Is it true Xbox 360 games are being dumbed down from PS3?

hellobrandontwb

The Xbox is better and that's that.

[QUOTE="brandontwb"]hellojarrod54545

The Xbox is better and that's that.

well i would agree at this point yes it is.

no not dumbed down proibly compressed to fit the files.

i don't see a difference.

They're not "dumbed down". Microsoft uses compression to fit more data onto a smaller disc. Sony doesn't have the compression technology to pull it off, but then they don't need to because BR discs are so much bigger,

The bottom line is that 360 and PS3 games are pretty much identical. Look at Oblivion, GTAIV and now Bioshock. All pretty much the same. The PS3 fanboys will say that their games have to be "dumbed down" so that they're the same on both systems and vice versa, but that's BS. The developers will use all the power at their disposal regardless of the system, and the truth is that the 360 and the PS3 are about the same in terms of power.

With every generation of consoles there are fanboys who fanatically claim that their system is better because it has slightly more of x or is slightly faster at y. I've seen it all before over 20 years of gaming, and this generation is no different. Basically, fanboys can only afford one system, and feel that they have to justify their purchase. It's pretty dumb. At the end of the day we're all gamers, and we all just want to play great games. Which system we play them on is pretty much irrelevant.

I own a 360 and a PS3, so you wont hear any fanboyish comments from me. Honestly both systems games look and perform close to identical. Any differences are usually minimal and equal to nitpicking. Its true that once developers become familiar with the PS3's Cell technology and the larger amount of data the Bluray holds, that the PS3 has more performance potential.

I know last generation, Gamcube and Xbox owners complained about mutli-plats because the PS2 was so much weaker, but the 360 and PS3 are much more evenly matched.

no not dumbed down proibly compressed to fit the files.

i don't see a difference.

iam2green

Agreed

The only game "Dumbed Down" that I know of is The Darkness. Starbreeze was able to fit more ingame TV programs on bluray for the PS3 version.

The only reasons that Bioshock, Oblivion and games of that nature perform and look better is because they've had addition months of work put on them. This isn't always the case as The Orange Box performs worse despite PS3 delays.

the anboy comments do get annoying cos i hav arguments with a friend who insists the ps3 performs better but they are practically identical cept for blu ray but theres no differencea3ftninja

Sony doesn't have the compression technology to pull it off, but then they don't need to because BR discs are so much bigger,

grayoldwolf

what?!?! i own both systems so i wont be biased. but when you said sony doesnt have the compression technology to pull it off, i had to say something, any nerd with a pc can compress data, its hardly cutting edge technology.

but anyway, some games that are on both systems, the 360 version will have compressed data to fit everything onto the disc. it does make a slight difference but you'd have to be a videogame developer to notice. although some companies are leaning towards the ps3 as lead platform because of this massive space they can work on.

[QUOTE="a3ftninja"]the anboy comments do get annoying cos i hav arguments with a friend who insists the ps3 performs better but they are practically identical cept for blu ray but theres no differencedjrobst

I don't think counting exclusives means much because there's no fair way to compare them across consoles. Gears of War 2 and Mass Effect (when all the textures are loaded) look just as good as anything on the PS3. There's just no way to compare them.

Also last generation, while the PS2 held the Xbox the Xbox always had better graphics, lower loading times and better frame rates...because it was the more powerful system.

So if the PS3 is more powerful than the 360, why on the graphics comparisons is the lighting usually worse and the loading times are sometimes longer (unless an install is involved)?

I would think it has more to do with the machines being very close to one another with their capabilities and the only difference seems to be one machine can do certain things better than the other. PS3 generally has better AA.

[QUOTE="grayoldwolf"]

Sony doesn't have the compression technology to pull it off, but then they don't need to because BR discs are so much bigger,

damedude123

what?!?! i own both systems so i wont be biased. but when you said sony doesnt have the compression technology to pull it off, i had to say something, any nerd with a pc can compress data, its hardly cutting edge technology.

but anyway, some games that are on both systems, the 360 version will have compressed data to fit everything onto the disc. it does make a slight difference but you'd have to be a videogame developer to notice. although some companies are leaning towards the ps3 as lead platform because of this massive space they can work on.

by compression I think he means this. I've heard, but never looked into the rumor, that the PS3 doesn't compress data not just because they really don't need to but the fact that the bluray reads data off the disc much slower than DVD drives. So just keeping this on the DVD plane, you can have the same data compressed the same way but a DVD drive with read speed of 40X's would be better than a DVD drive with the read speed of 12X.

again, i've never looked into this but they do say the Bluray drive read speed is much slower but then again the drive reads data differently.

also some say that the 360 has reached its limit on what it can do graphically, but the ps3 still has some improvements left. look at gears of war 1 + 2 as an example, gears 1 was an amazingly graphical game, people expect gears 2 to be amazing yet again, but it more or less looks the same except for some lighting differences. so many see that as proof that gears 2 is the limit. i kind of agree with them, that ps3 games will eventually look better than 360 games. but then again, the 360 has about a 5-7 year life span while sony has made the ps3 to still be up to date after atleast 10 years.damedude123

The major improvement in GoW2 isn't lighting, it's the ability to render more models at once. The first instance of GoW 2 showed like 100 locusts running through the streets at once with no slowdown. So while the graphics aren't getting a complete overhaul, the game is pushing the limits of graphical power in quality and quantity.

ps3 has blueray disc's which hold up to 50 gb of information, as the xbox 360 uses dvd's which only hold 9 gb of information. Plus blueray is High def, when dvd really isn't. But with technology these days dvd's can play high def now.jsbigboy

It uses dvd9 learn your consoles!

I also own both systems - so no fanboy here. Graphically, I prefer the PS3. On the PS3, the games appear to be sharper than the 360, which appears to be smoother. I also believe that the blu-ray disks provides better sound quality in games as well. Other than that, there aren't any other differences worth pointing out. Most of my games are on the 360, but I'm leaning more towards the PS3 for future titles - the PS3 in my opinion can handle games that are someone pushed to thier limits - I'm on my 3rd 360.shaunchgo

Ok first of all you have a lot of MP games on your ps3 and 360 but you also have a few old 360 games you have played lately COD3 lost planet and if you were smart you would also know the 360 has beat the ps3 3 times in the Graphics feature on gamespot so get glasses!

also some say that the 360 has reached its limit on what it can do graphically, but the ps3 still has some improvements left. look at gears of war 1 + 2 as an example, gears 1 was an amazingly graphical game, people expect gears 2 to be amazing yet again, but it more or less looks the same except for some lighting differences. so many see that as proof that gears 2 is the limit. i kind of agree with them, that ps3 games will eventually look better than 360 games. but then again, the 360 has about a 5-7 year life span while sony has made the ps3 to still be up to date after atleast 10 years.damedude123

wow you don't think gears 2 looks like an improvement LMFAO its a big difference compared to gear 1 and even if ps3 games do look better eventually the difference will hardly be noticable so face it the ps3 and 360 are even in power.

and damedude the first thing you said was "also some say that the 360 has reached its limit on what it can do graphically"

LOL do you honestly listen to the ps3 fanboys devs can find new ways to push systems and if people were unbiased they could see that both are even.

i think they both look very simliar.... all though i can't tell the diffrence between blueray and dvd, or HD and standard....

depends really on the game :O like gears 1&2 look very impresive, and games like uncharted or mgs4 also look awesome... but take a game like gta4 for both consoles and they look the same...

I own a 360 and a PS3, so you wont hear any fanboyish comments from me. Honestly both systems games look and perform close to identical. Any differences are usually minimal and equal to nitpicking. Its true that once developers become familiar with the PS3's Cell technology and the larger amount of data the Bluray holds, that the PS3 has more performance potential.

I know last generation, Gamcube and Xbox owners complained about mutli-plats because the PS2 was so much weaker, but the 360 and PS3 are much more evenly matched.

ThisCurse

I have both as well. All in all, I think they look the same. All that really depends on, however, is if one is hooked up to your hdtv with HD component cables and the other is on HDMI. Then you will see a slight difference.

and damedude the first thing you said was "also some say that the 360 has reached its limit on what it can do graphically"

LOL do you honestly listen to the ps3 fanboys devs can find new ways to push systems and if people were unbiased they could see that both are even.

TX360

ya, if developers are saying ther not pushing the ps3 to the limits, or havent even touched the surface of it... then why do games look the same on both systems?..

Even if what is being said is true, who cares a damn when the games on the 360 look and perform just as (and in some cases, perhaps more so) good as they do on the PS3...?

I have an Xbox 360, and hold no obligations against the PS3 coz I'll be purchasing a PS3 within 2 months time. All these things don't matter since the games are equally good.

Games aren't being dumbed down. It's simply a matter of illusion.

If Microsoft had've had the foresight to realise that Sony has won almost every format war it has entered it would've installed BluRay devices into 360s - but then again, maybe not, because Sony would intentionally charge through the teeth for licensing rights. Disc space wouldn't be an issue then.

As for raw power, the Cell processor touts 7-coprocessors under the controller, but in the series used in the PS3 the chip comes with one core deactivated for greater yield and another blocked for use in System Software. Straight away, PS3 fanboys are ignoring the fact that 6.4GHz of the Cell's design isn't actually available to the game being played. "That's still 6.4GHz more cycles than your **** little box" many a PS3 fanboy would cry, but the fact that the 360's three cores are all identical means that multithreading and other process distributions can be sent to and processed by the first available thread whereas the Cell has to fartarse around trying to prioritise orders, meaning more processing time is lost.
Other little idiosyncratic things mean that the PS3's "superior hardware" won't be any good to them for a good while still, but I couldn't be bothered continuing on.

There will eventually come a stage where PS3 devs will be able to outperform the 360 blindfolded because they learn to work around the Cell's strange architecture, but Xbox devs always seem to come through with tweaks that mean our gaming experience is never lesser than that of a PS3 fanboy's.

So no, 360 games aren't being "dumbed down" and, if I'm right, there will come a stage where games have to be "smartened up" to play on the 360.

Wow, long post.