more programming woes for ps3

[andrew]

First reported by 1up.com, perennial ea staples ncaa football 08 and madden 08 will be superior on the xbox360. These games will run at a silky smooth 60fps and have superior graphics on the 360 while over on the ps3, they will run at only 30fps. Looks like more programming woes for the ps3 which has been one of its downfalls.

[VideoGameCritic]

It doesn't matter how great the hardware is if developers can't program it well.  Just ask any Saturn fan.

I find it curious how games actually tend to look better on the Xbox 360 than the PS3!  The level of detail is about the same, but the visuals look much smoother on the 360.  Also, PS3 games take forever to load.  Is that because of the Blu Ray??

In addition, the 360 controllers put the PS3's to shame.  I've played The Darkness on the PS3 and 360, and the rumble in the 360 controller makes a dramatic difference.

[Michael D]

You know, another thing I can't stand about this whole "PS3 looking worse than the 360 version" is how Sony played up just how superior their system was in terms of power and graphics.  As far as I'm concerned, if they're going to go out there and boast about their superiority, they really have an obligation to put up or shut up, and in between the fake trailers at E3 05 and the mostly underwhelming graphics in many PS3 games now, now's the time for them to get their act together.

[feilong801]

This is another reason why I've been skeptical of Sony's stratagy in this generation.

I can accept that some people are going to be turned off by the Wii's barely better than last gen (and on many games the same or worse than last gen) graphics, and they'll thrill to the ultra high resolution graphics of Gears of War and Motorstorm.

What I don't accept, though, is the idea that the PS3 will ever deliver graphics that are so much better than the 360's that we'll be saying "Oh, wow, better get a PS3. It makes my 360 look like crap." It just isn't going to happen.

Even on games where you can say look better on the PS3 version, the difference is negligible. Take Obilivion. Yes, it is one of the few cross platform titles that looks a tiny bit better on the PS3. But the difference is incredibly small: it amounts to a few more trees showing up without draw-in, and slightly better looking ground textures.

I doubt most people are going to buy a console over differences like that.

-Rob

[m0zart1]

[QUOTE=feilong80]Even on games where you can say look better on the PS3 version, the difference is negligible. Take Obilivion. Yes, it is one of the few cross platform titles that looks a tiny bit better on the PS3. But the difference is incredibly small: it amounts to a few more trees showing up without draw-in, and slightly better looking ground textures.

I doubt most people are going to buy a console over differences like that.[/QUOTE]

Oblivion also had some more realistic and detailed facial constructions.

But yeah I agree, that kind of very slight different won't mean anything to most gamers -- I mean when has that kind of difference ever been the deciding factor for a console's place in the market?

[Superjay]

[QUOTE=Michael D]

You know, another thing I can't stand about this whole "PS3 looking worse than the 360 version" is how Sony played up just how superior their system was in terms of power and graphics.  As far as I'm concerned, if they're going to go out there and boast about their superiority, they really have an obligation to put up or shut up, and in between the fake trailers at E3 05 and the mostly underwhelming graphics in many PS3 games now, now's the time for them to get their act together.

[/QUOTE]
I wish they were honest about there systems power when they were saying they would do millions more polygons per second on screen more than the Dreamcast. Imagine how hot a Dreamcast 360 would be. Assuming they actually put quality games on it.

[feilong801]

Have they corrected the hideous "man face" problem on the women in that game? I love Oblivion, but wow, those are some of the most unnattractive women I've ever seen in game. I don't require every girl to look like Lara Croft, but some of those Oblivion gals have female body builder faces!

Anyway, yeah, just look at all the console reviews on this site. It is loaded with examples of consoles that succeeding without being the bleeding edge of technology at the time. In fact, you could argue that this is happened in every generation.

It reminds me of the heady days of the Neo Geo, CD-i and 3D0 (at least before PS1). Of course, yeah, if I could have suddenly found a way to make about quadruple what I was making mowing the lawn (I was 11 and 14 at the time those consoles were released), maybe I would have bought them (because, you know, a 14 year old isn't really thinking about making Roth IRA contributions ). But I always had the feeling that I wasn't missing much.

-Rob

[Anayo1]

[QUOTE=Michael D]

You know, another thing I can't stand about this whole "PS3 looking worse than the 360 version" is how Sony played up just how superior their system was in terms of power and graphics.  As far as I'm concerned, if they're going to go out there and boast about their superiority, they really have an obligation to put up or shut up, and in between the fake trailers at E3 05 and the mostly underwhelming graphics in many PS3 games now, now's the time for them to get their act together.

[/QUOTE]

Ugh! You know, it's thanks to those fake pre-rendered trailers that I spent the better part of 2005 and 2006 thinking that the actual next gen games that showed up in stores looked [i]lame[/i].