Call of Duty 4: Larger burden on Sony PS3 than Xbox 360
July 5, 2008 By Daniel
Filed under Gaming, Sony Playstation 3, Xbox 360
Games like Call of Duty 4 run at a framerate of 60 frames per second on both systems. But Call of Duty 4 is a game that experienced technical problems with various bottlenecks due to the varying levels of action that occur on the screen. The game was originally designed to run at 60 frames per second at 720p, but it caused drops in the framerate.
The proof of this is the fact that Call of Duty 4 runs at a resolution of only 640p on both the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. This may be “equal” in terms of what is displayed on the screen, but the FACT is that Call of Duty 4 is putting a much larger burden on the PS3 than it is the Xbox 360.
Confirmation of this can be seen in the large number of games that “run smoothly at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360, but struggle to run at 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3.” That was a quote from Gamespot.
It’s simple math: The Xbox 360 can display approximately 500,000,000 polygons per second, compared to 275,000,000 polygons per second for the Playstation 3.
Multi-platform games use what is called a “Lowest Common Denominator” form of programming.
Basically, what this means is the developers start out by saying to themselves, “We need to develop a game for the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3.”
Then, the developers put limits on how many polygons they are going to put on the screen, and they determine what framerate the game will run at as a result of that number.
When the developers multiply the number of polygons displayed on the screen by the number of frames being displayed each second, they examine what that number is. Multi-platform games can NEVER display more than 275,000,000 polygons per second, or else they can’t be released for the Playstation 3, since the PS3 cannot display more than 275,000,000 polygons per second.
As a result, developers are often conservative with the number of polygons being displayed with multi-platform games, especially with the poor reputation of inconsistent framerates that the Playstation 3 has acquired over time.
It basically comes down to these THREE factors:
If a multi-platform game running at 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3 uses 250,000,000 polygons or less, it gives the developers the ability to allow the Xbox 360 version to run at 60 frames per second, since 500,000,000 is double the number of 250,000,000.
If a multi-platform game running at 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3 uses over 250,000,000 polygons per second, it means the Xbox 360 version is also forced to run at only 30 frames per second. This is an unfortunate situation, because it means the Playstation 3 will be using 90-100% of its power by displaying somewhere between 250,000,000 to 275,000,000 polygons per second, while the Xbox 360 will only be using 60% of its power, since the Xbox 360 has so much more polygon power.
If a multi-platform game is intended to run at 60 frames per second on the Playstation 3, the Xbox 360 version will also run at 60 frames per second. The Playstation 3 version will be limited to 275,000,000 polygons per second. The Xbox 360 will also be limited to 275,000,000 polygons per second, due to the fact that 275,000,000 is the Lowest Common Denominator. This is unfortunate, because it means the Playstation 3 version will be using between 90% to 100% of the systems power, while the Xbox 360 will be using only 60% of the systems power. Call of Duty 4 is an excellent example of this situation.
The Playstation 3 only transfers data at a rate of 54MB per second as a Blu-ray player being used for movies. When it comes to gaming, there are hardware “bottlenecks” that the Playstation 3 faces, which allows the PS3 to transfer data at a rate of only 9MB per second. The Xbox 360 transfers data at a rate of 16MB per second.
The Official Playstation Magazine wrote an article about the longer load times of PS3 games shortly after the Playstation 3 was launched. The only time the PS3 does not have to deal with either noticeably or significantly longer load times is when the game is placed on the PS3 hard drive. Sadly, it often takes over TWENTY long minutes to write the game onto the PS3 hard drive. Even when a PS3 game is written onto a hard drive, the load times between Xbox 360 games and PS3 games is virtually identical, as we saw in Devil May Cry 4 and Grand Theft Auto 4.
Gamespot has conducted a Graphics Comparison between the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 each year since the Playstation 3 has been available. Xbox 360 has been declared the winner of the Graphics Comparison each of the three years: 2006, 2007, 2008.
2008 shows that the gap in performance continues to get bigger, in favor of the Xbox 360. Here is the hyperlink that shows the newest comparison–one the Xbox 360 easily defeats the Playstation.
Also, the Xbox 360 uses 10MB of eDRAM. This new form of RAM technology is something that even Windows Vista-based PCs do not yet take advantage of. The next release of Direct-X on the PC will start to take advantage of eDRAM technology for gaming, but it still hasn’t happened yet.
This just goes to show you how incredibly far ahead of its time the Xbox 360 Unified-Shader GPU/Multi-Core CPU design is.
Thanks to Mike Zoran
Get the latest news in our RSS Feed, Newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Dear Mister,
It is the worst fanoyist article I have read in months! All the technical stuff written down on here is fals and wrong. Please go back to school before writting down “so called” technical articles !!. The XBOX360 is able to claculate 1 teraflop erp second whereas the PS3 is able to calculate 1.8 teraflops per second. Punto.
And what is the point of this Article?You’re an absolute joke if you think GameSpot comparisons are to be used as a source of comparison,they’re the same guys who gave Mass Effect an 8,Bioshock a 9,and Ratchet&Clank a 7.HOW are they credible again?
Not only do you sound worried,that is,afraid of the momentum of the Ps3.But your Article comes off as nothing more than a last ditch attempt to bash the Playstation 3 for the FEW multi-platform games that run better on the Xbox 360(Don’t even ATTEMPT to prove me wrong,as I own almost all Multiplat games they have used in their Comparisons).You’re probably not going to allow this comment,since it exposes the obvious desperate nature of the Fanboys posing as Journalists Online.
Horribly designed Site,horribly written Article.Shoot me an Email once your Site is even remotely considered as a credible source by Gamers.
-ShootingPool
The biggest fail of an article I have ever read, where is the source for the following:
“It’s simple math: The Xbox 360 can display approximately 500,000,000 polygons per second, compared to 275,000,000 polygons per second for the Playstation 3.”
Made up garbage.
The Gamespot comparison was also laughable. It’s been shown numerous times and stated even by non-PS3 fanboys, that Gamespot has the PS3 video on ‘Limited’ rather than ‘Full’ for it’s settings. Gamespot refuses to change the settings. Watch Youtube for REAL comparison videos of the same games. So using Gamespot as a source is horrible ‘journalism’ knowing the PS3 isn’t set on ‘Full’.
I have to agree with the others. This is a fanboy rant. With no credible or reliable sources being used beyond personal fanboyism.
Explain MGS4 then bub.
Morne
This article is false and misleading. The PS3 can push way more polygons than the 360. The reason the 360 has won comparisons so far is because most multi platform titles have lead on 360. Porting a 360 title to the PS3 architecture is not very effective and usually ends up with a substandard product, as has been seen too many times.
A Sierra dev of the new Ghostbusters title recently stated the exact opposite of what this article is saying. He said that PS3 users are getting short changed because the title is also releasing on 360. If the title were a PS3 exclusive they would of been able to have TWICE as many polygons on screen at once but had to reduce it due to the 360’s inability to cope with it.
The problems so far with third party PS3 games are down to the devs either not understanding the machine properly or porting a 360 built game to save on development costs. The machine is more than capable as has been shown in first party games.
I suggest you do some research and get your facts straight before posting more lies.
That is not the way consoles work, evidently you are not a game developer and by the sound of your inference you will never be, not even a mediocre one. The reason the 360 video card can process 500 million triangles per second and the PS3 video card can process 275 million triangles per second is because the 360 GPU has access to twice the RAM, so if anything the RSX is actually faster per unit of RAM according to your numbers. However, the Cell processor, unlike 360s processor, also processes graphics. Theoretically speaking, the PS3 can calculate more floating point operations per second but you have to program it adequately. Of course, this is nothing you will ever understand, especially not after knowing you have an agenda.
Anyway, comparing specs is pointless across consoles since all games run differently and all consoles have different specific capabilities, the proof is in the pudding, and I have yet to see a game looking as good as Metal Gear Solid, Uncharted or Killzone on 360. The 360 has Gears of War, which is its best looking game, but it still does not measure up to the games I just mentioned.
This kind of articles is so 2005. Anyway, I just called the national education services, the short bus should be arriving soon for you.
Poor PS3 fanboys! Can’t take the truth, can you? I suppose all the failures of your system are getting to be too much to bear… Call of Duty, Orange Box, Haze… games just can’t run as well on the PS3 as they do on the 360. The PS3 was rushed out only as a Trojan Horse for Blu-ray anyways so enjoy all your Blu-ray movies (with the pauses in between scenes) that nobody else is buying. Sony really messed up this race. Well, hopefully one day MS will buy Sony and then we can get the next ICO/SOTC game (the ONLY game that really interests me on the PS3) on the Xbox and it will just be them vs. Nintendo.
Correction, the PS3’s GPU can only display 275,000,000 polygons while the 360’s GPU can display 500,000,000 polygons, that side of things is always carried out on the GPU in the 360, while on the PS3 it was designed so that the cell can take over these tasks while the rsx takes just some of the bulk and the less intensive tasks.
This is a new, unknown architecture that is misunderstood, people are misunderstanding it by judging the whole PS3 on just one or two pieces of hardware.
Developers are already advancing, and will hopefully get far ahead very soon, the 360 has used about 85% of it’s power already, 2 PS3 exclusives have already far exceeded all 360 exclusives.
I sense a tiny, itty bitty bit of bias in this article.
Yeah, that was so stupid. Get your thumb out your butt and read how things work.
Evidently Matt, you are a 360 fanboy if you think this is “truth”. The ignoramus that wrote this article used the poorest arguments to support his position. If he had cited any other game that runs better on 360 than PS3 instead of COD4 which runs as good on both platforms (unless you look at reviews on metacritic, gamestats and gamerankings and you will see the PS3 is rated a bit higher),I would believe it, but of course, making that kind of inference is really stupid, especially nowadays that there is so much information from developers mouths and from technologically savvy individuals.
Even the guys that made Call of Duty 4 said that there is a long way to go until the PS3 reaches its max potential. They never said that about Xbox 360, and I actually believe them since there is nothing looking better than Gears of War on 360 even after almost two years, not even Halo 3.
COD4 runs as good on both because it was started at the same time on both platforms, not just on 360. How is it a “larger burden” if it is running equally good? Somebody might have dropped the writer of the article when he was born because that is the stupidest attempt at inference I have ever read.
also @ IBM the 360 shares 512 mb between its GPU and CPU the PS3 has 256 for each of its GPU and CPU. Thereby creating more stability as both the GPU and CPU have their own separate pool to draw from totaling 512mb
“Even the guys that made Call of Duty 4 said that there is a long way to go until the PS3 reaches its max potential” except that COD4 looked like crap on the PS3 compared to the 360. Why was that if the PS3 is so much more magical and wonderful, hmm?
lol @my “also “… they wouldnt even allow me to post my first comment
“Even the guys that made Call of Duty 4 said that there is a long way to go until the PS3 reaches its max potential” except that COD4 looked like crap on the PS3 compared to the 360. Why was that if the PS3 is so much more magical and wonderful, hmm?”
That is your opinion, not a fact. I suggest you read reviews, they all say the PS3 version runs just as good, with a few reviewers giving it the edge (that is why it has a slightly better score on review databases) for having a more informed non-fanboy opinons, hmm?
Hey, 2006 called, they want their fanboy console comparisons back.
“also @ IBM the 360 shares 512 mb between its GPU and CPU the PS3 has 256 for each of its GPU and CPU. Thereby creating more stability as both the GPU and CPU have their own separate pool to draw from totaling 512mb”
The Cell processor can actually access the video memory too, therefore you have some of the flexibility that the 360 has too. Also, the XDR RAM that the cell utilizes runs faster on PS3, 3.2 Ghz to go on par with the cell processor which runs at the same clock speed. On the other hand, the 360 RAM runs @700Mhz (give or take), which causes bottlenecks to the Xenos (360s CPU) because the later runs at 3.2 Ghz.
Matt,
None of this even matters. Enjoy your videogames! We should all consider ourselves lucky that we’re not sitting in the dirt, starving with flies walking all over us.
@Matt
apparently you have not played the PS3 version of the game, nor have read the comparison articles that prove 360 version and ps3 versions are almost equal in terms of graphics. Give me one article that showed that 360 version was superior
damn kids nowadays
ok, couple of things u need to do:
1. research
2. buy a ps3
3. play ps3 exclusives like mgs4
4. research
5. visit other sites other than gamespot
6. did i already mention research??
The main mistake of the author is his/her “simple” math.
Author forgot that XBox 360 is capable to display half a billion poligons per secon using ALL ITS 48 universal pixel shaders. That means that if someone deside to putput all those pixels on a screen he would have no GPU power left for other tasks like texturizing, shaders effects (like moire, volumetric smoke, parictles), anizotropic filtering etc. Yes, RSX is capable to display only 350 (not 250) million polygons per second but it hasn’t unified archetecture like Xenos has. It means that RSX is actually capable to output that number of polygons, and still has additional shader pipelines for shader effects, textures etc because RSX has specific pipelines for different tasks of 3D rendering .
Thus, 500 000 of Xenos’s polygons is a synthetic number, that reflects only theoretical maximum power of Xenos, that is not accessible in real life. Substituting from this number the power needed to provide other 3D rendering tasks, we will get a much smaller number…
It is simple math ppl
This article actually made me stupider as I read it. I think that means your disease is communicable.
this is the lamest article I have ever read. The numbers you use, the specs, where in the blue hell did you get this #’s from?. Why dont you compare Gt5: Prologue to Forza or PGR, your precious box cant save you there. Explain Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted, hell even Ratchet and Clank. Explain the second generaton titles that are coming out on PS3 with the ones that came out for your box. Compare Killzone and Uncahrted with Gear of War and…ahh….oh yea your 640p”nexGen” Halo experience. Its funny how you xbots praise GearsOfWar as your savior, yet its not even a first party title. Microsoft Studios cant even do what Epic is doing with the box. Lol
How come Grand Theft Auto 4 streams better on PS3Oh and if your going to use numbers to make comparisions, the be aware that the PS3 will actually win:
More preprocessing power 204 GFLOPS single precision float, 15 GFLOPS double precision, the PS3 has 256 MB of Rambus XDR DRAM, clocked at CPU die speed(XDR)which clocks at 650MHZ, True 1080P out put(not upscaled), HDMI 1.3, BluTooth EDR 2.0, 6 3.2 GHz cores, 1 3.2 GHz PPU and 1 3.2 SPU for the OS and security,512 total memory(256mbx2), user-friendly upgradeable HDD, integrated Wi-Fi. Oh and it doesn’t require brick size A/C Adapter, or Strap-on HD DVD drive.
“Its funny how you xbots praise GearsOfWar as your savior”
whats even funnier is that gears of war creaters Midway, they almost made multiplatform title Unreal Tournament 3 - which is exactly same graphics as GOW if not better!
This article is full of fanboyism and false info. BTW it contains a lack of links and texts to proof the article claimings
stuffs mention in the article is OLD as hell and proven BS a long time ago
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/top-developers-slam-ps3-broken-allegations
Wow, PS3 fanboys are kinda sensitive! Anyways, the article doesn’t feel too authentic. All that I have experienced so far points to PS3 being a powerhouse (especially MGS4). However, the truth of the matter is that some third party common games DO look better on the 360 (i’ll take Madden for the 360 anyday). But that’s only cause developers are yet to learn to take full advantage of the cell (i’ll blame SONY for this one… juding from what i have read so far, the SONY dev kits are not exactly joy to work on).
And to the guy comparing GOW and Resistance, have you really played these two games? I really doubt it, mebbe you have played one of them tops. Anyways, Resistance is way behind GOW in terms of overall game play (if I owned only a 360, I wouldn’t really miss Resistance…and surely not Killzone). MGS4 is totally a different story… the 360 surely cannot pull off MGS4 with its MASSIVE content (kudos to Kojima). But then the 360 has HALO, which is right up there as one of the most exciting games ever to grace the console world. Final score, tie!
And please, stop the fanboyism… you are misleading people just to make two super-rich corporates richer!
Hello Daniel,
There are number of presumptions, inaccuracies, and false statements in your article.
1. Call of Duty 4 is rendered at 600p (1024by600) at 60fps on both consoles, not 640p. The framerate is also relatively solid on both the PS3 and Xbox 360, but does fluctuate on both.
It’s no secret the resolution was dropped to achieve 60fps at the graphical fidelity Infinity Ward were aiming for http://www.ripten.com/2007/11/22/infinity-ward-asked-about-cod4-sub-hd-resolution/.
There are few signs that the PS3 is the “weakest link” at Infinity Ward, though it can be presumed that they had more trouble on this platform due to a number of reasons - mainly that it’s harder to “get into” the system due to Cell and Split Memory.
2. “p” does not stand for Polygons, but for pixels - the resolution a console can render at has little to do with how many polygons it can render (what makes up objects and characters in the game world), though of course as consoles increase in power the resolution they produce will grow as will the number of polygons. Both consoles are pushing many polygons, and due to Cell, it has been reported that the PS3 may be able to push just a few more.
3. You are making a hell of a lot of assumptions (when translating “polygons” into “pixels”) based on a 600p (you say 640p) resolution on COD4 - presuming the PS3 is the weaker console….and then presuming that the PS3 can only render 720p at 30fps, as opposed to the Xbox 360 720p at 60fps.
First off, you’re adding naughts, this would be 27,648,000 pps (approx 27.5million) and 55,296,000 pps (approx 55million) respectively - not 275million and 550million respectively.
Secondly, aren’t you ignoring 720p games running at 60fps on the PS3? Like Burnout Paradise? Ninja Gaiden Sigma? Devil May Cry 4? How about higher than 720p games that run at 60fps? Like Virtua Fighter 5 (1024by1024), GT5p (1280by1080), NBA07/08 (1920by1080), Super Stardust HD (1280by1080)…the list goes on.
That means the PS3 can render the maximum 1080p at 60fps…that is 124,416,000 (or approx 125million pixels). Your evidence and premise fail badly to reach any conclusive conclusion.
Due to these major errors - all of your inferences are false.
4. I won’t go into details but your reports on Blu-ray read times is also false, perhaps misled by Mike Zoran. Moreover, the advantage of a HDD needn’t be met with a large install - Uncharted Drakes Fortune performs no install, but caches through the PS3’s HDD to achieve zero loading during the game.
5. The PS2 had eDRAM. And you’ve failed to make a point of what its actual advantage is. Sounds as bad as “The PS3 has Teh Cell, that means it’s the bestest”. Xenon’s eDRAM is meant to allow for “free anti-aliasing” - which so far has not proved itself. Moreover, to get through this 10mb of eDRAM means you have to perform tiling…and to tile through this eDRAM your resolution has to be lower than 720p.
I would be happy to publish my rebuttal of your article, but I will give you time to respond - or more intelligently, to pull your article completely.
Usually I see myself as above fanboy arguments, owning to the fact that they are pointless, and I own both 360 and ps3 (and a good PC rig), and have no interest in owning a wii (good as it may be).
However, I am getting sick of 360 fanboys trying to make the 360 out to be more powerful. Its not. Get over it. Its older. of course its going to be less powerful. For gods sake the PS3 is using the most powerful/versatile processor in the world, developed by computing giants. The ps3 has great games, and so does the 360. Its not dead yet, but it IS less powerful. Stop crying, and enjoy the great games being released for 360.
This article is just flat-out wrong, and smacks of typical fanboy ignorant hearsay bias and nontechnical mumble-jumble. The PS3 is widely regarded as the MORE POWERFUL machine, more powerful than the XB360. There is no proof anywhere that the XB360 can display more polygons per second than the PS3, nor is the metric of “polygons-per-second” claimed by Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo a reliable indicator of graphical performance anyway. Trusting a company’s claim of polygons-per-second is like trusting an HDTV company’s claim of their LCD’s contrast ratio. Polygons-per-second has NEVER historically been a good indicator of graphical power, PERIOD.
The biggest reason that some multiplatform games have performed better on the 360 than the PS3 is that developers have yet to come to grips with the specialized PS3 hardware, particularly its unique and nontraditional Cell processor. The Cell processor is not trivial to develop for, and is a very different beast than what programmers have seen in the past, whereas the 360 is closer to the familiar PC processor, and has a quicker learning curve for them to overcome, allowing them to achieve results quicker on the 360. Another factor that doesn’t help the PS3 is the fact that many multiplatform titles were developed first on the 360, and later ported to the PS3, which isn’t ideal in and of itself to tailor a game to the strengths of the PS3, but also hurts because the porting process was usually done in a less than optimal way that doesn’t do the best job to leverage the Cell processor.
Load times identical??? This guy is smoking crack. PS3 games loads faster thanks to the game data installation. I have both consoles and when I see PS3 and XBOX 360 games, 360 is no comparison in terms of graphics.
Seemingly I got pushed by your unconventional reasoning - moving from resolution to polygons in the blink of an eye to justify your argument.
It would help if you provided sources and continued along a logical line of thought. You are still referring to COD4 low resolution and trying to relate it to polygons.
It is true that the PS3’s RSX has been guessed to process 250million triangles per second, as opposed to Xenon’s 500million per second http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1082499&postcount=6 - but it’s not as simple as that. There are other factors included, and by the examples I gave…ie. GT5p (rendered at 60fps at 1280by1080) is certainly not a low polygon game.
i suggest staying away from technical discussions when you don’t understand the content, nor do you provide trusted sources to back your arguments (for want of a better word).
“Matt // Jul 5, 2008 at 7:28 pm
“Even the guys that made Call of Duty 4 said that there is a long way to go until the PS3 reaches its max potential” except that COD4 looked like crap on the PS3 compared to the 360. Why was that if the PS3 is so much more magical and wonderful, hmm?”
Chris, you really are a tosser aren’t you 360 fanboy?
The PS3 use the cell to process graphice as well which, quite franyl, shits all over the 360. Once developers begin to maximise this the 360 is going to look llike a real lame horse!!!
As for the author, how insecure can you get? What a feckin idiot
let’s see it took only ONE YEAR for the PS3 to match or exceed the graphics of the 360 which two TWO YEARS! (MGS4, Uncharted, GT5p and more…) THIS ARTICAL IS BOGUS!
Fanboys of any console makes me laugh. Nothing funnier then hearing fanboys calling other fanboys. All you guys calling the author a fanboy are fanboys themselves. Unless you are being by MS or Sony to defend there consoles then shut up. People pulling out there butts numbers like 360 is at 85% of its power, but mad at the author for pulling numbers out his butt.
PS3 guys only want to believe positive articles on there system and the same with 360 guys. Yet when a negative article comes out it is dismissed as biased and fanboyish. I have both systems and can careless what somebody writes, if you enjoy the system you bought then enjoy it and be quiet. Unless you are being paid by MS or Sony why the extreme loyalty. People acting like the authors of these articles are talking about your mothers
first things first,i own all 3 consoles!im not a fanboy! im a gamer! and i really have to agree in the major point of this article “YES,THE GREAT MAJORATY OF MULTIPLATFORM GAMES RUNS MUCH BETTER ON THE 360!!if you guys so call gamers can see that is just because of two points,”BLIND FANBOYISM,OR NOT OWN A 360 !!!”. by the way MGS4 is a GREAT GAME !! BUT RUNS AT 30frames per second !! and not totally constant!!
Haha!
I must say: great article!
It’s amazing to see how (for at least a paragraph or two) you manage to convice the reader you know what you’re talking about. But then, the rest of the article happens…
Why do people write about subjects they don’t know anything about? Why?
This article is bullcrap through and through. It takes one little tidbit of information and tries to build a whole article around assumptions and omitting all the contextual information about how the Cell works together with the RSX to produce the PS3’s visuals.
The PS3’s architecture is entirely different than the 360’s and each has its strengths, but you can’t directly compare them like this. What a sad, worthless piece of misleading writing.
And to think this is linked from the Google main page. Hopefully less-in-the-know people scroll down to the comments to get the real story before taking this as truth because this is one of the most biased, fabricated articles I’ve ever read.
These message boards are filled with sony fanboys. Yes his article is incredibly biased. But look at the facts, almost all of the multiplatform titles have a lower framerate on the ps3 than the 360. If the ps3 which came out a year after the 360 is so much more powerfull than wouldn’t that be the opposite. Stop defending your companies as if you would die for them. Every company has its problems. Microsoft=rrod Nintendo= third parties Sony=harder to develop on and framerate issues. Each company has its strong points too. So please don’t let other people get to you. you are entitled to your own opinion. YOU WILL NOT CONVINCE EACH OTHER THAT THE OTHER CONSOLE IS BETTER. SO SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.
Whatever the truth, it still will never get you the exclusives for both consoles and its game quality that you count, not polygons. I own all 3 systems - way more polygons than your single 360….
lol what utter rubbish,these r the guys that put 2video`s of a car game together i cant remember the name now and they said one was the ps3 version and one was the 360 version and they made the 360 version look better but it was reveealed they made a mistake and both video`s was the ps3 version…..so one of the vidoes`s was dumbed down to make the ps3 look bad,prove there in the bill gates pocket….oh and the ps3 also has 500,000,000 polygons its just that this can be split in half to 250,000,000 so what u talking about know ur hardware u idiot,i`ve heard the opposite that is the 360bringing down the ps3 not to metion oblivion n the devs agree has better graphics then the 360 n pc verions,oh n mgs4 just blew ur crappy 360 away pal,im not even a fan boy just facts im afraid,il agree it might be a little hard to code for buts thats just cause of lazy devs use to working on the 360 first
Just accept it, man. Xbox 360 is a dying horse or should i say…very fragile it can die any day since you bought it!
One question, have you even asked infinity ward about this?Or did you just make numbers out of your head? Considering as stated in previous comments infinity ward said the ps3 has a long way too go?
well if the ps3 can only display 275,ooo polygons per second, how is each car in GT5 200,000 polygons.
Wow I thought MGS4 looked a lot better than COD4 with more polygons on screen, higher resolution textures and a framerate that I’ve never seen drop but I guess COD4 was the best the PS3 can do. I guess that means all the Killzone 2 gameplay was fake.
Also it must of meant that when Naughty dog said that they were only using a third of the PS3’s power they were lying.
Right Pete!! Just let them compare MGS4 of PS3 to any games of XBOX(already out or still coming). I think they cant even start a letter with their comparison..
He’s like comparing a Ferrari and a Mitsubishi Car with Nitros. The Ferrari maybe faster, but look how fast a Mitsubishi Car will be when using Nitros.. It will blow you away..
The PS3 is a console with Nitros..
Wow Matt, you really are using your shit cannon at full power today. First you say…
“Wow I thought MGS4 looked a lot better than COD4 with more polygons on screen, higher resolution textures and a framerate that I’ve never seen drop…”
And then
“…but I guess COD4 was the best the PS3 can do.”
What your saying is that you thought it looks better than COD4 but the best is COD4. Talk about contradicting yourself.
“I guess that means all the Killzone 2 gameplay was fake. Also it must of meant that when Naughty dog said that they were only using a third of the PS3’s power they were lying.”
Yeah, the E3 2007 showing was surely fake, also the latest showing this year at GDC. The final product will be a completely different game. When did Naughty Dog say that they were using “a third of PS3’s power”? As I said before, the proof is in the pudding, and Uncharted was the best looking game on PS3 until MGS4 came out. I look forward to whatever 360 has to try and beat PS3, but I doubt that will happen since Alan Wake appears to be vaporware, and Gears 2 looks only marginally better than the first Gears. The following showdowns should be interesting:
Metal Gear Solid 4 vs Gears of War 2
Uncharted vs Gears of War
Killzone/Resistance 2 vs Halo 3
GT5:P vs PGR4,
GT5 vs Forza 2
Come up with your own conclusions, do not let your fanboyism blind you, douchebag.
OH MY GOD!
Just enjoy whichever system you have and quit with the comparisons. There is so much more that magazines and game sites could write about then these stupid comparison deals. I myself do not have a Xbox360, but I have seen games running on it and think to myself that if you it then you are getting a great experience, but I do have a PS3 and realize too that I am having a great experience. To finish this comparison thing off I would also say that I have a Wii and am having a great time and experience with this system also which can’t compare in graphics with either the Xbox360 or PS3. JUST ENJOY PLAYING VIDEO GAMES!!!!
I fully admit that I am a fanboy …. or fan man if you will… BUT I am a fanboy of ALL that is video games . THIS is what lead me to purchase all three systems . there are some GREAT GAMES to be had on each and every one of these systems . And there are things about each that I can honestly say I like more than the other consoles .BUT… your article reaks of total one sided stupidity. Your abilities as a journalist are OBVIOUSLY flawed at the core. I for one can not understand who in their right mind would have hired you and I would prefer it if you would go back to making those “find the item” spreads in Cricket magazine as I can see that THAT is about your level of journalistic knowledge . It Truly does disgust me that some people are THIS ignorant about the topics that they write about . Just looking to hop in on the hype and force traffic to this mouse hole of a web site. Just because you live with your mommy and daddy and have no real job which limits your fundage and ability to purchase all three consoles you make something up on the fly to justify your choice and make yourself feel a little better about your life in general.
Wow Matt, you really are using your sh1t cannon at full power today. First you say…
“Wow I thought MGS4 looked a lot better than COD4 with more polygons on screen, higher resolution textures and a framerate that I’ve never seen drop…”
And then
“…but I guess COD4 was the best the PS3 can do.”
What your saying is that you thought it looks better than COD4 but the best is COD4. Talk about contradicting yourself.
“I guess that means all the Killzone 2 gameplay was fake. Also it must of meant that when Naughty dog said that they were only using a third of the PS3’s power they were lying.”
Yeah, the E3 2007 showing was surely fake, also the latest showing this year at GDC. The final product will be a completely different game. When did Naughty Dog say that they were using “a third of PS3’s power”? As I said before, the proof is in the pudding, and Uncharted was the best looking game on PS3 until MGS4 came out. I look forward to whatever 360 has to try and beat PS3, but I doubt that will happen since Alan Wake appears to be vaporware, and Gears 2 looks only marginally better than the first Gears. The following showdowns should be interesting:
Metal Gear Solid 4 vs Gears of War 2
Uncharted vs Gears of War
Killzone/Resistance 2 vs Halo 3
GT5:P vs PGR4,
GT5 vs Forza 2
Come up with your own conclusions, do not let your fanboyism blind you, douchebag.
MGS4 didnt have as much going on “on screen at once”. The game needed to load each time you moved into a new area. Yes that game was very cool but it was able to do what it did because it had so many loading screens, an hdd install and it also had to load later parts of the game. I like my ps3 but i always move back to my xbox because it actually delivers. Forget when people say one is better than the other because that is not the case, the case is that Ps3 was supposed to be this huge powerhouse that would stomp on xbox and really its only been about equal. Thats where all the fire came from. Im sure xbox lovers were scared that the ps3 would put the xbox to shame and when it didnt all hell broke loose because the fans started wars that are pretty lame. I just want my ps3 to finally be what it was supposed to be and not have problems like the 2.40 bricking situation and the no headset in box and the over priced rumble controller and the large hdd installs. Go ahead and get all pissy about how those arent really problems and they are like that for a reason yadda yadda etc. Im just saying that if the ps3 is so great (yes i have one and i do like it) why hasnt it pounded the xbox? Will it ever? I hope so but it looks like the next xbox will be out by the time the Ps3 shows what its really got under that hood.
SOOOUUURRCESSSS….
SOOOUUURRCESSSS….
where are you?
360 can push more polygons than the PS3 huh?
[quote]
Gran Turismo 5: Prologue, PS3, 2007
Cars - 200,000 polygons
Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune, PS3, 2007
Main characters - ~20,000-30,000 polygons
Drake - ~30,000 polygons
Pirates - ~12,000-15,000 polygons
Mass Effect, X360, 2007
Sheppard + armor + weapons - ~20,000-25,000 polygons
Gears of War, Xbox 360, 2006
Wretch - 10,000 polygons with diffuse, specular and normal maps
Boomer - 11,000 polygons with diffuse, specular and normal maps
Marcus - 15,000 polygons with diffuse, specular and normal maps[/quote]
[url]http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=43975[/url]
[quote]So really to answer the question, its all about the polygons. Nathan Drake and the other main characters are in the upwards of 25k to 30k polygons. Probably one of the highest for a next gen game. It really wouldn’t have been possible without our amazing programmers and engine as well as the sheer power of the PS3. I know that term goes around a lot but really, the machine is a beast![/quote]
[url]http://www.ripten.com/2008/01/17/richard-diamant-uncharted-interview-part-1-background-and-character-creation/[/url]
Yeah… I don’t think this article is well informed.
Also @ Matt
Go to bed fanboy the people here already have proven you’re an idiot, no need to help them.
The 12-yr-old fanoboy who wrote this article is a desperate and pathetic idiot
Matt…listen to Patrick, he knows what hes talking about, unlike u, ignorant, and u dont even have good sources, stop making shit up plz.
We all know he wrote the article so he could kick back and watch everyone explode.
Sources would have been nice too, from anyone making an argument. Many thanks to the ones who did.
Anybody think this idiot is just trolling for hits to this pathetic site, and causing a stir to get a ridiculous headline on goodle search? Don’t feed into it by wasting your time writing defense posts, just stop visiting this site, that’s the best way to hit this amateaur where it hurts
Daniel, nice job. Your check is in the mail!
this is not true America and don’t forget we made bush president
In reply to Matt
shut up and stop embarrassing yourself even more than you already have. I’m shocked that no one picked up on this “Call of Duty, Orange Box, Haze… games just can’t run as well on the PS3 as they do on the 360.”
Haze is exclusive to Ps3 so how would you know that it runs better on 360
Just to let everyone no before they flame me, i have all three consoles and has to be said, i prefer the ps3 overall
GT5:Prologue… Nuff’ said!
whos the moderator? they are terrible. What a wimpy moderator
Wah- wah you sony boys got your panties in a wad. Xbox blew the ps2 out of the water graphically from day one and yet the ps2 still came out on top - its games dumbasses, not graphics that make a system. Just like the psp was supposed to blow the DS out out of the water because of superior graphics - lmao. Fact is the ps3 hasn’t blown the 360 out graphically yet and is nearly 2 years old and is still 6 million units behind the 360. And at the rate the ps3 is “catching up” in sales it’ll be 7-10 years from now. I owned all four systems last gen and have 2 of the systems this gen, I’ll get a ps3 when it has something I want that isnt on the 360 or Wii. Until the I keep lmao at you fanboys saying how superior the ps3 is, and how much potential it has. Fuck potential - give me games, something sony did the last 2 generations.
this is actually proof that ps3 fanbabies are the worst. the truth about a “powerful system” comes out and look at the rabid fans try to make up for it. honestly people. do us ALL one favour. shut the FUCK up already. deal with it.
Funny isn’t it. In the last two years of visiting forums for PS3, 360 and PC debates. PS3 owners don’t even bother visiting the 360 sites, yet some weird reason the xbots always come onto PS3 forums and slag that machine off. Is M$ paying bored IT students studying ASP.net to bug the hell out of PS3 forums? Propaganda shit like they did with M$ office vs Lotus, IE vs Netscape, Java vs M$ java, etc. Windows vs MacOS. Anyway I digress… Metal Gear is graphically better than Gears of War, Gran Turismo is better than Forza. COD4, Burnout Paradise, GTA4 all run slightly better (but look much better) on PS3. Run them side-by-side for real and not on biased videos (with colour, brightness, contrast biases)
This website has accomplished what they set out to do. Gain traffic by appealing to fanboy argument.
I dont care who says what about what system the 360 and ps3 are kick ass in there own right. I do my home work on the games and whos making the games. I’m no fanboy by any means I’m a gamer baby!! thats all that matters to me pimps and playas yall can talk smack to each other all day I dont give a lol well yall know what I’m sayin. If theres a multi platform game that comes out that I want to play and I do have all three systems so what ever system that game will play best on then I’ll get the game or that system end of story. You guys go on and on about the same old thing. A true gamer will have at least two systems so stop bitchin about whos got more of this or that cus I dont give a ssssh- it.
who invented the term “fanboy?”…. what a valuable mother fu$@er.
1. MS genuinely cares about the customers by making next-gen affordable.
2. Xbox Live is the best online service ever conceived. 360 also has the best, most diverse online gaming community.
3. 360 has the best library and the most developer support from only the cream of the crop.
4. 360 doesn’t rely on cheap gimmicks and doesn’t need to pander shamelessly to the casuals.
5. 360 has the best accessories from harddrives to wireless controllers to innovotive concept of customizing the look of the 360 with unique faceplates and everything else in between.
6. MS stole Nintendium from Nintendo. 360 is built sturdy as a rock as long as you take real good care of it (open ventilation, never vertical, don’t disturb the system while it’s running, take short breaks every few hours, simple thing like that).
7. Plays DVD movies without need of an extra accessory.
8. Best warranty in the business (Three years parts & labor).
9. Microsoft doesn’t force useless stuff on you like Bluray or hard drives. You can tailer your 360 to suit your own needs.
10. Microsoft is the market leader in next-generation consoles (Wii doesn’t count sorry Nintendo fans).
Age of Conan
Alan Wake
Banjo Kazooie 3
Bioshock 2
Command and Conquer 3: Kane’s Wrath
Crash Time
Culdecept Saga
Dark Messiah of Might & magic: Elements
Dead Island
Elveon
Fable 2
Guilty Gear 2: Overture
Gears of War 2
Halo Wars
Huxley
Infinite Undiscovery
Kingdom Under Fire: COD
Left 4 Dead (4 player co-op zombie killing!)
Lost Odyssey
Ninja Gaiden II
Operation Darkness
Postal 3
Project Offset
Sabotage
Sacred 2
Supreme Commander
Tales of Vesperia
Splinter Cell Conviction
Too Human
Universe at War: Earth Assault
Warhound
World in Conflict
GTAIV: Superior Xbox 360 Version
-Star Wars: The Force Unleashed
-Superior Madden & FIFA
-Saints Row 2
I’m not gonna get into too much depth, because quite frankly, I don’t know which is better these days.
However, I will point out something that shows the bias of this author. The author states:
“Gamespot has conducted a Graphics Comparison … each year … Xbox 360 has been declared the winner of the Graphics Comparison each of the three years: 2006, 2007, 2008.”
Now this quote from Gamespot’s May 2008 conclusion:
“Overall, the PlayStation 3 outputs visuals that are either on par with the Xbox 360 or only slightly behind.”
That quote really doesn’t support what the author is stating. If they’re willing to bend the truth about that, then they probably are about other things as well.
Article seems to be written by a Xbox fanboy while all the comments seem to be written by ps3 fanboys. bloody hell you idiots have your head so far up your a***es all your doing is talking s***. Graphics aren’t the what makes a game great, its the experience. I have a 360 myself and play a fair ammount of Ps3 at my mates place but to me PS3 is a console made for asians and asian wanna-bes. call me racist but what they make and develope is rubbish.
Sorry folks, played MGS4 and thought it was pretty average, graphics were okay i guess, but ive seen better and played better games. And don’t you dare say Rachet and Clank is a game or Final Fantasy, the greatest game PS3 has is Grand Turismo that game is a graphical master piece, better than PG4 and Forza on the 360 by a mile.
Hey IBM i just want to point out mass effect is one of the most beautiful games I have ever seen, much, much better lookin than GOW…I think you need to have your eyes checked. But personally I think both PS3 and 360 are great, the Wii on the other hand, i hate, if they had decent graphics, and games i would want one, but it doesn’t.
“well if the ps3 can only display 275,ooo polygons per second, how is each car in GT5 200,000 polygons.”
—-Terry, it’s called LOD. Look it up.
So much fail here. No wonder there’s like a thousand comments. What a pos article.
the ps3 gpu is less powerful than that in the x360. not for the reasons listed in the article though. they factor but aren’t the entire cause.
there is numerous reasons, fillrate, both gpu’s run at the same core speed, 500MHz, the x360 has, in a usual situation, 32 pixel pipelines running and the ps3 has 24, that leaves 8 vertex pipelines running on a ps3 and 16 running on an x360. this is why the ps3 lags in triangles per second and pixels per second.
secondly the memory issue, they both use 512MB of total memory, the x360 has one pool of 512MB the ps3 has two pools of 256MB, the issue here is that most games need video memory. you don’t build a software program that has 256MB of memory running simultaneously and expect it to run well. an operating system like windows xp needs that much memory, a video game does not. the gpu can fetch inofrmation from the cpu’s pool on the ps3 but looking for data where it’s not meant to be takes longer. conversely the memory is all in one place on an x360 so if your core game engine only uses 100MB the remaining 400MB can be dedicated to models and textures.
next shader model 3.0+ vs shader model 3.0, the x360 has access to beyond shader model 3 features, referred to as such because at that stage sm4.0 wasn’t actually defined so the x360 could not possibly be shadermodel 4. the x360 supports geometry instancing and various other features that the off the shelf gpu in the ps3 does not. these features are probably being added via cell’s spu’s to bridge the gap. so the end result isn’t as obviously behind
the gpu in the ps3 IS behind the x360 in graphic performance, any apparant gains you see over the x360 in exclusives is probably more related to the cells spe’s than the video card. but in doing so they need to sacrifice any features the spe’s could have brought to the game.
can anyone tell me what first party game on 360 looks as good as any PS3 first party game. Thats were the real numbers come from you know 60 frames per second 1080p you know stuff like that which the 360 has yet to do but the PS3 has quite alot of and for 1 if you dont have the elite or a newer 360 you shouldn’t even mention 1080p cause you’ll never experience it at least in it true unscaled form and stop bragging about what the 360 can do in sub HD thats so much better than what the PS3 is because hello no one should bragging that both consoles are doing under what they should be lol when the 360 can put out anything unscaled you know the way a HD console should do you let me know and this would explain why the 360 has a better hardware scaler and the PS3 has a inferior software scaler to me the only reason to have scalers in a game because the console needs help so by microsoft adding a better scaler in the 360 just means they know they were building a inferior console aside from the ever so popular RROD
I have to admit that this kind of article is really entertaining and so are the comments! Really! If this article would have contained informations and facts, it would not have been that amusing and probably I would not have entirely read it. Also I read ALL of the comments and had so much fun. Wy can’t live be as trivial and amusing as console wars?
Did we just skip the end of the Gamespot article or what?
“After going through another eight games, we’ve found a few trends that follow both of these consoles around. Outside of Rainbow Six Vegas 2, our findings didn’t show any drastic differences in image quality between the two consoles–nothing compared to what we found when we compared first-generation games in our original comparison feature. The PlayStation 3 generally lags behind the Xbox 360 in high-quality textures and the depth/normal maps that go with them. However, in the same games, the PlayStation 3 sometimes comes ahead with better shadowing and antialiasing. Games on the PS3 do tend to be blurrier than their Xbox 360 counterparts, but the PlayStation 3 games can look just as good as the Xbox 360 games when developers put some effort into it, as is evident with both Grand Theft Auto IV and Burnout Paradise. Overall, the PlayStation 3 outputs visuals that are either on par with the Xbox 360 or only slightly behind”.
Hardly a blow-out.
Entertaining article Daniel, even more interesting comments.
Wow! Look at the lengths a fanboy can go to prove his console is better than the other. Grow up and appreciate the games not the hardware, dumbass!
1st thing, i find the
article funny.
but even more funny is the dimwits who come to argue, that the PS3 is better.
each and everyone has played into the PS3 Fanboy stereotype
if any of the replay were anyway subjective, they would be valid.
except that nearly everyone, is saying how good the PS3 is.
so what!!
i have both and a wii
am not concerned by, whats better, that’s beneath me.
and it should be for the rest of you.
both the HD consoles are excellent.
just enjoy them.
they both have great features.
i just don’t get.. the PS3 is better thing by fanboys.
the fact is, even though the wii is 480P max
that is still out selling both, even though i don’t play mine, it`s for the kids.
its nice to have, buy not essential.
i would never take sides, its Not a war!!
you guys should not take the bait, it just make the fanboys look desperate.
what is funniest, fanboys will hate this:
sony has implemented a lot of M$`s ideas.
i think its a great idea.
and does not concern me at all.
anything to improve each console is good news,
IE update 2.40
that’s excellent news to be able to chat to my buddies on PS3 like on 360.
just enjoy, there are loads of games on each system that take my eye.
i used to pay those on 360 due to achievements, but i have trophies now, so that just expands my gaming.
wii should follow next.
come on guys, really! apart from fanboys of one system, who cares????
Just face the truth sony fanboys, every mutliplatform game is better on xbox360, even the games that first have developed for playstation 3 such as Virtua Fighter and Unreal Tournament are looking better on xbox360. Playstation3 just sucks.
@Anonymous
1. “MS genuinely cares about the customers by making next-gen affordable.” You must not have bought yours at launch. They were not inexpensive.
2. “Xbox Live is the best online service ever conceived. 360 also has the best, most diverse online gaming community.” I’ll save my money and play on PSN any day.
3. “360 has the best library and the most developer support from only the cream of the crop.” That’s funny because I thought PS3 had the same third party developers.
4. “360 doesn’t rely on cheap gimmicks and doesn’t need to pander shamelessly to the casuals.” Umm…yeah, they do.
5. “360 has the best accessories from harddrives to wireless controllers to innovotive concept of customizing the look of the 360 with unique faceplates and everything else in between.” The proprietary HDD’s are laughable.
6. “MS stole Nintendium from Nintendo. 360 is built sturdy as a rock as long as you take real good care of it (open ventilation, never vertical, don’t disturb the system while it’s running, take short breaks every few hours, simple thing like that).” You are a joke. RROD does not care if your POS360 is flat, on it’s side or stored in a clean room. No amount of TLC can save your investment.
7. “Plays DVD movies without need of an extra accessory.” Are you serious?
8. “Best warranty in the business (Three years parts & labor).” Ummm….the only reason for this warranty is because 33% of the POS360’s bought by consumers have had to be returned. They did this to avoid a class action lawsuit, not because your special.
9. “Microsoft doesn’t force useless stuff on you like Bluray or hard drives. You can tailer your 360 to suit your own needs.” Or in other word’s “Buy our core system, it has nothing but a controller. You can’t save your game progress or play online because you didn’t get a HDD, but hey, you can still watch DVD’s!
10. “Microsoft is the market leader in next-generation consoles (Wii doesn’t count sorry Nintendo fans).” In the US. And yes, the Wii count’s.
this is at Anonymous post 73 who made me cringe
“1. MS genuinely cares about the customers by making next-gen affordable.”
Well if you call cutting the price of a console that started near the price of the ps3 so more people would buy it then yes, but adding costs like paying to play online, paying for add ons to the the console any good no. Ms are the worst money grabbers in the world, they try and cover it up by making it look like you have got the console for £180 when your really paying £300 plus to make it wireless controllers and online compatible (xbox live fee) and all the other stupid add on that ps3 comes built in with with no other extra costs once bought.
“2. Xbox Live is the best online service ever conceived. 360 also has the best, most diverse online gaming community.”
ps3 is catching up, for free
“3. 360 has the best library and the most developer support from only the cream of the crop.”
only because it was rushed out so people would start buying it, thats why most games are on 360 because devs are used to now making games for 360. But that’s slowly changing now that they understand what can be made on a 50gb blue ray disc compared to last gen 9gb dvds
“4. 360 doesn’t rely on cheap gimmicks and doesn’t need to pander shamelessly to the casuals.”
don’t really get you here, I personally haven’t read any digs from sony at xbox. But I have read pathetic digs from ms at sony i.e the whole gta loading time, how xboxers can do a few things in the time it takes ps3 to install the patch.
Shame on them for being pathetic
“5. 360 has the best accessories from harddrives to wireless controllers to innovotive concept of customizing the look of the 360 with unique faceplates and everything else in between.”
yeh of course they do, thats how they make more money, but ripping you off at the beginning and not having these as part of the console, so yeh buy accessories at a stupid price while the ps3 comes with them already.
“6. MS stole Nintendium from Nintendo. 360 is built sturdy as a rock as long as you take real good care of it (open ventilation, never vertical, don’t disturb the system while it’s running, take short breaks every few hours, simple thing like that).”
yeh but they forgot one small thing, a little rubber ring that goes on the dvd reader that stops the reader from scratching you games. While ps3 has that in there, blue ray discs are known for being very durable and even with a load of scratches can still be read. Plus you get red ring of death.
“7. Plays DVD movies without need of an extra accessory.”
so does the ps3 and ps2, you say that like its amazing, its last gen. Ps3 can watch dvd’s plus blue ray
“8. Best warranty in the business (Three years parts & labor).”
yeh only because it has such a high break down percentage, and most of my friends that have an xbox have told me that MS make excuses to why they can’t replace they’re faulty xbox but are still stupid to go and buy another, most of them have gone through 3 xbox’s most of them being paid for by them.
“9. Microsoft doesn’t force useless stuff on you like Bluray or hard drives. You can tailer your 360 to suit your own needs.”
yeh because it doesn’t have the rights off sony to use blue ray. Also they can charge you for good accessiors for a much higher price if they’re not included in the console
“10. Microsoft is the market leader in next-generation consoles (Wii doesn’t count sorry Nintendo fans).”
For now yes because they released the console a year early, and they bribe software makers to make exclusive titles or release games earlier on xbox or exclusive dlc.
sales figures are rapidly declining for xbox and are boosting for ps3 so not for long will ms have they’re dirty hands on the neck of the gaming market
although you probably won’t come back and read this response i felt i had to say it all and hope it gets published in the comments lol
you are such of FVKIN STUPID you dont even know what your talking about!!!
dont waste your time reading this article!
What is the point of this article? To show how ignorant you are. I was watching an interview on Gamespot and a developer said the PS3 pushes way more polygons, you just have to know how to take advantage of the Cell Processor. I’ve played CoD4 on both systems and they both look and run fine. I’ve noticed that games built from the ground up on the PS3 look better than 360 exclusives. GTA IV had a seven minute load time. DMC 4 was too long but that was Capcoms fault and if the 360 didn’t have hard drive restrictions then the developers would make 360 owners install games on their hard drive too, which I have no problem with because it does make the game faster. This article is pathetic, misinformed and ignorantly biased. Do us all a favor, when your 360 red rings get a PS3 and see what the real next generation of gaming is like.
“Thanks to Mike Zoran”
This guy also goes under the name mikemgoblue on 1up (as well as other places) who was exposed and shown to be a Microsoft employee that was basically trying to deface the ps3 all over the internet
Some other links to Mr. Zoran