happy to hear of framerate issues! Not acceptable, not acceptable at all. £40 quid is a lot to pay for 'framerate issues' Have to think about this one. Too often in modern gaming there is a lack of attention to detail, the very thing that make a good game,great.How can you mark a game as 9.5 when it has framerate issues ? Hyperbol !
i have refrained from posting on these comparisons, mainly because until the last month or so, i only owned a 360. The only way i would consider making a comment would be if i could -in my own home, makes the direct comparisons.Well, now i can.And i gotta tell you - like some have already mentioned, the 360 demo is clearly superior to the PS3 demo.How so? Right.When the title screen comes up and the camera is moving into the cityscape, the PS3 version is stuttering and there's pop up!! While ...
in this game having not played the first, but it's beginning to sound like it could be an excellent FPS. I think i'll give this a purchase if the reviews continue to be so positive.
If we are truthful, we all know there is unlikely to be any clear cut winner this generation.Having stated the obvious, who do YOU think will be most pleased by this?
when i say, i really want to buy games for my PS3, but other than the up coming exclusives- a couple of which will surely be spectacular, i just can't bring myself to buy an inferior version of a multiplatform game.Last week Dead space, this week Fallout, Sony did so many things right when designing the PS3, but ignoring the Developers wasn't one of them.In almost every way, i prefer my PS3 to my 360, that is, with one exception - when playing games.
i think all three versions are identical, that is, rubbish!!!
Sorry, but just had to say it :) This is one game that escapes me.
with HDD installs in themselves, but if it's required just to give an acceptable load time, then my question is why?
Okay, i live in the UK where 360 is by far, the preferred choice. Still, it's possible,but highly unlikely.However, i'm happy to let the devs have the final word on this, because where they go, gamers will follow.And we all know the PS3, currently, does have inferior multiplatform games. Why do you think i got 360 version of Dead space?
While i do take account of reviews, i certainly don't bother with 'averages' like metacritic. Any first year maths student knows, averages -especially of this nature, can never be reliable anyway.
the point i was trying to make in a post yesterday. Sony thought it would be smart to go their own way and design a console that is 'different' in architecture terms.Sony seriously expected -based on their previous generations success -that developers would naturally follow, but they haven't, not entirely anyway. Instead, developers are only 'following'as far as it suits them, not as far as it suits Sony.As the saying goes- You can force a horse to water, but you can't make it drink! Sony hav...
but the argument for that one goes like this. The reason software is so expensive is,because for every copy sold, 10 copies are pirated!!
Kinda cyclic, this one. Chicken and egg :)
but charging people bucket loads of cash for a game isn't? No, my friend,pirating software is illegal, not necessarily immoral!
every post, but i'm gonna get my two cents in like you guys.Time and time again, i hear the same arguments. 'Yeah, but if PS3 was used as lead platform it would be on par with 360' 'Devs need to develop to the PS3's strength' etc etc. when you make those comments you should really look more closely at what you are actually saying. I own both machines, and while PS3 specific titles are very good, in some cases great.they are, imho no better than 360 specific titles. If you choose to believe di...
Some of you have already intimated at the possible reasons for this.Well, to me it's fairly obvious.A price cut to the 360 will increase 360 sales, only in the demographic that has no intention of paying PS3 prices.consequently, PS3 sales won't be affected.Isn't that sort of obvious?If anything,it would effect Wii sales from a pricing standpoint, but then again, are Wii players really looking for a hardcore machine? MS might try to sell 360 as a family machine, however, getting the price to a...
problem solved, no need for censorship. Easy really, isn't it?
To me and you this is a great deal, but to the mums out there it's still to expensive,do you see? 360 arcade £99.99, PS3 £340.00. Both equally powerful, both with great games. For GAMES, what would you choose? Now, as a gamer i choose both, but as a casual player it's now a Wii or a 360. And before you start, please don't preach to the converted, i do own a PS3 and it's worth every penny of the £299.00 i paid. Well, it will be when the new batch of games arrive.Anyway, don't ge...
Tried the demo, but was hoping for something more in the sequel.Although, to be fair, i didn't like the first game that much, but gave it a try because it came free with my PS3.The game idea has potential, but to my eye's, that's as far at it goes.I found the original and the new demo very boring, very quickly.
Of course five years is a sufficient life time for a console, in technology terms at least.Already, graphically, both the PS3 and 360 are outdated! To believe anything else is quite delusional.And before you start in with the 10yrs cycle mantra, i would like to ask you this;If 10yrs is good, why did you bother buying a shiny new PS3 or 360 instead of sticking with your PS2 or Xbox? Yes,because it's better technology.Don't agree? Okay lets hear your arguments.
EDIT: @Glossgreen ...
whether or not this 'forward compatibility' is feasible or practical from an technological standpoint, seems somewhat irrelevant to me.Simply because i can't see many devs willing to make a single game that spans two console generations,can you? Let's face it, without the 'next gen' release of existing IP's, i see a lot of poor devs! Why charge once when you can charge twice for essentially the same game? Technically possible? Maybe, Financially viable? We'll see.
realised that photo's or still shots are absolutely useless when it comes to making comparisons! We all know -so i assumed - that the things that really make a better or worse game experience, like frame rates or jaggies, really can't be shown in stills.I wonder why they chose images?