So when has specs won a console war and why would it this time?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by PAL360 (27161 posts) -

good thing there's no CELL2 in the PS4 :)

Malta_1980

Completly agree, man ;)

#52 Posted by haze_blaze (3907 posts) -
This gen. The PS3 had the best exclusives and has outsold its competitors.
#53 Posted by Heil68 (46421 posts) -
Since Feb 20th, 2013 and Sony said so, and thus SDC. Strap one on TC, it's gonna be pedal to the the muther fvcking metal. Live, Learn and Love, the Sony way. http://www.gamestop.com/ps4
#54 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

Sony's for gamers by gamers, yo...

They make their systems powerful just to please us, the gamers...

 

p.s.: the console with best 3rd party support wins.

NES - best 3rd party support

SNES - best 3rd party support (excluding the Sega CD & 32X)

PS1 - best 3rd party support

PS2 - best 3rd party support

Wii - best 3rd party support (altho most of it was shovelware)

#55 Posted by bezza2011 (2700 posts) -

[QUOTE="bezza2011"]

you can't class the wii, as that was aimed at casual gamers for its gimmicky controls, and ps3 came out a year after the 360 came out and o look it's only just a couple million behind the sales now so there doing ok.

ps2 won because of the sheer amount of games it had and o yea xbox didn't come out for a good while and of course it would be better, it came out later. 

of course it's not about specs but it helps, if the xbox came out at the same time as the ps2 then the xbox probably would of won in the end, ps3 has closed the gap even with them having a year head start, that must show something, and in my eyes the orginal ps3 was made alot better and the quality was alot better than the xbox 360 cheap taccy looking block, and blu ray was always going to win.

how you have got sony failing is beyond me were in a recession, there selling buildings off to have some extra money in the bank sony sell tv's, hi-fi's, and what ever else i can't think of, how are they failing when there only just behind microsoft on console sales, and o yea they INVENTED blu ray, so every blu ray sold they earn money so look when microsoft unvail there machine and it has a blu ray drive you crawl to your corner and remember each 720 sold sony gets profit. hhmmmmmm

TheWalkingGhost

Why do morons keep saying Sony invented Blu Ray and they get money from each player sold? You are a moron, Sony owns nothing and will get nothing from any blu ray sold they didn't make.

hmmmmm might be because they did, and with the new information with a few other people. which i didn't know but still i'm guessing sony and this foundering blu ray lot still get a small slice of profits for a blu ray drive being sold.

#56 Posted by bezza2011 (2700 posts) -

720 probably wont have the strongest specs but will dominate, due to it catering to old and young, rich and poor. Pushing the boundaries with user Interaction, with great new IPs and Familiar core Favorites Jack-Burton

Just one thought microsoft exclusives are made up of halo, gears and fable, and i hear thier other brand new ip is being titled the new halo o my god another FPS brilliant thats all i want lol, sony has such a better catalogue of different genre's in their first party publishers, i want an excuse to get the next xbox as i normally do get every console but with everything being multiplat and now ps4 hardware being pretty much a pc, why bother when sony has the better exclusives when it comes to variety. 

#57 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

ps1 gen the N64 won for me and was more powerful. Last gen Xbox won for me and was more powerful. This gen 360 won for me and is equal to ps3 and its certainly not the weakass wii that won it for me. I don't care if it sells more i want games, shiny games and that's what you get on the most powerful systems, gameplay AND graphics.silversix_

 

nintendo fanboys came up with this stupid argument, playstaion consoles were always the most powerful consoles for there time, so of course a  console coming out a year and a half later would be more powerful, the only problem with ps3 was sony chose blue-ray and that why it was on par with 360, so yes specs always matter, the only time it didn't is with wii, and cuase it sold as a fitness gaming machine, look at it now a failure and won't recover, no matter what nintendo fans say becuase they sold a fad, that over with now.

#58 Posted by Jack-Burton (2433 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jack-Burton"]720 probably wont have the strongest specs but will dominate, due to it catering to old and young, rich and poor. Pushing the boundaries with user Interaction, with great new IPs and Familiar core Favorites bezza2011

Just one thought microsoft exclusives are made up of halo, gears and fable, and i hear thier other brand new ip is being titled the new halo o my god another FPS brilliant thats all i want lol, sony has such a better catalogue of different genre's in their first party publishers, i want an excuse to get the next xbox as i normally do get every console but with everything being multiplat and now ps4 hardware being pretty much a pc, why bother when sony has the better exclusives when it comes to variety. 

And PS4 is launching with Killzone and Infamous the two most drabbest exclusive franchises Sony has. Until MS has at least announced its launch line up its all speculation.
#59 Posted by Jack-Burton (2433 posts) -
This gen. The PS3 had the best exclusives and has outsold its competitors.haze_blaze
Which competitors there are no official figures, plus Wii sold 95 million no matter how much you pray to Kaz the numbers aren't that good.
#60 Posted by clr84651 (5537 posts) -

Sony is failing on all fronts right now, their credit rating is junk, do you realize what that means? they are on deaths door, failed badly with the vita and they are fighting a COSTLY war of attrition with ms...

suppose ms decides to eat a nice loss on the rumored weaker 720? They come in much cheaper... get some big name exclusives... do you really think all the live gamers are going to switch to sony because of teh ggdr5... something they never heard about? lol



nintedo beats master system = master system has better specs.

snes beats neo geo, neo geo has better specs

ps1 beats n64, n64 has better specs

ps2 beats gc and xbox, they both have better specs

wii beats 360 and ps3, they both have better specs


robotapple

What if I found a million dollars! 

And Sony isn't on death's doorstep. :roll:

#61 Posted by clr84651 (5537 posts) -

[QUOTE="bezza2011"]

[QUOTE="Jack-Burton"]720 probably wont have the strongest specs but will dominate, due to it catering to old and young, rich and poor. Pushing the boundaries with user Interaction, with great new IPs and Familiar core Favorites Jack-Burton

Just one thought microsoft exclusives are made up of halo, gears and fable, and i hear thier other brand new ip is being titled the new halo o my god another FPS brilliant thats all i want lol, sony has such a better catalogue of different genre's in their first party publishers, i want an excuse to get the next xbox as i normally do get every console but with everything being multiplat and now ps4 hardware being pretty much a pc, why bother when sony has the better exclusives when it comes to variety. 

And PS4 is launching with Killzone and Infamous the two most drabbest exclusive franchises Sony has. Until MS has at least announced its launch line up its all speculation.

And please tell everyone just how the PS4 will fail? Wii U is garbage & the 3rd xbox has what games for it and when is it being released and what makes it better than PS4? You sure are throwing a lot of crap around here while Sony is doing all the right things with PS4. 

#62 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jack-Burton"][QUOTE="bezza2011"]

Just one thought microsoft exclusives are made up of halo, gears and fable, and i hear thier other brand new ip is being titled the new halo o my god another FPS brilliant thats all i want lol, sony has such a better catalogue of different genre's in their first party publishers, i want an excuse to get the next xbox as i normally do get every console but with everything being multiplat and now ps4 hardware being pretty much a pc, why bother when sony has the better exclusives when it comes to variety. 

clr84651

And PS4 is launching with Killzone and Infamous the two most drabbest exclusive franchises Sony has. Until MS has at least announced its launch line up its all speculation.

And please tell everyone just how the PS4 will fail? Wii U is garbage & the 3rd xbox has what games for it and when is it being released and what makes it better than PS4? You sure are throwing a lot of crap around here while Sony is doing all the right things with PS4. 

 

let nintendo fanboys have there say, it will be funny when both ps4 and 720p assuming they have enough suppley out sell wiiu life time  sales  in it's first holiday.

#63 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="Malta_1980"]

eehhh the powah of teh Cell didnt reach you my friend !!!!

Malta_1980

Hmm...to be realistic, the powah of the cell didn't reach anyone! In fact it almost killed Sony's brand, instead :P

good thing there's no CELL2 in the PS4 :)

GDDR5 is the Cell's spiritual successor. The Cell started the Domination, GDDR5 takes over with the Continuation.
#64 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]Well the ps3 is the most powerful system this gen and it won so...PAL360

So few words, yet so many wrong points! Impressive :o

1. Wii won this gen, sales wise.

2. 360 won this gen, when it came to library and dev support.

3. PS3 is not more powerful than 360. Actualy i would say 360 proved to be the most capable and flexible out of the two.

If by that you actually mean

1. Sales don't matter

2. 360 is a rip off with faulty hardware and three rehashed franchises and not much more

3. The PS3 has the best graphics (more awards and graphically impressive games)

Then I agree.

#65 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]Well the ps3 is the most powerful system this gen and it won so...kuraimen

So few words, yet so many wrong points! Impressive :o

1. Wii won this gen, sales wise.

2. 360 won this gen, when it came to library and dev support.

3. PS3 is not more powerful than 360. Actualy i would say 360 proved to be the most capable and flexible out of the two.

If by that you actually mean

1. Sales don't matter

2. 360 is a rip off with faulty hardware and three rehashed franchises and not much more

3. The PS3 has the best graphics (more awards and graphically impressive games)

Then I agree.

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

#66 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

So few words, yet so many wrong points! Impressive :o

1. Wii won this gen, sales wise.

2. 360 won this gen, when it came to library and dev support.

3. PS3 is not more powerful than 360. Actualy i would say 360 proved to be the most capable and flexible out of the two.

omarissac

If by that you actually mean

1. Sales don't matter

2. 360 is a rip off with faulty hardware and three rehashed franchises and not much more

3. The PS3 has the best graphics (more awards and graphically impressive games)

Then I agree.

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...
#67 Posted by StormyJoe (6346 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

If by that you actually mean

1. Sales don't matter

2. 360 is a rip off with faulty hardware and three rehashed franchises and not much more

3. The PS3 has the best graphics (more awards and graphically impressive games)

Then I agree.

kuraimen

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...

Really? What a bunch of unsubstantiated garbage.

Do moos sneak out when you talk?

#68 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

StormyJoe

Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...

Really? What a bunch of unsubstantiated garbage.

Do moos sneak out when you talk?

Yeah because lems are substantiating all the garbage they spew lol. It's a fact Uncharted 2 won the most graphics awards this gen more than any other game. PS3 games also won in general the most graphic awards.
#69 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

If by that you actually mean

1. Sales don't matter

2. 360 is a rip off with faulty hardware and three rehashed franchises and not much more

3. The PS3 has the best graphics (more awards and graphically impressive games)

Then I agree.

kuraimen

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...

 

gears of war 3 is on par with uncharted 2, but uncharted 3 looks better, and i disagree with kill zone 3 having better graphics then halo 4, kill zone 3 looks cell shaded to me which is a huge turn off but anyway if you didn't own a pc and wanted the console with the best over all looking games you would have to buy a 360, and that's why i chose a 360 this gen but nextgen it's looking like ps4 will be the most powerful by far and the new controller looks great, very close to 360 but with different anolog placement and much better d-pad.

#70 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

first off the ps3 will end up out selling the 360 this gen. second one, samething could be said for ps3, third i would choose 360 when it comes to being the graphics winner this gen, why you say, well best looking open world game is RDR, best looking FPS is halo 4, and best looking racer is forza horizone, then you have 75% of MP games looking better on 360.

omarissac

Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...

 

gears of war 3 is on par with uncharted 2, but uncharted 3 looks better, and i disagree with kill zone 3 having better graphics then halo 4, kill zone 3 looks cell shaded to me which is a huge turn off but anyway if you didn't own a pc and wanted the console with the best over all looking games you would have to buy a 360, and that's why i chose a 360 this gen but nextgen it's looking like ps4 will be the most powerful by far and the new controller looks great, very close to 360 but with different anolog placement and much better d-pad.

I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.
#71 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...kuraimen

 

gears of war 3 is on par with uncharted 2, but uncharted 3 looks better, and i disagree with kill zone 3 having better graphics then halo 4, kill zone 3 looks cell shaded to me which is a huge turn off but anyway if you didn't own a pc and wanted the console with the best over all looking games you would have to buy a 360, and that's why i chose a 360 this gen but nextgen it's looking like ps4 will be the most powerful by far and the new controller looks great, very close to 360 but with different anolog placement and much better d-pad.

I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

#72 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -
you can't desagree with factsomarissac
Your opinions =/= facts
#73 Posted by FragTycoon (6430 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

gears of war 3 is on par with uncharted 2, but uncharted 3 looks better, and i disagree with kill zone 3 having better graphics then halo 4, kill zone 3 looks cell shaded to me which is a huge turn off but anyway if you didn't own a pc and wanted the console with the best over all looking games you would have to buy a 360, and that's why i chose a 360 this gen but nextgen it's looking like ps4 will be the most powerful by far and the new controller looks great, very close to 360 but with different anolog placement and much better d-pad.

omarissac

I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

The difference in multiplatform games is not as big as fanboys make them out to be here in SW. There are games that look better on PS3 (via DF) but we will ignore those games because they hurt your argument.

#74 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.FragTycoon

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

The difference in multiplatform games is not as big as fanboys make them out to be here in SW. There are games that look better on PS3 (via DF) but we will ignore those games because they hurt your argument.

 

i could give a nice list of games that look and perform significantly worst on ps3, while the only game that i can think on ps3 being a significant difference is the first final fantasy, i'm not even a fanboy by the way, as i'm going with ps4 nextgen, and think microsoft is abandoning the core gamer, i'm just telling it like it is. it also doiesn't help that those were some of the best selling games this gen.

#75 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

omarissac

The difference in multiplatform games is not as big as fanboys make them out to be here in SW. There are games that look better on PS3 (via DF) but we will ignore those games because they hurt your argument.

 

i could give a nice list of games that look and perform significantly worst on ps3, while the only game that i can think on ps3 being a significant difference is the first final fantasy, i'm not even a fanboy by the way, as i'm going with ps4 nextgen, and think microsoft is abandoning the core gamer, i'm just telling it like it is. it also doiesn't help that those were some of the best selling games this gen.

Dragon Age Origins also performs significantly worse on 360 by the way...
#76 Posted by delta3074 (18672 posts) -
Well the ps3 is the most powerful system this gen and it won so...kuraimen
No it didn't, Wii won both Sales and Games.
#77 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]you can't desagree with factskuraimen
Your opinions =/= facts

 

 the fact that MP games look better on 360, if you wanted the best looking version of MP games you have to own a 360 if didn't have a PC.

#78 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

Hum, I'm pretty sure you're an alt account of some former lem, but whom I wonder? :question:

#79 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]you can't desagree with factsomarissac

Your opinions =/= facts

 

 the fact that MP games look better on 360, if you wanted the best looking version of MP games you have to own a 360 if didn't have a PC.

Not all. There are a few MP games that are factually better on PS3, let alone some exclusives that are arguably the best looking games this gen had to offer

#80 Posted by delta3074 (18672 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]you can't desagree with factsomarissac

Your opinions =/= facts

 

 the fact that MP games look better on 360, if you wanted the best looking version of MP games you have to own a 360 if didn't have a PC.

Gears 3 is one of the only Game on consoles that carrys it's graphical fidelity from the single player across to multiplayer.
#81 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

 

gears of war 3 is on par with uncharted 2, but uncharted 3 looks better, and i disagree with kill zone 3 having better graphics then halo 4, kill zone 3 looks cell shaded to me which is a huge turn off but anyway if you didn't own a pc and wanted the console with the best over all looking games you would have to buy a 360, and that's why i chose a 360 this gen but nextgen it's looking like ps4 will be the most powerful by far and the new controller looks great, very close to 360 but with different anolog placement and much better d-pad.

omarissac

I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

#82 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

The difference in multiplatform games is not as big as fanboys make them out to be here in SW. There are games that look better on PS3 (via DF) but we will ignore those games because they hurt your argument.

kuraimen

 

i could give a nice list of games that look and perform significantly worst on ps3, while the only game that i can think on ps3 being a significant difference is the first final fantasy, i'm not even a fanboy by the way, as i'm going with ps4 nextgen, and think microsoft is abandoning the core gamer, i'm just telling it like it is. it also doiesn't help that those were some of the best selling games this gen.

Dragon Age Origins also performs significantly worse on 360 by the way...

 

I just looked at the DF faceoff, they said it performed better on 360

#83 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

 

i could give a nice list of games that look and perform significantly worst on ps3, while the only game that i can think on ps3 being a significant difference is the first final fantasy, i'm not even a fanboy by the way, as i'm going with ps4 nextgen, and think microsoft is abandoning the core gamer, i'm just telling it like it is. it also doiesn't help that those were some of the best selling games this gen.

omarissac

Dragon Age Origins also performs significantly worse on 360 by the way...

 

I just looked at the DF faceoff, they said it performed better on 360

If I remeber correctly the DA:O case, it performed better on X360 but looked better on PS3, wich isnt saying much as the game looks like sh*t, even on PC

#84 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.Vatusus

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

 

even when ps3 leads 360 manages to keep up, even sometimes looking bettter like MGS rising, 360 has a better 10fps average, vanquish is about even, and FFX-2 or what ever the name is, 360 version is pretty close, i'm talking about significant diffrences, it doesn't matter what the engine is to me, if i wanted the best looking multi-platform games i would have to buy a 360 and over all 95% of games oare multi-platform.

#85 Posted by Miketheman83 (3156 posts) -
TC makes some good points.
#86 Posted by delta3074 (18672 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] I disagree, I think there are better looking games on PS3 than on 360. Specially in the exclusive department where the PS3 truly shines.Vatusus

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

Not true, there are quite a few games that where Not ports and a few games where the Ps3 was the lead platform that performed worse on the Ps3, the PORT excuse doessn't work for a lot fo the games,Even crysis 3 performs at a lower resolution on the Ps3 and we know that was optimised for the Ps3 using Cryengine 3, RDR was not a PORT, it's Sub-HD, Ghostbusters was significantly better on the 360 but the Ps3 was actually the lead platform. Although i agree with you that in a lot of cases it was bad porting but in quite a few it was the Ps3's lack of useable RAM that let it down, as was the case with Skyrim and other games like RAGE and Red faction Guerilla. Also, it had nothing to do with 'Lazy' developers it was more of a financial descision, why spend Extra time and money and man hours optimising a game when you can get it 90% to the 360 version without Ps3 gamers having to wait an extra 6 months for it to release on there console, everyone blames Lazy devs but Gives SONY a free pass even though they admitted they made the Ps3 hard to code for.
#87 Posted by AznbkdX (3467 posts) -

I actually made the mistake of saying the weakest one always won, completely dismissing Sega considering they just didn't come to mind. This way of thinking though is actually pretty valid in comparison to my previous haphazard thoughts. Its not the weakest that always wins, but the strongest that never wins.

Specs are not the end all be all to the sales of a system in the long run. It definitely helps considering it costs devs and gamers more money for higher spec machines (for devs mainly of their own volition though), but its the games and timing that is actually the driver for sales.

#88 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="Vatusus"]

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

omarissac

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

 

even when ps3 leads 360 manages to keep up, even sometimes looking bettter like MGS rising, 360 has a better 10fps average, vanquish is about even, and FFX-2 or what ever the name is, 360 version is pretty close, i'm talking about significant diffrences, it doesn't matter what the engine is to me, if i wanted the best looking multi-platform games i would have to buy a 360 and over all 95% of games oare multi-platform.

MGR isnt exactly a graphical benchmark. Vanquish actually looked better and was way faster and responsive imo. Vanquish versions maybe close yes, still does not deny the fact it was better on PS3

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vanquish-face-off?page=3

Vanquish input lag is fairly consistent on Xbox 360, while bizarrely, in these tests the PS3 appears to be more responsive when the renderer is under load.

If you own both machines and are wondering which to buy, it's a tough one to call overall but in my view, the v-sync implementation has to give the PS3 version the edge.

Dont know about FF XIII-2, but I'm sure at the time every major comparisson gave the PS3 the edge. And you should care about the engine or at least know that is a big part of what made the X360 MP games superior before talking about wich console has the better specs. Engine builds a game, the specs only support it

so before coming and saying the x360 is more "powerfull" than the PS3 because of MP games, first learn why thats actually false

#89 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="Vatusus"]

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

delta3074

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

Not true, there are quite a few games that where Not ports and a few games where the Ps3 was the lead platform that performed worse on the Ps3, the PORT excuse doessn't work for a lot fo the games,Even crysis 3 performs at a lower resolution on the Ps3 and we know that was optimised for the Ps3 using Cryengine 3, RDR was not a PORT, it's Sub-HD, Ghostbusters was significantly better on the 360 but the Ps3 was actually the lead platform. Although i agree with you that in a lot of cases it was bad porting but in quite a few it was the Ps3's lack of useable RAM that let it down, as was the case with Skyrim and other games like RAGE and Red faction Guerilla. Also, it had nothing to do with 'Lazy' developers it was more of a financial descision, why spend Extra time and money and man hours optimising a game when you can get it 90% to the 360 version without Ps3 gamers having to wait an extra 6 months for it to release on there console, everyone blames Lazy devs but Gives SONY a free pass even though they admitted they made the Ps3 hard to code for.

You have valid points. And I agree Sony screwed up with the PS3 architecture by making it to overcomplicated to work for, a mistake they seem to have addressed with the PS4, hopefully.

Notice I put quotes on the word "lazy". I didnt meant to say they were at fault for bad ports or not taking proper time with the PS3 version, only that it was a "lack" of budget/time/whatever that caused the vast majority of PS3 MP performing worse

#90 Posted by tormentos (19596 posts) -

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Your opinions =/= factsdelta3074

 

 the fact that MP games look better on 360, if you wanted the best looking version of MP games you have to own a 360 if didn't have a PC.

Gears 3 is one of the only Game on consoles that carrys it's graphical fidelity from the single player across to multiplayer.

 

Killzone says high... And has destrutibles to unlike Gears.

#91 Posted by delta3074 (18672 posts) -

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="omarissac"]

 

 the fact that MP games look better on 360, if you wanted the best looking version of MP games you have to own a 360 if didn't have a PC.

tormentos

Gears 3 is one of the only Game on consoles that carrys it's graphical fidelity from the single player across to multiplayer.

 

Killzone says high... And has destrutibles to unlike Gears.

kiillzone doesn't look Exactly the same in MP as SP though, gears 3 does, it doesn't loose any of it's Graphical performance in MP.
#92 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="Vatusus"]

[QUOTE="omarissac"]

you can't desagree with facts, MP games on 360 mostly looked better, some with huge advantages, like COD franshise, skyrim, RDR, bioshock, mass effect and bayonita was a day and night difffrence, you think sony excusives look better that's your opinion but we have digitail foundry comparing MP games.

delta3074

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

Not true, there are quite a few games that where Not ports and a few games where the Ps3 was the lead platform that performed worse on the Ps3, the PORT excuse doessn't work for a lot fo the games,Even crysis 3 performs at a lower resolution on the Ps3 and we know that was optimised for the Ps3 using Cryengine 3, RDR was not a PORT, it's Sub-HD, Ghostbusters was significantly better on the 360 but the Ps3 was actually the lead platform. Although i agree with you that in a lot of cases it was bad porting but in quite a few it was the Ps3's lack of useable RAM that let it down, as was the case with Skyrim and other games like RAGE and Red faction Guerilla. Also, it had nothing to do with 'Lazy' developers it was more of a financial descision, why spend Extra time and money and man hours optimising a game when you can get it 90% to the 360 version without Ps3 gamers having to wait an extra 6 months for it to release on there console, everyone blames Lazy devs but Gives SONY a free pass even though they admitted they made the Ps3 hard to code for.

 

you can add DMC 4, MGS rising, mirrors edge, dead space and burnout pardise, all those games lead on ps3 but came out looking even or better looking on 360.

#93 Posted by ShadowriverUB (5515 posts) -
There defintly gonna be close combat with Sony vs MS as it was this gen, nintendo is unknown, tablet controller didnt attract casuals as WiiMote only thing that can save it is Nintendo exlusives, but as past showed in the past nintendo exclusive alone don't push console to first place. I think bigger nintendo problem is accessibility, here in Poland i yet to see Wii U in the wild
#94 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="Vatusus"]

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

Vatusus

Not true, there are quite a few games that where Not ports and a few games where the Ps3 was the lead platform that performed worse on the Ps3, the PORT excuse doessn't work for a lot fo the games,Even crysis 3 performs at a lower resolution on the Ps3 and we know that was optimised for the Ps3 using Cryengine 3, RDR was not a PORT, it's Sub-HD, Ghostbusters was significantly better on the 360 but the Ps3 was actually the lead platform. Although i agree with you that in a lot of cases it was bad porting but in quite a few it was the Ps3's lack of useable RAM that let it down, as was the case with Skyrim and other games like RAGE and Red faction Guerilla. Also, it had nothing to do with 'Lazy' developers it was more of a financial descision, why spend Extra time and money and man hours optimising a game when you can get it 90% to the 360 version without Ps3 gamers having to wait an extra 6 months for it to release on there console, everyone blames Lazy devs but Gives SONY a free pass even though they admitted they made the Ps3 hard to code for.

You have valid points. And I agree Sony screwed up with the PS3 architecture by making it to overcomplicated to work for, a mistake they seem to have addressed with the PS4, hopefully.

Notice I put quotes on the word "lazy". I didnt meant to say they were at fault for bad ports or not taking proper time with the PS3 version, only that it was a "lack" of budget/time/whatever that caused the vast majority of PS3 MP performing worse

me a single console owner, i want a console the can gives me the best MP games experiance, ps3 didn't really do that even after 7 years, ps4 should change things, and unless nextbox can surprise us with some amazing specs, which i think is not going to happen, ps4 all the way for me nextgen. in the end both ps3 and 360 had amazing looking exclusives, i would say GOW3 is the most impressive, but halo 4, forza horizone, GeOW3 and RDR are amazing looking games as well for me, right up there with ps3 best.

#95 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24126 posts) -

pretty obvious that so far better specs insure you lose.

sure people want to argue the exception to the rule is snes being better than genesis but i always thought the sonic games were proof that the genesis had more going on under the hood than the snes had.

maybe this will be the 1st gen where the console with the most horsepower wins. you never know.

#96 Posted by omarissac (177 posts) -

pretty obvious that so far better specs insure you lose.

sure people want to argue the exception to the rule is snes being better than genesis but i always thought the sonic games were proof that the genesis had more going on under the hood than the snes had.

maybe this will be the 1st gen where the console with the most horsepower wins. you never know.

Riverwolf007

 

its really a stupid comparsion,a system that comes out later will always have better specs, the playstation 1 and 2 were very high tech and expensive for there time a, systems came out a year and half later and had better specs , no shi! if they all came out at the sametime, they would all be very close in power, with sony probably having the most powerful consoles, and still would have won those gens easily.

#97 Posted by StormyJoe (6346 posts) -

[QUOTE="StormyJoe"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Most game with graphics award this gen: Uncharted 2 Best looking hack and slash game this gen: GOW3 Best looking FPS (on consoles) this gen: Killzone 3 I'm sorry but 360 falls short...kuraimen

Really? What a bunch of unsubstantiated garbage.

Do moos sneak out when you talk?

Yeah because lems are substantiating all the garbage they spew lol. It's a fact Uncharted 2 won the most graphics awards this gen more than any other game. PS3 games also won in general the most graphic awards.

Killzone 3 better looking that Crysis 2/3? Whatever, dude.

#98 Posted by the_bi99man (11054 posts) -

BECAUSE GDDR5, B1TCH!

#99 Posted by Vatusus (5055 posts) -

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="Vatusus"]

Its been explained for quite some time now that the fact most MP looked and performed better on X360 were made for the 360 and then ported over to PS3. Most of the times where it happened the contrary (ex: Vanquish, L.A. Noire, FF XIII and a few others) the game ended up looking and performing better on the PS3.

Most devs were "lazy" this gen and prefered to aim to the more friendly developing console, also helped by the fact 360 software also generaly sells better. It had nothing to do with console specs but what devs were eager to do.

edit: oh, also have in mind like 80% of games this gen are made with Unreal Engine 3, an engine known to have problems with PS3

omarissac

Not true, there are quite a few games that where Not ports and a few games where the Ps3 was the lead platform that performed worse on the Ps3, the PORT excuse doessn't work for a lot fo the games,Even crysis 3 performs at a lower resolution on the Ps3 and we know that was optimised for the Ps3 using Cryengine 3, RDR was not a PORT, it's Sub-HD, Ghostbusters was significantly better on the 360 but the Ps3 was actually the lead platform. Although i agree with you that in a lot of cases it was bad porting but in quite a few it was the Ps3's lack of useable RAM that let it down, as was the case with Skyrim and other games like RAGE and Red faction Guerilla. Also, it had nothing to do with 'Lazy' developers it was more of a financial descision, why spend Extra time and money and man hours optimising a game when you can get it 90% to the 360 version without Ps3 gamers having to wait an extra 6 months for it to release on there console, everyone blames Lazy devs but Gives SONY a free pass even though they admitted they made the Ps3 hard to code for.

 

you can add DMC 4, MGS rising, mirrors edge, dead space and burnout pardise, all those games lead on ps3 but came out looking even or better looking on 360.

What a load of BS

DMC4 and Burnout Paradise both are better on PS3, even if slightly

http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/burnout_5/features/article/burnout_paradise_xbox_360_vs_playstation_3.html

The PS3 game wins, but it's by the smallest margin.

 taken from IGN DMC4 Head2Head 

Features
DMC4 offers a mostly identical experience across both platforms. You'll find the same staggering number of unlockable difficulty levels on both Xbox 360 and PS3, going from the breezy "Human" to the utterly insane "Heaven or Hell" mode. Outside of tweaking the difficulty, DMC4 offers players a challenge arena called Bloody Palace where players will be able to take on wave after wave of enemies to hone their skills and complete a series of progressively difficult missions to access more unlockable booty. Said booty is also identical across both platforms, offering a story theater for viewing the game's prolific cutscenes, a concept art gallery, and a kind of bestiary that will let you study enemy models. Both versions also allow players to post their high scores for individual levels to leaderboards.

The only other major feature in DMC4 is the built-in achievement function which will, likely, be a point where some people develop their own preference for one particular version. The actual achievements are mostly the same across both PS3 and 360, however the interface is slightly different. The 360 offers the same XBL message box that pops up in the corner of the screen when a new achievement is unlocked, and then the running tally is kept in the blade menu. On the PS3, achievement messages are delivered on a separate system-level screen (like the one you get when you hit the PS button on the SixAxis to turn off the console) that takes you out of the game for a few quick seconds. It's a little more intrusive and doesn't seem to connect to any additional PSN features (though there's been much speculation about eventual integration of these achievements into Home?we'll have to wait and see).

On a basic level, the achievements add a lot of repeatability to the game, built around replaying the single player over and over again. Having achievements in the PS3 is a great addition, but long-time 360 fans will probably prefer grabbing the points for their gamer score. Since that's a system-level feature and not a fault of the game itself we won't use that as grounds to favor one version or the other. Otherwise, the feature-set is identical on both PS3 and 360.

Overall
1. PS3 & Xbox 360


Control
DMC4 is a game built around precision controls and stringing endless combo chains together to get a new high score. The controller has a crucial role to play in that process and here, mileage will vary drastically depending on your preferred input device. Technically, the SixAxis and 360 controllers offer an identical number of inputs and the DMC4 controls are mapped in the same exact way across both versions. You'll attack and jump with the face buttons, control the camera (when the game allows it) with the right analog stick, and switch fighting styles with Dante using the d-pad. You can lock on with the right bumper on the 360 or the R1 button on the SixAxis. The left trigger, and L2 button respectively, is used to rev up Nero's Red Queen sword for added damage. When you unlock Dante, you'll use the right trigger, or R2 button, to switch weapons.

Objectively, the game's controls are far more similar than dissimilar. Still there's no denying the significant differences in the actual hardware. The 360's controller is a great piece of ergonomic design with really solid analog sticks and great analog triggers. The bumpers, however, aren't as convenient to access at regular intervals during intense sword battles, and it definitely feels awkward having to hold down the right bumper to stay locked on during a frantic fight with multiple enemies on screen. The inclusion of rumble is also a nice visceral part to the mix, offering a small but palpable bit of feedback during battle.

The SixAxis is a lighter controller with soft, breezy analog sticks, but better access to the R1 button during combat. It doesn't feel nearly as awkward holding down R1 while trying to keep a combo going as it does the 360's bumper. Players familiar with the DMC series may also feel more naturally at home on SixAxis as the game has always been made for Sony controllers. DMC4 definitely feels light and nimble when you've got a SixAxis in your hand, assuming you don't mind forgoing rumble, which we're willing to wager many players won't want to do. SixAxis also allows players to assign camera control to the controller's tilt function, but the feature isn't nearly sensitive enough and proves far too awkward to use in the heat of battle. It's an entirely negligible add-on that most no one will use.

Ultimately, neither controller is inherently better or worse than the other and the option for customizing your controls should allow fans to find a comfortable way to play the game on either console. I tend to prefer the PS3's spongy analog sticks and flat face buttons, but just as many people will get more mileage out of the 360's tight analog sticks and rumble

Overall
1. PS3 & Xbox 360


Graphics
DMC4 features some richly detailed gothic environments, imaginatively conceived enemies, and massive levels set across sprawling castles and maze-like forests. It's an impressive workload to run through any console, and while most multi-console games have featured a noticeable difference in graphical fidelity from the 360 to the PS3, DMC4 looks near identical on both platforms. You'll be getting similarly detailed texture resolutions, the same animations, the same particle effects and lighting. Capcom really has done a tremendous job coaxing an almost indistinguishable visual experience from both consoles and we take our hats off to them.

Some hardcore videophiles will notice that the PS3 version of the game has a slightly crisper over-all look. We did a series of tests checking texture resolution and environmental detail in both versions, flicking back and forth between the two consoles on one monitor, and while it seems that the textures and environmental assets appear to be the same, there's something slightly muddy about the 360 version in comparison. It's a marginal difference that we would have never noticed had we not been switching back and forth between the two versions with our faces 6 inches from the monitor combing for discrepancies. The game looks 99% identical across both platforms, and it's not an issue where Capcom has dialed back detail or simplified texture resolution, but something in the way the PS3 renders an image on screen appears marginally sharper than the 360. PS3 gets the nod here, but only by the thinnest of margins.

Overall
1. PS3
2. Xbox 360

 Mirror's Edge and Dead Space are more or less the same 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-16-article?page=2

 

DICE has done a magnificent job on both versions, regardless of the platform it may have led on, and Unreal Engine 3 has been proven as a cross-platform middleware capable - with minor compromises - in producing like-for-like multiformat games.

 In terms of real-life impact, the tearing is a minor annoyance on the PS3 Dead Space, taken by IGN inside


Graphics
If there's one category that should matter most for a game like Dead Space it's the graphics. So which version is better? EA Redwood Shores has done an outstanding job of making sure the game looks and runs identically on both consoles. Dead Space is brought to life with an impressive lighting model, high-resolution textures, and a remarkably detailed character model for Isaac. The color palate is comparatively limited to the industrial grays and blacks of a futuristic space station, but the significant amount of environmental detail is always impressive.

The 360 and PS3 versions of the game are all but indistinguishable. There is a small difference in the ways each render color, but with Dead Space's flexible brightness customization, you should be able to get an equally impressive image with both versions. Dead Space doesn't always have the smoothest framerate. You'll notices some hitches if you make wide camera swings in new areas. There's also a bit of slowdown in some rooms with a lot of enemies. This happened in equal measure on both the 360 and PS3. Videophiles might have some issues with the slowdown, but I actually found it enhanced the play experience, exacerbating the sense of fear and helplessness. Finally, you'll get a terrifically detailed and atmospheric game on both consoles, neither is inherently better than the other.

Overall
1. Xbox 360 & PS3

Overall
EA Redwood Shores has done one of the best jobs I've seen of making sure their game runs equally well on the 360 and PS3. The game looks great, sounds great, and plays great on both platforms. Neither version is missing a crucial feature, and EA has outdone most other major third party publishers by including Trophy support in the PS3 version. The game runs identically on both platforms, and controls equally as well on either controller. You'll be able to save yourself a few seconds when loading a saved game on the PS3 version, but this isn't something you'd notice unless you were actively timing it. Ultimately, the PS3 and 360 version of the game will deliver an identically entertaining and atmospheric experience.

END

so please, dont lie to suit your fanboyish needs

 

#100 Posted by osan0 (12914 posts) -
the best that can be said about specs and victory is that there is no link. specs don't cause a console to lose but they don't make it win either. i suspect that specs will also matter even less this gen than last gen.....i think the real battle will be between PSN and xbox live. i have a gut feeling that content is king is not really going to hold up as much this gen as it did in previous gens in the sense that content will be mostly shared amongst platforms. 3rd parties now wear the pants in this industry which means the content between the big 3 will be very similar in the big budget area. neither sony nor MS have any really massive system sellers any more. halo is questionable at best now and we havent seen a GT in so long that we cant say for sure. It's the CODs, the GTA, ACs and so on...these sell hardware and they are third party. so the question sony and MS have to ask themselves is how do they get gamers to buy those big 3rd party games for their system? itll be a war of timed exclusive DLC and delivery of service. this is not to say first party no longer has value....but they are now releagated to dark horse status. sony may get lucky and land an unexpected massive hit from one of their own studios causing PS4 sales to spike. MS could also with whatever first party they have left. one would also be very foolish to write off nintendo in that area at this stage in the game. at the mo first parties need to focus more on filling gaps in the release schedule, demonstrating what a system can do and staying out of 3rd parties way. i suspect sony and MS will also be offering significant discounts on the upfront cost of the console for those who subscribe to a 24 month gold/+ contract to try and get more customers. the strategy has worked very well for the xbox and will negate the damage inflicting loss leader strategy. they may even over price the cost of the console up front to get people to go for subs instead. once someone is tied into one service its very hard to get them to switch to another so this, i think, will be sonys and MSs focus. nintendo, as always, will remain unconcerned :P j/k.