Sony updates PS3 firmware for better 1080p playback

So who can think of something bad about this?

That question seems to be answered in every other Sony topic without being asked! And it's annoying!

lol

you completely ignored the fact that this update contains also:

CUSTOM BACKROUNDS
(something i wanted much)

I bought a PS3 on Wed and I must say I am impressed, with everyone saying so many bad things about it I did not expect too much! With HD content, media streaming from my PC, remote play via PSP and great looking games. Hook it up with digital optical audio, HDMI and watch the Transformers trailer, WoW! All within a few months of release. There is one MASSIVE mistake tho, no rumble/force feedback on joy pads... What's that about??! The update is grand and having your own wallpaper is a must customisation! :)

I think most people who are complaining about the PS3 are gamers that would actually want one but don't have the money to get it.
The steady flow of updates is good sign of continued support of Sony to the gamers community and wallpapers support was definitely something fans have been asking for.

Originally posted by kyo28:

---

I think most people who are complaining about the PS3 are gamers that would actually want one but don't have the money to get it.

---

Nah, I just spent my $600 on a 360 and Wii, that way I'll get to play all but the 2 exclusive PS3 titles that are out. ;-)

Originally posted by kyo28:

---

I think most people who are complaining about the PS3 are gamers that would actually want one but don't have the money to get it.

---

It's more like most people who are complaining about the PS3 are gamers who want one but won't buy because of the lack of games and are sick and tired of waiting for new releases which are always being delayed.

I traded my XBOX 360 in for a PS3 on Tuesday and I am extremely happy. Its becoming really exciting with the awesome lineup of games coming within the next few years.

i see they failed yet again to offer any backwards compatibility fixes which seems to be the norm now its not in the news!

I cant wait till I get one.

I have both systems (PS3 & Xbox360) and I must say, I play my 360 waaay more. All the stuff that Sony's implementing now are things that the 360 already does. Sony's playing, "follow the leader." The only games that look decent for the PS3 are Ninja Gaiden: Sigma & MotoStorm. Resistance looks like garbage when compared to Gears of War. I'd bought two PS3's trying to dump them on Ebay but was only able to sell one. As of now it's collecting dust. I'd bought the 60 Gb but as of now, Sony seems to be getting rid of it and replacing with the new 80 Gb version that doesn't support backwards compatability. Oh, and they're adding a new 120 Gb to compete with Microsofts Elite (again, playing follow the leader.) All the talk about Sony's Free online service. All I'm gonna say is, "you get what you pay for." Microsoft's LIVE is waaaay better. I invite all my friends to come over and play either system at my house which is hooked up via HDMI & DVI to my 50" Samsung 5th Generation HDTV complete with 700 watt Samsung surround sound and let them be the judge. For the $, Microsoft wins. For the games, Microsoft wins. For online, Microsoft wins. For movies, Sony wins. Anyone having a PS2 will like the PS3 'cause it's better than the PS2 by far. But if they'd open up and check out the 360, they'll love it! I personally know of 5 Sony lovers who broke down and got a 360 after coming to my house and comparing the two.

The updates only make the PS3 get better and better. I like when a company says "here let us make that already incredible machine even better for you".

If you consider the head start the 360 had the game lineup is not that impressive. That is unless you play nothing but RPG's.
Right now the thing that sucks is they are making games for the 360 and porting them to the PS3. Just wait until they make games for the PS3 that use the power the PS3 has to offer. The game could be so much better if the developers weren’t so lazy.

I also own both the 360 and the PS3 and if I have a choice I get the game for the PS3. I stay with a winner and a company that will admit it's mistakes. Took MS over 2 years to own up to the fail rate of the 360. Sony took blame for the lies they told and the shitty launch in less than 6 months. What Sony did was bad but at least they know it.

how is the BWC coming?

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

how is the BWC coming?

---

Couldn't tell ya. I’m too busy playing new games.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

how is the BWC coming?

---

Couldn't tell ya. I’m too busy playing new games.

---

and I bet you are happy with the whole 10 games on it :P

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

how is the BWC coming?

---

in the uk i can tell ya that backwards compatibility sucks, and that they are NOT issuing ps2 fixes anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

how is the BWC coming?

---

in the uk i can tell ya that backwards compatibility sucks, and that they are NOT issuing ps2 fixes anymore.

---

The 8oGB PS3s will be he same (no EE chip) so it will interesting to see what they do with BWC, I hope they are saving a big update till after they launch the 80GB units in the states,then patching the other chipless units will be easy..

The ps3's BWC emulation is fine. A ton of games are supported.
Check it out:


http://www.us.playstation.com/Support/CompatibleStatus

Originally posted by oofRome:

---

The ps3's BWC emulation is fine. A ton of games are supported.
Check it out:


http://www.us.playstation.com/Support/CompatibleStatus

---

these are to the chip'd units remove the chip and it falls 30% so see the UK support list for how the new BWC will be,while better than the 360 its hardly a added value when you have to go online to upgrade it to play your older games, coherent BWC it is not,coherent BWC is out of the box 80%+.

Perhaps they are going to double the efforts on BWC and get the new chipless units up within 5-10% of the chip'd unit.

Both sony and MS have lost sight of whats important Nin seems to get and its paying off for them.

Again i am glad to see they are continuing to make positive progress. All i will say is at least their progress is coming in the first year. Plus to those that keep pushing the graphics suck on the PS3 for the current games, when the holiday season hits and each system is dropping the their hottest title bomb then you will have a real reason to say who's games look like crap or who dont have what. Thats the real tell of the tape because i remember when the 360 didnt have nothing but 5 games that were good enough. This isnt a FANBOY statement is more of a real statement. Just give the credit when its due. If they waited 2 - 3 years to do anything then all the negative points would be points well taken.

Originally posted by spydah:

---

Again i am glad to see they are continuing to make positive progress. All i will say is at least their progress is coming in the first year. Plus to those that keep pushing the graphics suck on the PS3 for the current games, when the holiday season hits and each system is dropping the their hottest title bomb then you will have a real reason to say who's games look like crap or who dont have what. Thats the real tell of the tape because i remember when the 360 didnt have nothing but 5 games that were good enough. This isnt a FANBOY statement is more of a real statement. Just give the credit when its due. If they waited 2 - 3 years to do anything then all the negative points would be points well taken.

---

meh niches to niches the 360 has its stolen PC game niche the PS3 has some jp dev niche in the end it all works out to everyone havign a bit of everythign and you need the whole pie to enjoy it all.

Originally posted by djeazyg:

---

The updates only make the PS3 get better and better. I like when a company says "here let us make that already incredible machine even better for you".

If you consider the head start the 360 had the game lineup is not that impressive. That is unless you play nothing but RPG's.
Right now the thing that sucks is they are making games for the 360 and porting them to the PS3. Just wait until they make games for the PS3 that use the power the PS3 has to offer. The game could be so much better if the developers weren’t so lazy.

I also own both the 360 and the PS3 and if I have a choice I get the game for the PS3. I stay with a winner and a company that will admit it's mistakes. Took MS over 2 years to own up to the fail rate of the 360. Sony took blame for the lies they told and the shitty launch in less than 6 months. What Sony did was bad but at least they know it.

---

Hey, here's a good link to an article I found from a game developer. There are several developers on the internet to support this case. Here I've cut & paste from the article for yours and everyone's reading.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm

Being a video game developer (I develop for both, Playstation 3 and XBOX 360) people ask me almost daily which platform I think is better. These are my personal feelings, in no way does this reflect my employer.

Short answer: XBOX 360.

Long answer: Price, performance, visual quality, game selection and online support. I think the XBOX 360 wins in every category.

Price: This is obvious; the XBOX 360 core is only $299. The PS3 is around $499 for the 20GB version. It comes with a hard drive, but you don’t need a hard drive to enjoy a lot of great games on the 360 so I think it’s fair to compare both core systems.

Performance: On paper, the PS3 is more powerful. In reality, it’s quite inferior to the 360. Without getting into too many details, the three general-purpose CPU’s the xbox360 has are currently FAR easier to take advantage of than the SPU’s on the PS3. I suspect a few years down the road some high budget, first party PS3 exclusive titles will come out that really take advantage of the SPU’s and do things the XBOX 360 can’t, but I don’t think the console is worth buying based on this speculation (for some it will be though, we'll have to wait and see how these games turn out).

Graphics: The XBOX 360 is a clear winner. The GPU is more powerful. It has more powerful fillrate, and far more pixel and vertex processing horsepower. Part of the reason is their choice of memory, and architecture of pixel and vertex procesing. I can’t get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower on the PS3 than the XBOX 360. The 360 also has a clever new way rendering high definition anti aliased back buffers. To accomplish the same effect on PS3 is prohibitively expensive. For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality.

Game Selection: The XBOX 360 has a huge head start here. 1 year is an eternity in gaming. Almost all multi-platform developers have made the XBOX 360 their primary platform due to timing of release-to-market, this means the games will look and perform better on the 360. The PS3 versions will be ports of the 360 versions. (The opposite was true for XBOX 1 vs. PS2). The XBOX 360 is also far faster to develop for due to better development tools (massively popular Visual Studio .NET vs. proprietary, buggy PS3 compiler and debugger), better documentation, and easier architecture (3 general purpose CPU’s vs. 8 specialized processors that require DMA). Timing has also caused all next-gen middleware developers to make XBOX 360 their primary platform, and they will ‘add ps3 support’ as needed. This support will probably be inferior to the XBOX 360’s due to manpower and more importantly, demand. It’s this catch-22 now that will continue to drive the 360 forward and hold PS3 back.

Live: Microsoft’s online support with XBOX1 was phenomenal. They built in-house experience, user base, facilities, $$ commitment from executive level (since it proved successful), and most importantly, feedback from 100,000s of XBOX Live subscribers. Playstation 2’s online support sucked. They are now playing catch-up, trying to emulate Xbox’s model. But they had their hands tied just trying to make the PS3 work, it was incredibly ambitious (blu-ray etc.). I haven’t seen it yet, but I seriously doubt the quality will be anywhere to the level of XBOX 360.

HD Content: The PS3 comes with one built in (blu-ray). The XBOX 360 offers HD-DVD as an add-on for $200. You probably don’t care about HD-DVD right now. But you will soon (The quality between DVD and HD is comparable to VHS vs DVD, if you have the right TV) so I suggest paying attention to the war that’s begun. There are two formats: HD-DVD and BLU-RAY. Basically if you rent a BLU-RAY DVD from Bockbuster, it won’t play in your XBOX 360 HD-DVD, and vice versa with the PS3. The implications of this format war would require another article on its own. But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store. In 3 years standalone units wlil probably only cost about $99-150. Another point for the XBOX 360, is that I don’t know who will win the format-war, so I would rather wait with purchase of a HD player. The PS3 doesn’t give you this option.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by djeazyg:

---

The updates only make the PS3 get better and better. I like when a company says "here let us make that already incredible machine even better for you".

If you consider the head start the 360 had the game lineup is not that impressive. That is unless you play nothing but RPG's.
Right now the thing that sucks is they are making games for the 360 and porting them to the PS3. Just wait until they make games for the PS3 that use the power the PS3 has to offer. The game could be so much better if the developers weren’t so lazy.

I also own both the 360 and the PS3 and if I have a choice I get the game for the PS3. I stay with a winner and a company that will admit it's mistakes. Took MS over 2 years to own up to the fail rate of the 360. Sony took blame for the lies they told and the shitty launch in less than 6 months. What Sony did was bad but at least they know it.

---

Hey, here's a good link to an article I found from a game developer. There are several developers on the internet to support this case. Here I've cut & paste from the article for yours and everyone's reading.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-348-1.htm

Being a video game developer (I develop for both, Playstation 3 and XBOX 360) people ask me almost daily which platform I think is better. These are my personal feelings, in no way does this reflect my employer.

Short answer: XBOX 360.

Long answer: Price, performance, visual quality, game selection and online support. I think the XBOX 360 wins in every category.

Price: This is obvious; the XBOX 360 core is only $299. The PS3 is around $499 for the 20GB version. It comes with a hard drive, but you don’t need a hard drive to enjoy a lot of great games on the 360 so I think it’s fair to compare both core systems.

Performance: On paper, the PS3 is more powerful. In reality, it’s quite inferior to the 360. Without getting into too many details, the three general-purpose CPU’s the xbox360 has are currently FAR easier to take advantage of than the SPU’s on the PS3. I suspect a few years down the road some high budget, first party PS3 exclusive titles will come out that really take advantage of the SPU’s and do things the XBOX 360 can’t, but I don’t think the console is worth buying based on this speculation (for some it will be though, we'll have to wait and see how these games turn out).

Graphics: The XBOX 360 is a clear winner. The GPU is more powerful. It has more powerful fillrate, and far more pixel and vertex processing horsepower. Part of the reason is their choice of memory, and architecture of pixel and vertex procesing. I can’t get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower on the PS3 than the XBOX 360. The 360 also has a clever new way rendering high definition anti aliased back buffers. To accomplish the same effect on PS3 is prohibitively expensive. For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality.

Game Selection: The XBOX 360 has a huge head start here. 1 year is an eternity in gaming. Almost all multi-platform developers have made the XBOX 360 their primary platform due to timing of release-to-market, this means the games will look and perform better on the 360. The PS3 versions will be ports of the 360 versions. (The opposite was true for XBOX 1 vs. PS2). The XBOX 360 is also far faster to develop for due to better development tools (massively popular Visual Studio .NET vs. proprietary, buggy PS3 compiler and debugger), better documentation, and easier architecture (3 general purpose CPU’s vs. 8 specialized processors that require DMA). Timing has also caused all next-gen middleware developers to make XBOX 360 their primary platform, and they will ‘add ps3 support’ as needed. This support will probably be inferior to the XBOX 360’s due to manpower and more importantly, demand. It’s this catch-22 now that will continue to drive the 360 forward and hold PS3 back.

Live: Microsoft’s online support with XBOX1 was phenomenal. They built in-house experience, user base, facilities, $$ commitment from executive level (since it proved successful), and most importantly, feedback from 100,000s of XBOX Live subscribers. Playstation 2’s online support sucked. They are now playing catch-up, trying to emulate Xbox’s model. But they had their hands tied just trying to make the PS3 work, it was incredibly ambitious (blu-ray etc.). I haven’t seen it yet, but I seriously doubt the quality will be anywhere to the level of XBOX 360.

HD Content: The PS3 comes with one built in (blu-ray). The XBOX 360 offers HD-DVD as an add-on for $200. You probably don’t care about HD-DVD right now. But you will soon (The quality between DVD and HD is comparable to VHS vs DVD, if you have the right TV) so I suggest paying attention to the war that’s begun. There are two formats: HD-DVD and BLU-RAY. Basically if you rent a BLU-RAY DVD from Bockbuster, it won’t play in your XBOX 360 HD-DVD, and vice versa with the PS3. The implications of this format war would require another article on its own. But as far as the consoles are concerned, the XBOX 360 wins because the DVD player is a separate unit. Playing movies is very taxing on the DVD reader, and let’s face it. In 3 years when your PS3 DVD drive goes out due to playing lots of movies (PS2 was notoriously bad about this) you will have to go buy another PS3. With the 360, you’ll just chuck your HD-DVD player, and go buy another one at the store. In 3 years standalone units wlil probably only cost about $99-150. Another point for the XBOX 360, is that I don’t know who will win the format-war, so I would rather wait with purchase of a HD player. The PS3 doesn’t give you this option.

---

===========================================================
=====================================================
===========================
From the research I have done the PS3 and 360 are equal but do things a bit diffrently the PS3 dose Hdef spec and Physics better than the 360 the 360 has a better online system has a bit better bottle neck for graphics and the codeing itself will mature at a faster pace,basically the PS3 hardware wise started out above the 360 but the 360 had a year start and they have not made much head way from where they were with the Xbox in all they are still stuck in their niche.

The PS3 has the advantage because of brand power and Jp dev support most seem to dismiss this but tis crucial to understand why the PS3 will start gaining ground in a year or 2.

Dont get me wrong the 360 is a solid system however it "M.O." is a high end game niche based off stealing PC games, the PS3 will have the high end niche + the PS"X" dev/game franchises becuse of that in the long run the PS3 will gain ground over the 360.

The 360 could be seen as high end gaming for the masses the WII is simply gaming for the masses period I see the WII havign a solid 3 years run until the PS3 has a solid libary and sony is ready to drop under 200 of the WIIs price (currently;under 450).
its
1.WII
2.360
3.PS3
now
in 2-3 years it will be
1.WII
2.PS3
3.360
in 3-4 years or more the PS3 can out pace the WII,why? dev support the PS3 still has large large support from JP devs whoever has the most of them will be number 1,MS simply can not gain their support and the style of PC gaming they offer is a aquried taste.

kishan73....

Point taken. I confess that I don't know much about the technical stuff that goes into each system so I have to take your word for it. I do remember that a lot of the very same things were said about the PS2. Wouldn't last long, too expensive, a bitch to develop games for and how many times did the haters say the PS2 had reached its max especially after the first Xbox hit the stores. Look at the games still being pumped out for the PS2. They look Great.
I'm not saying you’re wrong, you seem to have your P's and Q's in order, I'm just saying that the PS2 made the tech guys sit up, take notice and say wow and I think after it is all said and done the PS3 will do the same(I hope anyway).

As for the PS3 playing catch-up with Xbox Live.... true, but I don't see this as a bad thing. They have the mistakes of MS to learn from. Sometimes if your sit in second place you can watch and learn from your competition. Don't make the same mistakes they made. You think maybe this is how MS got over on Sony in the first place? Learned from Sony's mistakes? Everybody wants to say Sony got a big head. Not really. They just had to do it first to find out that it wasn't going to work. MS said OK we won't do that and it's paying off.

Game selection.....Once again I'm not saying you’re wrong. The selection for the PS3 is weak but like I said the selection for the 360 after 2 years doesn't impress me. Maybe it's just my opinion but the exclusives they brag about for the 360 don't impress me either. Sony on the other hand has games I find to be more fun than an RPG. Just my opinion but Sony and the PS3 just seem to fit my style better. The 360 has some great titles as well and that why I bought one. Just not as many as the PS3. FOR ME. Plus a lot of the 360 games are also made for the PC as well so I just play on my PC.

Format war.... Your right in saying that it really don't matter to me. But just for S and G... Yes the PS2 had DVD playback issues but if I'm not mistaken the fail rate was still less than 30%. Here is another example of Sony learning from MS's mistakes. I'm sure that Sony won't let the customers down if the drives start to fail. If they don't fix the issue if it arises nobody will follow them to PS4 and that includes me. And I know a bunch of people that still use the PS2 for a DVD player and have never had a problem.
BlueRay means nothing for games right now but the potential is there if they figure out how to use it. Also, if BlueRay does win your ready for it. Even if BlueRay fails it don’t really mean nothing to me. If Sony was smart they would offer the 80 gig version as DVD and the 120 gig version as BlueRay. Make games on DVD and see what happens. To me this the only real mistake that Sony made with the PS3 that they haven’t owned up to yet. I like the BlueRay in there but some people don’t. Give people a choice. Add-ons are just clumsy and is usually nothing more than an afterthought that’s more of a pain in the ass than it’s worth. MS should have made the Elite version HD-DVD. People would still have a choice and it would have taken a bite out of Sony’s small, but noted lead in this war.
Also…. I have a Samsung 1080p 48” LCD. I know about HD and it looks fantastic compared to DVD, I just don’t watch enough TV to appreciate it. It is more for my kids and the wife. To me the PS3 is for games. The media thing (for me) is just fluff I don’t really need but it’s there if I change my mind.

This whole situation with each console is like a big game of poker. Whos gonna show their hand first whos gonna give away what their strategy and whos bluffing and whos not. We all can argue spec's all day long but its all gonna show in the end who did their homework and answered the call of the customer.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

how is the BWC coming?

---

in the uk i can tell ya that backwards compatibility sucks, and that they are NOT issuing ps2 fixes anymore.

---

The 8oGB PS3s will be he same (no EE chip) so it will interesting to see what they do with BWC, I hope they are saving a big update till after they launch the 80GB units in the states,then patching the other chipless units will be easy..

---

not sure about state side but in europe we have already been told that sony are putting resources into future titles and not backwards compatibility which is what has happened as we have not had any game fixes in the last couple of "updates"!

Originally posted by david reeves:

---

Rather than concentrate on PS2 backwards compatibility, in the future, company resources will be increasingly focused on developing new games and entertainment features exclusively for PS3, truly taking advantage of this exciting technology

---

quote taken from scee here: http://www.scee.presscentre.com/Content/...31&NewsAreaID=2

the link to the bc page is also on that link and when sony say a game is working, they mean it loads, not a single game ps2 i have tried has worked 100% with the likes of ff7, none of the fifa, madden, nhl, silent hill, onimusha, gran turismo 4 to name a few, being totally appalling as some are listed as "No known issues to date" which in my opinion means NOT TESTED!

Sounds Interesting. I may buy one by the end of next month the way im saving at the moment. So i may fiddle with what the Playsation 3 has to offer soon enough.

Opinions are like noses - everyone has one.

People - Buy the console YOU want to buy. Do some research and pick the one that's best for you. Each console, at the moment, has it's advantages and disadvantages. Think about it - these two companies (Sony & Microsoft) will be competing with one another for a very very long time. We (consumers) should be extremely happy they are competing with one another, because it brings us the latest and greatest technology to our tv screens. I have no complaints about either console. They are both great consoles bringing me exciting games to play. If anything about the consoles would decide which is better for ME... It would be the controllers. My hands hold a PS3 controller easier. It just feels more comfortable for ME. BTW - the PS3 controller is under production for rumble. Give 'em time people - christ - they just came out with the PS3 a few short months ago and already a major controversy is on stage.

the 360 has the graphical edge only in ported games. compare someof the coming ps3 exclusives with 360's. they are par if not better. many ported games are made and contured to the 360, then downgraded to make it playable on ps3 with little code changing. its called lazy developers, and sony should slap them.

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

the 360 has the graphical edge only in ported games. compare someof the coming ps3 exclusives with 360's. they are par if not better. many ported games are made and contured to the 360, then downgraded to make it playable on ps3 with little code changing. its called lazy developers, and sony should slap them.

---

Think about it? They're businesses in business to make money. Who wants to drive 20 miles for $5 when they can drive 5 miles for $5? Meaning, both systems are roughly equivilant BUT one takes two to three times as long to program for. I disagree that coding is DOWNGRADED to make playable on PS3. All systems utilize High Level programing. Difference is, Xbox360 has 3 general All purpose cores opposed to the PS3's 7 SPE cores. All of the SPE cores can't do the same thing. Each one has to be given a specific purpose, thus requiring more time for programing. It's not that the developers are lazy, they just wanna make more $ at a faster pace 'cause people like you and I want our games NOW, not tomorrow.

Originally posted by WhiteOwl:

---

Opinions are like noses - everyone has one.

People - Buy the console YOU want to buy. Do some research and pick the one that's best for you. Each console, at the moment, has it's advantages and disadvantages. Think about it - these two companies (Sony & Microsoft) will be competing with one another for a very very long time. We (consumers) should be extremely happy they are competing with one another, because it brings us the latest and greatest technology to our tv screens. I have no complaints about either console. They are both great consoles bringing me exciting games to play. If anything about the consoles would decide which is better for ME... It would be the controllers. My hands hold a PS3 controller easier. It just feels more comfortable for ME. BTW - the PS3 controller is under production for rumble. Give 'em time people - christ - they just came out with the PS3 a few short months ago and already a major controversy is on stage.

---

Hey bro, I can't agree with you more. It took Sony a lont time to finally pay Immersion their $. Sony figured no one would mind and that's 'cause they're not gamers (they're business men.) But rumble is on they way. They need to scrap the whole motion control thing. I move my hands during play already and all I need is to get excited while playing and move the controller and have my onscreen character backflip off a cliff (haha!)

Yes, the PS3 did come out a few short months ago but it's been in production for years AND Sony did ALL KINDS of bragging about how the PS3 is gonna end World Hunger, Cure cancer, and make the best ham sandwich. People are expecting them to live up to what they said and so far, they're coming up a little short. But hey, I have a PS3 so I've invested in them so I'm patiently waiting for them to perform. In the meanwhile, I'm gonna be playing Metal Gear Solid 4 on my Xbox360. And yes, I just read two days ago that Metal Gear Solid 4 is coming to Xbox360 shortly after the PS3 release. Sony said it was exclusive but they conviently left out that it's only for a month or so. Konomi wants to make $ and Microsoft has it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

the 360 has the graphical edge only in ported games. compare someof the coming ps3 exclusives with 360's. they are par if not better. many ported games are made and contured to the 360, then downgraded to make it playable on ps3 with little code changing. its called lazy developers, and sony should slap them.

---

Think about it? They're businesses in business to make money. Who wants to drive 20 miles for $5 when they can drive 5 miles for $5? Meaning, both systems are roughly equivilant BUT one takes two to three times as long to program for. I disagree that coding is DOWNGRADED to make playable on PS3. All systems utilize High Level programing. Difference is, Xbox360 has 3 general All purpose cores opposed to the PS3's 7 SPE cores. All of the SPE cores can't do the same thing. Each one has to be given a specific purpose, thus requiring more time for programing. It's not that the developers are lazy, they just wanna make more $ at a faster pace 'cause people like you and I want our games NOW, not tomorrow.

---

general purpose is not used much in gaming past ai, and even then so its not much better. the spe's kill physics and make water eyedpoppingly realistic at times. look at cod3 and thp8, those games were reduced to 1040x620 and 1040x576 respectively, and for the ps3 releases reduced graphically. dont even try telling me those games are the ultimate in graphics. madden looks like a downgrade on ps3, but ps3 load times pwn the 360 once in game. just wait for fall and winter and compare exclusives, not ports. its about money as you say, and if they can save money by not optimizing for the ported to system as well as should be, they save money and it ruins a consoles rep. the ps3 also does not take 2 to three x as long, most devs say its a little more but few have issues with anything. its a new generation and companies need to learn to stop taking the easy road and put out last gen games with better pics. where are the desdtructables? where is everything we should have?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

the 360 has the graphical edge only in ported games. compare someof the coming ps3 exclusives with 360's. they are par if not better. many ported games are made and contured to the 360, then downgraded to make it playable on ps3 with little code changing. its called lazy developers, and sony should slap them.

---

Think about it? They're businesses in business to make money. Who wants to drive 20 miles for $5 when they can drive 5 miles for $5? Meaning, both systems are roughly equivilant BUT one takes two to three times as long to program for. I disagree that coding is DOWNGRADED to make playable on PS3. All systems utilize High Level programing. Difference is, Xbox360 has 3 general All purpose cores opposed to the PS3's 7 SPE cores. All of the SPE cores can't do the same thing. Each one has to be given a specific purpose, thus requiring more time for programing. It's not that the developers are lazy, they just wanna make more $ at a faster pace 'cause people like you and I want our games NOW, not tomorrow.

---

general purpose is not used much in gaming past ai, and even then so its not much better. the spe's kill physics and make water eyedpoppingly realistic at times. look at cod3 and thp8, those games were reduced to 1040x620 and 1040x576 respectively, and for the ps3 releases reduced graphically. dont even try telling me those games are the ultimate in graphics. madden looks like a downgrade on ps3, but ps3 load times pwn the 360 once in game. just wait for fall and winter and compare exclusives, not ports. its about money as you say, and if they can save money by not optimizing for the ported to system as well as should be, they save money and it ruins a consoles rep. the ps3 also does not take 2 to three x as long, most devs say its a little more but few have issues with anything. its a new generation and companies need to learn to stop taking the easy road and put out last gen games with better pics. where are the desdtructables? where is everything we should have?

---

From what I understand, all games are created in 720p and then upscaled to 1080p (if possible). Games run slower (close to 30 fps) when run in 1080p. 720p is the sweetspot (60 fps). The PS3 is a very powerful machine, don't get me wrong, but without Developer Support, it's going nowhere. Developers and Publishers want $ and they all have deadlines. The deadlines are to short and they're pushin' the games out like processed hamburgers. The current Qtr Pounder w/cheese isn't what it used to be. So yeah, I want destructable environments, better A.I., better gameplay, and better graphics but I strongly believe that Sony is in a pickle right now. Nintendo's got everyone re-writing their playbooks. Microsoft has a landslide of games coming out (that look & play great) and Sony's shufflin' around firing Executives, introducing new hardware platforms (80g/120g) and shooting bells & whistles trying to get you/me/us to believe that their gold is shinier. Listen, the PC is always going to triumph over any gaming console. The PC can constantly be upgraded whereas gaming consoles are only as good as that particular moment that they're made. With that being said, PC games will always be ported down to either gaming console. Like I've mentioned before, I own both consoles and have them both pimped out to the max. For the money, for the games, and for the playability, my Xbox360 out manuevers my PS3.

If we really want to get the best then Sony would have to build it, and Microsoft would have to program the software for it and EPIC, UBISOFT, EA, and BLIZZARD would have to make the games for it. That, my friend, would be Nirvana/Utopia/Heaven.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kishan73:

---

general purpose is not used much in gaming past ai, and even then so its not much better. the spe's kill physics and make water eyedpoppingly realistic at times. look at cod3 and thp8, those games were reduced to 1040x620 and 1040x576 respectively, and for the ps3 releases reduced graphically. dont even try telling me those games are the ultimate in graphics. madden looks like a downgrade on ps3, but ps3 load times pwn the 360 once in game. just wait for fall and winter and compare exclusives, not ports. its about money as you say, and if they can save money by not optimizing for the ported to system as well as should be, they save money and it ruins a consoles rep. the ps3 also does not take 2 to three x as long, most devs say its a little more but few have issues with anything. its a new generation and companies need to learn to stop taking the easy road and put out last gen games with better pics. where are the desdtructables? where is everything we should have?

---

From what I understand, all games are created in 720p and then upscaled to 1080p (if possible). Games run slower (close to 30 fps) when run in 1080p. 720p is the sweetspot (60 fps). The PS3 is a very powerful machine, don't get me wrong, but without Developer Support, it's going nowhere. Developers and Publishers want $ and they all have deadlines. The deadlines are to short and they're pushin' the games out like processed hamburgers. The current Qtr Pounder w/cheese isn't what it used to be. So yeah, I want destructable environments, better A.I., better gameplay, and better graphics but I strongly believe that Sony is in a pickle right now. Nintendo's got everyone re-writing their playbooks. Microsoft has a landslide of games coming out (that look & play great) and Sony's shufflin' around firing Executives, introducing new hardware platforms (80g/120g) and shooting bells & whistles trying to get you/me/us to believe that their gold is shinier. Listen, the PC is always going to triumph over any gaming console. The PC can constantly be upgraded whereas gaming consoles are only as good as that particular moment that they're made. With that being said, PC games will always be ported down to either gaming console. Like I've mentioned before, I own both consoles and have them both pimped out to the max. For the money, for the games, and for the playability, my Xbox360 out manuevers my PS3.

If we really want to get the best then Sony would have to build it, and Microsoft would have to program the software for it and EPIC, UBISOFT, EA, and BLIZZARD would have to make the games for it. That, my friend, would be Nirvana/Utopia/Heaven.

---

----------------------------------------------------
Nirvana/Utopia/Heaven=PC :P
well if they would make the games for it it would be anyway LOL

The PS3 still has great potential but it seems to mostly a preview for what will come in gen 8,sony jumped the gun a bit to much and with the hardware and the high price comes to damage the brand,PS3 dose have power while its true power remains untaped its starting out above the 360 hardware wise however like the 360s limits the PS3 has a limit on graphic power but can do better physics out of the box compared to the 360,once they manage to optimize its power more the PS3 will be as good or better than most current PC gameing rigs but thats the catch when they get it optimized until then its still a force to be rekened with even with the 360's faster maturing optimizations the PS3 is at or above the 360s level of graphics(yes I know contradiction but look at the data look at the pics the style the some of the PS3 games uses is more smooth and colorful than the 360),sony should be able to wiggle out of the tight spot in a couple years and between price drops and a larger game libary it should reclaim most of what it has lost,altho I pretty much consign this 7th gen of gaming to the WII and MS must to its shagrain will be a 3rd wheel as long as their are 2 coherent Asian consoles on the market(the PS3 needs to be below 450 to be coherent).

MS is doing a good job with what it has I wish it would treat the PC more eaqully I am gettign tired of the steal PC game spew....


In the end both sony and MS are stuck in the high end game mud,Nintendo foresaw the coming fight and instead of trying to outpower them and lose money they undercut them added some needed spice in control design and have made enough profit to fund something as powerful as the PS3/360 but maybe twice the ramm their next go around and prehaps not wanting to waste money on the hot format of the day they will stick with DVD but use a HD or large flash drive to cahe data,altho with nin being cheap and smart they could use Hdvd but have it altered enough where its unreadable on normal drives (like the DC had) BTW whats DVDs theroricail limit? could nin make a 15GB DVD'esc disc and use that for their new system,is read only flash drives a option?
if you can make a 16-24GB read only flash card for under 25$ it might well be a option for nintendo,but then again in 3+ years Hdvd/BR will be cheaper

also, remember when the cell was supposed to be the 2-in-one solution for cpu and gpu. it wasnt good enought for both, nor was it too graphically impressive. but imagine when and if they hybrid both the cpu and gpu in the future when the middlewares to do so are developed so and company can take advantage.

my ps3 was the best choice of an investment to me. i love the os, the many demos and original downloadables, aswell as games and exclusives to come, excellent product work, even great customer support. the 360 kind of scares me with a 30-35% failure rate. a three year warrenty wont convince me to buy a product that, if it survives that long, will probably die soon after. plus the games are not all that great, there are just more of them due to time. plus only a minor percentage of the games push the graphics to a good point. i'll wait for a big price drop and 65nm dies, not to mention picking it up used with such restrictions.

----------------------------------------------------
Nirvana/Utopia/Heaven=PC :P
well if they would make the games for it it would be anyway LOL

The PS3 still has great potential but it seems to mostly a preview for what will come in gen 8,sony jumped the gun a bit to much and with the hardware and the high price comes to damage the brand,PS3 dose have power while its true power remains untaped its starting out above the 360 hardware wise however like the 360s limits the PS3 has a limit on graphic power but can do better physics out of the box compared to the 360,once they manage to optimize its power more the PS3 will be as good or better than most current PC gameing rigs but thats the catch when they get it optimized until then its still a force to be rekened with even with the 360's faster maturing optimizations the PS3 is at or above the 360s level of graphics(yes I know contradiction but look at the data look at the pics the style the some of the PS3 games uses is more smooth and colorful than the 360),sony should be able to wiggle out of the tight spot in a couple years and between price drops and a larger game libary it should reclaim most of what it has lost,altho I pretty much consign this 7th gen of gaming to the WII and MS must to its shagrain will be a 3rd wheel as long as their are 2 coherent Asian consoles on the market(the PS3 needs to be below 450 to be coherent).

MS is doing a good job with what it has I wish it would treat the PC more eaqully I am gettign tired of the steal PC game spew....


In the end both sony and MS are stuck in the high end game mud,Nintendo foresaw the coming fight and instead of trying to outpower them and lose money they undercut them added some needed spice in control design and have made enough profit to fund something as powerful as the PS3/360 but maybe twice the ramm their next go around and prehaps not wanting to waste money on the hot format of the day they will stick with DVD but use a HD or large flash drive to cahe data,altho with nin being cheap and smart they could use Hdvd but have it altered enough where its unreadable on normal drives (like the DC had) BTW whats DVDs theroricail limit? could nin make a 15GB DVD'esc disc and use that for their new system,is read only flash drives a option?
if you can make a 16-24GB read only flash card for under 25$ it might well be a option for nintendo,but then again in 3+ years Hdvd/BR will be cheaper

---

I enjoy reading about games. I also enjoy reading about technology. There's already new forms of media being created that surpasses HDDVD or Blu Ray. It stores terabytes of information. HDDVD/Blu-Ray could possibly phase out like the old laser discs that Sony tried to push on the public years ago. Even though both camps (Toshiba & Sony) make claims as they are winning the Hi-Def war, their $ numbers are horrible. Microsoft didn't want to jump in on an unproven technology and lose $. Sony created it, so they slapped it in there. They want to try and win on all fronts. They wanted everyone to jump on the Sony bandwagon and pay for Blu-Ray. Sony is also a movie company. If Blu-Ray gets accepted, Sony Corp. wins in a big way. They win on the PC side, the Major Motion Picture side, the Video Gaming side, and the Music side. Bottom line, Blu-Ray is too expensive. The money to be made by other partys envolved is minimal. Sure, Blockbuster just signed onto the Blu-Ray camp. Target did too. Walmart trumps Target anyday in regards to volume and only select Blockbusters are going to carry Blu-Ray and no one really has a Blu-Ray player other than the PS3.

Now, I may be getting a little off subject, but in the end. I see the Xbox360 has having a longer shelf life. Bill Gates could probably buy Sony with his own $ without help from his company (Microsoft). MS paid $50 mil for GTA4 exclusives and supposedly, they're getting MGS4 (it'll be slightly different; Konomi's making it but under different lead gaming director.) It'll come out shortly after MGS4 for PS3. I, personally, have ever played MGS series but apparently it means a lot to Sony to try and keep it so it must be a worthy game.

Oh, you meantioned something about the PS3 colors being smoother and more colorful? Are you on crack? You're probably correct about the PS3 handling physics better but the Xbox360's graphics card is waaaaay better than the PS3. Even games that support both consoles, the Xbox360 looks better, shading's better, details clearer, the whole nine yards. It's all over the internet. All kinds of gaming websites support it. IGN, GameSpot, GameTrailers, GameInformer,etc..

I had this one website, I can't find it, it's a technical website that deals with hardware and leading technology. It has forums attending by publishers, developers, programmers and coding specialist. It details about how the PS3's CPU/GPU is designed for calculations and how the Xbox360 was designed to be more incline with what works best for processing game code. It's a great article. I wish I could find it so I could send it to you. I sent it to a friend earlier this month but he no longer has the email.

All in all, I just want to be blown out of my seat. I wanna fall in love with gaming the way I did back when the Atari 2600 was the bomb! Back when the Commodore 64 set the standard. You may be too young to know about these things I speak but back then, if you had either item, you were the man!

Both units are cool. I just downloaded Heavenly Sword Demo for my PS3. It's ok. Doesn't look as good as Ninja Gaiden: Sigma though. Team Ninja are wizards at writing game code. They can program for anything. Itagi (lead game director for Team Ninja) prefers the Xbox360 but won't turn down a buck so he'll program for anyone and he'll make it look superb 'cause his reputation is on the line. Gears of War is great but now that every Publisher on the planet has licensed Epic's Unreal Engine 3 technology program, all games are gonna look alike. I wanna see something groundbreaking. Sure, Crysis (for PC) looks good, but who has $5,000 to buy a computer that can run it?

im tired of people saying sony and nintendo are stupid for being in the high end market. just because the masses are please with something else doesnt mean there are not millions wanting to be pleased with the high end. everyone needs a part, not one controlling what everyone should have. .

and post me to link where they prove the 360's gpu better past shading. pipes arnt everything fyi. i'm sure i'd find just as many saying the ps3's is better. everyone claims credibility. i dont know where you come of seeing the 360 with better graphics, the colors sure are not as deep and sharp, not to mention backgrounds on the ps3 kill the 360. faces are on par, but thats all devs. it's all based around what the devs can do and how well they know what their doing. if you creat a game where the models and levels are 1.5x or 2x larger than normal and zoom out the cam, you can make the graphics appear to increase dramatically.

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

im tired of people saying sony and nintendo are stupid for being in the high end market. just because the masses are please with something else doesnt mean there are not millions wanting to be pleased with the high end. everyone needs a part, not one controlling what everyone should have. .

and post me to link where they prove the 360's gpu better past shading. pipes arnt everything fyi. i'm sure i'd find just as many saying the ps3's is better. everyone claims credibility. i dont know where you come of seeing the 360 with better graphics, the colors sure are not as deep and sharp, not to mention backgrounds on the ps3 kill the 360. faces are on par, but thats all devs. it's all based around what the devs can do and how well they know what their doing. if you creat a game where the models and levels are 1.5x or 2x larger than normal and zoom out the cam, you can make the graphics appear to increase dramatically.

---

MS and SONY,nintendo took the low road and wound up doing better than ever, MS and Sony took the costly path same as the last gen or 2 MS cant get out of tis niche and Sony has bitten off more than it can chew.
With the new games on the 360 you are seeing first gen PS3 style graphics so again graphics are not the end all for it plus the PS3 has lower bottle necks,but so far what the PS3 has shown is good even if the games are lacking the price is iffy at best the BWC is waffling sony still has a lot of work to do to make the PS3 a success.

bah I cant find my links, I had a couple goign over the PS3 and the 360,going over the data rates and such basically it boils down to the 360 being better at graphic data handling(yes extra pipes mean more data but ti was more than that had something to do with the bottle necks of the systems them selfs and that the 360 could handle data better because it did not have so many things shearing copoantants) and the PS3 being better at physics,in a year or 2 the PS3 should hit its first optimizations that will hopefully push it past or on the same level of what a good PC game rig can do.

the best way I can think of the PS3 and 360 the 360 starts out lower but can evolve faster the PS3 starts out higher but evolves slower the final main diffrances being one will be centered on Jp devs (stale mainstream RPGs)the other with have US/UK PC style game devs(stale mainstream shooters) ZOMG zippy is a bitter furry :P

Home will be the Xbox Live killer.

PS3 already has 4-5 games that won't and can;t be made for the XBox 360 due to it not being able to do the pyhics for the games.

MGS4 won't come to the Xbox360 as the Main guy behind it isn't making anymore MGS games and has said that MGS4 couldn't be made to work on the Xbox360 either.

I couldn't see anyone else being able to come up with more MGS games as they'll probably be dissed to the max.

As per the dev person I wouldn't fuss about because if he really had a PS3 he'd know the PS3 doesn't do SD at all only HD and the main res is 1080P the only PS3 games that do 720P were the first line up games.

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Home will be the Xbox Live killer.

PS3 already has 4-5 games that won't and can;t be made for the XBox 360 due to it not being able to do the pyhics for the games.

MGS4 won't come to the Xbox360 as the Main guy behind it isn't making anymore MGS games and has said that MGS4 couldn't be made to work on the Xbox360 either.

I couldn't see anyone else being able to come up with more MGS games as they'll probably be dissed to the max.

As per the dev person I wouldn't fuss about because if he really had a PS3 he'd know the PS3 doesn't do SD at all only HD and the main res is 1080P the only PS3 games that do 720P were the first line up games.

---

Actually Kojima has stated otherwise that the 360 can handle MGS now,the PS3 has only a small bit of physics power the 360 dose not have hardly enough to make it impossible to make for it, don't kid yourself with the bottle necks of each system they both are equals the PS3 games do tend to use HDR/Bloom to smooth and brighten games on the fly but sometimes its more a blruy visual soup all in all the only R E A L thing the PS3 has is BR and PSH and neither will help them much.

the industry is set in a DVD9 with nin being in a DVD5 thus most games can easily be put ion 2 or 3 discs sicne BR games use 10-18GB of filler to help speed issues of the BR.

PSH is cute but mostly a marketing scheme, gamers who only care about games will dismiss it as fluff,if I had a choice between a simple menu system and a extravagant virtual world setting I'll take the menu thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Home will be the Xbox Live killer.

PS3 already has 4-5 games that won't and can;t be made for the XBox 360 due to it not being able to do the pyhics for the games.

MGS4 won't come to the Xbox360 as the Main guy behind it isn't making anymore MGS games and has said that MGS4 couldn't be made to work on the Xbox360 either.

I couldn't see anyone else being able to come up with more MGS games as they'll probably be dissed to the max.

As per the dev person I wouldn't fuss about because if he really had a PS3 he'd know the PS3 doesn't do SD at all only HD and the main res is 1080P the only PS3 games that do 720P were the first line up games.

---

Actually Kojima has stated otherwise that the 360 can handle MGS now,the PS3 has only a small bit of physics power the 360 dose not have hardly enough to make it impossible to make for it, don't kid yourself with the bottle necks of each system they both are equals the PS3 games do tend to use HDR/Bloom to smooth and brighten games on the fly but sometimes its more a blruy visual soup all in all the only R E A L thing the PS3 has is BR and PSH and neither will help them much.

the industry is set in a DVD9 with nin being in a DVD5 thus most games can easily be put ion 2 or 3 discs sicne BR games use 10-18GB of filler to help speed issues of the BR.

PSH is cute but mostly a marketing scheme, gamers who only care about games will dismiss it as fluff,if I had a choice between a simple menu system and a extravagant virtual world setting I'll take the menu thank you.

---

Don't tell me your that short sighted. I wouldn't say you would take the menu over the "extravagant virtual world" until you see and/or use it. It’ll be a lot more than just a menu and I'm sure if it annoys people too much there will be a way to turn it off. I agree that Sony still needs to prove its self with HOME but don't knock it till you try it.

And to answer your comment to me from before......I'm only enjoying about 5 of the 10 of the new games on PS3. I'm also only enjoying about 5 out of the 1000 games on the 360. Quality over quantity almost always wins.

Lol... the Playstation has always been about quantity over quality. They're just having a harder time with that now because of what the development costs are for the ps3. Which is generally why the games that are not system exclusive have looked better on 360. It's easier to make a multiplatform game look good on it. Oblivion was an exception but they had an extra year and a half to work on that version over the 360. Kind of the same with Ninja Gaiden. Great game... it's awesome... but at the same time it's a game that already had all the pre-development done from a previous system, and they spent most of the time streamlining. It's the same though for Virtua Fighter on the 360. That version looks better than the ps3 and has extra features because they had more time to work on it. In the end, given time and money, you could get the same game to not look or play any better on one system over the other. At this point the system power is having less and less to do with the quality of games... plus MS is probably gonna have another system out in 2-3 more years and with Sony not planning another... in the end I don't think it'll matter... getting closer to reaching hardware limitations that not too far in the future graphics quality will no longer be a difference between systems.

Also, I'm not biased towards any system... I play what's fun... and to say that only 5 of the 360 games are any good is just being fanboyish. There's good stuff out for each system though Sony still has some development bugs to work out and MS has their hardware issues(which are finally smoothing out).

Nintendo needs to release a few more high profile titles... most of the people I know only have WiiSports, Zelda, and maybe 1 or 2 other titles (not including virtual console downloads). But with the accessibility and price point, that's enough for Nintendo to sell tons of systems.

360 has had some bad releases recently as well but that's always how it seems to be around e3 for every company. There's a lot that's coming out in the next 2-4 months that's probably gonna have me spending more money on games than I did for the last year total. They like to show off the game and get a reaction before finally releasing it if it has big money potential.

Sony's biggest problem still comes down to dev support. Yeah they have the backing of some good JP brands... but they lost the exclusivity or totally lost a developer compared to ps2 when the devs first got their hands on the kits when they first came out. They really haven't been improved upon much and in the end it still costs way more to make a low profile 3rd party title on the ps3 than it does to make most of the mid to high profile games on the other systems.

In the end it still comes down to that more than half the games on any system are always going to be crap :) I'd hold off any judgment or final prediction on any company until after seeing what the holiday sales this year will be like since it's the first true year of competition between all 3 being on close to equal establishment and ground.

Originally posted by DragonRM:

---

Lol... the Playstation has always been about quantity over quality. They're just having a harder time with that now because of what the development costs are for the ps3. Which is generally why the games that are not system exclusive have looked better on 360. It's easier to make a multiplatform game look good on it. Oblivion was an exception but they had an extra year and a half to work on that version over the 360. Kind of the same with Ninja Gaiden. Great game... it's awesome... but at the same time it's a game that already had all the pre-development done from a previous system, and they spent most of the time streamlining. It's the same though for Virtua Fighter on the 360. That version looks better than the ps3 and has extra features because they had more time to work on it. In the end, given time and money, you could get the same game to not look or play any better on one system over the other. At this point the system power is having less and less to do with the quality of games... plus MS is probably gonna have another system out in 2-3 more years and with Sony not planning another... in the end I don't think it'll matter... getting closer to reaching hardware limitations that not too far in the future graphics quality will no longer be a difference between systems.

Also, I'm not biased towards any system... I play what's fun... and to say that only 5 of the 360 games are any good is just being fanboyish. There's good stuff out for each system though Sony still has some development bugs to work out and MS has their hardware issues(which are finally smoothing out).

Nintendo needs to release a few more high profile titles... most of the people I know only have WiiSports, Zelda, and maybe 1 or 2 other titles (not including virtual console downloads). But with the accessibility and price point, that's enough for Nintendo to sell tons of systems.

360 has had some bad releases recently as well but that's always how it seems to be around e3 for every company. There's a lot that's coming out in the next 2-4 months that's probably gonna have me spending more money on games than I did for the last year total. They like to show off the game and get a reaction before finally releasing it if it has big money potential.

Sony's biggest problem still comes down to dev support. Yeah they have the backing of some good JP brands... but they lost the exclusivity or totally lost a developer compared to ps2 when the devs first got their hands on the kits when they first came out. They really haven't been improved upon much and in the end it still costs way more to make a low profile 3rd party title on the ps3 than it does to make most of the mid to high profile games on the other systems.

In the end it still comes down to that more than half the games on any system are always going to be crap :) I'd hold off any judgment or final prediction on any company until after seeing what the holiday sales this year will be like since it's the first true year of competition between all 3 being on close to equal establishment and ground.

---

Nice! I believe the next comment from the other guy should read, "touche!"

Originally posted by DragonRM:

---

Lol... the Playstation has always been about quantity over quality. They're just having a harder time with that now because of what the development costs are for the ps3. Which is generally why the games that are not system exclusive have looked better on 360. It's easier to make a multiplatform game look good on it. Oblivion was an exception but they had an extra year and a half to work on that version over the 360. Kind of the same with Ninja Gaiden. Great game... it's awesome... but at the same time it's a game that already had all the pre-development done from a previous system, and they spent most of the time streamlining. It's the same though for Virtua Fighter on the 360. That version looks better than the ps3 and has extra features because they had more time to work on it. In the end, given time and money, you could get the same game to not look or play any better on one system over the other. At this point the system power is having less and less to do with the quality of games... plus MS is probably gonna have another system out in 2-3 more years and with Sony not planning another... in the end I don't think it'll matter... getting closer to reaching hardware limitations that not too far in the future graphics quality will no longer be a difference between systems.

Also, I'm not biased towards any system... I play what's fun... and to say that only 5 of the 360 games are any good is just being fanboyish. There's good stuff out for each system though Sony still has some development bugs to work out and MS has their hardware issues(which are finally smoothing out).

Nintendo needs to release a few more high profile titles... most of the people I know only have WiiSports, Zelda, and maybe 1 or 2 other titles (not including virtual console downloads). But with the accessibility and price point, that's enough for Nintendo to sell tons of systems.

360 has had some bad releases recently as well but that's always how it seems to be around e3 for every company. There's a lot that's coming out in the next 2-4 months that's probably gonna have me spending more money on games than I did for the last year total. They like to show off the game and get a reaction before finally releasing it if it has big money potential.

Sony's biggest problem still comes down to dev support. Yeah they have the backing of some good JP brands... but they lost the exclusivity or totally lost a developer compared to ps2 when the devs first got their hands on the kits when they first came out. They really haven't been improved upon much and in the end it still costs way more to make a low profile 3rd party title on the ps3 than it does to make most of the mid to high profile games on the other systems.

In the end it still comes down to that more than half the games on any system are always going to be crap :) I'd hold off any judgment or final prediction on any company until after seeing what the holiday sales this year will be like since it's the first true year of competition between all 3 being on close to equal establishment and ground.

---

There's that word again......

Nothing Fanboy about it. I own both systems and enjoy both. I was being sarcastic when I said 5 games. There are more than 10 games for the PS3 so I was going with the sarcastic flow of things.
There aren't many games, in my opinion, that are worth playing on the 360. If you take in the fact that I don't like RPG's. Any other games I can get for the PS3. The games that are worth playing on the 360 are what made me buy it. But since then I've been really disappointed.

Quote:

---

Nice! I believe the next comment from the other guy should read, "touche!"

---

Ummmm..... Why? He didn't say anything that hasn't been said before. My opinion Vs. His. Big deal.

djeazyg
PSH is a virtual world drowned in marketing it will have its merits but for the most part is virtual life hanging with friends and buying stuff.

Quote:

---

Actually Kojima has stated otherwise that the 360 can handle MGS now,the PS3 has only a small bit of physics power the 360 dose not have hardly enough to make it impossible to make for it, don't kid yourself with the bottle necks of each system they both are equals the PS3 games do tend to use HDR/Bloom to smooth and brighten games on the fly but sometimes its more a blruy visual soup all in all the only R E A L thing the PS3 has is BR and PSH and neither will help them much.

the industry is set in a DVD9 with nin being in a DVD5 thus most games can easily be put ion 2 or 3 discs sicne BR games use 10-18GB of filler to help speed issues of the BR.

PSH is cute but mostly a marketing scheme, gamers who only care about games will dismiss it as fluff,if I had a choice between a simple menu system and a extravagant virtual world setting I'll take the menu thank you.

---

Lol, and where has Kojima said this, at E3 he has said MGS4 is PS3 only and it was his last MGS game, the same has been said at the 20th year party for MGS I think MGS online might be on 360 though, but not MGS4.

He has 3 MGS games coming out, MGS4, online, and one for the DS but it isn't MGS4.

Your telling me the PS3 with 8 CPUs can't compute physics yet on the Folding@home service 1 PS3 is has the same computing power as 200 PCs put together, and the 360 with it'll 3 general CPU's is better?

I'll let you know something Samford isn't releasing Folding@Home on the 360 due to it's poor processing power compared to the PS3, that isn't a game a packet of data for the PS3 has a time limit of 2 days the PS3 processes data faster than a GPU can as most times it does a packet in about 8 to 12 hours.

In terms of games there's around 5-6 games that can't be released on the 360 due to it's poor physics processing power, in other words these games can only be released on the PS3.

PS3 also has 1080P (FullHD) and now does 174khrz audio processing with audio upscaling for music CDs, these 2 options open up the PS3 to the high end HD player side if your wanting these in a HD video/audio player.

Home will be a major thing as it'll open up the system to different user markets, the people who want to have a way of showing things to family members from all over the world.

Beside the 3d aspect Home does have a menu system the PSP and Sony mobile phones and the Home website make no use of the PS3's 3D view of Home they all use a menu system so it has the 2 systems 3D walk around view and the menu system.

The Home website uses a blog or myspace type system to show pictures videos movies and music to people who don't use Home but still want to see things from with-in the Home network.

DVDs are for the 360, the current crop of PS3 games are mainly over the size of a DL DVD disk, they are between 8 to 12 gig the next crop are around the 25gig for lair and little big planet
MGS4 is 30gig, so it's larger than a HD-DVD disk.

So even if MGS4 was to come to the 360 you'd be looking at 2 HD-DVD disks or 4 DL DVD disks and Kojima has said MGS4 isn't a swap disk game.

There's no regions for PS3 games.

BR drive would be reading around the 12meg or more mark even at 2x spin, there's a news story about the 2x BR drives read faster than 7200rpm HDDs.

You really need to stop comparing the PS3 to the 360 the 360 is simply a upgraded PC wraped in plastic that causes it to over heat and break down, where as the PS3 was designed to deal with the problems of disk sizes and typical processing problems after a few years.

The 360 would most likly be hitting it's peak now, and be sliding down the other side basicly 2 years after it was released.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Actually Kojima has stated otherwise that the 360 can handle MGS now,the PS3 has only a small bit of physics power the 360 dose not have hardly enough to make it impossible to make for it, don't kid yourself with the bottle necks of each system they both are equals the PS3 games do tend to use HDR/Bloom to smooth and brighten games on the fly but sometimes its more a blruy visual soup all in all the only R E A L thing the PS3 has is BR and PSH and neither will help them much.

the industry is set in a DVD9 with nin being in a DVD5 thus most games can easily be put ion 2 or 3 discs sicne BR games use 10-18GB of filler to help speed issues of the BR.

PSH is cute but mostly a marketing scheme, gamers who only care about games will dismiss it as fluff,if I had a choice between a simple menu system and a extravagant virtual world setting I'll take the menu thank you.

---

Lol, and where has Kojima said this, at E3 he has said MGS4 is PS3 only and it was his last MGS game, the same has been said at the 20th year party for MGS I think MGS online might be on 360 though, but not MGS4.

He has 3 MGS games coming out, MGS4, online, and one for the DS but it isn't MGS4.

Your telling me the PS3 with 8 CPUs can't compute physics yet on the Folding@home service 1 PS3 is has the same computing power as 200 PCs put together, and the 360 with it'll 3 general CPU's is better?

I'll let you know something Samford isn't releasing Folding@Home on the 360 due to it's poor processing power compared to the PS3, that isn't a game a packet of data for the PS3 has a time limit of 2 days the PS3 processes data faster than a GPU can as most times it does a packet in about 8 to 12 hours.

In terms of games there's around 5-6 games that can't be released on the 360 due to it's poor physics processing power, in other words these games can only be released on the PS3.

PS3 also has 1080P (FullHD) and now does 174khrz audio processing with audio upscaling for music CDs, these 2 options open up the PS3 to the high end HD player side if your wanting these in a HD video/audio player.

Home will be a major thing as it'll open up the system to different user markets, the people who want to have a way of showing things to family members from all over the world.

Beside the 3d aspect Home does have a menu system the PSP and Sony mobile phones and the Home website make no use of the PS3's 3D view of Home they all use a menu system so it has the 2 systems 3D walk around view and the menu system.

The Home website uses a blog or myspace type system to show pictures videos movies and music to people who don't use Home but still want to see things from with-in the Home network.

DVDs are for the 360, the current crop of PS3 games are mainly over the size of a DL DVD disk, they are between 8 to 12 gig the next crop are around the 25gig for lair and little big planet
MGS4 is 30gig, so it's larger than a HD-DVD disk.

So even if MGS4 was to come to the 360 you'd be looking at 2 HD-DVD disks or 4 DL DVD disks and Kojima has said MGS4 isn't a swap disk game.

There's no regions for PS3 games.

BR drive would be reading around the 12meg or more mark even at 2x spin, there's a news story about the 2x BR drives read faster than 7200rpm HDDs.

You really need to stop comparing the PS3 to the 360 the 360 is simply a upgraded PC wraped in plastic that causes it to over heat and break down, where as the PS3 was designed to deal with the problems of disk sizes and typical processing problems after a few years.

The 360 would most likly be hitting it's peak now, and be sliding down the other side basicly 2 years after it was released.

---

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/676/676685p1.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2005/11/16/kojima...n-the-xbox-360/

BTW the coding advancement on the 360 is outpacing the current level of power on the PS3 and coding advancement for the PS3 because of its hellish architecture,sure hardware wise its a few rungs up on the ladder but the 360 has managed to stay just one under it.

but limitation are exactly that. and the 360 is reaching alot of theirs pretty quickly, or relatively soon. not to mention its one year head start, no wonder they know it a little better. but sony is pushing hard on the middleware and support so that these devs can suck it up and quit whining about learning something new.

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

but limitation are exactly that. and the 360 is reaching alot of theirs pretty quickly, or relatively soon. not to mention its one year head start, no wonder they know it a little better. but sony is pushing hard on the middleware and support so that these devs can suck it up and quit whining about learning something new.

---

But thats the problem the industry is not adapting multi core/multi architecture like it should,thats why the 360 will be getting some of the best advancements while the PS3 will faced with a uphill battle even if its its started out higher.

The PS3 is going to have a hell of a time in the short run after 2 or 3 years it should be doing well but until price stays below 500 and the libary expands more the PS3 will be a niche of high end JP games, with the 360 will remain a niche of medium high end PC style games.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Actually Kojima has stated otherwise that the 360 can handle MGS now,the PS3 has only a small bit of physics power the 360 dose not have hardly enough to make it impossible to make for it, don't kid yourself with the bottle necks of each system they both are equals the PS3 games do tend to use HDR/Bloom to smooth and brighten games on the fly but sometimes its more a blruy visual soup all in all the only R E A L thing the PS3 has is BR and PSH and neither will help them much.

the industry is set in a DVD9 with nin being in a DVD5 thus most games can easily be put ion 2 or 3 discs sicne BR games use 10-18GB of filler to help speed issues of the BR.

PSH is cute but mostly a marketing scheme, gamers who only care about games will dismiss it as fluff,if I had a choice between a simple menu system and a extravagant virtual world setting I'll take the menu thank you.

---

Lol, and where has Kojima said this, at E3 he has said MGS4 is PS3 only and it was his last MGS game, the same has been said at the 20th year party for MGS I think MGS online might be on 360 though, but not MGS4.

He has 3 MGS games coming out, MGS4, online, and one for the DS but it isn't MGS4.

Your telling me the PS3 with 8 CPUs can't compute physics yet on the Folding@home service 1 PS3 is has the same computing power as 200 PCs put together, and the 360 with it'll 3 general CPU's is better?

I'll let you know something Samford isn't releasing Folding@Home on the 360 due to it's poor processing power compared to the PS3, that isn't a game a packet of data for the PS3 has a time limit of 2 days the PS3 processes data faster than a GPU can as most times it does a packet in about 8 to 12 hours.

In terms of games there's around 5-6 games that can't be released on the 360 due to it's poor physics processing power, in other words these games can only be released on the PS3.

PS3 also has 1080P (FullHD) and now does 174khrz audio processing with audio upscaling for music CDs, these 2 options open up the PS3 to the high end HD player side if your wanting these in a HD video/audio player.

Home will be a major thing as it'll open up the system to different user markets, the people who want to have a way of showing things to family members from all over the world.

Beside the 3d aspect Home does have a menu system the PSP and Sony mobile phones and the Home website make no use of the PS3's 3D view of Home they all use a menu system so it has the 2 systems 3D walk around view and the menu system.

The Home website uses a blog or myspace type system to show pictures videos movies and music to people who don't use Home but still want to see things from with-in the Home network.

DVDs are for the 360, the current crop of PS3 games are mainly over the size of a DL DVD disk, they are between 8 to 12 gig the next crop are around the 25gig for lair and little big planet
MGS4 is 30gig, so it's larger than a HD-DVD disk.

So even if MGS4 was to come to the 360 you'd be looking at 2 HD-DVD disks or 4 DL DVD disks and Kojima has said MGS4 isn't a swap disk game.

There's no regions for PS3 games.

BR drive would be reading around the 12meg or more mark even at 2x spin, there's a news story about the 2x BR drives read faster than 7200rpm HDDs.

You really need to stop comparing the PS3 to the 360 the 360 is simply a upgraded PC wraped in plastic that causes it to over heat and break down, where as the PS3 was designed to deal with the problems of disk sizes and typical processing problems after a few years.

The 360 would most likly be hitting it's peak now, and be sliding down the other side basicly 2 years after it was released.

---

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/676/676685p1.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2005/11/16/kojima...n-the-xbox-360/

BTW the coding advancement on the 360 is outpacing the current level of power on the PS3 and coding advancement for the PS3 because of its hellish architecture,sure hardware wise its a few rungs up on the ladder but the 360 has managed to stay just one under it.

---

This is to Zippy & the rest of all Sony FanBoys,

I'm going to cut & paste information from a "computer/IT website" and then I'm going to provide the link so that you, and other readers, can read it for youselves.

"CPU
The Xbox 360 processor was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. The Cell processor has impressive streaming floating-point power that is of limited use for games.

The majority of game code is a mixture of integer, floating-point, and vector math, with lots of branches and random memory accesses. This code is best handled by a general purpose CPU with a cache, branch predictor, and vector unit.

The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming.

Xbox 360 has three general purpose CPU cores. The Cell processor has only one.

Xbox 360's CPUs has vector processing power on each CPU core. Each Xbox 360 core has 128 vector registers per hardware thread, with a dot product instruction, and a shared 1-MB L2 cache. The Cell processor's vector processing power is mostly on the seven DSPs.

Dot products are critical to games because they are used in 3D math to calculate vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. The Xbox 360 CPU has a dot product instruction, where other CPUs such as Cell must emulate dot product using multiple instructions.

Cell's streaming floating-point work is done on its seven DSP processors. Since geometry processing is moved to the GPU, the need for streaming floating-point work and other DSP style programming in games has dropped dramatically.

Just like with the PS2's Emotion Engine, with its missing L2 cache, the Cell is designed for a type of game programming that accounts for a minor percentage of processing time.

Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements. A relatively small percentage of instructions are actually floating point. Of those instructions which are floating-point, very few involve processing continuous streams of numbers. Instead they are used in tasks like AI and path-finding, which require random access to memory and frequent branches, which the DSPs are ill-suited to.

Based on measurements of running next generation games, only ~10-30% of the instructions executed are floating point. The remainders of the instructions are load, store, integer, branch, etc. Even fewer of the instructions executed are streaming floating point—probably ~5-10%. Cell is optimized for streaming floating-point, with 87.5% of its cores good for streaming floating-point and nothing else.

Game programmers do not want to spread their code over eight processors, especially when seven of the processors are poorly suited for general purpose programming. Evenly distributing game code across eight processors is extremely difficult.

GPU
Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU.

The 51 billions dot products per cycle were listed on a summary slide of total graphics system performance and are assumed to include the Cell processor. Sony's calculations seem to assume that the Cell can do a dot product per cycle per DSP, despite not having a dot product instruction.

However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock.

It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

With the number of transistors being slightly larger on the Xbox 360 GPU (330M) it's not surprising that the total programmable GFLOPs number is very close.

The PS3 does have the additional 7 DSPs on the Cell to add more floating point ops for graphics rendering, but the Xbox 360's three general purpose cores with custom D3D and dot product instructions are more customized for true graphics related calculations.

The 6800 Ultra has 16 pixel pipes, 6 vertex pipes, and runs at 400 MHz. Given the RSX's 2x better than a 6800 Ultra number and the higher frequency of the RSX, one can roughly estimate that it will have 24 pixel shading pipes and 4 vertex shading pipes (fewer vertex shading pipes since the Cell DSPs will do some vertex shading). If the PS3 GPU keeps the 6800 pixel shader pipe co-issue architecture which is hinted at in Sony's press release, this again gives it 24 pixel pipes* 2 issued per pipe + 4 vertex pipes = 52 dot products per clock in the GPU.

If the RSX follows the 6800 Ultra route, it will have 24 texture samplers, but when in use they take up an ALU slot, making the PS3 GPU in practice even less impressive. Even if it does manage to decouple texture fetching from ALU co-issue, it won't have enough bandwidth to fetch the textures anyways.

For shader operations per clock, Sony is most likely counting each pixel pipe as four ALU operations (co-issued vector+scalar) and a texture operation per pixel pipe and 4 scalar operations for each vector pipe, for a total of 24 * (4 + 1) + (4*4) = 136 operations per cycle or 136 * 550 = 74.8 GOps per second.

Given the Xbox 360 GPU's multithreading and balanced design, you really can't compare the two systems in terms of shading operations per clock. However, the Xbox 360's GPU can do 48 ALU operations (each can do a vector4 and scalar op per clock), 16 texture fetches, 32 control flow operations, and 16 programmable vertex fetch operations with tessellation per clock for a total of 48*2 + 16 + 32 + 16 = 160 operations per cycle or 160 * 500 = 80 GOps per second.

Overall, the automatic shader load balancing, memory export features, programmable vertex fetching, programmable triangle tesselator, full rate texture fetching in the vertex shader, and other "well beyond shader model 3.0" features of the Xbox 360 GPU should also contribute to overall rendering performance.

Bandwidth
The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.

The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.

Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.

The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.

HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

CONCLUSION
When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.

However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3."

This is the whole article. You can read for yourself at this link here: http://www.itvidya.com/playstation_3_vs_xbox_360

I love hearing comments from people, but please, have some sort of link/website/photo to support your claims. I look forward to your responses.
[img]http://www.slide.com/s/YmMdLyvG7D9Wqpwej7OxnplPB-TBJ3PH?referrer=hlnk">This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 30 Jul 2007 @ 4:29