Midway's Bilder Talks X360 To PS3 Conversion Issues

ruibing - 789 days 17 hours ago

I have a PS3 and I won't be getting this, not because it was late or anything, but because there's already a lot of games (both exclusives and crossplatformers) that just forced this game off my list from the very beginning.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

gamesblow - 790 days ago

When using multi-tools to develop with.. Yeah, the ps3 isn't much stronger... when using exclusive tools to dev with. The ps3 is 2 folds stronger. It's all in the tools and when you have multi-platform code you can't get all crazy with it. IT's going to be a strict development process. Don't fool yourself. The CPU in the PS3 litterally cripples the GPU and CPU of the xbox 360 combined. It's all in the dev tools, folks.

Agree(7) | Disagree(7) | Report

wageslave - 790 days ago

"Whereas with the PS3 and the 360, it's certainly more of a level playing field"

How did you come to this " the ps3 is slightly stronger than the 360" conclusion?

It doesnt say that at all. It sounds far more like what IGN said in their hardware shoot-out:

"When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3."

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

IGN further went on to say " 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. "

Which sounds like you have it about right when you said "it's not to the extremes that Sony or the fanbois are making it out to be"

Clearly, we see it again here with Stranglehold (and again with PES 2008 and Smackdown vs. Raw 2008 just this *week* alone). That the design of the PS3 requires far more effort to reach par performance with the Xbox 360.

Thats the bottom line. Its the whole story of PS3 vs. Xbox 360; "PS3 gives you less for more"

Agree(3) | Disagree(7) | Report

Xi - 790 days ago

of those that bought into the sony hype. I bet you also thought that the ps2 could do toy story like graphics eh?

The ps3 is not "2 fold" in strength when compared to the 360, if that were the case then you could run crysis on the ps3 without a problem, but the dev clearly stated the game is not possible on either platform. Not to mention you have a dev clearly stating that the difference in the systems is less than that of last gen, and the xbox was not 2 times more powerful than the ps2. You have numerous other developers saying that the systems are nearly equal in power.

Also The gpu in the 360 is able to preform dx10 features, I ask, why then can the ps3 not if it's 2 times the power. Why is it that the 360 can preform HDR lighting in full. When the original Xbox released it had the best looking console games to date, such is not the case with the ps3, even though dev kits for both platforms were released at the same time. Snap out of it dude.

The ps3 is mildly stronger than the 360 it's power comes from the abilty to stream data at very high ammounts which is a requirement for blu-ray to work, but it does not compute branching code, ooo coding, or much convential gaming code well, but excels in parellel coding. It also has blu-ray which is a double edged sword such that it's a slower drive and cannot stream data as fast off the disc, however it offers up much more space. Some people just don't want to look at their investment as what it is, and will do anything to justify their purchase, enjoy the games man, i do.

Agree(5) | Disagree(5) | Report

Proxy - 789 days 21 hours ago

People like Computer Engineers buy PS3's and build all kinds of advance programs to run on them. Unless you suggest that these people like to pay more money for a less powerful system, then we have to concluded that the PS3 does have something special under its hood.

Whether this will give an advantage in the gaming department remains to be seen.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Martini - 789 days 21 hours ago

....... " so I don't think it's necessarily a negative to put the PS3 first. But it does help mitigate some of that risk in framerate, memory, technology, just the hardware differences......"
He seems to be implying that if you make game on PS3 it will be easy to make it run on 360 but if you make 360 game and try to make it run on PS3 it will strugle with memory/framerate problems. So 360 > PS3 according to this guy.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

gamesblow - 790 days ago

I'll agree on 1 thing here... no one wants to play a game that's been out for months on end. VF 5... MGS4... UT3... HAZe... I think these will be interesting match ups in a few months when we see who's who when playing "old" games.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Proxy - 789 days 21 hours ago

I someone bought a PS3 today they would probably buy Resistance, even though it's been out almost a year.

I but those who made the switch from PS2 to 360 bought the original Halo game, even though that's years old.

Perhaps the attach rate is low because people refuse to buy crappy ports. Give me a good port, or give me nothing at all.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

GIJeff - 790 days ago

youre such a dumbass

EDIT: i guess bloodmask dissagreed..happy halloween.

Agree(8) | Disagree(7) | Report

thereapersson - 790 days ago

What a surprise. More SPAM from Bloodmask the repeater! Do you sit next to your keyboard with a .txt file open ready to copy and paste your canned replies?

Yet another example... blah blah FUD FUD .... teh cell is hard to program for...

Man, just lighten up and play games!

Agree(9) | Disagree(3) | Report

Einherjaren - 790 days ago

In the beginning the PS2 was extremely hard to program games for! But look at them now..This will apply to Ps3 as well!

There are several teams out there struggling to make easy to use dev.tools, but as of now only a few developer teams want to devote themselves to the current tools in order to make True Nextgen games: 1080P!!

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

Meus Renaissance - 789 days 23 hours ago

Many of your points are irrelevant.

The performance for the PS3 is clear for everyone to see in their 1st party line ups. It's foolish to make comparisons based on multi platform games, even the ones that look and perform exactly the same. Its more logical and accurate to instead draw conclusions from how the 1st party developers react to their respected platforms.

The subject of focus is the PS3 as its architecture is alien to the expertise and experience developers have with the PC/Xbox 360 that are similar. Therefore there will never be a day where ports can be developed on e.g. a PC and then just release it on the 360 and also PS3. The latter requires individual attention.

Historically the suggestion, for arguments sake, that the PS3 is significantly more powerful than the Xbox was used to justify the heft price tag of the machine. Now the prices are matched, there is no need to point at specific components of the hardware to hail and boast about. So if both cost the same amount, they are meant to atleast perform on the same level. Having said that, there are things the PS3 can do better on the Xbox, and there are things that the Xbox handles better than the PS3.

Companies naturally want to make profits and the install base is an issue. Or shall I say was an issue. Now that the issue of price has been addressed; the install base will grow. And now the lack of software issue is being addressed so there is absolutely no reason as to why anyone would suggest the installbase of the PS3 will not grow to the point that developers and publishers can't make a profit. By the end of the year, Sony will have atleast 6-7million consoles and that figure for its year is more than reasonable to heed the anxiety that some accountants may be having.

On a personal note; I think comparisons between the consoles is less relevant now because of the prices are matched. Some of the PlayStation 3 owners will believe their system is better and vice versa; that is why they own that console. You, or I, or anyone here will not convince them that their $399 investment is a waste of money and that should pay another $399 for a console and restart their game collection. That just won't happen.

So apply to their intelligence and common sense and cut the BS. If you disagree I'd like your point of view

Sincerely, Meus

Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report

Bloodmask - 789 days 23 hours ago

How is my comment SPAM?? It is clearly related to the article. And typical to people of your nature to resort to a personal attack. What does your comment have to do with the article?? If anything your comment is SPAM, offensive, and also off topic, which I will report.

Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report

wageslave - 789 days 22 hours ago

@meus.

You are the most delusional PS3 fan on this site. Unlike the others who froth at the mouth, you can at least string a sentence together. This talent has enabled to string along the SDF Useful Idiot minions.

But some of us are paying attention, and not so easily fooled.

These things come to mind from your post:

"360 and also PS3. The latter requires individual attention."
Yes, additional expense to achieve equal performance. Less expense results in an inferior game, as you see in dozens of titles this year.

"Now the prices are matched"
Not that it honestly matters (IMHO), but no, they are not "priced matched". The Xbox 360 still costs less than the PS3.

"there are things the PS3 can do better on the Xbox, and there are things that the Xbox handles better than the PS3."
Agreed. PS3 plays BR. Xbox 360 is a better game machine.

"Or shall I say was an issue."
The XBox 360 has outsold the PS3 since the release of the PS3. In addition, the Xbox 360 wasnt late to market as the PS3 was, and consequently has an install-base lead.

"the install base will grow."
It will grow, but so will Xbox 360's base. And, there is no reason -- OUTSIDE OF MEUSLANDIA -- to think that the Xbox 360 wont _continue_ to _outsell_ the PS3.

"PS3 will not grow to the point that developers and publishers can't make a profit."
That is smaller than the profit they could make on Xbox 360. For two reasons; A) the Xbox 360 has a larger base (and it is extending the install-base-gap) and B) Xbox 360 users buy more games per console per year ("attach rate) than PS3 users... I dont know why (BR only users? younger, less disposable income? more "2nd console" users (who are buying Xbox 360's superior multi-plat titles?))

"By the end of the year, Sony will have atleast 6-7million consoles"
Perhaps. But they have less than 5.5 now, they'd better have a great Xmass. But, its really not the point. During the holiday, the sales trend is *very* likely to continue. Yes, PS3 will sell. But the Xbox 360 is certain to sell more -- the question is, "how much more".

Meus, you cannot deny past performance being an indicator of future expectations. The PS3 still costs more, still has inferior games (sorry, no doubt about it, see Metacritic), has inferior "extra" offerings (LIVE Messenger, XBLA, WMC, LIVE, Guide Features) its bigger, sorta-fugly (matters to The Consumer(TM)), and is already far far out front in mindshare and marketshare.

Wishful thinking as permeated your post and replaced good reason.

Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report

Meus Renaissance - 789 days 22 hours ago

I was not comparing the sales figures between the Xbox and the PS3. Here are some of your comments that I'd like to address because I believe you've misunderstood me.

"It will grow, but so will Xbox 360's base. And, there is no reason -- OUTSIDE OF MEUSLANDIA -- to think that the Xbox 360 wont _continue_ to _outsell_ the PS3."

How well the PS3 or Xbox sales is not indictive of how the other is selling. Both consoles can sell very well, the point is that 3rd party developers will not shun away from the PS3 or consider it lesser because it has a small installbase. In comparison to the 360, it does have a smaller fanbase however on its own - 6 to 7 million customers is alot to a publisher. This would mean they'd also continue their support for both platforms. They could make money on both platforms, instead of just the Xbox 360 with its high userbase at the moment.

"Yes, additional expense to achieve equal performance. Less expense results in an inferior game, as you see in dozens of titles this year."

The additional expense is a natural result for the fact that developers need to give the platform individual attention. Much of this money goes to research and development and therefore is only temporarily; we'll see those costs go down significantly over the next few months and years.

"Not that it honestly matters (IMHO), but no, they are not "priced matched". The Xbox 360 still costs less than the PS3.

Well technically you are right. But the highest spec 360, which I'd personally would get, is the Elite and it costs more than the 40Gig. The Elite lacks WiFi but you can buy that for an additional $100, and it lacks Blu-Ray which is not related to gaming but it's still something someone would rather have than not in their package. It's practically a free Blu-Ray player on top. The 360 lacks that. And the Premium is $50 cheaper than the 40GB PS3 yet has half the HDD and has the Elite's lackings aswell. The PS3, for $50 more, offers a much greater value that no one can deny. If it was launched at that price last year, then there'd be no such comparisons between owners or criticism towards Sony's high price tag.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Einherjaren - 789 days 23 hours ago

It's "ONLY" Phil Harrison spotting a comment..!!!

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

karlostomy - 789 days 21 hours ago

Hey Phil

In theory your post makes sense.
But i need to highlight a few words out of your post:

you said: "until you add in the processing power of CELL and combined with Blu-Ray thats when PS3 kicks into high gear "
more specifically pay attentio to these keywords :"until...." and "when..."

dude, "until" and "when" isn't that what all the ps3fans have been saying from day1 ?
It's just not happening.
The PS3 has had plenty of time to show its prowess. I think there is very little power left in it to expand on. Sure, they will optimise it, but nothing is blowing me away...
Perfect case in point: Fifa08 (developed first on ps3), inferior multis.. etc etc.

I am tired of posting facts and getting downbubbled, so i'll shutup.
Please just you do the same with talk of 'what the ps3 WILL ONE DAY do"

gimme a break

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

Meus Renaissance - 789 days 23 hours ago

Games like MGS, Uncharted, KillZone 2 and Gran Turismo aren't hype or CGI trailers. They're a reality. They've been played, they've been shown and my word their release dates cannot come soon enough. So what do you mean by "hype"?

Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report

wageslave - 789 days 22 hours ago

@Meus 9.1

"Games like MGS, Uncharted, KillZone 2 and Gran Turismo"
Are *ALL* hype. Have you played these games yet?

"So what do you mean by "hype"?'
Killzone 1 was mediocre at best. GT has serious competition and its own problems to overcome (gameplay physics). MGS4 will probably be the best game the PS3 has every played, but its just one game.

You post amounts to "wait until _these_ games ship", and then a denial that the PS3 is hype. It *is* hype.

Your post is exactly, 100% hype. Call me when someone can play those games.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

Meus Renaissance - 789 days 22 hours ago

Have you played Mass Effect? Did you play Halo 3 before it came out? Did you play Bioshock before it came out?

No ofcourse not. Journalists play these games to give us hands-on previews. I particularly enjoyed reading the KillZone 2 one as they addressed much of the flaws with the first game. So the developers learned from their mistakes and have rectified them, and on top of that, the game play has impressed all those journalists who no doubt were very keen to test that considering KillZone 1.

Uncharted is an AAA, MGS4 will be an AAA and so will GT and KillZone. Ofcourse I'm not going to say "I guarantee it" but all the signs point to that from the buzz in the industry. So does that mean I don't have the right to suggest these games will be fantastic when the same people who played those great 360 titles have played these aswell? Come on, open your eyes and be realistic.

Your obviously challenging my choice of words rather than what I'm actually saying because you're not going to imply all those games I listed are crap.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

shelbygt33 - 789 days 21 hours ago

Can't everyone just realize that both consoles have great looking games. Honestly... this site scares me sometimes.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

thereapersson - 789 days 23 hours ago

Microsoft has never committed any wrongs at all in their history of being a company! Yes, yes, Sony is in league with Satan and his band of minions, meanwhile Bill Gates and Co. sit at the right hand of God. Our mistake!

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

Meus Renaissance - 789 days 23 hours ago

4D statements and CGI visuals aside, they would only mean anything if there were no good titles on the platform, right? Imagine Microsoft said the same thing yet produce an array of software titles as they have, who would be complaining?

Although I agree it was stupid on their part to get that arrogant; it was obvious to everyone then and now that it was just over excited PR that I'm sure Sony regrets on the face of.

However like I said, the PlayStation 3 in terms of games has alot to go for it and there is no denying that whatsoever, even the most avid fanboys would not dispute that. If KillZone 2 turned to look crap, and games like Uncharted and MGS were whitewashed with bad press and negative reviews then we'd all go back to Sony's original claims (lies) and we'd be up in arms. I have no desire to seem that I am defending those claims but I am more than happy with how the trail of games are coming along.

KillZone 2 ironically doesn't look far from that CGI trailer in 2005 as people have realised, and from the hands on previous from several reviewers, it sounds like it plays very well indeed. GT Prologue itself looks amazing and plays well judging from the demo, I'm sure GT5 will be improved with more functionality and even more cars. MGS4 - you don't need me to speak about that, or Uncharted.

The only criticism can be that Sony should not have used CGI but with these games, that can be forgiven by everyone other than those who choose to find some kind of flaw or negative with the platform.

Personally I'm happy. I'm gonna have a busy 12 months playing video games on my PS3.

P.S. How come you've touted games you haven't played yet yourself? I'm sure I've read you say Mass Effect will be amazing somewhere around here...Hmmm..

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Bloodmask - 789 days 23 hours ago

that Microsoft hasn't committed any wrongs. Obviously they have. Thereapersson you are one of the "Minions" I am referring to. The RROD was a huge issue, and guess what, Microsoft corrected it or are at least trying to. It was a mistake in design. I also have a problem with Windows being preinstalled on almost every PC that is sold. Kind of a Pseudo-Monopoly if you will. Kind of like Bluray being in every PS3.

It just cracks me up that people like "you" just can't admit the "truth" about Sony's marketing BS and also their Bluray agenda.

Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report

slugg - 789 days 22 hours ago

Because the PS3 has trouble running games developed on the 360 first... due to "memory limitations," the code that runs fine on the 360 has to be broken "into chunks" to work on the PS3. PS3 developed games port over to the 360 easier, because it can "handle" them... don't get all excited thinking that the PS3 versions of games that are still multi-platform will look or perform better; that's not the point. The point is that now, in order to get multi-platform games released at THE SAME TIME, they HAVE TO start on the PS3 version first to iron out all the roadblocks, etc., that the PS3 presents to development. Devs were starting on 360, thinking that since the PS3 was "supposed to" be a more powerful machine, converting code would be easy. In fact it is not. So they will switch and do it the other way. Won't make any significant difference in the quality of either version (except more PS3 games that now run at 30fps while their 360 counterparts run at 60fps might actually make that 60fps target). I think that Sony really is to blame for all this-- Microsoft, love them or hate them, went and asked developers what they wanted in the 360. Sony said, hey, we are the market leader, we are going to make this awesome all-in-ONEder machine to do games, HD movies, etc., and you will learn to program for it because we are the market leader. If Sony really can produce awesome first-party games that outshine the first-party offerings on 360, they need to get on it, because as of now, to the average consumer, no one can tell that the PS3 is "supposed" to be the most powerful machine. Most people consider Gears of War the pinnacle of console graphics, a game that came out a year ago. On the 360.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

wageslave - 789 days 22 hours ago

Why? So they can loose money?

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Dlacy13g - 789 days 23 hours ago

... I totally see where you are coming from. And again...Sony exclusives have an edge on 3rd party in one major area. NO 2nd or 3rd platform to develop for. All they are doing is concentrating on the PS3 build. So they can maximize their efforts plus they set a release date that is proper for building a PS3 game. They have no 360 or PC versions to compare their games too. Nor do they have to worry about a set time for release...they can build it and ship "when ready" not on a "same day and date" release schedule that so many 3rd parties try to do.

On a side note... Haven't you ever noticed that not one of the PS3 or hell PS2 games that were "Sony" exclusive games have ever made it to the PC? Seriously think about it... The only Sony exclusive titles that I know of to go PC was Everquest...and that was because it started on PC and then migrated to the PS2 due to its success. I could be wrong....but I really dont think there was ANY PS2 games made by Sony to go to the PC...and I dont know of any PS3 games made specifically for the PS3 that are going to the PC. Makes you wonder...

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Einherjaren - 789 days 23 hours ago

..3.rd party developers have a bunch of greedy, pushy publishers in their backs!

And Sony needn't do anything, but release Home! Continue to have faith in their system and develope new improved dev.tools!!

@Dlacy13g: UT3!!

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

Dlacy13g - 789 days 22 hours ago

Actually I would say UT3 was never meant to be a Sony exclusive. It was always meant to be multiplatform...just the PS3 was the lead platform. So from the get go its always been...this game is going multiplatform. Unlike the original Halo for instance. Was built for Xbox...then years later they create an enhanced PC version. And what I really mean is... I have never seen Sony make a game (i.e....made by Sony for Sony only) then later ported to the PC. Just never happens.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Martini - 789 days 15 hours ago

That is weird because stranglehold looks very good on 360 not even close to last gen.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report