I'm still waiting for Splinter Cell: Ninja Theory
Splinter Cell Double Agent PS3 IGN Review..
- Thread starter chris100
- Start date
Wow, that was wise! Show them that they get few sales on the PS3, that will probably make them care even less about the platform...
I agree with your last statement, but it certainly not the case for the first 3 examples you gave. I would argue that some generalizations can be derived from dissimilar architectures, such as those in the case of Xbox and PS2. Yes, PS2 was better in some environments, but it would be fair in many cases to say that the Xbox was much more powerful. Remember that we are targeting consumers that will be doing the comparisons, no matter how inaccurate they may be. But I understand how from an engineers point of view that would be a frustrating generalization.
In the end, it is possible to deconstruct every issue to its fundamental constituency. That is the way my analytical brain works as well. The complications of comparing the best outputs of all systems of a single generation are tedious.
I would argue that a good method would be to say at the end of the generation that "System 1 overall had more graphically superlative games than System 2". Because who cares if system 2 was more powerful when its games looked bad compared to system 1's? In the case of Saturn and PS1, I don't think that anyone could argue that Saturn had more great looking titles than the PS1, even though arguably it was a more powerful set of hardware. Obviously things have gotten more complicated since then.
In the case of PS3 and Xbox360 it becomes very muddled. I honestly think that fanboys are mostly responsible for the debate, because to my eyes, comparing systems that are so similar processing capability wise is silly. The law of deminishing returns is so in effect that sometimes it is difficult to see many improvements with graphics on systems of an order of magnitude processing power apart (DOA3 vs DOA4 for example).
There are surely things that each system does better than the other, though at peak efficiency it would seem that the PS3 has more advantages than the Xbox360 does. Will we ever see the case where PS3 is at peak utilization, and will it be utilized in a way that is overtly noticeable to the end user? Or will it be something that the X360 can cleverly fake and achieve the same effect?
Has anyone seen the real time raytracing demo rendered on 3 PS3s (18SPU's)? Its fantastic. I doubt the xbox could do that. That being said those PS3 Splinter Cell picks look like shite!
(flamesuit on!)One last thing: We are at a point where real-time graphics are approaching the visual fidelity of offline renders. These are rendering farms with thousands the processing capacity and output graphics which are measured in frames per day and not frames per second. And yet, to the observer, the effect can be similar. (Examples are FF13 and GT:HD for me) In light of the similarity quality despite huge gaps in "power" isn't it funny that we find ourselves quibbling over the relatively insignificant differences between PS3 and 360?
X86? huu? The explanation is easy, Ubi Soft sucks, other developers delivered the same experience on both platforms with little or no difference. Whenever someone makes a port like this it´s the industry shortshifting it´s customers, blaming developer tools is nonsense.
For me it´s a non buy and money on something else.
Sad but true.
Bit of a catch 22 there. Xbox owners last gen didn't gobble up the mgs port and this likely had something to do with mgs4 going exclusive (for now). Same will probably be repeated this gen as ps3 owners will already miss out on sc5 and if sc4 sells below avg, sc6 might be xb exclusive as well.
I use the only viable metric, the games. It doesn't really matter which one can pull more Flops or which one has the better GPU, what matters is how useful they are in making a great game. We probably can't make any declarations until the middle of the generation, but at one point we should be able to say a) PS3>360 b) PS3
QFT
While every console will always have their nitch application or variable that they will outperform their competition in, historically a pattern of performance in released games has clearly established a "bar" for each console and where that "bar" measured up to its competition is how the "system powa" was established.
FTR - I vote for b)
ps3 loves xb360.
"but we do know other ports exceed the 360 counterpart"
Where? What ports that have been put out show they actually are better than the 360 versions? Even ports like Fight night 3 and Ridge Racer are give and take and the PS3 version is not overall better just better in certain area's.
You have to be in denial to not see this pattern that ports to the PS3 from multiple developers, multiple genre's of games are ending up running and looking worse on the PS3. To simply try and throw each dev under the bus every time is part of that denial.
The Xbox had no problem from day ONE showing it was much more powerfull than the PS2, day ONE ports looked and ran better.
If the PS3 and the Cell are just so much more powerfull why is it having problems? Why are devs having to take an extra 6-12 months on a PS3 version of a game just to equal the 360 version and most of the time they don't even equal it.
We also could be seeing what less useable memory on the PS3 actually means now in the real world. Many devs have commented on this and this is something the cell won't be able to fix.
Where? What ports that have been put out show they actually are better than the 360 versions? Even ports like Fight night 3 and Ridge Racer are give and take and the PS3 version is not overall better just better in certain area's.
You have to be in denial to not see this pattern that ports to the PS3 from multiple developers, multiple genre's of games are ending up running and looking worse on the PS3. To simply try and throw each dev under the bus every time is part of that denial.
The Xbox had no problem from day ONE showing it was much more powerfull than the PS2, day ONE ports looked and ran better.
If the PS3 and the Cell are just so much more powerfull why is it having problems? Why are devs having to take an extra 6-12 months on a PS3 version of a game just to equal the 360 version and most of the time they don't even equal it.
We also could be seeing what less useable memory on the PS3 actually means now in the real world. Many devs have commented on this and this is something the cell won't be able to fix.
Last edited by a moderator:
Great post Pakotlar and I agree 100% - but I wanted to highlight these two sections to address.
I think Farid has a point in establishing b3d to its root which is a highly technical forum discussing 3d matters. This should not get lost in the shuffle. Having said that, I think it is important to make the distinction of the existing sub forums in the console section. If one would like to discuss the finer technical details of why a game (which is the point of consoles afterall) looks the way it does or how they achieved a certain effect or how they overcame what was once thought to be a hw limitation, the console technology section should be a place where one could share or learn the finer/tedious details. However some people just want to go to the games section to discuss, or point out a game that looks interesting for whatever reason.
I would hope the intention isn't to turn b3d into an "all tech talk, all the time" forum from top to bottom. Not all of us share intimate knowledge of every working piece of silicone in these consoles (me
) but I would think everyone is here to learn more about them and to share what knowledge they do have to others who are eager to learn. While the "console wars" have certainly added unwanted fodder posts oops: ), I think over time these posts will lessen as the userbase becomes more informed.Not sure if this is offtopic or not but I thought I would share my opinion on the matter given the origin and hopefully I won't get a "offtopic/derail/trolling" for posting this.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lets turn that one around, why teach them that bad ports is all that is needed. Oblivion, i´m buying you instead..
Even simpler, the team that worked on this particular game didn't have the resource, experience or capacity to do the game justice, based on some unknown but real set of factors.
Saying Ubisoft sucks is to ignore the many prestine and gorgeous games they have done recently, GRAW2 being a shining example.
"The explanation is easy, Ubi Soft sucks"
Yea so I guess every developer sucks that has tried to put a game on the PS3?
Could it just be that the PS3 has less usable memory has a CPU that is hard to develop for has a GPU that is not completely on par with Xenos and does not have as good developer tools?
Gee think that may be it?
Face facts the PS3 in real world games is simply not more powerful and in some cases may be less powerful than the 360.
Yea so I guess every developer sucks that has tried to put a game on the PS3?
Could it just be that the PS3 has less usable memory has a CPU that is hard to develop for has a GPU that is not completely on par with Xenos and does not have as good developer tools?
Gee think that may be it?
Face facts the PS3 in real world games is simply not more powerful and in some cases may be less powerful than the 360.
scooby_dooby
Legend
The 'developer sucks' argument is ridiculous imo.
I think a much better, and much more realistic argument that could be made is the fact Dev's have had 18+months with final hardware on 360, and only a fraction of that for PS3. I'm sure that explains the vast majority of underperforming ports, not 'ports are shitty', 'ubisoft sucks' etc etc
Who said "Ubi sucks"?
Again, a bad port is proof of an inferior Sony product and then you guys ignore the fact there are some very good ports. When you guys can't rely on logic you fall back to mis-characterizations and sheer numbers and back-patting post.
scooby_dooby
Legend
nevermind
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems people don't understand the difference between a developer and a publisher. Developers don't tend to have sign off rights, the money(publisher) retains most control, unless game development is night and day different than other commerical software development. To blame a dev saying they released it too soon would be pointing fingers at the wrong place.
I do find it a touch ironic that people are giving their blessings to Bethesda with respect to framerate issues. Or is the more about console comparison, than the game itself?
I do find it a touch ironic that people are giving their blessings to Bethesda with respect to framerate issues. Or is the more about console comparison, than the game itself?
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Guys, I think we might have to start facing the possibility that the Xbox 360 is more powerful than the PS3 overall. Sure Cell is a great CPU, but when you look at the system as a whole the PS3 might not be quite as powerful as the X360 with its edram and unified memory architecture. Especially when it seems like about 10-15% of the PS3's power is restricted to OS-level functions.
I think this quote is appropriate:
Bill_Gates_2005 said:
http://ps3.qj.net/Gates-Talks-Xbox-3.../pg/49/aid/485
Overall, it seems devs have been saying this for a while: xbox360~ps3