Support NeoGAF

[Raven.]

From GI

"Something so detailed and smooth, the naysayers claimed, simple could not exist, even on the most powerful hardware unveiled by Sony earlier in the conference. It's an elaborate fake, they said. Guess what? It's not. We played it. Fight Night Round 3 is the real deal, and those who couldn't believe that the PS3 could generate such amazing gameplay are about to get another shock: Fight Night Round 3 is also coming to XBox 360.

The talented crew at EA's Chicago studio began working on the 360 version of Fight Night mere months ago, and already it looks nearly identical to the PS3 footage shown at E3. When finished, the two versions should be practically indistinguishable."

What's this? Is this the opinion of someone at GI, or is there more to it? That is did EA's chicago actually say something about it? That said, I don't doubt this game's obviously possible on both systems, wasn't it running at best on a 7800?

PS
As for what's been shown , it looks good in motion. The teeth and the shorts need to be seriously improved, and it'd also be nice to see better hair on eyebrows, chest.

ed

 

[Amir0x]

Uh, who ever said Fight Night 360 might not be able to look like Fight Night PS3? Jesus Christ, I would hope it could do at least that.

 

[Mrbob]

Uh, who ever said Fight Night 360 might not be able to look like Fight Night PS3? Jesus Christ, I would hope it could do at least that.

Exactly. But around GAF PS3 is the only true next generation console.

I still don't know why EA is getting bashed for their next gen wares when they are offering some of the most impressive looking next gen games.

 

[newsguy]

Uh, who ever said Fight Night 360 might not be able to look like Fight Night PS3? Jesus Christ, I would hope it could do at least that.

I don't remember anyone saying that specifically, but when all the x360 hate was going on around E3, I remember a couple of articles that mentioned the Fight Night footage on PS3 was real time and it blew away the real time suff that was shown on the 360.

 

[Amir0x]

Exactly. But around GAF PS3 is the only true next generation console.

I still don't know why EA is getting bashed for their next gen wares when they are offering some of the most impressive looking next gen games.

Personally, I think the quality of the visuals they produce fluctuates wildly. I would by no means call them among the best, that's for sure. Tiger Woods looks atrocious in my view. Need for Speed: Most Wanted also looks mediocre. On the other hand, Madden looks pretty good from what we have heard and the little we've seen. Fight Night looks pretty nice, in the middle of what we've seen so far real-time for next-gen.

That said, Fight Night was probably among the best we've seen from them (I haven't seen Madden in motion so I won't comment). And seriously, if 360 couldn't even reproduce the visuals from that launch PS3 game then the system was in trouble at least in the minds of hardcore gamers. 360 is a capable machine! The gap is not going to be so large so that multiplatform EA games look vastly different from machine to machine.

I don't remember anyone saying that specifically, but when all the x360 hate was going on around E3, I remember a couple of articles that mentioned the Fight Night footage on PS3 was real time and it blew away the real time suff that was shown on the 360.

So basically, nobody from Sony, nobody from Microsoft and nobody from EA said it was going to be difficult?

That's what I thought. It's all posturing from people with agendas. If anyone was so blown away by Fight Night PS3 demonstration that they thought 360 was incapable of it, they are dumb.

 

[Mrbob]

I'd argue most multiplatform games will look close. Not just EA games. I say next gen is all about the special effects. Next gen can push such an insane amount of polys it is what you do with them which is more important than how many you push. Many sequels nowadays are having more detailed character models with less polys. It is all about the special effects.

Also, on a semi related note, I do find it interesting to see PC guys like Carmack and Newell complain about next gen when I'm seeing some awesome things out of console focused developers. Not saying their wrong. But it is interesting to see the crying coming from the PC side.

 

[Amir0x]

I'd argue most multiplatform games will look close. Not just EA games. I say next gen is all about the special effects. Next gen can push such an insane amount of polys it is what you do with them which is more important than how many you push. Many sequels nowadays are having more detailed character models with less polys. It is all about the special effects.

I don't know if I'd simplify it like that. I'd just say the developer that has the best of all worlds will produce the best shit. It's gonna be more important for stellar art direction, though, that's for sure.

Also, on a semi related note, I do find it interesting to see PC guys like Carmack and Newell complain about next gen when I'm seeing some awesome things out of console focused developers. Not saying their wrong. But it is interesting to see the crying coming from the PC side.

Not to go off on a tangent, but I'm still underwhelmed from what I've seen so far next gen. There's very few exceptions to this, so I don't know how right or wrong Carmack is yet. This is the first time I've ever been unexcited about a new generation, and I've been gaming since THE DAWN OF TIME. So I'm just waiting for the dice to be thrown, at TGS, X05 and E3 2006. Then we'll see just what the systems can push. Halo 3 teaser + Metal Gear Solid 4 teaser + Zelda/Pikmin Rev teaser = my expectations set for next gen.

 

[Barnimal]

the funniest thing about this is that a game demo'd on ps3 first will hit 360 first and look just as good if not better than that demo. sucks to be sony for being late to the party! :lol

 

[Ninja Scooter]

this is just EA's preemptive damage control for when people ask why their PS3 games look just like Xbox360 games.

 

[BigBoss]

the funniest thing about this is that a game demo'd on ps3 first will hit 360 first and look just as good if not better than that demo. sucks to be sony for being late to the party! :lol

Still doesn't change the fact that Saint's Row looks like crap. :lol

On a more serious note, where did you get the idea that Fight Night will look better on the Xbox 360?

 

[MarkRyan]

(Hope it hasn't been said already.)

Fight Night on PS2 looks just about as good as Fight Night on Xbox. Therefore PS2 = Xbox?

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Ea develops to the lowest common denominator

 

[BirdySky]

From GI

I highly doubt it. If their other xbox360 games are any indication of their ability to harness power out of the system.. Because between you, me and the world. They're shit.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

Okay if Fight Night looks like this for a first generation game either PS3 or Xbox360:

*snip*

What are we bickering about again?!

 

[Hemmdog]

nice scans...which arent supposed to be here

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

nice scans...which arent supposed to be here

*Shrugs*

I got them from another thread on the first page, I'ill edit I guess.

 

[FightyF]

Doesn't EA play the lowest common denomanator game?

Yes they do.

Which is why from that standpoint, it doesn't matter to MS that the PS3 is a bit better.

 

[krypt0nian]

Yes they do.

Which is why from that standpoint, it doesn't matter to MS that the PS3 is a bit better.

This should be the entire point of this thread.

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

Silent Hill 2 came out on multiple platforms, and you and Dark10x kept trotting it out.

Silent Hill 2:GH is Restless Dreams.
All graphics and extra content intact, and without the sound bug.

Doesn't EA play the lowest common denomanator game?

Yes they do.

That would explain why Burnout Revenge looks better on PS2.

And yeah, if you want to maximize profits then you make your game fairly even on all platforms that way it sells on all platforms.

The games that are going to push each console will be the games developed specifically for each console near the end of each consoles life cycle. So what we can do is argue over who has the biggest set of balls for another 5-10 years, make lame screenshot comparisons, and laugh at the console that can't do 1080p or 4xFSAA.

 

[FightyF]

That would explain why Burnout Revenge looks better on PS2.

And yeah, if you want to maximize profits then you make your game fairly even on all platforms that way it sells on all platforms.

The games that are going to push each console will be the games developed specifically for each console near the end of each consoles life cycle. So what we can do is argue over who has the biggest set of balls for another 5-10 years, make lame screenshot comparisons, and laugh at the console that can't do 1080p or 4xFSAA.

Exactly. As they are created on the PS2 first, they can try to push it as far as they can, and then do a port to the Xbox and don't bother to really enhance it that much, if at all.

Compare that to VC's sports games, which looked far better on the Xbox, it's quite a leap.

 

[ManaByte]

So did MGS2...

Thing is, in both cases, the non-PS2 versions were missing numerous graphical features. The PS2 versions were considerably more impressive as a result...

Those are exceptions, not the rule. They were made for the PS2 and only ported around later. Kinda like Resident Evil 4 on the GC...

Uh, IIRC the Xbox versions of SH featured better flashlight effects while the PS2 MGS2 had better rain because the PS2 is a particle monster.

 

[Barnimal]

Still doesn't change the fact that Saint's Row looks like crap. :lol

On a more serious note, where did you get the idea that Fight Night will look better on the Xbox 360?

better than the demo possibly. things usually improve beyond REAL TIME *ahem* demos. so the finished product may have more gloss and that may be a plus for the 360 in gamers eyes. Maybe ps3s "demos" will end up shooting sony in the foot in more ways than one.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Maybe ps3s "demos" will end up shooting sony in the foot in more ways than one.

How much are you hoping that something like that happens?

 

[hasanahmad]

Yes EA goes for the lowest common denomitor but remember the PS2 games having lower textures and pixels in NFL games compared to Xbox games. If there is no difference in Next gen games then it regards the argument that the graphical chips inside the Xbox 360 and PS3 are similiar in power

 

[Barnimal]

How much are you hoping that something like that happens?

i pray to allah every day that it happens.

 

[mrklaw]

The quote actually says the PS3 is the most powerful hardware, and the X360 could also pull Fight Night off (meaning they aint trying on PS3).

/SpinningItMyWay

IAWTP. Doesn't have any quote from the developer saying what their thoughts are about the actual consoles. It simply states that the game on PS3 is doable on X360.

Has anyone ever mentioned Fight Night as an example of amazing next generation gaming? Or something that pushes PS3 to the limit?

No.

 

[mrklaw]

Doesn't EA play the lowest common denomanator game?

they develop to the biggest common seller. PS2

Next gen I would expect them to also develop for the biggest common seller - PS3. So that will no longer be the weakest technology, so it isn't cut and dried that ports will look the same.

*if* there is a noticable power difference between the consoles in PS3's favour, then I would expect multiplatform titles to look better on PS3. Most will lead development on that platform at least

Look to splinter cell or Resident Evil 4 as an example of a good multiplatform strategy - take advantage of the capabilities of the lead platform, and then convert as best you can.

 

[sonycowboy]

IAWTP. Doesn't have any quote from the developer saying what their thoughts are about the actual consoles. It simply states that the game on PS3 is doable on X360.

Has anyone ever mentioned Fight Night as an example of amazing next generation gaming? Or something that pushes PS3 to the limit?

No.

Yeah, certain fans are pretty tightly holding onto this little tidbit and using it to fit a particular argument, but that's cool, because the same is true of the PS3 folks when the opportunity arises.

As to your second point, I was VERY impressed with the FIGHT NIGHT demo @ E3, and I remember lots of folks being impressed as well. I thought it was probably the third most impressive PS3 showing behind MotorStorm & Killzone and it was also only one of two games running confirmed realtime, which made it all the more impressive.

Of course, there is the issue that the PS3 dev kit wasn't using RSX, was probably barely using the CELL, didn't have anywhere near the bandwidth that the real system will have and they're telling us that the 360 should be able to equal that showing. And EA couldn't really have fudged the presentation as the demo was controllable (while not necessarily interactive) so that the camera could be changed on the fly and the grahics were recalculated realtime.

Again, I thought it was very, very impressive and it would be the most impressive 360 game, I've seen yet with Gears of War being right behind and then PGR.

 

[Borys]

the funniest thing about this is that a game demo'd on ps3 first will hit 360 first and look just as good if not better than that demo. sucks to be sony for being late to the party! :lol

Xbox(R) 360: Who Needs Playstation(R) 3?

 

[bill0527]

they develop to the biggest common seller. PS2

Next gen I would expect them to also develop for the biggest common seller - PS3. So that will no longer be the weakest technology, so it isn't cut and dried that ports will look the same.

*if* there is a noticable power difference between the consoles in PS3's favour, then I would expect multiplatform titles to look better on PS3. Most will lead development on that platform at least

Look to splinter cell or Resident Evil 4 as an example of a good multiplatform strategy - take advantage of the capabilities of the lead platform, and then convert as best you can.

I disagree.

EA's method of doing business is to get a game out the door on time for just about every single platform out there. Most of their next-gen engines are going to be built on Xbox360 first, just for the fact that its probably going to be released a year before the PS3. I don't think EA is going to turn around and build all new PS3-specific engines for all of its games. This isn't how EA creates a game. They build one engine and then port it to everything else. They will then use that same engine for the next 4-5 years with a few annual tweaks. Unless you have information to the contrary, I don't see EA changing this policy next generation.

 

[Amadeus]

and there is still not a single screenshot of def jam 3 on the whole web (except the people that are saying that these screenshots look stunning) :lol

 

[Stinkles]

I do find it interesting to see PC guys like Carmack and Newell complain about next gen when I'm seeing some awesome things out of console focused developers. Not saying their wrong. But it is interesting to see the crying coming from the PC side.

Yeah, that works my nerves. What they really mean is, "Why can't I have a bloated PC to work on."

It's like bitching that a motorbike isn't a car.

 

[Kleegamefan]

Let me get this straight.....EA is saying the X360 version of FN3 will look just as good as a game currently running on a dev system without the final GPU, 3/4 CPU speed, 3/4 RAM speed and 1/20 the bandwidth as the final PS3??


Impressive!!!! :rollseyes

 

[Mrbob]

I'm sure next gen is a bitch to develop for. But it seems like the console guys are keeping their mouths shut and getting to work instead of complaining how hard it is going to be. Of course the PS2 probably taught them some lessons and gives them a leg up on next gen!

Ea develops to the lowest common denominator

Yeah but in this case there is no Revolution version planned!

*zing*

I wish EA would post the Def Jam screens. They are more impressive than Fight Night because they have the same detail in the character models as Fight Night with detailed backdrops.

Let me get this straight.....EA is saying the X360 version of FN3 will look just as good as a game currently running on a dev system without the final GPU, 3/4 CPU speed, 3/4 RAM speed and 1/20 the bandwidth as the final PS3??

Yeah but that was a tech demo. The models were intact but everything else was bland about the demo. Once all the backdrops and lighting gets set in for each stadium that will take a ton of resources.

 

[dorio]

Let me get this straight.....EA is saying the X360 version of FN3 will look just as good as a game currently running on a dev system without the final GPU, 3/4 CPU speed, 3/4 RAM speed and 1/20 the bandwidth as the final PS3??


Impressive!!!! :rollseyes

All those things won't contribute to better looking games. Developers don't code to maximize all those elements.

 

[gofreak]

All those things won't contribute to better looking games. Developers don't code to maximize all those elements.

Best tell Sony to not bother finalising PS3 hardware then, eh? :lol

Seriously..what? You don't think a faster CPU, a faster GPU, a heck of a lot more CPU-GPU bandwidth can help make games look better?

EA might not "maximise" things, but that's nothing to do with what the system is capable of. And you can be sure some devs do what EA don't. Maybe you mean that of the hardware is finalised late, it won't have much of an impact on first gen games?

 

[karlikk]

edit: nevermind <- posted by piepz (COOKIES!)

 

[Piepz]

I don't remember anyone saying that specifically, but when all the x360 hate was going on around E3, I remember a couple of articles that mentioned the Fight Night footage on PS3 was real time and it blew away the real time suff that was shown on the 360.

Yeah, I remember this too.
When there was trolling X360 VS PS3, Sony fanboys shoved Fight Night 3 footage and said that this is true next-gen and can't be done on X360 :lol

 

[gofreak]

Fight Night was better looking than a lot of the stuff shown at E3 on X360. I think few people thought it wouldn't be possible on the system though!

 

[Kleegamefan]

All those things won't contribute to better looking games. Developers don't code to maximize all those elements.

Sure, they just throw shit out and see what sticks...

 

[dorio]

Best tell Sony to not bother finalising PS3 hardware then, eh? :lol

Seriously..what? You don't think a faster CPU, a faster GPU, a heck of a lot more CPU-GPU bandwidth can help make games look better?

EA might not "maximise" things, but that's nothing to do with what the system is capable of. And you can be sure some devs do what EA don't. Maybe you mean that of the hardware is finalised late, it won't have much of an impact on first gen games?

Try rereading for understanding. Developers don't design games around maximizing every element of a system. If they are happy with the amount of polys they are pushing they are not going to push more for the hell of it. They will spend their energies on other things. Are you that naive to think that every game that was ever released maxed out the polygon counts, bandwidth, gpu, and cpu? Developers reach their target visual and then optimizations come in the form of increasing or stabilizing framerates.

 

[JMPovoa]

2 fighters in a ring. Noone around to watch them fight, some great effects (like the cheeks "dancing"). What's there that shouldn't be possible on the Xbox 360??? I take that demo more as a small showing of what's to come than anything tapping a next gen console's power!

 

[TheDiave]

EA better be careful... They say too much and SCEA might not invite them to speak at their E3 press conferences anymore. :lol

 

[dorio]

2 fighters in a ring. Noone around to watch them fight, some great effects (like the cheeks "dancing"). What's there that shouldn't be possible on the Xbox 360??? I take that demo more as a small showing of what's to come than anything tapping a next gen console's power!

That's what xbots were saying when sonybots were raving about the fight night footage. Now xbots think its impressive and sony guys are saying wait for the final ps3 kits. So funny how things change. Can't wait until we can talk about how games play in addition to this hardware pissing contest.

 

[Cuth]

Let me get this straight.....EA is saying the X360 version of FN3 will look just as good as a game currently running on a dev system without the final GPU, 3/4 CPU speed, 3/4 RAM speed and 1/20 the bandwidth as the final PS3??


Impressive!!!! :rollseyes

It doesn't seem so to me.

They said:

"The talented crew at EA's Chicago studio began working on the 360 version of Fight Night mere months ago, and already it looks nearly identical to the PS3 footage shown at E3."

...and...

"When finished, the two versions should be practically indistinguishable."


So, two different thing:

1) at the moment, they ported the game on X360 and the "work in progress" 360 version is "nearly identical to the PS3 footage shown at E3" (this part says nothing about how the final versions will be).

2) "When finished, the two versions should be practically indistinguishable".
Seems pretty clear to me: the final versions of the game should be practically indistinguishable. They don't say at all that the final versions will be equal to the E3 demo.

 

[jaundicejuice]

Ea develops to the lowest common denominator

Beaten to the punch.

 

[gofreak]

Try rereading for understanding. Developers don't design games around maximizing every element of a system. If they are happy with the amount of polys they are pushing they are not going to push more for the hell of it. They will spend their energies on other things. Are you that naive to think that every game that was ever released maxed out the polygon counts, bandwidth, gpu, and cpu? Developers reach their target visual and then optimizations come in the form of increasing or stabilizing framerates.

EA might not "maximise" things, but that's nothing to do with what the system is capable of. And you can be sure some devs do what EA don't.

I reread, and I took the same meaning from your post the second time as the first. Saying that faster GPUs/CPUs etc. won't make for better looking games just isn't true.

I wouldn't like to suggest what devs will or won't do with more power. Saying " Developers don't code to maximize all those elements." is a wide, sweeping statement that simply isn't true. Some don't as I said above.

Certainly I think some devs will "max out" any piece of hardware - for some devs, there's never enough. I think the PS3 kits as they currently stand don't represent the extent to which devs will use it or will want to use it- it represents the extent to which they can currently use it, but that's it. First-gen games may be limited by the pace of evolution in the dev kits i.e. if final kits come very late, but that's not the point I saw in your post.

 

[dorio]

I reread, and I took the same meaning from your post the second time as the first. Saying that faster GPUs/CPUs etc. won't make for better looking games just isn't true.

I wouldn't like to suggest what devs will or won't do with more power. Saying " Developers don't code to maximize all those elements." is a wide, sweeping statement that simply isn't true. Some don't as I said above.

Certainly I think some devs will "max out" any piece of hardware - for some devs, there's never enough. I think the PS3 kits as they currently stand don't represent the extent to which devs will use it or will want to use it- it represents the extent to which they can currently use it, but that's it. First-gen games may be limited by the pace of evolution in the dev kits i.e. if final kits come very late, but that's not the point I saw in your post.

I imagine you have more experience at this than I do but I don't see how you can maximise every element of a hardware system. There will always be a limiting factor involved in hardware. Have you ever programmed a game that used the maximum amount of polys a gpu could push, the maximum bandwidth and the maximum cpu? If so then well done. Imo, the best system is a balanced one.

 

[gofreak]

I imagine you have more experience at this than I do but I don't see how you can maximise every element of a hardware system. There will always be a limiting factor involved in hardware. Have you ever programmed a game that used the maximum amount of polys a gpu could push, the maximum bandwidth and the maximum cpu? If so then well done. Imo, the best system is a balanced one.

There's only so much you can do. When I say "max out the system" I don't mean having every paper max being met. You can't do that. But there is a upper limit on how much you can do in the realworld with a system that I'm confident some devs will meet. Look at PS2 - and awful beast to get to grips with, yet I'd say most would agree it has been satisfyingly "maxxed out".

The "All those things won't contribute to better looking games." bit is the main stickler for me though:

A faster GPU is going to help you do more things than a slower one. A faster CPU is going to help you do more things than a slower one. More bandwidth is going to help you do more things than less. If they didn't, why would we bother? Do you think we've hit a ceiling? We haven't.

 

[dorio]

A faster GPU is going to help you do more things than a slower one. A faster CPU is going to help you do more things than a slower one. More bandwidth is going to help you do more things than less. If they didn't, why would we bother? Do you think we've hit a ceiling? We haven't.

My point was more in relation to software pretty far along in development though which it sounds like fight night is. I just don't see developers saying, "hey, we have 20% more gpu power, let's redo our models etc." I think those decisions are made based on the target ps3 specs early in development, and the extra power is used for more stable framerates etc. Things that won't make a difference in the final frame output ie. how a game looks.