Why does 360 look (and run) better than PS3? (multi platform games)

[Rotrmm]

Grand Theft Auto IV performs better (slightly) on the PlayStation 3 than on the XBox 360. But as for why the 360 wins out on other titles? I don't know, since I was under the same impression that the PS3 is more powerful.

Actually, that's not true. While the PS3 has slightly less pop-in because of the mandatory install, it also runs at a lower resolution than the 360 version and at about 15-20% less FPS.

So, for example, the 360 version renders at 720P (HD resolution) while the PS3 runs at 600P (sub-HD) and upscales, which is why it's more blurry. Additionally, if for example the 360 version is running at 30FPS, the PS3 version will be running at 25FPS or thereabouts.

Both systems run the games around 600p, only some of the earlier and less demanding games run at 720p. When you set your system to run at 1080p its not real, the image is just upscaled to that resolution. Similar to the DVD players that upscale DVD to HD resolutions.

Current gen consoles are in a fake HD stage right now. The only gaming that is running at native higher 'HD' resolutions are PC Games.

Not true. Most currency gen games run at 720p or thereabouts. And in the case of GTA4 on the 360, it does indeed run at 720p while the PS3 version runs at a reduced 600p.

But you're right in that there are more sub-720p PS3 titles out there than on the 360.

 

[Dommyboy]

I highly doubt that many PC players even had HD Monitors and stuff, when the 360 was introduced with HDMI support then HD television sales rose slightly more and into the mainstream.

Wait, what?

Just about any monitor above 15" was able to do 1280x960 or higher after the turn of the millennium. They aren't called HD monitors, because the resolutions were there before the whole term HD came commonplace. I can assure you, just about every gamer I personally knew was playing "HD" games way before this generation.

Don't you need a video card that can support HDMI to get the most out of HD with games and videos on computers? Sitting up close with a computer monitor you can notice the defects easily though some objects are viewed smaller which do them justice in the graphical department.
So has anyone mentioned how the PS3 is harder to code and the hardware isn't as well sought after (due to its price and unknown specs) so it can be a pain to some programmers. From what I have seen though, the only game that seems to play differently from the 360 to the PS3 is GTA4.

 

[TheLoneOne]

speaking of HD, I do find it amusing how in the beginning Microsoft scoffed at Sony for putting an HDMI port on the PS3 saying that gamers weren't interested in HD and now of course, the 360's come with an HDMI port.

 

[Woe Is You]

Don't you need a video card that can support HDMI to get the most out of HD with games and videos on computers?

Considering I've been playing HD games for almost a decade now...

No for the thousandth time.

speaking of HD, I do find it amusing how in the beginning Microsoft scoffed at Sony for putting an HDMI port on the PS3 saying that gamers weren't interested in HD and now of course, the 360's come with an HDMI port.

Not really. It's MS that started the whole HD raving in the first place.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

Lets just sum this up before we progress this flame war, devs have had more experience with the 360, remember games like quake 4, remember they hadn't learned the console layout, remember the PS3 is also new.

 

[PxDn Ninja]

NOTE: This is not a fan war.

Why is it that on multi platform games; Xbox 360 looks and runs better that PS3?
I had thought the PS3 was meant to be more powerful than 360, but this does not appear to be the case.
Many reviews that i read comment that the game looks slightly better and runs smoother on the 360 than PS3... Anyone know why (or am i completely wrong)?

Having developed on both systems simultaneously with a single title, I can tell you from experience what the biggest contributing factor is. The fact that most developers use Visual Studio for their engineer teams to program with, and are using XP based PCs for developement. Because of this, Microsoft is in control of the entire dev pipeline (Programming on a Microsoft compiler, in a Microsoft Windows environment, that neetly hooks up to a Microsoft console to debug through the Microsoft Compiler). This makes testing, programming, and fixing issues on the 360 faster and easier than on the PS3, with it's own unique (and pain in the backside) compiler and deployment system.

For this reason, many multi platform games are primarily developed for 360 and port to the PS3. Ultimately the PS3 has more potential, but with the difficulty to develop on it, it shoots itself in the foot.

Sony is getting better about Dev support, so over the next couple of years, you should start seeing a noticeable difference in titles, but don't expect anything overnight.

 

[The Wizard]

The Xbox has a faster CPU and less cores (3 cores). PS3 programs will have to be programed for each core for a program to utalise Cell's 8 cores.

Games are basically easier to make on the Xbox.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

NOTE: This is not a fan war.

Why is it that on multi platform games; Xbox 360 looks and runs better that PS3?
I had thought the PS3 was meant to be more powerful than 360, but this does not appear to be the case.
Many reviews that i read comment that the game looks slightly better and runs smoother on the 360 than PS3... Anyone know why (or am i completely wrong)?

Having developed on both systems simultaneously with a single title, I can tell you from experience what the biggest contributing factor is. The fact that most developers use Visual Studio for their engineer teams to program with, and are using XP based PCs for developement. Because of this, Microsoft is in control of the entire dev pipeline (Programming on a Microsoft compiler, in a Microsoft Windows environment, that neetly hooks up to a Microsoft console to debug through the Microsoft Compiler). This makes testing, programming, and fixing issues on the 360 faster and easier than on the PS3, with it's own unique (and pain in the backside) compiler and deployment system.

For this reason, many multi platform games are primarily developed for 360 and port to the PS3. Ultimately the PS3 has more potential, but with the difficulty to develop on it, it shoots itself in the foot.

Sony is getting better about Dev support, so over the next couple of years, you should start seeing a noticeable difference in titles, but don't expect anything overnight.

Quote for agreement. "Looks Better" is highly debatable, but the primary thing holding back Sony is it's more difficult to dev. for it's system then it is for the 360. This is reflected in Sony's sales and the size of their library.

On the upside, I havn't seen as much Sony advertisement recently, so I think they're letting their newer titles advertise for them and focusing on improving the fundamentals of their system, and given that both Sony and Microsoft are huge corporations that can absorb substantial loss, the PS3 could come back in the long run.

 

[Rotrmm]

The PS3 has been know to do it more, but xbox360 is no better. Halo 3 runs at 640p, Call of Duty 4 at 600p and other games like Project Gotham Racing 3, Perfect Dark Zero and Tomb Raider: Legend are rendered sub 720p. After x2 AA and being upscaled it doesn't look bad for some games but its still noticeable.

They simply do it to keep the framerate up, we are likely will see it more and more on newer games as the consoles gets older but they want to visuals stay at least up-to-date looking. As much as people don't want to admit it, the consoles are using pretty dated tech now. It makes sence they are struggling with 1280x720 if you look at how old the hardware is.

I see what you're saying, but your original post was stating that it's newer games where reduced resolutions are more common. The above post dispells that and, for the 360 at least, it's older titles for the most part.

Going forward, just as the PS3 has the fabled "untapped potential", so does the 360. Yes, the tech isn't that advanced these days, but in rendering capabilities at least the 360 is ahead of the PS3. With its more powerful renderer and, just as importantly, more memory available for the rendering pipeline, the scope is there to still generally meet the 720p mark even with ever greater graphical complexity. As the engines out there mature and more devs find better ways of utilising the unified shader architecture (as well as other pipeline streamlining measures), graphical fidelity will continue to progress without a major detriment to the resolution or framerate.

On the side of the PS3 it's obviously a little more complicated. With older, less flexible, shader tech and a more limited memory system (as well as less available memory overall), it is more likely that resolutions will suffer.... especially is developers primary platform is the more powerful 360. Of course, the SPU's may come in to play at some point in the future, taking some of the workload off the GPU, but of course doing that will reduce the opportunity for the devs to utilise the SPU's fully for things such as physics, etc.

So I would expect, in the future, sub-720p games will continue to be the exception rather than the rule but, as it is today, less of an exception on the PS3 than 360.

 

[Digikid]

The PS3 isn't more powerful that is just marketing Hype. Learn a bit about the hardware and software tools and you realise neither is faster they are both fairly even in capabilities.

FINALLY someone with brains. LOL!!!!

That is quite correct.

 

[PxDn Ninja]

The PS3 isn't more powerful that is just marketing Hype. Learn a bit about the hardware and software tools and you realise neither is faster they are both fairly even in capabilities.

FINALLY someone with brains. LOL!!!!

That is quite correct.

Actually the PS3 is more powerful theoretically. With the way the architecture is set up, it has a higher expandability and capability than the X360. It is following the same pattern that Sony used on the PS2. Look at launch titles for the PS2 and then look at titles recently released and notice the massive difference. The PS3 has that same capability. The X360, while powerful, doesn't have much room for expandability. Developers will be able to find new ways to milk the 360 for more power and performance with tricks here and there, but the PS3 provides more ways and opportunities for it.

They can't do much more, they are already hitting the wall now.

We are still pretty far from the wall, however we are at a large hump. Dev teams are milked most of what the 360 can do "out-of-the-box" but with tweaking and tricks, they will find ways to continue improving until the next generation comes out.

 

[Kair]

Here's a fact:
Multi platform games have to be nerfed down to a puddle of piss before ever making it to the stores (because 360 fans would cry if ps3 version had more content).
Example:
The GTA 4 world had to be severely smaller because the DVD discs would not support a larger size. It would have been a lot bigger on blu-ray discs because they have more space, but then the 360 fan boys would cry.