id's Rage Runs Slower on the PS3 than on the Xbox 360 or PC

[sycogrim]

Its quite sad though..Ps3 is way newer than the x360 and its already falling behind...

yeh it is quite disturbing i guess and considering it has high sales and just on the console alone but hey lets wait and see what sony has to say about it...

[Blackhand]

Graphics options and upgrades on the consoles? I could go for that. As long as the hardware isn't almost double the price like the games, for whatever reason.

Even though I have and have had various consoles, my gripe with them is, the games don't really progress a whole lot after the console's release. Minor code optimizations here and there let devs squeeze a leeeeetle bit more out of the hardware every other game release, but for the most part progress is at a halt till the next generation of consoles.

On my PC, game devs can push the boundries and my budget determines how far I can push up those graphics sliders, though I generally upgrade if they're not maxxed out =)

For very casual people though, I get it that a PC and upgrades are just too much housekeeping and maintenance.

[Strifehart]

Graphics options and upgrades on the consoles? I could go for that. As long as the hardware isn't almost double the price like the games, for whatever reason.

Even though I have and have had various consoles, my gripe with them is, the games don't really progress a whole lot after the console's release. Minor code optimizations here and there let devs squeeze a leeeeetle bit more out of the hardware every other game release, but for the most part progress is at a halt till the next generation of consoles.

On my PC, game devs can push the boundries and my budget determines how far I can push up those graphics sliders, though I generally upgrade if they're not maxxed out =)

For very casual people though, I get it that a PC and upgrades are just too much housekeeping and maintenance.

Hmm, can't say I agree. If you look at the launch titles on the PS2 and compare them to the titles released during the console's "final" months there is quite a big gap in visual quality. Developers managed to squeeze a lot of power out of the console at the end of the day. Some of the games even rivaled games on the Xbox 1 visually.

[OmegaFenix]

Its quite sad though..Ps3 is way newer than the x360 and its already falling behind...

yeh it is quite disturbing i guess and considering it has high sales and just on the console alone but hey lets wait and see what sony has to say about it...

The PS3 was suppose to be this console that last 10 years or something. But it would seem that it was more bark than bite. Sony will say something about the dev's haven't gotten to grips with the "Awesome" power of the PS3 and that dev's will only unlock the true potential of the ps3 later in its life span. If the guyz from Id can't do it then im pretty sure everybody is screwed. Then again isn't this Id's first console game since Quake 4? They could, like the Ghost Busters dev's, just be struggling with the tech.

Graphics options and upgrades on the consoles? I could go for that. As long as the hardware isn't almost double the price like the games, for whatever reason.

Even though I have and have had various consoles, my gripe with them is, the games don't really progress a whole lot after the console's release. Minor code optimizations here and there let devs squeeze a leeeeetle bit more out of the hardware every other game release, but for the most part progress is at a halt till the next generation of consoles.

On my PC, game devs can push the boundries and my budget determines how far I can push up those graphics sliders, though I generally upgrade if they're not maxxed out =)

For very casual people though, I get it that a PC and upgrades are just too much housekeeping and maintenance.

If consoles start with the tech upgrading its over. The whole reason people buy a console is so that they can enjoy the same high res game play that pc owners can with out the constant upgrading hassle.

If sony dont come up with a fix for this or something i see the PS3 slipping behind and ending up like the dream cast or something.

[Strifehart]

The PS3 was suppose to be this console that last 10 years or something. But it would seem that it was more bark than bite. Sony will say something about the dev's haven't gotten to grips with the "Awesome" power of the PS3 and that dev's will only unlock the true potential of the ps3 later in its life span. If the guyz from Id can't do it then im pretty sure everybody is screwed. Then again isn't this Id's first console game since Quake 4? They could, like the Ghost Busters dev's, just be struggling with the tech.

I don't think the PS3 will have any trouble with keeping a 10 year lifespan. Titles such as Uncharted 1/2 really shows off exactly what can be done on the console if the developers actually apply themselves to the technology.

If consoles start with the tech upgrading its over. The whole reason people buy a console is so that they can enjoy the same high res game play that pc owners can with out the constant upgrading hassle.

Agreed.

If sony dont come up with a fix for this or something i see the PS3 slipping behind and ending up like the dream cast or something.

Sony's got a lot of "brand loyal" consumers, so I don't think they will completely fall out of the console industry like Sega did. However considering today's turbulant times, other factors might come into play that force them to "rethink" their strategy.

[OmegaFenix]

I don't think the PS3 will have any trouble with keeping a 10 year lifespan. Titles such as Uncharted 1/2 really shows off exactly what can be done on the console if the developers actually apply themselves to the technology.

See naming an exclusive title and say, uncharted 1/2 shows us the power of the ps3 is like saying Gears of War 1/2 shows us the power of the xbox 360. You have to compare the same title. When things like this start to pop up, xbox out performing ps3, not matter how trivial or how badly the dev team screwed up the average joe see's this and makes a choice based on that.

Sony's got a lot of "brand loyal" consumers, so I don't think they will completely fall out of the console industry like Sega did. However considering today's turbulant times, other factors might come into play that force them to "rethink" their strategy.

There i agree with you. But when you see big name ps exclusive titles not being exclusive that makes the public wonder. Now i know FF is only releasing a little bit on xbox but how does that look to the world out there. 12 year exclusive title all of a sudden goes multiplatform. Makes you wonder if Square still has faith in sony. We as more hardcore gamers see these thing differently for us it's not a sign that the ps3 is doomed and everybody should convert to xbox. All i am saying is news like this causes doubt in the consumers mind, a consumer who is already cutting down on luxuries. If he/she can get something cheaper and the quality, even in just one title, is better than on console x than console y and they then buy based on that, that is one less customer for console x and one more for console y.

[Strifehart]

See naming an exclusive title and say, uncharted 1/2 shows us the power of the ps3 is like saying Gears of War 1/2 shows us the power of the xbox 360. You have to compare the same title. When things like this start to pop up, xbox out performing ps3, not matter how trivial or how badly the dev team screwed up the average joe see's this and makes a choice based on that.

I wasn't trying to make a comparison. Exclusive or not, it's a good measurement of what the console's potential is. Third Party Devs just need to tap into that.

World at War looks pretty much in the same league as Gears2 (from a visual perspective anyway, UE3.x and all that) and it looks pretty much the same on both consoles.
I'm sure that Modern Warfare 2 will push the line even further.

So if Infinity Ward and Treyarch can manage to show pretty damn good looking titles on each console, then no one else has an excuse. Even Capcom is doing a really good job on their titles and Resident Evil 5 still looks really impressive especially considering that all the cinematics are rendered in realtime.

Sure the PS3 has crappy AntiAliasing, borked shaders and a pathetic scaler engine but this hasn't stopped the abovementioned devs to make the games look as good as they possibly can.

There i agree with you. But when you see big name ps exclusive titles not being exclusive that makes the public wonder. Now i know FF is only releasing a little bit on xbox but how does that look to the world out there. 12 year exclusive title all of a sudden goes multiplatform. Makes you wonder if Square still has faith in sony. We as more hardcore gamers see these thing differently for us it's not a sign that the ps3 is doomed and everybody should convert to xbox. All i am saying is news like this causes doubt in the consumers mind, a consumer who is already cutting down on luxuries. If he/she can get something cheaper and the quality, even in just one title, is better than on console x than console y and they then buy based on that, that is one less customer for console x and one more for console y.

It's not so different from when Square opted to go with Sony instead of Nintendo after the 16bit generation. The only difference there was that the games weren't multiplatform. I think it's a great time to be a consumer. It's an even better time to be a consumer who owns both consoles.

[OmegaFenix]

I wasn't trying to make a comparison. Exclusive or not, it's a good measurement of what the console's potential is. Third Party Devs just need to tap into that.

World at War looks pretty much in the same league as Gears2 (from a visual perspective anyway, UE3.x and all that) and it looks pretty much the same on both consoles.
I'm sure that Modern Warfare 2 will push the line even further.

So if Infinity Ward and Treyarch can manage to show pretty damn good looking titles on each console, then no one else has an excuse. Even Capcom is doing a really good job on their titles and Resident Evil 5 still looks really impressive especially considering that all the cinematics are rendered in realtime.

Sure the PS3 has crappy AntiAliasing, borked shaders and a pathetic scaler engine but this hasn't stopped the abovementioned devs to make the games look as good as they possibly can.



It's not so different from when Square opted to go with Sony instead of Nintendo after the 16bit generation. The only difference there was that the games weren't multiplatform. I think it's a great time to be a consumer. It's an even better time to be a consumer who owns both consoles.

Please dont mis understand im not trying to say one console is better than the other. or anything like that. Infinity has already said both consoles will render at sub HD level. So yeah its propably just the Devs who need to get the hang of the software and hardware.

The whole ff was just an example. For those educated its a gr8 time. For the average joe on the street is just another day. Except he find out if he buys the cheaper console he gets better visuals. Does go to check other facts or things like that. Just acts.

[Strifehart]

Please dont mis understand im not trying to say one console is better than the other. or anything like that. Infinity has already said both consoles will render at sub HD level. So yeah its propably just the Devs who need to get the hang of the software and hardware.

Cool no worries.

IMHO As long as the scaling of the game is done well I couldn't care if it rendered at 640x480 and scaled to the native resolution. A lot of titles do this already and they still look stellar.

[OmegaFenix]

yeah. I would love to see the amount of effort going into shiny pictures going into game mechanics, AI and so forth. Also i read the other day that the destructive engine Red Faction Guerrilla used should become common place. This is what dev's should focus on. My opinion anyways.