Naughty Dog: Uncharted 2 'Impossible' On Xbox 360

HyenaThePirate

New member
Jan 8, 2009
1,412
0
0
Deity1986 said:
The comment about the 360 not being able to support the game is moot since, even if it is because uncharted 2 isn't compressed very well, a ps3 bluray disc will hold more than the xbox HD disc regardless of what you're trying to put on it. Eventually the ps3 will have bigger and better games purely because of the technology available to it.
Except most game developers won't have Naughty Dog's level of experience in a short enough period of time to apply to their projects. The typical, moderately decent title takes a little over two YEARS to develop.

What is my point?.. that by time the majority of developers start making those "bigger and better games" for the PS3, and they start becoming the standard and not the 'exception', it'll be well on the cusp of a new Xbox, if a new one isn't already entering post-production/testing stages which I suspect it is. Microsoft probably has the next Xbox iteration well in the development stages and is just keeping it locked down until they siphon every cent they can from the current generation.

But what people don't seem to be considering is the massive effect of digital data on the industry. Sure, the xbox doesn't have 25 gig disks, but it does have a hard drive (several of them actually). Eventually even BD are going to become obsolete as the industry discovers faster and more convenient ways of transferring game data to consoles. When that happens, the sky is the limit.

I personally, will poop myself when Kojima releases the first 100 gb game, Metal Gear Solid Opus Maximum et al Machina Extrema Final in the year 2013...

WhiteTiger225 said:
Wow, do you just say yes to everything? By claiming theres LESS of a mod community for PS3 just made me LOL! There is NO MOD COMMUNITY FOR PS3 save for little big planets level designer XD And even then, you cant add new models and such in. AND I love how you further shoot yourself in the foot by claiming it's 1.) Hard to find good mods 2.) that any one who mods obviously doesnt have enough games.

See heres the thing you cute little sonic fanboy ^.^
1.) If I find a game I love, I will play it endlessly. I played morrowind WITHOUT MODS for 3 years (among other games) because I truly enjoyed exploring it.
2.)Good luck playing on your crappy PS3 network with your buddies, unless you're one of those types who enjoy huddling around your television screen like highschool shutins (Funny, really, how your own attack against PC multiplayer can be so easily turned around XD)
3.) PS3 is now selling at a nice loss, and they took out backwards compatibility. SO, while I am sitting her enjoying my copy of final fantasy 7 on PC, you're just shit out of luck and have to buy a PS1 to play it XD and while I am at it, lets make a realistic comparison. A computer made for gaming, selling at a loss, 300-500? AND it has backwards compatibility :D
4.) "For people who strictly want to play games, ONLY games, and move on with their lives, the PS3 is the best value. " For people who want to get a life and go outside for a change, trashing your PS3 is the way to go. See how that works? I can easily claim console gamers have no life too XD
Except you'd be wrong.
Again I'll answer you in short answers to save time.

Ps3-hacks.com and other sites have a rather robust modding community. It's just that console gamers don't really care all that much about playing games like Uncharted in a Captain Picard skin. We're too busy playing GAMES, which release with frequent regularity, where as you can cruise the PC game aisle in walmart for months without seeing anything worth buying that isnt either already available on a console or BORING.

Little Big Planet has absolutely NO real counterpart on the PC, unless you count Spore, which was mediocre at best. It's one of the most original and fun games created in the past two years, but you probably missed it while you were playing Morrowind on your PC while most of us had tired of Oblivion three years ago.

Decent PC mods for ANY game are hard to find, and slow to arrive. Take Battlefield 2 and 2142. I used to play those religiously. Every now and again a mod would arrive worth looking at but for the most part the mods out were either boring, lame, or a combination of both. I've seen and tried a few mods for Fallout but again, decent ones are hard to come by. Any jackass can muck around with a level editor, but that doesn't mean that 90% of user created content is garbage that would have been panned by every gamer on Earth if it had been part of the official game.

and now for your points:

1. If i find a good game, I play it, beat it, play it a little more, then buy a NEW game because I have explored that game enough. I don't need to download someone's Kim Possible Mod for "x" game because that crap has no appeal to me.

2. Playing on PS3 with my friends is quick, easy, and painless, often involving nothing more difficult than passing them a CONTROLLER. How well does that work on the PC? Oh wait, it doesn't. You either play LAN or on servers or you don't play at all.

3. News Flash! I can play Final Fantasy 7 on my PS3 too! You might have missed this while you were busy extolling the virtues of PC gaming, but the PS3 still plays PS1 games just fine. It's PS2 games that are the issue, so unless you are playing Final Fantasy 10 on your PC (you're not), your argument falls apart. Even better, I don't need patches, tweaks, or alternative drivers to play older games, things you often need with PC's if you don't need an emulator OUTRIGHT just to get it to work.

4. I could care less about the loss Sony takes on the PS3. How does that effect ME, the consumer? I still pay $299 for my PS3 while YOU pay upwards of $800-$1200 for your PC, which usually requires additional upgrades every two years or less for $150-$300. My PS3 works just fine and will work just fine for the next 5 years, keeping pace with the best the PC has to offer.

5. Please explain how PC games can go outside and have a life and PS3 gamers can't? How does that even make sense? I can simply play my ps3 and shut it off at any time, while you're still tooling around with your resolutions to find that magic mix of framerate and visual quality.

Bottomline: The PS3 is for gamers who dont want to be bothered with trying to manage all that a PC requires in maintenance just to play a game. We've got better things to do than worry about if our new game will meet "recommended requirements" which more often than not people are finding out that they don't.
Prime example is Crysis. Sure it's a pretty game. But how many people were able to run it on release day without issues or having to upgrade? STALKER was another decent game but again, most casual mainstream gamers would have needed to upgrade in order to play it. Thats the biggest flaw of PC gaming... even when you think you meet the recommended specs, there is no garuntee when you open that box that you'll be able to play that game without issues. It's always and consistently a crap shoot with PC's where as consoles don't have that problem.
 

WhiteTiger225

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,039
0
0
HyenaThePirate said:
Deity1986 said:
Apparently listening skills aren't part of the PS3 fanboys aresenal as we already pointed out you could make a PC that towers over PS3 in terms of EVERYTHING for about the same price as a PS3, and actually, a company losing money SHOULD worry you. Why? Because in the end they will have to find a way to force you to spend more money to at least make ends meet :p But hey, your a PS3 fanboy, you wouldn't care :p
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
WhiteTiger225 said:
PSN netowrk is okay.. but at the same time it's a piece of crap. Just the way it's structured makes it hard to find friends and such.

next, SONY itself announced it will no longer be doing backwards compatibility. BUT, it will be happy to sell you the right to play the games you already own the disks for. Cute, huh?

and finally, theres nothing wrong with console gaming. Just don't go trying to state that consoles are superior to PCs when it comes to gaming when PCs can handle better graphics, larger scenarios ( Try playing the indie ganme "Mount & Blade" with a battle size set to 2000 without the PS3 chugging about XD) and unlike PS3, computers arent stagnant technology, they can grow and expand. I paid 400 dollars total for my PC because I built mine myself. So no, if you have a clue how to shop around, they arent that expensive. I play consoles all the time, I just get annoyed when console tards (The people who ruined oblivion by making it dumbed down for them) try and claim console gaming is in every way superior to PC gaming XD
I will never deny, nor have I ever denied, that PC gaming is superior to consoles in most every single way.

But which parts it's superior in, that's debatable. In terms of potential power, sure, though I'd argue that it isn't as optimized as consoles are as there are thousands of PC parts that developers have to test out. In terms of reliability, that's a definite plus for PCs, but then again people are known for being stupid and screwing up computers easily (Where the hell's the "Any" Key!??!). In terms of games, that depends on what you're after. Controls, well give me a controller over a mouse and keyboard any day.

PC gaming is definitely for those who love to get into the technological side of machines and gaming. It is certainly not for everyone, not everyone has the time or patience to sift through dozens of pages for Sound Chips. Consoles on the other hand give a complete package without most of the researching and optimizing that PCs demand from the user.

I like to think that PCs start out expensive (building the PC) but then get cheaper as time goes on(cheaper games, replacing outdated parts every few years, ect...). While consoles tend to start out cheap ($300 for a 120GB PS3 Slim that's exactly the same as a $600 one) but get more expensive later (LIVE has you pay, more expensive games ($60), controllers, accessories, ect...).
 

WhiteTiger225

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,039
0
0
Jumplion said:
WhiteTiger225 said:
PSN netowrk is okay.. but at the same time it's a piece of crap. Just the way it's structured makes it hard to find friends and such.

next, SONY itself announced it will no longer be doing backwards compatibility. BUT, it will be happy to sell you the right to play the games you already own the disks for. Cute, huh?

and finally, theres nothing wrong with console gaming. Just don't go trying to state that consoles are superior to PCs when it comes to gaming when PCs can handle better graphics, larger scenarios ( Try playing the indie ganme "Mount & Blade" with a battle size set to 2000 without the PS3 chugging about XD) and unlike PS3, computers arent stagnant technology, they can grow and expand. I paid 400 dollars total for my PC because I built mine myself. So no, if you have a clue how to shop around, they arent that expensive. I play consoles all the time, I just get annoyed when console tards (The people who ruined oblivion by making it dumbed down for them) try and claim console gaming is in every way superior to PC gaming XD
I will never deny, nor have I ever denied, that PC gaming is superior to consoles in most every single way.

But which parts it's superior in, that's debatable. In terms of potential power, sure, though I'd argue that it isn't as optimized as consoles are as there are thousands of PC parts that developers have to test out. In terms of reliability, that's a definite plus for PCs, but then again people are known for being stupid and screwing up computers easily (Where the hell's the "Any" Key!??!). In terms of games, that depends on what you're after. Controls, well give me a controller over a mouse and keyboard any day.

PC gaming is definitely for those who love to get into the technological side of machines and gaming. It is certainly not for everyone, not everyone has the time or patience to sift through dozens of pages for Sound Chips. Consoles on the other hand give a complete package without most of the researching and optimizing that PCs demand from the user.

I like to think that PCs start out expensive (building the PC) but then get cheaper as time goes on(cheaper games, replacing outdated parts every few years, ect...). While consoles tend to start out cheap ($300 for a 120GB PS3 Slim that's exactly the same as a $600 one) but get more expensive later (LIVE has you pay, more expensive games ($60), controllers, accessories, ect...).
That I will definetly agree with, PCs are the more costly investment, but in the long run can cost you LESS, while consoles are cheap to begin with, but buying the new next gen console every few years, 60 dollar games, and the ability not to milk your enjoyment of your game for every penny (Mods) can make it more costly. Consoles ARE much easier to plug and play yes, and the controllers can be much more friendly for FPSs, but at the same note, compare using a mouse for an FPS to a controller (I love playing CoD4 for pc, someone comes up behind me and I turn in a split second to take em down XD) it all comes down to your patience level, and your preference for controller type.

And to the sonic fanboy...

You do realize to make those mods that are on that site for ps3 games you... I don't know... NEED TO DO IT ON A PC!
 

HyenaThePirate

New member
Jan 8, 2009
1,412
0
0
Jumplion said:
My PC that I am using right now is hardly optimized for gaming. Hell, it can hardly run the Half Life 2 demo for Christ's sake. Replacing all of the necessary components to make it at least decent in playing games would take a few hundred dollars for a few parts. Replacing it with a completely new built up PC would maybe take a few hundred more. No doubt after you get into PC gaming, it gets cheaper, but the entry cost just to get in the fucking door is much too much for many people.
THIS.
This is why PC gaming is a low-level competitor to consoles at best, a niche at worst.
The majority of people get PC's for doing WORK or looking at porn. Buying a decent computer off the shelf for gaming for the price of a console is nigh impossible and even building one from scratch with quality parts requires monumental patience. With a PS3 I know all my parts are already assembled and ready to go straight away, no having to be concerned with the quality of the cooling system, gpu, video card, motherboard, or any of the rest of it.

Console gaming is superior simply by virtue of being EASIER for the majority of people. You certainly wouldn't take the time to build your kid a PC, which requires constant maintenance. You see, I think this is where PC enthusiests fail... they tend to be arrogant. They think "PC's are Easy!" and anyone who can't understand or operate them with extreme efficiency are idiots. I HAVE a PC. I game on a PC. Just not as much as my console. Why? Because I got tired of being in a never-ending race to stay on the bleeding edge of technology in order to play the games I want. Call of Duty 4 was the last game I bought where once again, I needed to apparently come out of the dark ages of video cards and upgrade and I still got low frame rates and high pings and the occassional crash requiring a reboot. Maybe I'm a PC idiot? Unfortunately thats the only answer you ever get when you experience those issues, which makes people decide that it's better to be an idiot with a console than a smug elitist with a PC.

That coupled with driver issues, operating system problems, computers are NOT just "plug and play" the way you claim they are. You have to be able to make adjustments, often times an inconvenience AND annoyance because even PC game developers acknowledge that EVERY PC is essentially different!

But i'll just end it here, because these sorts of debates are seldom if ever resolvable. Everyone has an opinion and a preference and realistically nobody is ever going to change anyone else's mind.

Like I said, show me each and every individual part and price to build a PC capable of playing Batman on the PC for less than $299 and I will acknowledge that PC's are better than consoles. That includes Mobo, CPU, Fan, Power Supply, Hard Drive, Ram, Video card, and Sound card. Thats the challenge. But I can save you the trouble by already telling you that you can't. I don't care that Sony is losing $400 on each console, It's not coming out of MY pocket.
 

ae86gamer

New member
Mar 10, 2009
9,009
0
0
If the 360 can handle games like Oblivion and Fallout 3 then I'm pretty sure that it would be able to handle Uncharted.
 

Shynobee

New member
Apr 16, 2009
541
0
0
The Bandit said:
TsunamiWombat said:
What?! OH NO-wait...

Who... cares?
This. For multiple reasons. 1. No one cares about Uncharted. 2. No one cares about technical bullshit.
well thats simply not true. While you or I may not care about this "technical bullshit," i can guarantee that some one, somewhere does.
 

HyenaThePirate

New member
Jan 8, 2009
1,412
0
0
WhiteTiger225 said:
HyenaThePirate said:
Deity1986 said:
Apparently listening skills aren't part of the PS3 fanboys aresenal as we already pointed out you could make a PC that towers over PS3 in terms of EVERYTHING for about the same price as a PS3, and actually, a company losing money SHOULD worry you. Why? Because in the end they will have to find a way to force you to spend more money to at least make ends meet :p But hey, your a PS3 fanboy, you wouldn't care :p
Lol thats funny, because a week ago, I was an "Xbox" fanboy.
People need to make up their minds.

Thing is, I'm a GAMER. I like GAMES.
I just find Consoles superior to allow me to do that over PC's which require considerably more effort just for me to enjoy the privilege of playing a game I could have been playing flawlessly within moments if I had bought the console version instead.
 

WhiteTiger225

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,039
0
0
HyenaThePirate said:
WhiteTiger225 said:
HyenaThePirate said:
Deity1986 said:
Apparently listening skills aren't part of the PS3 fanboys aresenal as we already pointed out you could make a PC that towers over PS3 in terms of EVERYTHING for about the same price as a PS3, and actually, a company losing money SHOULD worry you. Why? Because in the end they will have to find a way to force you to spend more money to at least make ends meet :p But hey, your a PS3 fanboy, you wouldn't care :p
Lol thats funny, because a week ago, I was an "Xbox" fanboy.
People need to make up their minds.

Thing is, I'm a GAMER. I like GAMES.
I just find Consoles superior to allow me to do that over PC's which require considerably more effort just for me to enjoy the privilege of playing a game I could have been playing flawlessly within moments if I had bought the console version instead.
Yeah I mentioned that before. consoles are more the little hassle plug n play, BUT, in the long run, end up costing you more to keep too, then to upkeep a PC, into the next gen console era. Yeah, the controls were easier for oblivion on console, BUT, without the 82 mods I use for oblivion (OOO, MMM, and Deadly Reflexes and Global companion script being among those) I would have never gotten my moneys worth out of that game. Now.. you want a moddable system... Nintendo DS! Where else can I port over my comp of Descent onto a portable system!? XD

erm yeah... back to what I was saying... My biggest problem with PS3 atm (I own a great PC, PS3 (Free) with backwards compatibility, Xbox360, Nintendo Wii, Nintendo DS, Gamboy advance SP, Gamboy Advance, Gamboy Color, Gamboy Pocket, Gamboy Micro, Gameboy, Famicom and so much more XD) is the fact it is showing it's true colors market wise. From it's cruddy customer server, to it's lackluster games (I t has SOME memorable, great games, but nowhere near as much as PC or 360 atm, and claiming it beats Wii is like claiming I won the special olympics XD) Sony is really displaying it can care less and less about it's customers. I mean, to remove the BIGGEST feature that made SONY famous in the console market (Backwards compatibility) is a big spit in the face of gamers. AND THEN TO HAVE THE "BALLS" to try reselling us the games we ALREADY OWN is just fuckin PATHETIC. I am sorry, I am not forking out for FF7 on PS3 when, for the same price they sell it for, I could pick up a PSX or PS1 or hell, fork out a bit more and get a PS2 and play the game WHILE getting access to loads of other classic games (Zone of Enders, Red Faction, Final Fantasy 10, Final Fantasy 9, Monster Hunter 1-2) and so much more.
 

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
cleverlymadeup said:
ZippyDSMlee said:
Dude...... 2 or more GB of ramm a modern dual core CPU of more than 2Ghz and a 80-150$ PCI E on a solid mobo will run circles around the PS3.... and you don't even have to spend more than 500$..... so perhaps you need to cut back on your PS3 koolaid intake...
ok you are wrong and i'll explain why

first off with that 2 GB of ram, you are probly using 500+ MB for the OS alone, so now you are down to 1.5GB, then you have what ever other programs you are running, so that takes it down a bit more.

there is also the amount of driver calls that need to be relayed thru the OS, which impedes the performance of the PC as well. not to mention the normal OS tasks, such as services and windows had a TON of running services that really don't need to, not to mention stuff like anti-virus.

DirectX was initially designed to work around this and talk directly to the hardware instead of going thru the OS in order to improve performance. however due to m$'s problem with good memory management, yes vista is even worse than XP at it and frankly should run faster than it does but that's a whole other conversation. even DirectX has a bunch of issues getting rid of the OS and talking directly to the hardware and isn't overly nice on the memory

keeping all those things in mind you have now probly exceeded the ram in your system and forced to use a lot more of the swap space found on your hard drive.

a PS3 or a 360 does not have any of the over head, the OS on both systems has a very small memory footprint compared to windows. this allows it to run things better with less. they will always be able to do more with less because they have less of an overhead to worry about
You are only partially correct, pure hardware/software interface/speed wise a console can run up to 3 times faster than its PC counterpart, however you can do 10 times more things on a PC than just gaming.

So again realistically speaking they are about even because of the limits of the console and the over head of the OS.


HyenaThePirate said:
Thanks for all that informative information on the PC vs a gaming console (PS3).

But can it run a game straight out the box, correctly, every time, without having to do anything at all such as meeting arbitrary "requirements" that seem to fit only about 10% of the gaming community at any one time, avoid game crashing glitches, and low levels of installation while allowing the gamer to play within 10 minutes of opening the BOX?

I'll go ahead and answer for you.

NO, it cannot.

Fatality
PS3 Wins.
So can any console, so can the PC if you A:have a brain,B:can read, and C: Have a PC that's in range of what the developer made it for.
Its not that difficult a concept...... don't blame the PC for the devs lack of interest of supporting slightly older PC hardware.

Also with a few big titles requiring installation consoles are slowly becoming PCs...
 

Chicago Ted

New member
Jan 13, 2009
3,463
0
0
CompanionCube said:
The most realistic graphics in the world can't fix the problem of crappy level design or other game flaws.
Amen to that brother! Speak it like it is!
 
Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
Wow. I'm a 360 fan (though I'm getting a PS3 once I can manage to get a job in this economy), but both sides are being idiots. If the game is fun, who cares if it can or can't run on the 360?
 

nYuknYuknYuk

New member
Jul 12, 2009
505
0
0
katsabas said:
ianrocks6495 said:
In all seriousness, does anybody believe this bullshit? It could be made for the 360. But for some reason, Naughty Dog likes to be Sony's *****.
I don't and I am PS3 owner. But if you want to talk about bitches, check out your own avatar. Like Bethesda and MS, Naughty Dog has been supporting Sony from day one. Crash Bandicoot, Jak and Daxter etc. They have done pretty well for themselves so why change the course?

Whether XBOX can run U2 or not is of no importance. Having recently dropped the price, Sony was bound to pay someone to say something and toss oil in the fire. That's business. PS3 won't get Left For Dead 4 even though it can run it easily for example and on the other hand, XBOX will not get Infamous although it is surely able to run it. It is not technical issues that do not allow several titles to cross over to other systems but the profits. Both companies are full of shit when it comes down to it. And why wouldn't they be? MS has that Lamestation douche while Sony has their marketing department that is incompetent.
Yes, but it's that they are saying it won't work. If they had just said "We aren't gonna make it for 360 because it's gonna be an exclusive and that's our choice, Sony pays us to do it", I would have no problem. But now they say it wouldn't work with 360 because of hardware issues, that's shit. BTW, I am a PS3 owner too, and on your Betheseda comment, if they too are Sony's *****, then why didn't PS3 owners get Fallout 3 DLC, and won't get it until X-Mas? Anyways, I'm not getting Uncharted after the first was a little meh in my opinion.