the Sony has more to gain maximizing their machine as well, than say, some random 3rd Party developer working on multiple consoles simultaneously.

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"][QUOTE="J-WOW"] then why arent they doing it? I mean I know we havent seen the PS3 version BUT for them to just come out and say the PS3 verions in going to be the crappy one, like its the weather its not right. The game has lots of time still and right now they with that comment probably means they arent going to put much effort into it and are just going to say excuses once its releasedJ-WOW

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] PS3 requires more coding work to achieve the same level of fidelity. Thats why they consider it the lowest common denominatior

Filthybastrd

I don't think we should consider the expression "lowest common denominatior" in sole terms of hardware power in this context. What works well with some architectures, works like ass with others.

I'm not going to argue over which console has more power, because that horse has been flogged to well past redundancy by now, but I don't think any multiplat will truly "maximize" any console. As long as the code is made to work on two different platforms, there's something that could have been made to work better.

[QUOTE="J-WOW"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] Um.. where did you find them saying anything like that? They have 2 separate teams in competition for the consoles, all they are saying is tthat the ps3 is the lowest common denomnator cause it takes longer and harder to do the same stuff.johny300

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="J-WOW"] either way, the PS3 better not get the short end of the stick this time, cuz its 2010 (Crysis2 will be out 2011) and this bad port BS is getting ridiculousJ-WOW

First party dev IMO. cause they focus only on ps3 system.

Naughty Dog.

Writing custom shaders in assembly. Those guys are machines.

Should this even be a question? Obviously Sony's first party developers are going to produce a higher quality game than a multiplat developer will.

Honestly, so far I'd easily go with Sony first party.

Square Enix!

The ones who have been consistently taking advantage of the system and it's strength since fall 2007, Sony.

[QUOTE="J-WOW"][QUOTE="johny300"] Then buy a 360 ?johny300