360 Assassin's Creed has better crowd AI? Heck, no |
Ó
Christopher C., you were right. It is a misunderstanding. Ubisoft has officially stated that there are supposed to be NO performance differences between the crowd AI of the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions, according to PS3 Land.
In case you need a recap, this fracas started because of the way a paragraph in the IGN preview of Assassin's Creed reads. It implied that the 360's hardware allowed for an "improved" crowd AI behavior. No mention was made of the PS3, but then again, maybe that wasn't IGN's intent. Of course, that paragraph could be read wrong any which way.
But what exactly did IGN say? Here's a part of it:
"While the PlayStation 3 and 360 versions of Assassin's Creed are virtually identical, Raymond did say that on the 360 the team is putting a special emphasis on achievements. The hardware also allows for improved threading, which will improve even further the crowd AI."
PS3 Land - and our boy, Chris C. - read this entire episode as a misunderstanding between the IGN interviewers and game producer Jade Raymond. Ubisoft's correction emphasizes: "Players will experience the exact same crowd results on PS3 and Xbox 360."
Hopefully this calms down both the Xbox 360 and PS3 crowd. Simply because the platforms are different doesn't mean a publisher has to short out on the gaming audience.
Buy: [Assassin's Creed for the PS3]
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
I'm paying over a 1000$ worth of technology buying the new PS3 in November... I'd better be getting the best out there... Assassins creed will rock thats for certain. 360's version will be cheaper (10gb cheaper, thats a fact)
The 360 will still have better AI than the PS3. This article was linked to a PS3 news site. They retracted their statement so that the PS3 version will sell instead of just the 360 version. It's happened before to other companies.
obviously you don't konw how to read....
quote: "Players will experience the exact same crowd results on PS3 and Xbox 360."
Don't flatter yourself. I'm pretty sure, they'll be the same. Just because you don't understand how technology works doesn't give you have the right to bash consoles. Anyways, since it seems like there is so much fanboyism going - I guess I'll contribute: You PS3 fan boys may be proud that THEORETICALLY PS3 is better than the 360. I will agree, but what I don't agree with is why do you compare the two side by side. You need to realize that two are TOTALLY different in their architectures. In essence, you can't directly compare the storage mediums (DVD vs BR) because 360 is pretty much a computer and last time I checked, computer games don't have 25 GB games. PS3 on the other hand PS3 has a Cell Processor, and in order for that to achieve identical performance more/less (I'm leaning towards more) space is needed because of the code. (Different processor instruction codes) Here is a little example: take a .mpg file and a .avi (DivX) file. Two are pretty much the same but I actually think divx is better and takes up less space, Alot less!. I hope you see what I mean. Same goes for GIGAHURTZ/Number of processors. Big deal Cell has 8 SPEs @ 3.2 GHz and 360 has 3 @ 3.2 GHz. On paper, people go "Wow, PS3 must be superior to the Xbox by about 2x." Well, no, again here is a little example. Let's compare Intel to AMD. Intel used NetBurst in Pentium 4 and D and on paper it looked awesome @ astounding 4 Ghz (overclocked extreme edition). But why in the world would people go with AMD which is like 2.6 GHz. Well because AMD gives better performance, simple as that. It's the design of the chip that makes the difference. Visualize a big pipe welded to a small pipe. You let water run through the big pipe and let it come out through the small pipe. Obviously, the flow of water will be limited by the small pipe. Point: Just because something in the system is theoretically better, doesn't mean it is. What if there is a limit such as bandwidth or cache which will totally neglected the Cell's power. I hope you guys got mine point and realized until PS3 comes out, there is really no proof whatsoever to which console will have better performance. Unless you designed the PS3,you know what it can do and know its limits. You can't go and spread rumors that one system will perform better with multi-platform games. Factor in the price/performance and 360 is a better value. Again, realize Sony had an extra year to refine their PS3. Why do you think PS3's games sucked at E3 2006 and were alot better at TGS 06? It must be a GIVEN that it will perform better for the same price to even compete w/ the 360. Yet, games are almost identical (from what I've heard - slight advantage to PS3 maybe?) and price goes up by 0. Don't start that crap with "HD-DVD addon will make them cost the same". Well guess what, how many of you will actually watch movies on HD (% of 1080p TV's owned are in single digits). Pretty sure most of you getting this for games and won't buy HD movies for another 2 years. I bet all my money on that. Rofl By that time Xbox 3 will be out with some new storage medium (Sorry folks, not all of us can keep up the pace with the technology like you hardcores which is like what 5% of all games?) You Sony Fan boys just say that cause you need to justify your investment in PS3. You guys even admitted being loyal to Sony. Doesn't that mean your biased and will do whatever it takes to defend the system? Exmaple: "Japan". Boom, just one word is needed to prove that.
P.S. Nice source BTW. If there is a word "PS3" in the domain name then I pretty sure it'll be biased in the favor of PS3, pick a better source next time like GameSpot or IGN. GG. Thx.
"And there followed the silence of one hundred thousand fanboys.
And there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Sorry, I type fast, got some typos.
Anyways:
"Yet, games are almost identical (from what I've heard - slight advantage to PS3 maybe?) and price goes up by 0" -from last post
the $0 should be $200.
XBOTS AM CRY
wouldin't it have been better if thay just put an intel dual core in the PS3? insted of spending so much time and money on somthing thats old tech before it's even released in somthing. i used to think cell was going to be some new cool thing that would be right up thare next to intel and AMD, but no it was a big letdown
wow...that's a wishful thinking....
Here's my idea
*****
You are too young to understand what's happening right now.
Please go back to the primary school classes you've missed trying to write that horrible analogy above.
*****
There, all good.
First off I am a first shipment 360 owner, I enjoy the console, and look forward to quite a few games coming out but I still consider myself a PS3 fan. Cerberus made some good points but I must dissagree with him on a few things pertaining mostly to Well's post. Yes ghz numbers are not 100% reliable in comparing overall console performance .....but when the Power PC core (same as 360's 3 symmetrical cores) is the go-between for the SPE's than yes ghz numbers are reliable besides the fact the the SPE's are more floating point and not as general purpose as the 360's dual threaded cores.....also I agree that bottle-necks also completely throw these comparisons into chaos, BUT, and this is now inclucding Well's post, Sony's investment into the Cell would seem to speak against said bottle necks. Sony invested in the Cell as a long term, multifacet microchip investment with PS3 as the priority and the use of the chip (especially ones not considered PS3-worthy) in all there other electronics bringing the total cost down through extreme mass production. Why spend so much money in R&D to create a chip wth insane processing power and deep bandwidth pockets onle to limit it instantly on the machine it was prioritized for? I agree sony's had a bad attitude and had made that many great decisions as of late but come on......let's be serious. I do believe that the ps3 will show it's graphical advantage a lot sooner than many expect but then again...who cares. Sure it will be great but I will love my 360 games too as long as they are engaging, tactful, interesting, and FUN. I have a ps2 and an O.G. XBOX and I liked the ps2 games better on a whole despite the double processing speed of the O.G. Xbox.
Summary.....PS3 is certainly more powerful but 360 is certainly well equiped enough to steal market lead if game material, firmware updates, etc prove to be better handled, designed and released through microsoft.....I have to admitt I hate the lack of video streaming on my 360 through plain old xp but on everything else I think they're doing a stellar job.
Well in a little over a month we'll know for sure.
To be honest, I don't see why there should have been any confusion over the AI in the first place, except perhaps the need online to make something out of nothing (if there's no news... then let's make some news ;)).
I don't really see why fanboys of either console have to compare them. I guess its their sad pathetic way of comparing their *****s?
Considering the rate at which technology develops and the fact that the 360 will be a year older than the PS3 (when and if it comes out lol), if the PS3 isn't a reasonably big jump over the 360 you should be disappointed with it.
Look at the XBox over the PS2. The XBox was ALOT better then the PS2 because it came out later and therefore used newer/better components. I personally don't think think the gap between the 360 and PS3 will be very noticable (which it should be as it has had a year over the 360).
To sum up.. stop comparing ur sodding consoles! ...360 owners, the 360 will not be as good as the PS3. ...Potential PS3 owners, stop over rating your console! It will be better, but not much!
I was wondering how a simple port could result in worse AI...
More BS be shoveled around...
In your face Xbox fanboys......
Why you not trying to understand that the, X360 will NERVER BE MORE POWERFUL THEN PS3____NERVER!!!!! !!_____
can NOT be used to compare! normally those games are maked
purposely to look the same on any of the shiping platforms. Besides theoretical performance (PS3 > X360), there is a real life example that hints a possibilty that PS3 will blow eventually X360. You already know that PS3 is much difficult to develop for that X360, but now we are looking at first gen games for PS3 than surpasses anything first gen on x360 and even compare with the best looking second gen on the X console, and we are no mentioning other things like physics, interaction with enviroment, particles effects, etc, (MotorStorm comes to mind)
What? that's your foot in your mouth? You can't talk? Well you can listen. See, we knew you were misunderstandin g. However, like all 360bpys you had to shoot your mouth off. This is so much like the american government it makes me sick. Nobody understands why there are so many people protesting yet GW still gets elected. Have you ever heard of silent majority? Well they are the PS3 fans. You may be louder, and no how to cry a little more, but in the end you are still the minority. You should understand though that all you have really done is make PS3 fans hate the 360. I really wanted to buy a 360 after my PS3 and Wii, but now after seeing you and hearing you guys and what the Xbox has turned you into, my god Im staying away. Though I may not like GW, Ill never become a little ***** liberal tree hugger protester. Ill stay moderate, and ill play my PS3 and Wii. The 360 can catch fire for all I care now, THANKS GUYS!!!
.
I said it last time "stop taking rumors seriously"
and now we have it: this was a mere rumor!
STOP OVER REACTING ON THOSE RUMORS...
The PS3 is slightly more powerful than the 360, it isn't going to blow it away, not now nor in the future. Also, comparisons of first gen to second gen games are distorted by the fact that the PS3 was delayed. Those 'first gen' PS3 games would not have looked as good if the console had launched on time in the spring as planned, just as how those same first gen games would look even better if the PS3 was delayed until Nov 2007.
Totally agree with #19, I was a sony fan, now im not too sure, i love my 360, and its providing a great gaming experience for me, as for the ps3 , only time will tell.
The ps3 does THEORETICALLY have better performance than the 360, but no where near the amount that the xbox had over ps2. Ps3 will NOT blow 360 away, its games might though.
As far as games go, I think the 360 has the upper hand. Games like Halo Wars, Gears of War, Halo 3, Lost Planet: Extreme Condition and Mass Effect are all fine examples. PS3 has MGS4 and... I honestly can't name another PS3 title off the top of my head. Sorry.
As a professional programmer I can tell you for 100% certain that the difference in processor will create no remarkable difference in the size of the compiled code. Certainly not enough difference that a cross-platform game would take a DVD on the 360 and a Blueray disc on the PS3.
That is so utterly ridiculous that I felt physically ill reading it.
The difference between video formats is compression, not compilation. Video is not code. It is data. Further, Divx is lossy compression and MPG is not. You know what happens if you compress machine code with lossy compression? The code doesn't work.
As for the misunderstandin g... The way the article was worded, it DID say that the Crowd AI would be different between consoles. Blame that on the idiot journalist who wrote it without verifying what it meant. (Or paraphrased and didn't bother to say so.)
The correct is not a 'cover my butt' statement, but a correction to the idiocy that fell from that article.
As a professional BS detector I can tell you right now that you don't know crap about cell, so your argument is pointless. If you think that by saying professional programmer, gives you more credibility then I think your full of it. If your so professional, trust me, you wouldn't be browsing these forums. Sorry bud, but nice try. I don't know what instrustions cell processor uses, but i know that you don't know either so cut that bull crap of yours will ya. GG thanx.
"The difference between video formats is compression, not compilation. Video is not code. It is data. Further, Divx is lossy compression and MPG is not. You know what happens if you compress machine code with lossy compression? The code doesn't work."
You think I don't know that. You totally misinterpreted my post then. What I meant by that is that same quality doesn't always mean same size. Let me explain it differently. Take a MAC and a PC. Two use different processor instructions. In order for them to perform similarly, different formats are need, hence more space for one format over the other such as that lousy Mac format from iMovie (3 GB for like 7 minutes of DVD quality movie). (That's why I brought in .avi and .mpg which I guess wasn't the best example). Instead here is another example: DVD players only uses one format ".vob" which usually takes up to 5 GB for one movie. With avi you can have identical quality for 1 GB (For PC). Two formats are just different ways to store data, but since DVD player's processor doesn't have the power to read .avi, it has to rely on .vob. But one thing with DVD players is that there are so many of them and by now there is probably some that can read .avi. But the thing with PS3 and Xbox 360 is that there is only one of each. (Xbox 360 is at least flexible with dashboard updates - pray PS3 will have a similar method of patching - but then again Sony is not a software company). So in console terms, let's say one processor doesn't have the power to do procedural synthesis (Xbox 360 does - Oblivion), then it would have to make it up by using textures which take up vast amount of space.... The actual code might not be significantly bigger or smaller, but how it executes it and with what does.
In addition to cerberus's explanation, Microsoft, for example is using a 'high-level description' of polygonal information with which the polygons are then rendered by the processors, as opposed to storing the actual polygonal information. THIS makes for a MAJOR decrease in data storage requirements as polygonal information takes up a decent amount of space.
I see this as just one example of why different architectures would bring about different processing and storage requirement as well as different product end-results.
this is amazing because the PS3 has one more thread it should be the tiniest bit better. the only difference will be physics, volumetric clouds etc. 360 is good but it hasnt impressed me enough for me to get one im waiting on PS3 to see how it does lol. i went down to my local futureshop the other day to get a case for my iPod(yeah i know... its all for the wheel, with out that wheel it would be a POS) i stopped to watch the BLU RAY demo kiosk... well i was amazed. the image appeared to have no edges anywhere creating a sloppy image and ever second or so there would be what appeared to be some sort of static or distortion, umm lets see whats a better way to describe it.. when you go to the movies sometimes in crappy theatres you'll see some black spots for a second or so. thats what i saw on a 1080P sony LCD with a samsung Blu ray player. and it gets even worse for the HD DVD demo. it wasnt even playing 720P video it was 480P wether the wrong disc was put in or it just acually is that bad i cant be sure but i was disgusted but i usually am whenever i venture into that comissioned waste land. Best buy isnt any better either. but at least at futureshop they make you feel good about buying whatever you're buying as long as it's towards the higher end of the product range they carry
Do you know what this proves?
That all of you know JACK ***** about the specs of the PS3 and XBOX360 and know absolutely nothing about what it takes to make a game, technologically or otherwise.
Stop pretending like you do. Because you DON'T know. Stop pretending like you know Blue-ray is going to "win the console war". Because you DON'T know. Stop saying that the graphics processor or cell processor has a mile-leap over current technology and can cook your breakfast and walk your dog. Because it WON'T. STOP PRETENDING like you know.
Some of you might be programmers. Some of you might be graphic artist, I don't know. If so, that's cool.
But don't come in here blabbing your mouth like you know what's going on in the development for each console. Because in all seriousness, YOU DON'T KNOW.
Instead of being accusatory, why don't you be a little more constructive and you know inspire us somehow. Apparently you know less than us and I gained 0 (zero) knowledge out of your post. GG Thanks. Go cry.
Its all about the games neither system is graphically superior to the other the difference maker will be in the games the games will decide the winner.
INSPIRE YOU?
What. The f_ck kind of request is that.
I'm just telling you what kind of idiots some you guys are being, acting like you know *****.
If you didn't get anything out of my post, then you're either one of two individuals:
1) a person who's not on the receiving end of the accusation, because he or she has not partaken in any discussion that attempts to reveal his or her "knowledge" about any one console.
2) a person who's too idiotic to even tell when he or she is being reprimanded for his or her behavior.
You decide which one you are.
See, again, I learned nothing and actually feel dumber now. (after reading your port) You are so abstract and have no solid proof (facts and sources) to counter anything we said. If you do, then come back and reply, otherwise I will continue to think that you'll full of it. End of Story. GG. Bye, Sony Fanboy. Nice Try. Go commit suicide.
Wow. You're not even smart enough to understand a general comment.
BTW, don't take the liberty categorizing me on a "side". I don't like Sony this generation. They've been extremely arrogant and have broken a multitude of their promises. I don't even see WHERE IN MY POST I indicate that I side with Sony. If anything, I'm complaining about ALL OF YOU who claimed to know something that we don't, Microsoft, Sony, OR Nintendo for that matter.
You just see what you want to see.
By the way, "Go, uh... Go eat sh1t". Or something.
Telling people to do asinine things over the internet must be a fad or something, you seem to enjoy doing it.
I really don't understand the appeal, though.