YES SCC NOT FOR ps3. The XBOX360 has better graphics anyway.

SC C not to PS3 because MGS4 would stomp all over it.

quote:

Originally posted by Knot3D:
SC C not to PS3 because MGS4 would stomp all over it.

No not really

quote:

Originally posted by ShockWave_942:

quote:

Originally posted by Knot3D:
SC C not to PS3 because MGS4 would stomp all over it.

No not really

What is Ubisoft trying to proof by making it exclusive? None of the other Splinter Cell games ever stayed only on the Xbox and PC for long. Both Pandora and Chaos Theory came out on [i]cellphones[i] for God's sake.

quote:

Originally posted by savior2006:
What is Ubisoft trying to proof by making it exclusive?

They're trying to proof that they like money more than their fanbase

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:

quote:

would also have better grapgics on PS3

No dude.....just no.

What do you mean, no? Do you even know what a grapgics is? Hun, I'll have you know, the PS3 is a grapgic machine! Everytime I play my PS3, my mind is boggled by the grapgicness that it exudes. I've never seen anything like it!

Now graphics, on the other hand, really isn't much different.

quote:

Originally posted by ElBaero2007:

quote:

Originally posted by ShockWave_942:

quote:

Originally posted by Knot3D:
SC C not to PS3 because MGS4 would stomp all over it.

No not really

quote:

Originally posted by JohnsHomegirl:

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:

quote:

would also have better grapgics on PS3

No dude.....just no.

What do you mean, no? Do you even know what a grapgics is? Hun, I'll have you know, the PS3 is a grapgic machine! Everytime I play my PS3, my mind is boggled by the grapgicness that it exudes. I've never seen anything like it!

Now graphics, on the other hand, really isn't much different.

seeing comparisons on gametrailers, theres not really a difference.then again can u go by that.but ive seen several other videos and just see a slight difference.maybe on games just for ps3 but not platform.

My post was a joke, I don't know if you noticed that.

I was making fun of the fact that he said grapgics instead of graphics. Basically I was implicating that they were both two different things. Get it?

I get it!....

quote:

Originally posted by JohnsHomegirl:
My post was a joke, I don't know if you noticed that.

I was making fun of the fact that he said grapgics instead of graphics. Basically I was implicating that they were both two different things. Get it?

aww i thought you were trying to say that xbox 360 doesn't compare to ps3 "graphics".which is not true.my bad

you guys should see my grapgics.... too much sexy...?

Okay, a few things on this subject.

First: PS3 vs Xbox, PS3 has the better graphics capability. The better card, the better processor (which is designed to be utilized for one core for AI, one for physics, one for lighting, etc etc.. whether its used that way or not is a different story). Games created for multiple platforms, you won't notice much of a difference.

Second: The PS3 is built on a *NIX like / based OS (like the PS2). While Xbox is built on a very Windowsish OS (of course, M$ likes to put Windows on everything, no matter how bad it [Windows] is). Thus a port from PC to 360, I imagine, would be fairly simple. I'm not sure of the exact methods, but from what M$ spams me with, their free Xbox / PC development kit (cant remember the name) is pretty much the same thing.

Third: I haven't heard of haze, but from watching the TV trailer, its a knock off of Halo & Crysis. I recognize a third game in there, but I cant really place my finger on it.

Fourth: Back on graphics, games built exclusively for the PS3 which are geared towards using the PS3s graphics and are graphically extensive games, vs Xbox 360 games which are as graphically intended (but exclusive for their own platform), you'll get better visuals on PS3, than Xbox 360 but it would be nearly impossible to compare (not the same game, characters, story etc etc).

Final verdict: Why revamp the graphics so you can have it look better on one platform over the other, when you can have it look the same between the two. No difference in most cases.

As for Xbox 360 being better. I'll never buy an Xbox360, I don't believe in supporting monopolizing companies like M$, who value building bad products, and like ripping off other companies and them suing them for patent infringement.

Anyways. Go Splinter Cell on PC. I'll get it for that (I'll suffer booting into my Windows partition to play it).

nobody is trying to start a console war here so why post this we didnt ask for the game to be exclusive anyways Microsoft just kind of bribed Ubisoft into doing this.

Oy not another one. As a PC gamer I have a good perspective with which to compare and contrast the console hardware against. If there's one thing that drives me nuts it's a fanboy that has swallowed all the Sony marketing/hype into believing that the PS3 is an almighty supercomputer that wipes the floor with the 360. It does not. To me, RealSnakeDiver, you are part of a group I have come to revile more than the trash talking tweenagers that infest Xbox Live. You are Sony sheep.

The PS3's GPU is nothing new. It's an Nvidia 7800 with a faster bus. It has a marginally higher clock rate than the 360's GPU but that doesn't mean much because we are comparing apples to oranges. The 360's GPU has more novel, modern features than the 7800: unified shaders, special buffers in the hardware itself for AA (it's no accident that features like these have been made standard in the latest version of Microsoft's DirectX). Hearing you flatly state that a 7800 "has the better graphics capability" than the Xenos chip makes me wince.

As for the CPU, well, I had my eyes on the Cell since it was first announced by STI (Sony, Toshiba, IBM). Lots of people have been waiting for something new to come along; anything to move beyond the x86 instruction set used by the Intel Pentium chip but the jury is still out on the Cell. So, no, the PS3 does not have the better CPU. The Cell is faster on paper but its radical design means that it is not being used to its full potential. And I've got news for you. It won't hit that peak for years...if ever. That's right. Years. The Cell is a brand new design. It takes years just to mature the compiler technology let alone rewrite the game engines. You can't just do a port of existing software. There is some serious redesign involved when moving to the Cell.

I have to ask. Do you or did you own a PS2? I'll bet the answer is yes and I'll bet you just loved your PS2 to death, right? So when you heard Sony go on record about how awesome their new PS3 was going to be you swallowed every bit of it, right? Brand loyalty. I know it exists.

OSes: PS3 uses a Linux variant. Xbox 360's OS is nothing like Windows XP or Vista. The Windows bloatware you justifiably hate is not present.

Back on topic. We still don't know if this is a timed exclusive. It would not surprise me if the game shows up on the PS3 6+ months later.

Both Dr_Cube and RealSnakeDiver have good points.

Dr_Cube:
Yes it is brand loyalty that gets us Playstation fans mad that X-Box might be getting exclusive rights to a game. Wouldn't you if your Mighty PC(please forgive me no offence meant) was denied rights to receive a copy of a new game that you want.
But its also that some of us might have spent a lot of money on our prefered console when we would've gone the other way had we known of the possible exclusive.

And yes I suspect that if everyone is patient that Conviction will come out on everything...especially if their launch sales don't go through the roof as expected because of all the disgruntled console owners.( I think the old Consoles should get it too[PS2 and X-Box 1])

RealSnakeDiver:
I agree if they make games for multiple consoles the graphics should be equal. Other than if PS2 and PS3/360 or X-box get something then I can understand a difference in graphics.

I agree MS doesn try to dominate too much but so does everyone else. Its just that MS succeeds in their plots. I'd never buy an X-box but its coz I used the PS first and prefer the control. If their was a port switcher out so that you could use PS controllers in X-box or vice versa I wouldn't have much preference...in fact I'd buy both so I could get the best of all the differences.


Ok I've said my bit.
now
ERN456:
It is unfair that we Fans should suffer so from choices made for money by other people.

Dr Cube: I own a PS2 and I own an Xbox. I game on neither really. While I preferred some games on PS2, I did like the features on my Xbox. The real issue I have with the Xbox is that its made by M$.

As for the Cell processor, I happen to be watching it since HP first made the announcement. Remember, STI didn't develop it, they bought the technology from HP. In my post I state what the intentions of the Cell processor are. The Cell, PS SDK and the two combined are designed to work like I said: "Physics processing in one core, AI in another, lighting in another". What this would allow is dynamic rendering of lighting effects and textures and AI, instead of pre-rendering these into memory during the load times.

Whether developers do this or not is another story. As well, compilers *should* not have to be developed by each company. Sony *should* have created a compiler with the SDK which allowed this to be done during development with not much work on the part of the developer. (i.e. when developer designs physics, they use the physics package which the compiler automatically recognizes and flags in the code to be threaded to the right processor).

The PS3 does have the capability to put out the better graphics. Overall the PS3 is a better machine in terms of hardware specs. But as you said, whether developers bother learning the development guidelines for the PS3 or just hack away at the documentation until they have something which looks cool is dependent on whether or not the PS3 looks the better.

As I keep saying, my main distain for Xbox is that its made by Microsoft. I don't know what Xbox's OS is. I can only assume its close to Windows (in terms of available APIs) as the (free) development kit is the same thing for Windows and Xbox game dev.

Anyways, this is a thread about why it isn't for PS3. The reason is probably because of cost in some form or another. Its kind of like the "Why isn't The Force Unleashed Coming to PC" thread at the Lucas Arts forums (which happens to span a year and contain some 1900 posts).

PC version for me (maybe).

This is off topic. I am responding to RealSnakeDriver.

quote:

STI didn't develop it, they bought the technology from HP

Bought from HP? STI, though mostly IBM, developed the Cell. The only silicon HP has been involved in over the last 10 years was Intel's Itanium project.

quote:

Physics processing in one core, AI in another, lighting in another

I read the presentation Guerrilla Games gave on Killzone 2. The AI and physics are all done on the PPU (the only general purpose core in the Cell). The 6 usable SPEs (the other vector processors in Cell) are assisting the GPU with the rendering. Why didn't they farm out physics and AI to the SPEs? That's a very good question.

Regardless, the GPU is still doing the lion's share of the rendering. The Cell's SPE's may be helping out but they are not substitutes for the GPU's pixel and vertex shaders.

quote:

As well, compilers *should* not have to be developed by each company.

IBM is the one that provides the compiler for the Cell. But it takes years (and I don't mean 1-3 years) to mature a compiler and the Cell's compiler had to be built from scratch.

quote:

when developer designs physics, they use the physics package which the compiler automatically recognizes and flags in the code to be threaded to the right processor

That's how the Xbox 360's compiler and CPU work. You can't do that with the Cell. The Cell is not that simple. Its "cores" are not cores. They are not general purpose cores like those in the Xbox 360. They are specialized vector processors good at matrix/linear algebra. You can't just feed them a thread that does AI or physics and let the compiler automagically assign and manage resources. This is one of the main reasons why it is so hard to make games for the PS3. When developers ***** about working with the PS3, this is one of the main sources of their pain.

quote:

The PS3 does have the capability to put out the better graphics.

I think this statement assumes too much. The only games I know of that have a chance of pushing the PS3 to its limits are the exclusives MGS4 and Killzone 2. Killzone 2 is the one I am keeping my eye on. They have high graphical expectations to meet because of that Killzone 2 trailer they showed during E3 2005 which turned out to be non-realtime, prerendered CGI footage. As of 2008, no PS3 game has even come close to that footage and 360 titles like Gears of War hold the graphics crown.

quote:

Overall the PS3 is a better machine in terms of hardware specs

The PS3 does have fancy hardware. The Cell is nifty and BluRay is nice. It's been a long time since somebody made a brand new chip like Cell, but it does not wipe the floor with the 360's CPU because nobody is using the Cell to its full potential (and they may not be able to). As for GPUs, the 360's GPU has features you're not going to find in the PS3's 7800.