Am. Football games 2008 PS3/X360

[Neb]

Exactly..

Swanlee if you feel you need to compare the visual quality of video games across platforms as a "perfect indication" of hardware capability then shit! You really have no idea.. Plus I can't believe I spent a good 30 mins on my last post in an attempt to try and explain something to you and you respond with arguements of which i've already explained why they don't work in real life..

In your own little world sure! the Xbox360 can be the most powerful console in the universe!

But come back down to earth, get a brain for the science of the subject and do some reading and you'll soon realise that you don't need multi-platform games to "prove" that hardware A is technically more powerful than hardware B

Heck you don't even need a game.. If you did then by that logic both RSX AND Xenos are "more powerful than nvidia's G80 purely because there are no games "released" which "prove" G80's technical superiority".

Heck we could even go further than that and claim that PS3 is more powerful than IBM's blue gene because that particular multi-million-dollar supercomputer doesn't have any games (available or in development) for it at all!!

You still get a hint, even though it is a bit early now. Think about this, if so much more powerful why is there not 16xAF and 4x/8xAA on all games released so far?

I mean atleast AF shouldn't be hard to implement... :smile:

Edit: Oh I think Crysis is the game for G80 so... //

 

[betan]

Development is a zero sum game. Adding multiplayer to a game takes time and money away from other parts. If it wasn't like this then Uncharted, Mass Effect and Lair would all have multiplayer.

By the same logic, same goes for everything else, cut-scenes, acting, animation, bigger levels, etc.
Adding those take money and time away from other parts.
Particularly the three PS3 games you listed are going for cinematic experience. It shouldn't be cheap.

By the way, since you mentioned Forza 2, I feel you forgot Motorstorm and F1 both of which have MP.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

These ideas are irrelevant..

Nobody has stated anything in relation to bad, lazy devs nor have they blamed the hardware for sh***y ports/versions of multiplatform games..

I was talking in general not this thread in particular.

 

[iceberg187]

By the same logic, same goes for everything else, cut-scenes, acting, animation, bigger levels, etc.
Adding those take money and time away from other parts.
Particularly the three PS3 games you listed are going for cinematic experience. It shouldn't be cheap.

By the way, since you mentioned Forza 2, I feel you forgot Motorstorm and F1 both of which have MP.

Motorstorm doesn't have local multiplayer. Playing online is like the same as playing single player. They don't have to account for 2-4 people going through co-op, combating the same enemies. Things of that nature.

 

[NovemberMike]

By the same logic, same goes for everything else, cut-scenes, acting, animation, bigger levels, etc.
Adding those take money and time away from other parts.
Particularly the three PS3 games you listed are going for cinematic experience. It shouldn't be cheap.

Of course. When I said this was a zero sum game, I meant that when you add up the resources used on any game you get 1 (think about it like percentages). Any good developer should balance each need to create the best game.

Take your first example, cut scenes. You could blow 10 million dollars easily on an hour of movie perfect CGI (like in Finding Nemo). The reason nobody does it is because it's a bad design decision, but they still need a small amount (not really sure about the amount, but maybe 1-2 million). Those three PS3 games I listed don't have to worry about multiplayer though, so that is an entire category that they can reallocate to their other departments. The xbox games don't have that luxury.

You also have to remember that multiplayer limits certain design decisions. Let's say there is an open-ended encounter in a valley (couple banshees in the air, small human contingent with some vehicles to the west, brutes to the north and flood charging in from caves to the southeast). With one player, this is fairly easy to balance because Bungie just has to make sure that nothing can kill the player too quickly for him to fight back. With two players though, they have to up the difficulty without making it impossible for the players to split up a little bit. 4 players adds even more to the problem.

By the way, since you mentioned Forza 2, I feel you forgot Motorstorm and F1 both of which have MP.

I am not really interested in a list war.

 

[patsu]

Development is a zero sum game. Adding multiplayer to a game takes time and money away from other parts. If it wasn't like this then Uncharted, Mass Effect and Lair would all have multiplayer.

It also depends on what game the developers want to make. If Lair were to have multiplayer, it may play like Warhawk (full-blown air-ground war). Online patching change the dynamics too: There are talks about adding multiplayer via a follow-up patch for some games.

In that sense, they don't have to be mutually exclusive over time. I like the other new Cell thread (How SPUs are used in games). It would be interesting to see how the content evolve.

 

[Nesh]

You still get a hint, even though it is a bit early now. Think about this, if so much more powerful why is there not 16xAF and 4x/8xAA on all games released so far?

I mean atleast AF shouldn't be hard to implement... :smile:

Edit: Oh I think Crysis is the game for G80 so... //

Harder to develop for probably?

Wasnt the same case with many complains regarding the PS2's capabilities in its first year of its life?

Are the ports released so far SOOO advanced on it PS3 cant do them well or do better graphics?

Depends also what you mean by "so much more" powerful, because I havent seen anyone trying to say that the PS3 is "sooooo much more powerful than 360"

What we did see though from respected members (and developers) is "lack of optimization" and that the PS3 is more powerful than what these multiplatfom games suggest. There is nothing strange or extraordinary in that

I mean check out the multiplatform games. Even the simplest effects arent well ported most of the time. Its more illogical to believe that the PS3 cant even do these. Especially when they are there in other games with more complicated effects too. Even AC4 lacks a bit on the PS3. A 1st gen game without anything special visually. Looks mediocre in its best form on 360 too.

 

[Nesh]

By the same logic, same goes for everything else, cut-scenes, acting, animation, bigger levels, etc.
Adding those take money and time away from other parts.
Particularly the three PS3 games you listed are going for cinematic experience. It shouldn't be cheap.

By the way, since you mentioned Forza 2, I feel you forgot Motorstorm and F1 both of which have MP.

But thats exactly the point. All these add to the single player experience and they are important for the developer if he wants to make that SP experience as rich as possible. Trying to add MP, might sacrifice from the effort, resources, time and money usually put into the SP and move them towards a well built MP mode.

edit: also depends from the game your are trying to make

 

[Neb]

Depends also what you mean by "so much more" powerful, because I havent seen anyone trying to say that the PS3 is "sooooo much more powerful than 360".

Well for a starter, SONY.

What we did see though from respected members (and developers) is "lack of optimization" and that the PS3 is more powerful than what these multiplatfom games suggest. There is nothing strange or extraordinary in that

Of course there will be games badly optimized but for how long will the phrase 'lack of optimization' be used, until games look better on PS3 no mather how many years or months it takes or?

If it looks worse it is 'badly optimized', if it looks better it is 'optimized' or?

I mean check out the multiplatform games. Even the simplest effects arent well ported most of the time. Its more illogical to believe that the PS3 cant even do these. Especially when they are there in other games with more complicated effects too. Even AC4 lacks a bit on the PS3. A 1st gen game without anything special visually. Looks mediocre in its best form on 360 too.

It is a balance, extra of some effects may require devs to cut down on something else, 20/20/60, 30/10/60, different ratios but the aim is to mantain 30/60fps at HD res. Xbox360 has it strengths and PS3 has it strengths as well as weakness (both) and thus it may be visible in games. Can be such thing as lack of X feature or not as detailed effect as X platform and so on. :smile:

 

[Pozer]

Maybe it's easier to port from the 360 to ps3 or, due to market conditions devs are getting in the habit of porting from the 360 to the ps3.

 

[Jesus2006]

If it looks worse it is 'badly optimized', if it looks better it is 'optimized' or?

You got it! :smile:

It is a balance, extra of some effects may require devs to cut down on something else, 20/20/60, 30/10/60, different ratios but the aim is to mantain 30/60fps at HD res. Xbox360 has it strengths and PS3 has it strengths as well as weakness (both) and thus it may be visible in games. Can be such thing as lack of X feature or not as detailed effect as X platform and so on. :smile:

That doesn't answer what he wrote (that there are games that excel(l) whats missing in those games on PS3 by far).

 

[Nesh]

Well for a starter, SONY.



Of course there will be games badly optimized but for how long will the phrase 'lack of optimization' be used, until games look better on PS3 no mather how many years or months it takes or?

If it looks worse it is 'badly optimized', if it looks better it is 'optimized' or?



It is a balance, extra of some effects may require devs to cut down on something else, 20/20/60, 30/10/60, different ratios but the aim is to mantain 30/60fps at HD res. Xbox360 has it strengths and PS3 has it strengths as well as weakness (both) and thus it may be visible in games. Can be such thing as lack of X feature or not as detailed effect as X platform and so on. :smile:

Ok Sony said that at E3 2005 and has been beaten to death already. Now its 2007 and you arent talking with Sony in here. You are talking with independent members who dont follow the "XBOX360=XBOX1.5".

How long? It may even take as much as the console's life too. And in these years you will also see a few occasions where ports are perfect.
PS2's Sonic Heroes (as well as many other ported games) looked like crap in 2003 when Sonic Adventure on the DC looked 5 times better on DC in 1998. Sega's Ferrari game, Ecco the Dolphin, Headhunter were slightly better on DC. And I think DOA2 as well despite Tecmo's claims. Some of these occasions were used as originally as an indication that DC was much better than the PS2 in terms of capabilities.

It would have been about balance if these games were demanding. Well they are not. Its like having 2 different pots that can be filled with differently shaped objects. Well they are both less than half full. For example whats so special or demanding about CoD3 that made the PS3 lack? Or AC4? What part of that game is so sophisticated that it takes advantage of a 360's special strength absent from the PS3?

Of course you have noticed, in these bad ports, there is no place where the PS3 looked better because it had "a strength". Even the most standard, the most simplistic things are not well done. Things that have nothing to do with particular "strengths". Its more like PS3's strengths were all downlplayed from 30/10/60 to 10/10/30. So where's the balance?

 

[rounin]

Well its less than a year since PS3's launch (by the earliest launch date) and already there have been games that look just as good (and depending on preference, even better) than their X360 originals.

Most notable is Rainbow 6 Vegas, because it runs on Unreal 3 engine (not quite sure, but I think that was the final conclusion in the other thread), which signifies that at least one dev is already able to port games using the widely used engine on the X360 properly to the PS3 with little penalty.

Seeing the last generation and how long it took for the PS2 to catch up to the DC's visuals in terms of ports (and some doubt it ever did), I would say the PS3 is doing quite well for itself already.

 

[assen]

Most notable is Rainbow 6 Vegas, because it runs on Unreal 3 engine (not quite sure, but I think that was the final conclusion in the other thread), which signifies that at least one dev is already able to port games using the widely used engine on the X360 properly to the PS3 with little penalty.

Even if you argue that Vegas looks just as good on PS3 - which will place in you in disagreement with most reviewers - I wouldn't call a six-month delay "a little penalty".

 

[Neb]

Even if you argue that Vegas looks just as good on PS3 - which will place in you in disagreement with most reviewers - I wouldn't call a six-month delay "a little penalty".

UE3 engine should work quite good with PS3 since it should be optimized for PS3/CELL architecture. I mean didn't the UT3 devs say that they ported the UT3 demo to PS3 in about 2 months for E3'05 and that UE3 engine took advantage of UE3 in a good way?

 

[rounin]

Even if you argue that Vegas looks just as good on PS3 - which will place in you in disagreement with most reviewers - I wouldn't call a six-month delay "a little penalty".

My answer to your post would be in the post that you replied to if you read it differently.

 

[assen]

UE3 engine should work quite good with PS3 since it should be optimized for PS3/CELL architecture. I mean didn't the UT3 devs say that they ported the UT3 demo to PS3 in about 2 months for E3'05 and that UE3 engine took advantage of UE3 in a good way?

UT3 devs said "buy our product, it is good". The dearth of UE3 PS3 titles shows that there's something fishy going there.

My answer to your post would be in the post that you replied to if you read it differently.

Sorry, I tried again, and I couldn't find an answer to the question: is a six month delay a "small penalty"? Would it be a "small disadvantage" to the platform if all multiplatform titles arrive there at either half the framerate (football), half the detail (Spider-Man 3) or with 6 months delay (Vegas)?

 

[patsu]

UE3 engine should work quite good with PS3 since it should be optimized for PS3/CELL architecture. I mean didn't the UT3 devs say that they ported the UT3 demo to PS3 in about 2 months for E3'05 and that UE3 engine took advantage of UE3 in a good way?

Porting and optimization are 2 different beasts. I think Epic got sucked into Gears of Wars shortly after. So they may still have (much ?) work before them. Perhaps the developers can comment.

 

[warb]

Earlier this week, EA confirmed that Medal of Honor Airborne for PS3 would be arriving in November this year, as opposed to the August 28 release date for the Xbox 360 and PC versions.

Executive producer Patrick Gilmore told Next-Gen in a phone interview today that the Airborne team had received PS3 dev kits “a little bit laterâ€￾ than Xbox 360 and PC, and those two SKUs have “alwaysâ€￾ been ahead of the PS3 version.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6285&Itemid=2

 

[Neb]

Earlier this week, EA confirmed that Medal of Honor Airborne for PS3 would be arriving in November this year, as opposed to the August 28 release date for the Xbox 360 and PC versions.

Executive producer Patrick Gilmore told Next-Gen in a phone interview today that the Airborne team had received PS3 dev kits “a little bit later” than Xbox 360 and PC, and those two SKUs have “always” been ahead of the PS3 version.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6285&Itemid=2

Thats why PS3 multiplatform titles recieves half a year or more of development time or?