大象传媒

"Despite the hyperbole, there is not a single game, in my opinion, on the PS3 that truly looks like it surpasses the technical limitations of the Xbox 360"

while i agree to an extent i think Killzone 2 should be the title to show what the PS3 can do. MGS4 would not be the same title on the 360 in my opinion, i think its technically brilliant and makes use of blu rays capacity to the full. Even games like Uncharted (released in the PS3s first year) showed immediate results that were on par with 360 games 2-3 years into the 360s lifecycle.

Regarding Nintendo i cant honestly say i like one of their products. Watching their E3 presentation was laughable! With a lot of these motion elements the novelty wears off, sometimes you just want to sit down and play a high quality game with a great story and characters and great graphics.

Microsoft stole a lot of elements already in the marketplace , something they have done with their operating systems also. They take ideas from others and pass them on as their own. Aside from Gears of War 2 and the announcement of FF13, what else is there to shout about in gaming terms?

I thought this years E3 was disappointing , i think we should just let Apple make a games console and how them how its done.

It urkes me that the Wii is continuously placed in this "next gen console" label and compared continuously to the PS3 and 360. The comparison is like comparing the sales of a a standard non-HD DVD Player to that a Bluray player and make the claim "DVD is ahead in the HiDef movie revolution".

Most numbers generaly suggest that a large proportion of Wii owners also own either 360 or a PS3, so it is an obvious assumption to therefore assume the Wii will sell more simply because the numbers are essentialy 360+PS3 sales.

It also urkes me that the first year of release of the PS3 and the games in that release are compared to, what, the 3rd year of the 360.

Compare the current range of PS3 games to that of the range of XBox 360 games during its first year, and there is definitely a difference between the two with the PS3 edging the lead. Add that to the statement in Darren's topic above about both the PSone and PS2 not really getting into it's own until 2-4 years into development, it seems a pretty fair assumption that within 1-2 years the PS3 will again edge its way in the lead.

Simply put, the 360 is now running games at it's current limits as where the PS3 is barely scratching the surface of what the Cell can really deliver. So I would say Sony's message of "be patient" seems pretty fair to me.

The problem Sony now face with the PS3 is the same as MS faced with the Xbox 1. Sure its a more powerful system, but if 70% of the games are cross platform then the title will usually look the same or similar. Or (as has been the case so far) worse on PS3, due to its complex architecture. The remainder 30% would be the ones to show off the power of PS3, but there will be Singstar and Buzz sequels as well as Eyetoy games, so lets say 15% are free to really show us what the PS3 can do. Bear in mind most of that 15% will come from Sony (say 13%) who dont have the greatest track record with great gaming development. So we rely on 2% from 3rd parties, which might equate to 3 or 4 games a year, of stunning quality, that show off what a PS3 can do.

The numbers just dont stack up for developers of cross platform titles to spend time optimising for the Cell, when there are more 360's out there, which by all accounts performs better with more tradidiotnal coding patterns. As MS stated early on in the 360 lifespan, the differentiator now is NOT hardware, but software and services. And PS3 is finally catching up with services (in the US anyway), but there just isnt the volume for developers to create great exclusive titles anymore. The great exclusive titles will arguably be for Wii these days - cheaper to develop for along with its unique controls providing greater opportunity to create exclusive titles that wouldnt work on the more "traditional" PS3 and 360. Unfortunately for Nintendo, they are the only ones capable of creating those titles it seems!

Before I get blasted for being a 360 Fanboi, Wii-Lover or PS3 hater, I do actually own all 3 systems, playing more on the PS3 right now (GTA4 and MGS4), then the Wii (SMG) then the 360 (nothign really atm!). So my views may not be balanced, but I do have a clear allegiance to all 3 systems, wanting them all to succeed.

"It is just frustrating that European gamers cannot enjoy the same level of service."


I agree!

However, aside from the DS, which is all levels of awesome, I find the Wii has only found itself due to being marketed to and bought by housewives and pensioners.

Although Boxing on Wii Sports is fun :)
And rumour has it that a port of Dead Rising will be surfacing on the Wii sometime, finally another game to add the Wii's small collection of what some might call "real games" (me included)

I own a wii and a 360, and in truth, my wii gets far more play. I don't think it's fair to assume that the wii is solely a one trick, montion sensing pony.

Yes, nintendo are marketing novel concepts that are encouraging members outside of the standard gaming demographic to pick up and play games (which in itself is no bad thing), but it's a mistake to think that the wii offers nothing more. Believe me, I hate the sheer volume of third party games that throw a montion sensing element into an otherwise poor game, thinking that suddenly makes it acceptable and novel. It doesn't, its making a gimmick out of the incredible technology that nintendo has created.

There is a good sized library of wii games that, whilst not offering 1080p HD quality graphics, still can overshadow any 360 or PS3 game in terms of the quality of gaming experience. Granted the majority are first party titles, aside from a special few, but just because the PS3/360 are more powerful, it doesn't necessarily mean that shiner interations of previous IP, whose only innovation is the increased output resolution, makes good 'next gen' games.

Don't get me wrong, titles such as Gears of War and Bioshock were fantastic, but there is not enough of this standard game coming from either the 360 or PS3 camp to say they are leading way forward for this generation of consoles. I too want all 3 parties to succeed. Competition should only produce more innovation, and innovation could lead to more imersive, involved and improved gaming experience, so lets hope that the best is still to come, from all 3 developers

"Despite the hyperbole, there is not a single game, in my opinion, on the PS3 that truly looks like it surpasses the technical limitations of the Xbox 360."


Look at the differences between Tekken and Tekken 3 just on the PSX hardware - if you just saw the screenshots you would swear they were different generation machines. The same difference can be seen in franchises that covered the PS2's lifetime.

You also have to bear in mind that the 360 is fairly standard hardware that's been in wide use for three years whereas the Cell chip is a radically new design so it's going to take a little longer before developers learn all the tricks to truly take advantage of it's power.


As for the Wii, Nintendo realised that it's irrelevant how mind-blowing the graphics are if a title lacks gameplay. They've realised that what makes people buy Nintendo products is the gameplay first and foremost (they produce a lot of stuff in-house) and so they have simply opted out of the hardware spec wars. The fact that an awful lot of Wii owners also own a PS3 or 360, it seems to have been a sensible strategy.

You could give Nintendo a bag of spanners, a wheelbarrow and some cocktail olives and they'd turn it into a game you'd play all night without getting bored.

Darren, I find it shocking you think you can comment on such things when you haven't even seen the products, because you had you wouldn't say the PS3 hasn't shown itself as better than the 360's technical ability.

Simply put I have to deduce that you have:

1) Never even heard of GT5:Prologue
2) Never even heard of Killzone 2
3) Never even heard of R:FOM which looked better than Halo 3
4) Never even heard of Motorstorm which looked better than any 360 racing game

You shouldn't be reporting on this, unless you are out there in E3. Simple as that, move over for someone from 大象传媒 America to send us the live reports!

>But in the US, at least, it is getting its act together, with a movie and film download store, and great use of the PSP as a satellite device.

The movie download does not look so attractive to me. Their service is not streaming, so that you have to wait 1-2 hours until SD quality movie is downloaded completely. Your HDD capacity may even turn out to be not enough. For HD quality downloads, the file size is so big. Dual layer Blu-ray can record 50GB, which is used for HD movies. HDD should be close to 1-2 terabite to store these. I am not sure how long it takes to download such a large file - at least more than a few giga bytes - though the net.

For Sony, their position has not improved even after GTA and MGS, and their chances of recovery looks clearly very limited for this generation.

For Nintendo, they understand how people are changing to spend their time and how to create small rewards even after playing half practical software, and importantly, how to design the physical and mental feelings of "good" game software. Even looking at all the titles announced at E3, their lineups are differentiated enough to keep them in a very strong position. It is way too early to tell when Wii HD with backward compatibility will be released but it is just a matter of time.

Train your brain and swing your hand and body!

The thing to remember about these 2 systems is that they are actually quit differently balanced.

PS3 - Fast CPU, Average GPU, Low RAM
360 - Average CPU, Fast GPU, High RAM.

The PS3s problem is that the CPU is only fast if you can take advantage of those SPEs. If you cant then you essentially have a CPU 1/3 the speed of the 360's (The 360 has 3 cores @3Ghz, the PS3 has 1 Core @3ghz+8SPEs). And given the graphics architecture in the 360 is arguably more advanced, and has more RAM its fair to say that the 360 will probably stay pretty competitive with the PS3 with graphics.

Where the PS3 *should* shine over the years is in the CPU intensive (and SPE-craftable) areas such as physics, AI and whatnot. But graphics will always be competitive on 360 simply because that ATI chipset is a more advanced part than the Nvidian PS3 counterpart.

@thedo666

I think you need to check out the architecture of both systems again.

PS3 - Very fast CPU, average GPU(550Mhz), 512Mb RAM split 50/50 between the 2 processors.

360 - Fast CPU, average GPU(500Mhz), 512Mb RAM - shared but the CPU's access is through the GPU...although the GPU has 10Mb eRam which acts as a large frame buffer.

There really isn't much between the 2 GPU's and what difference there is the CPU in the PS3 can make up for.

- comparison between the 2 architectures.

Cell explained -

E3 this year was a little of an anti climax...nothing of any serious excitement and most of it we already knew about.

Soemthing that is really hacking me off, is the complete and utter decimation of the local multiplayer on the PS3. I have 4 driving games at the moment, and only one - GT5 prologue - has a local multiplayer. And that's only a 2 player. And even then that has flaws.

I don't want to play online with people, I want to be in my living room with my mates looking desolate as I beat them. Have people forgotten the success of goldeneye for the N64 - the best deathmatch game ever? Sony will be wondering why nintendo are getting so many people going over, when nintendos games have so much multiplayer support.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with my PS3, I just want to play with friends not by myself in my bedroom.

@jotch13

GPU Mhz dont really come into it in this case (you can argue that the PPC Cores are pretty equal for comparison as they share similar architecture (except for the SPEs)). The ATI GPU is much more liek a DX10 part architecturally - unified shaders mean that you can ensure you use the system in much more intelligent ways - if your game is vertex shader heavy, then thats where the silicon will work. The PS3 part however is much more DX9 in its architecture - Seperate vertex and pixel shaders, mean that if your game is pixel shader bound, and the vertex shaders are idling then your not running at 100% speed. The 360 would run optimally in these scenarios.

The Cell is an architectural marvel, however its difficult to code for and not especially tailored for games (tbh neither consoles have CPUs ideal for games - in-order chipsets suck for these sorts of applications).

Darren, has anyone ever told you that you look exactly like Greg Scott?

Hey MMPR, you realise Darren is actually at E3??? The video of him standing in front of the Kodak Theartre is a bit of a giveaway :-)

"Despite the hyperbole, there is not a single game, in my opinion, on the PS3 that truly looks like it surpasses the technical limitations of the Xbox 360."

Both MGS4 and GT5 exceed anything yet seen on the 360 in terms of graphics. As for technical limitations? MGS4 is not possible on the 360 - for technical reasons - and we have not seen anything on the MS console that looks like it could match MAG - unless MS have told you directly that they could do that with their hardware or shown you an equivalent. No? Then you are wrong again.

Oh, and was it you or Rory who was absolutely blown away by the industry-changing PS3 demo Sony gave the 大象传媒 a sneak preview a few months ago.......you know, the one we still don't know about and which could do things never done before?

Of course, it all depends on what you mean by "technical". And, like all bad journalists, you leave sufficient ambiguity to allow you to wriggle out of any "proof" that you are wrong.

And why do you dislike Sony so much?

Where's Rory...........?

hi odysseus_nz,

he may have a photo of him being at E3 but it appears that may have missed Sony's and Nintendo's conferences. All he has reported is what 大象传媒 Newsbeat got from quotes off a reporter for Nutz magazine, which is Lads mag and has nothing to do with the gaming industry.

Essentially this is poor reporting from an establishment like 大象传媒. This Darren Waters couldn't even see what Sony was doing for its conference, they are alerting the non-gaming world of people can do with Sony products... not just PS3.
Which is why Darren failed to realise it wasn't a PS3 conference, but a Sony entertainment conference.

To Sony, and all those here commenting, saying "be patient".
I respond with a simple question: Why?

Why should I be patient and wait for Sony to show us what it's console is capable of?
I really do not care - at this precise moment - what the machine will be able to do in 2 - 3 years time.
I care about what it can do right now.

I'm not about to invest over 拢300 now on something that will produce results in 2 years time. I will invest my money only when it starts to prove itself.

In my 29 years I've owned just about all the big hitting consoles ever released. But I only buy them when they're cooked.

The problem Sony have right now is that (it seems) they desperately need people to invest today in order for them to produce the required results in 2-3 years time.
That, unfortunately for them, is not my problem. And if that means they can't produce the results then so be it. Somebody else will just take their place.

Just take a look at the PS3 MRD, it offers more than all the other consoles available.

What people are expecting (wrongfully) is a wonder machine that will cook their food for them.

It is the best Blu-Ray player on the market, and this will be important for you, because there is no real point in buying a 360 or PS3 without a HDTV. You can save money buying the 360 games on PC at a later date and still have the HD gfx that most PCs offer. However if you really want a 360 or PS3 then a HDTV is a must have to get the best experience, and when you have a HDTV then HD Video is the only thing that will do... Blu-Ray, you will never look back on DVD again.

There was none of this moaning when the PS2 came out, back then it appears that everybody, even reporters, knew about gaming and knew that titles get better farther into the lifecycle of the machine.

It must also be pointed that there is no criticism being aimed at Microsoft, despite the far larger problems that still exist with its console. Nobody even knows if the 360 will still be on the shelf in 2 years, instead being replaced by Microsoft's current policy of replacement after 3 years!

And the 大象传媒 are still making out that Sony are bad guys?

The facts are these:

360 runs on decade's old archcitecture, and had a years headstart of development and it cannot out do the PS3.

PS3 is built on a much less known architecture and uses technology that is brand new/virtually untouched and through out the rest of 2008 they have shown up coming titles that will blow away the competition, including top of the range PCs for the next several years.

@MMPR

I think the jury is still out on bluray. Its biggest competetor now being DVDs, which, with modern upscaling players, produce quality that bluray only just beats. The question is, will people prefer to keep their current dvd collection, and be able to watch them at near HD quality, or go bluray?

As for PS3's blowing away high end PC's - COD4 looks better on a PC even with the last generation of video cards. I doubt if the rate at whch the utilization of the cell can match the rate at which PC hardware improves.

Blythy_vxR wrote:

'I don't want to play online, I want to be in my living room with my mates. . .'

I could not agree more my friend! I have a ps3 and whilst I love it and do play online. I would still much rather play with or against my mates in the same room. The only multiplayer games I have are Guitar Hero 3 (which I only have one guitar for) and the latest PES, which isn't that good.

This means that when my mates come round we end up playing games such as Athens 2004 (ps2) or Crash Team Racing (ps1) meaning my ps3 is pretty useless for social gaming.

It's really frustrating and has put me off buying alot of new games. I mean I got F1 and Motorstorm as part of the package when I bought my ps3 and couldn't play either of them with friends. Imagine how good Motorstorm would be even if it was only a 2 player game!

Hi Lem001,

I have a large TV (by normal standards, not overly large) and I can guarantee the best DVD's upscaled are nowhere near the quaility of the latest Blu-Ray transfers. The DVD upscaling doesn't have the detail, all you get is rounded edges at the expense of the finer points, as well as colour depth and the sound is far superior.

The added benefit of Blu-Ray though is that people won't necessarily need to rebuy their DVD collection, but once the experience Blu-Ray then poeple will no longer buy DVD's.

Also, I have seen some extremely meaty PCs very very recently, and when they are connected to 40" HDTVs they look nowhere near as good as the PS3 version (and the 360 version for that). These are PCs with dual gfx cards, dual core (one was quad-core) and unnecessary amounts of RAM at 4GB.

The biggest problem with comparing PS3 with PCs is that most people compare using a 20" or smaller monitor while the PS3 is connected to a TV that has way over 163% larger viewing area.

I guess I could connect the PS3 to a small monitor so that the image quality is beyond, but it kinds of defeats the object of the HDTV capabilities I bought the machine for.

Hi MFPR,

To be honest, if you have access to everything you're in a far better position to judge than myself.

I do have to admit that whilst I have seen examples of all, i've never had them side by side. I've relied on internet reviews and forums to come to my conclusions (the majority of which have said a good quality upscaling dvd player can almost match blu ray, and cod4 looks superior on a pc)

I'm not sure as to why a PC running on your tv at 1920脳1080 should have any problems, most benchmarks with latest video cards getting 50+ frames per second with 4XAA and AF

@ VampiricHoshi

It urkes me that the Wii is continuously placed in this "next gen console" label and compared continuously to the PS3 and 360.

It Irks me too, as the Wii is a true Next Gen console - they've taken the gameplay to a new level.

Just what has the PS 360 done? Wow, better graphics, yawn.

Ugh, seems like everywhere there is discussion on videogames, you have the rampant fanoys!

I love Nintendo, but frankly they were quite disappointing at E3... completely leaving behind their non casual fanbase. Hopefully, we will see more from them at the tokyo show.

I also agree that no game thus far on the ps3 looks any different than that on the 360. But don't try to explain that to sony loyalists!

I write gaming blogs for www.gamegirl.com you should check us out ^_^

-Navie