Final Fantasy XIII Will Use 100% of PS3's Power

[Paragon Fury]

100%?

My god.

Imagine the hair they'll be able to do. IMAGINE THE $%^&* HAIR.

 

[Jumplion]

Sorry if I seemed to be going crazy all over the place, it's just that I've seen this stupid argument a billion times and in all honesty you seemed like the classic PC fanboy/elitist that I see post these kinds of things.

But let's continue, all in good fun of course.

Wow.

I think someone needs to turn down the console fanboyism just a tad.

As I said before, it was you who seemed a little overenthusiastic with the PCs

I enjoy both console and PC games, and I enjoy them for different reasons.

Well, good for you, it would have been nice to put a little [sup]*I play both PCs and consoles*[/sup] to avoid most of this, though I'll admit that's more of a personal gripe.

However, simply because you attacked with such ferocity, I feel the need to poke a hole in every argument you have, so, here goes:

Like I said before, sorry if it seemed like I was going crazy, but I've seen this argument a billion times and it frustrates me to see a bucnh of PC "dudes" come around and go crazy over "PC IS SUPERIOR!@#!@$" Not saying you intentially did that, but that's how your comment came off to me.

Never talking about PCs? This is a forum about gaming, isn't it? And PCs are a part of gaming, no? Also, why is it that 40% of the posts I can see right now (Latest comments, most popular, etc.) are for PC-only games?

We're not talking about PCs in this thread. You can't go to a thread about Pies and start talking about Cars just because it's the "off-topic" board. There may have been other PC-related posts, however yours was the most prominent out of a necroed thread.

Gaming consoles were created way back when computers couldn't play games, but the acceleration in computer technology has outpaced that of consoles, however consoles have been able to keep up with visuals by using 'different' ways of rendering (not better, not worse, just different). This is because a console's renderer can be more static, because it's somewhat predictable what's going to happen. The fact that consoles can keep up is quite simply remarkable, and a wonderful feat. However, the simple fact remains, consoles just don't have the processing power, and aren't dynamic enough to be the future. They are great in their own respect, but as we drift closer to not needing a dedicated machine exclusively for gaming, I feel that consoles will slowly die out.

I say that's a load of bullhonkey. Like I said before, consoles get outdated practically the month they're released, the advantage is you don't have to have advanced researching capabilities and technical know-how just to put the damn Motherboard in the case. Pcs and Consoles attract different crowds, when the Oddessy was released you better believe that PCs were lightyears ahead of it technologically, it just wasn't fully in the public at that time.

There are a ton of games being released and advertised primarily on consoles. I am not, nor have I ever said or suggested, that PC gaming is dead/dieing, but you've got to admit the focus tends to be more on the console side nowadays. Whether or not this is a fad, I cannot say, but I firmly believe that consoles won't be gone for a while.

As for building or purchasing a computer, it doesn't take much time or expertise, and it's not like people don't buy them for other purposes, such as professional applications like digital graphics, audio and video editing, etc., all of which generally require 'gaming' quality PCs.

I highly doubt a stay-at-home-mother/father requires a quad-core-duo-163783DX3 multi-core processor (I took that right out of my ass) to share simple photos. Right now I'm assuming buy "getting their own PC" you're saying to build the PC, and you better believe that the majority have no clue where the damn "Esc" button is.

The issue with the PS3 isn't that it is obsolete in 5 years; the issue is that Sony wants the PS3 to be on the market for 15. At the current rate of development, the iPhone GSXPZ will be playing games similar to a PS3 by the time it's life is at an end.

PlayStation 2

Need more? Okay, the Wii.

It doesn't matter how obsolute the technology is, it's what you can do with it. The PS2 definately has extremely inferior hardware in it and yet it has a life-span of nearly 10 years and they're even selling them in Latin America (as Sony said last E3) a place where nobody can afford to build their own PC let alone buy a premade one.

People thought God of War visuals looked impressive on the PS2, imagine everyone's surprise when God of War 2 came along on the PS2. It blew everyone out of the water.

As for games; I generally prefer PC games, simply because I have an obsession with accurate physics which borders on the fetishistic, and to date I've seen only two games which satisfy that on consoles, both of which have been ported to PC. In short, there are great games which are only available on consoles, but there are just as many for PCs.

Alright then, good for you, I'm glad you think that. (<---Not sarcasm, don't worry)

As for consumption vs. efficiency: modern computation has drawn away from this; nearly all APIs are designed to be as efficient as possible, code is written in an intelligent and logical manner, and even the processors and compilers themselves are so advanced that they optimize code on-the-fly (trust me, when you write in assembly, you can see just how well this works). Coupled with the power of modern processors, even 100% consumption could be 98% efficiency, due simply to the abundance of available cycles for computation, the small number of unnecessary and redundant cycles would amount to little more than nano-seconds.

I call a load of bull on that, but supposed 100% consumption is 98% efficiency. That extra 2% of efficiency could be the thing we need to push it even further. I remember my dad once told me something about cars; "Only 1% of the total energy goes to moving the driver and the rest is to the car. If we could make 5% of the energy go to the driver, it would be a breakthrough in technology." Granted, I have no idea how accurate it is as he told me this a few years ago, but even the slightist bit of efficiency can mean the difference between 60fps and 20fps.

And finally, before you accuse me of "[going] around spouting PC stuff all over the place", might want to check my posts; this is the first time I've ever posted anything about PC gaming.

Again, I'm sorry if I came off as crazy, but I have seen so many posts like that and it just infuriates me whenever I see someone come off as "PCs ARE TEH BETTURZ THAN CONSULZ!#$!@#!$" (again, not saying you did that, but it came off like that). A person saying the same thing, but vice versa would never get away with that and I'd agree with any PC person who'd say "no, PCs are much superior than consoles" but it's just wholley out of place when we're talking about a console game and PCs aren't the main subject in the thread.

Sorry for the huge quote tower, I type more than I think I do.

 

[Gladion]

Thats right 100% of the PS3 power on unskippable cut scenes! Cant wait for me to watch all of the coolest parts of this game unfold right before me and me contributing nothing at all.

Who the hell makes cutscenes unskippable nowadays?

Though it's not like you really can skip the cutscenes. Doing that can easily leave you confused, as one moment you could be on a train and then after a brief cutscene you could be suddenly fighting a giant crab demon.

even Xenosagas cutscenes were skippable.... the second time thru any way - and that's O.K. i think i got around to skipping all the cutscenes by teh third play through of every game, it just never makes sense (to me any way) to skip the story parts of the games the first time you get to them, but then i am crazy

No, it's perfectly right, but in my book, a good game must feature the option to fucking pause a cutscene. Why do so little games have that? What if the doorbell rings or something? You're fucked.

damn, you're right!!! not to sound like to much of a fanboy but once again Xenosaga let you pause teh cutscenes and decide to continue or skip. we must bring the light of Namco to the rest of the gaming world!!!!

Now I wanna be a fanboy too, for once. Shadow Hearts 2 did it as well ;D

But to be perfectly fair, I think you could also pause the cutscenes in Final Fantasy 12, couldn't you?

 

[FinalHeart95]

Oh God, the 360 version is going to be awful. They either need to nerf it for the 360 or the 360 version will run like shit.

Besides, didn't MGS 4 also push the PS3 to the limit, or was it just that there wasn't enough memory on the disk so they had to cut down on it? I can't remember.

Have you ever known Square Enix to make a 'horrible' game? Sure, Ok, Dirge of Cerebus... but, that wasn't really a horrible PERFORMING game.. just a horribly WRITTEN game. The gameplay was lame, but otherwise it still worked better than a HUGE margin of other PS2 games.

I have faith in Square Enix that no matter what, they will deliver an identical quality game to both consoles, and the only difference between the two will be on the graphical end, but it won't be such a difference in quality graphically that 99% of gamers would notice.
I imagine it'll be something like Fallout 3 or Ghostbusters... Side by side visual comparisons might be slightly noticeable, but it's not going to be a deal breaker, and I doubt that after all the bitching about the "exhorbitant price" of the PS3 that people are going to run out and buy a PS3 just to play it if they already have a 360 unless it turns out the 360 version is incredibly broken.

And as for the amount of disks, I've noticed that a game's fun-factor and quality is rarely limited by being printed on multiple disks. Sure it's 'bitching-fodder' for fanboys who live in a state of denial of the fact that complaining about having to change out disks is really more of a declaration of that person's inherent laziness and our society's increasing need for "instant gratification", which will be rendered moot by the high likelihood that the game will be fully installable upon the hard drive to alleviate the entire issue.

Well, if the game pushes the PS3 100%, then it can't possibly be as good-looking on the 360, as th PS3 is a much stronger system graphically. A game that pushes the PS3 100% will look better than a game that pushes the 360 100%.

Also, I wasn't complaining about the amount of disks, I just couldn't remember if MGS 4 had to cut down on the amount of content to fit onto the disks or if it was another game that pushed the PS3 to its limit.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

A game that pushes the PS3 100% will look better than a game that pushes the 360 100%.

Also, I wasn't complaining about the amount of disks, I just couldn't remember if MGS 4 had to cut down on the amount of content to fit onto the disks or if it was another game that pushed the PS3 to its limit.

I've never advocated that they would look the same.
I just believe that with Square's standards for quality, any GRAPHICAL difference will be negligible, and will only matter to absolute graphix-whorez. For me, how great a game looks is far from as important as it PLAYS... if the PS3 version has massive bugs compared to the Xbox version, I don't care if the PS3 version was in HD and featured the faces of me and all of my friends recreated in perfect cgi from a scan of my Eye toy, I'm getting the version that plays well.

That said, Side by side comparisons of visuals is for people who get off to particle effect beauty and such things. But the GAME, itself, will undoubtedly be so similar on both consoles that you won't be able to tell the difference at a glance under normal circumstances.
If I built a kiosk and played Fallout 3, I can almost guarantee you won't be able to tell what console it's playing on.

As for the graphical dominance of the PS3, I've somewhat begun to question that over the past year or so... I'm not so certain the PS3's graphical power is much greater than that of the 360 based on the video cards and chipsets, but thats for another argument in another forum.

 

[traceur_]

*raises hand* umm yeh... technologically retarded guy here. What exactly does using "100% of the PS3's power" mean? longer game? good graphics? can someone enlighten me?

Anyway I think it will be a great game, I'm the kinda guy who absolutely loves pre-rendered cutscenes and would never think of skipping one so fingers crossed for lots of them. From what I've seen on gametrailers, it looks orgasmic.

 

[Jumplion]

*raises hand* umm yeh... technologically retarded guy here. What exactly does using "100% of the PS3's power" mean? longer game? good graphics? can someone enlighten me?

And that is why this "We're using 100% of the PS3's powah!" is bullshit. 100% doesn't mean anything if it's used in different parts. For example, like you said, 100% could mean they used 100% to make a longer game or to make it 1080p/higher-def. 100% could mean they used up 100% of the audio they could use, or 100% of the power to the cutscenes for Christ's sake!

100% doesn't mean anything unless 100% for everything.

Good job, you get a cookie out of not knowing anything. Which would you like, Sugar or Chocolate Chip?

 

[Vriggchan]

I would hope that the US ps3 version is the same as the japanese while the company revamped the game for the 360.

 

[traceur_]

*raises hand* umm yeh... technologically retarded guy here. What exactly does using "100% of the PS3's power" mean? longer game? good graphics? can someone enlighten me?

And that is why this "We're using 100% of the PS3's powah!" is bullshit. 100% doesn't mean anything if it's used in different parts. For example, like you said, 100% could mean they used 100% to make a longer game or to make it 1080p/higher-def. 100% could mean they used up 100% of the audio they could use, or 100% of the power to the cutscenes for Christ's sake!

100% doesn't mean anything unless 100% for everything.

Good job, you get a cookie out of not knowing anything. Which would you like, Sugar or Chocolate Chip?

ooo chocolate chip please.

 

[rated pg]

How does it do it? Simple, it pushed the limit but isn't well optimized to take advantage of the resources. That also explains how it works on the 360.

Well that, and Squeenix is well known for its lies.

 

[Brockyman]

I mean, we already have Crysis - who's to say that PC games won't keep pushing that margin?

Well, I'm guessing the PS3 will actually be able to run FFXIII. Though, the price of the PS3 makes it just about as accessible as Crysis.

Anyway, I can't wait to see it in action on my new 42" plasma in my room. Only like another 3 years, right?

Seeing as a PS3 is $400 US and buying a PC that can support Crysis can be well over $1000 or the investment in money and time to upgrading your current PC...your statement makes little to know sense

It makes know sense? Really? I hope you were trying to be ironic. If not, you're just an idiot.

Two things: for many people, $400 may as well be $1000 dollars. If both are out of their price range, they're both inaccessible and the difference matters little. Next, I believe the PS3's price has gone down since I made that post THREE MONTHS AGO.

Ok, Your entire response is a weak attempt to make up for your ignorant statement.

First of all, the "know" was a typo. I was doing two things at once and mistyped. I'm not an idiot, I'm a human that makes mistakes. A person's intelligence can't be determined by their writing style or a few typos..

I try to quickly proof read and use my best spelling and grammar, but I doesn't read over a forum post on a gaming website like it was a freaking term paper to impress some pretentious pricks that think they are Grammar Gods.

So...with all due respect...get the f*ck over it.

Now, on to the subject at hand.

I hate it when people use the "the pity argument" like you used... If a person wants something bad enough in life, they will work to get it, and earning/saving an extra $400 is a lot easier then an extra grand. And if a person is so poor that he can't feed or cloth himself, then this argument shouldn't even enter their minds...they should be focused on feeding and clothing themselves. But, for most people, $400 is a LOT more accessible then $1000+. It's doing a few extra hours of overtime or cutting back on other luxuries.

The stupidest thing about your argument is that it doesn't affect you at all. You just stated the you bought a 42 inch plasma tv.

And last, I checked bestbuy.com before making this post. a 80G PS3 still costs $399.99 (US).

Just remember, before you start bashing people for a little typing error, how about you check your own facts first... You're an adult, now try to act like one.

 

[Krakyn]

I mean, we already have Crysis - who's to say that PC games won't keep pushing that margin?

Well, I'm guessing the PS3 will actually be able to run FFXIII. Though, the price of the PS3 makes it just about as accessible as Crysis.

Anyway, I can't wait to see it in action on my new 42" plasma in my room. Only like another 3 years, right?

Seeing as a PS3 is $400 US and buying a PC that can support Crysis can be well over $1000 or the investment in money and time to upgrading your current PC...your statement makes little to know sense

It makes know sense? Really? I hope you were trying to be ironic. If not, you're just an idiot.

Two things: for many people, $400 may as well be $1000 dollars. If both are out of their price range, they're both inaccessible and the difference matters little. Next, I believe the PS3's price has gone down since I made that post THREE MONTHS AGO.

Ok, Your entire response is a weak attempt to make up for your ignorant statement.

First of all, the "know" was a typo. I was doing two things at once and mistyped. I'm not an idiot, I'm a human that makes mistakes. A person's intelligence can't be determined by their writing style or a few typos..

I try to quickly proof read and use my best spelling and grammar, but I doesn't read over a forum post on a gaming website like it was a freaking term paper to impress some pretentious pricks that think they are Grammar Gods.

So...with all due respect...get the f*ck over it.

Now, on to the subject at hand.

I hate it when people use the "the pity argument" like you used... If a person wants something bad enough in life, they will work to get it, and earning/saving an extra $400 is a lot easier then an extra grand. And if a person is so poor that he can't feed or cloth himself, then this argument shouldn't even enter their minds...they should be focused on feeding and clothing themselves. But, for most people, $400 is a LOT more accessible then $1000+. It's doing a few extra hours of overtime or cutting back on other luxuries.

The stupidest thing about your argument is that it doesn't affect you at all. You just stated the you bought a 42 inch plasma tv.

1. Nobody said that the price affected me.
2. I wasn't using a pity argument, I was using a practicality argument. Most people wouldn't buy a $1000 dollar computer to play Crysis..and as the market shows, most people wouldn't buy a $400 PS3. There's a limit to what people will pay for a certain product, and while your argument of "if they want it enough" may make sense to you, we're not talking about "if they want it enough." I specifically said in my original post "just as accessible." If you thought the PS3 was worth the money, you would've already bought it like I did.

Most wheelchair-bound people can get up a flight of stairs if they throw themselves to the ground and work hard enough pulling themselves up, but does that make it handicap accessible? I don't think so.

lol stupidest part of my argument. Way to make assumptions, retard; you've actually turned it into one of my best points. It just goes to show that I have more perspective than you. I'm able to look at things from a viewpoint that's not my own, where as you give the ol' "if you work hard enough, anything is possible" line.

And last, I checked bestbuy.com before making this post. a 80G PS3 still costs $399.99 (US).

Just remember, before you start bashing people for a little typing error, how about you check your own facts first... You're an adult, now try to act like one.

Dur-hur, way to check the current price, genius. Like I said in my last post, my original post was THREE MONTHS AGO. Get it through your thick skull. What was the price in March, huh?

It's like talking to wall around here sometimes. A severely brain-damaged wall.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

I just hope it will run well on the average 360, and that it will live up to the immense hype. We've only snagged one former-Final-Fantasy-PS3-Exclusive so far, so let's hope it turns out well.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

*snip*

Good God you just said something I admire. What the hell's wrong with you? You're supposed to be my PS3 fanboy hate figure. I can't like you. It's against the rules.

I agree with you that that the concept of using 100% of the PS3's power is marketing crap, as it would be for any game on any system.

 

[Froobyx]

Blimey every 360 running this is going to combust!

I was thinking along the same lines

 

[Iron Mal]

Vegeta, what does the scouter say about his power level?

It says...1006...kick his ass Nappa.

To me this whole thing sounds like a 'we have better graphics than you' claim, this doesn't nessercarily mean the game is going to be any better.

 

[peterwolfe]

Final Fantasy XIII will make the PS3 use 100% of it's power...thus detonating consoles worldwide, killing billions.

 

[Rayansaki]

Guess they were full of %&$#.