DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Fantasy & Gaming X BOX 360 vs PS3

j/c

I got DJ Hero today from my wife.

Anybody else got it to battle online?

Quote:

---

2) at this time, the ps3 is VERY difficult to code for. that means, any game that is not an exclusive to the ps3, the 360 version is always superior. people have 4 years of coding experience on the 360 and the way the cell processor is structured, in addition to their memory structure, lends to very high programming costs. the most recent real world example:

---

We are going into year 4 of the PS3 so most Software companies have got it figured out by now. The issue isn't the difficulty of the ps3 or the memory structure it is the Software company that built a game for the 360 and did a half ass port to the PS3.

Most likley it was a bean counter estimating how many copies it will sell and deciding their port strategy. In many cases since the hardware structure is vastley different it may require almost a complete rebuild of the game (Depending on how you coded the game for the 360). If your a game like Bayonetta where you will probably sell a few hundred thousand if your lucky, your going to half ass it and deal with the complaints.

If you gave that game to Naughty Dog you think they could not get equal performance on the PS3??? I think so.

Also many devs have found it easier to port from the PS3 to the 360 and they build it on the PS3 first. EA has done that several times.

just to show i wasn't pulling this out of my ass:

Quote:

---

Earlier this week, Shaun Himmerick, executive producer for "Wheelman" and employee at Midway, told the hosts of the "This Xbox Life" podcast that developing for the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 couldn't be any different.

"The politically incorrect answer is that the PS3 is a huge pain in the ass," Himmerick told the hosts.

"Anyone making a game, if you're going to make it for both, just lead on the PS3 because if it works on the PS3, it'll work on 360," he said. "We had to play catch-up on the PS3 because of the memory constraints and how it renders; how it processes is just different. And it's harder on the PS3," Himmerick continued.

A slew of well-known developers have spoken out against Sony's high-power console.

Valve's Gabe Newell said in 2007--long before Sony's decline started--that the PlayStation 3 is a "waste of everyone's time." He went on to tell Edge Magazine that "investing in the Cell...gives you no long-term benefits. There's nothing there that you're going to apply to anything else. You're not going to gain anything except a hatred of the architecture they've created. I don't think it's a good solution."

A report in the Dr. Dobb's Journal tested the development process of the PlayStation 3 and found that Sony's console is "difficult to program for." The report's authors went on to explain that "software that exploits the Cell's potential requires a development effort significantly greater than traditional platforms."

I looked for some Sony supporters and found the best source of them all: Kaz Hirai, CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment. He can explain this and settle this once and for all, right? Think again.

In one of the most shocking and bizarre comments ever made by a company chief, Hirai, the brains behind the entire PlayStation empire, explained to the Official PlayStation Magazine in its February issue that Sony didn't want to make it easy on developers.

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai.

Huh? But his explanation didn't end there.

"So it's a kind of--I wouldn't say a double-edged sword--but it's hard to program for," Hirai continued, "and a lot of people see the negatives of it, but if you flip that around, it means the hardware has a lot more to offer."

I won't debate that the PS3 may have "a lot more to offer," but I do take issue with Sony's justification for it. What good is a powerful console, if developers don't know how to get the most out of it? I simply don't see anything positive about making things too difficult on developers.

The video game industry is unique because hardware makers rely on third parties to be successful. The more games a console has, the more likely people will want it. But if development is too challenging for third parties, I'm hard-pressed to see how that will benefit Sony at all, even though developers can do more with the console.

Developers are looking at the installed bases of consoles. realizing that Microsoft has more units in the wild. Developers want to make their games as appealing as possible to those extra 8 million people. So spending extra time (a luxury most developers don't have) on PS3 development just plain doesn't make sense.

That's precisely why I haven't seen much difference in the games offered on both consoles. Sure, some look better on the PS3, but the difference is minor, and that's the only improvement I can see. I don't think developers are taking the Sony bait and working harder at harnessing the power of Sony's console. The incremental benefit of doing so, at least if we judge by what we've seen so far, simply isn't high enough for developers to follow Sony's plan.

I'm all for powerful consoles and getting the most out of gaming machines, but I don't understand Sony's strategy. Third-party developers are key to a successful gaming generation, and Sony makes it hard on them. And in Hirai's own words, people (ostensibly, developers) are seeing "negatives in it."

That's not good.

---

http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/

I never said you were pulling it out of your ass and I never said the PS3 isn't hard to program for. The reason a game that was made for the 360 and then ported to the ps3 has problems is not because the PS3 can't handle a 360 game.

The reason is the company making the game doesn't want to put in the work required to optimize the PS3's architecture to achive the equal performance.

Quote:

---

if it works on the PS3, it'll work on 360

---

and if it works on the 360 it will work on the 360. The issue is it is far easier to port from the PS3 to the 360 than vise versa. But in both cases there is work that needs to be done and for example Burnout Paradise was built on the PS3 platform first and then ported to the 360. The PS3 version was darn near flawless where as the 360 version has multiple issues. It was not because the 360 can't handle the PS3 game. It's because the PS3's structure is different than the 360/PC structure.

we're agreeing.

the link is for future readers who might want support.

Just clicking...

I don't necessarily want to, but I have been thinking about selling my PS3. I bought it brand new about a month and a half before the price was lowered to $299, so it is relatively new and used sparingly. I also have Uncharted 1 (which came with it), Madden10, MLB 07 The Show, and Fifa 10. Only have one controller for it.

So the question obviously is...How much could I potentially sell that for?

i would say around 400.