EA: "We've Maxed Out The 360," But Not The PS3
It's something we've heard before from developers, and a theory that many in the industry accept as fact. This time, a representative of one of the biggest publishers in the world has echoed the idea that while the Xbox 360 may be at its peak, they haven't yet "maxed out" the PlayStation 3.
In speaking to OXM, Senior VP of EA Games Europe, Patrick Soderlund, made the comments during E3. He first says he really liked the Natal presentation during Microsoft's press conference and freely admits that the 360 is his "personal favorite console." We have difficulty agreeing with his comment that Microsoft "is on a roll right now," based o the current circumstances, but hey, everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion. As for the PS3 and its potential, Soderlund had this to say:
"Sony has a lot of good games this year. If you go to their booth, there's a very consistent, high quality product line-up and that will help them. I do think that we'll see developers inside the organisation getting to understand the PS3 better and I think that we're getting more power out of PS3 right now... I think that we've maxed out the 360 but we haven't maxed out the PS3."
Recently, some developers - including Sucker Punch, the makers of the inFamous and Quantic Dream, creators of Heavy Rain - have come right out and said that their project couldn't be done on anything but the PS3. Microsoft insists such statements are never true while Sony insists they are (big surprise there), but even Jack Tretton made a point of saying at E3, several times, that certain things are "only possible" on the PS3. And most will say we're already starting to see the gap with certain exclusive titles...what say you?
6/5/2009 Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (96 posts)
Superman915
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:34:42 AM
Reply
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:41:17 AM
Trarman
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:43:27 AM
Dustinwp
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:44:23 AM
Mr Bitey
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:52:33 AM
Sony's first party studios will be utilizing the PS3 to it's full potential, while multiplatform games have to appeal to the least common denominator.
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:20:16 AM
For a multi-platform title, consistency is necessary.
fatelementality
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:11:28 PM
Superman915
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:48:35 PM
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:57:14 PM
A lot of the difference in games that we've seen in the past between 360 and PS3 is disappearing. The trouble is that the first generation game engines for multi-platform titles on the PS3 were ports of the original 360 engine, and the devs were still learning the platform. As time has passed, most devs have either implemented a new engine on both platforms at the same time, or continued to develop their PS3 engine seeking to match the 360 version. Had there not been a year when there was no PS3, it's unlikely we'd be able to tell the difference between versions of multi-platform games. Sadly not all devs have done a good job learning the PS3 yet, and some multi-plat games still have differences that should not be there.
HOODGE
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 2:50:54 PM
sobleck
Monday, June 08, 2009 @ 7:31:57 AM
WolfCrimson
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:41:42 AM
Reply
Microsoft: That's not true! Nobody listen to him! I'm right, he's wrong!!
Sony: What are you talking about? Of course it's true. Here, it's even written in the Guinness World Book of Records.
Microsoft: You're lying *sniff* YOU'RE LYING!!
Sony: No I'm not, check it out. See? "Most Powerful Console To Be Able To Run Games That Other Consoles Can't, Especially The 360: PS3"
Microsoft: That's a lie!! Check for Xbox 360, I'll show you!
Sony: Ok. *Looks for Xbox 360 entry* . Found it.
Sony: ... "The Console to Break Down Most Frequently"? Is it this one?
Microsoft: NO!! Check for something similar to yours.
Sony: Ok. ....... "The Console That Cannot Play The Games That The PS3 Can: Xbox 360"
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:50:54 AM
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:40:54 PM
Wage SLAVES
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 9:56:42 PM
oldmike
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 1:32:12 AM
YesterdysRising
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:44:26 AM
Reply
Arvis
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:52:44 AM
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:56:16 AM
Arvis
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:26:22 AM
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:48:34 AM
One thing that bothered me was this: When Nathan jumps in the water, his clothes get wet, its the famous wet look they have done so damn well, but the other 2 characters on co op mode dont get this same look. I'm not asking for all characters including enemies to get this, but it would add to the realism if the other 2 got the same effects
bigrailer19
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:46:13 AM
Reply
I would have to say with the evidence that Games exclusive to PS3 are looking and running better has testiment that these games truly are "only possible" on the PS3.
DarthNemesis
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:00:52 AM
Reply
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:06:06 AM
Reply
Last edited by n/a on 6/5/2009 11:07:33 AM
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:45:15 AM
Sorry but when comparing the 2 systems exclusives graphically, games that are released already and future games, its clear the ps3 has the edge. That's not to say games on 360 suck, just stating the truth.
I also don't agree with the opinion that some have about 360 not getting any better graphically, it might be maxed out, but i dont think that really says it cant get a game better looking than its last great looking game
Last edited by aaronisbla on 6/5/2009 11:50:29 AM
Karosso
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:51:10 AM
The difference between GOW2 on PS2 and most games from its second year is huge, so I still think the PS3 has a good chance of showing something that far surpasses the current standard... Just my two cents, base on the PS2 time line.
Hope you don't get offended by it.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:23:03 PM
HeXeN
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:31:10 PM
Dustinwp
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 2:40:04 PM
Last I checked all these features can just as easily make or break a gamers experience. Which would hamper the quality of the overall product. Which is the topic of the article.
Last edited by Dustinwp on 6/5/2009 2:56:24 PM
BikerSaint
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 3:02:58 AM
Arvis
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:55:55 AM
JDC80
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:17:57 PM
Superdynamite
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:26:12 AM
Reply
Microsoft showed us a bunch of stuff that has already been done; The Metal Gear Solid franchise has been out for over a decade. Both XBox & PS3 get Final Fantasy 13 but Final Fantasy 14 is exclusive for PS3. Again, a franchise that has been available for over a decade, but what's the point of getting a FF13 exclusive if you can play FF14?
Sony showed us the future of PS3 gaming. Microsoft grabbed a few old names and attached them to XBox360. As we can see, the philosophies of these two companies are vastly different. Where Microsoft paid a truck load of money for GTAIV DLC, Sony showed us a new exclusive from Rockstar Games entitled AGENT. AGENT is a stealth based espionage game set in the late 70's and is exclusive to the PS3.
I'm not sure how much old stuff Microsoft can bring over to XBox before their fans get board with stuff they have already experienced. Or how many times they can release a title from the Halo franchise, that hasn't been good since the original.
Here are the exclusives that were announced at e3 2009:
The PS3 EXCLUSIVES: Uncharted 2, M.A.G., AGENT, Mod Nation Racers, The Last Guardian, Gran Turismo 5, Final Fantasy 14 and God of War III.
The 360 EXCLUSIVES: Shadow Complex, Joy Ride, Crackdown 2, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Forza 3, Halo 3, Alan Wake & A.P.B.
Round by Round Break Down :
Round 1:
We got to see 360's Joy Ride. A Kart-type racing game exclusive to 360. Then on Day 2 Sony shows off their fully customizable Kart racing game that was inspired by Little Big Planet. A crushing blow to Microsoft's Joy Ride.
Round 2:
Microsoft had a few more rabbits in their hat. Next up is the 360 exclusive Splinter Cell: Conviction. Then on Day 2 Sony announces their very own stealth/espionage exclusive called AGENT. AGENT is brought to you by the makers of the Grand Theft Auto franchise, Rock Star Games. Yet another of Microsoft's rabbits landed in a pot.
Round 3:
The Final Fantasy debacle - On Day 1 Microsoft touted that Final Fantasy was finally coming to the XBox360 in the form of Final Fantasy 13. Then on Day 2 Sony completely crushed that announcement with news of their own; Not only will PS3 be getting FF13 but they will also be getting Final Fantasy 14 as a PS3 exclusive. A visually mind blowing installment from the Final Fantasy franchise that has online multiplayer and is only possible on the PS3.
Round 4:
Microsoft announced that Metal Gear Solid: Rising was going to be a 360 exclusive. Konami has now said it will be released on PS3, PC & 360. Ouch! What was Microsoft thinking when they announced it as an exclusive???
Final thoughts:
The best game Microsoft showed off at E3 2009 was a game called A.P.B. It's a brand new MMO title headed for the 360. It's a cross between Team Fortress and Saints Row meaning it plays like Saints Row but has the graphics of Team Fortress.
With original franchise exclusives such as MAG and The Last Guardian coming to PS3, I don't see how anyone in the gaming industry can deny it's massive appeal over the competition. If Rockstar's original PS3 exclusive, AGENT, has anywhere near the impact they had with GTA3, we're looking at a title that could propel PS3 light years beyond all other consoles. And last but not least, the Demo of God of War III was just mind blowing. The environment surrounding Kratos' battle was so vast that it appeared as if you could look into the distance for miles and miles at end. Completely amazing.
What was boring:
For me Nintendo showed nothing interesting or appealing to a true gamer. Wii Fit Plus was Nintendo's diamond crown but truthfully, I don't see the sparkle at all. Same old nonsense. Same old baby game garbage. Nintendo is showing us that cheap is not better. Wii is the ultimate dust collector for people that want to say that they play video games. Get in on the conversation for $300 bucks. No thanks.
As for Sony & Microsoft's motion controller presentations; A giant NO THANKS!
I feel, as most gamers do, that as a whole, the whole Motion Controller thing is a galactic waste of R&D time and R&D money. Both Microsoft & Sony wasted over 30 minutes each of stage time on this useless item. Garbage!
And the e3 2009 winner is:
Sony showed big, original, exclusive titles coming to the PS3. Titles that are pushing the limits of our gaming experience that are "only possible on the PS3". Sony met all of Microsoft's big announcements with a crushing blow of their own and that's what E3 is all about. It's about showing off your best while knocking out the competition and Sony accomplished just that.
The winner is Sony & PS3!
2nd place goes to Microsoft.
3rd goes to Nintendo's Wii which showed nothing exciting for it's future. Wii Fit Plus? A different way to jump around. Yuk!
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:55:30 AM
They said something like "every game showed after this statement is exclusive" and then later on in the show, hideo kojima came on stage to announce the game. The exclusive statement wasnt meant for this game, MS and Konami even says this
Totalz
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 1:50:12 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 3:48:19 PM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 6/5/2009 3:49:05 PM
Nynja
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:26:13 PM
Example: LittleBigPlanet was only possible on PS3. Mmk. So the PSP version is not really a LittleBigPlanet game. I understand they may be referring to specific elements of the PS3 version of the game. It just sounds idiotic.
Come on Sony, think before you speak.
JPBooch
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:56:36 PM
JackKnifeZero
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 6:33:36 PM
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:38:33 AM
Reply
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:44:16 AM
Last edited by n/a on 6/5/2009 11:47:24 AM
Arvis
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:57:15 AM
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:04:07 PM
Yes, xboxlive is good but stop trying to downplay psn. You act as if the psn isnt capable of online gameplay. Till this day, i haven't met anyone who can come up with a good excuse as to why they pay for live, nothing on there justifies paying for it. I do think live is a bit better than psn, but not by much, pretty slim actually
Bottom line is they both offer awesome online entertainment, but one is free.
Also, Back in the day you might have had a point with the Achievements but now that ps3 has trophies, they are both the same sh!t, both aren't my cup of tea either, rather do without it to be honest. Until one of them offers some type of reward other than e penis points, they both suck imo
Edit: @Arvis: He can't explain why, since they both do the same damn thing
Last edited by aaronisbla on 6/5/2009 12:06:12 PM
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:07:36 PM
Trophies are better, to be honest. Four kinds of trophies and you can try to reach a certain number of overall trophies or level up.
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 1:00:25 PM
Nynja
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 2:13:52 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 3:51:38 PM
HOODGE
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 3:54:45 PM
For all you xbot trolls out there get an education and do some research and reading. You might be able to learn something. Your brain is not in you're controller hands is it.
Here's another question for Xbots. What is the difference between Lives Shared servers and PSN's dedicated servers?...................
Shared servers allow all Live games to run through one server base continually together. Thus the sharing of one massive server base. Lives server bases act to perform functions for all 360 services such as the dashboard, content downloads, videos, online gaming, voice messaging and text messages, etc. Basically it is a multi multi tasking setup. Thus is why I have yet to play a game on 360 that runs smoothly and doesn't freeze often where I have to reboot my machine. On top of that I have yet to see a 360 online game that supports more than 24 online players.
Another pitfall for 360 users is for the last 2 Christmas seasons I have had the worst experiences logging into the system and playing online games without just horendous lag and freeze ups. During that time period expecially the 2007 December period till the middle of February 2008, Live's server base was close to being down. Remember that period where you could barely log on and play games (This also coming from the fact that I have a 24meg Internet service)? And the worst is you pay for that garbage. Now that's sad!
One other example, When your big hits like GOW 2,& you're Call of Duty's launch, Live is so bogged down with so much activity from people playing those games online that everyone else suffers.
Now on Sony's side they have the PSN that is at the center of the service that runs the dashboard, PS Store, and online friends messaging and chat services.
The online games run from their own dedicated server bases for optimal bandwidth ensuring better and easier connectivity and thus the ability to focus on one task. Without having to do multi tasks like Live, dedicated game servers can handle MMO games such as we will see with 256 players in MAG and run online games much smoother and better with little to no lock ups. The online quality of dedicated server gaming is much much more rewardings.
If you require more information about shared and dedicated servers just google the search on the web.
That is my experience with online gaming with both 360 and PS3. I don't deal with getting booted and locking up much at all. It rarely happens and when I'm on my 360 it is a daily thing.
Ya we don't have voice messaging or ingame voice chat yet, but that is coming and when all the dust settles, Online gaming on PS3 is twice as good as 360.
I hate that people who only own the 360 have the balls to say that they have the better online service on Live when they have no clue about how PSN works nor have experienced it.
Hope you trolls got an education today.....
Last edited by HOODGE on 6/5/2009 4:01:31 PM
Wage SLAVES
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:20:31 PM
Take it to 'em
Coming from experience epic scaled games like Resistance 2 and Killzone 2 run without a butt twitch of lag.
And according to GamePro in reference to Cod4 online they say, "Stable, dedicated servers are preferable to peer-to-peer networking any day of the week. Since it carries all of the same features as Xbox 360, that key element gives PlayStation 3 a big boost."
(www.gamepro.com/article/features/164708/ps3-vs-xbox-360-ports-the-cold-hard-truth-page-3-of-4/)
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:40:33 AM
Reply
Last edited by n/a on 6/5/2009 11:47:55 AM
Gone
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 11:55:32 AM
Reply
Just bought GTAIV at Fry's for $24.99, sale good until 6/11/09.
Last edited by Gone on 6/5/2009 12:00:25 PM
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:00:44 PM
Jawknee
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:52:40 PM
i dont believe them. FFXIII is most certainly going to be dumbed down so it will run on the 360. if anything the Cut scenes for the PS3 version will be less compressed, but thats about it. Makes no sense to me when a company says they maxed out the PS3 yet the same game will run on the 360. Then why isnt MGS4 possible on the 360? oh yea, cause its a piece.
The PS3s superiority was obvious when Uncharted: Drakes Fortune was compared to Queers of War 2 and Uncharted came out on top.
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 12:59:10 PM
You could show 100% utilization of every resource in a system, but that says NOTHING about how efficiently you are using the resources, nor does it indicate whether your processes are well designed.
coverton341
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 1:43:02 PM
HOODGE
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:40:06 PM
Last edited by HOODGE on 6/5/2009 4:40:38 PM
BikerSaint
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 3:28:45 AM
Actually, I doubt they're anywhere near maxing out the PS3. I think that they just haven't fully figured out the cell's system yet, so only they, "themselves" have maxed their own games out.
Once they figure out the cell, then they'll realize how farther they can optimize their game in order even start taking the mighty beast towards it's max.
Gone
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 10:03:20 AM
Nynja
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 1:57:26 PM
crawdaddy
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:00:24 PM
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:51:42 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:00:20 PM
Reply
In the PS3 camp look at GOWIII, its smooth. U2 looks even better than U1, and if Crysis is going to function on 360 too then it won't even be able to touch Killzone 2 in terms of graphical qualities.
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:13:11 PM
Reply
Andysw
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:30:09 PM
Dustinwp
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:47:40 PM
Last edited by Dustinwp on 6/5/2009 4:52:11 PM
HOODGE
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 4:49:11 PM
I feel sorry for arrogant fangirls like yourself who come in like they know everything about every system but only own the 360. I own them all and you're earlier statements above couldn't be farther from the truth. Know your facts before you open your mouth.
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 5:03:11 PM
I owned two Xbox 360s myself. The controllers, however, left me with arthritic index fingers because their triggers were too stiff and unforgiving. Also, why I should I pay $68 CAN to play online with mostly teenage boys who sound like they more interested in being annoying than serious? A lot of them sound like Mushmouth from Fat Albert. I can't even understand them.
I don't troll Xbox 360 boards telling them to sell their console for a PS3 and Nintendo Wii. I've washed my hands of the console. Yet, here are the trolls who seem to make daily visits to PS3 sites to stir things up and try Ben and Arnold's patience. It's obvious that you've made an error and instead of correcting it, you just harass people and dis their console of choice.
It's getting really tiresome. Until MS creates a durable console and cleans up the riffraff on XBL, why bother with the 360? In my case, it isn't worth the $$$ or grief.
At least Sony allows you to report troublemakers on Home. I don't know if they really do anything but at least it's easy to report those causing "grief".
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 6:13:53 PM
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 9:09:32 PM
aaronisbla
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:41:06 PM
-How are Achievements better than trophies when they both serve the same purpose which is to stroke a player's e penis?
-In what ways is xboxlive so much better than psn to the point where one can justify paying for it? i thought the point of an online service was to play games online, both tend to do this fairly well, except one is free. It just gets tiresome to hear the same excuse "Crossgame chats/invites" so this justifies the pricetag per year?
-What makes you think this is the best of whats to come? Are you serious? i don't even think thats true in the 360's case, they just need to stop relying so much on the Unreal Engine 3 and things will get better, case in point, lost planet 2
Instead of getting so defensive, refute those points with facts, if u can
maxpontiac
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 3:49:06 PM
Deleted User
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 5:07:37 PM
Maybe EA should be more concerned about the one analyst who said they missed the boat this generation. Like a lot of people here, only Burnout Paradise, Fight Night and Dead Space seem to have that sheen this generation. Mirror's Edge and NHL '09 are two others but I'm not into those games.
JPBooch
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 5:05:29 PM
Reply
If you premised your thoughts with some articles by developers than perhaps people would believe you. Right now you sound pretty 360fanboyish...most say "I own both systems but,"
Last edited by JPBooch on 6/5/2009 5:07:30 PM
RadioHeader
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 5:19:22 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 6:17:36 PM
Reply
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 6/5/2009 6:17:59 PM
Dingodial
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 8:25:50 PM
Reply
Highlander
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:58:02 PM
From the point of view of the RSX there is no difference between graphics and system memory, it has complete access to either.
I'd never deny that having more memory is better, a PS3 with 1GB of RAM (768MB of XDR and 256 MB of video memory) would rock, but considering the cost of the unit already adding another half gig of XDR to the design would have been insane.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 9:35:31 PM
Reply
It doesn't work. So like I said, knock it off unless you've got something concrete to say. Otherwise, it just seems like you're trying to rile people up.
sabitrulz
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:40:14 PM
Reply
Mind u.......Masseffect2 and splinter cell:con....Alan Wake is also looking pretty cool......but those tittles are nothing compared to God of war 3/last guardian/uncharted2...............
formerroadie
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 10:47:50 AM
Reply
Deleted User
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 10:56:31 AM
Reply
Major Lee High
Saturday, June 06, 2009 @ 4:11:16 PM
Reply
The FACT is, ignoring graphics, with blu-ray and cell ps3 games have far more room to grow in other areas while still having top notch graphics. 256 player fps, if it manages to keep graphics, lag and fun up, is EIGHT times better than any 32 player game. Mag might not be fun for everyone, but if it works that's a huge advance in a area other than graphics.
If you really don't think the PS3 has tons of room to grow then consider this. The size limits of DVD, cheap hardware and lack of Hard Drive on some 360's is going to limit the hell out of what the devs can do on it as games get more advanced.
NetheRealm
Tuesday, June 09, 2009 @ 8:43:10 AM
Reply
Last edited by NetheRealm on 6/9/2009 8:47:24 AM

See Full Image









Dustinwp
Reply
Friday, June 05, 2009 @ 10:34:36 AM
Last edited by Dustinwp on 6/5/2009 10:38:44 AM