Sorry your browser is not supported!

Actually Jeku, I think replying to Matts personal opinion with the word "Bollocks" is not particularly friendly or constructive

Anyway, I don't normally partake in these 'next gen' discussions any more after I posted some opinions from interviews with developers I had seen. I got accused of being a 'fanboy' of one brand and 'anti' something else. Its just not worth the hassle of trying to remain unbiased when you get barked at from all sides.

I will just say that a recent interview I saw on GamerTV with a developer at E3 did say that they are only now starting to see people take advantage of the extra power available on the PS3 (their words not mine, before you start shouting at me). This is something I think most of us agreed with in its early days, that the software coming out for the PS3 was mostly lazy conversions because the development for the console involved something new and wasn't as easy as development for other consoles. Personally I believe that we still have some way to go before we see games pushing the 360 to its limit, but I think we have a huge way to go before we see games pushing the PS3 to its limit. Perhaps even another 2 or 3 years.

Even in that post alone that's been proven un-true...



Since the very first time I said anything on the topic of the next-gen console debate, you've been saying I'm full of crap, I'm stupid, I'm blind, I'm narrow-minded, I'm making stuff up, my remarks are "legendary," I'm the only person who thinks a certain way, and the list of insults and outlandish remarks is literally neverending and astounding.

You say you've looked at both consoles objectively. Okay, then point me in the right direction here by showing me any single instance where you said something about the PS3 was better than the 360. No objective, non-biased person could possibly believe the 360 beats the PS3 in every single way... only a 360 fanboy could come to conclusions like that. At least I'm able to admit and acknowledge my fanboyism. If you're as non-biased as you say you are, then please, enlighten me with a list of things you think the PS3 has/ does better that the 360 doesn't have. I can name things the 360 has that the PS3 doesn't, and I'm a hardcore Sony nutter... in fact, haven't I done that in one of the millions of anti-sony threads before?

All I'm trying to saying here is that I expect the same level of respect from you that you expect from me. When we talk about most other topics, you don't act like that. You're usually open about things and accept my opinions as nothing more than opinions. It's only religion, politics (back in the days when those topics were more leniently moderated), and the console debates that you start talking down at me and barking insults in my direction, and then when a debate starts happening like that, it starts to bleed into other threads until the first thread dies out.


Right. But the difference is, they don't resort to cheap insults to get their points across. Bizar and I have had a bet going for quite some time now: not once (that I can remember) has either of us insulted the other. Chris disagrees with me but I can't remember a single instance where he said I'm full of crap or whatever. And if either of them has done that, it was so infrequent that I don't remember them doing it. It forces me to come to the conclusion that they acknowledge my opinions as nothing more than opinions, whereas you seem to treat it like I consider every word I say on TGC as a fact, when that isn't always or often the case. From now on I should just say [opinion] before any opinion I post to avoid confusion .

I've played both consoles, and in my opinion, the PS3 is the better system. The Sony Network is, in my opinion (and the opinions of most of my friends, who I'll more than gladly put you in contact with via email or telephone or smoke signals), better than, or in the very least equal to, the quality of Live. As a fact, PS3's specifications surpass those of the 360 on paper. In my opinion/ to the extent of my guessing ability, we'll start seeing the PS3's full potential unleashed in any of the plethora of announced and upcoming PS3 titles. On the flipside, PS3 has a smaller fanbase, which equals less people playing the most popular games on PSN as opposed to the millions of additional players you get with Live. The PS3 is overpriced because of the Blu-Ray drive, which it doesn't really need. There are more games on 360, due largely in part that (A) the 360 has been out far longer, and (B) developers are having a hard time working with the PS3 dev kit, which is overly complicated. There, some objective comments, and I can come up with more if needed. But at the end of the day, I personally consider the Sony Playstation 3 a superior system over the Microsoft XBox 360. And I refuse to acknowledge or even recognize any effort to belittle the authenticity of my personal opinions, and I won't succumb to petty insults because I disagree with anyone. If you disagree with my opinions, that's fine, we live in a free hemisphere and we're allowed to have differentiating opinions and remain civil, or even stay friends. But if you try to make me out to be some idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, or invalidate my opinions by saying I haven't taken the debate seriously or unbiasely from all angles, or downplay me personally as someone who lacks any degree of intelligence when it comes to the topic at hand, well, that's just unnecessary and rude, and will only be responded to with an attitude of equal beligerance.

If you read the tone of my posts, it's pretty friendly considering. Bollocks is the only word I know to describe what Matt said about PS3 comparisons with the 360. I'm still trying to find anyone else on any of the forums I've been to that can rightfully compare a version of a 360 to a PS3 game. A game coming out a year later is not a fair comparison in any way shape or form. Hell, GTA 3 looked extra tasty on Xbox, as it came out over a year after the PS2 version (and the Xbox had a fair bit more meat than the PS2).

Motorstorm is slick looking, but after playing DiRT on my 360, it doesn't compare, in my opinion.

EDIT:

Matt, I've read enough of your Raven-like posts, and I'm still not going to argue this with you anymore. I'm not the only one who thinks what you're saying is comical to say the least.

But, why do you think that? I've heard loads of people say that, but why?

It's like, the engine team at every studio will have had a PS3 for probably over a year now, these guys are seasoned pros, they don't turn up every day - for a year - and go like "Duuur what does this doooo?".

They have tech docs, THEY KNOW HOW THESE PROCESSORS WORK.

@ Matt Rock

A game on 360 that looks better than Motorstorm? COD4. Best looking game of all time - yes even better than MGS4. It was playable at E3, on 360.

Exactly. Like I said before, both pro-football games are running at 30fps on PS3 and 60fps on Xbox 360. Hmmmm...

I haven't played DiRT. I'll take a look at it and report what I think, and I'll be happy to admit if it looks better. One of my friends must have bought it by now, if not, after my girlfriend and I move into our new place we'll rent it and play it on someone's 360.

I think DiRT is on PS3 also though?

Though I haven't read the arguments, I agree with Jeku there, I mean it seems with the time gap things can be improved between console versions. But also, I don't know the power difference between the 360 and PS3, but does it really matter that there are some differences with different games, there is a fair amount of performance that lies on the developers and their interaction on the different hardware as well as the hardware itself, so I'm sure even current games don't show the full extent to each of the consoles power. So these comparisons look petty to me.

However, though I didn't scan for Jeku's tone on the posts I didn't read, the word 'bollocks' though vulgar, I've heard used in a friendly context more so than a non-friendly, dunno if it's because I am English (I'm sure people have heard the term 'it's the dog's bollocks' meaning it's good.) 'Bullsh**' I've never seen to come with a friendly tone. So I'm sure if anyone wanted to be rude or non-constructive, I'm sure they would sooner use that word.

Take a look at the earlier 360 games. Or earlier PS2 games as opposed to newer ones. It takes time for developers to learn their way around dev kits, especially the immensly complicated PS3 dev kit.


I haven't played COD4 yet, but I'm sure we will this weekend, or at our christening (sp?) LAN Party for our new apartment. So long as it doesn't interupt our Gran Turismo 4 6-way touring car 1 hour endurance race at Nurburing or our 6-way race car 1 hour endurance race at Le Mans (Circuit de la Sarthe II), which I've been dying for.

Edit:

Exactly. Referring to my opinions as comical and Raven-like. I'd hate to break it to you, but you're no more qualified to post your opinions than I am. What I find comical is that when I asked you to say specifically what Live has that PSN doesn't have, you ignored it. What I also find comical is that after going into a long-winded explanation of how exactly you're acting beligerant and childish, you respond to it with the same attitude instead of trying to recognize your faults. So fine, if you want to ignore my posts on this subject, it won't exactly be treated as spilled milk. There's obviously no getting through to you.

Any idea on the reasons for the difference Jeku? just an fps comparison without other variables makes it difficult to relate a reason for the drop. do the PS3 models have twice the number of polys or is there something else added into the PS3 version that could account for it? Or are both very near identicle but just the fps is that much worse?

I don't know, I wouldn't say there's anything particularly better than MGS2 is there? Shadow of The Collosus I guess, but that game could get pretty jerky.



Heh good luck!!

There's a gameplay video here:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/20756.html

Well, at first I thought it was an EA thing when finding out about that with Madden. No sooner had I found that out that I read the same thing about 2K Sport' football franchise. Nobody from both developers has claimed the PS3 version has higher poly models or anything else that would seem to make sense with an fps drop of that magnitude. Apparently the games look identical (and so they probably should if the middleware is done properly), so it's anyone's guess as to why the PS3 can't handle those two games in 60fps mode.

@Matt - Honestly, you're farting in the wind. I'm sick of arguing this with you, as I have spoken my mind at least a dozen times about this in various threads, and you still ask me the same questions. I'll let the numbers do the talking.

Just look back at previous consoles. People develop their own code libraries and engines over time which are much better than the initial ones which come with the dev kits. They learn new and faster methods of doing things which might not have worked on other machines. They are able to take time to develop really good engines instead of just porting existing engines across to get games out quickly. The best example I can think of at the moment is 'God of War II' on the PS2. It is debatabley the best game made for it and comparable to games on the next gen machines. Its a real shame its taken this long to develop a game that good for a machine near the end of its life.

Hey wait, where did I say I'm more qualified? Haha-- nice spin

Gran Turismo 5 looks pretty spectacular (and they're finally adding Ferrari to their their massive lineup of cars), although it seems that most of the aesthetic updates were made in lighting and reflections (here's the trailer). It has tons of new camera angles, including a new internal camera which I'm looking forward to (and the character animation is pretty awesome as well, imo). Here are some screenshots from IGN... the pit crew looks especially amazing, far better than the pit crew in GT4, which was somewhat hoaky (cool that they had the pitcrew, but it could have looked better I think, even on the PS2).

Otherwise, Lair looks pretty good. I keep hearing that a game called White Knight Story will be awesome, although I haven't tried to look into it much because what I've heard so far indicates that it isn't my kind of game. Final Fantasy XIII looks jaw-dropping as well (although rumors are afoot that the game might see an altered version get released later on the Wii, sort of like the Metal Gear: Substance games on xbox). And then there's all of the buzz in Sony circles about Heavenly Sword, which I'm also not interested in, but I keep hearing it looks stunning. The big "money shot" (in the words of a hardcore sony fan friend of mine) will be UT3. A lot of Sony fans are convinced that the PS3 version will run circles around the 360 version, since John Carmack has frequently said that, while the PS3 is harder to develop for, it has more power than the 360. But I'm sticking to the "only time will tell" view on that one, lol. My money says he'll be developing it for the PC and porting directly to the PS3 and the 360 without taking horsepower into consideration, but that's just a guess.

Edit:

It's a perfectly valid question, and every time you've answered it in the past I've given a valid response, which you ignore/ refuse to acknowledge. Which is my point exactly.


When you claim that my opinions are "comical" and "Raven-like," that tells me that you seem to believe your opinions are more qualified or valid than my opinions, which is absolutely rediculous in every way, shape, and form. I'm not spinning anything. Here's an opinion: I like the Playstation 3. Now here's a fact: Your opinion on the subject is no better than mine.

Still waiting to see something from that game that's not pre-rendered.



Um, Carmack has nothing to do with UT3

And where has he "frequently" said the PS3 has more power than 360? Just curious.

UT3 is coming out on PC, PS3 and 360. AFAIK Sony has exclusive "first-release" rights for it for PS3, but it will be coming to 360 shortly after.

Right here. He said the same thing a few weeks later as well. And I thought Carmack was doing stuff on UT3? I must have misheard or misread something, but he's definitely talked about UT3 a number of times.


I didn't know that, I thought UT3 was being released on all three platforms simultaneously.

God of War II looks awesome, yeah (not as nice as RE4 on GC but whatever), the point is, it is not significantly better than MGS2 or Halo or any other early game where they put effort into the graphics...

It is still bloody obvious which generation it belongs in. Some PS3 owners seem to believe that some time in the future PS3 games will be obviously better than 360 games coming out at the same time.

It's not going to happen. It's like Xbox vs. PS2. Apparantly Xbox was more powerful, but where does it show?

FFXIII geez... the Superbowl Halo 3 trailer looked stunning and all



Dude Carmack founded id, Epic's sworn enemy...

----------------

Err... that article is kind of vague...



That doesn't really sound like something Carmack would say, I mean, "peak power"... what does that mean?

The link they provided to the actual interview goes nowhere... website doesn't exist...

Just seems odd that he would say basically the standard sensible Sony fanboy line. It's what PSM say the whole time without backing it up - PS3 is harder to develop for but ultimately better.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

It's *possible* this is true:



But it's wrong of you to suggest that

1. UT3 will be better on PS3
2. John Carmack prefers PS3, stating "frequently" that it is better

I think Carmack would be annoyed with you for nailing a viewpoint on the matter to him TBH.

---------------------------

I stand corrected he did say "peak power". Here's the full quote, not so PS3 favourable when you read it in it's original form:

Snake in 2001


Snake in 2004



And Metal Gear Solid 2 was "pushing the PS2" when it came out supposedly.

You said "frequently", so I was expecting more than one source. Also, that article fails to mention your claim that the next game's PS3 version will "run circles around the 360 version".



Are most of your facts taken from your friends' opinions and heresay or something? I'm getting all this from the big gaming sites (GameSpot, IGN, G4, etc.)

I don't really remember where, but I think I remember a website (or something) saying that the PS3 CPU was slower than it was planned to be. I think the thing I read said the way the multicore CPU communicated (or something) slowed it down worse than if it were a single normal CPU. But again, I'm not sure how accurate that is.

Looks like snake got a new head, the rest of the body and especially the hand look like past generation technology IMO. No normal maps to help matters either. Sorry but that's a typical Sony move, spend all the polygons on the guys face, because people are only interested in head modeling these days since those Cryengine head screenies.

@dabip: No, the PS3 processor is significantly faster than the Xbox360's, although if I remember correctly, it's slightly less powerful in GPU terms, and has less memory bandwidth.

I suggest you re-read what I wrote before. I said, and I quote, "A lot of Sony fans are convinced that the PS3 version will run circles around the 360 version." Read what I write before you try to bite off my head, it's more than you can chew . I was obviously mistaken about Carmack, I was thinking of an article in PC World earlier this year where he talked about competing with the Unreal engine. But the fact still remains that a lot of Sony fans think the PS3 version of UT3 will smoke the 360 version.


Actually, I never said it was a fact. But I did gather that notion from an interview in Gamepro Magazine, which took me forever to dig up online. Normally I wouldn't go through that much trouble, but it's worth it just to make you stop acting like I'm some idiot who makes stuff up :



edit:

The screenshots he posted are from PS2 games, not the new PS3 game. And Sony doesn't make MGS, Konami does, so it can't be a "typical Sony move." I agree that sometimes Sony does some bogus things, but I defy anyone to name a single international corporation that hasn't done an equal number of bad things. It's just the nature of the beast for big corporations to act that way, and if I remember correctly, a lot of people have defended other corporations who've done far worse things than anything Sony has done. I'm not trying to go after you personally Van, I'm attacking the notion that somehow Sony is the most evil corporation in the world and they lack respect for their customers more than other companies. I never see anyone getting as worked up over half of the autrocities that other corporations perform on a daily basis (even in threads that talk specifically about those autrocities). And considering the extremely short period of time that Sony has been performing these actions, and the relatively small volume of instances they've acted that way (compared to the massive number of advertisements, press junkets, and other such marketing plays they make every single day for their thousands of products), it's unfair to make such cruel assesments on a very small handful of marketing mess-ups. Every other corporation in the world that deals with even close to that same number of products has the same number of similar mistakes, if not more.

Of course they do --- they're trying to justify their purchase And a lot of 360 fans think the opposite, of course. What does it matter if people who don't work for the company think a game will run faster? There's no evidence to back it up.



By the way, Matt, there's this thing called E3 where the companies tend to make big announcements. Epic made an announcement (a few weeks ago, months after your Gamepro article) at E3 that UT3 will first appear on PS3 and PC, before 360. This was the biggest news for Sony at the conference so honestly I'm surprised you didn't read about it.



Point me to where somebody said Sony is evil, in this thread.



If you're inferring that every single corporation makes exactly the same number of mistakes, that's just ludicrous. This isn't communist Russia where the state owns all the business sectors--- these are privately-owned businesses. People who cry when somebody disses a company, and turn around to say that every company is the same, are sorely ignorant. I'm not saying MS or Nintendo don't make mistakes, but how can you say they all make the same amount of mistakes? It's ludicrous. They're different companies

Sony is Evil - Will that suffice Jeku? Let's put it this way, anyone who says Sony is evil is a moron and shouldn't be taken notice of. Well, unless you're debating the use of slave labour or anything like that, but I wouldn't know 'who' they use to make consoles, but this obviously isn't the kind of 'evil' that is being referred to.

Personally, they are not the same, but none of them are the greatest either, because the term is subjective, there will be differences, though between the PS3 and 360, the actual results won't differ too much for anybody to give a rats arse about, some games will perform better on one, and others will perform better on the other, but not huge differences. The reason they'll be different relies on the programmers and the engine. So really, what's the point of debate, Jeku doesn't want to use a PS3 and Matt is a PS3 user, big whoop. I know people that would pick the Wii above all. Me, I'd be a PC, Wii and PS3 dude (If I had the money), other people it's up to them, and once you've got your favourite console, does it really matter with the differences between your own and others? You're not going to use the other console, so what's it really worth? As they're happy with theirs.

And again, I didn't say that either. I've said countless times that I will buy a PS3 when the price is right and there are games I want on it. Matt keeps pigeon-holing me into the MS/Ninty fanboy category

AFAIK he doesn't actually own one...?

I missed out on reading anything at all about E3. I've been dealing with that Paypal mess for ages now, trying to market EE (and as of today, trying to find someone who can help with that), I've been writing code for a new game while laying out the foundation for another game, we're about to move into a new apartment and need to get stuff sorted for all that... so I've been a bit too busy to read anything about E3 lately. It's on my "to do list," as everything else is. And that's why I've been hostile on TGC lately... I come here to cool off, and instead I get insulted repeatedly for having differentiating views, so I don't see how it's too hard to understand why I've been blowing up at you every time you say things like "there's this thing called E3."


Well, it's been said in a billion other threads and you can't possibly expect me to believe you haven't seen that before. But again, when Van said "that's a typical Sony move," it implies that every (or even a majority) of their business actions is bad in some way, when that's simply not the case.


I think it's fairly obvious that I didn't mean every single company makes the exact same volume of mistakes, but it simply can't be said or even denied that every company does make mistakes, and there are a lot of companies (even in the game industry specifically) which have made far more mistakes than Sony has. I'm not defending their actions in any way... I've said repeatedly that I'm pretty peaved at how they've conducted themselves since the PS3's launch started making headlines. But I'll definitely say that there is, without question, a lot of anti-Sony sediment (not a typo... I think it's all sludge) because of one crappy marketing campaign from a company with an otherwise almost picture-perfect record of delivering on promises and coming up with innovative products. Do you know what a typical Sony move is? Releasing the world's first 3-CCD camcorder. Might not mean anything to some people, but go ask a cinematographer what they think of Sony and they'll praise them up and down, right before showing you their Betacam. Another typical Sony move, having one of the cleanest, most environmentally friendly factories in the entire world (in Tijuana Mexico). And in a previous thread, when people were naming Sony's "flops," like Betamax and minidisc, no one apparently looked down at their 3.5" "floppy" drive (excuse the bad pun). Yep, that was all Sony (the drive, not the pun). Now look a few inches upward (or maybe down on some PC's) and you'll more than likely see a CD-ROM. Well, guess who partnered with Phillips to create the compact disc? If you guessed Sony, you're on a roll. Then there's video8, the walkman and discman (from the "before-times" lol), aperture grill televisions and computer monitors (one of the methods of making tube televisions and monitors), DAT and ADAT (analog audio recording tapes that have been the standard in audio recording studios (well, analog studios anyway) around the world since the 90's). And the list goes on and on.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is I'm getting tired of everyone ripping on Sony as a company because one single department of theirs has been goofing up lately. Didn't someone go so far as to make a thread a few months ago where they claimed they'd never buy another Sony product again (after something they messed up in some Star Wars game)? When people say stuff like "typical Sony move," it degrades a company that has provided us with a large number of consumer, professional, and industrial electronic devices for a very long time, longer than some (possibly most) TGC'ers have been alive, myself included. Again, I'm not trying to yell at or single out Van in any way, I'm only talking about that specific way of thinking, that Sony can do no good.


Not until this October... can't wait. I already know exactly what games I'm getting with it as well. I'd have one by now if it weren't for us moving and all that (and my girlfriend getting her NYS license for message therapy). And my Mom, upset that she couldn't get us (myself, my brother, and my sister) Wii's for Christmas has said repeatedly she's getting one for each of us this year (and one for herself, as well... she thinks the Tennis game would help arthritis, although I argue it'll probably make it far worse). So anyway, no longer will I be confined to playing the PS3 and Wii at a friends' house. Soon, multiplayer Motorstorm dominance will be mine

Nintendo. Sony just backed out of the deal like cheapskates and made the PS1.

Are you trying to say Nintendo got together with Philips to develop the compact disc? On October 1st, 1982 Sony introduced the CDP-101 which was the first Compact Disc audio CD player. Also look up James T. Russell (hint)

Fairplay, then what's there to argue? If you willing to purchase a PS3, then why do we need a debate on the Sony side of things, if you thought they were all that bad, then you wouldn't be buying one, surely that would be the end of it, we know the consoles and companies are different and that the companies are different, but none stick their head high above the rest (MS might be higher due to early release and PS3 lower to their price, but that doesn't mean a lack of quality on one side as the PS3 could easily be as popular once the prices drop and Wii is quite popular)...so what does it matter?

Matt, if there's one thing that annoys me it's over-hype, and Sony is guilty of this more than any other console manufacturer. By typical sony move, I meant that they're too involved in marketting, and unfortunately the consumer is the one who has to pay for it.

If the PS3 cost the same as the 360, then I'd have bought one by now - I'm not against sony, I'm against being brutally raped in the wallet .

Matt, on a games development forum when people say "Sony" it is fairly safe to assume they are referring to "Sony Computer Entertainment".

Please refrain from reeling off useless and unrelated information about Sony as a whole, all it does it makes it blatantly obvious that you decide to support something with a Sony label on it before you consider it as a product.



Sony invented the 3.5" floppy?? EVERYONE BUY PS3s!!!

PS3 all the way baby

anyway, XBOX 360 cannot handle fluids properly when you use an AGEIA accelerator whereas PS3 can, but that really is the only downsize to having an XBOX 360, but it wont be too much of a problem lol

Well if I had the choice of where I was raped (if that were to occur), I would choose the wallet over everything else.

.......

Why mention anything that doesn't have to do with gaming? Sony may have made *insert product* first, but does that have anything to do with their marketing practices in the gaming industry?

Does the PS3 have a lot of ads right now? I haven't seen any, but maybe they have them some where. That and their price might indicate why the PS3 has flopped as of now.

If it doesn't matter to you, why are you in this thread? Obviously it matters to some people. It seems like in every debate thread you come in and say "come on guys, let's be friends. everyone is equal, everything is equal." etc. etc. In reality, some products are better than others, and that's what the debate is about.

I've said this before in another thread... when the contracts were first written up for SNES-CD, Nintendo should have actually read them and agreed to them before signing them. Instead, they didn't read them, and a year later they found themselves backing out of the deal with Sony and running for Phillips (Wiki, best I could come up with in a limited period of time). Sony never backed out of the deal, Nintendo did. But none of this had anything to do with CD's anyway .


I can't argue with that, I'm just saying it downplays the company as a whole when it's really just their SCE division that's committing foul play, and it's pretty recent that they've started acting like this as well. When they launched PS3, they were launching the follow-up to the two most popular consoles in history, so they assumed it was going to immediately be the most popular console in history. I made that mistake as well, but I'm allowed to: I'm not some marketing guy at the company in question, lol.


I wish there weren't so many anti-Sony/ anti-PS3 threads on TGC, and that they weren't all 5,000 pages long, or maybe that TGC had a search engine that could find specific phrases in conversations. I'd love to hunt down the exact thread where, when I said something to the effect of Blu-Ray being awesome, someone said something to the effect of "yeah, Sony has a great track record of releasing popular new formats, like Betamax and minidisc." No one yelled at that person for using an unrelated arguement, but then I'm criticized when I use that in support of Sony. Anyway, it was definitely said by someone and no one got upset or said anything to counter their arguement whatsoever, see what I'm getting at? With a comment like that, assuming Blu-Ray is going to fail simply because Sony developed it, all it does is downplay all of the other awesome products they create/ invent.


I don't think it's a matter of the products being better as much as it's a matter of people liking certain products more. I prefer the PS3 over the other consoles, the Wii over the 360, and the 360 simply doesn't interest me. Others (most others, actually) prefer the other two consoles over the PS3. Partly, mostly, or (in some cases) entirely because of how Sony handled the PR for their newest console. Unless by "better" you mean "cheaper" in terms of retail cost, or "better" in terms of the number of units they've sold, or how many games they've released so far. But I don't think it could be argued that the 360 is a better console than the PS3. All consoles take time to master for developers and until the PS3 and 360 are both pushed to their outer limits, it can't be said that either console is better than the other. Until that happens, the arguement should stay on paper. But on paper, the PS3 beats the 360, so I'm sure no one wants the arguement to happen on paper, hehe.

Edit: Yay, I remembered where it was! The Lik-Sang thread, found here. Funny because it was the very first article I looked at trying to find where someone said this. Anyway, Kentaree said...

Which was followed by Raven defending Blu-Ray, but then saying this:

And I was pointing out that no, Sony actually does have a fantastic track record of introducing new technology, and that when comments like these were made, no one said it was unrelated and in turn was meaningless to the debate at hand . I was wrong before also, I thought that I'd said something about Blu-Ray being awesome, but I didn't. Woops

Matt, he said



The important part being "own format".

CD, DVD and 3.5" Floppy (while partly developed by Sony) are not proprietary.

That was relevant, because he mention Bluray as a factor in the appeal of the PS3.



That has NOTHING to do with the PS3 or gaming. You don't even mention Bluray.

They have the cleanest factory? What? Why mention that, I don't understand what it has to do with anything.

The world is not unfair against you.

Actually, we've discussed this before, and nobody could come up with specs that point out PS3 is more powerful than 360 as a whole. When you tell me it's more powerful because of its "peak speed", that doesn't mean anything to me. Cartridges have faster read access peak speeds than CD-ROMs, for heaven's sake.

I have to agree with that, if Sony have succeeded in one thing this generation, it's in spreading the myth that the PS3 has some great untapped potential that the 360 doesn't have.

The 360's processor has much more potential than Cell - FACT.



See, anyone can do it.

If you\'d bothered to read the article (which is a bit of a gloss over what happened), then you\'d realise that Nintendo didn\'t back out of the deal.. neither did Sony. In-fact what was happening was Sony were trying to gain the full properties of Nintendo titles on the sly in order of establishing the PlayStation (which they had every intention of selling seperately to the SNES-CD) and basically stealing everything that fans loved about Nintendo.

This is post MSX, which Sony had previously used to gain control over Nintendo properties in the PC-Compatible market.

The underhanded dealing of Sony went extremely deep at that point in the companies history; and while I won\'t gloss over the fact that Nintendo also weren\'t that trust-worthy the whole affair is a testiment to how both companies handled bad situations. What we find ourselves in with the HD-Generation is that grudge-match finally coming to it\'s peak. Sony and Nintendo might not be fighting hard here, but in the Asian markets there is a very definate war being waged that Microsoft just aren\'t a part of.

The tactics really haven\'t changed either.



a) Sony did NOT invent BluRay, they merely own the patent on it. BluRay is the 2nd Generation DVD-RAM technology from Panasonic (Matsush*ta); a technology that Nintendo still use. It also is the technology that Sony and Philips forced off the consumer market several years back in favour of DVD-ROM.

b) BluRay will fail not because it\'s a bad product, but because of it\'s costs. This is the same reason Betamax, Minidisc and UMD have. They\'re freaking amazing technologies, but ridiculously expensive to produce en-mass.

It\'s why Cassette superceeded LP, and CD superceeded Cassette. When you can produce more space at the same or less cost, then it becomes a viable alternative for not only the public but business as well.

Apart from anything else, right now BluRay is still too young for market. It\'s extremely slow compared to HD-DVD and the space on-discs just won\'t be used for most titles because it isn\'t needed. Partly for cross-platform reasons, but also to keep costs down.

It\'s cheaper to produce something like 25 DVDs over 1 BluRay. Business\' just won\'t be willing to cut that deep into profits for a lil more space that right now just won\'t be used even close to fully. We\'re just about using up the 9.2GB on standard DVDs, and now BluRay offers 25-50GB which just won\'t be used. There\'s only so much content that can be created within standard game development pipelines and also only so much the graphics and memory can handle at any given moment. In-all most games don\'t need that much, add to this compression technology is getting much better with support for most older formats now hardware accelerated; again making space a moot point. Especially when you consider loading times can be almost double on BluRay to DVD.



That depends on how well you can read between the lines.
On paper GeForce GPUs have looked impressive as hell, in practise they often fall slightly short of the competition.

With the Cell processor, this shows where \"on-paper\" is just so highly in-accurate it\'s not even funny. In-fact developing on that architecture is like shooting yourself in both hands before you start to program.

If however you do want to take the \"on-paper\" route.
On-paper, the Xbox 360 is built and works like a console. The Playstation 3 however is build like Personal Computer.

From a developer point of view, there is no competition to which console is actually superior; and that\'s the Xbox 360. It\'s hardware is all designed to work together within a shared environment to make sure there is very little overhead; and that the console produces performance greater than the sum of it\'s parts. That is what a console is suppose to do.

The GPU in the 360 is basically an X1800 which are quite slow compared to the newer X1900 chips that were released later; but because it doubles as the NorthBridge (aka Controller Chipset) this means it directly accesses both memory and processor. This cuts down bandwidth issues; add to this it has dedicated buffers on-die to handle the output meaning that AntiAliasing and multiple draw pipelines can output without taking up valueable system memory as they\'re constructed as-needed not per loop then copied between system and video memory.

We also need to take into account a number of facts with both systems. Xbox 360 still runs a modified Windows 2000 Kernel, utilising the exact same technologies Windows for x86 does; only cut-down to what is needed rather than what might be used.
The overhead on Windows for games usually is between 15-25% (even in the background) on the 360 it\'s <8% at any given time, running in it\'s own processor thread which still leaves most of the processor free anyway so it could just happily run on the background without any problems. The driver set again is identical to Windows only optimised for a single GPU, this makes it more stable and quicker than it\'s Windows counter-part.

Now if we look at the Playstation 3, it\'s GPU has lots (256MB) of dedicated memory; only it has to transfer data through a seperate northbridge.. which is stored via the system memory. So it\'s possible to have 2 instances of the same data amount. Like you get on a PC. What is possibly more important about this fact is that both systems have the same amount of Memory (512MB total) however the difference in internal design is aparent by the fact the PS3 can\'t handle as much data as the 360 can due to the fact that not only is streaming more difficult to do without creating copies of files but that there\'s more steps to take to achieve it.
Without the OS itself providing the support to stream data, something the present set-up really doesn\'t lend itself to... data movement and storage is slower and more bloated.

Which it is, I mean my biggest complain when I worked on the PS3 was quite simply there isn\'t enough memory to do what you want. It\'s like a Ford GT, the engine and power is awesome with that car.. problems appear when you want to turn the damn thing and the fact that a full tank of gas only gets yo a few miles before needing to stop and refuel. That really examplifies my point here between the consoles.

The 360 might not have the brute power the Playstation 3 does, but because of it\'s design it can utilise what it has better. This problem is extremely apparent in the Cell processor.

I\'ve heard a couple of developers talk about \"how much more power it has we have to unlock\", which is bullcrap. One of the biggest limiting factors in the Cell is that it\'s not a true multi-core processor. At it\'s heart there is a 64-bit PowerPC @ 3.2GHz, which is great.. only you don\'t get to use that much. Because it\'s there to control the SPEs.
Now I\'ll quickly cover what an SPE actually is; it\'s an acronym for \"Synergistic Processing Unit\", which for those wondering; no Synergistic is not a word.. it\'s something Sony/IBM have invented just to make it sound cool. I\'d also like to point out that really the word Processing also is a stretch here.

The SPE is effectively just a calculator, and fairly limiting too.
You can Add, Subtract, Divide, Multiply, SquareRoot and Dot Product. each SPE comprises of 4x 32-bit SIMD Registers, which allows you to hold up to 128x128bit RegisterFile; (basically queueing for 128 register ops)
Now this is valid per SPE, it\'s basically like a todo list.. so to speak. What gets slightly confusing is that the SPEs talk to each other; utilising the CPU. So they can schedule where data is best kept and run, or offloading extra instructions another has.

This is part 1 of why it\'s a pain in the arse to develop for, because most of what happens is behind the scenes out of developer control. Now the next issue is they provide ZERO branching, after all they\'re just math units like Writek, AltiVec or SSE. They don\'t actually process anything except a sum. So while yeah you can do some cool mathematics quickly you still have to then use the main processor (which is a single core, single threaded processor) to the do the logic.

So now you should have a little better understanding to how it works, but here\'s the kicker. The PS3 SPEs have 64KB memory each... keep in mind the SPE is designed to hold 128x128b(16B) in order to reach their peak performance which Sony claimed of 14GFlops they would need atleast 2MB. Sony for the PS3 have limited them to 4 Operations Per Cycle out of the 128 it was designed to do.

As I said, Memory is one of the biggest issues I have with Playstation 3 development; but more so because what Sony claim the tech can do.. if it was default hardware working solo then yes it might reach what they claimed. As it is though, it is budget hardware that relies alot on each other just to achieve most of what they can do on their own.

Combine this with the fact that while the actual hardware inside both machines for all intended purposes is fairly equal in terms of computing power; Windows with ATI Direct3D, will outperform Linux with NVIDIA OpenGL any day of the week on the same title.
Why this is, I have no idea.. as both developers are in their elements with a given API; but I\'ve never been able to personally achieve better performance doing the exact same tasks in OpenGL on Linux as I have with OpenGL on Windows; and more to the point OpenGL just hasn\'t been as quick as Direct3D in a good few years since 9 was released.

If you want to argue about on paper, and the facts of the hardware then fine. I can give you so many examples of where the Playstation 3 fails as a console period; this excludes my own personal bad experience with this console that never ceases to amaze me what else it can do to disappoint me.

According to who ?

I've decided to summerize Ravens posting with a cool Japaneese Anime cartoon title.

"Playstation 3 mega-hyper-turbo-godforce-sucks"

@ Kevin Picone

I think you missed:



Perhaps I should have smilied it, just to be safe...

Because I don't like opening up these sort of threads where they get into hot debate, well should I say an argument, I had always thought the reason politics and religion weren't allowed to be debated because they turn into arguments, arguments aren't far from people offending each other, I have noticed the tone fire up between you two, and Matt has taken a few of your comments the wrong way, all it takes is someone immature (like in religious and political debate) to push the wrong buttons and it's out of the window. Okay, I've made my mistakes of talking religion or politics, but I've stood down when realising when I see the line I've just crossed. In my mind, this sort of argument has just the same potential. Whether or not you agree there, but that is why I am posting in this thread. It is also the reason I stand between Windows vs Mac vs Linux debates, which do have people posting ignorant/immature comments.

Various game developers have been quoted to state that the ps3 is powerful, but its a pain to use it at its maximum potential whereas the 360 may not have as much but its easy to take advantage of everything. There have been a few quotes floating around this page.

@ Raven, you are really good at writing. I mean, REALLY good. I read everything you wrote, and it's really convincing. I wish you had posted some links though.

I nominate Raven as the best writer on the forum, even if he does say a bit more than he needs to.