The Playstation Loses.. To the Playstation

[RikSharp]

edit...

Do you have any understanding of the words irrelevant and anecdotal? Any at all? It means unsubstantiated and unverifified, and not in any way linked to the subject matter respectively. Look, Developer word is fact. you are an idiot. If Sucker Punch says that inFAMOUS only works on the Ps3, its only possible on the Ps3. End of story. No arguing, no "yeah, but". Nothing. It cannot be done on the PC, because the PC is designed differently to the Ps3. If you're going to use the word inferior, then it gets applied to the PC, because its producing as-good results but is cheaper.

God of War is more respected than a fair few of the games on your list, and the fact that you say its a button masher says you're a tool as well as being an idiot. It means you haven't played it on anything other than the pussy level. And even still, you listed it as a good PC game (well I'm pretty sure you did, unless you used God Of Wars acronymn to describe another game, but even you aren't that completely, totally and utterly stupid)

so, as i developed a small flash game and i say it can't run on ps3, as developer, my word is fact and the ps3 must be inferior to pc as any pc can run it...

edit myself:
did you just say that as PC gets the same results for cheaper, its inferior...
i'd of thought that would make PC superior...

No, the Ps3 is producing as-good results but cheaper. I thought that would have been clear.

"then it gets applied to PC, because it's producing as-good results but is cheaper"
definately sounds like you said it about the PC...

and besides, sidestepped my first point.
i say ps3 cant run a basic flash game and by your argument i must be right, so which is it?
am i right and the ps3 is not as good as pc or are you wrong and anything console can be reproduced on the right pc system?

 

[DrScoobs]

Why? Wasn't one God Of War enough? I liked the First but the second one was the same exact game. We didn't need two, much less three.

I'm hearing alot of people on this thread say they want the PS3 to lose it's exclusives.

Whatever happened to it not having good exclusives anyway? You fanboys are so hypocritical.

InFamous is as good as it gets. What else does it have, seriously?

God of War 3 (Recycled Game)

Metal Gear Solid 4 (Boring game, bad story. For the record I didn't play the first two Metal Gear Solids, but I played the third one and the story was.. decent, but the game was terrible.)

Final Fantasy (Overall atrocious)

Killzone 2 (Hell, I remember that the original Killzone on my PS2 was basicly a Sci-Fi mish-mash of the Iraq War and WW2. I remember this city that eerily reminded me of Baghdad and another mission set with pillboxes and trenches with barbed wire that reminded me of D-Day. There wasn't a story I could remember, and the game felt clunky and mishandled. )

Besides InFamous the playstation 3 doesn't have a strong catalog.

As I said, I had a PS2 last time around, this console generation I waited, I did my research on what games were coming out for what console. A big monetary investment like this isn't something i'm going to do based solely on brand loyalty. Playstation 3 didn't really impress me at all. It came down to Wii and 360 and 360 held the stronger catalog of games.


Playstation 3 is failing because its always sold on the promise of good things to come. Well we WILL have this and we WILL have that, but for now amuse yourself. The 360, while having a broader catalog of games, still doesn't have the mass appeal that the Wii does. Not only appealing to teenage girls, but soccer moms, children, and those poor misguided souls who hold hope that Metroid, Legend of Zelda, and Mario will justify a purchase of an entire gaming console. I will agree that the Playstation 2 was the better console from the last console generation but what the fuck happened to all of the good games I remember?

and halo 3 wasnt a remake of halo 2 with better graphics. gears of war 2 was 1 with better multiplay.
mgs has a betta story than most games and i rly enjoyed all of the series.
final fantasy? atrocious O_O. what are you on?
yea killzone 1 was pretty average but killzone 2 was actually good!

 

[DrScoobs]

wow flame wars on this thread! what a surprise!

 

[RikSharp]

@ metroidgearsolid

>';-)

i'm only arguing because indigo dingos logic was way off.
i appreciate that all systems are different and neither is better.

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

No-one is denying that the PC has great games. My point is that there is no situation under which you can say it has the best, as ignorant PC-tards keep saying. The PC doesn't have Shadow of the Collosus, therefore it can never claim to have the best. The Ps3 doesn't have Warcraft III, therefore it can never claim to have the best.

I thought this was a debate on how good the PS3 was compared to the PC.

1. Shadow of Colossus is not god's gift to gamers. There are many greater games than it. It is completely subjective whether or not any specific person likes it or not, much like your Metal Gear example and my Diablo II example. Plus, Shadow of Colossus is not a PS3 game, so its inclusion is irrelevant to the arguement.

2. The PC has a far better selection of RTS games than the PS3, ergo will be a better system for anyone who likes that genre.

3. The PC has a far better FPS selection than the PS3, ergo will be a better system for anyone that likes that genre.

4. The PC has a better Hack and Slash selection than the PS3, ergo will be a better system again, for anyone that likes that genre.

5. The PC has a far larger selection for any MMOs that there are to play. Again, the PC wins.

6. The PC has a far larger selection of Western style RPGs. If you wish to play them, I would suggest a PC over any other system.

7. Unlike consoles, if you upgrade your computer to "the next level", you can also find mods which will increase the capabilities of many different games, to almost be of that "next level's" quality. If I play an old game in my new system console wise, often they will look worse (when hooked up to the very TV that the PS3 is designed for).

8. If I run out of storage on my PC, I can simply add another harddrive. I can burn information to save space. If I run out of space on a PS3, I have to replace the harddrive, which means that I may lose information and reinstallion is often necessary. It is very cumbursome compared to a PC. I can't backup any items that I have purchased, I need to redownload them, which often takes a large amount of time.

9. To make my games perform better, I can simply upgrade a single component. Your games will never perform better than they were originally designed. If it has slowdown, it will continue to have slowdown.

All your "facts" about how the PC is superior are irrelevant. You keep talking about how the Cell application in place of a regular processor used in the same conditions will lead to it getting less than impressive results. I rebutt by saying that using it in the exact same situations is not using it correctly, that as the developers keep saying, when a game is designed around the Cell (as all of the games I said were), it is much more impressive, and that the game itself cannot function on a PC. Like how Crysis can only run on the PC - it is using resources available differently. If we see a lack of the resource the developers say is the basis of the game, then its pretty clear that the game couldn't function on said platform.

Certainly, you can continue to use your ratchet to hammer in the nail into the wall, while I will use a different tool called a hammer, which is far more apporopriate to the task at hand. As well, my finished job will more than likely be better, as I have less of a chance at screwing up.

And no, GoW is not the acronymn for Gears of War. Thats just stupid. Its acronymn is GeoW, due to precedent.

I hear GoW used for both God of War and Gears of War. I have to read the conversation to identify which they are talking about. I have not ever seen GeoW used once. Just because you think that GoW only stands for one thing, doesn't mean it's true. Truy Googling "GoW". I think it's pretty safe to say that Gears wins this round.

Oh, and look up the mods for Unreal Tournament III.

Okay, there is one game that uses mods...that you have to design on a PC...I was wrong in there are no games that support them. However, I don't think my point is truely countered. Modding on the PC is second nature to many games, and has yet to be worked into console gaming as a whole. Games that are designed for modding first are mostly only moddable on the PC. Which will always make their version of the game superior.

 

[Woe Is You]

The PS3 version of UT3 had some legal issues regarding the sounds so you can't make any mods with custom sounds, though.

That means no total conversions, really.

 

[RikSharp]

it says:
"Shadow of Colossus is not god's gift to gamers. "
not that it wasn't good.

and besides, shadow of colossus was a ps2 game and as such irrelevant...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sotc_boxart.jpg

 

[Woe Is You]

It was at the point where you said that Shadow of the Collosus wasn't good that it became evident you are just arguing without basis.

Well, you've been doing the same in regards to games on other platforms with the addition of insulting people for disagreeing and exaggerating their position (the last one being a common trolling tactic). Like... I don't know, this thing I'm quoting right here is a good example of what you like doing.

 

[bounceback11]

Indigo dingo because a developer says that infamous isn't possible on anything other than a ps3 it has nothing to do with technology its because sony own the fucking rights. Thats why nothing to do with the cell which sony fans seem to see as some kind of fucking NASA grade technology.
Yes the cell is more powerful than any other console processor but it is fucking small fry compared to most new hardware.
EA said its actually easier to develop on cell tech and then port to standard processing which is exactly how they developed Burnout Paradise. There is a prime example for you of the worlds biggest publisher stating the ease of porting from cell to standard processor.
Have you looked at sonys business plan do you even realise that they plan to start putting cells in TVS and FRIDGES??? One cell on is own is not powerful the unigueness of cells is the ability to combine them that is why sony at the last minute compromised and put a graphics card in the ps3, a decision Ken Kutaragi himself said they didn't expect to have to do. So yes a fucktonne of cells in a supercomputer AWESOME, one cell in a ps3 distinctly average!

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

It was at the point where you said that Shadow of the Collosus wasn't good that it became evident you are just arguing without basis.

I know you like to twist people's words to suit your own needs, but that is ridiculous. I like how when your arguements are proven to be baseless you run away with your tail tucked between your legs.

It's okay to like other systems.
It's okay to like games on other systems.
It is also okay to prefer one system to another.

But when you start spouting off nonsense about how one system is better than another, you had best have all of your facts straight before doing so. Opinions and repeating company rhetoric mean absolutely zero. Otherwise you may be associated with this guy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Romero].

For some facts, I like the PC. I also like the PS3. I chose the PS3 because of the backwards compatability (which was removed in later models, being one of Sony's sillier mistakes) and of the future franchises that would be appearing on it. At the time I did not know of the other good games that would appear, like Uncharted, LittleBigPlanet and Valkyria Chronicals. As well, the games that were on the XBox that I was interested in were also on the PC, a system that wasn't prone to failure. So by buying the PS3, I got the best of all worlds, in my own mind.

If I did not have a PC that could run good games, it would be a closer race, as there are great games on the XBox that I was interested in (like Mass Effect, Fable, Riddick, KoToR). Right now, I can safely say there are only 2 games I would like to play that I can't get: Fable II and Castle Crashers. We'll see what the future holds, but right now I made a good choice for me.

It'd be nice if more people would spout less opinion as fact. It would make for far fewer flame wars...

 

[Laughing Man]

I know I said I wouldn't post again but... The PS3 has 256MB of VRAM and 256MB of RAM. The average gaming PC has 3GB of RAM and 512MB of VRAM. This means that you could (if you had a PS3 emulator) run any PS3 game that exists and ever will exist. Also, the Cell processor (which would have been your logical counterargument) is roughly equivalent in UTILIZED (not potential, utilized) power to an AMD Athlon 4800+. Also (again), the Xbox 360 is pretty much equivalent (512MB shared memory between VRAM and RAM) to a ps3 in every aspect except the processor.

What the hell are you talking about.

Wow where to start?

1). Using RAM and VRam to find comparatives between consoles and PC is stupidly flawed. You can't even use the core hardware to find a comparative, Here's an example why. If you take a 1.4L engine and stick it in a ton and a half of family hatchback then the car will be fairly slow and have a limited top speed (PC). Now take that 1.4L engine and stick it in a motorbike chassis and suddenly you have something that will kick the ass out of most modern super cars (Console.) Exactly the same hardware but applied differently.

2). The PS3 doesn't even use the same instruction set architecture for it's CPU and GPU. A PC will use the X86 instruction set the PS3 uses what is sexily called the SPU Instructtion set. So right from the off you can determine that the PS3 operates in a different way to a standard PC. Remember the 1.4L engine in the Car vs Bike.

3). The GPU on a PC usually uses the Directx API. On the other hand the PS3 uses the Opengl API. So once again same 'engine' being used in a different 'chassis'

4).This is the biggy. The games / software for the PS3 are designed to be run on a system that has 7 CPU cores. Now to my knowledge their is only a few select PC systems out there that have anywhere near that many cores, we're talking Skulltrail and serious cash here. So assuming that the majority of PC gamers don't have 4 grand PCs lying about you would need to develop an emulator that is capable of taking a program that is designed to run on 7 threads and get it to combine the work load in to 2 threads. You would also then require the program to do the on fly conversion of the graphics API and the on fly conversion of the instruction set. Now you see why their isn't any PS3 emulators out there.

This means that you could run a lot (most) ps3 games on a 360 if you cut down on the processor-heavy calculations (physics, volumetrics etc). And, FYI, you probably could play STALKER on a Ps2 if you cut down on the graphics and installed half the game onto a hard drive (like the Ps3 does with its games).

5). You could fly to the moon if you stuck a rocket up your arse and wished hard enough but chances are all you would end up with is a badly burnt anus. Saying what you could do if.... does not mean you should or for that matter actually could.

Finally

Examples of good PC games include:
-Crysis (can't be run by ps3)

Actually Crytek have said that they could get Crysis to run on BOTH current gen consoles.

http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/10480/Crytek_Says_Crysis_Next-Gen_Ports_are_Possible.html

 

[bounceback11]

4).This is the biggy. The games / software for the PS3 are designed to be run on a system that has 7 CPU cores. Now to my knowledge their is only a few select PC systems out there that have anywhere near that many cores, we're talking Skulltrail and serious cash here. So assuming that the majority of PC gamers don't have 4 grand PCs lying about you would need to develop an emulator that is capable of taking a program that is designed to run on 7 threads and get it to combine the work load in to 2 threads. You would also then require the program to do the on fly conversion of the graphics API and the on fly conversion of the instruction set. Now you see why their isn't any PS3 emulators out there.

Erm Nope...You are correct in assuming that the ps3 has 7 cores. One runs the operating system and the other six run the games (just to point out though an xbox 360 actually has 3 cores and its processor is based upon upgraded ps3 tech but obviously is not as powerful) but you compare cell and standard pc processing with no knowledge of how they actually work. Standard processor have numerous features which the cell lacks such as branch prediction etc...it gets v technical...that actually mean whilst not having as many cores as as a cell they are actually capable of much higher performance. Therefore mid to high spec dual core processors easily best the ps3 for power and the gaming processors are far ahead. As I have previously said cell processors are great if you have a load of them such as the IBM supercomputer but just one on its own is average compared to pc tech.

 

[Jumplion]

Condense

If you had read further into this paragraph;

No-one is denying that the PC has great games. My point is that there is no situation under which you can say it has the best, as ignorant PC-tards keep saying. The PC doesn't have Shadow of the Collosus, therefore it can never claim to have the best. The Ps3 doesn't have Warcraft III, therefore it can never claim to have the best.

and read the last sentence, then that whole list would have been avoided.

Seriously, Indigo made a compromise right there and everyone still gets off their rocker and goes after him.

That's just a notice on that one part, not the whole argument.

Just sayin'...

EDIT: Though as an overall point, I feel that when developers (mainly on PS3) say "It's only possible on PS3" they mean mainly against the other consoles, and not really recognizing the PC. PCs can play most if not all games, no denying that, but when people say "It's only possible on PS3/Wii/360!" they probably mainly mean it's only possible on that console and not the other consoles.

 

[Pendragon9]

Oy. Are you people still arguing about this? I bet Yahtzee would be facepalming tenfold if he were to wander onto these forums and see everyone trying to argue their opinions as fact.

LEt me clear it up for everyone.

The Ps3 has good games.

The 360 has good games.

The Wii even has good games.

The Pc also shares good games.

You're entitled to your opinions, but stop trying to pass them off as fact. I'm really getting tired of it. It's a sickening trend where people seem to think their opinions on games are accepted fact.

Okay? So can we stop the arguing and the tech talk going out of hand?

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

Condense

If you had read further into this paragraph;

No-one is denying that the PC has great games. My point is that there is no situation under which you can say it has the best, as ignorant PC-tards keep saying. The PC doesn't have Shadow of the Collosus, therefore it can never claim to have the best. The Ps3 doesn't have Warcraft III, therefore it can never claim to have the best.

and read the last sentence, then that whole list would have been avoided.

Seriously, Indigo made a compromise right there and everyone still gets off their rocker and goes after him.

That's just a notice on that one part, not the whole argument.

Just sayin'...

Certainly, I did see that, and if he had stopped his statement there, I wouldn't have had an issue. Instead he chose to press his "point" that the PS3 is better than the PC due to "superior" games. If he wants to start a debate with his claims then he should be prepared to back them up with facts rather than rhetoric. He has yet to respond to all of my points, rather choosing to cherry pick certain ones to twist words to suit his own agenda, and then running when he can't put up an arguement with facts rather than opinion.

EDIT: Though as an overall point, I feel that when developers (mainly on PS3) say "It's only possible on PS3" they mean mainly against the other consoles, and not really recognizing the PC. PCs can play most if not all games, no denying that, but when people say "It's only possible on PS3/Wii/360!" they probably mainly mean it's only possible on that console and not the other consoles.

I'd agree with that statement, to some degree.

 

[Computer-Noob]

I think I read somewhere that the PS2 is to date the most sucessful system ever. Im pretty sure that it was actually the most successful during its own time, but even so, its not totally surprising. But I still think that the whole "ridiculous price" is a bit of a weak reason to not buy it. Then again, the justification for buying the system anyways may change as sales continue (or fail to continue).

I'm hearing alot of people on this thread say they want the PS3 to lose it's exclusives.

Whatever happened to it not having good exclusives anyway? You fanboys are so hypocritical.

Win.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Holy cow! Are people really fighting over whether the PS3 is better than a PC?

You people are comparing a console DEDICATED to gaming to a multi-function product that half the time you have to toy around with settings and drivers to even get a game to work correctly.

Quite frankly, the PS3 does what it was designed to do with little involvement from the consumer. You buy it, you plug it in, you put a game in the drive, and you play.
Thats it, thats all it will ever do and you never need update a driver or run out to get a new video card or even bother checking system requirements to ensure you can even PLAY whatever it is you just bought.

That said, sure the PC has great games.
Unfortunately, those games tend to come far and few between. When was the last great PC game released? It should tell you something that when the most consistent PC game topping the sales lists is an expansion to a 4 year old MMO.
Walk along any PC game rack in walmart and you'll see a slim selection of mediocre titles with a ratio of 1 really good title to 20 throw away Nancy Drew coasters.

Bottom line: if you want to play games, and JUST play games, your best investment is a console.
If you want to do other things and occassionally play a decent game while surfing the internet so you can target forums to argue about how awesome PC gaming is as if you are trying to convince YOURSELF more than anyone else, then fine, enjoy your PC. I wont even get into the difference in cost, considering having a good gaming PC requires a time and financial investment to stay up to date enough to play the latest and greatest with anything resembling consistency.

 

[BBQ Platypus]

Not surprising. Frankly, I'd even be surprised if the Wii sold HALF as many units as the PS2. I mean, they sold 140 million of the damn things.