rahstar2003 | explosive78

• 4:45am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 1

Insufficient ram is a mistake im sure sony wont make again.

Maxkiller | Maxkiller0

• 5:07am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 2

well Ram is needed to load games but i think this has nothing to do with the ps3 the developer just does not know how to use the ps3's ram and Cell Processors as you can read they trying to say we just don't know shi.t about the ps3 and we just trying to move everything we have done on the xbox 360 to the ps3 cause thats where we were building the game in the 1st place and now we just having a hard time to make everything work but we made it at the end even tho we still don't know sh.it. anyhow this game looks good but i don't think i will buy it just yet i have seen videos and stuff but i just don't like how the story is going tho it looks like a nice 3rd person shooter :)

tanner1 | OB1K

• 5:22am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 3

Konami didnt struggle with MGS4 did they?

princevegeta1980

• 6:13am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 4

Just hope they make the game interresting enough to buy because the graphiques and gameplay looks awesome!

Lord_Von_PS3

• 6:31am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 5

@2.  RAM for textures more than anything.
@3.  MGS 4 runs at 1024x768 (sub HD) - same as VF5 PS3.  Not HD, but better than Haze or The Darkness.

 

While the Sony PS3 was intended to offer HD gaming, I'm yet to see many games released at a full HD resolution of 1920x1080p @ 60fps.  People, you have to keep in mind that the PS3 was such a pain to code for that Sony had to ask dev teams to share their code.  Sure, we're seeing more games released now, mostly ports and it has never been easy.

A lot of people who bought a HDTV for HD gaming should feel disappointed with sub HD games, but if they're exclusive to PS3 and are great games to play, then video resolution won't seem like such a big deal.

Zippie151 | Sanguineous

• 6:48am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 6

well tbh Lord_Von the quality of the picture and graphics wouldnt be possible without HD or High resolution TVs/monitors even with teh sub-hd content.
With regards to what the dev was saying bout memory he is right, as far as i know and correct if im wrong but the PS3 has allocated 256 for ram and 256 for gfx which means they arent interchangeable like the 360 which has 512 which can be used for what is needed whenever. i think he is trying to say its hard to "port" (if thats what they are doing) something that doesnt have a fixed ram usage to something that does. For example and some points in game say 360 is using 300mb for ram and the rest for gfx when ported to PS3 it cant do that aswell coz its only got the 256 and thus would lag behind with frame-rate problems and god knows what. Also that why it hink PS3 ports have lower res textures as they take less memory to load.

Gitaroo

• 7:12am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 7

@Lord_Von_PS3

VF5 runs at 1024X1024 on PS3 and 360 in 7200 mode, higher res than 1280X720.

Limanima | Limanima

• 8:08am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 8

Sony should have put more memory on the PS3. Memory is so cheap nowadays... Such a powerful processor should have more memory.

@Lord_Von_PS3: I'm glad I just got my HD TV one year after the release of the PS3. I decided to get a 720p TV becasue I don't see many 1080p games.

 

 

Muzikguy | Muzikguy

• 9:15am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 9

@1 That's what I thought too. But they've (Sony) had insufficient RAM in 3 systems now! Maybe the PS4 will have 3 gigs or something. Anything more than the next Xbox would be great.

zarajoe

• 9:24am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 10

But I thought that the ps3's ram for the cpu was faster then the ram in the 360, so that way data could be moved through the ram faster making it more efficient.  Still the memory problem is something that devs will soon work out, give em time

Xdeth | Xdeth

• 9:41am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 11

It comes down to wiether the dev has taken the time to build the game for each system or just try to port. Both consoles work diffrently  when it comes to proccesing and rendering.

@Lord_Von_PS3 My friend, your an idot if you think the people who bought HDTV for gaming should feel disapointed. I bought my HDTV specifiaclly for my PS3 and it has been one of the best investments I've made. Have you seen What PS3 looks like on a SDTV? My best friend and his brother and several other people play on SDTV's and tell me how good they think the games look. Then when they come over to my house and see it on HD, they frankly s*** their pants. No most of the games don't run in 1080p but 720 looks a heck of a lot better then 480i/p.  I personally couldn't imagine not playing PS3 on and HDTV. It was ment for it.

Lord_Von_PS3

• 9:55am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 12

@Gitaroo.  VF5 is 1024x768 @ 1080p mode.  Quaz51 confirms on the B3D Forums (For others, he's the same guy who confirmed GTA 4 runs at 640p on PS3, NG 2 at 585p on 360, etc).  He directly compares MGS 4 to VF5 stating both are 1024x768 (665p), which makes sense as that's a 4:3 screen ratio that dev's can render thinner to & upscale to 16:9 widescreen.  Interesting that VF5 renders at 1024x1024 @ 720p mode, thanks...

@ZaraJoe.  It doesn't work as simply as that.  The 360 has 10MB of eDRAM which has an extremely fast throughput (gives 360 a decent fill rate).  The only issue there is 10MB isn't always enough with some games to ensure 1920x1080p when AA or bilinear filtering is employed.  It depends on whether tiling used / how dynamic the screen is (i.e. how much is going on), etc.

 

@Xdeth.  Sure, HDTV does of course look better than SDTV, but I'm just making the point that more and more games seem to be dropping well below 720p (HD) these days.  At first we could argue it was just bad ports - but MGS 4 and Haze are exclusives - right..?  You're quite right that the sub 720p resolutions we are getting are still more than 480i/p as you say, but if the games are not 720p, then we're not being given the HD games that were advertised to us (false promises).  On that basis - I'd be saying be disappointed with buying a HDTV for gaming.  I'm not in any way saying compare HDTV to a SDTV, so would rather you kept your insults to yourself.

Solrac | Solrac7688

• 9:55am BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 13

 Developers need to stop acting like little girls and stop porting games from the 360 into the PS3. They should act like MEN and realize that these two systems run differently and thus make them both look different. Having two versions of the game , One version the 360 look and the other the PS3 look  

MMDs | MMDs

• 12:05pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 14

 @Lord Von

anything above 480p, I consider HD, because correct me if i'm wrong, a standard TV doesn't output anything that is above 720 x 486. I think we were promised HD gaming and they delivered HD gaming to us, there are a few true HD (1920x1080)  games out (RR7, etc.) but i don't remember sony PR saying that every game for PS3 would be true 1080p, if you have a source to this information i would like to see it. All i know is that True 1080p HD games are possible on the PS3.

Lord_Von_PS3

• 12:38pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 15

@MMDs...  I never said 1080p games weren't possible at all on PS3.  I just think we'd all like to see a lot more of them instead of the odd one or two!  It really should be the other way around (i.e. most games at 1080p, the odd one that isn't).  BTW, I have RR7 & its great.

Now I don't want to draw on semantics with you and I don't really like to reference wikipedia, but I'm not the only one who considers anything sub 720p to be < HD.

 

N.B. "High Definition usually refers to 720 vertical lines of video format resolution or more."

 

Its a quote I personally agree with, in spite of yours and maybe some others.  Particularly in the sense that we've had PC's for years and they've been able to render at XGA resolutions and higher on CRT's and TFT's.

MMDs | MMDs

• 1:24pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 16

 @Lord_Von

no, i agree with you that there should be more 1080p games. I just don't think they've figured it out yet. We'll see what happens, if 1080p is going to be strictly for racing games because there isn't much going on other than cars and scenery, then so be it, its still nice to have 1080p Movies displayed on a 1080p set. 

War Devil is a game coming out for PS3 touting full 1080p at 60fps with some new engine or something. We'll have to wait and see if it works, and if it does then other developers can use it and we'll be even more happy with games than we are now. (well some people can never be happy, but besides the fact)

 

So some games are sub HD resolutions it doesn't change the fact that you still need an HD set to play them at their native resolution. I'm not saying you need an HD set to play the game, because you can play them at 480i/p on a standard set, just saying native resolution wise anything above that 480p will look better on an HD set.

I know i agree with you the sub HD games could've been alot better looking if they were done at 720 or above but hey its still early and developers are still learning.

as far as MGS4, do we know what the final resolution will be in the game, cuz i'm happy if its 720p or higher.

MMDs | MMDs

• 1:24pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 17

uhg.. i hate it when it double posts.

Lord_Von_PS3

• 2:36pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 18

@ MMDs.  Quaz51 has already stated MGS 4 will be 665p (1024x768) @ 30fps, so as I said before, the game will sub 720p (not HD).  That's based on MGO and various screenshots that he uses.  Don't take my word for it though, feel free to go and read up about it.

 

Anyway, you don't need a HDTV or SDTV.  If I wanted, I could run my PS3 on a PC TFT monitor using a composite - VGA adapter.  Why anyone would want to do that however is another matter entirely...  (e.g. http://www.play-asia.com/paOS-13-71-11z-49-en-70-1d2s.html, or http://www.x2vga.com/).  A HDMI & HDCP compliant TFT should also work.

MMDs | MMDs

• 3:05pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 19

 @Lord_Von

This Quazi guy, he has a copy of MGO or do you mean just from screenshots of both MGO and MGS4? and why should i take his word as truth?

and as far as the dont need an HDTV or SDTV situation where you talk about we can use a Computer Monitor for higher resolutions, thats great do they make a Monitor thats 50 inches and as cheap as an HDTV set?

Lord_Von_PS3

• 4:13pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 20

@MMDs.  Yes he downloaded MGO to come up with 665p.  He also looks at screens.  If you see (and I mean read up on) how he works out the resolution, its accurate.  He has shown how he does this of his own volition using markers and it checks out.

;-)

I95SOUTH | I95SOUTH

• 5:34pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 21

"It was one of those things that was really sort of challenging and scary at first," before stating the team has "gotten over most of the major hurdles and now we've had them running side by side simultaneously, and they look flawless,” said Gullett.

"You can't even tell the difference," he said, adding, “We've managed to pretty much get everything that we've put into the 360 version in the PS3 as well."

 

You all know what that means...PORT!!  Whenever they say thing like that that mean we didnt try to start from point one like we did on 360 so thats why we are having the problems that we are having. Thats what they should say. And if you have any mult system games that are frezzing just know that they are ports as well. All my friends that have a 360 games frezee and say they are getting ps3 because of it. Im sorry but I can't buy this. Out ofall the stuff the ps3 got he said memory, every game should look better then the 360. thats why ppl dont buy alot of the games because they are ported. dev think about it.

 

psn id: I95SOUTH<--- devs you need to read what im saying because you will start to flopwhen its time for ppl to start buying your games.

MMDs | MMDs

• 6:11pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 22

 @Lord_Von

thats interesting, i'll have to read up on it. 

and he did this with MGS4 too?

jphuff | jhuff

• 6:20pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 23

Oh boy...

I think "who cares?" if it's a port or not, if they both DO run just fine?

The only thing I'm not certain of is whether or not to be worried about the so called "sub HD" nature of so many games.  Especially with the 360, I'd think they would be used to it enough to be creating these games in full 720p resolution.  Do our consoles just not have enough power to do this or is it still a matter of knowledge and time for the developers?  As I said, I can buy this a bit more from dev's not being familiar with the PS3, but this seems to be exactly the same case with the 360 as well.

I guess I'm going to have to read up on and find out if games like Uncharted and Ratchet & Clank were also technically <HD.  If they were, I guess it's more likely to be concluded that the power isn't there yet.  If they WERE HD though, it would then be pretty clear that this is more of a knowledge and coding method concern.

Professor_chaos | Proffesor_chaos

• 6:54pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 24

if mgs4 runs in lower than hd, why does it look so fckin good???

bighawke5

• 6:58pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 25

@Lord_Von

yea i dont think that the game's out so how can that Quazi guy know what the resolution the game is running at?

gingo | gingo

• 10:00pm BST - June 2nd, 2008
• 26

psn id: gingo.... i really cant see this game running flawless, with the amount of changing enviroment and with characters all over the place i see quite a problem with clipping and tearing....... i think sony should have put about a gig of ram in just to make sure but sony always seem to put too little ram in all their products

Dmanishigh

• 11:19am BST - June 3rd, 2008
• 27

If they would just stop porting games and make a game on the PS3 they would not have as many problems.(DUMBASSES)

 

InfernoReaper | GrimDarkling

• 7:03pm BST - June 4th, 2008
• 28

They don't have a problem with lack of memory, the memory is just different.  The 360 uses "traditional" DDR3 which runs at a constant speed.  The Rambus XDR that the PS3 uses has variable speeds so it can be set at what the dev needs.  Multiplatform devs would rather have fewer cores with stable RAM than mess with all the PS3's cores and it's tweakable RAM.

Plus the PS3's RAM is much more expensive.