TheTHCGamer
Active Member
That is a very good point Game Over and this input delay could be a side effect of that.
PS3 vs 360 comparison
- Thread starter synce
- Start date
DR2K
Well-Known Member
Some of us know that all 360 games respond 1 frame faster than PS3. Yes it is noticable for any game.
TheTHCGamer
Active Member
Im pretty sure he didnt know that which is why he stated i told you the 360 version would be better without anything to back it up. If he knew that already he wouldve stated it and i think fanboy console wars are meant for sites like gamefaqs. On top of that his second post only further confirmed my theory.
Chaos
Well-Known Member
I don't know if its me but it seems like the last gen games had a longer/better story with more content but now the new games today only last in 4-6 hours.
Blazeincarnated
Well-Known Member
Dafuq are you talking about? Fanboy? Its just a fuckin expression dumbass. Stop getting your panties in a bunch.
And also because I knew. I added together feedback.
TheTHCGamer
Active Member
Yup one genre that is now dead to me for the most part is RPG's. Its a damn shame if your going to offer a short single player game without a multplayer experience then how the hell can you justify it only taking 10 hrs to beat max. With the exception of most multiplayer games i feel games have taken a step back for the most part this gen.I don't know if its me but it seems like the last gen games had a longer/better story with more content but now the new games today only last in 4-6 hours.
So you previously brought up the frame delay featured in the PS3 version? Lol your the one calling me dumbass and your saying ive got my panties in a bunch okay.
Blazeincarnated
Well-Known Member
Game Over
Well-Known Member
Definite pros/cons with both major consoles (Wii doesn't count), but I don't fault either console for fails of this gen. Fails of this gen come really from the market "trending" toward games that are more low-bar "pick up and play" instant gratification games with high visual flair than past gaming "norms". The casual gaming market is becoming a bit "too" casual with gaming, showing little interest in games calling for moderate-to-significant amounts of thought, strategy, finesse, patience, etc., and flocking to games designed to give them "what they want" with not much investment of time and/or effort.
When the best-selling franchise of a generation is something like Call of Duty, especially considering the state it's in now, it's like Jersey Shore or American Idol being regarded as the "Best TV Show". It's kind of a disgrace to those who desire, and can appreciate, true gems of quality production.
To some degree, I place blame on the failings of the educational system in this country. As the quality of education for the average American pre-teen/teenager goes down (or stagnates at a low-level), this leads to more and more Americans growing up less and less accustomed to "working" for "rewards". They come up wanting more and more rewards in exchange for less and less work. In regards to fighting games, this is likely why games with cheap and flashy comeback mechanics (ex: SSFIVAE) top the pillar of popularity, while games providing layers upon layers of depth and strategy (ex: VF5FS) struggle to find/maintain a significant following outside Japan.
Rikuto
P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
No... that's not how it works. It's not increasing the time you have to do a command, that's the input window. They didn't change the window at all, they just delayed the action.
If anything, this would actually add to the lag during online play.
Basically, they added artificial lag on top of unavoidable lag. There is no benefit to this.
Game Over
Well-Known Member
That's what I was getting at. Increasing input delay so an input has slightly more time to register before the move executes. More time between input and execution, not more time for input.
I think I've got the idea, but maybe just wording things incorrectly.
ADD: Factor in online lag, and having less time between input and execution would likely lead to more dropped inputs (making online play less playable)... something that TN is probably trying to avoid here.
TheTHCGamer
Active Member
I agree to an extent and what i also forgot was you also have to take into account how much more games cost to make this gen. I know you didnt want to bring up the Wii however most of the games one the Wii are shovel ware which means a low budget is easier to turn into profit.
I do blame players these days for wanting instant gratification for games this gen however as i mentioned online play is now a huge factor for games these days. COD would have done well regardless and its not just because of casual gamers. People who dont play video games in general play COD because its such a simple game to just pick up and play. Yes i HATE COD but the idea of making games catering to even non gamers is genius.
Yes the education system is partly to blame but so are the parents. There are still kids out there who want to get a good education and take the time to play more challenging games. If you let your kid become content with being mediocre then thats what he or she will become. I also dont consider ultras in SFIV cheap combacks because you still have to land them and offensive players can build up a super meter.
SFIV as a whole however is more casual friendly then say SF3 but fighting games in general are more casual friendly. You also have to remember times have changed im a bit older and i remember playing fighting games in there prime in arcades. So the environment has also changed for these new gamers in they dont ever have to leave home.
It drives me ape shit because when i was younger i was never fucking home lol. Also its a lot easier to get a genre working online like a FPS then it is to get a fighting game that runs heavily on frame rate and timing. Even my favorite FPS are the more competitive ones (HALO) and its a shame that even HALO is trying to implement some of the same aspects from COD because those games are so fucking successful.
Then it drives me nuts when those kids think you just mash buttons to play fighting game or that HALO sucks just because the better player/team almost always win. So there is a few reasons why this gen has been disappointing.
chocogerman777
Well-Known Member
HAHA take that ps3 noobs!
..
...
....
I bought the ps3 version..
..
...
....
I bought the ps3 version..
Blah blah, yeah we all knew this as it happens in every PS3 game. It has to hold one part of the cell processor dedicated to the XMB being called immediately upon press. That means it takes 1 frame for it to register if the PS button is being pressed or not.
So yes, the PS3 has 1 frame more delay than the Xbox 360. It's not a problem with Team NINJA or their design, but just the hardware.
So yes, the PS3 has 1 frame more delay than the Xbox 360. It's not a problem with Team NINJA or their design, but just the hardware.
Cricket
New Member
I suspect that would lead to a very active modding community.
NightAntilli
Well-Known Member
They've added a framerate comparison:
Cutscene
Gameplay
Seems like the X360 is superior here as well. Much less screen tearing during gameplay. During cutscenes the X360 has less tearing too, but, it drops frames here while the PS3 doesn't. At least gameplay is always 60fps for both.
Cutscene
Gameplay
Seems like the X360 is superior here as well. Much less screen tearing during gameplay. During cutscenes the X360 has less tearing too, but, it drops frames here while the PS3 doesn't. At least gameplay is always 60fps for both.
chocogerman777
Well-Known Member
HAHA! Xbawks fa lyf son!I never seen screen tearing during gameplay. smh... Pfffff ..fanboys
I bought DoA5 for the PS3...
Arnell Long
Active Member
Naked characters "EVERYWHERE"...!