Top
650°

Activision: Stop Being Console-ist

Hello Activison,
Look at Black Ops on the PS3,
Now look at it on the 360,
Now back at your PS3,
Now back at the 360.
Sadly, the PS3 version doesn’t look or play like the 360 version.

The story is too old to be commented.
Masamori Sumimura2901d ago

What kind of article is this?

Quagmire2901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

A creative one, what were you expecting, a top 10 list?

But anyway, i'd rather EA side with Sony rather than Activision, as EA has more to offer such as Dead Space 2, Medal Of Honor, Battlefield, Need for Speed, Mass Effect etc...

visualb2901d ago

its an "Opinion piece"

its written under the picture.

they do differ.

STiRacer2901d ago

______________________________ _____________________

badz1492901d ago

I'll take EA over Activision any day of the week! even with CoD, Activision is just a mediocre company with mediocre games with deep pocket and dumb followers!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2901d ago
ash_divine2901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

For those of you who don't get the joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Quagmire2901d ago

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

This was a joke?

frostypants2901d ago

Dude, you're clearly too cool to find it funny.

Teach us your ways.

tacosRcool2901d ago

Its too bad that what Activision did is true

Christopher2901d ago

I can't believe that anyone on the Internet wouldn't get the reference...

multipayer2900d ago

It is like the hitler skit, both are funny the first time you hear them and then not so much... I really couldn't care less if Call of Duty had better graphics either, which it will-->NEXT YEAR!(Don't buy it, Battlefield 3 is out)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2900d ago
headwing452901d ago

I assume this joke is about the PS3 version not having multiple PSN log ins, but I believe the 360 version doesn't have 3D support. If that's the case, I'd say the 360 version got screwed over.

AlienFodder2901d ago

The 3D support for Black Ops is actually available for the PS3, 360 and PC.

headwing452901d ago

Oh really? I thought you needed blue ray to do this, but I guess not.

Christopher2901d ago

The type of 3D support is different. 360 utilizes the standard red and blue glasses, IIRC, and the PS3 version the new glasses that use interlaced frames to create 3D.

edgeofblade2900d ago (Edited 2900d ago )

cgoodno... that is 100% wrong. You could not be more inaccurate. You are making shit up off the top of your head. This is criminally incorrect, and you should... well maybe not burn in hell for pretending you know anything about 3D on 360... but something bad should happen to you for your egregious error.

I just went over to verify it. I don't have a 3D TV, but if you put the game in 3D mode, it puts the images side by side. If I had a 3D TV, it would also be sending a signal to page-flip the two images which, combined with a pair of LCD shutter glasses, would yield a 3D image.

No red/cyan glasses.

Same as the PS3.

Again, just to be clear:

alex33692900d ago

haha thanks your comment made my day. lol you are actually 100% correct and cgoodno is indeed incorrect.

edgeofblade2900d ago (Edited 2900d ago )

And while I'm on a roll, headwing45.... why would a Blu-ray disk be necessary to 3D? IN A GAME, no less. All the strain is on the rendering side, not on the disk space. Now, a 3D MOIVE takes could take twice the space, depending on compression methods and whether or not only half the frames are present for each eye of the movie... but probably not.

There has been quite a bit of scuttlebutt about the 360 not having the right version of HDMI for 3D (which is evidently wrong as well). But this is the first I've heard of a Blu-ray disk being technologically necessary for 3D.

For gods sake you sheeple... Blu-ray is not fucking magic. It's larger. That's. It. It does not enable any new technology, just more the technology you already know and love.

This is why I have such a beef with Sony... their advertising and marketing breeds morons who swallow anything their fed because they don't know any better. They don't reason through it. They just accept it.

headwing452900d ago (Edited 2900d ago )

You really have nothing better to do, do you? 0_0

The reason why I thought it is because 3D has been heavily advertised on PS3 and not at all on 360, that's it. I'm not in a fantasy world were I sit in my corner pretending that the PS3 is all mighty, I'm just not a 3D expert like you claim to be. I also herd rumors that the PS3 3D is a little more advanced the the 360 because of the mix of blue ray and PS3 updates Sony has been giving us for the last couple months. I don't know weather or not it's true, that's why if you read my comment above, I said "I thought."

EDIT: I found an article detailing the differences between 360 3D and PS3 3D

http://n4g.com/news/461517/...

3D on the Xbox 360 can't do the same thing as to what the PS3 can do, 360 can't have HD at the same time as 3D and the FPS gets reduced to 30, which can cause headaches overtime. I think the people advertising the 3D on PS3 (the people who don't no anything) say that blue ray mixed with the PS3's power can achieve a full 3D experience.

Christopher2899d ago

***cgoodno... that is 100% wrong. You could not be more inaccurate. You are making shit up off the top of your head. This is criminally incorrect, and you should... well maybe not burn in hell for pretending you know anything about 3D on 360... but something bad should happen to you for your egregious error. ***

Cute, let's see where we end up with this...

***I don't have a 3D TV, but if you put the game in 3D mode, it puts the images side by side.***

Oh, you mean just like standard 3D viewers that require the red/blue glasses do? You see, shutter glasses rapidly swap between the two images, they're not present on the screen at the same time.

***If I had a 3D TV, it would also be sending a signal to page-flip the two images which, combined with a pair of LCD shutter glasses, would yield a 3D image.***

Which is impossible on the 360 since... it can't buffer enough data to keep the 120fps needed for both images to result in a 60fps view in 3D.

Seriously, I may not have been 100% accurate, but I'm way more accurate than what you're spewing out here. The 3D between 360 and PS3 are vastly different. 360 utilizes sub-HD images at the same time while the PS3 is capable of buffering through double the frame of images at HD resolutions. Certain TVs are capable of handling both methods of 3D display and can make it much easier on the eyes to view 360 games in 3D, but they will, at this time, not equal up and feel less dynamic in the result.

***why would a Blu-ray disk be necessary to 3D?***

Constant high video buffer output rate for 120fps requirements utilized with the shutter lenses.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2899d ago
TheLastGuardian2901d ago

Activision are biased. They showed it off at Microsofts E3 event and at the end of every trailer it say Xbox 360 this and Xbox live that. I haven't played Black Ops on the 360 but I'm having so much fun playing it on PS3. I just stayed up all night and played it like 10 hours straight.

mrb3ar2900d ago

the article and hilarious photo

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2899d ago
Gam3s4lif32901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

lol :)

Supman2901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

I agree with this article,
activision sucks.

I mean only advertising on 360?
stupid activision.

Nariko-20112901d ago

Why is nobody complaining about EA's love for PS3? oh because it's PS3 we can look aside?? Fifa had some ads in the UK that omitted the X360, why is nobody pitch forking about that?
Lets drop console favouritism, ok...but lets drop the double standards as well shall we?

big_silky2901d ago

good point about ea, i didn't see too many tears about moh and dead space 2 on ps3 coming with free games...plenty of tears about this and the 360 getting first crack at fallout dlc though...

i love hypocrisy.

Motorola2901d ago

Tears for Fallout New Vegas? Really? There are enough quests in that game to not want DLC....I havent seen any tears for that

InFAMOUS12901d ago

I agree about advertising and etc, however MoH plays almost identical on both consoles, where as CoD does not.. The article is not about advertising issues, but rather technical issues.. Activision and Microsoft are too in bed together on ALL levels... It is just wrong! It 3 years, when PS3 is 5 million units ahead of 360, Activision is going to cheating on M$ with Sony, cuz that is the company that they are....

pixelsword2901d ago

Nariko,

Were the games you listed for the PS3 broken on the 360?

That's what we're talking about here.

Silly gameAr2901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

EA doesn't completely ignore the 360, or act like it doesn't exist. Get off your soapbox for a sec.

It's so easy to buy respect this gen then earn it. The only thing Activision should known for when we look back on this gen, is how much they whored themselves out and ignored a whole console and it's fanbase because MS put a few mill in their G-string.

Supman2901d ago

I know, why do they even make thier games multi-platform
if they only want to sell it on one console?

wedgie2901d ago

I have not made up my mind on Call right now- I promised myself that I would skip it, but we'll see.

But I am all about dropping all MULTIplat console favoritism in general, for both the xbox and ps3. I feel that let the first party studios show off what each system is about, for they are the ones designed for that system.

But when it comes to multiplat, buying DLC, buying extras, buying ads to omit the competition is just silly.

First, anyone who is a little bit informed knows that it is being sold for both systems.

Second, exclusive Multiplat and DLC annoys the snot out of me. Waiting a few months for the game to release on the other system, as well as DLC, should not happen. Exclusive DLC is another point, as seen with Fallout 3 DLC, GTA, and the Batman AA Joker, EA games, etc. All parties should be annoyed at this, for this is killing gaming. Advertising for just one system is pointless. Delaying the other systems games is infantile. Like Bioshock, DLC, and most other games, it comes over eventually, and so waiting just for the sake of waiting is stupid. If you are going to make people wait, do it because you need to optimize or tweak the game for that system.

Third, the point being made in this article was not about the advertising love on XBOX (which is annoying, and I agree, PS3 is just as guilty of, and it should all stop) but the development of the game on PS3. I understand that their largest fan base is on XBOX, but PS3 gamers still want to play and enjoy the game as well. The game should have had as much care and quality put into it for the PS3 as it did for the XBOX. The same can be said for games crafted for the PS3 and then over to the XBOX as well.

In the end, time and care should have been put into developing both versions of this title. It is a multiplat for a reason. The fact that it is not is a sad fact about the industry today, and something that ALL gamers should decry.

The game should have had the same amount of developing into both systems. Whether it is a good game, though, is another point, and that is for you to decide.

10thnightvolley2901d ago

add ubi's assasin brotherhood for ps3

Lawliet2901d ago

Because EA had a solid partnership with Sony? They always has been, even before Microsoft came into the gaming market. They even on many occasion show their great friendship on stage! Why would anyone complain about that when they knew all of these commotion? The only ones that will complain are those who are totally clueless about the market.

However that would lead you into thinking why they signed exclusives deal with Microsoft. EA is a money badger, that will never change and Sony couldn't be bother as they've confidence that those games will sooner or later be on their platform as well. And instead invest those money on first-party.

VALVE used to favor Microsoft, because they hated Sony for their system complexity, and the man came on stage to make an apologize and now taking all matters of PS3 ports being the BEST version.

But how is Activision relate to Microsoft? Is what bugging everybody.

No Way2901d ago

You see.. only what you want to see.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2901d ago
xAlmostPro2901d ago

i know it shouldn't have been an issue, and i agree they are totally erm 'console-ist'.. but the PC game is also wrecked to so its more 'platform-ist' lol..

but yeah, taking microsofts money for timed exclusivity is one thing, but it truely seems that maybe some of microsofts money is to cover the game not being 'as good' on other platforms so they can keep making statements like "the 360 has the best COD experience"..

meh

BlackTar1872900d ago

I don't remember any tears for fallout. Well nothing like your explaining.

Dark3602901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

LOL...Nice one!!!HAHAHAHAHA

chazjamie2901d ago

it looks awful on the ps3. i dont know why though. the spilt screen looks disgusting and they removed the levelling up as well. mw2 looks 100 times better than black ops in relation to the spilt screen.

so not really hahaha. advert parodies are funny. but...

ZombieAssassin2901d ago

LOL nice, I don't blame Treyarch that much though it's mainly Activision and not giving them time or resources for proper optimization.

theonlylolking2901d ago

Its both of their faults. Activision for not giving them the resources and possibly time. Treyarchs fault for not doing the best they could with the time they had and the resources. It could have easily been just as great as the 360 or better but NOOO.

Ducky2901d ago (Edited 2901d ago )

Eh?
How do you know Trey didn't do the best they could?
How do you know that it could have "easily been just as great as the 360 or better"?

Meh.
If both 360 and Ps3 versions were same, you'd have less people complaining. Seems people don't care about actual quality of a game... all they care about is whether someone else is getting a slightly better experience.

theonlylolking2901d ago

@fat old man

If they did then the game would be just as great as the 360 version.
Naughty Dog, Dice, etc... where given 2 years to do some of their games on PS3 and look at their games. Now look at treyarch's...see the difference.

Adrela2900d ago

@the_only_lol_king;
Again, how do you know that they didn't do the best that they could? Simply because the game has flaws on the PS3? Not every company can tweak and manipulate a game to work fine on every console just the same, relax...

skip2mylou2901d ago

treyarch has had time to figure out what they wanted to do since [email protected] except for the fact they went after other games like 007 which failed