Let's face it: PS3 should have been marketed as a 540p console. If 540p was the goal 99% of games would run at 60fps

Let's face it: PS3 should have been marketed as a 540p console. If 540p was the goal 99% of games would run at 60fps

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=KDanwF1Nrcsz
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Retarded thread, off yourself

Alan wake and FF13 were 540p on the X360 and they didnt run at 60fps

would you rather 720p 25~30fps or 540p/60fps?

with 4x multi-sampling anti-aliasing

The PS3 is one of the worst consoles ever made.

You might think this is hyperbole when consoles like 3DO exist, but it really isn't. Sony managed to take the most popular gaming brand in the world and, in one single generation, fuck it into the dirt, losing every last penny they made across two console generations by developing a hulking mass of shit with an over-engineered design. It took years and years for anything remotely good to come out for the console, and even when a few things did, the games were simply not up to the standard of quality set by the competition, not even the Wii. It had the worst ports, the worst exclusives, the worst online features, the least content, everything. Take for example Halo 3: campaign with co-op, splitscreen, map editor, customization features, great matchmaking, etc. What does Sony respond with? Turds ike Resistance 2 and Killzone 2, games that died within a year of release because they were so fucking shallow and light on content. People will tell you, "the Xbox 360 had no games", which is the biggest joke in gaming history. Xbox 360 had some amazing games, and though it had fewer exclusive franchises and fewer exclusives overall, the quality of exclusives and the quality of multiplats far exceeded everything on the PS3.

Even though the shitty library and lack of features are somewhat subjective, even the objective truths are nasty. Remember when Sony decided that gamers didn't want rumble, so they removed it from the original PS3 controller, and gave you tacked-on motion controls that NOBODY ever used instead? Remember when they removed the ability for you to install another operating system? Remember when they removed backwards compatability? PS3 isn't only a terrible console, it is actually the only console I can think of which actually got worse over time. Holy fuck I hate this piece of shit.

800x600 at 15 fps

Ni No Kuni, Gran Turismo 5, Shadow of the Colossus HD and MGS4 saved PS3.

Demon's Souls and 3D Dot Game Heroes were great too.

>Ni No Kuni, Gran Turismo 5, Shadow of the Colossus HD and MGS4 saved PS3.
A weeb game, the second worst iteration of GT in the series, a PS2 game and MGS4 did not save the PS3.

MGS4 is honestly one of the worst games I've ever played, it was a slap in the face to the fans of the first three games at every turn.

The rumble thing was because they werent allowed to use the tech for legal reasons, once that got sorted out it happened

Thats not V

>Halo kiddie
Get out of here you underage faggot. I bet the 360 was your first console.

>The rumble thing was because they werent allowed to use the tech for legal reasons, once that got sorted out it happened
Bullshit, every single name in the game was using rumble by that point. Sony was either too jewish to pay royalties on use of some random patent or they were seriously so retarded that they thought nobody wanted rumble anymore. For fuck's sake, the PS1 had it built in as of 1997.

>Get out of here you underage faggot. I bet the 360 was your first console.
The truth hurts doesn't it? I'm not a "Halo kiddie", I was probably playing NES when you were still a crooked sperm swimming through your dad's sack. Literally anyone who isn't suffering from a spectrum disorder can see that Halo 3 was a better game than any shooter the PS3 ever produced, and that is backed up by sales figures, critical reception and common sense. Get fucked and don't forget to breath retard.

>Boasting about console FPS
You're a child.

Let's face it: no one cares now

Wasn't rumble not included because it interfered with the motion controls of the Sixaxis?

>getting assblasted enough to make apost

Ahh the playstation 4 experience?

I enjoy this pasta.

>being this triggered because you made the wrong console purchase in 2006

PS3 was shit to develop for but let's not get carried away and forget that the PS3 version was handed to some no name developer to port it. Funnily enough, the PS3 version outsold the 360 version by a sizable margin.

>Halo 3 was a better game than any shooter the PS3 ever produced
*blocks your path*

Ahh the Switch experience?

ftfy

Let me guess: couldn't afford a HD TV when the PS3 came out?
I bet you rage about 4k nowadays.

FF13 looked terrible on the 360 I remember. But that may also have to do with video compression.

it's 100x better than MGSV
Not a bad game a t all

Works for both

PS3 was more powerful than 360, with the exception of RAM, which wasn't THAT big a hindrance.

PS3's problem was Sony went full retarded and deliberately made a console that was a mess to develop for, most likely to discourage porting to the competition. It backfired hard.

I thought this was common knowledge?

>couldn't afford a HD TV when the PS3 came out
actually I fell for the meme and bought a HDTV
540p + AA is always better than 20fps at 720p

>short, easy campaign
>no splitscreen
>no map editor
>no matchmaking
>no real custom games
>barely any weapons
>no vehicles
>no character customization
>every match is "grenades in hallway: the game"
There are actually people retarded enough to think this game was better than Halo 3. Amazing.

...

>implying ive owned anything but a pc since the 90s

6th gen games wouldn't run at 60 just because you made them 540p. Especially if you add AA on top of it. You're an idiot.

I was playing 360 on a CRT for a long while, but then there was a game where I couldn't read the text so I had to upgrade.

Nah PS3 completely buried the 360 after about 4 years. When devs finally figured out how to use the cell and the capacity of bluray.

Microsoft pretty much stopped getting Japanese games and focused on Burger trash and Kinect in the second half of the gen.

kek. rekt by

>When devs finally figured out how to use the cell and the capacity of bluray.

Only first party devs ever really got the hang of it and were able to utilise the PS3's "power". Right up until the end of the generation, most multiplats performed better on 360, though the disparity decreased. GTA V, for instance, still ran better on 360 than PS3.

the sad thing about PS3/360 is that subtitles were small
They only fixed this on PS4/X1

Nope. I liked my JRPGs on PS3.

>80% of the Switch library runs at 60FPS
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAJAJAJAJAJAJA

So, that's 2 games.

>80% of the switch library is NEOGEO ports
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAJAJAJAJAJAJA

>Game from flagship franchise struggles to maintain 30

>nah man, the PS3 totally buried the 360 after it was already practically the end of the generation and came out a year afterwards to begin with
Fucking lmao, and where exactly did the PS3 bury the 360? Underneath all of the 360's actual good games and superior multiplats? Or perhaps underneath a truckload of "The Hangover" BluRays?

>80% of Switch games are 2D indie games

Impressive that those run so well. Too bad Zelda runs at 20fps.

>Nope. I liked my JRPGs on PS3.
Well, that doesn't surprise me, you're a faggot afterall.

Funny thing is that the ridiculous focus on being a powerhouse paid off as time went on. PS3 little by little started getting the definitive console versions of many games, and games like LittleBIGPlanet, Uncharted 2, and MGS4 just wouldn't work on the 360. Sony can make mistakes but after making their biggest one yet they were able to dig themselves out of the hole and marginally outsell Xbox 360 within the generation. I don't think there's been a single other console of this scale that has done that.

>4 mad replies instantly
Lm@o

I miss Mayoiga threads.

>PS3 was more powerful than 360, with the exception of RAM, which wasn't THAT big a hindrance.
Wrong.

PS3 had...
-Worse GPU (no unified shaders)
-CPU had 3x worse general performance except for SIMD
-No eDRAM for super fast framebuffer
-Slower memory in general
-Split memory pool

All PS3 had going for it was a hell of a lot of SIMD performance on the CPU end, but even this advantage was mitigated by the fact that 360's GPU had a unified shader model so it was very flexible with offloading SIMD onto the GPU.

Especially considering the $599 price, PS3 next to Saturn is one of the most poorly designed console of all time.

It's fun to have these threads to remember a time when xbots still existed and hadn't been completely BTFO yet by their own company.
They're still delusional, though. The 360 was by far the worst console of its gen. It had the most painfully generic exclusives and all the multiplats it prided itself on running better than the PS3 could be ran better on the PC anyway.
In every aspect it was a more childish console than the Wii itself, which incidentally, was a much better console than it even with its gimmicks because it actually had a good library.

>Funny thing is that the ridiculous focus on being a powerhouse paid off as time went on.
Yeah, that never happened actually.

>PS3 little by little started getting the definitive console versions of many games
Nope. Actually it didn't. It received the worst ports of almost every game throughout its entire lifecycle, not even accounting for the lack of quality multiplayer servers and cross-game voice chat.

>games like LittleBIGPlanet, Uncharted 2, and MGS4 just wouldn't work on the 360
Yes, because they were designed for the PS3. The 360 had plenty of games which fucking destroy those games graphically and otherwise.

>Sony can make mistakes but after making their biggest one yet they were able to dig themselves out of the hole and marginally outsell Xbox 360 within the generation
Lol... yeah, they only had to waste 250m consoles' worth of cash and 7 years to "marginally outsell" the 360, good fucking job Sony.

Colour TV was a meme too.

And yet none of the 360's best looking exclusives even come close to looking as good as the PS3's exclusives. I wonder why?

Oh look, another faggot 7th gen revisionist who wants to pretend that waggle and 599 US DOLLARS was somehow better than the god-tier 360 library, amazing online and dirt cheap pricepoint. Seriously, just drink bleach and get it over with, nobody will ever miss you.

If the PS3 isn't more powerful than the 360 kek, then why did NASA use 1760 PS3s to create a supercomputer? Why not use 1760 Xbox 360's? Would they have needed more 360's if they went that route?

Most 360 games look better than most PS3 games. The PS3 has a few standouts like Killzone 2 because they were developed as glorified tech-demos. Sony knew they were losing the content battle so they put extra emphasis on graphics to try and lure more business their way. Sure, Uncharted 2 looks marginally better than, say, Gears of War 2, but it had no content. 360 alway had the content: splitscreen, LAN, good online, unlockables, you name it. That's why it won.

Anywhere outside North America.

I'll never understand why Americans like xbox so much.

>Especially considering the $599 price
because sony included PS2 hardware inside and decided to release in a time where Toshiba blu ray players were 700 dollars

>360 library
>God tier
Let's not get too carried away, it was a step down from the original Xbox's library which was inferior to both PS2 and GC.

>If the PS3 isn't more powerful than the 360 kek, then why did NASA use 1760 PS3s to create a supercomputer?
Because there was a time when you could install Linux on it you fucking retard.

What are you on about? The only truly graphically impressive games on PS3 are all by Naughty a Dog, and they both one of the leading technical devs in the world and coded PS3 to the metal.

Barely any 360 games were coded to the metal. You didn't have to since the system was well balanced.

Don't kid yourself though. If Naughty Dog coded 360 to the metal, the results would be better than what they achieved on PS3.

I know its bait but
because the shit PS3 CPu could do the kind of calculations supercomputers to work in military need

For gaming it's useless

>god-tier 360 library, amazing online and dirt cheap pricepoint
>Less exclusives than any of the two competitors and of lower quality at that
>Paid online that created a cancer within the industry, along with fucking adds riddling every facet of the UI
>Piece of shit console that fell apart in your hands and you had to pay extra for all the overpriced proprietary add-ons like the hard-drive

The 360 was by far the most expensive console of it's gen when you include all the extra shit you have to pay for to have the same features as the PS3 had.
Not to mention you'd have long periods where you couldn't even touch the thing because you had to send it in for repair every two months.

>being this fucking new

not surprising

niceme.me

>That's why it won.
It didn't, though. By literally any metric.

>The 360 was by far the most expensive console of it's gen
More revionist bullshit? The extra shit? Like what? $10 a month for LIVE? Even if you bought nothing but a standard arcade model and needed a harddrive and headset, that cost fucking pales in comparison to the ridiculously overpriced PS3 which didn't see significant price drops for years.

Exclusives and online.

Retard Killzone 3 and GoW 3 destroy everything on the 360

>It didn't, though. By literally any metric.
PS3 "won" by selling something like 1 or 2 million more units than the 360, after the generation was basically already over and 360 had held its lead for 7 fucking years. It also sold the most games, bar none. Sony literally almost bankrupted themselves because of how badly they fucked up the PS3, they literally blew every single cent they made on the PS1 and PS2 and then some. You are beyond retarded.

>Retards seriously believe this
Your library was shit with nothing but shooters and you only think your online was better because of placebo.
You know who else has better internet? The PC. And you don't have to pay out the nose for it.

My 360 dying on me due to RROD about 5 times says otherwise.

And then the Failbox None launched with a forced Kinect on every cuck that bought one.

Boy, those Kinect games at this year's E3 sure are something, huh?

>PS3 has better numbercrunching CPU, therefore PS3 is more powerful at games than x360

Heres a funny though, PS4 has weaker CPU than in 360, yet games run faster and better on it, it's almost like GPU is more important part for games than the CPU

Then the developers for 360 exclusives were mentally challenged

So you're saying it was 3rd in consoles sold in the 6th gen.
Glad you understand.

>Your library was shit with nothing but shooters
Cute bait.

Congrats on your 1 (one) JRPG.

This is token as fuck.

>So you're saying it was 3rd in consoles sold in the 6th gen.
Yeah... that was actually the 7th gen, and 3rd place goes to the PS3. You know, the console that actually ended up losing money, sold the least games, and sold the least consoles, only selling more because it was still being produced in 2016. I feel deeply sorry that your mother and father have to wake up every day knowing they have a retarded child.

Congrats on your weak bait.

>blue bragon
>tales of
>eternal sonata

I though Alan wake was pretty good looking game on 360, arguing about what games looks better is retarded especially if they can't be directly compared from one hardware to another.

>Killzone 3
terrible framerate
>GoW 3
looks good but by no means the best

>Better version was on the PS3

Congrats on your 1 (one) JRPG.

No, its even in the Wikipedia page, it was originally going be dualshock3 since the beginning but they were facing patent infringment lawsuit

What worthwile exclusives had the 360 other than halo and gears of war anyways?
I only remember playing shmups on the thing.

>PS4 has weaker CPU than in 360
I don't think you understand how CPUs work brah. This isn't at all true.

360/PS3 CPUs were basically Pentium 4 tier, hugely inefficient per clock.

>It didn't, though. By literally any metric.
360 sold 84m units. PS3 sold 80m. It also stopped production a year before PS3. Consider this the stupidest thing you've ever said on Sup Forums and make it a personal goal to never say anything stupider.

Japan only and 1 year later.

>PS3 little by little started getting the definitive console versions of many games

No, for most multiplats, the 360 still had the superior version. Third-party devs figured out how to not make their games run like ass on the PS3 but could never get it to work to the exact same standard, or consistently better, than the 360 version.

There's plenty of proof.
Here's Dead Rising 2, released in 2010, running at 30fps on 360 and dropping as low as 18fps on PS3 in comparable scenes:
youtube.com/watch?v=KDanwF1Nrcsz

>b-b-but....

Lol

Hmm...

The Wii sold 100 million. The 360 didn't win its gen by any metric.

I remember when this came out and people were legitimately trying to argue that it looked better than crysis.

>blue dragon
>good
I'm fucking tired of this meme.
The only good thing to come out of that game was the boss theme.

Wow, you managed to squeeze out 2 (two)!
At this rate, by next christmas, you'll have as many as the PS3 had.

>The Wii sold 100 million. The 360 didn't win its gen by any metric.
Nobody said anything about the Wii retard. This entire thread has been about 360 vs PS3.