mckmas8808 said:
1. Why did his comments that the Xbox is the most powerful console hold any weight?
Outside his company they should not have. I think we would ALL agree that there are PS2 games that look better than competing Xbox games. Power is completely relative to your skill, limitations, and task. I think as recent example of this is the Burnout games. I have not played them, but the concensus is the PS2 version looks better. Why? The particles. The PS2 EXCELLS in particles. Based on what ERP has said the Xbox pretty much stomps in most areas--but in games that are limited in certain areas, like particles, the PS2 is going to excell.
So the answer, "Console X is more powerful than Console Y" is a misnomer. What are you trying to do with your game? Depending on that answer to that question it will change the answer to the next question: "What is the most powerful console".
So a guy like Itagaki, Susuki, Miyamoto, Carmak, Newell, Koji, etc... can say, "This console is the best". But they can only speak in regards to their design goals and to their fans.
Anyhow taking a claim as a "universal truth" is in for a rude awakening. That is not to say certain hardware is not more powerful comparatively--PS3 stomps on the SNES--but within generations of hardware, given that a similar amount of investment has been made into the hardware and software, it is really hard to say "Console X is faster than Console Y 100% of the time in 100% of code". And it does not even need to be that relative. Look at the PS2--having a lot of fill rate from the eDRAM allowed the PS2 to overcome seemingly many "shortcomings".
You just cannot add up console power by the numbers. This is not to say one wont be more powerful *on average* or easier to work with, get better results, etc... but time and games are the measure for that.
The only thing that matters if you are a fan of a franchise/developer is: Where are your games coming. The whole power thing is for the elementary playgrounds.
2. Why doesn't he just admit that Tekken has done more graphically on the PS2 than even he has done?
Because Tekken is a competitor and praising ones direct competitor is bad for business? Because he thinks his Xbox version looks better? Because he cannot stand the thought of defeat?
To be fair, I cannot think of many devs who openly will discuss their competition--let alone say their competition is better!
3. Why did say that if devs think that the PS2 is just too hard to program for to get great result then they just aren't good enough, yet his team can because he and the others are so smart?
Because he is hyping his title? He wants free pub? He has no respect for other developers? (Bad thing FYI) Because he is arrogent?
Or maybe, beyond hyping Team Ninja, he is playing to the Console Magazine Crowd. You know, the 13 year old who watched WWF and likes to curse when his mommy ain't looking. The testosterone laiden kiddies. "Oh man, Itagaki says your game sucks man! You own a trashy console!"
Smack talk. The EMGs of the world LOVE the rumors... and in return it is great pub. Kids love it. Maybe Itagaki is an entertainer?
I obviously don't like those comments, but hey, I don't run a software house. If he alienates programmers and loses business it is his fault.
4. And if he is so smart from the PS2 days then why is he even mentioning that the PS3 is too difficult to program for?
Maybe to get the performance he wants it is too hard. Maybe working 10 hours to get the same result you can get in 2 hours is too much considering the big risks--$40M budgets, short development timelines, etc.
Maybe his opinion has changed? As people get older they get wiser. As Shifty noted maybe his head has come back down to earth.
Maybe it is because he was hyping his PS2 game back then and had TOUGH competition from Tekken, VF, SC, etc.
And maybe, just maybe, the idea of working with 8 processors and getting and getting performance anywhere near the theoretical peaks is too difficult for Team Ninja.
5. Why does he even hate Tekken so much? (joke question but it is interesting)
I think the answer to that question is obvious
Sales. Tekken is a direct competitor. He feels his game is better (and some gamers do too... I have only played Tekken, but based on the gameplay movies I have a HARD time seeing how DoA is better *for my tastes*, but that is neither here nor there).
Most devs don't talk about other devs, especially competiting products. Tekken is one of the market leaders... so my guess is he is trying to attack the big boys. Get pub, get interest.
Call it cheap advertising. Free and below the belt. Of course if DoA was better no one would argue with him.
I think we would all agree based on DoA and NG on the Xbox and DoA on the PS2 his team 1.) can make really nice looking games and 2.) seem to be able to spread their wings a lot better on the Xbox than PS2 and 3.) other devs have been able to get similar results as TN's Xbox DoA on the PS2.
So we can see that, for fighting games, for top tier devs the PS2 = Xbox. I am not seeing a big drop off between the two, technically, in this genre. Yet for TN Xbox > PS2.
For Team Ninja the Xbox was more powerful for fighting games--this is true. But it is also true that for other devs the PS2 was just as powerful.
Skill, dev team size, dev budget, design philosophy, dev time frame, whatever the difference, Namco is capable of getting as much out of the PS2 as Team Ninja did out of the Xbox. Yet Team Ninja could not do this on the PS2. So for TN the Xbox is more powerful.
And my guess is, for Team Ninja, right now Xbox 360 is the platform they could get the best results from. All I can go by is his own statement and the results of his games on both platforms.
And as I said earlier: it does not matter because it only applies to him and his team. It was a pointless question from 1Up.com. 1UP.com has got a TON of press and HITS from that question. We are rewarding trolling by magazines!
