ps3 sports games only 30 fps

i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.justifythegame

worser?

I bet you don't even know what FPS has to do with video games.

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.eclipsed4utoo

worser?

I bet you don't even know what FPS has to do with video games.

FRAMES PER SECOND genius. means that the ps3 version run SLOWERRR, is it clear enough for your now? do i have to type slower...? the 360 version will look better, run smoother faster and easier to notice subtle animations because it has m o r e f r a m e s p e r s e c o n d as the article put it. what did you think? that i heard some random word and posted it for no reason.

so yes of course its worse, anyone w/ common sense could recognize that.

Sound like EA is lazy and doesnt want to do decent ports to the PS3...mobius1979

all pro football 2k8 will run at 30 too so its 2k too not just EA

i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.justifythegame

You bought a PS3 for sport games? *raises hand to slap you*:|

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.sm66612

You bought a PS3 for sport games? *raises hand to slap you*:|

rofl! at leat now i have nba 08 to look sorta forward to...and heavy rain!

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.sm66612

You bought a PS3 for sport games? *raises hand to slap you*:|

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.sm66612

You bought a PS3 for sport games? *raises hand to slap you*:|

i bought s a ps3 for games period with $600. what, is it so much to ask that i can also play sports games as well as others, i did pay 600, it shouldn't be limited to anything.

[QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"]

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.justifythegame

worser?

I bet you don't even know what FPS has to do with video games.

FRAMES PER SECOND genius. means that the ps3 version run SLOWERRR, is it clear enough for your now? do i have to type slower...? the 360 version will look better, run smoother faster and easier to notice subtle animations because it has m o r e f r a m e s p e r s e c o n d as the article put it. what did you think? that i heard some random word and posted it for no reason.

so yes of course its worse, anyone w/ common sense could recognize that.

When i first read this, i have to admit i was up in Arms as well, VERY dissapointed.... After playing Madden 07 at 30 fps on the PS3, 30 fps didnt cut it... and IMO ruined the game.

I will give EA the benefit of the doubt and wait ..w/ my fingers crossed the 30fps doesnt let the game run like Madden 07 did.

I have pre ordered NCAA 08, Madden 08..when i heard they were at 60 fps, on a few articles,no where stating each system had different FPS........ If either are slow, i personally will not purchase another EA based sports franchise game.

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.sm66612

You bought a PS3 for sport games? *raises hand to slap you*:|

uhhhhh he bought a ps3 to play games....just in case you dont know, theres a genre called "SPORTS GAMES".

I blame lazy development teams. It seems most developers were lazy with the first wave of PS3 games. Rather than redoing the coding to work accordingly on the PS3 they just did straight ports. The 360 and PS3 are very different in terms of writing programming code for, so if you just do a straight port and don't rework your coding it won't run the same. Same thing would happen if they developed something on the PS3 first and then just ported it over. That's why I'm tired of people ripping on the PS3 with it's graphics. It's not Sony's fault, it's the fault of developers for doing a poor job porting.dbzfreak

Yah, i'd agree with this

I blame lazy development teams. It seems most developers were lazy with the first wave of PS3 games. Rather than redoing the coding to work accordingly on the PS3 they just did straight ports. The 360 and PS3 are very different in terms of writing programming code for, so if you just do a straight port and don't rework your coding it won't run the same. Same thing would happen if they developed something on the PS3 first and then just ported it over. That's why I'm tired of people ripping on the PS3 with it's graphics. It's not Sony's fault, it's the fault of developers for doing a poor job porting.dbzfreak

i do agree with you , but at the same time i do wish Sony would give some more support to these dev's, kinda like how MS host dev meetings to help Devs get more used to the hadware.

[QUOTE="dbzfreak"]I blame lazy development teams. It seems most developers were lazy with the first wave of PS3 games. Rather than redoing the coding to work accordingly on the PS3 they just did straight ports. The 360 and PS3 are very different in terms of writing programming code for, so if you just do a straight port and don't rework your coding it won't run the same. Same thing would happen if they developed something on the PS3 first and then just ported it over. That's why I'm tired of people ripping on the PS3 with it's graphics. It's not Sony's fault, it's the fault of developers for doing a poor job porting.bizzy420

i do agree with you , but at the same time i do wish Sony would give some more support to these dev's, kinda like how MS host dev meetings to help Devs get more used to the hadware.

[QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"]

[QUOTE="justifythegame"]i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.justifythegame

worser?

I bet you don't even know what FPS has to do with video games.

FRAMES PER SECOND genius. means that the ps3 version run SLOWERRR, is it clear enough for your now? do i have to type slower...? the 360 version will look better, run smoother faster and easier to notice subtle animations because it has m o r e f r a m e s p e r s e c o n d as the article put it. what did you think? that i heard some random word and posted it for no reason.

so yes of course its worse, anyone w/ common sense could recognize that.

you will not notice any difference if the PS3's version says above 24fps.

and how exactly will it "run slower"? does the disc spin slower? will the players run at half the speed?

Guys chill, we still on the first gen of games, as devs get beter at utilizing the ps3's power I am sure we will see an inrease in FPS on games .... Fingures crossed !! dont forget direct comparison games atm are being launched on a new system and an older one, there are bound to be some teathing problems in the ports .. like The hitchhikers guide to the galaxy says, don' panic !:)

Sports games are for casuals, and they're not going to care. This has no affect on me whatsoever.Timstuff

i am a sports gamer I am not a casual gamer and I do care.

have not bought madden in at least 5 years or have no desire to but I hope all the other sports titles from both companies dont follow suit.

No 360 sportgame run at 60 fps last year.
The developers have made games for the 360 longer than what they have done for the PS3, so I´m pretty sure that we will see 60 fps sportgames next year.

But I guess that TC is some genius that can make his own games so he have the rights to complain...

This was posted like crazy and argued about extensively in about 800 topics last week. It's old news.

I'm going to make my same points anyway though. 30fps and 60fps won't appear much different unless you are nitpicking for details IF the framerate stays solid. In the article EA clearly states that they went with 30fps for the ps3 version because it produced that best experience. Would you rather them claim it run at 60fps and but have it jumpy as hell because it couldn't handle it?

Also, this is EAs third crack at the Madden on the 360 (both older copies ran at 30) and its EAs first. People really just don't understand just how different Cell Programming is.

True, people believes that the Cell is the holy spirit that magically makes everything better.
Heck, it´s not even made with gaming in mind, it´s just great to calculate stuff. Like how the hair on a character will change in the wind, but that´s everything it does, calculating.Foppe_

What are you talking about? EVERYTHING about graphics is about calculation! You want a 3D image to spin? It's calculation. You want a image to appear semi-transparent? It's calculation!

Damn.. if you don't know anything about computer graphics, please don't comment on it.

Cell was designed with gaming in mind, nor was Xenon (or whatever the name for the core of xbox360).

Cell just has superior power in computation, which factors into graphics, AI and tons of other stuff.

Now, the realquestion is if that power will ever be harnessed by the developers, and when will it be harnessed?

My answer is roughly 3-5 years.

As far as frame rate is concerned, well it's EA we are talking about. A couple of months ago, EA's president openly critized Square Enix's FF13 for stiff animation. Guess what, I've never seen any EA games witha better animation. And with 30FPS, no wonder EA's animation sucks...

it is true that graphics needs calculations, but if that was everything it needed we would see PS3 games that chewed Xbox 360 games for breakfast since day one.
The Cell is overrated at the moment.Foppe_

how is it "overrated" at this moment? will it become not-overrated in the future?

it doesn't matter how powerful the CELL is. If the developers can't harness the power, it doesn't really matter. Does this mean the CELL is a bad or overhyped processor? no. If it was, then other companies wouldn't be looking into using it in calculation intensive applications.

it is true that graphics needs calculations, but if that was everything it needed we would see PS3 games that chewed Xbox 360 games for breakfast since day one.
The Cell is overrated at the moment.Foppe_

I agree with the Cell overated for video games so far. Nothing has been remotely shown that will make a difference between the 360 or the PS3, yes it is still early but to show it off like the holy grail and not having anything to show is pretty overated to me. I dont know how to program a game so to me it doesnt matter what is in their as long as the games look up to par with today.

Here is a better question for you.
How fast does the human eye read?

The answer? 24 FPS.
Now shush up.

Here is a better question for you.
How fast does the human eye read?

The answer? 24 FPS.
Now shush up.

SirisKurt

There is clearly a difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. 60 looks a lot smoother.

[QUOTE="SirisKurt"]

Here is a better question for you.
How fast does the human eye read?

The answer? 24 FPS.
Now shush up.

Deihmos

There is clearly a difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. 60 looks a lot smoother.

show me.

[QUOTE="Deihmos"][QUOTE="SirisKurt"]

Here is a better question for you.
How fast does the human eye read?

The answer? 24 FPS.
Now shush up.

eclipsed4utoo

There is clearly a difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. 60 looks a lot smoother.

show me.

If your remark, "show me," is directed towards the comment about 60 FPS looking smoother, just play a game online on a PC. You will notice that games like Day of Defeat or Battlefield 2 will look and "feel" a lot better with higher FPSs. A game running at 30 FPS isnt all that great. If there are any hicups, any slow downs what-so-ever, the game will come to a complete halt. You will see it and it will appear to slow down. You may think that your eyes cannot see the difference but when a game moving along at 60FPS hits the 30 FPS mark you see it...

If this game maintains a constant frame rate throughout then it wont be a problem. But I doubt it will stay at 30 FPS

[QUOTE="Foppe_"]it is true that graphics needs calculations, but if that was everything it needed we would see PS3 games that chewed Xbox 360 games for breakfast since day one.
The Cell is overrated at the moment.balindos

I agree with the Cell overated for video games so far. Nothing has been remotely shown that will make a difference between the 360 or the PS3, yes it is still early but to show it off like the holy grail and not having anything to show is pretty overated to me. I dont know how to program a game so to me it doesnt matter what is in their as long as the games look up to par with today.

I work for medical imaging company (a 3D imaging company to be precise), and CELL has proven itself on rendering 3D interactivemedical images.

Currently, to render the images from a 256 slice CT scanner requires a new generation of Nvidia Quadro graphics card, and Cell can competently match the image quality and speed of the Quadro graphics card.

So calculation and graphics rendering for Cell is of no problem. The problem is how to use that power in conjunction with the graphics card.

My fear is that by the time developers figured out how to harness that power say 3 years later, PS3 no longer matters in the gaming market. Personally, I follow where the FF and metal gear game go. If they continue to stay on PS lines, I keep buying the PS console.

Aren't EA and 2K the only companies really making 1080p games? If I recall, both companies have sports titles that run at 1080p. So I can forgive a few less frames of animation, since I probably would be too busy playing to notice. Especially if that's a constant 30fps (which is the standard fps for tv shows by the way - movies are only 24fps). It would suck if they tried to go for 60 FPS and in reality the game fluctuated between 60 and 30 because then you'd notice.Teyon

no. EA has never released a 1080p game. I can't remember if NBA 2K7 was 1080p or not.

For all that it is worth, @ a steady 60FPSI believe that theR.O.D. will plague the 360or atleast overheat them.

Or this article is a Microsoft drive forAmericans to buy a 360 instead, Considering that Madden or any Football game is a large selling point for consoles.

i just read an article, it was saying that games from ea and 2k run at 60 fps on 360 but only 30 fps on ps3. so let me get this straight, i spend 600 on a ps3 and the versions on ps3 are worser? man this blows.justifythegame

Big deal. I'd take a smooth 30FPS over an unstable 60FPS anyday.