Here are technical facts that show why developers prefer, at the moment, Xbox 360 over PS3. In short, the Xbox 360's ease of use from a development standpoint has made the choice rather simple when it comes to the standard platform to utilize.
LOL soooooooooo true
a b**tard website that claims x360 has more powerful GPU when xenos is r420 based and is very weak PEOPLE report this as SPAM ...it comes from a BOT website http://www.avreview.co.uk/n... thts right BOTS..ps3 is way more powerful than x360...the RSX too is more powerful than XENOS @Power of F*G:- ps3 can do everything the x360 can but NOT VICE VERSA you bring up TECH DEMO sscreens of ALAN WAKE (Another cartoon game ) BUT we all know how the ingame loooks like:- http://www.gametrailers.com... lol what a shame another cartoon game like CARTOON HALO 3 BTW u will never see GRAPHICS like this on GARBAGE BOX 360 http://www.gametrailers.com... the garbage box 360 would need 10 XENONS to have as many enemies as LAIR on screen . The water alone has more poly than an entire scene of Bioshock/gEars a single dragon in LAIR has 20 x more poly than an entire scene in GEARS http://www.gamasutra.com/fe... Each model, Worch claimed, contained somewhere between 100,000 and 170,000 triangles. Each had a bunch of other special maps and lighting applied, and the main character was built up with "over ten textures". He compared this to an estimated 10,000 for characters in Gears of War and other recent high-res games. The high-res models, meanwhile, that got dithered down to produce the in-game models, ran up around 5,000,000 triangles. even RR7 was not possible on the x360 http://www.pro-g.co.uk/ps3/... Not one to blow his own trumpet, Teramoto also expressed his pleasure to offer RR7 in 1080p, at 60fps and in 5.1, something he claims is only possible on the PS3.
This article was obviously crossposted to the PS3 side by mistake, or maybe so Rowland can cook some burgers on all the flames that will fire from everywhere.... This is a comment from an xbox fan on xboxusergroup crossposted on both n4g xbox and ps3 side.... FLAME AWAY... Even worst, there's absolutely no reference except maybe a link to a pc web site where nothing could be found. Just flame bait, move on ; )
sorry, While I do favor the 360 heavily right now, this article is just worthless. At the VERY least, it is ridiculously old. Who approves this crap?
it's all about taste. if you prefer a sharper, brighter look, than go with the ps3 version if you prefer a shiny, darker look, go with the 360 version these are the only differences i notice when i play games or demos for both systems. except DIRT, which runs much smoother and looks a little better on the ps3.
we know that your a ps3 only person
PS3 has bright washed out less color and less detail. 360 has better darks when things are suppose to be dark and better brights when things are suppose to be bright and more rich vivid vibrant color like the way true HD looks, thats all HD is, More detail, more vibrant color & more clear detail and PS3 fails to compare. Its not preference when people buy $2000 HDTV's to experiance HD(color/Detail/better darks/better brights/ its an excuse due to blind loyalty and a lack luster console. No one believes the PS3's short commings are a wonderful choice for people to admire its viewed as a handi-capp and not as advanced. All PS3 games that do have color have a bland powered look to them. You wont see this on PS3 not ever(pics) http://www.alanwake.com/scr... http://www.alanwake.com/scr...
There is proof all over the market that proves the ps3 is the inferior console. Gears of War wipes the floor with every current and every hyped upcoming ps3 title. And here is the sad part, Mass Effect coming for 360 in Nov, wipes the floor with Gears of War. You sony minions either don't pay attention to what's on 360, your a sony "plant" and get paid to fill peoples head with bull****, or your just flat delusional.
Sorry PoG but those are PC DX10 shots. I love my 360 and all, but honestly those are beyond what either the PS3 or the 360 are capable of. I can't imagine even an 8800 GTX doing those at 60FPS. Some serious shader performance required there. I hope I'm wrong :) Because those are good enough to print and frame and hang on the wall....
Those Alan Wake screens Power was talking about reminded me of something I had seen in a beta...
the whole article is a fanboy blog on an x360 site. wow, really suprised at what was said. and there is no spin required. i have a ps3 and am very happy with it. 360 is a good system too but only 1 game i would want.(bioshock) this should be a great site for game news and discussion. but it's overly subjective, flame-war crap like this that won't allow it to happen. and you aren't any better than nasim, evil angel.
if one (that one being developers) were too try a little harder! The end result could be unfathomable! ( adjective- Incapable of being grasped by the intellect or understanding ) MGS4 being an example!
Wow, what a nice attempt of story recycling. The original Story was posted in November 2006, and has now been QUOTED on the xBox Fanpage. Thats about as OLD as it can get.
@power of green so which one of those Alan Wake pics was in game?
LOl at pOG ...looks like even your friends agree with you (sarcasm) next
its an article written by a guy who says himself that he doesnt have a ps3, and its posted on an xbox site... ill take his word alright :/
Actually 'was' written .. in November 2006, by a mysterious anonymous "developer"
an XBOX fanboy site.....yeah right! like im going to beleive anything a bunch of fanboy losers are saying.
facts are facts but where you get your facts from makes a big difference. If this was a respectable website then i wouldnt have a problem with this....if we started grabbing news like this from the sony defence force then we are in trouble...
that would run in HD on Xbox 360 could not run in HD on PS3. Oh yeah I've seen plenty of those NOT. The Graphics processor is better on Xbox 360 but this guy just sounds like he picked this up off the net and blogged it in 5 minutes.
LMAO of the irony. but..but.but... halo 3 is not final its the alpha!!!!! game is couple of days away from realese and it still looks like an xbox game, pls x360 sucks at graphics 2 year old gpu is crap now.
ps3 is better HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
PS3's is in last place in everything. I'v read many time from the Techies and Chip designers PS3 will get out performed in everything(graphics and Physics when devs learn to fully use the Hardware taking different road ending up ahead of what can be done on PS3). It shows now and it will continue to do so PS3 is over hyped.
"I'v read many time from the Techies and Chip designers PS3 will get out performed in everything(graphics and Physics when devs learn to fully use the Hardware taking different road ending up ahead of what can be done on PS3). " I'd love to read these articles that you're referring to.
Wow, I really thought the PS3 would win a comparison from an XBOX site.
The main problem is that Sony and MS have a split in interests. Sony is too busy jerkin' it to BluRay and praying to Linux gods, while Microsoft has spent a great deal of time and effort into its XNA sdks. Microsoft Game Express could be likened to MovieMaker, in the sense that it gives even wannabes a shot making something. "The youtube of games", right? No matter how you look at it, it actually supports the industry in the most possitive way, because in the end gamers are more educated on what a real life dev faces when starting from scratch and making a gradeA title. It also gets those who are interested a foot in door so to speak.
This would be a pointless article. But, THE GAMES PROVE IT TO BE TRUE! The proof of the pure power of the 360's GPU is evident in the games. Storage does not make games better in graphics and gameplay if you can't process it. The processor is the brains of any modern cpu system. I knew this when I purchased a 360. I read the designs of the 360 and was thoroughly impressed that is why I have it in my house today. I compared and contrasts the ps3 specs and that memory allocation issue is a big avoiding issue for me. And, given the games I have seen it has proven a wise decision. Remember splinter cell on 360 and ps3 video comparison. Horrible. Multiple cores or spe are pointless without memory allocated for them to function adequately and provide the graphics we all love. Gears of war wouldn't be possible without 500 megs of accessible memory in the 360 for example. Imagine it with 250 only...bleh.
and running graphics code from one platform and shifting it onto the other causes massive performance deficits. The SPUs actually do have 256 Kb of dedicated memory for each SPU(the speed of L2 cache, but the predictableness of RAM) called Local Storage, have 300GB/s of transfer speed between all 8 cores, twice the memory bandwidth as Xenon, and run off of 5x faster RAM. And it's CPU ram, not GPU ram like in the 360.
One more thing, optical Drive speeds are always a fraction of an HDDs speed, with a nominal 8-16mbps and 30-80mbps for each, respectively.. This minimal tranfer rate has to yield enough throughput for all of the tasks the Disc will undergo as the game is played. Obviously, using the HDD as temporary space helps developers overcome such inherent disc limitations. But 50GBs of data isn't going to be put on the drive, so they have to make choices about what is going and what isn't. That's why the PC world had such things as Minimal, Recomended, and Complete install options. And 256mb GDDR3 of texture space is all that you're going to see, since developers need to count on the fact that the memory resources are ALWAYS persistent. And no, you can't run texures into the other 256mb XDR, since each allocation is tied to a certain subsystem. 256Mb XDR is linked through the FlexIO Rambus controler of the CellBE's chip, while 256MB GDDR3 is linked to the RSX. Each has its own bandwidth, so a developer would have to work with the expected performance output of each memory allocation. FlexIO is hardwire programmed through firmware to "see" 256mb XDR somehwere in the system, as is RSX to its 256mb GDDR3. I put the speed in every mention of each allocation to highlight some else too.
You are funny guy. "The processor is the brains of any modern cpu system" - I thought CPU was always a brain of any system, unless it is 360 invention! Are you comparing CPUs or GPUs. 360's GPU is maybe 5% more powerful than PS3 GPU but if it comes to CPUs - CELL is much faster. "I read the designs of the 360 and was thoroughly impressed that is why I have it in my house today" - if you bought 360 in 2005 ... well it was only next gen system available so decision was kind of easy. I did not "analyze" design of any system,just bought all 3 because I like games(and HD movies too). "Gears of war wouldn't be possible without 500 megs of accessible memory in the 360 for example. Imagine it with 250 only...bleh." - ????????????? . When devs say than 360 has more memory they mean "TOTAL MEM"-"SYSTEM MEM" 360: CPU+GPU 512-32=480MB PS3: CPU 256-48=208 GPU 256- 8=248 (I could be wrong) PS3 total=456MB So the difference is 24MB - your "250" statement is kind of biased and misleading. BTW "500MB" -->512 and "250"--->256 "I compared and contrasts the ps3 specs and that memory allocation issue is a big avoiding issue for me" - so what are you developing now??? Because if you just play games than there is no issue for you(No disrespect intended). Leave design and coding "issues" for developers. There are paid to find solutions.
[11.20.06] Anyone see when that original article was dated? Good job digging this old joke up. "I thought it would be a good idea to ask my friend, who is a lead programmer for a large gaming company that produces games for both PS3 and XBOX 360." Considering his "friend" made this statement so early on in the console's(ps3) life cycle...like the first week of it's launch. I find it amazing anyone is taking it so seriously at this point.
Everything written in that blog was false. Multiplatform games are starting to perform and look better on PS3; that alone shows that the tide is turning. For more proof, take a gander at Killzone 2, GT5: Prologue, and Heavenly Sword.
What the hell are you talking about. What tide turning. In sales. Both hardware and software. Show me how many games a month are in the top 10 for PS3. Show me how many times the PS3 has outsold the 360. The point is it doesn't matter if this article was done in 2006 or not. The fact that you and I are still waiting on MGS4, just now got Lair(WTF) HS(great looking game that last 6 hours after all this fuc*ing time in development) then to top it off they said "if it sells well we will offer downloadable content" again WTF? You got Blu-Ray and you brag about how many gigs each level is just to have a 6 hour game and THEN offer extra content. Where the hell was it since it is about ready but since when is this the reason why you offer downloadble content let alone make an announcement basically saying please buy our game. Look I want a PS3 I just want them to show me a reason why it is worth what it is. I don't care about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray so that is a non issue. I can give a damn who wins the format war that has absolutly nothing to do with my gaming experience(Halo 3 next Mass Effect) So hey let me know when the tide turns becuase honestly it isn't about the sales for the tide to turn for me to actually purchase it. What needs to happen is the games to come out. Here I will give u some history from this site and others like. 2005 "Next Gen doesn't start until we say so" "People will buy this on name alone" "here is what we heard through 2006" (a;lsdfjs;ledrjfwe;lrj;alerje ;laakjf;lskejf;alwekjfr;awle;s l efja;slejf;slef;Sfj;SElfj:SLEf j ;sLefj;SEflj:SELfjs;e PWNED arfl;jwe;ljaf;lekja;lefjw;lejf j) Now we are here in 2007 STILL waiting for the da*n games. Again I want the system just bring the games out that are GOOD for me to get the system. FOCUS fuc*ing FOCUS Sony then you will have another customer. Simple as that. Bottom line you are trying to compare games that are yet to be released after 3 years which honestly for some and it shows in the numbers why the PS3 isn't beating the 360(don't give a damn about the Wii and fully aware it is leading but can't play the games I want on it that I can on the 360 and eventually on the PS3 ever)
If the tide was turning, why has Sony dropped its 20gb model, lowered the price of the 60Gb, introduced an 80Gb variant, and remodeled the PSP all in under a year, still to no avail? It's in 3rd. It's making some headway, since I would agree that $499 isn't too much to ask for the 60GB model. But MS has had a great time running with the ball and hopscotching its way through Sony's crumbling empire. Bad press aside (they've both got issues and nobody likes it) 360 has risen to prominence. Thank Buhdda I held back PS3! "I am number One, cause 2 is not a winner, and 3 nobody remebers"
face it..NO one is buying into the ps3 right now...if a price cut comes then there will be a movement in consoles. but the reason people will be buying them are for the cheap blu-ray player...HS is not selling consoles. Lair is definetly not selling consoles. MGS will sell consoles...in 2008..ff13 will sell consoles...in 2009 in NA.
The author attempts to make the arguement that the XBox is better using the fallowing points to support his opinion. 1. The PS3 has more processing power, and multi-platform games wont bother taping this extra potential. In my own words, PS3 gets the dumbed down version that is able to run on the 360. (This point actually is in support of the PS3, which is why it's so awesome it was included in an article attempting to show the superiority of the XBox. "XBox is better, because PS3 has more processing power, mwa HA!") 2. The XBox has a better graphic card. After some breif talk about vertex shaders, and pixels, etc, he admits he's not a programmer. He then states "Microsoft has developed an ingenious method to run its high definition anti-aliasing back buffers. The same process on the PS3 would be outrageously expensive to implement." [sarcasm] Indeed, writing the software may be expensive in itself, but then copying that software to every PS3 would add a significan 0.00001 cents per unit to the cost. [/sarcasm] 3. The XBox came out first, and has more game. This is the ultimate proof that the XBox has better hardware. This also, apparently, makes it easier from a development standpoint - but he's not a game developer remember. I'm going to go post my opinion of a REAL ARTICLE in the N4G forums, then post my opinion and crapy summery of the article as a hot news story and watch it make the front page. I will also provide a link to the REAL ARTICLE in my post, but the link will not work. Just like this guy. He tries to sum up another article, attempts to link to it, but fails to actually create a link in TWO locations, so you end up having to just copy and past into your URL box, smooth.
[...The PS3 has more processing power, and multi-platform games wont bother taping this extra potential...] This is simply not true, examples are Graw2, Skate and you will see it in Burnout Paradise and others.
You must relize that I'm mearly restating what the article said. If you disagree with that statement, you disagree with the article. I myself to not agree with the article either. We both think the same thing. Just to clear that up. ;) LOL, and I think I remember reading that article when it was posted here months ago. Like I said, pick an old article, put a personal spin on it, and post it on the front page like it's something new. WOOT!
360 has better exclusives games and multiplat games look and play better on 360 unless its released a yr later on ps3 xbox was more powerful than ps2 and it showed it in the games from day 1, no need for waiting truth hurts sonykids get over it= JOY
Ok if the games thats multiplat-formed then what you have to say bout UT3 SINCE IT WAS MADE ON THE PS3 first, you see i hate people who dont even own or play video games state bull ish statements but to eaches own, all i gotta say is i hope you guys dont talk bout the same junk everyday i never heard people brag bout being in second place and they had a year head start. I hope its not grow azz people in here talking bout this junk , just enjoy your systems Damn
but I understand your point. Going from PS3 -> 360 would require way too much re-work versus going from PC to 360. Proof? The multitude of articles stating the PC and 360 platform are very similar (including M$'s own XNA, which is made for cross-platform--M$ platforms-- gaming development). gCM (not directed at you Chino3xl) Folks, stop with the "mine is bigger than yours" crap. Play the system that has the games you want. I say this, and yet I know it won't happen, as the 10 year olds with mom's internet just aren't comfortable enough with their own selves yet to "get along". Guys, your manhood isn't measured by how many you anonymously flame on the internet. Go throw a football or something... At some point, you'll discover girls (in real life, not on tv).
360 is @ 90% using all 3 cores already. PS3 is @ 40% using 3 spu's. You do the math. Gears of war. Texture and thats all. Not much going on screen is there.lol 360 will lose yet again, get used to it. xbox720 will be out in late 2008. By then it'll be too late. lmfao.mass effect, you mean the halo clone.(graphics wise) god and halo 3 is awful. KILLZONE 2, GT5, R%C, UNCHARTED. FOR THE WIN BABY.
"(I’m not a game-developer, nor do I claim to be one)" Ok?.....how the h*** does he know about the development then? Waste of time if you ask me. I like hearing from developers....
BLORGE.com has learned exclusively what some of the key points of the Xbox vs PS3 war are, and it's not all about the Halo. In a recent conversation with an undisclosed developer source, GAMER.BLORGE.com has been made privy to the biggest problems facing developers as they work with the Xbox 360 and the PS3: It's all about the RAM and the processor. According to their source, it's easier on almost every level to work with the Xbox 360 in the development stage. Due to the older systems large amount of RAM, developers can work with a little more head room and not worry about running out of operating memory. Where the real problem stem is in the two system's processors. While Xbox games can be tweaked to move up to the PS3, the reverse is not always the case. Due to the PS3's advanced processor, games developed for the Sony backed platform sometimes can't be downgraded to the the 360's chip
CODE MONKEY AT LEAST WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE MUCH RESPECT
Its not CGI fool. lol Its part of a demo for the game's tech you should Wiki Alan Wake its far more advanced than most or all PS3 games. (((Ri0tSquad))) WTF?... PS3 is over hyped Like PS2 back in the day its Sony's marketing style. Sony's Japanese roots have them hyping products making then seem supernatural works well over there and worked well over here untill Xbox came out then people started thinging. PS3 has finally proved what many thought!; its going to have to prove its Graphical prowess which it has not and will not as it would have already done so by now being 5X's more powerful or due to all the "ON PAPER" jibba jabba... You should read up on ATI's take on it etc... WH... http://files.filefront.com/... 1st pic:HL 2nd pic: KUF/COD 3rd pic: EVL PS3 is rubbish and no one will take you people serious untill we see, play and see scores saying otherwise
It's a funny article to read by the developer. Also it's very old and out dated. This developer must work for Microsoft and sucks as a developer. He admits the PS3 is stronger then the 360, but claims developers will never reach its full potential. Then he goes on saying that you don't need a Hard Drive for good games (LOL). Whats his idea of a good tic-tac-toe. The rest of his statements about price, online, and game selection has nothing to do with his expertise If you really read into the story what he was trying to tell people that the ps3 will be superior in 2 to 3 years over the Xbox360. Also as a developer he sucks and can't learn the new programming. Thinking about it he might work for EA. This is the link to the article http://www.hardcoreware.net...
Thx for that link. That is a funny article, indeed. [...Being a video game developer...] does that mean programmer ? I doubt it. Sounds like a producer - or even worse, "hired to talk". [...Without getting into too many details...] and [...I can't get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower...]. Come on, spoil us with your knowledge. He his a developer, but he "cannot go into details". Well, sure because there are none. The vertex shader in the RSX is faster, but sure, if you can allocate all vertex shading in the xenon and not use any pixel shaders, the xenon is more powerful. Well, he forgot to mention, you can replace the vertex (or pixel) shader in the RSX up to 100% thru SPUs code - not that you want to or have to. Well, what ever. As soon as the middleware is ported and at an acceptable optimization level, PS3 games will push ahead. Simple.
The 360's gpu can switch fully from vertex to pixel shaders as necessary, there is no extra step involved, sorry to break that news to you. I haven't seen any information officially released that states that the RSX's vertex and pixel shaders can be switched via SPE's. So if you can let me know where you got that info, that would be nice.
yup, flame on again. who cares? pick the system you know you will have the most fun with.
is the more powerful system. Are you guys mad that we took $600-$500 from you with nothing but promises??? Why do you think we at Sony bad mouth the 360 and it's games every chance we get??? Because we don't want people to buy it they will realize the truth and people are still buying the 360.
Why do these articles keep popping up? When the pure reason why PS3 games aren't surpassing X360 games, is because developers aren't even using the SPE's. And yes the GPU of the 360 vs the PS3's GPU, the 360 is more powerful. But keeping in mind, that only relates to the PS3's GPU by itself. The RSX GPU was designed to work hand and hand with the Cell Processor, sharing the load with each other. Obviously there's a learning curve on how to apply 6 SPE's to work functionally with the RSX GPU. But think about it, the RSX GPU plus the main processor alone in the PS3 is already making games look 95% identical to the X360. So the PS3 has a long developement to go, and the 360 hit the ceiling with Gears of War, and Mass Effect.
Here we go again. How about some tech demos
You mean like this http://www.youtube.com/watc... ...
this video is intended for 360 retards. this guy is IBM engineer OK. he said the cell is faster 40x than ur processor. goodbye, have a good sleep 360.
how does this help the PS3. So what that they are demonstrating this on a pc equipped with cell. Umm, that's IBM's job. To promote the use of their new processor. But in no way do they say that the ps3 is capable of this. That's like showing a suped up triple core computer, and XBox fanboys saying this is what the 360 can do. That video is a lame excuse to promote the cell, try promoting the PS3!
X360 Also has an IBM processor. So does the Wii.
Dareaver, the cell helps the ps3 by being it's PROCESSOR. That means that it does the majority of the calculations (computer thinking) within the ps3. Why don't you get a "suped up triple core computer" and try running that ray tracing demo on there. Here's another example of the cell's power being applied outside of gaming, although it's pretty clear how this piece of hardware (the cell) has capabilities beyond almost anything else commercially available. http://www.mc.com/cell/demo...
the cell is a nice piece of hardware, but the only problem is that in that demo you don't and i don't know what kind of environment that cell processor is in. you don't know how much ram the computer has, you know nothing about the hardware setup on that computer. Nor do i, that is all i was trying to say. The cell is a very advanced cpu, but it's environment has to be optimal for it to be able to do a lot of these things. It's nice to say what that processor can do, if we were talking about pc applications, but we are talking about the PS3. Promote what it can do on the PS3. That would make more sense. Don't you think. Since when have consoles been so heavy on telling their hardware specs. I'll tell you when, since PS2. That's just how Sony has changed the game. Did you know that the Sega Saturn had two more powerful cpu's than the PS1, but it was also too hard to develop for and was lacking in third party support. Like i said before, what the cell can do is nice, but that is like promoting a cpu, i want to see what the PS3 can do. That's all.
Just wait a few more years and once the devs are able to harness the subpar power of ps3, it will double the performance....of [email protected] that it. Games nah.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.