thats what im always trying to say to everyone when some gamers will realize that, but you explained it well. kudos to you.

its simple making the best they can be in each system may anger a couple of people who think "the other console's game looks better than mine" which may equal to less sales so the devs try to make it so that everyone gets pretty much the SAME experience to make most everyone happy

"what we need is devs that do multiplat games to stop holding back the ps3 version bcuz of the 360"

Give me two examples of proof of this.

1. GTAIV is one which SAM HOUSER said "the 360 will hold the PS3 back"

2. Any exclusive PS3 looks WAAAAAYY better than EVERY 360 game....like Uncharted, Killzone2, MGS4, Heavy Rain and LBP.

3. 360 devs saying the 360 isn`t going to be able to do much more, Like EPIC, and Turn10 (i think, Forza`s makers)

I think that is PROOF enough.

Not being a "fanboy" these are the FACTS.

Final Fantasy XIII is said by the developers that they're going to fully utilize the PlayStation 3 for the game. So they're going to use the full 50GB according to them and will launch first in Japan then the North America version will come out with the XBOX 360 version. The XBOX 360 version is most likely going to be on six discs compared to the PlayStation 3 version.

I'm going to see how Prototype and Infamous stack up because Infamous is exclusive because of the memory on the disc / design of the game.

that was one example and 2 assumptions.

edit: also, it was a disk space limitation, not a power limitation.

@ other: It would be expensive because the platforms are so different. It's expensive enough to push each system to it's limits on it's own. Look at the budgets of those games you mentioned. Platform specific development would double. Compare that to making a single game that is easily portable to each system, where you get about the same sales with little cost.

In one sense I'd like to see every game take full advantage of the hardware, but in a more practical sense I would really like to see equality across multi-plat releases.

The reasoning behind it is simple. The games you buy are games you want to play. There are few things as disappointing as hearing that a game you bought wasn't the best "version" of the same game.

I've passed on games in the past that had lazy developers (madden 08) that didn't create an equal experience across platforms.

Either go exclusive and make it the best you can, or make them so close to equal across the platforms that there is no reason to buy one over the other. With all the games coming out and all the "versions" we're subjected to, it's really hard to keep up for an avid gamer like myself, but to a casual person it's enough to make a head spin.

Just my humble opinion.

-CadDad

The thing is that the only things being held back by the competition are game length and overall limit of game data. The PS3 isn't better in the graphics department in any way.

You get better draw distance due to the use of AF or whatever smoothing/filtering process they're using instead of AA, that's a plus. You can also have a lot more going on on the screen at any given time at a smooth rate due to cells power, also pretty awesome.

But then there's the whole issue with all the games having terrible textures and looking smeared/vaseline on the camera from the filtering which totally kills the whole point of high definition gaming. What's the point of hd when all the crisp textures are smoothed together?

My PS3 is a beast and I admit it can do things my 360 will never be able to do without installs and multiple discs but i think you guys go a little overboard with your confidence in it and it's completely unrealistic.

3 disagrees and no replies.If you're going to disagree why don't you point out what I said wrong or provide some pictures where the PS3 puts out good texture quality?
Disagreeing because you don't like the truth just seems silly.

Totally agreed, Dro, especially about the third party games. But this won't happen until the PS3 install base is significantly larger than that of the 360's. Developers have to find reason to make sure that giving special benefits to the PS3 is worthwhile financially.

I personally think it's worth the risk, and that PS3 owners would gladly embrace such benefits. We're worth every cent of effort!

12

Well with DLC a factor, some versions
of a game are already better then others.

PS3 and the 360 are actually quite Different.
I Say they should make a multiplat game based
off of the Console, if the PS3 version takes longer
and cost more, simply jack the price of the game.

If a multiplat game came out but I know the PS3 version
may look better even have added content etc, I Wouldn't mind
forking over an extra $5 - $10, or even renting it!.

Tordavis as much I like you but I hate it when you say xbox360 can do everything Ps3 can do

Epic's Fergusson said Xbox 360 'Approaching Upper End' Of Visual Potential also "I still think there's room to grow" , there no fu#king huge deference between GEARS1 and 2 http://www.gamasutra.com/ph...

Now for Ps3, Naughty dogs said that they used 30% of PS3 power, now uncharted and MGS4 is better then GEAR, also Sucker Punch PS3 can do "everything you want", also read http://www.dasgamer.com/gue...
That's the deference between Ps3 and Xbox 360
If gears 2 used X360 MAX Potential then other games on Ps3 blow Gears out in every aspect (Graphics, physics, animation).

especially after those earlier busted PS3 versions of multiplat games (Madden, the Orange Box).

The COD4 team helped other devs see the light and showed them the right way to develop multiplatform titles

Props to the Burn-out: Paradise team as well!

EDIT

But yeah, each system has things that it does particulaly well. It's time that devs start having console-specific teams to encourage optimizing games for each console.

I'd like to add one more thing to the "more expensive" argument. Well, SW is only 1/3rd of the development process (well, 1/4th if you'd add test as a separate entity). The rest is design and asset production (art). So, I am not sure if this will play too much into design. Yes, maybe, you might want to add feature right from the beginning in the design phase. This will increase costs. The second part is assets. I do not see a cost factor here. Maybe overall it might cost a bit more to produce more assets, but one platform being a subset of the others, its more removing what you can't use, instead of adding more (half empty/half full problem). And finally, SW. Engines need to be written for the specific platform anyhow. The architectures are so different, that you cannot simply port on to another. In parts yes, but you need the low level guys doing SMP or SPU work and SW architecture to begin with. Adding streaming to one will not be that much of a problem if done right from the start. And finally it will add some costs to the test cycles if content is different so test scripts need to be adjusted for each platform. But some platform specific testing is already there anyway. So, again, will it be more expensive ? I guess so. Ridiculously ? I doubt it. And in the worst case, just make 360 games cheaper. Done with it. But, no PS3 game was ever cheaper. Usually, I'd expect the costs involved in a port about 2/3 cheaper then the original game, because all design costs and asset production costs should have been covered already. But, still, each port costs the same. They simply roll over the costs from the original production.

Torrance, Start thinking outside the box for once. No HDD on the 360 is holding back a lot of games that of course should of looked good. look how GTAIV streams on the 360 to its PS3 counterpart. thats one example that the 360 is holding games back.

i dunno what browser you use, but both Google Chrome and Firefox (Safari too?) have got built-in spell checkers.. if not there is always Office (Word to be precise) or otherwise the free version OpenOffice.org ...
coz i didn't understand much of it lol

of the four development costs (not manufacturing costs), those being software development, game design, art/asset creation, and QA, software development is the largest and most affected by porting. When you push each system, you're essentially doing 1.5 times the work in that area, and that's not taking into account having to redo some models/textures/lighting/effec ts that don't work on either console.

@DarkSilv - :)
I don't think the 360 can do everything the PS3 can. I've known since day 1 that the PS3 is a more powerful console.

@High Definition - You can't use exclusives in this argument. This is about multiplat titles. Sam Houser knows they could have done more with the Blu-Ray and the fact that the 360 was the lead platform is a good example of the 360 holding the PS3 back. But if you think about it, the PS3 version of GTAIV would have probably been in development for another 6-8 months to fully utilize the hardware. Also, if MS allowed forced HD installs on the 360, they could have spent more time on that version to get it up to the PS3 quality or close to it. Knowing that the 360 is almost at it's peak(it really isn't close to it's peak, it just needs a good dev to bust out the pixie dust)doesn't mean it's holding the PS3 back. So you gave me one good debatable example.

All I'm saying is this, people have been complaining that the 360 is gimping the PS3 but I haven't seen it. I think if developers can make the PS3 version look better then they should. It's only looks we are talking. Gameplay is a non issue right? COD4 had better textures on the PS3 therefore people said it was the better version. Gameplay however, is equal. Same with Burnout.

PS3 has been touted as the starter of the next generation. MS started it first, PS3 continued it and made it better. I think people are looking for reasons to say that the PS3 blows the 360 away. Fact of the matter is, it's not blowing it away. If MS and Sony were the only ones making games for each console, I'd say that it actually is blowing the 360 away. There are far too many 3rd party multiplatform titles that look and play the same on both systems to consider the PS3 the better platform. The gap is widening though. Killzone 2 IMHO is the first jaw dropping game that's a step above what we've seen on the 360. I still think it's hasn't fallen far from the COD4 tree though. Then there's Project Origin...(drool).

I just want to make one more statement for all gamers. The PS3 is newer hardware. Devs are still learning how to utilize it. It's a year younger than the 360. It SHOULD be producing better looking titles. Just equate this to Xbox 1 and PS2. PS2 had better selling titles, but the Xbox games looked better. Did this stop the PS2 from dominating worldwide? Nope. I say to each his own. While some of you here are busy with your F@nb0y agendas, I'll be playing titles on both the 360 and the PS3 and enjoying myself immensely. No producer, PR rep or F@nb0y can change that. I own MGS4 and I own Gears Of War. I have the best of both worlds at my finger tips.

I hear ya, but............

The reason for that is, like GTAIV is 360 has mainly been the lead platform, but that`s changing. We`ll see in 2009 since alot of companies are using PS3 as the "lead".
The more the 360 continues to sell less than the PS3, will also influence them to step up the PS3 development.

Like I said we`ll see in 2009.

And as I said before exclusives MATTER the most and that`s where the PS3 seems to shine and there`s no DENYING that. To me that proves the PS3 can do more, so multiplat must be being affected by the 360 and more so DVD9.

Tordavis you won't see a difference on miltplat games because Dev Have to consider X360 weakness, that's why I don't use multiplatform games in my argument, that’s why I compare gears 2 to other Ps3 games, and Kill zone 2 is not the first jaw dropping game, GT5 and heavy rain is another example.
I'm going to say it again if gears 2 used X360 MAX Potential then other games on Ps3 blow Gears out in every aspect (Graphics, physics, animation)
Let me tell you, I have both consoles and I'm going to enjoy them both.,

@The lazy one. Well, I agree. You just confirmed what I said, but rephrased it, didn't you? In ports the majority of work is the SW part, being 1/3 of the costs, and basically reducing the other 2 to zero, a port should be about 2/3 cheaper. That's what I said, no ?

Obviously, if you write an engine the first time on a new platform, this equation is not that trivial. But people will get the picture. Also the bit of more costs to touch up assets are also neglected here.

You guys make good points but I still don't see the point in comparing exclusives when debating that devs are holding the PS3 back with 360 development. With that argument you can only compare multiplat titles. Would GTAIV be better as an exclusive? Maybe. What about Bioshock? I don't think so. I think the developers idea was manifested exactly how they envisioned it. If I were a dev and could make the PS3 versions better every time, I would. Based on your argument, why would devs not use the full power of the PS3 in multiplat titles? Criterion did it, 2K Boston did it, Infinity Ward did it, so what's EA's excuse? What's Rockstars excuse? There are only a few devs that have matched what Epic pulled off on the 360. PS3 devs seem to put more time and effort into their titles and are getting more out of the system. I still think some of the exclusives on PS3 can be done on 360 with ease. Uncharted is one of them. And seriously, what's the point? Go where the good games are at.

Just want to point out that lots of multiplatform games on the original XBOX were better than the ps2 version. The problem is the XBOX fanboy. Making a game better on XBOX was no issue last gen because the ps-fanboy is not as rabid as the XBOX fanboy, having won (excuse me, destroyed) the last war the ps-fanboy is not insecure and expects a win again. The XBOX fanboy thought he could sway the ps-fanbase by putting the console down at every opportunity,even before it was on the market; in hopes of not losing on his investment like the last time when they discontinued the system putting his money to waste.

Definition of ps-fanboy: Someone who is so sick of hearing from XBOX fanboys that he has grown to literally hate the system and anyone who owns it. Thus, he does anything to make them feel the same pain.

With most of the multi-platform games coming out looking equal on both systems, the only thing we can compare are exclusives. Exclusives are supposed to bring out the best that the console has to offer. So if your going to compare what each console has to offer you should look at they're exclusive line up. That said, at the end of the day many of the years best games will be multi-platform so we can all enjoy them equally.

Sony & Microsoft should pay for multiplatform games to do things that can only be done on there system.

Keep the same core story and game macanics then make exclusive content for home/live, cell/RSX, 50gig Blu Ray/DLC.

When Shadow of Colossus sprang into our lives. I only hope they show their next game soon.

Whoever created the PS3 is a F**KING GENIUS!!!;)

Whoever created the xBox 360...should be SH0T!!! ;-D

You created the PS3. Pride is a sin my son.

If Infamous dev got enough talent , they can do anything they want

cell and blu alone are not enough

Talent >>------>>> cell and blu

PS3 rocks.

Nuff' said.

Second Son was alright but didn't touch the first two games

It felt short and lacking in comparison

Also I really thought Reggie would have made a better protagonist, someone who is anti-conduit as much as him and ends up becoming one would have been interesting to see. I kind of enjoyed his character throughout the game as his development.

why is it right now, the thing I want the most from Sony is to release remasters of inFamous (1,2 & SS), KZ (1,2 & 3), Resistance (RFoM, 2 and 3) and Motorstorm (1,2 & 3)??

Would love a remastered collection on PS5/PC

There are a lot of games that consumers have been asking Playstation for, Playstation won't do it, so a lot of these developers have gone and made it themselves by any means possible such as Kickstarter (e.g. Armed Fantasia, Penny Blood, Ratatan, 100 Heroes, ect...). Developers have even asked if Sony could help them out with porting/remasters some of these older games for Playstation, they said no.

Um...dude like you say that as if nobody bought them....the devs went on to do ghosts after 3 infamous games....3

People ask for new resistance and new infamous at every moment where it makes sense to mention it.

Having a remake of 1 and 2 would be very welcomed I'm sure.

go back to marvel avengers, sounds like more your cup of tea

You know what, now that I think about it.. yeah none of that makes any sense.

Yes to a reboot, absolutely no to Marvel characters in it.

*either a proper equal of a reboot of the original. *

Damn, there needs to be an extension on the Edit feature.

"Either a proper sequel or a reboot of the original"

And people aren't with Cole interacting with cameos from Marvel? Especially with Sony making Spider Man and Wolverine?

Why exactly would that be a bad idea? Especially with the multiverse being a huge deal and all.

Infamous 1-2 collection would be amazing on current generation. God of War 1-2 and PSP games also playable on PS5 Yes please. And last but not least MGS4

There are so many great games which are on PS3. We need them to be remastered and released for current generation.