PDA

View Full Version : Deus Ex 3 PS3... please not a port...please!!!



Zedux
26th May 2008, 09:30
i remember as if it was yesterday going to a game shop I was very young and buying a pc game i didn't know much that was august 2000.

long time has passed I'm still alive lol but now I do most of my gaming on a console.

I'm realy looking forward this game but please Eidos tell me the PS3won't be a port or anything like Kane & Lynch: Dead Men! Or I've to give up on multiple platforms and just buy PS3 exclusives!

jordan_a
26th May 2008, 10:19
Don't worry, PC gamers are far more likely to worry about that! :D

Kneo24
26th May 2008, 10:42
I don't know why you're so worried. Games being developed for consoles these days usually get more attention to controls than PC games do.

DXeXodus
26th May 2008, 12:21
I can appreciate what you are saying. But you must realise that console gamers are being treated alot better than us PC gamers lately. We hardly get PC exclusives anymore, the games we do get are often direct ports (except for a few special cases) and alot of new games aren't even coming to our platform as developers seem to think that PC's cannot run next gen titles for some reason (ala SW Force Unleashed) even though my PC with 3 gigs of ram and a massive graphics card massively outranks the measily memory capacity of an XBOX or PS3.

I have had to sit by and watch as console gamers salivate over games like Fable 2 and GTA4 when I cannot play them despite owning a capable machine. It makes me sad

Do excuse me for saying that I want this to be made properly for the PC and then they can look at giving the spoilt console fans a piece of the action. I'm tired of getting second rate games by developers that simply make a game for a console then port it to PC.

sea
26th May 2008, 14:03
I can appreciate what you are saying. But you must realise that console gamers are being treated alot better than us PC gamers lately. We hardly get PC exclusives anymore, the games we do get are often direct ports (except for a few special cases) and alot of new games aren't even coming to our platform as developers seem to think that PC's cannot run next gen titles for some reason (ala SW Force Unleashed) even though my PC with 3 gigs of ram and a massive graphics card massively outranks the measily memory capacity of an XBOX or PS3.In the case of Force Unleashed, LucasArts simply didn't want to say "we don't think we'll make enough money to make up for the costs of porting it to the PC in the first place." Terrible excuse, though.


I have had to sit by and watch as console gamers salivate over games like Fable 2 and GTA4 when I cannot play them despite owning a capable machine. It makes me sadI wouldn't be surprised if Fable 2 makes its way to the PC, so don't cry yet. :P

It should be noted that Deus Ex 3 is likely going to be developed for consoles first and foremost, and then ported to the PC; I would not at all be surprised if the PC version is the worst of the bunch due to unoptimised interface and controls, etc. I'm hoping that Eidos will at the very least provide PC users with a re-tooled interface that takes advantage of the mouse and keyboard properly, if not completely different game features that are made possible by the mouse and keyboard. I also hope that it will actually run well on PCs, as opposed to most other console ports (Assassin's Creed, Rainbow Six Vegas) which not only don't run very well but also barely scale their visuals at all.

Suffice is to say, if you're looking at a console version of the game, I think you should be more concerned about which of those console versions is the best, rather than if they can match the PC version.

~Psychotic~
26th May 2008, 14:44
I don't know why you're so worried. Games being developed for consoles these days usually get more attention to controls than PC games do.

Yeah, exactly. And that's extremely unfair. Equal attention should be made for all gaming systems. Whether it be console or PC. And if DX3 is made for a damn console primarily I will be pretty pissed off. IT WAS MADE FOR THE DAMN PC, WAS NO DX1 MADE FOR PS2 FIRST? NO, IT WASN'T.

But really, so long as no port is dumbed down like the PS2 version of DX1 was then it should be fine. I hate PC ports because you can do so much more with a PC, in terms of gameplay (and even graphics-wise) than you can do with a console. A console is limited to it's one system specs, a console isn't upgraded whilst PC hardware is always being renewed and upgraded.

Larington
26th May 2008, 22:20
Worst case scenario, I go to check the key config on my PC port from console, and the screen that comes up shows a game pad that bears NO relation to my mouse & keyboard setup, yet alone the fact that theres no display on this screen of the keys that are currently bound. For instance, though I understand this has subsequently been corrected, Resident Evil IV commited that travesty and I refuse to install it or another RE game again as a result. Get the port right, or don't friggin bother imho.

jcp28
27th May 2008, 02:20
Note, if you want to port DX 3 from consoles to PC, then please change the controls to reflect the platform!

minus0ne
27th May 2008, 03:24
Note, if you want to port DX 3 from consoles to PC, then please change the controls to reflect the platform!
I'd rather they make a PC game and port it to consoles, since the other way around is usually a disaster unless great care is taken.

DXeXodus
27th May 2008, 05:32
I'd rather they make a PC game and port it to consoles, since the other way around is usually a disaster unless great care is taken.

Exactly. I dont understand why develpoers insist on creating their game for a console and then porting it to PC. A PC is a much more powerful and versatile tool that allows far more in terms of game design. Make the game the best it possibly can be and then trim it down if need be for the consoles.

Zedux
27th May 2008, 09:17
Exactly. I dont understand why develpoers insist on creating their game for a console and then porting it to PC. A PC is a much more powerful and versatile tool that allows far more in terms of game design. Make the game the best it possibly can be and then trim it down if need be for the consoles.

PC is not realy more powerfull than a console (ps3) simply because they are totally diferent... you can compare both PS3 and PC with - PS3 a Drag Race car made from the ground just for straight speed in the lowest time possilbe and PC as a Porsche (being kind to PC) that has speed, corner performance, versatile, confortable, etc.
So which one wins in a 100 meter straight race? i.e. gaming = PS3
Which one wins in a all round track? i.e. versatile = PC

I realy think Eidos has to take into consideration the PS3 as the standard platform 'cause PS3 is capable of the best gaming graphics, physics and AI plus will be around for some 8 years so a good engine for it is essential for future Deus 4 plus it hasn't being hacked so every PS3 user will buy an original game (i.e. if the game is good for PS3).
And then concentrate on doing a great port to PC as it can handle most of what will be done for PS3. And third port to 360 as it is mostly a gaming pc with a diferent cover and no hardware updates possible + most people just download ISOs!

DXeXodus
27th May 2008, 09:22
I agree with you to an extent. But do you really think that the PS3 will be faster than a decent/mid-range PC when the game is released? Say for example 18 months time?

Zedux
27th May 2008, 09:32
I agree with you to an extent. But do you really think that the PS3 will be faster than a decent/mid-range PC when the game is released? Say for example 18 months time?

In 18 months time the PS3 will be much more known by programmers. Right now only Sony can handle the machine but even they are not even near to take it to it's maximum. if you see what Killzone 2 is achieving is unbilievible and even Killzone 2 won't even come close to Killzone 3 in maybe uhh 18 months! I'm not a PS3 fanboy I realy was into the other console but what Sony did with the PS3 was jumping from PS2 to a "PS4" what made most of industry angry with them because if you look in the end all they want is profit $$$. So Sony just "jumped" from the modern era to real next-gen without a trasition wirh a "not real (but) next-gen PS3" which would be the "right" thing like the other console did.

So my point is that if Deus Ex 3 is gonna be a good game and have a chance with a future Deus Ex 4 Eidos has to take the chalenge of creating a great Deus Ex 3 engine from ground. The other console will be left by it's company some time soon just like they did with it's predecessor which just died and you can't even play the games on the "new" console. So it depends a lot on what Eidos is looking to, short term revenue retorn, a major franchise or what. By combining the PS3 techonlogy all 3 PS3, PC and Eidos can achieve great results. I just hope they can see that and that they just don't sell themselves to the other console owners which would be the end!

minus0ne
27th May 2008, 18:04
Exactly. I dont understand why develpoers insist on creating their game for a console and then porting it to PC. A PC is a much more powerful and versatile tool that allows far more in terms of game design. Make the game the best it possibly can be and then trim it down if need be for the consoles.
The problem is time. If they can make a control scheme which can easily be applied to both platforms, that saves them a lot of time. It's like it's easier to take the 'lowest denominator' in the equation and apply that to both PC and console.

In 18 months time the PS3 will be much more known by programmers. Right now only Sony can handle the machine but even they are not even near to take it to it's maximum. if you see what Killzone 2 is achieving is unbilievible and even Killzone 2 won't even come close to Killzone 3 in maybe uhh 18 months! I'm not a PS3 fanboy I realy was into the other console but what Sony did with the PS3 was jumping from PS2 to a "PS4" what made most of industry angry with them because if you look in the end all they want is profit $$$. So Sony just "jumped" from the modern era to real next-gen without a trasition wirh a "not real (but) next-gen PS3" which would be the "right" thing like the other console did.
I'm afraid you're not making much sense to me. If you know your hardware, you know that crunch-by-crunch, even current medium to high-end PCs are faster than the PS3. This is evidenced in the fact that a high-end PC GPU alone can beat the Cell at distributed computer crunching.

Now if we look at a high-end PC in 2 years time, that comparison just gets ridiculous. The PS3 will be beat at everything from number of cores to bus speeds to (number of) GPU(s) to memory amount and throughput. There is no way you'll be able to put them on the same level. The goes for medium-end machines. Seriously, what were they thinking at Sony when they went with 512MB memory and a 60GB HDD (good for installing no more than 10 games!)?

The fact Haze can't be played at at HD resolutions is a hint of things to come. Hell even my modest OC'ed 1900XTX and Pentium 4 (!) can do that in demanding games. I think we'll be seeing these kinds of issues in newer games on the 360 too, they're just going to have to rely on the fact that the majority of console players won't even notice the graphical differences between upscaled 576p (that's old-school PAL resolution) and actual high resolutions.

Sony did anything but "go from PS2 to PS4", they made a overly complicated (to develop for) and underpowered platform with all sorts of gimmicky features to make up for the downsides. I don't see how, if you want this game to be good, you would intentionally wish for Eidos Montreal to design this game for the PS3 first, and then port it to PC. That would be no less than a recipe for disaster.

Blade_hunter
27th May 2008, 18:25
For me the consoles development makes the game too light and uncompleted. Just take a look for DX 2. The development for the XBOX breaks the game itself by the reduction of the gameplay to "adapt" the product to this console.
I prefer they make a complex game with a lot of options, than a cheap game for a console that have less capabilities than a PC.

Zedux
27th May 2008, 23:11
The problem is time. If they can make a control scheme which can easily be applied to both platforms, that saves them a lot of time. It's like it's easier to take the 'lowest denominator' in the equation and apply that to both PC and console.

I'm afraid you're not making much sense to me. If you know your hardware, you know that crunch-by-crunch, even current medium to high-end PCs are faster than the PS3. This is evidenced in the fact that a high-end PC GPU alone can beat the Cell at distributed computer crunching.

Now if we look at a high-end PC in 2 years time, that comparison just gets ridiculous. The PS3 will be beat at everything from number of cores to bus speeds to (number of) GPU(s) to memory amount and throughput. There is no way you'll be able to put them on the same level. The goes for medium-end machines. Seriously, what were they thinking at Sony when they went with 512MB memory and a 60GB HDD (good for installing no more than 10 games!)?

The fact Haze can't be played at at HD resolutions is a hint of things to come. Hell even my modest OC'ed 1900XTX and Pentium 4 (!) can do that in demanding games. I think we'll be seeing these kinds of issues in newer games on the 360 too, they're just going to have to rely on the fact that the majority of console players won't even notice the graphical differences between upscaled 576p (that's old-school PAL resolution) and actual high resolutions.

Sony did anything but "go from PS2 to PS4", they made a overly complicated (to develop for) and underpowered platform with all sorts of gimmicky features to make up for the downsides. I don't see how, if you want this game to be good, you would intentionally wish for Eidos Montreal to design this game for the PS3 first, and then port it to PC. That would be no less than a recipe for disaster.

PlayStation 3 Specifications and Details
Product name: PLAYSTATION 3

CPU: Cell Processor

PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz (more than most dual core pcs)

1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB L2 cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE

* 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy total floating point performance: 218 GFLOPS
GPU: RSX @550MHz

.8 TFLOPS floating point performance
Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
Multi-way programmable parallel floating point shader pipelines
Sound: Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell-base processing)

Memory:

256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz (how fast your pc ram go)
256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz

System Bandwidth:
Main RAM: 25.6GB/s
VRAM: 22.4GB/s
RSX: 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB: 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)
System Floating Point Performance: 2 TFLOPS

PS3 is much better for gaming than a PC
Do you want to know why?
-It uses XDR Ram. XDR ram is 12x faster than the typical PC ram.
-ps3 ram operates at 3.2 GHz.

-This is an example of how ps3 creates more with little.

Now go and see what your PC will give you while gaming!!! As I said PS3 is a drag racer just to straight speed (gaming) while PC is a all round better porsche (versatile).

P.S about the gig I have many friends that upgraded to 500 gig HDD right now!

AaronJ
28th May 2008, 00:44
i remember as if it was yesterday going to a game shop I was very young and buying a pc game i didn't know much that was august 2000.

long time has passed I'm still alive lol but now I do most of my gaming on a console.

I'm realy looking forward this game but please Eidos tell me the PS3won't be a port or anything like Kane & Lynch: Dead Men! Or I've to give up on multiple platforms and just buy PS3 exclusives!

KANE & LYNCH: DEAD MEN WAS A FANTASTIC AND BRILLIANT GAME. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT. EVERYONE GIVES IT PERFECT REVIEWS. YOU SAW NOTHING.

http://cherished79.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/fired1.jpg

Zedux
28th May 2008, 05:01
KANE & LYNCH: DEAD MEN WAS A FANTASTIC AND BRILLIANT GAME. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT. EVERYONE GIVES IT PERFECT REVIEWS. YOU SAW NOTHING.



you don't know what you are talking about especially by not being a PS3 owner (if you were you wouldn't need to write what you wrote plus you would have discussed the issue not simply writen BIG like someone who has no arguments and have to play low)!

but for the next time you can check http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/kanelynchdeadmen/index.html and get updated!

DXeXodus
28th May 2008, 05:06
PS3 is much better for gaming than a PC
Do you want to know why?
-It uses XDR Ram. XDR ram is 12x faster than the typical PC ram.
-ps3 ram operates at 3.2 GHz

Just because the PS3 uses faster RAM doesnt make it a quicker machine.
My computer, which is merely mid-range, currently has 12 times more Ram than the PS3. It might have a slower operating speed, but even now it is alot more powerful.

You mention CPU speeds as well. A 3gig Dual core is only mildly special now. In 18 months time even my grandmother will have one.

And with regards to graphics processors, A top end card now, say GeForce 9800GX2 or Radeon 4870X2 (I think thats what it's called) will absoloutely walk all over the PS3's Graphics processing ability. Now, those are the cards that will be considered mid-low range in 18months time.

And, if PS3's are the 'drag-racers' and PC's are the versatile 'porsches' then why would you want DX3 developed on something that only focusses on getting to the finish line first. Why not have it developed on the most versatile of the two, the one that gives you a good ride?

That surely makes sense, especially because a PC is not only more versatile, but more powerful in actual fact.

Zedux
28th May 2008, 05:20
currently has 12 times more Ram than the PS3.

A 3gig Dual core is only mildly special now. In 18 months time even my grandmother will have one.

Now, those are the cards that will be considered mid-low range in 18months time.

And, if PS3's are the 'drag-racers' and PC's are the versatile 'porsches' then why would you want DX3 developed on something that only focusses on getting to the finish line first. Why not have it developed on the most versatile of the two, the one that gives you a good ride?

That surely makes sense, especially because a PC is not only more versatile, but more powerful in actual fact.

Ok I'm talking about present facts you are trying to guess the future but remember PS3 was launched in 2006 so you can see what a piece of hardware it is! Still it isn't being pushed even to half of its potencial but still when they reach the peak they will still be able to improve. PS3 can handle graphics AI and physics much fasters than a pc cause it uses 8 tonnels to do so at an amazing speed. So when you read 250 mb ram don't get fooled by the numbers cause it makes no sense to put 5 gig ram when its a different ram plus it won't be used at all.
I agree game makers should not forget harcore pc gamers and they should give their best to make the best possible pc game. I've a pretty piece of pc hardware running on HD cable with a hpw2408h screem 24 inch but i don't get fooled when it comes to gaming. And please if you can come out with some comparison on gaming with the best ever pc config compared to the ps3 i would appreciate. it won't be difficult just use google. but go deep in the numbers don't simply say 250mb ram n 3 gig pc ram go deep!
you can campare with the data I posted bit on top! all the ps3 hardware is focus on just one thing "gaming" while the pc will need to run many stuff and share a lot of resources at the same time. So the drag race car wins in straight speed "gaming".
P.S plus you can use your keyboard and mouse with the ps3 too... l do that all the take with bluetooth!

DXeXodus
28th May 2008, 05:39
Ok I'm talking about present facts you are trying to guess the future but remember PS3 was launched in 2006 so you can see what a piece of hardware it is! Still it isn't being pushed even to half of its potencial but still when they reach the peak they will still be able to improve. PS3 can handle graphics AI and physics much fasters than a pc cause it uses 8 tonnels to do so at an amazing speed. So when you read 250 mb ram don't get fooled by the numbers cause it makes no sense to put 5 gig ram when its a different ram plus it won't be used at all.
I agree game makers should not forget harcore pc gamers and they should give their best to make the best possible pc game. I've a pretty piece of pc hardware running on HD cable with a hpw2408h screem 24 inch but i don't get fooled when it comes to gaming. And please if you can come out with some comparison on gaming with the best ever pc config compared to the ps3 i would appreciate. it won't be difficult just use google. but go deep in the numbers don't simply say 250mb ram n 3 gig pc ram go deep!
you can campare with the data I posted bit on top! all the ps3 hardware is focus on just one thing "gaming" while the pc will need to run many stuff and share a lot of resources at the same time. So the drag race car wins in straight speed "gaming".
P.S plus you can use your keyboard and mouse with the ps3 too... l do that all the take with bluetooth!

First of all, YES, I'm looking into the future. I can do this by looking at current trends and those trends from the past. Thisngs that are awesome now in the technology industry (i.e graphics cards, RAM, processors, etc,) are mediocre within a year.

Lets look at the Ram:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1021/3/crucial_s_high_performance_ram_ballistix_pc2_8000_epp_tested/index.html

Here we see the speeds of current RAM for PC's. Going up to 1.2 Ghz. Now If I simply have 2 GB of this Memory, then It will smash the PS3's 512 Mb of 3.2 GHz memory. Say for instance you have a huge river, flowing at massive speeds, and at the end, just a little pipe to drain it, you can only get so much out of that pipe. It is the same here. If you have descent amount of Ram operating at a fairly high speed, then your result will be greater than alot of speed in a tiny amount of Ram.

Zedux
28th May 2008, 07:49
First of all, YES, I'm looking into the future. I can do this by looking at current trends and those trends from the past. Thisngs that are awesome now in the technology industry (i.e graphics cards, RAM, processors, etc,) are mediocre within a year.

Lets look at the Ram:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1021/3/crucial_s_high_performance_ram_ballistix_pc2_8000_epp_tested/index.html

Here we see the speeds of current RAM for PC's. Going up to 1.2 Ghz. Now If I simply have 2 GB of this Memory, then It will smash the PS3's 512 Mb of 3.2 GHz memory. Say for instance you have a huge river, flowing at massive speeds, and at the end, just a little pipe to drain it, you can only get so much out of that pipe. It is the same here. If you have descent amount of Ram operating at a fairly high speed, then your result will be greater than alot of speed in a tiny amount of Ram.

I really apreciate the way you discus the issue! This way people can see things properly and diferent visions of the same thing! I'm not taking the ps3 side as I've both a great pc and a great console! Looking forward playing DX3 online with you :D but lets keep this open... I'm reading your link right now!

Ok can you tell me your pc config or even your dream pc config?? I need to make the comparison you didn''t won't to!

DXeXodus
28th May 2008, 08:38
This sort of debate is really interesting to me and I am grateful that you can make an argument for your side without ranting on and saying that "My platfrom are the L33T3st and yours is so suxors! PS3 rules cuz I say so!". I cant stand people like that.

My current PC configuration (which is about to get replaced) is as follows:

AMD Athlon64 3000+
Gigabyte SLI nForce 4 mobo
3.0 Gb DDR 400 RAM (Kingston)
320Gb SATA2 Seagate HDD
XFX nVida Geforce 7900GTX 256Mb

My dream PC, which will be pretty standard stuff by the time this game comes out is as follows:

Top End intel quad core or Intel core 2 extreme
4.0 Gb Ram as mentioned above in my previous post and it's link
500GB SATA HDD
nVidia 9800GX2 or Radeon 4870X2

The reason I didnt make the comparison is that I am at work and dont have the time to do that kind of research right now :)

So, I am open to you presenting a well researched stats comparison to make your case with....

gamer0004
28th May 2008, 14:00
May I ask what the AMD 3000+ is for? You've got a 7900GTX! I've got a 7800 GT combined with a 3500+ and even that can't always keep up with the 7800...

serene_chaos
28th May 2008, 14:15
you don't know what you are talking about especially by not being a PS3 owner (if you were you wouldn't need to write what you wrote plus you would have discussed the issue not simply writen BIG like someone who has no arguments and have to play low)!

but for the next time you can check http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/kanelynchdeadmen/index.html and get updated!

Ahem, i believe i detected a smidgen of sarcasm in globalnode's post. Also, your 'sentence' in brackets needs commas, or full stops, or something. :)

sea
28th May 2008, 15:19
The PlayStation 3's Cell processor is not built for gaming, but rather is meant to be a sort of all-purpose highly parallel processor. Although in theory it is capable of quite a bit, it's honestly very difficult to program for; much like the PlayStation 2's Emotion Engine, when harnessed properly it's capable of quite a bit, but it has a lot of strange quirks that need to be learned and accounted for.

For the record, a high-end PC will completely destroy a home console performance-wise, even with a bloated operating system and less-than-perfect drivers running along with it. There's a reason why a high-end PC can play a game at a resolution literally two times higher than what consoles support, at faster and more consistent framerates. There's also a reason why those high-end PCs cost a lot more, too.

Larington
28th May 2008, 16:10
I must admit initially the new console generation threw me out of the hardware loop, choking on console fumes. When I specced the computer a year and a half ago I had no idea that the boundaries would be pushed quite as much as they have. However I've just specced my new computer (I'm updating it right now) and I'm now WAY ahead of the consoles again, I can just smell the sweet sweet joy of high framerates and resolution...

Think I might've gone a bit overboard this time though, the graphics card was only released in January and it requires not one but *two* power rails in order to run, which is really insane (Its a 2GPU card, 512 memory running for each graphics processor), and a quad core CPU too (Though not the latest 1600 internal speed processor, which is 3x the price of the 2.5 gig quad core I've got here)... So I'd better not need to upgrade for a good 2/3 years, or when the next generation of consoles emerge... Maybe.

EpeSeta
28th May 2008, 19:32
I don't know that much about computers and consoles. I have no earthly idea of which is the more powerful. But I do know this: They can make just as good a game for the consoles as they can for the PC if they just DON'T UNDERESTIMATE the consoles and more over the console gamers. And yes, if they just put their mind on it a game can be ported very succesfully either way. It's not a question of who's got more capability, it's a question of Eidos' willingness to go through some trouble to make the game enjoyable for PC and console gamers alike.
So, honestly, I don't think the current tops of PC and console performance matter one bit. They're both more than enough.

Kneo24
28th May 2008, 20:16
My dream PC, which will be pretty standard stuff by the time this game comes out is as follows:

Top End intel quad core or Intel core 2 extreme
4.0 Gb Ram as mentioned above in my previous post and it's link
500GB SATA HDD
nVidia 9800GX2 or Radeon 4870X2

The reason I didnt make the comparison is that I am at work and dont have the time to do that kind of research right now :)

So, I am open to you presenting a well researched stats comparison to make your case with....

Your dream PC is missing an extra HDD to do a RAID 1 configuration (you know, for faster load times, and redundancy in case one crashes).

minus0ne
29th May 2008, 00:07
Actually my 500GB is getting awfully small these days. I'd go for at least 2TB or more in 2 years time.

AaronJ
29th May 2008, 03:17
you don't know what you are talking about especially by not being a PS3 owner (if you were you wouldn't need to write what you wrote plus you would have discussed the issue not simply writen BIG like someone who has no arguments and have to play low)!

but for the next time you can check http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/kanelynchdeadmen/index.html and get updated!

You understood that so fast my text got smaller.

DXeXodus
29th May 2008, 04:18
Wow! magic! It actually seems quite silly debating as to which is more powerful here, the PC or PS3. Computers are constantly getting better. With each new piece of technology, PC's just get quicker while the PS3 and other consoles just stay the same. Zedux mentioned that there is still alot of ability left untapped in the PS3, but that is only by way of optimizing the game. PC's have that raw power which developers can use to the maximum capacity... which gets bigger everyday

Zedux
29th May 2008, 05:41
I don't know that much about computers and consoles. I have no earthly idea of which is the more powerful. But I do know this: They can make just as good a game for the consoles as they can for the PC if they just DON'T UNDERESTIMATE the consoles and more over the console gamers. And yes, if they just put their mind on it a game can be ported very succesfully either way. It's not a question of who's got more capability, it's a question of Eidos' willingness to go through some trouble to make the game enjoyable for PC and console gamers alike.
So, honestly, I don't think the current tops of PC and console performance matter one bit. They're both more than enough.

I agree totally with you!!! (my worry is that Eidos may want to program the DX3 for Mr.$$$'s console and screw the PS3 which is much better!


Wow! magic! It actually seems quite silly debating as to which is more powerful here, the PC or PS3. Computers are constantly getting better. With each new piece of technology, PC's just get quicker while the PS3 and other consoles just stay the same. Zedux mentioned that there is still alot of ability left untapped in the PS3, but that is only by way of optimizing the game. PC's have that raw power which developers can use to the maximum capacity... which gets bigger everyday

That's true too!!! (raw has to be worked like Michelangelo used to do with rocks to create great pieces of art)

DXeXodus
29th May 2008, 07:10
raw has to be worked like Michelangelo used to do with rocks to create great pieces of art

Exactly :D

Zedux
25th Jun 2008, 07:33
Exactly :D

anyway! just hope Eidos makes a magnificent job!