IGN Reviews Madden NFL 08' for the Playstation 3

The Madden franchise is one of the longest-running in videogame history. It began around the same time as The Simpsons (and looked just about as ugly at that point) and has since grown to become a national phenomenon. Like anything that manages to last nearly two decades, Madden has gained a near equal number of ardent fans and passionate detractors. No matter what developer Tiburon does with its football title, the fans will always support it and the haters will always cry foul. Fortunately for those who love Madden, the gang at Tiburon finally got its next-gen act together and created the best version of its seminal football series since Madden NFL 2005. In fact, Madden 08 feels in many ways a throwback to 2005. That's a good thing. Madden 05 rocked.

Hit the jump for more...

The story is too old to be commented.
TheExecutive4054d ago

a whole point due to framerate issues? ouch! Sorry to say this but EA shouldnt have rushed out the ps3 version if it was this big of a deal. They did it so they could release it on the 14th instead of a later date. It kinda looks like they screwed ps3 owners this year, since i dont have a 360 anymore looks like im not gonna support a crappier version.

Maddens Raiders4054d ago

I really feel castrated by EA since they brought out this short-bus version of the game for the PS3. Look like my NFL Sunday ticket and College Gameplan subsriptions are getting extra - heavy useage this year. I see people qeueing around town for it, but I won't be one of them. First time I'm doing this w/ Madden -- EVER.

ESPN is hyping the 360 version right now like it's the last game on planet earth. Go figure. I'm not bitter with the 360 version at all...the framerate issue is not the only thing thats bothering me. If all I wanted were new animations on the 2008 version and some new "stick techniques" then wth did I buy a nex-gen system. I had shytloads of fun with Madden on the PS2 so it's not all about graphics.

I was going to write a whole bunch of other crap, but it's just as well. Bottom line...I'm sitting this one out.

Since I am a Football fan to the core. I have to stick a jab in there for the hell of it at my rivals...he, he....

Looks like with all of the people lining up for Madden there will be a lot of 360's undergoing a virtual stress test...I hope the old man can take it out there!!!...the gridiron's HOTTTT BOYYY [[[[Blue 22, Blue 22, Red 80, Red 80....setttt..... Huttt, Huttt, Huttt!!!]]]]

sticky doja4054d ago

Killer pic man. UT for the national championship! Colt McCoy for heisman!

InMyOpinion4054d ago

That was a lot of excuses in one comment, Maddens. I hope you convinced yourself. I'm going with the better version for this one. Not a hard choice really. The game looks excellent and has gotten very high reviews.

bluebrad19744053d ago

The Cell processor is simply not as good at running games as the 360's cpu. It should be pretty obvious to everyone by now.

nobizlikesnowbiz4053d ago

Sure- don't support one of the PS3's biggest titles.

I sure hope not all PS3 owners are doing the same, for Sony's sake.

Dareaver14053d ago

if you don't believe, here's why.... and if you disagree, please support your disagree with a valid REBUTTAL.

since you want to talk about speed here is info on the daughter di on the 360 which helps with rendering...

In order for this to be possible developers would need to setup their rendering engine to take advantage of both the EDRAM and the available onboard 3D logic. If anyone is confused why the 32GB/s is being multiplied by 8 its because once data travels over the 32GB/s bus it is able to be processed 8 times by the EDRAM logic to the EDRAM memory at a rate of 256GB/s so for every 32GB/s you send over 256GB/s gets processed. This results in RSX being at a bandwidth disadvantage in comparison to Xenos. Needless to say the 360 not only has an overabundance of video memory bandwidth, but it also has amazing memory saving features. For example to get 720P with 4XFSAA on traditional architecture would require 28MB worth of memory. On the 360 only 16MB is required. There are also features in the 360's Direct3D API where developers are able to fit 2 128x128 textures into the same space required for one, for example. So even with all the memory and all the memory bandwidth, they are still very mindful of how it’s used.

With the capability to fetch from anywhere in memory, perform arbitrary ALU operations and write the results back to memory, in conjunction with the raw floating point performance of the large shader ALU array, the MEMEXPORT facility does have the capability to achieve a wide range of fairly complex and general purpose operations; basically any operation that can be mapped to a wide SIMD array can be fairly efficiently achieved and in comparison to previous graphics pipelines it is achieved in fewer cycles and with lower latencies. For instance, this is probably the first time that general purpose physics calculation would be achievable, with a reasonable degree of success, on a graphics processor and is a big step towards the graphics processor becoming much more like a vector co-processor to the CPU.

here's a tidbit about why the 360 would be better at AI...

The 360 CPU however, due to its 3 symmetric General Purpose Cores, is not only much easier to program for than the cell, but having 3 PPE capable of handling things such as AI also means the 360’s CPU will be the better of the 2 CPUs when it comes to AI code. Either way we can look forward to great things from both CPUs in the future.

Here's the bit about memory useage and advantages...

It’s highly doubtful that Blu-Ray will lead to better graphics because the PS3, due to split memory pools containing 256MB worth of GDDR3 memory and 256MB worth of XDR memory can at best dedicate 256MB worth of ram to textures at any given moment whereas the 360 uses unified memory for a total of 512MB. That alone is a major limiting factor to Blu-Ray’s space advantage.
There are however methods to gain use of more ram as from e-mail exchanges with developers I found out that it’s possible for the PS3’s GPU (RSX) to texture from the XDR, but there is a penalty for texturing from the XDR ram because in order to do so it would need to travel over the cell’s FlexiO , which some developers have actually done. There is also another way of going about doing this which is by copying from the XDR to the GDDR3 memory kind of like a fast cache and just proceed to stream in the content. Even with such methods available, the Xbox 360 just has more memory to work with.

Xbox 360 has 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth. The PS3 has less than one-fifth of Xbox 360's (48 GB/s) of total memory system bandwidth. When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3.

The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.

The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.

Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.

The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.

HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

well i hope it helps you see where i drew my conclusion from.

WoundedMoon4053d ago (Edited 4053d ago )

If EA wants to produce a sub-par product for the PS3 owners, they can't keep their product, and I'll keep my money.

The PS3 is better. But, even IF the 360 was a little bit better, any non-lazy developer is going to be able to get a game running ALMOST as well on the PS3, IF the 360 is better. The fact that there is such a lag in the Madden version is a negative reflection on EA, and as stated, they'll not be receiving any of my money for this one.

Interestingly, all the PS3 titles I own are exclusives, and I still think it was worth a weeks pay.

LOL, I'll lose bubbles for this one. :D

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4053d ago
TheExecutive4054d ago (Edited 4054d ago )

"For PS3 owners, this isn't as exciting. Madden 08 runs (sometimes) at 30 frames per second. It makes a huge difference, as you lose a lot of the subtleties in the animations. There are plenty of framerate hitches that will likely frustrate players. This can cause a lag in the Hit Stick sometimes. And, let's face it, no one wants to see a runningback pause for a second in mid air as the framerate stutters. You can still play and mostly enjoy Madden, but beware that on PS3 the game does not run smoothly."

That is rediculous! Its not like the ps3 is incapable of running at 60fps, there is really no excuse for this.

TheExecutive4054d ago (Edited 4054d ago )

"Madden NFL 08 on PS3 is no a great game. It is a shadow of its cousin on 360. Though the feature set is identical, the drop to an unstable 30fps hurts considerably. The visuals and the gameplay suffer. If you are a real Madden nut and think you can fight through the framerate issues, Madden is an overall good game. It just doesn't run very well. If you only own a PS3 and live for Sundays, then there really is no other choice than to give Madden 08 a shot."

Loudninja4054d ago

EA has no excuse for this at all.I mean they cold have made the 30 FPS stable,but they did not even do that.

SKullDugger4053d ago

its not EA's fault that the PS3 is so hard to program for and the CELL just was not made for running games, U need to talk to SONY about this one its their system not EA's!!!!

WoundedMoon4053d ago (Edited 4053d ago )

In the meantime you can call Bungie and complain about your 360 that's now being used as a night-light, because it's incapable of doing anything besides producing a red ring of light.

If Sony is responsible for the slow framerate in Madden, then Bungie is responsible for the 360's high failure rate.

If the system that is easier to program for is always the better, then I argue that my 15 year old computer running DOS text based games is far superior to your XBox 360, due to the ease of programming. Nobody want to go though the trouble to make these "graphics" you feel so strongly about; you watch, those graphics will pass like every other fad in the industry has!

skynidas4054d ago

wow i expect that not all the EA games coming this year have the same problem of this one for example:
*FIFA 08.
*Army of Two.
*Need for Speed.

Bloodmask4054d ago

So many developers still finding it hard to code games on to the PS3 with a average 60 frame rate per second. EA talks about the Army of Two displaying on the PS3 at 30fps, while the 360 at 60 fps.
An EA developer has called in to let us know that he believes the Xbox 360 will triumph over the PS3 due to its better performance and more rounded support. These claims come on the revelation that development of Army of Two on the Xbox 360 manages to yield a maximum of 60fps while the PS3 version struggles to reach 30fps currently. Army of Two is expected to hit retail shelves during November.

TheExecutive4054d ago (Edited 4054d ago )

Well I see what he is saying about the 360 being easy to develop for and they definitely give developers more support. However, as with the ps2 (if you remember correctly) developers said the same thing about the dreamcast and how easy that was to develop for and how HARD the ps2 was to develop for.

Now I know this is different generations with different players, but the 360 will never outsell the ps brand this generation. there are three simple and glaring reasons for this:

1. MS has done nothing to take the user base away from Sony and the playstation brand. they are about the same for what they did with the first xbox. They have about 10 million consoles out there in almost two years... thats not great by anyones standards. thats about 20 million in four years. Saying this we see, if these selling trends continue, that MS has done nothing to rob sony of its user base. I think that this gen has started a little early. We see this because of the lack of people moving over from last gen (roughly 150 million). When they finally decide to do so (late next year) what console will they buy? One who has a life span of about another year maybe two or one that just taking off? They will stick with the ps brand for the same reasons they chose the ps1 and ps2... the diversity of games and the knowledge that sony will back their console.

2. This brings me to my next point. The 360 (as we know it, they could always add things to the 360, however at some point its just a new console) will have a shelf life of a little over 4 years. This short life alone will make it sell less than the ps3.

3. MS doesnt have worldwide support. Although they do have strong support in the states they lack sells in the rest of the world. FOr this reason they will never sell as many consoles as sony.

SO you see EA developers can say whatever they want, because in the end the ps brand will beat out the 360 in sells and then they will praise and praise the sony brand for making them rich.

Im not sure what this has to do with the madden game but i thought that I should say this in response to your post.

I do think however that the 360 as of right now is the superior console... but by this time next year (right in time for last gen casual users to flood over) the ps3 will have its heavy hitters out and in full force.

Clinton5144054d ago

You should be a defense lawyer. That is if you're educated enough.