And that's the one that actually worries me. John Carmack is who the development gods pray to. No doubt the PS3 is superior in tech, but I don't like the direction Sony took. Oh well, I'm still getting it Q3-4 '10.jamesworkshop said:John carmack (iD) Can't seem to get a stable 60Hz even after getting both PC/360 to do so with RAGE
It's a bullshit reason. The console is supposed to be head and shoulders above the 360, no one is going to look at games 8 years into it's life cycle and say "ho hum, we've seen this at the start. I think I'll sell my PS3, the graphics suck now". And it's not fair to the developers who end up making garbage ass games because they took a gamble with the hardware and lost.Didn't Sony also state the programing was made harder intentionaly to assure that later releases would be of a higher quality due to the time needed to optimise fully the hardware
You seem to be mistaking "promises" for promises. Unless you're in possession of a time machine one can't definitively promise anything or everything in a software development cycle.Pendragon9 said:This is Sega's fault right here. They promised equal graphical comparisons without doing their research on the Ps3's tech, and now once again they're shown as big fat liars.
I'm ignoring this game completely. Up yours Sega. And Platinum Games has really disappointed me too. Didn't they work on Devil May Cry? Disappointing.
Don't get me wrong I don't usually mind but with Assassins Creed I was very upset, the framerate difference is huge, it chugged on the PS3 and there's no reason they couldn't get it running smooth. I don't blame sony for that, well they get some blame for making the machine hard to program for but the developers get most of the blame.Megacherv said:Can I just say i'm loving this thread, everyone seems to have something slightly constructive to say.
I actually thought that the lack of colour on Assassin's Creed gave it a good feel. It all depends on which studio is making it. Some developers are better at it than others. The 1st-party developers (i.e. Insomniac Games, Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch etc.) are very good obviously, since they've only been trained in PS3 development. Epic are very good at PS3 development from what I've seen with their UT3 support, Battlefield:BC runs great, Lego Star Wars, all of the games I own seem to run great for most of the time. If I get a few framerate glitches occasionallyIi tend to ignore them, as I'm probably enjoying the game too much to care.Snotnarok said:The PS3 is too big of a pain in the ass to develop for, I've tried to get multiplatform games on it and I wound up getting the lesser version every time. Assassins creed had major framerate issues and almost no color vs the 360 version, Armored Core 4 had no color at all, even Resident Evil 4 had some problems (they were very very very minor but I spotted it).
The system does wonderful with exclusives but it's rare to see the same on both systems in terms of multiplatforming. I think Soul Calibur 4 ran better, but it honestly makes me nervous buying anything that isn't exclusive on PS3 with the poor experience I had with 4 games in a row (non-exclusives). Games like Uncharted are mind blowing how good they look, I just wish they had the same polish for the multiplatform games.