"Despite the fact that Sony's console is able to outperform Microsoft's Xbox 360"
Fact it is not. Opinion yes.
Growing numbers of groaning gamers have signed an online petition to demand a full refund for the PS3 version of Call of Duty: Black Ops. Despite the fact that Sony's console is able to outperform Microsoft's Xbox 360, the PS3 version of Black Ops allegedly comprises "sub-par graphics, buggy software and less [sic] features" …
"Despite the fact that Sony's console is able to outperform Microsoft's Xbox 360"
Fact it is not. Opinion yes.
i thought it was widely accepted tat the PS3 was a far more powerfull machine but a pig to code for compared to the 360.
Could be wrong, anyone got any good links?
Fact it is not.
Yoda, I must stop talking like.
A properly-coded app running on the PS3 will beat the socks off the 360. No-one is clustering PS3s together for number crunching.
Problem is, since Sony lost so many of their exclusives, most apps are cross-platform, and the more complex PS3 platform can be a real pain in the ass in cases like that. Sometimes it just comes down to which platform the developers favour. FF XIII was better on PS3, this is better on Xbox.
The Cell chip in the PS3 has six active processors, plus one for the OS, running at the same clock speed as the XBox's Tri-core Xenon (which also have to run its OS). That gives it s little over twice the processing power. Anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the PS3's hardware is also a hell of a lot more reliable than the XBox's, although I am told the newer model doesn't fail quite so often as it once did.
A turbo charged 2.0l petrol engined Mitsubishi Evo can out perform a 6l yank muscle car- straight comparisons are meaningless in terms of numbers.
If you read the almost endless Digital Foundry comparisons on Eurogamer.net, you'll see there are a tiny handful of multiformat games that run better on the PS3 than the Xbox 360. And that from a site that loves Sony (and even runs a paid for Sony sponsored site). Empirical evidence rather than hardware theory rules the day.
And so does Kratos.
Can't argue with a top treasure hunter nor a demigod
Yeah and 16 bits is twice as fast as 8 bits. I suggest you brush up on your computer skills.
So, more of a pig to code (which Sony admit) on but its getting easier.
Also, for online there was better, wider, coherent libraries for online development for XBL rather than PSN making it substantially easier to code for this requirement (I dont know if this is still the case).
I believe I remember reading that raw polygon creation Xbox 360 wins but given all the clever stuff in the CELL processor (PS3) means it should always be able to do more onscreen than the 360 can manage, which at the end of the day is what counts.
Apologies for slightly less than definite response but given the level of fanboi feeling on the matter its very difficult to find any 'facts'. A lot of the stuff out there is about as reasonable as a Tea Party activist on Obama.
Straight comparisons are bad in some places... but certainly not technology.
More processors and more cores ALWAYS equals more speed.
The 360 may be tri core, but they are all 2 thread cores, with the PS3 having 6 single thread cores, which I believe it has to surrender 1 on demand if the system decides it wants more power, plus both take a slice of memory, I dont see how this is twice the processing power, but given the local memory to each spu it most certainly has the upper hand by a good margin if coded for specifically, but gfx wise the RSX is the poorer cousin I believe and has no scaler chip, all in all its pretty level pegging with the 360 being more flexible and the ps3 demanding total attention but if well treated will shine, but it seems most corperate game houses just see $$ and rush crap out.
anyhow, its nice to see the Sony boys whine about being held back after the Xbox 1 got such a raw deal with rushed PS2 ports last time, but I think we all want the best effort possible, they spend millions on the whole thing then rush the final leg when the accountants get itchy feet :(
ITYM "No-one is clustering 360s together for number crunching."
That's like claiming a dual core Atom outperforms a single core Pentium.
The processing units in the Cell use more or less the same instruction set at the Xenon, but they're also much simpler.
"...and less [sic] features"
Grammar bugs too. That should read, "fewer features".
Taxi for one please.
I'm amazed you appear to lack an understanding of the "[sic]" which kind of already highlights that.
Or are you pointing it out again for some other reason I've missed?
[sic] is used to indicate a flaw in the original quotation, as opposed to an error made by the person doing the quoting.
It should be used as many times as there are quotes with errors you wish to indicate are not your own.
I think Roberts was trying to make a joke by poking fun of the people who wrote the petition, they had a grammar bug too.
well, that is how it reads to me (English isn't my first language).
Dabooka was responding to a previous comment fail, not to the use of [sic] in the original article.
Can't you see who is pulling the strings of this petition?
Microsoft are desperate to keep people believing that the Xbox is still relevant, and go to extrement lengths to achieve this, including creating bogus petitions and then letting their army of fools propagate it.
Having played both versions of the game, BOTH are flawed, and the PS3 looks and playes considerably better on occasion.
The only geniune gripe a PS3 owner should have, is why are we allowing Microsoft's system to hold back the PS3 games. This is WHY I main stick to PS3 exclusives, which vastly outclass anything availble on other systems.
AC stinks of troll.
"The only geniune gripe a PS3 owner should have, is why are we allowing Microsoft's system to hold back the PS3 games"
How do Microsoft back PS3 games by being superior on the Xbox 360 in this case?
"and the PS3 looks and playes considerably better on occasion."
How many occasions?
Every so often? Most of the time? Rarely?
You shot yourself in the foot and missed mate, maybe you used the PS3 for that?
>Having played both versions of the game, BOTH are flawed
The Xbox 360 version rocks.......
"Treyarch have allegedly failed to deliver promised features, which include online split-screen functionality"
My housemate just bought this for his PS3 and we were playing split-screen online last night. We did play team deathmatch, so maybe it's the only area it's available, but split-screen online gaming is certainly available for the PS3
I even managed to work out how to play split-screen online whilst drunk at the weekend! Was great fun :) Split-screen is available for all modes of play except for free for all and mercenary TDM.
I think the online is awesome and a lot better balanced than previous versions of the game.
But on XBOX you can play with 2 LIVE accounts.
This was a feature until the last minute on PS3 (as mentioned by ACTIVISION's official rep on the Sony Boards) but it was pulled about 1 week before release.
It means that on XBOX you can both earn XP and COD Points for your /Own/ account.
PS3 already has this dual account feature on other games (Resistance 2), so it is capable of it.
The whole game is a pretty crap really.
Having played it, it's rubbish. It's just a slightly more advanced platform game. You have to follow the "mission" religously or you get killed. There is far too much cut scening and bits of playable cut scene where you run along for a minute and don't interact and then more cut scene, then more game. If I wanted to sit and watch cut scenes, I'd get a DVD.
Virtually no "physics" in interacting with scenery etc...
A big step backwards in gaming IMHO.
I shall be waiting for Crysis 2.
sounds fishy to me.
COD Black Ops rocks on my PS3. I'll EASILY get a years entertainment out of it for my £40. If Treyarch are going to have to issue the odd patch to fix glitches, that's fine by me.
Console bashing? What is wrong with you people? Talk about Call of Duty.
A lot of games are coded to the lowest common denominators meaning PS3 users lose out on anything that will also be released on xbox, and then of course some software houses code specifically for the xbox witht he PS3 as an afterthought port.
It is a shame that even if you didn't buy one the Xbox still fecks up your gaming experience.
The Amiga was held back by the Atari ST's inferior hardware spec, particularly with regards to visuals. Cross-platform games made minimal use of things like the blitter and copper, let alone gorgeous features like PAL overscan. So glad there was a lot more to the platform than mere games...
If you read DF on EG, you will see that a lot of new games are downgraded to 30 fps to achieve platform equality. Hint: Not because of the 360.
"A lot of games are coded to the lowest common denominators"
Indeed. Which unfortunately seems to be a large part of why FPS gameplay and online features on the PC have taken several steps backwards in the last few years on big releases in order to allow the consoles join the party.
shouldn't this be a lawsuit? This is one of those cases where you will only get your money back through the court.
any way, I haven't played it yet, so no comment on the game. KillZone 3 and Crysis 2 are what I am looking forward to :-)
From the "Orange Box is inferior on PS3" thing (when the reality was, it was actually better). Seems to me the power of the press is still being manipulated by Microsoft.
COD4 : Modern Warfare is the best COD game.
I did prefer the general feel of MW2 multiplayer (until it got overrun with cheaters). If they had just given us that with dedi servers (as a PC player) I would have been happy. 10 years ago it would have been a patch. I don't understand how the engine looks worse and runs significantly worse on my PC than MW2 (hardly a high-spec system any more, but quad-core + HD5770 shouldn't be struggling with it I would have thought). Regardless of IWs sins, they did wonderful things with that engine.
I heard the PC game is a console port and plays like a dog with technical issues as well. So can we have a petition to just get the game redone?
And the PC version was never included in the price drops, it is always console which just don't do FPS like a PC.
And while we are at it, can we have one for Fallout - New Vegas which many forums (Steam, the fallout wiki) indicated is unplayable for many (including me) based on 'factional' hatreds that appear despite how you play the game, making it uncompletable for you and conversational dead ends or missing options that you need to finish.
Just to confirm - the PC version kicks ass. I have played all three versions and can confirm the PC version is by far the best. Smoother, crisper and faster. Sure I got an overclockers PC but credit wheres it due - the port is a good one. I have found no bugs.
So good, i thought it was originally for a PC - is that not the case? MoH 2010 was also extraordinarily good on the PC. Before I bought my PS3, i tested various games on both the Xbox and PS3 with PS3 continually coming up trumps - and I still think the Xbox looks like it something from the Early Learning Centre. My PS3 is my media centre and the PC is my gaming world. Maybe that will change - I was impressed with that new motion sensor kit for Xbox - something from Microsoft that actually works! But for the moment am sticking with what works.
PCs will always win with FPS - FPS was born on PCs but the marketing machines of the likes of Sony and Microsoft will eventually win out unfortunately.
Beer: cos I drink to all dev teams on all platforms allowing me to shoot shit.
I think, as a sweeping generalisation, cross platform games are better on xbox, but a platform specific game will be better on PS3.
when has any petition on "ipetitions.com", "petitionOnline", etc. etc. ever affected anything at all?
I want my money back because the original Gameboy version of Tetris has shitter graphics than the PC version!
That this pops up just before BlackFriday... I think not. This is clearly a pre-planned Microsoft stunt to do as much damage is gullible American minds as possible.
...due to DRM and locking games to accounts.
We don't often get demos, so we can't try before we buy, (unless we do something illegal) and of course we can't trade the games in either due to DRM. At least console gamers can trade in their copies and get some money back if they're not happy with them.
When PC gamers buy a game like this which is completely broken for over a week after release we are stuffed.
There really needs to be better consumer protection for this. Companies shouldn't be able to get away with a no refunds policy when games are so obviously broken or of poor quality.
...Paperboy on my Amstrad is nowhere near as good as on my friends Spectrum. Waaaah!
I bet a lot of those people moaned and signed boycotts against Modern Warfare 2, then bought it. They'll probably buy the Black Ops DLC
They'll be there at the launch of the next Call of Duty.
These folks don't seem to understand that once Activision, like any company, has your money, they don't much care what you think.
"Despite the fact that Sony's console is able to outperform Microsoft's Xbox 360,"
Just goes to show that this place isn't that clued up after all. The 360 has better bus speeds, graphics & DVD data transfer, something the PS3 developers have been struggling with
Most uneducated post of the week.
PS3 has faster transfer speeds, faster bus speeds (25Gbit/sec) and better graphics.
Of course, don't take my word for it, check the specs.
"The bus between the Cell and the PS3’s memory will achieve a peak data-transfer rate, or bandwidth, of 25.6 gigabytes per second. That’s about five standard DVDs per second—more than double what a high-end PC equipped with today’s fastest memory system can deliver. Meanwhile, the bus connecting the Cell to the graphics chip will move data at 35 GB/s, or about five to 10 times what you can get with today’s best PC-bus technology."
Looks like you fell for Microsoft's FUD. Just like all the shills signing this petition..
I'm probably the least qualified person to post a comment here, as I own neither a PS3 nor an XBox 360, but I recall the following info from the various hardware comparisons of the two machines:
1. The PS3 has higher memory bandwidth
2. The XBox 360 has more video RAM
This means that writing games for the XBox 360 is similar to the situation with PCs: you send all your texture maps, etc to the graphics memory at the start, then let the graphics card get on with doing its thing.
With the PS3, however, you keep all the texture maps in regular memory and just shuttle them to the graphics card's memory on demand.
Early PS3 games tried to shoe-horn all the graphics into the limited VRAM and the result was rubbish looking games (relatively, speaking).
This is also the reason why multi-platform games need to be tailored to each system. Sadly, it is often the case that the PS3 loses out because the Xbox 360 and PC architectures are so similar, they are what the software is architectured for. The companies then don't spend enough time making the necessary low-level program logic changes to get the most out of the PS3.
As you correctly stated, you have to design to suit the hardware, and a large pipe means you grab it when you need it. With the HDD option in every PS3, a game can reliably pull data off a drive faster( than it could off the removable media) every so often and probably do the rolling texture update so there is no loading screen for levels. The Xbox 360 sounds like it has to use a slower media (the dvd disk) to read from. Yes, it can be all stored in video memory up front as it has more room, but that sounds like there will be lengthy loading screens.