Which is kind of what I've always thought. Game developers making a game for multiple consoles aren't going to go above and beyond for one console just to "take advantage" of their hardware. They're going to make the same game for each system, but of course different platforms are going to look a little different.next-stage said:all i got from that was that they wrere generaly the same exept in a few small areas in different games
AoBfrost said:Depends on how the game maker makes the graphics and textures, if they go all out and make the game originally for 360, of course it will be better, because then they will be lazy and just port the game to the ps3 without redoing much stuff and making it use the power of the ps3, but in terms of power, looking at both systems, if we said they were cars, the 360 would be a mustang with a v8, the ps3 would be like a camaro, v8, but alot stronger, then the game is like the driver, the driver can drive both cars at 50mph and not be using their true power.
AoBfrost said:I want a system that will work, not give me christmas lights after 2 months.
Skullcandy Girl said:In the end to me, I don't really care who has a bigger "pee-pee". You can throw specs and processor power at me all you want, the bottom line for me is great games I can play more than once.
You're on the wrong forum to make a remark like that.AoBfrost said:I want a system that will work, not give me christmas lights after 2 months.
23Magnum said:Haha, you make a good point there, but this really isn't about a pissing contest. But as far as games go, I'd say that PS(whatever#) still doesn't have the number of games that are attractive to me, new or old, to commit me to buying their new hardware as soon as it comes out. Playstation did however shot themselves in the foot by not making the PS3 backwards compatible with all their old games. The 360 has and is continuing to do so, as well as Nintendo with the Wii(can't wait to get one and play all the old games). Yes, no one system is a clear winner in separate categories, but over all I'd say the 360 wins with functionality, usefulness, adaptability, and just plain awesome games. Let's wait and see how long it takes Playstation to come out with more good games before we make a final decision, because as we all know it took the 360 a little while to get the ball rolling as far as games were concerned.
23Magnum said:You need to play Timeshift, the rain itself is amazing.
4ng31 said:My initial interest in TimeShift was high, but it faded after the constant delays and dev problems. Did it turn out anywhere near as good as it originally looked? (aka, worth 60 bucks?)
Yea that is true, the only thing I really would absolutely love would for people with ps3's and 360's to play the same game against each other, like cod4, same game, but doesnt work because they are different systems and use different methods of connecting, ps3's runs directly from ea's servers, but the 360's run through xbox live then to ea's servers if i am correct, if not, there should be a upgrade to where you can join a server a xbox user is playing on, while your on a ps3.darthmaddy said:You're on the wrong forum to make a remark like that.
As far as I can tell, I don't think either system has a power advantage. Its like comparing a Ferrari Enzo to a Lambo Murcialago. One is a little faster than the other, but both will make you poop your pants.
preskewl said:Xbox Live.. 5 years later and 8million subscribers!!.. Can't go wrong with that, and oh I was a xbox live beta tester here in Seattle