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

[zeratul123]

Great this is a must buy.

 

[Natdaprat]

And yet they completely forget the PC can literally run anything, and all future games as hardware continues to evolve. Consoles are just for the masses.

 

[Last Valiance]

Good thing nobody likes infamous then; it was just prototype but worse.
More of a challenge though, I'll give it that; prototype was ridiculously easy.

In theory, the PS3 is better, but in theory, communism works, so why have I lost my train of thought? Oh well, simpsons quote

 

[Dorby5826and360]

The only thing that the developers were going by are the graphics, who cares about graphics, I still play my NES and I believe those games are better than any game out now, "game-play wise".
The developers are just trying to fuel another fanboy war.

 

[Silver Patriot]

I'll just drop in to say that I'm excited for inFamous 2 and I am very happy that they chose to improve upon the original's rougher areas.

[sub][sub][sub]Now where did I leave my keys...[/sub][/sub][/sub]

I want to take the time to stop and agree with what you just said.

[sub]We can take my car. What thread am I dropping you off in?[/sub]

 

[Treblaine]

(in short)Derp, Pc gaming is great, lol. Standardised and shit.

It's all the same standard? Afraid not. It if were, there wouldn't be patches made for just ATI cards, AMD machines, different USB settings (see devices) and whatever else you plug into our loveboxes. Its rather obvious you don't understand that no matter what "standard" things are running, they are not created equal or play nice with different configurations on other closed source systems. Again, HARDWARE is only PART of the issue with gaming. The software APIs must not be buggy. Calling Nvidias "draw" method SHOULD do more or less the same thing as ATIs correct? Wrong. I point you here: http://www.insomniacgames.com/assets/extras/ahairtearingoutbugquiz%282%29.pdf

This is an example using the PS3. You think other hardware doesn't have the same issue?

I program for a living, on different systems, OSes, and different hardware configurations. I can say without a doubt, that just because it "should" doesn't mean it "will". And yes. I know a lot about PC gaming, thanks for the concern however.

I realise there are quite significant differences between ATI and Nvidia cards (also between Intel and AMD processors) but that is a reasonably finite number of combinations. The differences from card to card within Nvidia or ATI's range is pretty insignificant, they just have to accommodate for the two competing draw methods. Competition is good, monopolies are bad.

I mean when was the last PC game to come out that ONLY works on nvidia cards or ONLY works on ATI cards?

 

[Jumplion]

Being someone who owns a copy of Infamous, I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on that one. The game is barely more graphics-intensive / computationally complex than Prototype, a multi-platform game released at the same time.

The only thing that the developers were going by are the graphics, who cares about graphics, I still play my NES and I believe those games are better than any game out now, "game-play wise".
The developers are just trying to fuel another fanboy war.

He. Is. Not. Talking. About. Graphics.

He is talking about processing power. Processors handle more than just graphics; AI, modeling, textures, etc...

Why is it that when a developer goes on to say "[Blah blah] isn't possible on [Wah wah]", people assume that they're talking about graphical capabilities? I'm pretty sure disc size, different hardware, different specializations, etc... also have an effect whether something can easily be ported to another console or not.

 

[Treblaine]

I'll just drop in to say that I'm excited for inFamous 2 and I am very happy that they chose to improve upon the original's rougher areas.

[sub][sub][sub]Now where did I leave my keys...[/sub][/sub][/sub]

I want to take the time to stop and agree with what you just said.

[sub]We can take my car. What thread am I dropping you off in?[/sub]

Second that, I don't know why I even came here...

[sub][sub] there room in that car for three? I got gas money[/sub][/sub]

 

[BehattedWanderer]

So why has Radical not stepped up with Prototype 2 yet?

 

[Omnific One]

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.

Eh, we're not really talking about PCs anyway, so if PC is better at physics and logic then good for them (maybe I'll find out soon when my new PC comes in )

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.

Some parts have been changed internally in both 360 and PS3, stating that more efficient uses of the parts were possible with the new pieces of hardware (I remember when the PS3 got a smaller, more efficient chip of some sort, that also allowed it to lower in price, though god help me if I can find the article(s))

If Crysis 2 and Rage can settle for "good enough", why can't Infamous 2?

Why would you ever want to settle for "Eh, good 'nuff"? That stuff gets you a "B-" in school. So all games should just settle for "good 'nuff" and just evenly spread the "love" and not try to settle for anything better?

Uh wait, he's saying that 360 games have to settle for good enough... so I was refuting that by stating that if some of the top games of our time are "settling" for the 360, why couldn't Infamous? He is basically stating that the 360 is completely inferior in every way and that devs have to "settle" for it. Maybe I should have put quotations around settle so it would make it more clear that there was a bit of disbelief in that statement.

 

[Jumplion]

I'll just drop in to say that I'm excited for inFamous 2 and I am very happy that they chose to improve upon the original's rougher areas.

[sub][sub][sub]Now where did I leave my keys...[/sub][/sub][/sub]

I want to take the time to stop and agree with what you just said.

[sub]We can take my car. What thread am I dropping you off in?[/sub]

Second that, I don't know why I even came here...

[sub][sub] there room in that car for three? I got gas money[/sub][/sub]

Yeah, after a few pages of debating/arguing (whatever you want to call it, I prefer debating) I've forgotten that I'm also looking forward to InFamous 2.

[sup]Any room for one more? I got snacks...[/sup]

 

[Treblaine]

He is talking about processing power. Processors handle more than just graphics; AI, modeling, textures, etc...

Hate to nit pick but aren't modelling and textures part of what we consider graphics?

Also not sure AI is ever that hardware intensive, the challenge is to make good AI at all, not the difficulty of fitting it into the clock cycles and memory bandwidth limitations.

 

[Jumplion]

Uh wait, he's saying that 360 games have to settle for good enough... so I was refuting that by stating that if some of the top games of our time are "settling" for the 360, why couldn't Infamous? He is basically stating that the 360 is completely inferior in every way and that devs have to "settle" for it. Maybe I should have put quotations around settle so it would make it more clear that there was a bit of disbelief in that statement.

Eh, I was probably just raging in general. I hate it when people go "Eh, good 'nuff" because that shows that they didn't put any effort into what they did. If they're going to make a game, go all out on it.

 

[CaptainKoala]

I hate to tell him this, but the 360's hardware is capable of playing every possible game that has ever come out, and ever will come out for another couple of years. The same goes for the PS3. Which has better hardware than the 360, but they both play games about just as well.

 

[Jumplion]

He is talking about processing power. Processors handle more than just graphics; AI, modeling, textures, etc...

Hate to nit pick but aren't modelling and textures part of what we consider graphics?

Also not sure AI is ever that hardware intensive, the challenge is to make good AI at all, not the difficulty of fitting it into the clock cycles and memory bandwidth limitations.

Well, you know what I mean, processors do more than just graphics, that much I know at least.

 

[Rayansaki]

OT: PS3 probably has a slight lead in technology, but it's a slight lead. Exclusive developers are pretty much Microsoft's or Sony's mouthpiece to say shit they want to say without the risk of pissing people off at their respective companies.

How is it a slight lead? The blu-ray alone already makes for a massive lead. Sure, its great for x360 to advertise "HD graphics and sound" but when games require a massive compression including 1/4th of the resolution and massive sound quality gap and still ends up with 3 discs instead of 1 blu-ray, there's already a major difference in product quality. I didn't buy an HDTV to watch quicktime clips.

Knowing Kojima's tendencies in games, I'm betting on MGS:Rising also having 3 or more discs with compression.

 

[Omnific One]

If Crysis 2 and Rage can settle for "good enough", why can't Infamous 2?

Because they don't have to bother developing for two systems, this studio is being paid by Sony to make the best possible game for their system they need to maximise their one system's potential.
With 2 systems every asset one must think not whether it will work on one system, but BOTH systems, so you can't be too ambitious.

In reality, what are the real weaknesses and strengths of the 360 versus the PS3 that would require a complete recoding? Maybe I'm just ignorant of the details but nothing suggests this is true. What about cross-platform games?

It's as strange mantra that co-development must have as similar products as possible and it seems to be for a very important reason: if Console-A owner thinks the Console-B version is significantly better they may hold off on buying since they think they are getting ripped off, or vica versa. The publishers want both PS3 and Xbox 360 owners to have no hesitation at all on buying the game for their system - to make money you know - so there is no point making one version look better. They want to honestly say "both versions are identical BUY OUR GAME NOW!" Also to eeak out the last better performance from PS3 (as these Sucker Punch developers have stated) takes a considerable amount of extra effort.

The real explanation is that PS3-exclusive devs just say this to give a guise of reason; likewise with any 360-exclusive dev that does the same. This above post seems like a Sony fanboy through and through so I can't argue with it as an impartial observer. In reality, neither the 360, nor the PS3 has really gotten anywhere near to what the PC can do so that statement that "the machine [360] has failed to really deliver the amazing graphics through even extended periods of exclusive development in the same way PS3 has" seems like a fanboy statement.

Consider that I play mostly on the 360. It has glaring flaws, just like every other console.

It may sound like a fanboy statement but the definition of fanboy is unreasoned and spurious assertions, these are THE DEVELOPERS! They KNOW what they are talking about.

It is NOT FANBOYISH to merely have an opinion that one system is better than another, especially in the Expert opinion of a Sucker Punch developer with a reputation to protect. Please, for the love of almighty mod, please could people STOP using the term "fanboy" inappropriately for people who merely disagree with them. Like many terms used on the internet it has been abused and will very soon become meaningless. Like "noob", used as an insult against inexperienced players, then pathetic losers started calling skilled players who killed them all the time the "noob". Meaningless now, only insulting.

I'm sorry, but you CANNOT reasonably accuse me of fanboyism just because I point out Xbox 360 can't match Killzone 2 and uncharted 2's graphical fidelity.

What? Do you want me to LIE? Do you want me to censor my speech so I don't "offend" anyone. Anyone who takes offence or feels angered by hearing that Uncharted 2 has the best console graphics needs a serious reality check and if they can't accept that then I don't want to hear about it.

Ok, Uncharted may have the best console graphics so far... but when that's stacked up against the PC, it is meaningless. If I truly cared about graphics, I would get a PC. Your statement was completely subjective. "Amazing" is a subjective term. I could say that Tetris's graphics were "amazing." When you use subjective terms as objective facts, it makes it seem like a fanboy statement. If you had said, "Well, the PS3 can render graphics at a higher level due in increased storage on Blu-ray", then I would say that you have a point. But you just took the "I think the 360's graphics aren't amazing" route with a subjective statement like that. It gets worse when you are arguing with someone that truly doesn't have a console preference with a plethora statements obviously aimed against the 360 demographic.

 

[Rayansaki]

He is talking about processing power. Processors handle more than just graphics; AI, modeling, textures, etc...

Hate to nit pick but aren't modelling and textures part of what we consider graphics?

Also not sure AI is ever that hardware intensive, the challenge is to make good AI at all, not the difficulty of fitting it into the clock cycles and memory bandwidth limitations.

AI is actually on the most most hardware intensive aspects of a game. There's a reason games that include split screen tend to cut heavily on AI extras to make up for it, specially in racing games.

 

[Omnific One]

Uh wait, he's saying that 360 games have to settle for good enough... so I was refuting that by stating that if some of the top games of our time are "settling" for the 360, why couldn't Infamous? He is basically stating that the 360 is completely inferior in every way and that devs have to "settle" for it. Maybe I should have put quotations around settle so it would make it more clear that there was a bit of disbelief in that statement.

Eh, I was probably just raging in general. I hate it when people go "Eh, good 'nuff" because that shows that they didn't put any effort into what they did. If they're going to make a game, go all out on it.

Ah, ok that makes more sense. I hate when devs settle for "good enough", but I understand when they may have to when it comes to console versions due to the obvious limitations. Glad we understand each other

 

[RooftopAssassin]

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."

Remember the Air Force buying a shitton of PS3s for processing power?, they didn't buy 360's for processing power.
I'd rethink that statement, lol.

They have basically the same processing power, the PS3 chips are just cheaper. Says so in their press release:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/345642/Air_Force_Taps_PlayStation_3_for_Research

It was just more cost effective...