Sony: Developing on PS3 first will make Xbox 360 games look better

[Nucleus]

It only makes since because GP processors(Xbox360) can handle any type of code where as specialized processors(PS3) must have its code used for specific functions. Here is a simple example of how I understand it.

Xbox360 is multilingual and it understands all languages and has a total IQ of 120. Today, developers program their code in English. Now the PS3 is also multilingual but it understands (Spanish, Arabic, French, Korean, Japanese, German, and Tagalog) and has an IQ of 180. Developers can simply use one language they both understand(Spanish) and use the extra time they would waste in translation to polish and improve their efforts while using the extra IQ on the PS3 as a shortcut to even more improvement both consoles can benefit from(mostly PS3 will benefit).

Or should I say, the PS3 understands all languages except English but it does understand all the languages that make up English but not English as a whole.

[Solid_Squirrel]

Guys need even more obvious example?

Orange box went from 360 to PS3 = Epic fail on the PS3

COD4 went from PS3 to 360 = smooth frames and awesome visuals

[webshark]

Guys need even more obvious example?

Orange box went from 360 to PS3 = Epic fail on the PS3

COD4 went from PS3 to 360 = smooth frames and awesome visuals

CoD4 was head developed on the PS3? i didnt know that. may i request a link perhaps?

[Syugo]

sony sure has been on their soapbox alot lately...

i dont really know if i agree with the main points of the article or not, but i would take issue with the idea that the ps3 is the best quality bluray player on the market, that just doesnt seem right.

and lol at buying cables <insert ps3 isnt hd out of box meme here>

Can you please stop trolling. I'm seriously surprised why you aren't banned yet.

[Syugo]

Guys need even more obvious example?

Orange box went from 360 to PS3 = Epic fail on the PS3

COD4 went from PS3 to 360 = smooth frames and awesome visuals

I think you mean burnout. CoD4 was developed seperatly for both systems, the best coders were on the ps3 verision.

[F1Rules]

Nothing that you mentioned has anything to do with game development in which this topic was about. just because you can share ram between the cpu and Gpu doesent mean thats it the best way. i can easily say unified ram is better. My elite looks just as good as my PS3 in my entertainment center.

Um and how does the fact that the hdd isn't packed in with every 360 not have an effect of development. And the Elite has a cheap look and feel to the casing just like the rest of the 360s. The exterior of the PS3 speaks quality in volumes. And it also comes with Sony quality to boot.

[sainraja]

....ah.....you can never be positive about Sony or the PS3, can you? There is nothing wrong with what was said.

Games that were built on the PS3 first and transferred to the 360 later did not have problems.

Going from something to easy to difficult isn't as easy as going from something difficult to easy.

~Don't respond to flamebait. Beamer11112

[pirulee]

What a pile of crap. This is just Sony trying to gee up support in getting their platform as a lead development platform - which is fine btw, but it's a pile of dog doo doo. Besides, the games where the 360 has been the lead platform have looked just fine to me.

Sorry but I don't agree with you.

I agree with Sony, and as they said, Burnout is the example; pls correct me if I'm wrong, but i guess DevilMayCry4 had the same situation and it turned to be very good on both systems.

[A7MAD]

Well I own multiple consoles but that doesn't mean I want more delays more often. The PS3 is harder to develop for and development takes longer, do I want to suffer from this? Well no.

PS3 being the lead development in all titles would mean I as a gamer miss out on titles being released earlier and running on an architecture that's easier to achieve the goals the devs have in mind.

BOP & DMC both suffered on the X360 version, they may have looked similar but had motion issues and screen tearing whilst these two titles would never seriously push the X360 hardware beyond its capabilities in any respect.

I know people would love for this to be but overall in hindsight it'd only benefit Sony, it's not my fault Sony chose harder development hardware whilst not making the tools better for the developers.

[aayman_farzand]

Well I own multiple consoles but that doesn't mean I want more delays more often. The PS3 is harder to develop for and development takes longer, do I want to suffer from this? Well no.

PS3 being the lead development in all titles would mean I as a gamer miss out on titles being released earlier and running on an architecture that's easier to achieve the goals the devs have in mind.

BOP & DMC both suffered on the X360 version, they may have looked similar but had motion issues and screen tearing whilst these two titles would never seriously push the X360 hardware beyond its capabilities in any respect.

I know people would love for this to be but overall in hindsight it'd only benefit Sony, it's not my fault Sony chose harder development hardware whilst not making the tools better for the developers.

well i think porting for PS3 to 360 would make the development process faster. When porting from 360 to PS3, its much more difficult and some parts of the game needs to be completely reworked for the PS3. But if devs started their work on the PS3 first, then they'd wont have much of a problem. Burnout & Cod4 did not have any delays, and Ghostbuster is till scheduled to be released on time. Its when porting from 360 to PS3 that we get delays, Example: red alert 3

[pirulee]

...BOP & DMC both suffered on the X360 version, they may have looked similar but had motion issues and screen tearing whilst these two titles would never seriously push the X360 hardware beyond its capabilities in any respect.

I know people would love for this to be but overall in hindsight it'd only benefit Sony...

Well, this is the PS3forums so we should hope these kind of benefits for PS3 rather than other consoles; some of you may find this statement fanboyism, but in my point of view it isn't, because the main reason we are discussing in these threads is because we have a ps3, we want it to have the coolest games ever and we want it to succeed. Right?

[Sparc]

Sorry but I don't agree with you.

I agree with Sony, and as they said, Burnout is the example; pls correct me if I'm wrong, but i guess DevilMayCry4 had the same situation and it turned to be very good on both systems.

The point I am making, and the only point I disagree with in the statement is that games ported from the PS3 to the 360 will look better on the 360 than had it been the lead platform.

It's completely unfounded and totally incorrect. Games on the 360 where it has been the lead have looked great and won't have looked any better had the PS3 been the lead.

The important inference though that I do agree with is that games where the PS3 leads and is ported to the 360 will more likely result in comparable games on both systems as opposed to the instances we have seen where the PS3 version is sometimes not given the attention it needs and deserves.

[A7MAD]

@ aayman_farzand

I can respect that. I disagree as we’d need evidence to support all that.
I see multi-platformers losing with this stance overall, of course a sole PS3 gamer would be better off though.

Well, this is the PS3forums

Really? I didn't know that, considering I've been here longer than you have. You learn something new everyday…

...so we should hope these kind of benefits for PS3 rather than other consoles;

Hmm, well not really. I owe nothing to Sony but they owe everything to me, that's my viewpoint. I paid them good money and they need to do their best to please me.

some of you may find this statement fanboyism, but in my point of view it isn't

I can understand that, I honestly can, I hope you can understand my viewpoint though.

...because the main reason we are discussing in these threads is because we have a ps3, we want it to have the coolest games ever and we want it to succeed. Right?

I own a PS3 like you do, that's right. I honestly am not bothered if the PS3 doesn’t have the coolest games because you and I are different gamers. You are passionate about the PS3 and may only own the PS3. I on the other hand own the PS3, Wii and X360 (not to forget a PC for gaming also), I don't necessarily ride on the PS3 success. Although I'll be there when/if it succeeds. I’m kind of like a free agent that reaps the benefits from whoever is paying (delivering).

The important inference though that I do agree with is that games where the PS3 leads and is ported to the 360 will more likely result in comparable games on both systems as opposed to the instances we have seen where the PS3 version is sometimes not given the attention it needs and deserves.

I agree.

[Outrage]

and in fact I think even Xbox 360 games will start to look better as a result.

How can anyone agree with this comment? This is utter nonsense. How can a game designed for the 360 look worse than a game designed for the PS3 and then ported? That's like saying multi-plat games will look better than 1st party games. Let's just assume for the moment that the 360 is the lowest common denominator out of the the two consoles. You still wouldn't be able to go above its threshold. Hell, if this were true, why don't we just develop games on the most powerful platform and port them over 100% of the time? At least I got a good laugh out of this.

[MephistoSoze]

cant believe you guys fall for this PR stuff. Care to explain what limitations the xbox have besides disc storage?

Alright, let's say it's all PR, then, and the limitation is only disc storage space. How does that refute my point? My point is when optimizing for the PS3, then porting to the Xbox, then it's likely you'll max out both; all 50GB of Blu-Ray Dual Layer, and all 8.xx GB of DVD9 (plus any other discs, if necessary). On the other hand, if you max out the DVD9--specifically optimizing for that, when you put it on the 50GB Blu-Ray Disc, you have over 40GB of free space to fill with either junk or leave empty. The game's already complete by then, there's no need to fill in the gap.

Do you get my point here? Whether it's simply storage, or the difference between a "regular" multi-core processor, and the Cell Broadband Engine, there is a benefit to maxing out the superior then fixing it to fit the inferior.

[zero1661]

Alright, let's say it's all PR, then, and the limitation is only disc storage space. How does that refute my point? My point is when optimizing for the PS3, then porting to the Xbox, then it's likely you'll max out both; all 50GB of Blu-Ray Dual Layer, and all 8.xx GB of DVD9 (plus any other discs, if necessary). On the other hand, if you max out the DVD9--specifically optimizing for that, when you put it on the 50GB Blu-Ray Disc, you have over 40GB of free space to fill with either junk or leave empty. The game's already complete by then, there's no need to fill in the gap.

Do you get my point here? Whether it's simply storage, or the difference between a "regular" multi-core processor, and the Cell Broadband Engine, there is a benefit to maxing out the superior then fixing it to fit the inferior.

All the PS3 exclusives ive seen so far have done nothing but fill the blu-ray disc up with "junk" so I dont see how it would be any different.

[Xelios]

Well then, some people will be pissed when they see the port of FFXIII.

[A7MAD]

Well then, some people will be pissed when they see the port of FFXIII.

Indeed, imo the X360 version may not be optimized that entirely well. It could shoot Square Enix in the foot with MS relations, unless they delay the PS3 release to the rest of the world (apart from Japan) to work longer on the X360 version to make them as comparable as possible... There's no doubt developers can make titles very similar with PS3 being the lead but just like needing to delay the PS3 versions when the X360 is the lead the same would apply if they wanted them to be very alike.

[zero1661]

Indeed, imo the X360 version may not be optimized that entirely well. It could shoot Square Enix in the foot with MS relations, unless they delay the PS3 release to the rest of the world (apart from Japan) to work longer on the X360 version to make them as comparable as possible... There's no doubt developers can make titles very similar with PS3 being the lead but just like needing to delay the OS3 versions when the X360 is the lead the same would apply if they wanted them to be very alike.

We'll see, but the fact that alot of these devs have touted the power of the PS3 and then had their games run just as well if not better on 360 makes me doubt it will be any different, but if its better on PS3 I will just get it for that.

[A7MAD]

We'll see, but the fact that alot of these devs have touted the power of the PS3 and then had their games run just as well if not better on 360 makes me doubt it will be any different, but if its better on PS3 I will just get it for that.

Look both of us are not upon the "Sony is the bestest in the worldz" mentality (the kind that gives no other corp any recognition because they aren't Sony) so we can be real with one another...

Those who say "never possible on anything other than PS3" or "without Blu-ray we couldn't do water" or "Cell delivers in ways no other processor could" are generally those who develop solely for the PS3. You've noticed this right?

The developers sing the praises of both consoles outside of this forum and news flash for those who disagree, MS didn't pay the developers to say it.

Of course at the end of the day those of us with the PS3 and other consoles/platforms will be able to decide, which is why multi platform development imo is not a bad thing at all.

[zero1661]

Look both of us are not upon the "Sony is the bestest in the worldz" mentality so we can be real with one another...

Those who say "never possible on anything other than PS3" or "without Blu-ray we couldn't do water" or "Cell delivers in ways no other processor could" are generally those who develop solely for the PS3. You've noticed this right?

The developers sing the praises of both consoles outside of this forum and news flash for those who disagree, MS didn't pay the developers to say it.

Of course at the end of the day those of us with the PS3 and other consoles/platforms will be able to decide, which is why multi platform development imo is not a bad thing at all.

Well yeah most of them were exclusive devs, but the ones that im thinking of are multiplatform guys, of course they said those things back when their games were still exclusive, but thats my point, ive seen both consoles doing extraordinary things, if they play to the strengths of the PS3 it will most likely be downgraded for 360 in some areas but other areas will probably be better. I just dont think its as black and white as alot of people believe.

[A7MAD]

Well yeah most of them were exclusive devs, but the ones that im thinking of are multiplatform guys, of course they said those things back when their games were still exclusive, but thats my point, ive seen both consoles doing extraordinary things, if they play to the strengths of the PS3 it will most likely be downgraded for 360 in some areas but other areas will probably be better. I just dont think its as black and white as alot of people believe.

I agree with what you said totally.

[VintageElise]

CoD world at war is being done on the 360 and then ported. I hope that doesnt make it suck. Was cod4 done this way?

[A7MAD]

CoD world at war is being done on the 360 and then ported. I hope that doesnt make it suck. Was cod4 done this way?

No, COD4 were ground up developments for both consoles, Infinity Ward worked hard to get the PS3 version on par, some beleive the PS3 version looks better also. GTA4 was also ground ups for both.

[chwisch87]

I've no idea how Devil May Cry 4 was created 360 1st to PS3

I *think* DMC was created on a PC and then ported to the PS3 and Xbox 360 ... in much the same way FF13 is being done.