This is similar to what I've heard from developers before. Both systems have their strengths but ultimately are about even. 360 has the advantage at the moment because of better development tools and a 1 year head start. PS3 developers are playing catch up.



I don't think anything I've said above is biased, although I'm sure sony fans will see it that way.

I am a little surprised with the route Sony went with RAM.

But the PS3 is still a great machine and it will only get better over time.



I can't wait for the PS3 to find its legs!!!!

Bethesda doesn't yet know how to work out PS3. I'm really disappointed with them. they have taken so much time. but yet the ps3 version looks like *****. they better start learning how to create games for ps3 before starting working on it. at one side we see some devs are creating awesome games for PS3 but at other side there are devs that are failing to deliver.Bethesda is a good dev. but failures from them is really hurtful. The ps3 version now has low res textures , loads of jerky scenes. Tbh it's not worth playing on ps3 now.

Yes nice game. If it specifically design for the xbox 1 they could of got more out of it, fact! Have a look at the specs dumbass, the gap is huge. PS2 had the advantage of a longer life span and bigger third party development budgets.

PSX and N64 emulators running at full speed, quality XVID/DIVX play back was all possible on the Xbox 1. The PS2 struggled with SNES and SMS emulation. The Xbox 1 was easily more powerful. I'm not taking anything away from the games that were created for it.

In reality you can store textures in XDR Memory and have the RSX GPU access them within that memory pool. The bandwidth to XDR RAM (35GB/s) is really high, and in fact RSX's bandwidth to VRAM is twice that of the Xenos GPU in the 360.



PS3 has all the advantages in that area. The problem is that you can't port a 360/PC engine over to the PS3 very easily. It has to be custom built from the ground up. A lot of developers are actually learning that they need to split their teams up since the PS3 and 360 are so radically different.

LOL this is so funny but I dont want to RAM it home so I will say no more...

"The way it looks now, Sony is pushing to create photo-realistic games while Microsoft is still pushing fictional looking games."



You can't generalise like that, it's dumb. The 'realism' in a game depends on the developer, the genre and the art style they're after. It's not a Sony vs Microsoft thing.

Which is our Case in Here..



Observe the PS2 and watch the Difference Between multi-platform Games and Exclusive games designed for the System Like FFXII..



In Fact FFXII turns Everything else into Shame.....It was designed with the PS2 in Mind from Ground-Up....it cannot be compared to any Other Multi-platform game on the PS2



If Bethesda thinks they can use the same techniques that Worked on porting the PC version for the 360 on the PS3...they are Blind,that Simply Wont Happen.



The RSX have Access to the CELL half of Ram [System Memory] but Not Directly,the PS3 OS uses 64Mb of System RAM as Opposed by the 360 which Only Takes 32Mb of System Ram [Someone said the PS3 OS takes from the VRAM...thats False]



Saying that they have technical Limitation [if they really did] is Extremely Wierd,if thats the Case then how did Factor 5 Run "Lair",which is Far more Detailed than Oblivion,with a Single Map in Lair as Big as ALL of Oblivion "4GB for single Map"...Oblivion With Voices and Cinematics "4600Mb"



All this was Running at 1080P,and it is Known that the Main Constraint for running Games at 1080P is Frame Buffer "aka RAM"



If the PS3 was Truly such "RAM Limted" it could never run Lair in its Current form at 720P...Let Aside 1080P "Which takes Twice the Ram for Frame Buffer"



You see the Difference Between Lair and Oblivion...is that Lair is an Exclusive Game Build from the Ground-Up for the PS3,While Oblivion is a Multi-Platform Game,Bethesda will never Spend Much resources to Improve the PS3 Version,things Dont go this way..



If It Runs....they,l Release it,thats all they Care.



They Never Bothored Using the PS3 HDD as Lair,s Factor 5 is Doing,to Stream and Save Ram,all they Have is Complaints.



In the End,as i always Say...only Exclusives Will Show the Highest Potential for the System,which Means that Sony was Right to Focus on its First-Party Division,It will All be Decided by Exclusives....Multi-platform Games Wont Show Anything they are the "Same".



For Performance....Wait for MGS4,Lair,FFXII I ann Sony Projects Like Killzone2 and GT5,Only these Will Show True Difference...as they Did for the PS2

The dev isn't talking about frame buffers, resolution, map sizes or general performance. The fact that he doesn't mention any of these probably means that the PS3 is capable in all those areas. All he is citing is a single technical limitation of the system.

"""you might be wondering if the PS3 version of Oblivion sports any technical improvements over the 360 version.



The answer: sort of. "It has a lot of technical niceties," Howard says, "just [as a result of] the development time. One of the things that always bothered us was how the distant landscape looked. You'd get this very perceptible line of where stuff is loaded and where it's not loaded, and then it pops in. On the PS3, it's a lot more seamless. We did some new shaders for how it takes information from the background to the foreground and blends all that together. It's a slightly cleaner image." The results are subtle, but noticeable."""





How surprising, the 1UP guys forgot to mention what's actually better in the PS3 version in Bethesda's actual words, and instead only focused on talking crap about PS3 with no Bethesda employee to back up their claims! Who would have expected that from 1UP? [/sarcasm]

The Words Above are Made By the 1UP Blogger,it Didnt come from a Bethesda Progarammer



1UP is Known to be one of the Most Sony Hating Sites...as is Gamespot [the MS advertizing site]



Until i read a "Direct" Quote from the a Programmer...then this is Considered BS



How did he say that they tried work Arounds..??..they can easily use the XDR 256Mb Half through the CELL to get more RAM for rendering Textures if Needed.



But then....i Expect no Less from 1UP,Visit the Site and "See" the Unbiasness For yourself

The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.





Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.



The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.



HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

im a huge sony fan, and i totally agree with you.



when i first heard of the 512mb ram on both systems, i was worried about these kind of problems. i just hope devs can get around it

BUT! the GPU and CPU have to share the 25(est.) gbps that the GPU has to connect to the memory. the CPU has to connect to the memory THROUGH the GPU wasting alot of valuable bandwith. Therefore it only has HALF of what you claim it is! also against this claim of not enough memory! i have a 6800GT overclocked and it runs oblivion on the highest settings quite fine (25FPS+) and it only has 256MB of memory. So where along the line did they think that there isnt enough memory if they had to do so on the pc!

I thought Resistance was developed for the PS3 ? why wasnt that so great then ?.

Manufacturers Dont want to See their Cars Having Damage...this Could Hurt the licence for cars in GT5.



GT4 featured 700+ cars,GT5 will probably have even More...thats a lot of manufacturer cars who will be upset to see them damaged in Such realism

Yes 700 cars great. 300 is fine with me.



"From sport compacts to purpose-built race cars, collect more than 300 cars from over 50 of the world%u2019s leading manufacturers including Ferrari, Porsche, Nissan, VW, GM, and Lamborghini. Take your car to the garage and install alternative engines, suspension kits, bolt-on superchargers, brakes, rims, racing slicks, and more. Dial in advanced suspension settings, tire pressure, and gear ratios."

Ok then, build a game that is perfomance efficient on PS3, and it will blow away 360 on the other side of the ball- Quality.

Perhaps the problem is Bethesda? "They tried it, did some work around..." and it didn't work out. But it's the PS3's fault? If I want to play Oblivion I'll play it on the PC, which it is meant for.



Bethesda is having so much trouble with PS3, yet other developers are doing fine.

Where did you get this information Pat?



Forza 2 has "more than 300 cars from over 50 of the world's leading manufacturers including Ferrari, Porsche, Nissan, VW, GM, and Lamborghini."





"Experience uncompromising physics: Top automotive engineers, professional race car drivers, and experienced programmers teamed up to create the most complete racing simulator experience available. Cars incur dramatic damage and wear, which affects car performance. Advanced tire and suspension models respond to heat and pressure changes as well as weight transfer and aerodynamic load."



http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/f/forzamotorsport2/

"I heard it from various people ... I am assuming it is true."



Typical sony zombie response.



I'm guessing you have played or seen Forza 2 in action before you made that judgment. There's a reason why GTHD is a demo.

stop using other people's names. Even if you don't like someone and want to make a Sony hater seem like a sony lover, don't use their name. That's pretty f---ed up. But anyways, even if it's not a limitation to others, if a developer says they were limited by something then yea, it's a limitation for what they need to do.



As mentioned before, there are ways to work around it that Bathesda doesn't seem to want to deal with, if the hardware is capable but hard to work with, then that in itself is a limitation.



Other companies might not see these limitations, but some will.

How can you use info from anandtech for the article??? Anandtech review is reaaallly old, many specs were not revealed, and even worse, the quote used doesnt even have anything to do with the problem, since using cell for vertex processing is an option, usually it's done by RSX...

Devise, the reason there is no damage to the vehicles in GT HD is because the car manufacturers would not allow the cars to be destroyed or damaged in the game. They did not want their cars to be associated with any kind of crashes. This is Fact, and it is the only way that Sony would be allowed to use the vehicles in the game.

That quote is from a 1UP guy. Bethesda never said anything like that.

Man u guys are dumb. All u Xbox 360 fans are gonna get it cause of that 120 gig thats gonna come out. I mean if it does come out, what it microsoft gonna do with the people who just have the 20 gig and core. The only way to get the hd port on the back and the 120 gig on your 360 is to probably mod it. Besides, 360 is winning cause so far it has more games. Right now theres not much titles for the ps3 so hold your horses. Here's an example of a pretty good game, downlad the trailers.

Well i guess there is only going to be one realistic racing sim and that is Forza 2.

Take the cotton wool out of your ears next time.



Start 16 minutes and 30 seconds into the 1up show and LISTEN this time. Or was it ignored because he says the 360 is going to get that shader fix too?



As for backing up their claims. THEY saw the latest build of the PS3 version (you didn't), THEY spoke to Bethesda, and THEY then spoke about their experiences publically. Since when is that not enough? If what they say is wrong, you could be sure Bethesda would make sure it's put right soon, either on 1UP or in another interview.

Do you know what that means? Do you know how to turn a core 360 into a premium 360. Or do you need it spent out for you?



I guess you were calling others dumb just to be ironic.

1.

LOL he hasnt been told the 360 Harddrive just pulls out then ?.



2.

And a screenshots or trailers dont make the gameplay especially if there is any delay problems due to ram limitations.

IF you were you'd see that PS3 is cheaper but since you feel its nessisary to support MS i hope you buy vista and it frys your HDD and you dont have any backups! Lies arnt MS? sure they arnt look at that article that IGN put together about the 360 vs PS3 based off of MS! they ADDED TOGETHER BANDWITH that was in the same line! if a four lane highway suddenly becomes a two lane highway you dont say its a 6 lane highway! and thats exactly what MS did! Also Sony hasnt directly attacked their competitors products they HAVE said Wii is an impulse buy but look at what MS has said about PS3 they're scared off it!

lagging INSIDE is considered impressive? thats what we call PETHETIC! go play oblivion for 360 and you'll see. it REALLY chugs along. yet somehow it got a 9.6 on GS.

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t+22858



THERE IT IS! read it and weep! it may be on a PS3 forum but those diagrams were not even made by anyone on that site! the diagrams in the first post prove my point that 360 has to share its precious bandwith to the memory.

I did say SYSTEM bandwidth.



The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.



The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.



Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.



The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.



HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

"THERE IT IS! read it and weep"



Weep? It's an uninformed article written by a 20 year old college kid with no experience on the console hardware.

SO what does all this mean???? does it mean that the ps3 version will have less graphics??? or WHAt???

well maybe not for queers per se, but yea I hated that game. It didn't even look all that nice(well i guess if you've got so much stuff to put into a game, then that's the best you can do) But man, I hated it. It was so damn boring. Don't get me wrong, I love RPG's but this one was .... not fun.





VERY INDEPTH...



But not fun...

Or perhaps you're not acting...



The poster referred to the 120GB 360 in future. Common sense alone should allow you to work out that such an XBox on the market would also mean the 120GB HDD will be available to current 360 gamers, just as the 20GB HDD is available.



Yes the PS3 is more flexible in this respect, but that doesn't change the facts and it doesn't change the reasoning behind the posts we were responding to (did you evem read it?).

Does this mean instead of charging us for downloadable content they can use the space on blu-ray and just burn it to a disk. Damn Sony for not thinking about the developers, they should be able to nickel and dime us whenever they want.

ign.com



IGN:

"Fans of the Elder Scrolls series have always loved the flexibility the franchise afforded them during their adventures, but when the eagerly awaited Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was released last March, even they were astounded by its depth. Players could literally choose their own adventure within the massive game, which offered over 200 hours of play. Characters could be customized in various ways, and it was easy for gamers to make powerful magic users, fighters, thieves or other classes as they attempted to close the gates of Oblivion. For PC and Xbox 360 gamers, it was a match made in RPG heaven. Fortunately for PS3 owners, Oblivion will soon be descending upon the system. We got the chance to play the latest build of the game today, and we came away with new impressions from the land of Cyrodiil.



Apart from the initial scale of Oblivion, which was simply huge, Bethesda Game Studios augmented the adventure with eight downloadable plug-in features. Items like the Horse Armor download seemed much more of a minor adjustment than a significant addition to the gameplay. Others like the Orrery or Mehrunes' Razor provided separate locations for players to battle through, collecting experience and valuable items. Unlike the PC and 360 versions, the PS3 edition will not feature all eight of the currently available plug-ins for the game. They may find their way to the PlayStation Store at some point in time in the future, but they will not be added into the version as a "PS3 Collector's Edition" or a special copy of Oblivion. Instead, the title will only include the recently released Knights of the Nine side quest, as you attempt to recover lost artifacts of the Divine Crusader and restore glory to the order of warriors.



PS3 owners will get their own taste of Oblivion this March

PS3 owners will get their own taste of Oblivion this March.

Players of the PC or 360 version of the quest know that only those characters who don't have any infamy associated to their name can begin the pilgrimage to start the Knights of the Nine quest. However, there have been a few changes made for the PS3 version. Characters can now immediately set out on their pilgrimage to the Wayshrines of the Divines as soon as they exit the sewers at the start of the game (which served as a tutorial). This immediately lets you bypass having to track down the rumor about the attack on Anvil Chapel and start on your quest for righteousness.



The PS3 version of Oblivion isn't a simple port of the game either, although players who have picked up the 360 version will be very familiar with the control scheme. For one thing, the PS3 version has been optimized to take advantage of the Cell processor and hardware that the system offers. As a result, the game runs a lot faster than the 360 build. Entering dungeons or buildings results in a load of 3-5 seconds, compared to the 7-10 seconds or longer for the 360 version of the game. Similarly, the amount of framerate drops or hitches that cropped up in the wilderness as you accessed a new area on the 360 have been substantially reduced on the PS3 version. There is a plan to completely eradicate these issues as the game nears release, as well as fixing a number of bugs that were present in the other builds. Kiss the item duplication glitch goodbye.



Visual textures are much sharper in the PS3 version of the game

Visual textures are much sharper in the PS3 version of the game.

The visual presentation of Oblivion has also been significantly enhanced. While it was a beautiful title on the 360, far off environmental details often displayed low resolution textures. This has been fixed with new shaders dedicated to rendering the foreground cleanly with sharper details, so rocky landscapes now have craggy appearances instead of smooth, non-distinct surfaces. While there is still a fair amount of pop-in that occurs (which can't be helped due to the size of the world), the draw distance is farther than the 360 version. As a result, screens from the PS3 version should approach those from high en

You guys should check out the IGN review of the latest PS3 build of Oblivion.



It'll inform a lot of you, and shut a bunch of you up too.

since you fail to check his sources i dont care if he was a 15 year-old. It makes no difference if the source is reliable! furthermore.. http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/news.html?sid+6165505+om_act+convert+om_clk+newlyadded

i see so the one site people claim is biased against PS3 is claiming the PS3 version is BETTER and there are no technical issues. i see now that we've cleared up that this technical issue is all BS lets discuss this idiocy you seem to be arguing about..

A review of the PS3 version of Oblivion from IGN:

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/762/762108p1.html



I hope that their comments about the game shut some people and this article up. If the thing runs that good on the PS3, why the heck can't it load some more downloadable contents?...

"since you fail to check his sources i dont care if he was a 15 year-old. It makes no difference if the source is reliable!"



And since you have no idea what you're talking about, you would trust the words of a 15 year old kid.



Show me the multi-platform developers who agree! That's right, you can't. The fact is developers like John Carmack and the developer of The Darkness, say the PS3 is only slightly more powerful than the 360. So I trust the views of devs with experience of the consoles over some spotty face school kid.

"lets discuss this idiocy you seem to be arguing about.."



You mean like your claim that Sony hasn't attacked the competition? R-i-g-h-t.

half of these people have their heads so far up their asses they dont see that they're arguing over which system is "better". But in reality it doesnt matter because the system will be as good as the games made for it. Take PS2 for example compare its first gen titles to RE4. See how far it can come, and how good it can look even though the xBox was much more capable?



In the end you all look like idiots because you are arguing over something that doesnt matter, all that matters is that retailers are calling the PS3 a fail and reccomend 360 because its "better" and doesnt "not play HD movies", "overheat", "burn discs". All of which 360 did at launch yet PS3 has yet to have any of these issues. This doesnt make sense to me because PS3 is MORE expensive, would it not make more sense to push the more expensive product? is that not what salesmen do?

the ps3 has "potential".. some one wake me up when that becomes a reality. i'm so tired of fanboys and their erotic love for sony. i have the ps3, nice system, resistance is fun, but.. i play the 360 because right now the graphics are better, the achievements are fun, and xbox live delivers. fanboys.. stop all the arguing about "what is going to happen..". it's tired, it's boring, and right now.. the 360 is in the lead. deal with it. when that changes, you can get all dressed up for your night with the message boards and tell everyone you were right all along. but until then.. stop making fools of yourselves.