The PS3 Power

Hello,

Am not an owner of ps3. I have 360, but it seems that I will be owning a ps3 in the near future as my 360 suffered the red lights and sent it to microsoft I got a used one back that has been "certified" to work. But I have a good feeling that it will break again, then its ps3 for me. Good games, great controller, just a bad hardware...

I want to open discussion about ps3 power. I think every one forgot how sony marketed the idea that ps3 is most powerful thing out there and examining the architecture of that thing they are kind of true, amazing cell-processor. Best graphics and amazing blue ray for games. Yet the reality is, ps3 is not giving anything more than 360 if not less.

As far as I heard the 360 put un-blurred images , i heard this in GTA4. For most part 360 has HD and ps3 is just as good. So what happened to all that power, given 360 came a whole year before ps3 did?

If you are going to play same games and same graphics, are we just paying more , or sony spending more on powerful hardware not being used, and should use less hardware which is less expensive to turn higher profit? Add to that, with wii sales, i think the whole industry is changing focus to casual gaming. Its business in the end, and if that is going to sell then they will make casual gaming. So did sony invest in un-needed hardware as casual gaming hardly needs high end power?

This is not a system war thread, its not about comparing the two, its about are we going to see that hardware power or not? If the ps3 was just as good as 360 or any other system, why did sony and other fanboys brag about it its capabilities?

Can you explain to me if this is not true, or if games using ps3 power are comming into existence? Its been a whole year the ps3 is out, and I think its about time, I would very much to hear that I have the wrong idea about ps3 power and how its not being used in the right way.

Can you explain to me if this is not true, or if games using ps3 power are comming into existence? Its been a whole year the ps3 is out, and I think its about time, I would very much to hear that I have the wrong idea about ps3 power and how its not being used in the right way.

Kingmohd84

*point towards Metal Gear solid 4*

Exclusive ps3 games really make the ps3 shine, multiplat not so much, but yeah the ps3 is a workhorse, think about it like this in the almost 2 years lifespan of the ps3, its capable of playing multiplat games (not talking about EA ports), that an older machine like the 360, is able to play in its 3 year lifespan,

Games like Call of Duty 4, Burnout, etc, the exclusives what show what the ps3 could do, just wait next month for Metal Gear Solid and all of its 50gb of glory

The PS3 is powerful but there is more to making good games than just the power of the system.

Some of the biggest jump in graphics comes from game developers tools. I cant think of a good gaming example but if you look at the final fantasy film they made, they spent over a year doing individule hair movement. The next your or a couple of years later Mosters Inc comes out and the hair on the moster is done by the computer working out the movement of the hair meaning the development team has saved months.

So the PS3 can bring out a exclusive game better than anything out there but it will take a lot more time to build. The more time it cost to build the more money it cost and every developer has to work to a budget. Multi-plateform game developers are just working with the most up to date tools they have so they wont risk the massive amount of extra devopment time to make PS3 game that uses all the power.

I think the PS3 was designed to be roughly on par with the 360 with exclusive games slowly getting better and when the xbox720 comes out then it will be on par with that to.

(side note) I just thought that if the xbox720 is more powerful than the PS3 then microsoft should be able to get more excluive games to use this power as it can be sold on the 720 and the PC giving developers a larger market to make the money back on.

is there actually any difference between 360 and ps3 on multiplat games?trenno2529

Yes! Ps3 is free!

Dont you think sony made the wrong bet as developers(looking for money obviously) are heading toward games that cost less to develop and more wide spread, like wii sport for example? or maybe mario kart?

Sure, ps3 will have more power but that means developers have to spend longer times, more money, and greater risk in making games than low risk low budget games...in the end this is gaming and if it is fun it will sell...

I do not see the industry heading toward Triple A titles with big budgets as they are learning from nintendo to step back and create money than spend a lot and take huge risks...

btw, what does more ram mean for the system?

I heard ps3 has 256 ram and 360 has 512, but what does ram means to gaming consoles?

this is not a comparison question, it is to understand what more ram does in the console, in pc it makes you run more stuff together like photoshop and other programs being faster.

is there actually any difference between 360 and ps3 on multiplat games?trenno2529

Burnout Paradise is better on the PS3, as is Devil May Cry 4. GTA4 also has less framerate issues and popups on PS3.

everybody gloats on why there system is better. I mean what is Sony or any company for that mattere going to do. "no do not buy our system, it is crap". Yes the industry is looking to make smaller games and the reason why sony has lost a few exclusives due to expensive costs of the new hardware, developers can't keep games exclusive to one system full time. That is why games are being multiplat not only to 360 but also on PC as well. Nintendo is making out somewhat because it is cheaper hardware wise to make games for the Wii. As far as marketing and ideas go Nintendo hit things right on the head. Yes a lot of it may be gimmicky, but people are caring less and less about quality and more about what is available to play. If you can market average to bad games at only like 200,000 dollars and get even only 100,000 to buy it then you have made over double what it cost to make the game.

Yes you might be able to do something super awsome with the power of hardware but if you are too expensive and no one wants to put out the money for your system, then you don't have a whole lot. They had systems that had arcade boards in them back in the good old 16 bit era, but no one bought it or developed games for it because for one it cost $1000 dollars to own it and then had a battery life and after awhile the games died out.

Sony is suffering from the same thing that the N64 did back in it's day only not near as bad as nintendo had it. This blu ray is too expensive and so either games are going multiplat or just jumping ship. Why do you think FF and all the other major games were put on PS1 because nintendo used cartridge and overall became bossy and tried to tell 3rd parties what to do. I mean games like Mario 64 and Turok 2 were awsome but, all that graphics, sound and whatever else cost nintendo a lot a decade ago.

Sure sometimes hardware can get you exclusives like Ninja Gaiden on Xbox 1 or Elder Scrolls 3, SNES had a huge advantage over the genesis with not only hardware in terms of 3d and color palette but also with the controller and the amount of buttons on it.

Yes sony scored some points in terms of MMO's with ever PS3 having a hard drive and the PSN being limitless and open. Konami stated somewhere that they like the PSN because of the openess of it's network. Sony needs to start taking some financial strains in order to secure some exclusives for their system, or at least send developers to help get games running properly on PS3, otherwise they will end up like Sega Saturn. I highly doubt it will be that bad since the reason Sega never made it was because they always wanted to have the newest hardware out and couldn't even get their first party games to run smooth on their last couple systems. They had to put VF 2 and Nights out twice because the original versions of those games. thier add ons weren't that much more better than their original system. The dreamcast didn't push their hardware enough. They had a lot of games that ps1 and n64 had but a lot of it didn't play any better. Not that Sonic Adventure was bad, but that game had a lot of bugs in it. falling through floors and walls.

Sony need to stop gloating the victory of Blu Ray and start showing off why their machine is important, because right now they don't have an image.

The Wii has we are simple and cater to the non gamer. the 360 has the online and community aspect to it. The ps3 has that we have everything built in and can make use of other gadgets like USB flah drives and PC gamepads which automatically map buttons so that games play similar to having a real PS controller.

The problem is that some of the exclusives while pretty awsome don't showcase the hardware in a unique way and their aren't any titles that have a huge interest in NA or JP markets. NA pretty much only plays with shooters and other "Mature" content so it's obvious why 360 has such a huge base there. The JP market pretty much doesn't play much of anything except old arcade hits, party like games, and JRPG's and that is why PS3 isn't too popular and the fact that the market there probably is not willing to pay 400 dollars for a system. Maybe once PS3 hits the original ps2 price you might see it gain attention. Europe has done welll because they enjoy a lot of racing games and so forth. The PS3 has a lot of racing games such as Motorstorm, Burnout, GT 5, F1, Dirt, Ridge Racer, Need For Speed, and so on. Sony needs to concentrate on the NA a bit more and they need to have a price drop and a few more Japanese oriented games.

[QUOTE="Kingmohd84"]

Can you explain to me if this is not true, or if games using ps3 power are comming into existence? Its been a whole year the ps3 is out, and I think its about time, I would very much to hear that I have the wrong idea about ps3 power and how its not being used in the right way.

numbersss101

*point towards Metal Gear solid 4*

I agree that i dont see how graphics are better, because both systems are HD.

yet I think the difference might be in like number of enemies, amount of content, amount of animation detail, and such...

Now it's only up to the developers to invest the time into their games to make use of all the power the ps 3 has to offer. REMEMBER THOUGH PS3 has the better processor and 360 has the better GPU, so it's all about how smoothly things run and how much stuff is going on at the same time. You'll get great graphics but ultimately the 360 GPU has the slight edge... i believe.

Also don't expect a multiplat developer to release a superior version of their game. They make them equal in every way.

Anywho if you want graphical prowess i suggest you look at the latest in game footage of Killzone 2. It is simply incredible... even though the AI seems to need to be touched up a tad.

Basically what it comes down to is programming...Microsoft did an incredible job of making their production suite for the 360 as user friendly as possible. But being that the 360 is about a year older than the PS3, power is lacking.

However, with the PS3's power comes a price...developers need to be able to program their code to take full advantage of the 9 or so processing channels available with the Cell processing architecture.

I have no doubt in my mind (being a 360 fanboy myself) that we will see some incredible things out of the PS3 hardware in the next few years, but as for right now I believe that developers are still struggling to harness the true potential of the system.

I think that truly the jury is still out on which system is more powerful. The two processors handle calculations in a very different way, so they are difficult to compare.

However, up to this point, most cross-platform games were developed for the 360 first then ported to the PS3. This has caused a big headache for the devlopers due to the vastly different hardware/software. It also means that there is little chance for the PS3 to look any better than the 360.

Developers are now finding that it is easier to develop for the PS3 first, then port to the 360 since the 360 uses direct-X API's that everyone is already familiar with. This is a good thing for PS3 owners. It is more likely that we will see higher resolution textures and polygons on the PS3 than on the 360 as a result, so I would say that in the next year or so, you will see the difference (if there really is one).

Obviously one of the major advantages of the PS3 is the larger storage capacity that BD allows. This doesn't directly translate to better graphics though, since the system is still limited by its overall rendering power.

This a good example of what the ps3 can do:Dmarterikster

Its a shame that this and FF(whatever the stupid roman numeral they are at) will be the only ones that can show what the PS3 can do but only if backed by a truly aweinspering budget and loads and loads of talent...multiplatfor(the way of the future it seems) 360 beats PS3 but then most multilplatform games are not really "made" to take advantage of the new structure that the Cell has and atleast now the small market share of the PS3 makes it unworthy to do anything "special" with the PS3 version.