Splinter Cell Double Agent PS3 IGN Review..

[JohnyBeGood]

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.

In my knowledge developers have hinted that PS3 is overall more powerful.Inferior ports don't necessarily mean HW superiority. If games optimized for PS3 look worse than 360's games, then what you're saying might have some validity.Question is : do they look better, worse or the same? I think there are games coming to PS3 that show visual quality at least on par with 360.

 

[iceberg187]

In my knowledge developers have hinted that PS3 is overall more powerful.Inferior ports don't necessarily mean HW superiority. If games optimized for PS3 look worse than 360's games, then what you're saying might have some validity.Question is : do they look better, worse or the same? I think there are games coming to PS3 that show visual quality at least on par with 360.

Armored Core 4 looks better on 360 than it does PS3 and Mercenaries 2 was demoed at GDC on the 360 when the PS3 is the lead platform.

 

[djskribbles]

Armored Core 4 looks better on 360 than it does PS3 and Mercenaries 2 was demoed at GDC on the 360 when the PS3 is the lead platform.

the 360 has a pretty typical hardware architecture, its been out over a year and is easier to develop for. whereas Cell is powerful, but completely new to devs and is hard to develop for. and before the Playstation Edge tools were released, the tools for the ps3 were quite bad from what ive heard.

in time, things may change.

 

[22psi]

the 360 has a pretty typical hardware architecture, its been out over a year and is easier to develop for. whereas Cell is powerful, but completely new to devs and is hard to develop for. and before the Playstation Edge tools were released, the tools for the ps3 were quite bad from what ive heard.

in time, things may change.

Not really, CPU-wise Cell is more alien than Xenon but Xenos is more alien than RSX.

 

[aselto]

Not really, CPU-wise Cell is more alien than Xenon but Xenos is more alien than RSX.

And I'm sure as hell the game is not CPU limited in PS3 version.

But maybe Cal would give us an explanation why things turned out like they did?

 

[Tap In]

Not really, CPU-wise Cell is more alien than Xenon but Xenos is more alien than RSX.

indeed. Xenos still has room to grow (I'm guessing) also.

I'm thinking this Splinter Cell example (and the other MP games) has far more to do with devs learning how to optimize for the PS3 with the SPUs than any hardware shortcoming(PERIOD). EDIT * Except for the less RAM available issue perhaps*

I mean the shortcomings in one area of any system are going to need workarounds and perhaps those shortcomings have taken less time to work around on 360 than the PS3's.

Hell... read the CT forum to see thread after thread of devs learning the tricks of the SPUs to design workarounds to make the "system" work for them.

 

[djskribbles]

Not really, CPU-wise Cell is more alien than Xenon but Xenos is more alien than RSX.

but overall, isn't the ps3 more difficult to develop for?

 

[tabs]

Farid in 20 or 30 years time, when I am able; I am going to give you rep for that post.

 

[JohnyBeGood]

Not really, CPU-wise Cell is more alien than Xenon but Xenos is more alien than RSX.

True, but Cell is a more radical departure from traditional CPUs than Xenos compared to traditional GPUs ( don't forget PCs already got or will be getting GPUs with unified shaders , on the other hand there's no PC CPU that resembles Cell).I believe PS3 is a more difficult machine to master than 360, hence the the difference in most multiplattforms games.

 

[iceberg187]

To my understanding, the RSX is basically a pre-existing Nvidia card, right? IF that is the case, that makes it the most straight forward part of both the 360's and PS3s innards. Cell and Xenon use multiprocessors and Xenos is radical tech in it's own right.

I could be wrong, and someone please correct me if I am. Isn't there like a difference of 4-5 million shader operations between the two consoles, with the PS3 holding the edge because they can leverage Cell with it? Those are theoretical numbers. Even then, isn't Xenos supposed to be 90-95% efficient as well? So wouldn't that nullify whatever edge Cell helped the RSX with?

 

[Vic]

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.

Did you Copy and paste that from EG?

Comparing ports so early into the life of PS3 is unfair. Lets see the first-party games before we start writing it off as an inferior system. I would have thought GTHD looking better than Forza 2, and Motorstorm arguably looking better than Gears, would dispel any thoughts that PS3'S power is untappable.

 

[quest55720]

Did you Copy and paste that from EG?

Comparing ports so early into the life of PS3 is unfair. Lets see the first-party games before we start writing it off as an inferior system. I would have thought GTHD looking better than Forza 2, and Motorstorm arguably looking better than Gears, would dispel any thoughts that PS3'S power is untappable.

How is it unfair? You don't think the xbox and GCs launch games were not compared to the newest PS2 games? PS3 developers have had the cell for a long time much longer than 360 developers have had xenos. I think the systems are to close to call in power with both having good and bad points. If the PS3 was clearly superior like the xbox or even GC we would would of seen it from day one. Halo and rogue squad were better looking than any PS2 games at the time. The xbox held its own on pretty much every half hearted port. It is time to quit throwing developers under the bus. The blame is squarely on sony they drove up unreal expectations and their tools were not as good MS's. Maybe when sony gets their tools better and get a larger user base things will change maybe not.

Gears vs motorstorm is not really fair. One is built from the ground up around its platform the other uses a generic engine not built from the ground up for its platform. That might be a problem MS faces not many games pushing the system to the limit because of the ease of use of the UE3 engine. On the other hand it makes development easier and cheaper.

 

[iceberg187]

Did you Copy and paste that from EG?

Comparing ports so early into the life of PS3 is unfair. Lets see the first-party games before we start writing it off as an inferior system. I would have thought GTHD looking better than Forza 2, and Motorstorm arguably looking better than Gears, would dispel any thoughts that PS3'S power is untappable.

GTHD needs to have things like damage to have that be a fair comparison

 

[Vic]

How is it unfair? You don't think the xbox and GCs launch games were not compared to the newest PS2 games? PS3 developers have had the cell for a long time much longer than 360 developers have had xenos. I think the systems are to close to call in power with both having good and bad points. If the PS3 was clearly superior like the xbox or even GC we would would of seen it from day one. Halo and rogue squad were better looking than any PS2 games at the time. The xbox held its own on pretty much every half hearted port. It is time to quit throwing developers under the bus. The blame is squarely on sony they drove up unreal expectations and their tools were not as good MS's. Maybe when sony gets their tools better and get a larger user base things will change maybe not.

Gears vs motorstorm is not really fair. One is built from the ground up around its platform the other uses a generic engine not built from the ground up for its platform. That might be a problem MS faces not many games pushing the system to the limit because of the ease of use of the UE3 engine. On the other hand it makes development easier and cheaper.

But this is a forum, with many knowledgable posters.

It seems many people are quick to jusge the PS3 four months into its life.

Regarding Gears, I cant see why its not a fair comparison when its a second generation title. Its has excellent graphics, but its been surpassed in the console space by Motorstorm.

In magazines over here, I have read that some developers are wondering how much more the 360 has to give after Gears. I think that is overtstating it slightly, as Alan Wake and Bioshock look very nice, but developer talk would suggest that the PS3 has more headroom. Certainly R&C, Heavenly Sword and Uncharted look amazing at this early stage. And thats without bringing in GT5 and Killzone.

You mention Halo and Rogue Squadron, (like Motorstorm) but they were exclusives. Not ports running on unoptimized code.

Thats just my thoughts anyway (following everyone else off-topic).

 

[quest55720]

But this is a forum, with many knowledgable posters.

It seems many people are quick to jusge the PS3 four months into its life.

Regarding Gears, I cant see why its not a fair comparison when its a second generation title. Its has excellent graphics, but its been surpassed in the console space by Motorstorm.

In magazines over here, I have read that some developers are wondering how much more the 360 has to give after Gears. I think that is overtstating it slightly, as Alan Wake and Bioshock look very nice, but developer talk would suggest that the PS3 has more headroom. Certainly R&C, Heavenly Sword and Uncharted look amazing at this early stage. And thats without bringing in GT5 and Killzone.

You mention Halo and Rogue Squadron, (like Motorstorm) but they were exclusives. Not ports running on unoptimized code.

Thats just my thoughts anyway (following everyone else off-topic).

Gears might as well be a port since the engine is not 360 specific. Gears is no way to judge the 360's room for improvement. Forza 2 will be the first real non launch game built from the ground up for the 360 I think that will be a test of room for improvement.

I think both systems have the same type of head room sony will just push more than MS. IMO sony has no other choice but to push harder to help justify the 200 dollars extra the system costs. MS on the other hand is just fine using the UE3 engine to save money and get solid results. It will be interesting how it turns out. Sony is going to go after it old school style to the metal get every ounce out of the system. MS is going new school ease of development and cost control.

I think both the PS3 and the 360 are capable of amazing things. The xenos and cell are amazing chips a head of their times.

 

[22psi]

In my knowledge developers have hinted that PS3 is overall more powerful.Inferior ports don't necessarily mean HW superiority. If games optimized for PS3 look worse than 360's games, then what you're saying might have some validity.Question is : do they look better, worse or the same? I think there are games coming to PS3 that show visual quality at least on par with 360.

Developers have hinted the otherway around as well. No one's doubting there will be games on the PS3 that will be on par with 360, heck it should be on par and even better with all the stuff Sony has said. If PS3 doesn't eclipse the 360 GFX wise 2 years from now then something's very wrong.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I'm thinking this Splinter Cell example (and the other MP games) has far more to do with devs learning how to optimize for the PS3 with the SPUs than any hardware shortcoming(PERIOD). EDIT * Except for the less RAM available issue perhaps*

That latter one is important. PS3's CPU isn't the only thing requiring more learning--its memory architecture is more complex than 360's as well and will require time to master it. If we were to be reasonable, we'd observe that the PS3 is more complex than the 360 and conclude that perhaps the 1st-gen titles won't be representative of its capabilities. But this a forum, and we need to lose our heads over every screenshot.

 

[Jawed]

PS3 developers have had the cell for a long time much longer than 360 developers have had xenos.

This is true for the lucky few, I'm sure, but:

1. PS3 developers didn't get a devkit with the correct architecture (i.e. the highspeed link twixt Cell and RSX) until spring 2006 - admittedly they at least had OpenGL to practice with (roughly equivalent to SM3 with extra goodies)
2. PS3 APIs and various tools have ramped up slowly on both Cell and RSX (lots of "don't knows" at the end of 2005)
3. PS3 SDKs had a lower base than the equivalent "DX" for XB360, e.g. an equivalent for PIX had to be written (performance measurement of graphics)
4. RSX got slightly down-graded at the end of 2005 (only about 10%).

So, while those lucky few got a headstart, it was a bit of a small sandbox with rather high walls...

XB360 has also seen fairly significant improvements and additions - key features were unavailable when the initial set of final devkits went out - I think it's fair to say that the base was lower than desired - but I think it's also fair to say that ATI delivered rather more in Xenos than anyone was expecting (e.g. performance measurement is "ludicrously" detailed)...

Jawed

 

[Todd33]

My point was Todd putting all the blame on the developers is unrealistic.

Please don't mis-characterize my views.. I was quite clear that we don't know why some ports are good and others are bad, I was pointing out that you and a few others are always quick to blame Sony with no evidence and claim your opinions as fact.

 

[JohnyBeGood]

Developers have hinted the otherway around as well. No one's doubting there will be games on the PS3 that will be on par with 360, heck it should be on par and even better with all the stuff Sony has said. If PS3 doesn't eclipse the 360 GFX wise 2 years from now then something's very wrong.

There's more than just nicer graphics , i'm expecting games that not only look but also feel solid, and not just high resolutions and poly counts . AI and physics are equally important, if not more.