Sucker Punch: Half a PS3 is better than a whole 360

[shakey]

Doesn't that have the same chance as something breaking your BD? At least with XBL, you can re-download everything. Good luck getting a replacement for broken BD.

Everything has pros and cons. DD is more convenient with nearly identical quality for most people.

If you maybe don't put your movies back in the case and maybe leave them laying on the ground.... But a HDD has a much higher failure rate then a bluray disc I'm pretty sure. There are a ton of things that can go wrong, and not by user error, on a HDD, where as with a bluray, it would have to mainly be your rough handling and stupidity to break it.

But for DD, on Live, you have to have a internet connection, have Live still being in service, and that movie still being offered in the store. You are always safer having a physical copy. Companies want you though to only go DD if possible, because it cuts back on sharing it, cuts cost for them on production, and leads to more people purchasing it due to not being able to share as much. But when the time comes that it goes kaput, just like with paper money, it is good to have something of real value you can hold.

Also, with my physical copy, I could resell it and get back a portion of my money back, where as your DD is just yours, and most likely no one will buy it back. Just a thought to throw out. You pay the same price for the same thing, sorta, but in the end, those with the physical copy have more options to them. Some of us love options.

[C_Guy]

Statements like this aren't supposed to be taken as fact, they are supposed to be taken as bait to get people talking about why it's a load of crap. And considering there's 7 pages of feedback on Neowin alone I'd say mission accomplished.

[shakey]

Statements like this aren't supposed to be taken as fact, they are supposed to be taken as bait to get people talking about why it's a load of crap. And considering there's 7 pages of feedback on Neowin alone I'd say mission accomplished.

It's good if it gives us something to talk and debate about. What isn't is when people get immature and flame on , lol. But isn't this what forums are about, discussion and chatter on whatever topics. We just have to make sure it is kept civil.

[Prince Charming]

This really is a retarded thing to say. It's not like there's some large guage that attaches to a PS3 with a convenient readout saying 'HO HO HO YOU ARE AT 180% OF XBOX POWA CAPACITY'. It's just pathetic trollbait, and sadder that it's coming from a developer. Should know better.

[zeke009]

pfft, the xbox 360 and ps3 all bow before the power of the Wii. That system can handle anything! Halo, Infamous, Gears of War, Uncharted, and God of War couldn't make use if it properly and that is why they skipped it rather than embarrass themselves! Wii FTW!

Simmer down, just adding a stupid post to a stupid topic about fanboy arguments over consoles. Yes, I trolled. Buy what you like, not what your neighbor told you to.

[DarkHarkNess]

Is anyone here a game developer?

I am, but nothing i can say will change peoples views on either console, at the end of the day each console has its advantages and disadvantages, if you develop for one console specifically its very difficult to change the code to the other once you've started, which is why Sucker Punch will say this about Infamous 2.

[OOOOOOOO]

I've worked in the games industry for 10 years ... in development, not marketing etc :p lol. But the point is ... who gives a crap? This is a dumb statement to make because it is a Sony exclusive product so their just trying to sell it with bigger and badder comments. Don't get me wrong, my PS3 is used FAR more than my 360, and for good reason in my opinion. I prefer the console. That said, I'm not interested in flame wars over this rubbish. So I find it silly that a developer makes these statements.

[spaceelf]

the company filed a chapter 11, not a chapter 7

Both are bankruptcy. They may not be completely gone but they're definately hurting.

[Emn1ty]

People bash blu-ray... but you do realize that is how you get to watch your movies in 1080 Full HD, instead of crappy yesterday's 480p DVD rubbish, right? Nevermind the fact that you can hold MUCH more data on a blu-ray than you can even a DVD9. So, if blu-ray is so useless and bad, what do you use to watch your movies on your HDTV?

Actually... the only reason Blu-Ray allows for full 1080p is because of its capacity and not because of the tech. A DVD is perfectly capable of outputting a 1080p video so long as it is rigged to read it. Which is why HD-DVD existed. Same technology improved. We bash on Blu-Ray not because we hate it, but because it is an inefficient and redundant new technology. None of that matters when you're watching the movie though.

[shakey]

Actually... the only reason Blu-Ray allows for full 1080p is because of its capacity and not because of the tech. A DVD is perfectly capable of outputting a 1080p video so long as it is rigged to read it. Which is why HD-DVD existed. Same technology improved. We bash on Blu-Ray not because we hate it, but because it is an inefficient and redundant new technology. None of that matters when you're watching the movie though.

Really... saying having a lot of space is now a downside? Some peoples views are so askew.... DVD is too small for almost uncompressed textures and uncompressed sound. There had to be a new format to allow for such things... and saying it has too much space, but cost the same basically now, is just grasping at straws man lol. Show a technology that could replace DVD, and be as cheap. If you can not, then it really is a logical next step.

[Emn1ty]

Really... saying having a lot of space is now a downside? Some peoples views are so askew.... DVD is too small for almost uncompressed textures and uncompressed sound. There had to be a new format to allow for such things... and saying it has too much space, but cost the same basically now, is just grasping at straws man lol. Show a technology that could replace DVD, and be as cheap. If you can not, then it really is a logical next step.

I never said that. I said it was inefficient, which compared to HD-DVD it was. HD-DVD was cheaper, ran faster and was just a renewed technology (which means the player could natively read DVD where Blu-Ray players require two lasers to do so). It is surprising that so many people have forgotten what HD-DVD was. It was a $150 player when the Blu-Ray players were still breaking $600.

[shakey]

I never said that. I said it was inefficient, which compared to HD-DVD it was. HD-DVD was cheaper, ran faster and was just a renewed technology (which means the player could natively read DVD where Blu-Ray players require two lasers to do so). It is surprising that so many people have forgotten what HD-DVD was. It was a $150 player when the Blu-Ray players were still breaking $600.

Ah, k, mistook what you said lol.

I would have loved for HD-DVD to win, but sadly it was just not backed enough. But since it did not win, we have to go with what did. But it basically required the same conversion of new materials. Bluray though is at least pretty future proof for when a even higher resolution makes its way to the market.

[Nihilus]

Ah, k, mistook what you said lol.

I would have loved for HD-DVD to win, but sadly it was just not backed enough. But since it did not win, we have to go with what did. But it basically required the same conversion of new materials. Bluray though is at least pretty future proof for when a even higher resolution makes its way to the market.

To be fair Sony are the reason it didn't win, and not exactly through fair competition. If it had been left to the free market to decide, with no anti-competitive behaviour going on, HD-DVD would have won hands down. Purely due to price and manufacturing considerations, let alone anything else.

Anyway, I don't see bluray as the future. More and more people that I know are downloading and streaming HD films and television, very few are buying bluray players. I think in the end the net will win, and IPTV will be the delivery method of choice.

[Andre S. Veteran]

It's not what the hardware can do, it's what the developers can do out of the hardware. Sure the PS3 with its 7 SPUs has more horsepower than the 3 hyper-threaded cores of the Xbox 360. But the fact that infamous was "only using 20/25% of the power" is typical of PS3 games; it's difficult to parallelize a program, especially a game, hell it's not always even feasible. Add to that that the GPU of the PS3 is not nearly as good as that of the Xbox 360, and you got a platform for which it is very tough to make a game look as good as on the Xbox 360. Sure, some do it; some can even do better than the Xbox 360; but it'll always take a lot of time and money, and it'll likely remain a minority of games that "truly" take advantage of the PS3's peculiar architecture. Infamous surely didn't. In the meantime it is always trivial to take full advantage of the Xbox 360, it's almost like a PC, except with fixed specs. And it's likely cross-platform titles will in general continue to be more fluid on the 360.

[shakey]

To be fair Sony are the reason it didn't win, and not exactly through fair competition. If it had been left to the free market to decide, with no anti-competitive behaviour going on, HD-DVD would have won hands down. Purely due to price and manufacturing considerations, let alone anything else.

Anyway, I don't see bluray as the future. More and more people that I know are downloading and streaming HD films and television, very few are buying bluray players. I think in the end the net will win, and IPTV will be the delivery method of choice.

Net wont win until broadband is available to most of the population and that there are no caps on usage. But with the current speeds around the world, it is far from being a reality.

[spaceelf]

The other plus Blu-Ray has is high end audio formats. The other side to that is barely anyone is actually capable of using those formats. I have considered it since the prices came down in a big way, but there'd have to be more to it than movies for me (since I don't plan to get a PS3.)

[onebadolepuddycat]

The PS3 is unassailable. I have, and run both. It is the world's premier gaming console. The deficiencies of the 360 and of the Wii in comparison should be more than obvious. For starters, boot them up side by side. now note how noisy this Microsoft product is. It reminds me a lot of the 333 megahertz emachine that I had run in 1998 with a one gigabyte hard drive and 128 megabytes of ram. Now boot up the Sony PS3....I will give Microsoft credit on this run, the PS3 is as quiet as an updated machine running Windows 7, an Intel Xeon X5570 2.93GHz processor, with at least 6 gigabytes of ram. The rest, most of you already know but will never admit it.

[Nihilus]

Net wont win until broadband is available to most of the population and that there are no caps on usage. But with the current speeds around the world, it is far from being a reality.

Hmm, maybe, but are the kind of people who can't/won't get decent internet really going to be particularly interested in bluray?

I mean the network infrastructure in the UK is already at the point where everybody has broadband, and the limits are rarely enforced. (I've been on both BT and Virgin, I download HD videos, games and countless other random things constantly and have never had an issue).

It isn't that much of a stretch that IPTV could deliver HD content in the near future, in fact there's quite a few other on demand services that do deliver it already. It's a much cheaper alternative to bluray, and in the end that usually ends up being what counts.

[Emn1ty]

The PS3 is unassailable. I have, and run both. It is the world's premier gaming console. The deficiencies of the 360 and of the Wii in comparison should be more than obvious. For starters, boot them up side by side. now note how noisy this Microsoft product is. It reminds me a lot of the 333 megahertz emachine that I had run in 1998 with a one gigabyte hard drive and 128 megabytes of ram. Now boot up the Sony PS3....I will give Microsoft credit on this run, the PS3 is as quiet as an updated machine running Windows 7, an Intel Xeon X5570 2.93GHz processor, with at least 6 gigabytes of ram. The rest, most of you already know but will never admit it.

How does the startup sound say anything about the capability of the console? And the new 360S is as quiet if not more quite than the PS3 Slim.

[HawkMan]

Really... saying having a lot of space is now a downside? Some peoples views are so askew.... DVD is too small for almost uncompressed textures and uncompressed sound. There had to be a new format to allow for such things... and saying it has too much space, but cost the same basically now, is just grasping at straws man lol. Show a technology that could replace DVD, and be as cheap. If you can not, then it really is a logical next step.

Would people stop with the ridiculous uncompressed textures crap already. read my earlier reply on that. but suffice to say, they don't exist, you don't have contorl of how they look, the PS3 has no room for them in memory and they're to slow to read and live compress. They would be a downside.

As for audio. It's not like your going to hear the difference between an uncompressed gun shot and a compressed gun shot. and they don't take much space anyway, since the sounds on the disk are all mono, since sounds only come from one "point" in the game, then the PS3/xbox does the sound magic and make it come from the correct location, adding echo and reverb and other room based sound effects to it. The exception would be music, but no game uses uncompressed music anyway, and music is only background stuff when playing anyway, and well, most blind tests people can't make out the difference between high quality compressed and uncompressed msuci on a high quality audio system anyway.

The PS3 is unassailable. I have, and run both. It is the world's premier gaming console. The deficiencies of the 360 and of the Wii in comparison should be more than obvious. For starters, boot them up side by side. now note how noisy this Microsoft product is. It reminds me a lot of the 333 megahertz emachine that I had run in 1998 with a one gigabyte hard drive and 128 megabytes of ram. Now boot up the Sony PS3....I will give Microsoft credit on this run, the PS3 is as quiet as an updated machine running Windows 7, an Intel Xeon X5570 2.93GHz processor, with at least 6 gigabytes of ram. The rest, most of you already know but will never admit it.

comparing to a launch day 360 are we.... :rolleyes:

and your 333mhz was probably fare more quiet than your fancy xeon since it shouldn't have needed any fans. unlike the Xeon whcih will have more fans than your average passenger jet.

[clotz2000]

I don't think the whole power thing has anything to do with it but Uncharted 2 or the upcoming inFamous would need to be put on 3 DVD+DL on the 360. The thing MS doesn't understand is if you want to go more Hi-Def and add things like 3D and more content you will need a better media, which media can store all of the data necessary? Blu-Ray, it's the only hi-def medium so embrace it, if not then keep putting large games onto 4-5 discs... Heck, God of War III is 40GB, I wouldn't want that to come out for the 360, would just be annoying...

[HawkMan]

I don't think the whole power thing has anything to do with it but Uncharted 2 or the upcoming inFamous would need to be put on 3 DVD+DL on the 360. The thing MS doesn't understand is if you want to go more Hi-Def and add things like 3D and more content you will need a better media, which media can store all of the data necessary? Blu-Ray, it's the only hi-def medium so embrace it, if not then keep putting large games onto 4-5 discs... Heck, God of War III is 40GB, I wouldn't want that to come out for the 360, would just be annoying...

Then explain all the big high def games on the 360 to me. maybe they used magic ?

the only games who really have an issue is JRPG's with pre rendered cut scenes instead of live rendered ones. and those are hardly a problem to change disk after 20 hours of gameplay for the next 20 anyway.

[Richard Hammond]

well being a ps3 owner I think the dev are full of it.. lest face it the PS3 console is acutally low end garbage..

IBM PPC 3.4GHZ single core (also knowen as the cell CPU) but intreallty its only a IMB PPC CPU .. u knwo the ones they used on the old macs before switching over to Intell..

256 Main Memory. my windows 98 pc had more memory then that 10 years ago

256 RX Nvidia, so big deal, pcs had 256MB cards ever since AGP days..

Lol, Firstly the "PPC" cpu in the PS3 is dual core and it also has 7 SPUs, the 360 has triple core "PPC" cpu thats very similar to the PS3 CPU considering IBM worked on both processors. Secondly the 360 has the same amount of memory they just use it as one big cache that you can dynamically allocate should you need more GPU ram but less ram for CPU at any given moment thats the only advantage memory wise the 360 has.

[.KICK]

All I know is that InFamous was a good game but it had so many issues. Sure, it looked great in places but the AI was shockingly bad! I don't believe Sucker Punch in this statement. It wouldn't surprise me if they said this to increase the hype for InFamous 2 which doesn't look a whole deal different at the moment!

[Hedon]

The PS3 is unassailable. I have, and run both. It is the world's premier gaming console. The deficiencies of the 360 and of the Wii in comparison should be more than obvious.

The PS3, 360 and Wii all have obvious deficiencies.

For starters, boot them up side by side. now note how noisy this Microsoft product is.

My 40gb PS3 is noisier and louder than my 250gb Xbox 360 S.

It reminds me a lot of the 333 megahertz emachine that I had run in 1998 with a one gigabyte hard drive and 128 megabytes of ram.

That sounds like my workstation at work