Fixed.
Anyway if these fanboyz are so angry over the loss of a PS3 exlusive they should put their money where their mouth is and promise to buy 2 copies of DMC4 per gamer if Capcom kept it PS3 exclusive.
Devil May Cry 4 Going Multi-platform! (Xbox 360/PS3/PC) *Confirmed
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
Fixed.
Anyway if these fanboyz are so angry over the loss of a PS3 exlusive they should put their money where their mouth is and promise to buy 2 copies of DMC4 per gamer if Capcom kept it PS3 exclusive.
Fu3lFr3nzy
Regular
@ fanboys.Im sure if Capcom announced sometime this year that LP and DR are going to the PS3 aswell, the same angry mob will become hypocrites and praise Capcom for their move.
Must be fun being close minded....
Im sure if Capcom announced sometime this year that LP and DR are going to the PS3 aswell, the same angry mob will become hypocrites and praise Capcom for their move.
Must be fun being close minded....
No, They'd be mad for getting "lowly xb360 ports".
Fu3lFr3nzy
Regular
Oh yeah, that too
No, They'd be mad for getting "lowly xb360 ports".
That would annoy normal consumers too not necessarilly fanboys
That's the point. It shouldn't "annoy" anybody. If the game is good, it's good. The image that some people have in their head of "xbox1.5" and the like is false and my favorite response to this lovely notion is, "check the multiplayer games". If the "lowly xbox360" can run a game better than ps3, what does that say about ps3?
Some people ...
It's like the notion of team A calling out team B before the game:
"Those guys suck and we're going to win"
If that's the case, then team A just won against guys who "suck", so how does that make the victory of team A over team B anything noteworthy? If team A loses to team B after calling out team B as "Those guys suck", then what does that make Team A?
Funny fanisms.
That's the point. It shouldn't "annoy" anybody. If the game is good, it's good. The image that some people have in their head of "xbox1.5" and the like is false and my favorite response to this lovely notion is, "check the multiplayer games". If the "lowly xbox360" can run a game better than ps3, what does that say about ps3?
Some people ...
It's like the notion of team A calling out team B before the game:
"Those guys suck and we're going to win"
If that's the case, then team A just won against guys who "suck", so how does that make the victory of team A over team B anything noteworthy? If team A loses to team B after calling out team B as "Those guys suck", then what does that make Team A?
Funny fanisms.
You shouldnt bring any fanboy comments like the"xbox1.5" one etc or who wins and who loses in the console wars as a reply to my post because I am only refering to the simple consumer who only wants the most best out of his investment. My point is that the casual consumer also cares about graphics with a sense of rationality. Thats why he bought a next gen console in the first place, which also can be the PS3. Its natural he will be anoyied by constant not good enough efforts from the developers. Especially when the reduced quality doesnt seem to be a result of hardware weaknesses.
Ist a natural behaviour in human nature to use contrasts and comparisons in an effort to form a judgement of his own wealth. Its called equity theory and it has nothing to do with the fanboys.
I wasn't talking about you, but if you look at the trail of comments and where my original statement stemmed from you would see my post in context. And If someone gets upset because their system got a great game like Lost Planet from the "lowly" xbox360 because it doesn't have "good enough graphics" I say point out a clearly better looking game on ps3.
But now that your reply enforces the notion ...
"not good enough ports". Any port that has been brought to the ps3 has been upgraded if given time (in some cases, downgraded in areas due to system constraints). If LP comes to PS3 and has a downgrade here or there it won't matter if the rest of the game recieved an overhaul and upgraded because to ps fanboys the game didn't "max out" the ps3 when in fact it may have done the best they could but the ps3 does actually have some shortcomings.
As it has been, up till this point, ps3 has recieved AAA dev support while xb360 has ben relegated to the 2nd tier in multiplat games. Now that situation is changing and it seems many devs are using the xb360 as the prime dev for multiple reasons but it doesn't matter because ps3 is still getting good support from good devs. They just need to pick up their end of the bargain and improve the tools to enable dev parity but any title that has been ported from xb360 at a later date to ps3 has recieved upgrades and even if LP did not, it would still be one of the best games on the platform but I guess some wouldn't realize this as the origin of this title was not of the "elite" ps3 breed.
But now that your reply enforces the notion ...
"not good enough ports". Any port that has been brought to the ps3 has been upgraded if given time (in some cases, downgraded in areas due to system constraints). If LP comes to PS3 and has a downgrade here or there it won't matter if the rest of the game recieved an overhaul and upgraded because to ps fanboys the game didn't "max out" the ps3 when in fact it may have done the best they could but the ps3 does actually have some shortcomings.
.
Pretty much the same as with PS2 vs Xbox in multiplatform games...
Fixed.
Anyway if these fanboyz are so angry over the loss of a PS3 exlusive they should put their money where their mouth is and promise to buy 3 to 5 copies of DMC4 per gamer if Capcom kept it PS3 exclusive.
Fixed it for you, with the install base ratio I expect around DMC4's release...
...and xbd thought the thread was going to die!
Hey, what can I say - Capcom makes an official press statement and the thread regains life!
I really do think all of this backlash against them and petitions and whatnot really has been the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen though in the world of gaming.
ehh ... not so much.
Xbox1 was clearly superior to ps2 from day one and the ability of devs to extract this superiority was fairly straightforward. If the same could be said for the relationship of ps3 to xb360, I'd agree.
But it isn't.
I know you werent talking about me. You were talking about fanboys when I was point out that normal consumers would also care.I wasn't talking about you, but if you look at the trail of comments and where my original statement stemmed from you would see my post in context. And If someone gets upset because their system got a great game like Lost Planet from the "lowly" xbox360 because it doesn't have "good enough graphics" I say point out a clearly better looking game on ps3.
But now that your reply enforces the notion ...
"not good enough ports". Any port that has been brought to the ps3 has been upgraded if given time (in some cases, downgraded in areas due to system constraints). If LP comes to PS3 and has a downgrade here or there it won't matter if the rest of the game recieved an overhaul and upgraded because to ps fanboys the game didn't "max out" the ps3 when in fact it may have done the best they could but the ps3 does actually have some shortcomings.
Mostly it either got more downgrades than upgrades or even only downgrades.
As it has been, up till this point, ps3 has recieved AAA dev support while xb360 has ben relegated to the 2nd tier in multiplat games. Now that situation is changing and it seems many devs are using the xb360 as the prime dev for multiple reasons but it doesn't matter because ps3 is still getting good support from good devs. They just need to pick up their end of the bargain and improve the tools to enable dev parity but any title that has been ported from xb360 at a later date to ps3 has recieved upgrades and even if LP did not, it would still be one of the best games on the platform but I guess some wouldn't realize this as the origin of this title was not of the "elite" ps3 breed.
In most cases it was 360 that was receiving AAA dev support, as it had complete dev kits when Sony was still gradually updating theirs, as the 360 was easier to develp for and as the 360 was already one year out in the market.
You say it doesnt matter and you make it sound as if only the fanboys care, but it does matter for the everyday consumer as well to see the ported games on their device look as good. And this have nothing to do with fanbois as I already stated earlier. Ok good devs show support. So?
People care if COD3 looks just as good on their PS3, they care if the next NFS carbon is as good, they care if FNR3 looks as good as the one on the 360 (well personally I am not interested about these but I tend to put myself in other people's shoes to understand their concerns). VT3 also lacks online. You dont need fanboys to point out "why doesnt the product I paid so much money for show the expected quality or support?"
Fanboys may be pissed for different reasons but thats not the point. The point is that the normal consumer will also care because they all tend to make contrasts to form a judgement on their own utility but you ignored that fact I guess despite that I pointed it out earlier.
the next trend could be developers that add small unnecessary, unimportant, meaningless, useless extras to minimize the difference of the lower quality on more important aspects. These may not always equate what they lost and find important, with what they got in return.
Personally as a normal consumer if I had a PS3 and i was a COD fan and VT3 fan I would have been pissed with the lower visual quality in COD3(mostly about the frame rate) and the lack of online in VF3. Not because I would have been a PS3 fanboy, but because I see downgrades that should have been absent.
Same thing if I had a 360 and all multiplatform games featured unnecessary noticable downgrades on my console.
Glad you recognize my post wasn't an attack on you or directed at you.
On multiplats that were released at the same time, yes. One's that came later recieved upgrades. (and some downgrades (FN crowds)
hehe, no disrespect, but not from what I've seen/heard. The A teams were asigned to ps3 from day 1. They just had to deal with subpar tools. Is that the devs fault that MS provided better tools? Give credit where it's due.
I agree it matters. The point of my original comment is getting lost here and it is simple. Many Sony fans (not pointing the finger at you) believe the ps3 to be the clearly superior system and recieving a port from the xb360 is seen as a port from a clearly inferior system. This statement is rediculous when comparing libraries and general abilities of the systems through a non biased eye.
Regarding the faults of some of these games ... I don't point the finger at AM2 for an inferior product. Sony should have provided better tools. (Again this example proves my point on AAA dev teams giving ps3 priority. Sumo Digital vs AM2 ... I'm amazed they were able to compete with AM2, the fact they provided a comperable product and online to boot in the same time frame speaks to the quality difference in the tools IMO... but AM2>Sumo Digital ... no disrespect intended)
Again, I agree, but my original comment in context was:
perception = ps3>xb360
reality = ps3 ~ xb360
Inferior ports to ps3 at this point are due to two things: dev kits & less available ram. Both Sony issues, not dev issues.
Agreed. hopefully Sony fixes the issues at hand but time will tell.
Me too, agreed ... Sony issue.
Agreed. Sony issue.
Speaking to the original Capcom MP topic. It seems LP and DR are both remaining xb360 exclusive. The sequels however are likely to appear on ps3.
With you infinite wisdom and console programming experience, you could not think of any other reason, one that isn't so blatantly anti-Sony?
How about.. *drum-roll* quick ports to make quick cash!
The same reason that Quake 4 was a horrible port on the 360, the PS3 got some quick ports from the 360. Of course, not all were worse which would make your claims wrong.
Full Auto 2 (1080P), RR7(1080P), Marvel Alliance(1080P), Blazing Angels, Oblivion, Madden 07, NFS:C - All equal to or in some cases better ports, depends on the developers and time taken.
Ok and how about the "quick ports to mske quick cash" at the xb360 launch? Devs had a few months with real hardware and still turned out decent efforts for the most part (q4 being one of the exceptions)
Dev kits for ps3 have been around for ages and they better represented the final hardware of ps3. That is no excuse. The teams working on the ps3 titles for the most part were the "A" teams. Poor dev kits and lack of available ram were the reason for these "quick ports" performing poorly. When given (more) time, devs were able to better utilize ps3 abilities.... (just like they would on any platform btw)
scooby_dooby
Legend
Dev kits for ps3 have been around for ages and they better represented the final hardware of ps3. That is no excuse. The teams working on the ps3 titles for the most part were the "A" teams. Poor dev kits and lack of available ram were the reason for these "quick ports" performing poorly. When given (more) time, devs were able to better utilize ps3 abilities.... (just like they would on any platform btw)
Don't you get it Chef? PS3 must be more powerful because sony says so, therefore any port that performs better on 360 must be due to lazy developers, and not due to hardware limitations.
Excellent circular reasoning there
I don't get it... when talking about multiplatform developers 360 vs PS3, who are these "A" teams you're refering to Chef? You think Capcom's been putting their "B" team on 360 until now, or...?
And this...
Can we try not to bring in the lunacy from other corners of the net to B3D? I understand there are a lot of Sony fans that feel DMC4 is going to be inferior now, or Sumo Digital vs AM2 blah blah blah, but since none of those arguments are being made here on this forum, what's the point in devoting energy to knocking them down? Yes, those people are stupid. No, it's not Sony's fault they're stupid.
And this...
Can we try not to bring in the lunacy from other corners of the net to B3D? I understand there are a lot of Sony fans that feel DMC4 is going to be inferior now, or Sumo Digital vs AM2 blah blah blah, but since none of those arguments are being made here on this forum, what's the point in devoting energy to knocking them down? Yes, those people are stupid. No, it's not Sony's fault they're stupid.
The only time I recall hearing about A team versus B team it was regarding VT3 and I think VF5, where AM2 worked on PS3 versions and some other dev worked on 360 version. Industry wide I do not believe anyone can prove this case.
Ok and how about the "quick ports to mske quick cash" at the xb360 launch? Devs had a few months with real hardware and still turned out decent efforts for the most part (q4 being one of the exceptions)
Dev kits for ps3 have been around for ages and they better represented the final hardware of ps3. That is no excuse. The teams working on the ps3 titles for the most part were the "A" teams. Poor dev kits and lack of available ram were the reason for these "quick ports" performing poorly. When given (more) time, devs were able to better utilize ps3 abilities.... (just like they would on any platform btw)
This is getting comical. The poor defenseless 360 devs had no time ("few months") and turned out decent ports (I agree!). Yet the "A" team devs working with evil PS3 dev kits and low RAM for much longer (insinuated) made poor ports! But alas, with much care and pain the "A" devs can make good ports, despite the lowly PS3 hardware!
Lots of claims and no proof.
You know the teams and how long they had devs kits on both the 360 and PS3 ports? Wow, I'm impressed. :smile:
Similar threads
