So with the recent release of Red Dead Redemption gamers once again see why it is better to buy the 360 version of a multiplatform title. Sure you can still enjoy the PS3 version but when you put it next to the 360 version one cannot help but get annoyed with Sony and the so-called power of the cell in the PS3. Yes I guess you can put part of the blame on the developer but IMO most of the blame has to go to Sony. Sony created an asymmetrical machine that seemingly tends to "choke" the power of the PS3. Having a lot of power means nothing if the anatomy of the machine is created in such a way that the power is seldomly brought out in the games being released.
Yes Naughty Dog has shown that given time and support that they can fight off the relentless "choke hold" in the system and harness a decent amoumt of power from the system and show off some of its graphical capabilities (Even though I was not as floored as other people with UC2's graphics).
So people see a game like UC2 and then the blurry mess that is RDR on PS3 and then scratch their head. Of course the easy thing to do is blame Rockstar but they like other developers are here to make money and time is money. So then you hear comments like, "Well if PS3 was the lead platform it would look better." Or "Look at the PS3 exclusives the 360 couldn't handle those games." Which brings me to my question is that statement really true?
People keep talking about the power of the PS3. Well heck...what about the power of the 360? The 360 is also powerful AND it's easier to develop for.
So my question is this...
Given the same development time don't you think that Naughty Dog, Kojima/Konami, Santa Monica Studios, Guerilla Games, Sucker Punch, Zipper etc.. could release a similar graphical quality that would at least be on par or dare I say slightly better because of the ease of development in the 360. Again think about it. The 360 is easier to develop for AND it's still freakin' powerful. My answer is yes that those games on the 360 would at least be on par. I mean look at Crysis 2. That game is already dropping jaws for the 360 version of the game. Yes the PS3 version is said to look nice too but all the talk has been about the 360 version.
....and don't tell me Crytek sucks because they are a respected developer in the PC community supposedly working hard to harness the power of both systems yet the 360 is getting the attention even if the difference is a hair. I've always wondered what Naughty Dog or Guerilla games could do on the 360....and even though their games look good on the PS3 I still notice a couple of graphical flaws that I wonder if they would exist if the game was developed on the 360.
....and please don't tell me well they already said their games were only possible on the PS3. Lol of course they're gonna say that for obvious reasons. Anyway I know it would never happen but I would really like to see what those devs could do with the 360.
T-razor1
Umm you do realize crytech said crysis 2 looks and runs better on ps3 currently??And no the ps3 isn't to blame rockstar engine was made for 360 not the ps3 they had 5yrs to make this game and it looks like crap plain and simple. Naughty dog made uncharted 2 in 2 yrs look at how good that looks so if I were you I would be quite because you are only going to get owned. Exclusives take full advantage for a system multiplatform titles the lead system takes the most advantage research you are only making yourself look bad. 
Log in to comment