Why is it the ps3 version of multiplatform games always do worse than 360?

[radgamer420]

Halo 4 is the best looking Halo game period! But Best looking game? Sent via Codec

This.^ Best looking game on 360 perhaps.

[AaronSOLDIER]

I'd say GOW3 is the most impressive. Haven't played UC3 yet.

[Blacksite]

We should get back on-topic, actually. We are discussing multiplatform titles afterall. Not which console has the better-looking exclusive.

[itachi73378]

Upcoming titles like Bioshock infinite may very well make it to 'Best Graphics of 2013' category.
Early previews of Crysis 3 on consoles suggest that there is a great gap between PC and console version (which isn't that surprising)

[radgamer420]

We've had some gorgeous titles this year. Hitman Absolution, AC3 and Far Cry 3 look so incredible. I don't know if Far Cry is just optimized badly but that game is the crysis of 2012. GTX 680s are getting 45fps at ultra. AC3 on ultra is also getting fps in that ball park on max settings. So if a $500 graphics card can't run CURRENT GEN games at 60fps locked, what does that mean for next gen games? (PC gaming is still expensive as hell)

Far Cry 3 does look awesome. Got it for PS3 and I gotta say the texture filtering is top notch. So crisp.

[Yungstar 2006]

I have yet to see a game on console that matches Halo 4. 2013 might bring one though.

gets my vote 2....

[three3-times]

We should get back on-topic, actually. We are discussing multi-platform titles after all. Not which console has the better-looking exclusive.

Just a friendly reminder guys.............

[mynd]

Its because....2 camels in a tiny car..

[Typical guy]

We should get back on-topic, actually. We are discussing multiplatform titles afterall. Not which console has the better-looking exclusive.

I thought the answer to this has been known for years now. The 360 uses PC type architecture so it's more familiar and easier to develop for. It's often the primary console then games are ported to the PS3. The PS3 being completely different and supposedly hard to program for, means that it's games are worse.

Look, game studios don't have unlimited time to port then optimize these games. They're given X months to do it so they do the best they can. It's amazing some of these games work at all.

These problems should be taken care of next gen. That's part of the reason Sony is moving back to normal hardware.

[Yungstar 2006]

I thought the answer to this has been known for years now. The 360 uses PC type architecture so it's more familiar and easier to develop for. It's often the primary console then games are ported to the PS3. The PS3 being completely different and supposedly hard to program for, means that it's games are worse.

that excuse is a bit long in the tooth now.. sure, hard to program for... but not 6 years later.

[mynd]

that excuse is a bit long in the tooth now.. sure, hard to program for... but not 6 years later.

Reality=PS3 has a crappier graphics card and it take a lot of buggering around with the cell to get comparable effects/framerates. Sometimes they can make them slightly better.

This has been hashed to death. At the end of the day you cant beat raw fillrate.

[Lethal_NFS]

Games are usually better on the 360 because they are developed for that console and then ported to the PS3. Developers always develop the game for the "weaker" console. They need to make sure everything is optimized to fit on the 360's format. And when I say "weaker", I am not strictly talking about horsepower. Disc format is a weakness as well.

So this is why the PS3 versions usually almost always seem a little inferior when compared to the console the games were originally created for.

Anyone who played Final Fantasy XIII on both the PS3 and 360 will immediately notice that the PS3 version is superior. That game was originally developed for that console and then ported to the 360.

Please correct if I am wrong though.

[F34R]

... and for six years, they've been having to go a certain way to get things done in their time frame. The time they've had to learn it better hasn't been able to be utilized properly.

[Typical guy]

Games are usually better on the 360 because they are developed for that console and then ported to the PS3. Developers always develop the game for the "weaker" console. They need to make sure everything is optimized to fit on the 360's format. And when I say "weaker", I am not strictly talking about horsepower. Disc format is a weakness as well.

So this is why the PS3 versions usually almost always seem a little inferior when compared to the console the games were originally created for.

Anyone who played Final Fantasy XIII on both the PS3 and 360 will immediately notice that the PS3 version is superior. That game was originally developed for that console and then ported to the 360.

Please correct if I am wrong though.

It also makes sense that MOST developers in the US would work on the 360 since it has the largest install base in the US. Japanese companies tend to develop for the PS3.

[mynd]

It also makes sense that MOST developers in the US would work on the 360 since it has the largest install base in the US. Japanese companies tend to develop for the PS3.

You know what makes sense...

2 camels in a tiny car.


Not being devs it is going to be very hard to answer this question correctly.

[radgamer420]

Here's the most recent one (comparing ME1): http://au.ign.com/videos/2012/12/11/...ps3-comparison I never see the differences. Sure there are minor ones, but fuck, you'd have to be really/nitpicky or a fanboy in denial to really see the "differences" - or rather, to blow the smallest of the most minute differences as something more than it is.

Having played a ton of multiplats on both consoles I have to agree with you. Alot of these "comparisons" are way overblown and are usually just used as ammo by fanboys who havent even played both versions themselves. These comparisons are really just another way for these sites to get hits because they draw in the fanboys like moths to a light. Just look at the comment sections of these comparison articles. Like you said the diffrences are so minor no matter which console "wins" the comparison. Sometimes its 360 and sometimes its PS3 but you would need a magnifying glass in order to see the diffrences in the vast majority of cases over the last 2 or 3 years. Even the comparisons themselves sound so nitpicky.

[Yungstar 2006]

Reality=PS3 has a crappier graphics card and it take a lot of buggering around with the cell to get comparable effects/framerates. Sometimes they can make them slightly better.

This has been hashed to death. At the end of the day you cant beat raw fillrate.

but, but, but...... some believe its because the 360 has the weaker hardware like DVD, so the PS3 version is made worse by this.

[Yungstar 2006]

Anyone who played Final Fantasy XIII on both the PS3 and 360 will immediately notice that the PS3 version is superior.

Please correct if I am wrong though.

checkout digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-face-off and you may better understand why.

[Fijiandoce]

Having played a ton of multiplats on both consoles I have to agree with you. Alot of these "comparisons" are way overblown and are usually just used as ammo by fanboys who havent even played both versions themselves. These comparisons are really just another way for these sites to get hits because they draw in the fanboys like moths to a light. Just look at the comment sections of these comparison articles. Like you said the diffrences are so minor no matter which console "wins" the comparison. Sometimes its 360 and sometimes its PS3 but you would need a magnifying glass in order to see the diffrences in the vast majority of cases over the last 2 or 3 years. Even the comparisons themselves sound so nitpicky.

agreed. its only real use (for me at least) is to see performance between the two consoles. i can't wait for console parity!

but then what will the fanboys talk about

but, but, but...... some believe its because the 360 has the weaker hardware like DVD, so the PS3 version is made worse by this.

i thought it was understood that the ps3 had the weaker GPU?
ps3 has the stronger CPU with architecture capable of helping the gpu...which is what mynd meant by "buggering around", as doing this isn't easy...

[F34R]

I like the comparisons. Sometimes there are small differences, other times there are decently measurable differences. I always get the best possible version of the game between the two/three consoles. Period.

[Disgustipated]

Games are usually better on the 360 because they are developed for that console and then ported to the PS3. Developers always develop the game for the "weaker" console. They need to make sure everything is optimized to fit on the 360's format. And when I say "weaker", I am not strictly talking about horsepower. Disc format is a weakness as well.

So this is why the PS3 versions usually almost always seem a little inferior when compared to the console the games were originally created for.

Anyone who played Final Fantasy XIII on both the PS3 and 360 will immediately notice that the PS3 version is superior. That game was originally developed for that console and then ported to the 360.

Please correct if I am wrong though.

I would have to agree on this. For example, Metal Gear Rising is sure to be better looking on PS3 than the 360 version. In fact, I don't believe the japanese are even getting a 360 version of the game in Japan because the 360 sells so poorly there. It will definately be interesting to see the differences (if any) in the two console versions when it's released.

[TGO]

I would have to agree on this. For example, Metal Gear Rising is sure to be better looking on PS3 than the 360 version. In fact, I don't believe the japanese are even getting a 360 version of the game in Japan because the 360 sells so poorly there. It will definately be interesting to see the differences (if any) in the two console versions when it's released.

Metal Gear Rising is a interesting one because of Platinum Games, you will immediately think of Bayonetta and the inferior PS3 port
Yet Vanquish which was made on both systems by Platinum Games was better on PS3
I really think it does come down to the developers, not saying they are lazy, just some are better then some

Sent via Codec

[mynd]

I would have to agree on this. For example, Metal Gear Rising is sure to be better looking on PS3 than the 360 version. In fact, I don't believe the japanese are even getting a 360 version of the game in Japan because the 360 sells so poorly there. It will definately be interesting to see the differences (if any) in the two console versions when it's released.

Bayonetta says "no".

Dammit TGO you bet me to it.

I don't recall vanquish being better on PS3, I thought it was identical? Some shadows I think were the difference.

[radgamer420]

Bayonetta says "no". Dammit TGO you bet me to it. I don't recall vanquish being better on PS3, I thought it was identical? Some shadows I think were the difference.

Yep according to DF shadows were better on PS3 but otherwise they were identical. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...quish-face-off

[Completely Average]

that excuse is a bit long in the tooth now.. sure, hard to program for... but not 6 years later.

What makes you think the PS3 is any easier to program for now than it was 6 years ago?

Sure, it's better understood now, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier. It still has the same limitations, same bottlenecks, and the same idiosyncrasies that it had 6 years ago, and that still requires extra time and extra effort to try to work around them.