inFamous Developer: You Can't Do That on a 360

[Treblaine]

UM...You know what you just linked shows the 360's GPU ahead in every single aspect right? Or were you being sarcastic?

PS3 has tons more power, deal with it.. it's fact http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.php?tid=19237 all the numbers favour sony

That chart is waaaaaaayyyyyyyy back in 2006. Is there an updated version of it now?

Why would it need updating? Consoles all have the EXACT SAME SPEC as back in 2006. Hardware update have only made them more power efficient, smaller, quieter and so on, they still have the exact same power, they run exactly the same.

This is why you all need to stop worrying about consoles. If you care about graphics, get a PC as that platform at least that has improved in the past 4 years rather than stagnating like consoles.

Regardless of which is actually "better" PS3 is capable of doing some really interesting things with it's unique hardware architecture that is generally seen with exclusive development. 360 has it's own unique strengths but they aren't that whiz-bang... just clever use of eDRAM for slight performance boost in certain areas.

 

[Zhukov]

Oh dear. I think someone just poked a nest of console fanboys.

 

[Interference]

"We can't do it on Xbox... Because Sony would cut our rather spectacular funding."

 

[Jumplion]

Why would it need updating? Consoles all have the EXACT SAME SPEC as back in 2006. Hardware update have only made them more power efficient, smaller, quieter and so on, they still have the exact same power, they run exactly the same.

Like you said, more power efficiency, smaller, quieter, etc... If they ran exactly the same then there would be no reason to update the hardware at all.

This is why you all need to stop worrying about consoles. If you care about graphics, get a PC as that platform at least that has improved in the past 4 years rather than stagnating like consoles.

We are not talking about graphics.

If what I was led to believe is correct, processing power does more than just graphics.

 

[vivalahelvig]

I'm a PC, and I have no place in this thread.

 

[Sea Auteur]

I didn't realize processing power made games more fun. I also didn't realize that the XBox 360 didn't have enough processing power to have fun in the first place. Looks like all the fun I had on it was a lie!

Well apparently the Xbox 360 doesn't have enough processing power to process the power of fun contained within Infamous 2 or Uncharted 2.

By that logic, the NASA/government supercomputers must be the most fun in the world! Hold on, I gotta go steal one now.

Well... launching rockets in your spare time does sound like fun...

NASA: Future dominators of the gaming market.

 

[Bigeyez]

Um in a word No, or at least thats not what I'm trying to say. The best analogy I can come up with off the top of my head is a Mac and PC. A program built to run specifically on the Mac would need tweaking and in some cases serious rewriting to run correctly on a PC. That doesn't mean that Macs are technologically superior it just means the programs architype and structure is completely different. Does that clear it up a bit more?

But that's exactly why these developers say that "[Insert PS3 game here] is impossible on 360", they've built the game around a certain piece of hardware, converting everything just to make the game run on another console is not a really good definition of "possible" to me.

You have to change the game a lot just to make it the same on another console.

Seriously, PS3 developers have been saying "[Blah blah blah] is not possible on [blah blah blah]" for a while now, isn't it possible that there's some validity to this now?

It is a valid claim to make! And thats one of the reasons why companies don't bother porting their PC games to Macs! BUT that DOES NOT mean that the PS3 (or in my analogy Mac) is a "better" machine. It's just completely different. Edit: What they really should be saying is "It would take a lot of man hours and money to port this so we aren't doing to do it". Exactly what most PC developers say about the Mac.

At the end of the day both PS3 and 360 have identical, or near enough that you could barely notice, processing power so this whole debate is essentially just one developer mouthing off to create fanboyism.

Don't you remember when 360 developers were saying that the PS3 was ineffecient to program for and blah blah blah? Same story, other side of the table now.

 

[Tdc2182]

I doubt they are just saying that. If it could really work on a 360 then they would do it, seeing how the 360 sells more.

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

Even with the ammount of bullshit this guy comes out with about the PS3, I still remain neutral in this "Console war". For one reason: we "xboxers" cannot take the high ground when it comes to bullshit, we have Peter Molyneux.

 

[Jumplion]

It is a valid claim to make! And thats one of the reasons why companies don't bother to port their PC games to Macs! BUT that DOES NOT mean that the PS3 (or in my analogy Mac) is a "better" machine. It's just completely different.

Well, now you're just going off somewhere else, because I don't recall claiming that the PS3 is a "better" machine than the 360. I'm just saying that if you have to completely rewrite you game's code that is originally on one system, just so it can be on another console (and on top of that with bugs, glitches, and basically starting a brand new game), it's basically as good as impossible/extremely difficult to me.

Personally, I think that if you either start with the intent of making a game for multiplatforms, you take multiple platforms in consideration.

 

[Macgyvercas]

I officially call bullshit.

I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty damn sure that the Xbox and the PS3 can both handle the exact same things.

Next time, I hope they just say, "Yeah, screw Xbox, we like PS3 more."

Believe it or not, I think the 360 has a better frame rate, or at least a more consistant one. I looked at side by side screens of Tomb Raider Underworld, and the 360 one did look a bit more refined.

 

[Thunderhorse31]

Technical arguments aside (because they cannot be won)...

That electric vortex scene in the Infamous 2 trailer may be one of the prettiest things I've seen on any console, ever.

He can run his mouth like an idiot for all I care, as long as he delivers a kickass game he can think whatever he wants.

 

[Treblaine]

I'm calling BS on this one. If you can get Rage or Crysis 2 to run on a 360, then you can certainly get a game that is significantly worse looking to run. It's just that Sony either paid them off or they are too lazy to optimize code/engine.

Edit: Same as I would call any 360 exclusive dev saying that a game can only run on the 360. I harbor no bias.

if only it was that simple.

You seem to take games like Rage or Crysis 2 on consoles with many assumptions:
-each are AS BEST as they could possibly appear on each system (they aren't, they settle for good enough)
-the developers are not merely trying to find the highest common denominator in processing between each system (actually they are doing that)
-both of those games WILL in fact look as good as each other (Digital Foundry have found this is rarely the case)

Regardless, if you want the best version of either of those games then get the PC version and upgrade your PC.

See it is when you have EXCLUSIVE development, that is when developers can respectively exploit each system's special abilities, code in content based on each system's strengths and avoiding its weaknesses.

While there have been good exclusive Xbox 360 games in terms of gameplay, the machine has failed to really deliver the amazing graphics through even extended periods of exclusive development in the same way PS3 has.

Now graphics don't make a great games to justify getting a console but they DO justify their expense, Xbox 360 Elite with Gold Subscription can be very expensive. Graphics = money. With this in mind that is why I got the XBox Arcade, the system is not worth any more than $199 in terms of graphical capability.

 

[FinalHeart95]

PS3 IS better, that much is true. It's obvious they support the PS3 in this case seeing how their game is an exclusive for it though.

As for whether or not it would work on a 360 though, I'm not sure. I'm not a programmer.

 

[cobrausn]

You know what the PS3 and Xbox can't do? Anything a good PC can. My laptop is more powerful than either.

Seriously, didn't console wars die with the SNES and Sega Genesis, back when spending a couple hundred bucks on a system was a lot of money? Considering the pricing of consoles these days and the amount of money people blow on games anyway, pretty much anybody who really wanted to could afford both of them.

 

[Nick Holmgren]

How many people on gamefaqs have already used this in a console war? Taking all bets.

 

[Breaker deGodot]

From a marketing standpoint, this makes no sense. Dissing another major console is a great way to turn possible buyers away. This guy is an idiot.

 

[Treblaine]

Why would it need updating? Consoles all have the EXACT SAME SPEC as back in 2006. Hardware update have only made them more power efficient, smaller, quieter and so on, they still have the exact same power, they run exactly the same.

Like you said, more power efficiency, smaller, quieter, etc... If they ran exactly the same then there would be no reason to update the hardware at all.

This is why you all need to stop worrying about consoles. If you care about graphics, get a PC as that platform at least that has improved in the past 4 years rather than stagnating like consoles.

We are not talking about graphics.

If what I was led to believe is correct, processing power does more than just graphics.

OK. PC is better at physics and logic too but only if you consider such features worth a dedicated GPU to process it (yes, paradoxically the graphics cards in PC can sometimes handle the physics). But anyway, quad core CPUs for PC, gigabytes of RAM... they're right crack.

But it's your earlier reply in this quote string I really want to respond to.
PS3 from 2006 runs games EXACTLY THE SAME as a brand new PS3 Slim from 2010... same with Xbox 360. This is what consoles are ALL ABOUT, the specifications are the same just shoved into smaller circuitry, games play identically, there has been no change in performance nor potential performance of any console platforms.

Just to clarify, any differences between Xbox 360 and PS3 in 2006 in terms of graphical capability or any other processing capability will remain the same forever. The "Balance of power" between Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo will only change once a new numbered console is released.

 

[zombays]

"OMG!!!111!!! GRAPHICS MAKE A GAME!", Sucker Punch studios on inFamous 2. Anyone remember Ocarina of Time and Half-life?