Last-Gen Console Discussions (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii)

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
That doesn't fix the problem at all 😬

There's a higher risk of losing the downloads altogether when the hardware fails.

Goodbye precious save data and game data..
Then you'll have to worry if you have to pay for the re-download of your games. It's just additional stress.

Maybe someday (hopefully) they can make a medium for consoles which is about the size of a PSP UMD or smaller, but with twice the capacity of a BluRay disc.. or the games are sold in 64GB+ Flash sticks

You never used Steam have you?

When you buy a copy of the game. You get a receipt and you can download whenever you want, no matter how many years later. It's with you for life. The game is always on Steam's servers. Also, at the moment, you can save all your configuration and saves in Steam cloud. It should be more prevalent later on. The only downfall is that it takes up bandwidth (not a big deal because most people who have computers that play games usually have a bigger size bandwidth usage) and if Steam is done, I don't know what will happen but its extremely unlikely that it will be done considering its doing extremely well.

No storage medium is perfect. Even flash drives can be corrupted, or worst, infected with viruses. They can also be damaged.

In the end, downloadable games are the best bet. No media to keep around, and you can always re download it. You can also back it up if you want too.

Originally posted by Smasandian
You never used Steam have you?

When you buy a copy of the game. You get a receipt and you can download whenever you want, no matter how many years later. It's with you for life. The game is always on Steam's servers. Also, at the moment, you can save all your configuration and saves in Steam cloud. It should be more prevalent later on. The only downfall is that it takes up bandwidth (not a big deal because most people who have computers that play games usually have a bigger size bandwidth usage) and if Steam is done, I don't know what will happen but its extremely unlikely that it will be done considering its doing extremely well.

No storage medium is perfect. Even flash drives can be corrupted, or worst, infected with viruses. They can also be damaged.

In the end, downloadable games are the best bet. No media to keep around, and you can always re download it. You can also back it up if you want too.

The game is on your system. It's downloaded and installed. If it screws up, its your files on your system. You can also back them up very easily, by hitting "Back up game" so you don't have to worry about downloading it again.

The game is kept on the Steam servers. If it's ****ed up (its happened, but just like having a disc), it gets resolved very quickly. Unlike a disc though, if the game is not working when the fix comes in, its automatically downloaded and installed without any trouble while with a disc, you have to go back and then get a new disc, and then wait until the company sends out replacements.

In the end, your game is much more safe than having a disc. It will always be on the servers.

so you could still back it up on an external hard drive? if so, thats awesome, and that is a REALLY good way to go, cuz you have it in 3 different places

Yeah. I'm pretty sure.

You can move the folders anywhere. There might be some tweaking a bit to get everything working. (Like settings and stuff) but yeah, you can.

Of course your account may get stolen(the chances of this are very slim to none if you're not an idiot) or Steam might just ban your account for seemingly no apparent reason(it has happened before). Also having to have Steam launched at all times(even if you're playing single-player) isn't very pretty IMHO. Downloads can also take quite some time if you're on a slower connection.

I like Impulse much, much more than Steam. Pity it's not quite as popular.

So as you can see, online distribution isn't without its issues, but it's becoming so popular not without a good reason.

YouTube video

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Of course your account may get stolen(the chances of this are very slim to none if you're not an idiot) or Steam might just ban your account for seemingly no apparent reason(it has happened before). Also having to have Steam launched at all times(even if you're playing single-player) isn't very pretty IMHO. Downloads can also take quite some time if you're on a slower connection.

I like Impulse much, much more than Steam. Pity it's not quite as popular.

So as you can see, online distribution isn't without its issues, but it's becoming so popular not without a good reason.

Steam doesn't take up huge resources so I don't really see a problem with having it opened.

It also has one great feature. And that's how I can visit a site without leaving game, or alt+tabbing it. It's proved very useful.

Hi I'm reviving this thread for some newbie questions. 313 😐

So when I started to get into games, I was in the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube era, and it clearly went like this in terms of graphical detail...

Xbox >> Gamecube >> PS2, or so I believe it to be. They had significantly different hardware specs which explained why whenever a game was released on two or all 3 of the consoles, there were gaping differences. An example is Soul Calibur 2. I have it now for the PS2 and Xbox. Gaping difference.

And ever since the start of THIS console war, I thought of it like this...

PS3 > Xbox 360 >>>>>>>>>> Wii (just something like that)

This should be no surprise since I read/heard years ago, that Nintendo wasn't trying to compete in the visuals department, which explains why Wii is so "fun".

However while the PS3 is now known to be overall superior hardware-wise to the 360...I highly believe, games that were designed to be both on the two systems do not have detail-based graphical differences. In other words, the only differences you will notice are in color and in contrast...but nothing else. This is the case with six PS3/360 game video comparisons I saw recently. Either the 360 or PS3 (in most cases it was the PS3) had a difference in overall color and brightness which was better than the other...but it wasn't like comparing PS2 to Xbox or vice versa. Sometimes the contrast gave a higher resolution also, but it's not like every PS3/360 comparison I've seen made the PS3 look better. I saw one for Devil May Cry 4 and wtf-gaped at how the 360 version "looked" better (better contrast and color) when supposedly, Capcom's had a 1 to 2 year head start with it on the PS3.

So as a general rule, are games that are designed for both systems, intentionally made to be identical in terms of graphical detail? Because all day I have been having this depressed feeling that my games which have PS3 versions, look inferior on my 360. I doubt this. Why then, would people be making these video comparisons just to point out differences in color and contrast? Has anyone seen anyone do this with PS2/Gamecube/Xbox? Because I think that would be funny and have blatant differences not worth showing in a comparison.

If the answer to the above is yes and they are identical in terms of detail, or if the answer is, "a game may or may not look better on one system or the other, so it's just random when it comes to which system the game ends up looking better on" then getting a PS3 with the games I already have on the 360 (to play on my PS3) may very well be useless, since I wouldn't be able to tell which look better in terms of detail, because there isn't like this number I can refer to, telling me which version of the game (360 or PS3) is visually superior, even when I can't make out the differences with my eyes. Like with a 720p and 1080p display, on a 25", you will not notice the difference from 15 feet away. However if I were to tell you the one on the left is 720p, you know the one on the right is greater, even when it's impossible to tell, all because I gave you specifics...

Well are there specifics when it comes to the level of detail in a game? Let's take Soul Calibur 4 for example. Is there a number (like 720p, or 1080p) I can refer to, to tell me which version of Soul Calibur 4 (PS3 or 360 version) has better detail overall? Or does such a specific measurement not exist? I'm thinking no...but I'd appreciate your help, peoples.

By the way, I'm not referring to anything having to do with monitor display. I am referring to the native game, Soul Calibur 4, not what it's being displayed on. I think games are measured in "bits" or something when it comes to their detail. I think this is the number I'm after...the measurement telling just how much detail there is in a game.

Can I ask some questions...thanks. 😄313

1. Is there a general rule saying they (the games designed on both consoles), generally speaking, look better on the PS3? How about the 360?

2. Can someone find out the graphic specs of a game? I think someone can find this out for pretty much any PC game, well how about a game like Soul Calibur 4 or Tekken 6? Can I find out the "graphics specs" for those?

Originally posted by FWahMaN
Can I ask some questions...thanks. 😄313

1. Is there a general rule saying they (the games designed on both consoles), generally speaking, look better on the PS3? How about the 360?

2. Can someone find out the graphic specs of a game? I think someone can find this out for pretty much any PC game, well how about a game like Soul Calibur 4 or Tekken 6? Can I find out the "graphics specs" for those?

1. As far as my experience goes(and I like to consider myself somewhat of an enthusiast in these kind of things), a well-made game will look virtually identical on both consoles provided the same display.

2. I think I might know what you mean, but could you please clarify this one?

1. O RLY? Thanks...cuz I was about to dish out 3-4 hundred dollars on a PS3 slim on sony's website...lolz.

2. I mean like you know how some people ask if their computers can handle PC games like Gears of War and MW2? And they give their compy specs and then some guys will tell them, based on the "graphic" requirements of the game if their pc will handle it or not...

Kinda like this: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26024846

I was just wondering, if I can find the specs of Tekken 6, telling me what kind of power is needed to handle all its details. I'm not saying I have a PC and want to play Tekken 6 on the PC (it's not even for PC I don't think...)

I just want to know Tekken 6's specs, and compare between the 360 and PS3 versions.

Originally posted by FWahMaN
1. O RLY? Thanks...cuz I was about to dish out 3-4 hundred dollars on a PS3 slim on sony's website...lolz.

2. I mean like you know how some people ask if their computers can handle PC games like Gears of War and MW2? And they give their compy specs and then some guys will tell them, based on the "graphic" requirements of the game if their pc will handle it or not...

Kinda like this: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26024846

I was just wondering, if I can find the specs of Tekken 6, telling me what kind of power is needed to handle all its details. I'm not saying I have a PC and want to play Tekken 6 on the PC (it's not even for PC I don't think...)

I just want to know Tekken 6's specs, and compare between the 360 and PS3 versions.

1. Yes, but I want to make it clear that we're talking about multiplatform games here(games that are on both 360 and PS3). Comparing exclusives and PC versions can be trickier.

2. Yea, I thought this was what you were talking about. There is no such thing as minimum/recommended "specs" for console games(since all 360/PS3/Wii/whatever models have the same hardware specs, except for storage, but that's more or less inconsequential). Though I can try to put it into rough PC specs: all X360 and PS3 games would roughly require about a mid-range dual-core CPU, 7800GTX(nVidia)/X1800XT(ATI counterpart) and roughly 1GB of RAM.

Keep in mind that console games are always very well optimized for what hardware specs they have(since consoles only have 1 hardware and software configuration, as opposed to PC, which potentially has thousands). I hope this helped.

Originally posted by FWahMaN
Can I ask some questions...thanks. 😄313

1. Is there a general rule saying they (the games designed on both consoles), generally speaking, look better on the PS3? How about the 360?

2. Can someone find out the graphic specs of a game? I think someone can find this out for pretty much any PC game, well how about a game like Soul Calibur 4 or Tekken 6? Can I find out the "graphics specs" for those?

If a multi-platform game is designed with the PS3 in mind, it would look better but thats rarely the case.

In most cases, I've heard that the 360 version generally looks better but it all depends on the game. Read the review for the game. They will generally say what game looks better.

Check the website for graphical specs. Easiest way to find. Or on the box and if your buying digitall, on the page.

Originally posted by Smasandian

Check the website for graphical specs. Easiest way to find. Or on the box and if your buying digitall, on the page.

That's the point though, console games don't display such specs.

The "specs" I listed is keeping in mind the more hardware demanding games like Resident Evil 5.

So this is confirmed...console games that are not on PC, don't have specs to refer to. So if I was in an argument between someone saying SC4 technically has better graphical detail than Tekken 6 and there are no such measuring specs available for either game, he can't prove it, right?

Yeah about what you said...the reviews. I guess...I can use that...since after all...it is now up to the eye since PS3/360 hardware are different and each console can do something better than the other can.

You know I really HATE how there are two consoles that have games that look awfully alike in goodness. I read a comparison between Ninja Gaiden 2 for the 360 and Ninja Gaiden Sigma for the PS3...each had pros and cons. It's funny though because they almost cancel each other out.

I like last generation because games that were made on PS2, Gamecube and Xbox looked so blatantly different graphics-wise so if you were to have an Xbox and a PS2 and you wanted to buy whatever version of Soul Calibur 2 that had the better graphics, you wouldn't have to read reviews and pain yourself to find out which one was better looking. SC2 on the Xbox is definitely more detailed.

LOL @ just about every game having a "collector's edition/limited edition" right now which is about the cost of the game x2. I mean I don't care about key chains, shirts and much for comic books (since I can find scans of that...but Ninja Gaiden 2 Sigma comic I'm dying for...but probably won't buy) but when it comes to "exclusive game content"...give me a break. A very good example of this is the business suit in SCIV. It being only for limited edition people my ass. Why don't they just make the "limited edition" video game content dlc? ESPECIALLY since it's "limited edition"?

I am as of the moment, starting not to care anymore...you ever go through one of those times where you're trying to find so many answers (because you want to know what to spend your precious money on) and in the end you just get fed up and stick to what you already have? I am having one of those moments lol.

If you want to prove your right, you just have to play the game.

Even on PC though, specs doesn't necessarily meant the game looks better. It means that you need those specs to play it. It all depends on how well the developer writes code.

When deciding between a PS3 and 360, the only thing to do is to look at the exclusives and see what you want to play. As everything is more or less identical.

Cross platform games tend to look better for the 360 simply because it's easier to develop for and because it's usually the 'primary' version as more people will play it.

Originally posted by FWahMaN

You know I really HATE how there are two consoles that have games that look awfully alike in goodness. I read a comparison between Ninja Gaiden 2 for the 360 and Ninja Gaiden Sigma for the PS3...each had pros and cons. It's funny though because they almost cancel each other out.

Yeah such as the Sigma one is suppose to be easier from what i've read and also less blood.