Developer explains what it’s like developing for each console: PS3 being the hardest

DaThreats5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

hmm
If the PS3 had the same GPU as the 360
The PS3 would of easily show its superior power compared to the 360
But now the PS3 exclusives do show the graphical power compared to 360 exclusives.
So it shows the PS3 is the better and more powerful system.

Reply Agree 100Disagree 87

decrypt5089d ago

5089d ago

Dante1125089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

@ decrypt

You gotta admit though. When looking at each console exclusives, the PS3 does have the edge when it comes to tech, graphics and higher FPS. If the 360 is so superior or on the same level as the PS3, then why don't their games reflect that? I don't even think the 360 managed to pull any Spike GOTY awards this gen.

Edit: Look at The Last of Us game and it's AI alone.

Edit2: You all remember when the Gears of War series was thought of as the games that had the best graphics, tech, etc on consoles? Len of Truth and Digital foundry just exposed everything, we probably still would have thought that if they didn't compare exclusives.

Agree 40 Disagree 35

Mustang300C20125089d ago

Since with did Spike become the end of all other awards. When did it become the overall official award. You just chose one out of a many that do an awards show. Spike isn't is the same as MTV movie awards vs the Emmys.

Agree 25 Disagree 12

5089d ago

Livin_in_a_box5089d ago

Brosy5089d ago

ThatsGaming5089d ago

There are many games that disagree... Fallout 3, Orange Box, Skyrim, Mass Effect 2/3, etc.

The PS3 wins from a pure numbers perspective. But, consoles are about a complete architecture from front to back. Throughput of buses, GPUs, CPUs, network, etc.

From an architecture perspective, the PS3 has many fatal flaws that keep it from reaching its potential.

Agree 21 Disagree 12

Twilightx75089d ago

To all the people using the "simultaneous Steam users" argument - who seriously logs off Steam? If your computer is on, and you're a steam user, there's a good chance that you're on Steam right now, even if you're not playing anything. Hell, I'M online right now, and I'm at work, so I'm sure as hell not playing anything.

PC gaming isn't anywhere close to dead, but stick to smarter arguments.

Agree 22 Disagree 7

darthv725089d ago

it depends on the developers themselves as to how much they invest in understanding the tech.

Not sure if is true anymore but it was widely regarded (a few years ago) that while the PS3 was more difficult to program for, it made for a better lead platform for multi-plat games. Meaning that if they were to achieve a certain fidelity in the game as it was created on the PS3 then the port to 360 would be very easy.

I guess it has something to do with the way the 360 can dynamically reassign resources to various tasks. As if to say the 360 can emulate the ps3 better than the other way around. This has been the case for many devs who make the 360 lead and then port to PS3 claiming they just cant get the same results.

So if it is true...then imagine an exclusive developer like naughty dog making a game for the 360. I am sure they would be able to pull off some great results like they do with the ps3.

Bottom line is both platforms are more alike than they are different. It is the talent of the devs that can bring about each platforms great games. MS developed the 360 with the 3rd party in mind so it is no surprise that their list of exclusive devs is much smaller. They are wanting to make the 360 a universal type of platform like they have done to windows.

Agree 8 Disagree 8

Angels37855089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

@Decrypt

LOL dont try and make out PC to be something its not. I will outright say I am a PC fanboy and the only other consoles I own are 360 and ps3 (FOR THE EXCLUSIVES ONLY) everything else I buy on PC. You say steam has more online players than psn and xbox live at a time? That couldnt be further from the truth. The highest Ive seen steam reach is nearly 5,000,000 users.....and it only peaked because of the STEAM summer sale. The psn an XB live numbers peak as well when they have sales. Despite all this go to microsoft's website and search around a bit and it shows xb live has an AVERAGE of 7 million players DAILY......thats more than steam even at its peak. PSN averages about the same...maybe lower. and those are averages...not spikes like steam has recently been having. I went on just a few min ago and the number was just below 4 million....like 3,9xx,xxx.

Im all for the growth of the pc platform, but 5,000,000 players online doesnt mean crap...you know as well as I do that console players outnumber pc players almost 10-1. Online numbers doesnt mean the console or pc has more users. plus with steam you have to be signed in to play....psn and xb live you dont. Sure you can ply in offline mode for steam, but no one goes and does that they just log in and play.

Agree 6 Disagree 6

joab7775089d ago

Except for the gpu. Memory issues have become very apparent with little to no fixes. What good is all the power if it's used to compensate for all it's deficiencies. It's more like a sad story of what could have been. I understand the push to move into the future but it comes off as more of a "look how smart I am." With production costs being so high, it really hurts to spend so much time figuring out how to use the power. It's too bad they were not able to fix the problems early on instead of forcing everyone to comply. I love the ps3 & That's why it hurts. And instead of moving in this direction, next Gen consoles will money away from this architecture.

Agree 8 Disagree 1

MmaFan-Qc5089d ago

Monkeyfun and Cory Bloyd never created a ps3 game.....so why would i want to listen to what he have to say about something he didnt touched?

Agree 4 Disagree 9

Godmars2905089d ago

Think it has more to do with MS setting out to make the 360 dev tools Windows if not PC friendly.

Sony likely did no one, especially themselves, any favors when setting up the PS3's architecture so that the console could be easily exploited, but an unwillingness to learn to learn that different structure when they already had the 360 didn't help anything.

And there's still the fact - semi-fact or whatever - that when effort is put into a PS3 exclusive it looks better than an Xbox or multiplatform title.

Agree 5 Disagree 11

ShinMaster5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

We already know the PS3's architecture is more complex. Don't get why "some" people keep insisting on it. Does it make them feel better? They must think they're dealing a low blow or something. That somehow PS3 games will magically stop looking good if they argue against it. Do they get a temporary false sense of satisfaction? How sad.

Easier to develop doesn't always mean better.
and
More powerful doesn't always mean easier.

* What matters are the end results. The games.
And PS3 games look fantastic. Period.

Agree 10 Disagree 13

ChrisW5089d ago

_-EDMIX-_5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

I think it comes down to something a lot more simple. It has to do with space. I think Sony having Bluray and MS using DVD9 (same format and space as last gen's systems)
are what allowed them to make such leaps in terms of exclusive games.

http://www.psu.com/a000629/...

Its games like that ^ which show you that even if you have the hardware (N64) doesn't mean you'll get games like (FFVII). What I mean is, disk formats are hardware too and really matter in every game generation. Nintendo lost that game generation JUST because of the format they choose. 64mb to about 800mb. Makes a huge difference between games like MGS1, GT1 and GT2, FFVII, FFVIII, FFIX etc. Mind you those games OUT OF THE GATE had 2 disk, or 3 or EVEN 4. So they actually really needed close to 3.2 gigs. 64mb isn't going to cut it.

that as an example shows, its not that game developers don't need it just because of games like Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Banjo series, Conker (not sure why i can only remember rare games right now lol) didn't need it, its that they had to make a game around 64mb and clearly they needed that ram pack that Nintendo had to offer later that gen for games like DK (or in MS case with GTAV, its likely it will be a mandatory install)

Games don't shrink each gen, they get bigger by 4, 6 or even 12 times there size from one gen to the next, new hardware means more data from graphics, ram, sound, frame rate, not even to mention AI and other features. Space will ALWAYS go up each gen. Its something that is a must, we can't ask for better or more and next gen expect it to take less space to due so.

Last gen's disk size was about 5.2gigs, 360's disk size was about 6.8 gigs (its now as of 2011. 7.95gigs).

I won't hark on and on on whats clearly wrong with that picture.

GOW1 and GOW2 on PS2 took a DVD9 and GOW2 EVEN TOOK 2 DVD9's!!

GT4 took a DVD9.

Now if I tell you what I said about FFVII and N64 and told you, GT5 and GOWIII would be on a bigger format then there last and Forza and PGR would use just the same space as last gen...which game do you think would have the largest leap in terms of content?

Theres a reason why PS3 has the best exclusives this gen BY A FAR! Developers from Sony are making next gen games as they should had been made by the rest of the industry. No doubt that Sony has great developers, but i feel there developers look even more great this gen in comparison. In reality, i feel EVERY GAME THIS GEN would had been 100 times better with the space they clearly need to make a next gen game. Games where gimped to fit 1 DVD9 disk.

Put it this way....if you disagree, does that mean you believe FFVII would had just been on the N64 JUST like it was on PS1 with 36 cartridges? Same scope, story, engine etc? Cause one would have to use common sense to realise that Square changed there game based on having space to make better.

How many games had to "change" to fit DVD9? We can say games "didn't need it" all day, but its like saying "they didn't need it 2 gens ago with Goldeneye and ignore that, that same gen games 12 times the size where releasing"

They needed it, they where just making a game around 64mb. No one chooses to limit there damn scope or features in a game there making unless THEY HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE! How many games have been "N64ed" this gen because of 360?

http://www.videogameconsole...

Unless History is lying to us too.^

Agree 6 Disagree 3

starchild5089d ago

Console fanboys are funny. There isn't enough difference between the 360 and PS3 to even argue about. They are extremely close in overall performance.

The PS3 has a more powerful CPU, but it isn't suited to all kinds of tasks (as pointed out in the article). The 360 on the other hand has a more powerful GPU and somewhat better memory architecture and more available memory due to the smaller OS memory footprint.

Neither console can be said to be definitively more powerful than the other because it really depends on how you design your game to take advantage of the different architectures. They each have strengths and weaknesses.

Overall, though, when comparing general performance the PS3 and 360 are pretty damn close. If you want to talk about a performance difference that actually means something we would need to bring the PC into the discussion.

Agree 7 Disagree 4

units5089d ago

pixelsword5089d ago

Well, here's the way I see it:

If the PS3 and 360 is very even in terms of tech, BUT the PS3 is harder to program for, THEN 360 games ought to have the edge over PS3 games in every way; PLUS the 360 have been out a year earlier.

So:

There should already be a game that is more advanced than The Last of Us on the 360.

Which one is it?

Which game was it that whipped-up on God of War.

Or had more online multiplayers in a FPS than MAG?

Or was a better looking racing game than GT5?

Or put Killzone, Resistance 3, or Uncharted 3 in it's place graphically?

What's the name of that one game that has more scale than Heavenly Sword and/or Lair?

I'm not saying the 360 doesn't have great games at all; there's a lot of great exclusive games, even if you want to count the timed ones, but all I'm saying is that you can't call the 360 equal or superior, then give the 360 a pass in any way when someone asks you to prove it.

That should be the easy part, not the hard part.

P.S.

Don't go into some Uber PC rant: Because there's already a website on record that says that GT5 was the best looking racing game they've ever seen; including PC games; and again, the easy part would be proving it, so if you disagree with me, merely prove it and it's done. I'm not bashing anything, but quit the bull, please.

and brosy:

When these mulitplayer games look better than PS3 exclusives, then you would have a case, but they don't, so that proves nothing.

Agree 3 Disagree 6

pixelsword5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Exactly: I get disagrees, but not a jot of proof. You guys are full of it.

I got a whole list of stuff for ya and you give me nada because you can't.

Just remember that the next time you post your thinly-veiled "truth".

Agree 1 Disagree 3

Reply Agree 26 Disagree 14

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 5089d ago

nukeitall5089d ago

I think you should read the article again:

"There’s only one CPU. It seems like it might be able to do everything, but it can’t. The SPUs seem like they should be really awesome, but not for anything you or anyone else is doing."

Yeah, it's really fast just not the type of workload you would be doing in most tasks!

andibandit5089d ago

Hoje03085089d ago

Tell him to take that comment to Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica or Guerrilla. I'm sure they'd have a laugh and might even give him some coding lessons if they have a few minutes to spare.

Agree 24 Disagree 35

nukeitall5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

@Hoje0308:

Not everybody has the interest nor business case to invest heavy resources into showcasing or even justifying Sony hardware especially when you have no real investment into the console.

That is unlike Sony first party studios whom would be embarrassed if they showed a poorly looking game on supposed expensive and "superior" hardware wouldn't it. If I were Sony, I would put lots and lots of resources too, because that is the selling point and justification for the PS3 price tag!

Agree 24 Disagree 10

extermin8or5089d ago

well if he can bench press 400 pounds, ho could throw far? lol no seriously that's a silly analogy; and I wouldn't say they need to learn to programme in general just how to change the workload to one the ps3 can do and somehow turn that into what they need; naughty dog do it and within a reasonable amount of time (2 years usually) so really if you actually want to make a game on ps3 you don't have an excuse; the AC devs do it every year to name just a couple; and they do have an investment in it the large install base they need to buy their games if they want people to buy their games then they'll bother putting the time and resources into making the game run well-else why bother at all?
Pc's architecture is like that of the 360 I believe and therefore easier to develop for however as far as I was aware in terms of pure computing power and number crunching then a more modern update of the CELL has greater Potential; I don't think you really see this with the ps3 however mainly because as he says "unfortunately most people eventually realise the SPU's need to be making up for the GPU most of the time." -hope Sony learnt heir lesson; use the CELL again but more SPU's and a better GPU in the ps4 oh and more RAM :D

Agree 7 Disagree 11

sak5005089d ago

ProjectVulcan5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

It isn't a silly analogy. Andibandit has a good one really. So you have a world class weightlifter but you need a sprinter. You can retrain him all you like but he'll probably never be a top sprinter.

PS3 is difficult to work with, with an awkward architecture that didn't really work out. 360 might have less theoretical performance, but it is more flexible.

There is always a limit to what you can achieve by relearning ways to program a machine- as with the above analogy. The fact most games and many engines were built for 360 first then ported to PS3 really hurts PS3, but then 360 was out earlier and had a sales lead for years, which is why devs targeted it rather than PS3 as lead platform.

It took years to realise that PS3 should be lead platform and then port to 360 because it is easier than the other way around. Flexibility of 360.

But anyway this generation has probably peaked and is now on downslope. Lets just hope Sony have learnt from their mistakes (difficult hardware, expensive, late) and we'll see an even better new Sony machine next year.

Agree 17 Disagree 5

ShinMaster5089d ago

insomnium25089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

I can bench press 400 pounds (396 is my official record for now though) and I used to work in a post office delivering daily mail to people. I am fast too lol.

Agree 1 Disagree 8

greenpowerz5089d ago

Angels37855089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

@Greenpowerz

That is almost laughable watch these http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.youtube.com/watc... Both explain the ps3 is a slightly more powerful console. Your QTE argument is moot. What about infamous 2, GT5, Killzone 3 (Much more open than killzone 2) and more online players than most games of today MAG (very sociable if you ask me). If you are comparing horizon and forza 4 thats where your fanboy allegience lies. GT5 has more cars and weather than BOTH of those games running at 1920x1080 at 60 fps. Games tend to be better on 360 because like explained in the article the architechture is different therefore it is easier to make a 360 game then PORT it to ps3. What about technical marvels like BF3, RAGE, just cause 2, portal 2, medal of honor and the lot that were developed with PS3 IN MIND? you leave those out on purpose? just because you make a game for 360 then port to ps3 doesnt mean the system IT WAS MADE FOR is better. it means it was designed to be efficient for it. also mind you 360 came out b4 ps3 and thats what devs started this gen on. You sound very biased. There are always exceptions to the rule You presented your argument that showed all the bad and left out the reasons for it. also in the vids above it say that the cell's integrated graphics capability more than make up for the gpu limitations and even surpasses the 360 as a unit. I will never say however that the ps3 is not hard to develop for. IT is and thats part of the reason why multiplats are better on 360. but you can see when a developer makes a ps3 game and ports to 360 that the ps3 version begins to look better. without a doubt. what i also find funny is you claim the ps3 versions run worse than the 360 versions in rage and crysis 2 when digital foundry and lens of truth both found that the ps3 versions of both games run better on ps3....where are you getting your information?

vulcanproject above said it best....read his comment.

Agree 10 Disagree 11

testerg355089d ago

Angel3785, gt5 is not 1920x1080.

Agree 7 Disagree 3

Angels37855089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

If you watched any of the videos in my comment above ^ and still disagree, then you are delusional. The man explains FACTS all I did was rephrase them. Anyone want to prove me (OR HIM) wrong?

@testerg35

yes it does http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... the 3D doesn't

Agree 3 Disagree 6

greenpowerz5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

GTA 5 and Crysis 3 will prove it. Forza Horizon has day/night cycles, weather and weather physics. Forza Horizon has Forza's Simulator physics in a open world game with improved Forza 4 graphics and human and AI traffic.

QTE games games don't matter? They are used to prove PS3 is superior when they're nothing more than a fancy interactive cutscene.

Infamous is a action game with the depth of a sheet of paper compared to GTA and Red Dead Redemption.

GT5 isnt the highest rated SIM on the market, the cars look good, well half of them do. Game not 1080p

KZ games are poorly designed with tacked on feeling multiplayer.
Linear compared to the games I mentioned

The rest of those games are not used to prove PS3 is more powerful due to their mediocrity in almost every way.

Agree 10 Disagree 11

Angels37855089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

@Greenpowerz

I like how you totally ignored the facts about the games like for example I was talking about the game engine...then you come back with "but those games suck in my opinion" despite what reviewers and sales show. I could give two shits if infamous doesnt have depth. Im saying what the graphics are looking like and the scale of the game. LOL killzone 3 more linear than crysis 2? LOLOLOL what are you smoking those two are almost identical BOTH more open linear shooters. I never said QTE dont matter and I agree many use them for their argument. but for example u say ps3 games only look good because of their linearity. What im saying is that ps3 games look good despite linearity when done right like not bad ports, or ps3 exclusives that aren't linear.

Plus why is it that 360s exclusive linear games dont match up to games of equal linearity. For example gears getting beat by uncharted/ MGS4, crackdown and fable beat by infamous 2, GT5 beating Forza 3 maybe 4 (up till recently since forza has had more time with two new games). LOL and btw horizon wont look better than forza 4, but it will look great for an open world. Ive seen vids of horizon and I have 4, they dont come close. Notice how your argument shifted to "oh just wait and see, i'm right, just wait" looks like your intro argument is moot. i also could give to shits if you think certain games are mediocre you said ps3 had no sociable games...I gave you killzone and MAG BOTH WAAAAAY more sociable than you are making it out. You said no ps3 games that are open can match up to 360 I said here is infamous 2, killzone 3 and there is more like starhawk twisted metal etc. You also said 360 could handle better games, when clearly that is only the case when the game is ported.

What you did is find no solution to my argument, but instead decided to make predictions (based on developers statements which we all know are always a tab below the truth) and take opinionated blows at games instead of trying to prove your point about ps3 having no unlinear good looking games. What if I just said "well rockstar games are boring" would that help my argument. Just in case you forgot we are arguing over ps3 not having any sociable or unlinear good looking games (despite the fact if you think they suck or not). TBH though GTA5 will probably be slightly better on 360 due to rockstar's track record this gen and btw just because their is a slight difference doesn't mean its better cuz I can guarantee gta5 will be ported to ps3. but to be fair Red Dead redemption was pretty close according to lens of truth, the only noticible difference was tearing on 360, and less shrubs on ps3 for better performance so if they pull that off with gta 5 that is no justification that 360 is superior.

if you want to continue this just PM me. my main thing is it depends on what each game is optimized and made for. Like medal of honor on 360 looked better on ps3 because it was made for it, same with BF3. the 360 is a much more flexible system and it can deal with a port, ps3 cant because it waants the game to be done a certain way due to its unique architecture. I cant stress this enough....WATCH THOSE VIDEOS they explain what I'm trying to say much better that I can do over the internet, maybe we are actually agreeing and we dont know what the hell the other person is saying LOL

Agree 3 Disagree 9

testerg355089d ago

Angel, gameplay is 1280x1080.

Agree 1 Disagree 1

badz1495089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

I think YOU should read it again!

"A few people dig deep into the SPUs and, Dear God, they are fast! Unfortunately, they eventually figure out that the SPUs need to be devoted almost full time making up for the weaknesses of the GPU"

it's clear that you need to fully utilize the SPUs to get really great results! this is the proof that if any game is looking bad on the PS3, it's just because the dev was TOO LAZY to use the SPUs!

@greenpowerz

Forza Horizon runs at 720p 30fps! the smoothness of Forza 4 will not be there

Agree 3 Disagree 4

nukeitall5088d ago

@badz149:

I suppose everyone, but Sony or their second party studios are lazy!

I'm not crazy, it's the world! /s

Agree 0 Disagree 1

MaxXAttaxX5088d ago (Edited 5088d ago )

They're not lazy. They just don't take the necessary time and resources BECAUSE they're third party multiplatform games.

First party studios and most exclusive games are focused on using the PS3 hardware exclusively. When a game is built on it, it looks and performs better. Look at games like as FF13 i.e. which were developed on PS3 and then ported to 360. Different story huh ;)

Most multiplatform games don't do this. They focus mostly on 360 and don't take the time or resources to do the same on the PS3 version, because of the fact that they're third party multiplatform games and not first party or second party exclusives.
How do you not get this!?

'angels3785' above posted a video that explains this. Even brain dead people should be able to understand.

Agree 0 Disagree 0

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 5088d ago

BanditGamer5089d ago

Yeah? How come PC is so easy to develop for then? Or are you paying ps3 is more powerful?

Reply Agree 7 Disagree 8

Zeixama5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Cory, be grateful, you won't struggle to find a job during next recession:

Recruiting Manager: Your CV?
Cory: Well, I made/programmed a video game for PS3, duh!
Recruiting Manager: Yeah, dual duh! You have been recruited!
Cory:

Reply Agree 10 Disagree 4

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

With great complexity, comes great inefficiency & lost market share? This is also true for sony.

showtimefolks5089d ago

well that should not be the case anymore, besides 1st party titles many 3rd party AAA titles look and play better on ps3. If someone is using ps3 as the lead console than do a port to xbox360 everything is fine and equel. But when someone ports a xbox360 game to ps3 its not even close to being equal

most EA games use ps3 as their lead console and most of them look better or equal to xbox360 same with UBI

but bathesda and activision still use xbox360 as their lead console and we see the results

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 3

SonyPS3605089d ago

Lose the positive connotation with it already. Being harder to develop for is never a good thing.

5089d ago

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5088d ago

JBSleek5089d ago

I laughed at the descriptions of all the system developing anologies. It makes sense.

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 3

Reply Agree 38 Disagree 13

samson-15089d ago

Seems like the 360 clearly was the better one over the ps3 developing wise.

5089d ago

Replies(1)

ShinMaster5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Easier doesn't always mean better.
and
More powerful doesn't always mean easier.

What matters are the end results to me. The games.

Reply Agree 8 Disagree 5

Rockefellow5089d ago

I cannot imagine what kind of idiots are disagreeing with you.

Agree 3 Disagree 2

Reply Agree 29 Disagree 9

green5089d ago

Pirelli said best. "Power is nothing without control".

Reply Agree 45 Disagree 15

Droid Control5089d ago

LOL

Fanboys still arguing about which 7 or 6 year old machine is more powerful.

The PS3 is more powerful but harder to develop for.
We've known for YEARS.

Can we PLEASE move onto next gen pi$$ing contests already?

NastyLeftHook05089d ago

exactly, we know this i hope we move on now.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 2

ALLWRONG5089d ago

I know it's like arguing which VCR is better than the other.

xursz5089d ago

Sigh... I meant my comment below in a serious way, just sick of reading all the fanboy dribble. Was just trying to start a change of pace around here and I get marked for trolling. *shrugs

On topic: we already knew the ps3 is harder to develop for. Is this new to some people?

Agree 0 Disagree 1

Reply Agree 19 Disagree 13

xursz5089d ago

ShowReplies(1)

5089d ago

Replies(2)

AusRogo5089d ago

And after 6 years, you'll have a few developers (bethesda, I'm looking at you!) That just can't be fucked trying to figure it out, ps3 instead gets the shitty port. Which is unfortunate for people who only own a ps3 (luckily I own a 360 also) . Yeah developers said its hard to develop for but you're job is to make sure you put out the game the best you can on all platforms, not screw people over.. /end rant

Reply Agree 24 Disagree 6

Mustang300C20125089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

See the problem with your rant and similar complaints is that you ignore that time is money. Don't blame the developers that have budgets and deadlines set by the publishers. It isn't the publishers fault that had budgets and deadlines set prior to the PS3 releasing. Sony is responsible for providing tools to handle the system they decided to make difficult to program for. The 1st party got better tools and if anyone says oh other companies could have went to Naughty Dog but again those developers are not going to work for free or delay their own deadlines to constantly help other devs. That's what you left out of your little rant. The game business works just like any other business.

Sony's design decision put them and developers in this situation that lead to what we continue to see with Ps3 versions today.

Zynga5089d ago

Omg dead on man! I could of not have said it any better. Maybe finally the fanboys will understand why and know its sonys fault for making the console a pain to develop. This is why the vita is now develop friendly like the 360.

Agree 12 Disagree 5

Imalwaysright5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Sure the PS3 is hard to develop for but that is unavoidable. When developers like bethesda release an unplayable game on any system i dont care for excuses. I dont care if its the tools or time constraints and i hold them 100% responsible for it. You dont put on the market faulty products and screw your costumers over period. If their game wasnt ready they should have never released it. That is Bethesda responsibility, not Sony's.

jib5089d ago

@imaalwaysright

did you buy the game? you have the choice not to

Agree 1 Disagree 0

XabiDaChosenOne5089d ago

@RedHemi300c "don't blame the devs that have budgets and deadlines" But I will, you speak as if we are getting these games for free. Devs are not the only ones with budgets, the majority of consumers do also. If a consumer can find it within their budget to purchase your product, a dev should find it within their budget to make the product work. There is to many multiplat games that work stellar on the PS3 for these pitiful excuses. This isnt 2006-2008 anymore.

Mustang300C20125089d ago

kobe357,

Um, hmmmm all those multiplatform games don't run on the same engine. Some do but not all. Doesn't That devs have budget aandromeda constraints. You still have a choice to purchase said product. If you are still buying inferior versions of games that do not meet up to par to the counter part then you have a choice as a consumer to not buy it. It is called research and how difficult is it to find the information to let you know this version isn't a dud. You deciding to buy a game doesn't change the fact that the companies still have a budget and time frame. The company does have a choice to put more to hthe project and also delay the version which has happened in the past with PS3 versions. Bringing up that it isnt 2006-8 just shows how much in denial you are that what is true then is still true today. More time and money is spent to get most multiplat games to look just as good as the 360 and First party devs have better tools. Again, Sony made their bed. They have to learn and move forward and if they pull this again next gen they will be worse off with devs than they were this gen. Look at the Vita situation. A lot better to develope for but no one is buying the system or games.

Agree 1 Disagree 0

XabiDaChosenOne5089d ago

"all those multiplatform games don't run on the same engine." Than this is no longer an issue with the PS3, rather the issue lies with the engine not being properly optimized for the PS3. Also not every consumer has the luxury of having both consoles, therefore getting the other version is not an option. Honestly, IMO if you are going to have cases like bayonetta and skyrim than it is just unethical to have the inferior version have the same price tag as the superior version. It has been shown countless times as this gen progressed that the PS3 is not impossible to develop on and that multiplat can be made to look equal to its xbox 360 version in a timely fashon. There is no disputing that, its a visible fact. Not to mention multiplats looking "superior" on the Xbox360 is few and far between nowadays. I dare you to prove otherwise. But I digress .

Agree 0 Disagree 5

Imalwaysright5088d ago (Edited 5088d ago )

I bought it day one. I was never expecting that at some point the game would become unplayable! Why would I? The moment a product enters the market it is expected to work properly. That is common sense! It was my choice to buy the game the moment it entered the market but its Bethesda responsibility to make sure that, before they put their game on the market, that it works perfectly!

The game is broken and unplayable! Bethesda knew it and they released it anyway. MS did the exact same thing with the 360 and they payed the consequences. The same should happen to Bethesda to set the example but this is just another case where this industry fucks the consumer and gets away with it! People like you will give them excuses and they'll keep on do it!

Agree 0 Disagree 0

Lvl_up_gamer5088d ago (Edited 5088d ago )

@ Kobe357

I am sorry Kobe but Redhemi is right. You as the consumer should be doing your research first before purchasing any kind of product of service. The devs have time and resource constraints and have to release a product when they feel it's as best they can do within the constraints given to them.

Nothing is forcing a consumer to purchase a product right at release. By researching how the product is ie. reviews you can then determine if it's a game worth investing in either by renting it first or buying it. I agree that in some cases some games don't warrant a $60 price tag, but there is no reason why you need to pay that price if it's a price that is too high for the game in it's current state at release. You can wait till the price comes down, search for a used copy ie. Kajiji, craigs list or ebay.

As for the differences in graphics/performance between multiplats, they are still there and not as far inbetween as you think. Only the highly anticipated multiplats and there are still clear differences between the games.

Either way, you as the consumer made your decision on which console to purchase over the other if you couldn't afford both thus whatever shortcomings or strengths that console has, you as the consumer can't complain about a product not performing as well on that hardware vs. how the same product performs on the competing hardware. It was your choice which hardware you wanted and why you wanted it over the competitions hardware.

@Imalwaysright

It's up to the consumer to research a product before buying either by renting or reading reviews. To the developers, the game worked fine on the PS3 in their opinion thus released the game.

Look at the car industry, it's well known that you don't buy new cars released in the current year, you wait a year to allow the engineers to hammer out any issues. Look at the current recalls from toyota, Hyundia, Nissan, Ford etc. All released that met criteria yet had to be recalled due to issues.

It's up to the consumer to research first then buy if they feel the product is worth their money.

Look at the RROD issues with the 360.

All examples of released products that met criteria prior to release that may not have been 100% perfected on release.

Agree 2 Disagree 0

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5088d ago

WeskerChildReborned5089d ago

Yea i hate when one system gets a bad port.

Reply Agree 21 Disagree 21

neutralgamer195089d ago

Tell him to take that comment to Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica or Guerrilla. I'm sure they'd have a laugh and might even give him some coding lessons if they have a few minutes to spare.

lol laughing that quote right on the money. Uc2 best game this gen with the most awards every received by a game. Before Uc2 and KZ2 and GOW3 no one ever thought at this stage those kinds of games could be pulled off on a console. Till this date those games are graphical and technological feats not done in other games on other systems. Ps3 is the real deal.

Reply Agree 13 Disagree 8

samson-15089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Come on dude, there are better looking games out there than the one's you named. What technological feats are you speaking of...lol. uc2 was a great game but saying its the best game this gen is totally subjective. You sound like a total fanboy with that comment. You missed the whole point of the article. It wasn't a graphics contest. That's not a good name for you with those types of comments.

Persistantthug5089d ago

Killzone 3 is also a technical marvel for FPS on consoles.

Agree 5 Disagree 13

Silly gameAr5089d ago

@Persistantthug

Just let these guys stay in denial. Arguing with them is like arguing with a brick wall.

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 8

ALLWRONG5089d ago

Rage looks better and it's 60fps, too bad the game sucked.

sandman2245089d ago

Ok, my only complaint with Sony is that why did they make there console difficult to develop for. If only they made it similar to the 360 in developer friendly way that it could've been the best console this gen. But they didn't and that really helped Xbox stay on top in the USA.

Reply Agree 9 Disagree 3

Reply Agree 6 Disagree 20

Tonester9255089d ago

If these 1st-Party Devs can make these beautiful games, why can't any other Dev do it as well.

Like I said before, it's the 3rd-Party Devs fault the game doesn't look or run nice when other Devs know how to make it work.

Make these Devs take a class for the PS3.

The only reason that it was easier the develop on the Xbox is because it modeled the PC closely

Reply Agree 15 Disagree 4

JBSleek5089d ago

First and foremost this is a business and as such it is Sony job to make it easy to develop for.

These developers are on a time constraint and budget by publishers and are expected to put out top quality games on all platforms in two years.

I expect Sony 1st party games to be better as they can spend their time and money on one platform but then expecting someone to turn out that same quality when they have to also make that game for PC Xbox360 Wii is just not logical.

"The only reason that it was easier the develop on the Xbox is because it modeled the PC closely"

Then why didn't Sony? And aren't Sony doing the same thing rumored for the next generation so they can cut cost and be easier to develop for.

Tonester9255089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Why do the PS3 Exclusives look better than Xbox 360's. It's obviously not hard for Sony's 1st-Party Devs. If you are a developer it should be mandatory to take classes to learn the new codes or whatever is soooo difficult to implement for the game.

Is it going to be difficult for 3rd Party Devs to create games on the Wii-U too?

Take them back to school like any other job.

testerg355089d ago

Sony devs have help from Sony on coding.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 1

Reply Agree 14 Disagree 7

000000000000000000015089d ago

No, it Sony's fault for not getting the software tools and information to 3rd party developers. The hardware isn't worth Shi$ without great software tools.

Rjs375089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

It's been long known (since the start of the generation) by developers that the PS3 is harder to work with, however as a lot of people have pointed out you can also get access to more power. So it's a trade off between power and ease.

The article was concentrating solely on which console was the hardest to develop for. Not which console had the most power and definitely not which console has the better games.

Ultimately if the software tools available are too hard to work with it will ultimately put developers off working with that platform. I hope that both console manufacturers concentrate on that side of things as a priority, otherwise it'll hinder the games that come out (at least at launch).

ChunkyLover535089d ago

At least developers try with the PS3. I remember how developers just gave up and wouldn't even try with the Sega Saturn, which was actually a powerful console. A lot of core gamer's still love the Saturn.

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 5

cstyle5089d ago

we've always know that the 360 was the most developer friendly. That explains why 99% of 3rd party titles turned out better on it. Sony screwed up with their architecture when you consider how much developer suffered with it at the beginning of this generation.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 4

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 10

neutralgamer195089d ago

This is a replay to Samson....

Better looking games? Really because i buy tons of games and havent really seen any that match those exclusives. Example mp3 is a new tps and comes years after Uc2 and doesnt look no where as good. Its a decent game but nah man you must be smoking.

Whats not subjective are the tons of awards
Uc2 received for good reason and no game before or after has received those many awards (doesn't that tell you something)

Please tell me what games look better? because ive played almost all the new AAA releases int he past few years. Please dont say Crysis 2 because i will laugh, dont say mp3 because ill chuckle.

By the way im not replying to the article but to some comments ive seen on here in regards to ps3 being or not being technologically superior to other consoles.

I am a fanboy-A fanboy of quality!!!!!!

one2thr5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

All's it boils down to is that some people just don't know when or how to let go of the past. Yeah the PS3 was difficult to develop games on, but that didn't stop some companies from pushing it to it limits. Yeah PS3 is hard to develope games on even the valve Gabe dude called the system trash but publicly ate his own words when he admitted that he was wrong and that the PS3 was the most "open" console compared to its rival console(s). And if anything what this gen should have taught us, is that some game companies are more than capable of coding games on tech that has bizaar architecture than others and can showcase the wierd innards capabilities through a high visual/gameplay quaility video game compared to other developers that can barely match visuals/gameplay on more easier system architecture... I for one think its a good thing, seeing that these methods can lead to better graphical & A.I. capabilities within the gaming industry...

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 8

OC_MurphysLaw5089d ago

That was an entertaining read. Regardless of what side of the fence you fall, it has to be a bit refreshing to see an industry developer talk so openly about all those platforms.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 1

DivineAssault 5089d ago

Naughty dog & santa monica put the ps3 to work! their games always come out looking great

Reply Agree 6 Disagree 5

INehalemEXI5089d ago

Indeed

NastyLeftHook05089d ago

yes there games are second to none.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 6

DivineAssault 5089d ago

Those ninny or 360 fanboys must have been through here..

Agree 2 Disagree 1

RickHiggity5089d ago

6 years later and we're still arguing over which is more powerful. Regardless of which console you bought, shouldn'd we be over this by now?

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 1

Bladesfist5089d ago

Years ago software engineers used to think that big amounts of spaghetti code that no one else could understand meant that their code was good but now a days we make things as readable as possible and comment our code. Their is no reason to over complicate things it just costs more money and makes it harder to maintain.

Reply Agree 7 Disagree 11

Treian5089d ago

even after 6 years, devs still complain about how "hard" it is to develop for the ps3. Give me a break. They are just sucky developers.

Pillville5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

I think if multiple companies are still complaining after 6 years, they may have a point.

Throwing more time and developers at a project is not valid solution in the video game industry unless you're working on a huge franchise or a 1st party studio.

Here, read Insomniacs presentations on how to try and get data sent correctly to the SPUs, and tell me that is something any sucky developer should just pick up.

https://d3cw3dd2w32x2b.clou...

https://d3cw3dd2w32x2b.clou...

Reply Agree 6 Disagree 2

Treian5089d ago

you expect some average person to figure whatever that is out? Use a better example trying to prove your point. If the ps3 is so hard to develop for, then tell that to Naughty Dog...

Pillville5089d ago

ND is a 1st party studio with Sony money and resources. They develop for one and only one platform. If they weren't the ones pushing the system the most, I'd be worried.

Agree 3 Disagree 0

NastyLeftHook05089d ago

i agree

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 8

KiLLeRCLaM5089d ago

PC 4 Lyfe

Reply Agree 7 Disagree 6

mdkgod435089d ago

Sony uses alien tech, that's why its hard to develop for

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 8

chukamachine5089d ago

I think the article is spot on tbh.

No machine is perfect, most coders already knew the PS3's gpu did not have enough grunt. If the PS3 had the 360 gpu, you would be seeing alot better.

SPU'S saved the gpu, and who better then ND,SM. etc.

I love the sony hardware and games, but i hope they use their resources better for cpu/gpu/ram.

But i did enjoy the article.

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 4

unchartedxplorer5089d ago

Sony's console may be a tiny bit more powerful than the 360's
but the 360 was the easiest in terms of sucking power out of the system while the PS3 was much harder.
I have a guy who compares the cpu http://www.youtube.com/watc...
and the GPU http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 5

Reply Agree 6 Disagree 12

Siren305089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Not really seeing how the ps3 is more powerful. Games like borderlands, cod, skyrim, mass effect 3 and several others have bad famerates on the ps3. As far as exclusives go you can't really compare them. Games like halo have far more features than games like killzone and resistance, and far better gameplay imo.

_-EDMIX-_5089d ago

...."better" ok. Now its subjective.

Powerful comes from graphical detail and scale and AI etc. In terms of tech, Killzone 2 and 3 are above any FPS on 360. Simply because none of them can pull this off.

http://www.psu.com/a001111/...

weather you liked it or not is irreverent to the point. I believe it had something to do with which one was powerful (not which one you liked or thought was better)

In terms of tech, more textures, animations, detail etc are for lack of a better word "better". PS3 can have more based on Bluray. Simple as that. The 360 can never pull that off based on having DVD9.

Why base "power" off of a port? Optimization is something a developer handles, that has nothing to do with hardware as much as it does programming.

Example, Metro 2033 runs like Crap on PC because of poor optimization, doesn't mean everyone's PC sucks, it just means the developers optimized it really poorly.

And explain how Halo has "more" features then those games? To may knowledge there was a little game called MAG that did something no 360 has ever done or will clearly ever do (based on hardware limitations....DVD9)

Format is Hardware too people and I believe you all know math right?

25gigs beats 7.9gigs easy. PS3 is better. Period. If both systems where PC's, the PS3 would be the better one, hands down. You need to look at EVERY feature before such claims get made.

Ever wonder why GT5 has well over 1000 cars and Forza 4 doesn't even have as much as GT4 did? Heres a hint, GT4 used a DVD9 and had 700 cars, Forza 4 used DVD9 and had less. One is last gen and one is next gen, yet both use the same format. HOW CAN FORZA HAVE MORE FEATURES AND MORE CARS AND BE (BETTER) IF IT CAN'T EVEN COMPARE IN CAR COUNT? The better format, gives more cars, more features. GT5 had rally, nascar, dirft etc.....yet STILL released on a single Bluray disk. Now what features did Forza have?

I'm not trying to down Turn 10, I think they are doing a great job with what little they have (i truly really do) i thinks its just that they have no chance to even MATCH the GT series with a such a limited format. (the same one GT used last gen, GT5 was next gen cause it had a next gen format to BACK IT UP)

Weather you like GT or Forza is irrelevant, " far more features" I think would count as more powerful hardware if those features CLEARLY are in GT and not in Forza or ANY 360 racer, one would clearly understand its because of a hardware limitation.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 6

MGRogue20175089d ago

I've heard that PS Vita is the most easiest out of all the handhelds/consoles to develop for. :)

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 3

fullmetal2975089d ago

The PS vita is essentially a high-powered smartphone. Seeing as the Vita does have a ARM CPU just like every other smartphone.

TronEOL5089d ago

Why is everyone arguing about what platform has the best looking games when the article is about what it's like developing on each console? Come on guys, if we want this fanboy shit to end, WE need to end it.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 1

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 11

ajax175089d ago

The hardest; but the most rewarding!

MadMen5089d ago

Dont be defensive, its a pain, plain and simple.

Next gen SONY will get it right, they have stated themselves they know they goofed in that area and wont repeat.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 2

blakstarz5089d ago

This is soooo 2007!

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 3

Reply Agree 10 Disagree 5

rickybadman5089d ago

It is completely stupid to say the PS3 is "more rewarding" to work with. Devs take joy in shipping games, not finally getting something to work on the PS3 that has been running find on the 360 for months. Sony screwed Devs/Publishers royally with the PS3 and were unapologetic about it. It makes it even worst if you remember that development cost were already expected to skyrocket.

The PS3's issues never went away, people just got better at handling them. And saying shit like "devs are just lazy, looking at what Naughty Dog or Sony Santa Monica does" is complete bullshit defense. These teams have over 100 plus people working, almost unlimited financial resources and outside help from Sony engineers to make the games look like that. It is unrealistic to expect a multi-platform studios to throw that many resources at the PS3 version. Why? so fanboys can gloat? Gimmie a break

Preferring the PS3 over the 360 all well and good. But defending Sony's ass backwards business practices plain old stupid.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 10

Silly gameAr5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

But what about the third party games that actually perform better on the PS3? What about Batman: AA? Rocksteady was a pretty small team and they made the PS3 sing.

I'm sure companies like Bethestha and Activision have more resources then them, yet they can't do half of what Rocksteady achieved on the PS3, or they just don't want to put forth the effort. Simple as that.

Certain devs have proved time and time again what the PS3 can do. I'm not sure why this even came up, then again, this is a GamingBolt article, so I'm not really surprised how the comments turned out.

rickybadman5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

1st-Most 3rd party games look better on the slightly 360

2nd- And yes Rocksteady is a relatively small team of just over 90 people. But they use outside contractors and where allowed over 9 months to prototype Arkhum Asylum and extra time to polish the game. Most devs don't get such luxuries and they don't have to worry about multiplayer.

3rd- COD has to run at 60fps, it is key to the experience. You can't have Killzone graphics and COD speed on the PS3. Skyrim is a much bigger game than the Arkhum games. Plus Bethesda only employs just over 100 peope too. They are not that big also.

Agree 4 Disagree 2

Nes_Daze5089d ago

I don't really care if the PS3 is more powerful, because it has already shown that it can handle games that put benchmarks on console graphics. Not to mention all th egreat exclusives constantly being pumped out.

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 8

beerkeg5089d ago

I don't know about constantly pumped out. There hasn't been anything worth buying on ps3 this year imo. I haven't turned on my ps3 for a few months now.

Reply Agree 7 Disagree 3

Nes_Daze5089d ago

Funny, I bought an Xbox360, and I've been trying to get rid of it, because I paid for Live and I might as well sell it if I'm not using it. There has been nothing on the xbox360 that has made it a better choice than the PS3 imo. As where as my ps3, I got PSN plus and I got Just Cause 2, Infamous 2, and Littlebigplanet 2 for free, so I have TOO many games on my PS3 lol.

Agree 2 Disagree 2

TheKayle5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

who cares..ms make more money with 3 games that sony with 8 exclusive ms laugh hard...period

sorry sorry trolling :)

anyway..devs r right against ps3 ...it is too hard..and well if 1 party studio can lose their time in project trying (and reaching) to put out the best from that console 3rd party arent interested in...

this is why sony will put out the cell architecture from the ps4 (99.9%)

next gen we will see more similar games over the two big consoles ...just different stories and ip if r exclusives

the cell is a number crucher...so single task at time...but is very very very bad in multitask processing (8 ps3 spe's arent 8 cores) he can do 1 thing at time but very very very fast...but there r things that somehow need to be done in the same time...imagine a OS over a ps3 would be a shit ( in fact linux on ps3 was a shit..and linux if a very very light os)
while u think that the ps3 browser is a shit just coz they didnt fix the browser no guys sorry..is a shit coz in multimedia the ps3 is very low.....it have lots of memory problems and millions of other stuff...look how much it take to load flash videos on a webpage.....u know what is the "branch prediction"? well a cpu like the cell cant do it..

u know the cell cant decode an altivec optimized h264 videos? well u need 8 times the power of the cell to decode it this mean the cell CANT stream the best quality of br decoder
heres why
http://rsim.cs.illinois.edu...

ecc ecc ecc

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 8

AriesFury5089d ago

I know this is a fact. Because I spoke with THQ rep and he said that doing the development of Darksiders it was difficult to work with the PS3 for Darksiders. But fine with 360. This is not news. Developers have been saying this for years.

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 1

kingduqc5089d ago

Over 7 years, fanboy still argue witch console is mroe powerful then the other?

The difference is small, frankly at this point the only thing safe to say is that they are underpowerd and we need new toys to play around with. Played many game in 720p without even getting 30 fps isn'T acceptable (considering i'm a 60+ fps adept on pc, going bakc to console just hurt me so much)

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 1

Lilioups5089d ago

ShowReplies(1)

jeagerjaques875089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

hard programming = risk = better graphics = reward/fail = ps3

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 4

wolfofashes5089d ago

People got to understand that both consoles have their strengths and weaknesses.They are very particular in the way they render the frame so much so that Carmack himself said to us that even after 5 years in this generation he is sure no developer know each one of the threads on the machines.To be honest I do believe that the PS3 is the most powerful one,based on what we see from Sony's first party studios and the fact that the 360 is much easier to understand.But in the end it does not matter which one wins the race,as long as we all get great games and have fun playing them.

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 5

representj5089d ago

at greenpowerz

wow so you're blasting sony of taking shorcuts of making their exclusives games
haha wow that is one of most idiotic responses that i have ever heard
and you say multiplatforms game on console are the best looking game
haha keep wishing that as you can see most games can even't compete with uncharted one and no game on multiplatform or xbox 360 exclusive looks good as killzone 2 and that came back in 2007

Before you come and starting blasting sony for taking shortcuts on their exclusives games, i u suggest you start playing ps3 exclusives and see how much work is put into that game regarldess of if it is linear or not.

Naughty dog can make open world game if they want to for the ps3
Jus look at jak and daxter on the ps2, what makes you think they can't do the same on the ps3.........
and lets be honest, xbox 360 is not even close to what the ps3 can do.
ps3 is not slightly powerful but it proves that it makes the 360 look like a joke. " not saying that 360 is a bad console, its a good console but the ps3 is just flat out better.......

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 6

baodeus5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

Then let me ask you something:
1. Why developers opt for mlaa/fxaa or deferred lighting instead of the msaa and hdr or true dynamic lighting?
2. Why kz3 or Uc3 cant maintain graphic fidelity (framerate, polygon, etc) going split screen or mp mode?
3. How comes games can't go beyond 720p or 30fps when it said to have the capacity for 1080p native at 60fps?

and how comes u guys never include any actual technical discussion to back up ur claim instead of just saying that it looks better? Sound like subjective opinion me.

ps3 is as powerful as u guys claim, should it be able to muscle through these bumps with ease like a pc? Why do they have to stick with cheap route to keep performance just like any other games on the inferior last Gen x360 console?

Reply Agree 5 Disagree 1

thebudgetgamer5089d ago

I hate when I hit my head and wake up in 2007.

GodGinrai5089d ago

LMAO! I was thinking the same thing when i read through the comments. your comment is ace though!

BrianC62345089d ago

I don't care about this. The PS3 has a lot of great tools to make it easy to develop for. Making the games the same as the 360 is what makes it hard. They aren't the same so don't try making the games the same way.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 2

_-EDMIX-_5089d ago

Put it this way. Both systems are pretty much the same. If i give you 2 systems and tell you, you will have 6 years to make games on this system.

Do you choice the one with the biggest format or the least?

(trick question)....Why the fuck would you choose the least? Even with slower read speeds, why gimp your space?

LMFAO! PS3 by default of Bluray is the better system.

Again..if they where 2 PC's on newegg with THE SAME PRICE! WHY ON EARTH WOULD ONE BE DUMB ENOUGH TO BUY THE ONE WITH A DVD DRIVE? (i can't stop laughing)

Some of you youngins need to go back, take a short google search and see why N64 lost and PS1 was made and won that console generation.

Better yet, take a look at how much space FFVII took up and how much the largest N64 game took up. I think some of you are WAY too young to remember or understand how that changed gaming.

The N64 was more powerful...yes....really didn't mean nothing based on it not having the space to make masterpieces like FFVII, MGS1, GT1, GT2 etc. Hardware is much more then a CPU and GPU, its the drive too.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 3

IWentBrokeForGaming5089d ago

I own both a 360 and a PS3... and I must say it's pretty obvious that you DON'T see games looking/playing anything like MGS4/Uncharted Series/Heavy Rain/GOW3/Littlebigplanet on 360.

It's NOT just because 360 don't have devs to make similar games (or is it? we know their 1st party support is in the dumps). But 360 just flat out isn't capable of those expierences!

Gears of War 3 is the 1st game I've seen come CLOSE to a PS3 exclusive... and it STILL DON'T touch them.

Problem is that I've found this gen, is that I feel more games play like 360 games than other games playing like PS3 games. Maybe it's the diversity in dev support? or maybe it's just flat out the time Sony devs are taking on their games rather than 360 devs theirs?

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 5

QuantumWake5089d ago

Ehh, I wouldn't go as far to say that the 360 isn't capable of games like the ones you mentioned. In my opinion multi-platform games like Red Dead Redemption and BF3 prove that the 360 is pretty capable.

In terms of exclusive games, I'll sort of give you that one. But games like Halo: Reach are eye-candy to me because of the open-world aspect it provides to players to roam around in huge open spaces. But that's just my opinion.

If there is something that REALLY brings down the 360, is the disc space. Games like MGS4, Uncharted 3, Killzone 3 already push almost to the 50GB maximum.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 0

IWentBrokeForGaming5089d ago

I gave an agree because you left a response with reason, nice to see on this site!

and yes I really enjoyed Reach as well!

Agree 2 Disagree 0

GodGinrai5089d ago

Its been ages since i come on this site...some things never change. I cant believe you guys STILL have these stupid arguments...about nothing. This gen is pretty much over at this point and you guys are still arguing about shit that probably mattered 3 years ago.If at all.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

Incipio5089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

It's been SIX YEARS, there is NO WAY the PS3 should be "hard" or "the hardest" to dev for. Sony has incredible dev support now, and the dev kits have awesome tech and rendering techniques built in.

I cannot believe that this dev hasn't gotten the memo that all the other worthy devs out there did a couple years ago when dev'ing for the PS3 became much, much easier and far less time consuming.

Stupid.

I still have no clue how they make the PS3 dev kit and dev process sound so ancient and archaic.

EverydayGuy5089d ago

The PS3 can't multitask very well, but it can do one thing very well if the dev develop the Cell to handle that single task. The SPU are there to unload code. The more you unload to the SPU the more you can push the console. The GPU was an after thought since they couldn't put a second Cell. Read how GG got their game to run on the PS3.

Enigma_20995089d ago

Well, that didn't stop them from making kickass games for the system, now did it?

DrRobotnik5089d ago

"Microsoft kinda, almost talked about setting it up as a PC-like DirectX box, but didn’t follow through."...was the xbox actually Dreamcast 2 in disguise!!0_0 I keep seeing more and more conspiracy theories saying such.lol

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 1

gnothe15089d ago

people keep asking why 360 exclusives dont look like ps3 exclusives....i feel that it was the PS3 that had to prove why it was more expensive then the 360..its was the ps3 tha had to live up to the hype that sony had put on the system...sony said next gen didnt start until they said so..so their first party developers HAD to really push the system......MS released a great system that was great at alotta things...an they let the games an online do the talking..but sony HAD to do games to try an show off the system...MS didnt..

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 1

5089d ago

ziggurcat5089d ago

you know, the "oh my god the PS3 is so hard to program for" argument really doesn't hold water anymore. after 6 years, you'd think that devs would learn something?

@siren30:

framerate has nothing to do with hardware. if you have a frame rate problems in a game, it's because the devs didn't properly optimize the code. so, really... blame the devs, not the hardware. looking at any 1st party PS3 title compared to a 1st party X360 title, it's pretty obvious which is the more powerful system. also, most (if not all) features in a game aren't related to the power/capabilities of the hardware. nice try, though.

alexmac5089d ago

i think consoles should use similar SDKs, rendering it easier for devs to make games crossplatform...

TheSaint5089d ago

Blatant troll topic.

b_one5089d ago

As consumer, i dont care.

but it would be nice from Sony to care about external devs in a more civilized way (docs in japanese, PLEASEEEEEEEEE)

i still wait when sony will learn to treat external devs in more civ way...

CouldHaveYelledUiiW5089d ago

The Cell Chip was a Bold move by Sony and I am (and was) impressed by their effort.

It was a unique power solution, that had a NEW architecture, so of course it would take developers time to get use to it.
>Any System that can crank-out "Heavy Rain" & "Beyond" deserves my respect.<

(Don't forget these words are coming from a Nintendo Fanboy).

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 5

kingPoS5089d ago

It all boils down to what tools & techniques you have to work with.
If lucky you were given the best, being unlucky you had to make do and build your own from scratch. I'll go out say it, 360 devs have it EASY over ps3 devs. But if the ps3 were a cakewalk to develop for, we probably wouldn't have the complex games we enjoy today.

PS2 wasn't a cakewalk either at first.

theWB275089d ago

All this man pointed out was how hard it was to develop for each system and it turns into xbox vs ps. I own both...and they have both produced games that have made me think "damn."

While I agree that a "FEW" PS3 games have outdone the 360, it isn't by enough of a margin for anyone to boast that the PS3 is the graphical powerhouse Sony touted it to be. Gears of War 3 is a mighty fine looking game, and colorful to boast.

These systems are neck and neck...closer than closed minded fanboys care to admit. The worst gamer is the one who pledges to a single brand...spend less time bragging about supposed superiority and just enjoy these great games being cranked out...whether by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.

(Unplugs Forza to play The Show)

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 0

HalfNerdHalfAmazing5089d ago

So basically the more powerful the console is the harder it is to make a game.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 1

Brettman20085089d ago (Edited 5089d ago )

All the rumours I have seen point to the next gen Xbox and Playstation using standard PC architecture to reduce console development costs and make things simpler for the game developers. I think the days of complex, unique architecture are over as the negatives outway the positives.

StreetsofRage5089d ago

badvlad5089d ago

This was a fun article to read for once.

leogets5088d ago

fuck this shit. (turns on my spectrum zx81) now this is a boiiiiiiist! waits 10 mins to load a game

BelieveinGhosts5088d ago (Edited 5088d ago )

I used to be a PS3 fan boy but recently, i consider my self a neutral gamer. Now i realise that the Xbox 360 is just as powerful if not more.

I recently started to follow xbox 360 news after the announcement of Halo 4 and boy does Halo 4 look amazing.

Technically, i have to admit that Halo 4 is going to be technically more powerful than any PS3 game to date.

And this is coming from a guy who bought a second PS3 after my first YLOD even though i could have gotten an Xbox 360 for almost half the cost.

I own and have played Uncharted 1,2,3, Killzone 2, Infamous 2, Resistance 2,3, GT 5, Heavy Rain, God of War 3. Pretty much every PS3 exclusive and i have to admit i am really impressed with Halo 4, Forza, Gears of War.

I have also suspected for a long time that Multi platforms perform better on Xbox 360.
Hell, i have notice a lot of lag in single player games on PS3. Maybe its input Lag or Frame rate? Its happened in Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm, FIFA and many other games.

Even Battlefield 3 that was supposed to be better on PS3 was a disgrace. How can a developer release a PS3 game with no voice chat? It made team work almost non-existent and BF3 is all about team work. There was also huge problems with many PS3 users having Input Lag. These problems were not addressed

Now i realise why Dice were making noise about the PS3 version and never bothered to hype the Xbox 360 version, it was to deceive PS3 fan boys like me. There was no need to hype the Xbox 360 version of BF3 because it was already coming along nicely, unlike the PS3 version

Call of Duty also runs better on the Xbox 360.

It pains me to have to admit all of this but i am no longer biased or easily deceived.

This is why i will pick up Halo 4 Xbox 360 slim 320 GB in November so i can experience Xbox live and see if my suspicions are correct.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

neutralgamer195088d ago

In response to AllWrong....

I dont think Rage looks better than Kz3 at all and kz3 does so much more. So although that is your opinion i dissent.

LKHGFDSA5082d ago

if the clutz was from a dev team that have actually made a notable title then I may have taken this seriously. but really it's just a nobody on a shitty site (reddit, I hate that site).