what is better
- Thread starter driftking3
- Start date
paintba||er
WiiChat Member
- Sep 17, 2006
- 3,414
- 53
- Wii Online Code
- 8354-0173-2009-5422
As others have said, the PS3 has more potential, but developers are lazy, and blinded by waves of money coming from MS, so they go for the console that isn't quite good (hardware wise) and later port the game to the PS3 without bothering to optimize it for the better hardware, which leads to the 360 games often looking better.
The online on the PS3 is nearly as good as Live, my only complaint is that there isn't a unified friends list, but I can live with that to save $50 a year.
How can Oblivion be rated higher on the 360? They took time to improve the graphics for the PS3 version, so it looks a lot better, not to mention it comes with the expansion. I know Madden deserves the better rating on the 360 because it has double the framerate, (another show of laziness) but the Oblivion rating is ****ed, and I don't know about the Orange Box, or NHL 08 I haven't played them.
BTW I have both consoles, (PSWii60 FTW) and love them both. (not the Wii) Consider that before you go ranting off and accusing me of fanboyism. (it happens every time -_- )
The online on the PS3 is nearly as good as Live, my only complaint is that there isn't a unified friends list, but I can live with that to save $50 a year.
Let me guess, you're getting those figures from GameSpot? *cough*bias*cough*busterbry said:
How can Oblivion be rated higher on the 360? They took time to improve the graphics for the PS3 version, so it looks a lot better, not to mention it comes with the expansion. I know Madden deserves the better rating on the 360 because it has double the framerate, (another show of laziness) but the Oblivion rating is ****ed, and I don't know about the Orange Box, or NHL 08 I haven't played them.
BTW I have both consoles, (PSWii60 FTW) and love them both. (not the Wii) Consider that before you go ranting off and accusing me of fanboyism. (it happens every time -_- )
killik119
Quality Control.
busterbry said:
Were they rated higher for their graphics being better, or for live? Because I doubt they were rated higher on 360 for the graphical quality, deffinately wouldn't go down like that on ign. The reason Orange box was rated so low, was because of technical issues... EA are responsible for their lazy work. I have Oblivion on ps3, it looks so much better than the 360 version. Again, framerates were the problem in both the sports games... a result of sloppy work.
Developers wont go that extra mile in multi-platform games, the extra mile being framerate... nothing more.
[DT]
Gearhead Surf Coder
paintba||er said:
Good post.
Sorry had to edit our your color setting - it was making me have seizures.
I'd clarify that "waves of money coming from MS" isn't as much some covert operation, as it is a simple (logical) business decision on the part of publishers: choosing the platform with a higher sales (would you rather sell into 50% of the 360 market or PS3 market?).
Also 360 development is quicker/easier - the MS SDK is better out-of-the-box and they've been able to leverage a huge community of PC based developers who know things like DX and the PC-a-like X360 architecture really well.
re: The underlined section - very true! Since I believe the 360 is the preferred development target (regardless of whether this is financially or technically motivated) games that originate on the 360 and are quickly ported to the PS3 are going to be lackluster. (when you start dealing with optimizing multi-processor code and even the multiple piplines of a GPU I can easily see how ported code would be incredibly de-optimized).
