Ghostbusters dev: Xbox 360 is holding us back

Wait a minute, here - they're developing a Wii version and a PS2 Version and the Xbox 360 is holding them back??? Methinks this reeks of back-door marketing tactics.

OMG EVIL COMMUNIST NAZI SDF BRIBED/THREATENED HIM TO SAY THAT!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Anyone willing to bet that this game will suck?

I bet anything this game gets no more then 65% on metacritic...

These guys make it sound like they're makin Crysis...

You know... I've come to the conclusion that processing power has little to do with quality of gaming. So what if fewer moving objects can be shown on the screen at once... the human brain can only track up to 11 discrete movement patterns at a time... and that's if you qualify as a genius! Any more and your brain simply ignores them.

I would consider my Dreamcast to be vastly inferior to even my original XBOX... but that SEGA machine has delivered some of the most memorable and highest quality gaming experiences I've had to date. If I had to take my ps3, 360, or Dreamcast with me on a deserted island... I'd take the Dreamcast every day and twice on Sunday.

Fuck him. This is guy is crazy!
I agree that he is already making excusses for his crap game!
So long Ghostbusters!

LOL!!!!

I'm thoroughly convinced that these guys drop comments like this simply because they know Joystiq posters go bat-f*ck crazy....it's a joy to watch.

Cats and dogs, living together, total hysteria!

I copied your guys comments and sent them some links to sites that compare how the 2 consoles stack up against each other. and if we are comparing threads (which is stupid) it would be 7 or 8 (depending on how the developer uses the PS3) to 6 on the 360. But wait. theres more, 360 can change the amount of RAM the CPU or GPU use, making it better for developers who want to put more objects on screen. Not to mention the better GPU on the 360.

You could start a blu-ray argument and say it can hold more, but remember you can only load 512MB (to anything for 360) and 256 (for CPU and the GPU) on the PS3, which kills that argument. The only thing the PS3 really has going for it is a harddrive install, which was because of how slow the PS3 Blu-ray drive is.

All in all this guy is either joking, or extremely stupid.

His comments might have been true if the BS3 was actually programmable for.

As always, your commentary is worthless. Both have exclusives worth buying.

You fuckers, screw the blast processing....SNES can do Mode 7. In your faces!!!

Wait...what were we fighting about?

I have both consoles and the platform exclusives did not convince me that the PS3 is the better system. Actually it only confirmed that they are pretty much equal which a lot of devs have come out and said. Even uncharted which took the Devs 3 years to get 30% out of the PS3 looks good but it never make you feel that it couldn't be done on the 360. The difference you see with platform exclusives between the 360 and PS3 are the developers.

Sony have a nice crew of developers that do an awesome job of producing AAA type games. This is the reason I bought a PS3 not because of some fanboy love affair with the Cell, Sony or blu-ray. It's the development crew that separate Sony from MS not the hardware.

The PS3 hardware is only as good as it's weakest component. There are way to many bottlenecks within the PS3 to get anywhere close to its theoretical potential.

"The PlayStation 3 has seven processors and the 360 only has three, so seven versus three means you can do a lot more on the PS3."

Wow...just freaking wow...I will cut the guy some slack noting he is a business person (president) and therefore very likely had no idea what he was talking about before he started the statement.

But it has been a very, very, VERY long time since I have seen such an inane and ignorant comment from someone like this. Now, I see kiddies on the forumns all the time talking about GHz and pipelines and it is obvious they are pretty clueless and are simply copy-n-pasting stuff from some other source. But for the official head of a company to put this out as if it was some meaningful and compelling "point". Wow...just wow.

I would love to sell this guy a system:
Yes sir. 2.2 Ghz dual core. Best of the best.

...of course, it has 64 megs of ram, 16bit video card, and a 8 Mb modem...but you can still tap that tower, look at yo' boys and say "2.2 Ghz dual core bee-otches!"

For the record, yes, I comprehend that the PS3 has 'more horsepower', not my point at all. My point is that this is akin to the head of Nike coming out and saying, "How many treads does Rebock have? 20. We have 60 baby, so we are obviously superior!"

The ps3 has one processor with seven cores. one of those cores is used for data redundancy. = 6 functioning cores.
Xbox 360 has six cores on 3 processors. = 6 cores.

this guy is full of crap. everyone knows the ps3 has a slight floating point advantage, but unless he's going to have thousands of objects onscreen at one time, it's just ridiculous.

also, the xbox 360 has more flexible memory, which allows it to use more ram for such "objects" physics, lighting, etc. In other words, this guy is full of crap.

He failed to mention the fact that the 360's 3 processors are hyperthreaded giving it 3 virtual ones running at 3 ghz.

"The PlayStation 3 has seven processors and the 360 only has three, so seven versus three means you can do a lot more on the PS3."

*LOL* Yeah, and a intel 486 chip with 466 MHz is better than a Pentium with 300 MHz... *LOL*

Man, this is the stupiest thing I heard all week.

Way to GO Terminal Reality!

Besides showing yourself as either shills of Sony or just incredibly technically inept, you've also assured yourself that learning the game will be substandard straight from the developers, I'll never even give it so much as a thought of buying it.

Your marketing dept must just love you Randel. :)

Why are we debating the differences between PS3 and the 360 still? These people aren't in the business of making friends, they're in the business of making money. They're going to take the path that makes them the most money. If they tone it down for the 360 then they have more potential income.

Wow... That picture is from a video TMHonfire made- used to play with him on Xbox LIVE in TDU and Forza. Now a total fanboy and shot his Xbox 360 with an AK-47 and AR-15.

Dear Terminal Reality,

Please make this a PS3 exclusive. The Xbox has too many games anyways. Chances are your game will only collect dust and end up in the bargain bin.

Thanks,
People who don't intend on playing sup-par games.

This whole "PS3 is more powerful than the 360 because its newer" is one of the most uninformed and ignorant statements since, "Sadaam was in bed with Al Queda" arguments.

Hey douchebags, did you know that the 360 and the PS3 were finished in their R&D development at the same times. If it wasn't for the strained supply on Blue Ray diodes the PS3 would've been released in 2005 along with the Xbox 360. Nothing was done to the PS3 internally from 2005-2006 right up to its release date.

The only advantage the PS3 has is a mandatory hard drive install for some of their games which helps texture pop in and load times. Which all Microsoft has to do is give the green light to developers to implement this same feature to certain titles as well.

STOP SPREADING THE FUD!

(At Picture)
We can rebuild it. We have the technology.

"Multi cores is the future. Gaming development is still stuck in a single CPU structure. Those games that take advantage of the separate cores will be amazing."

What do you mean by this exactly? You are aware that the cell is only a SINGLE core processor, right? SPE's are NOT cores, but more like 1 thread drones all dependent on the core. The Xenon's benefit is that it has 3 independent cores, but it runs a few less threads simultaneously.

When he talks about how the PS3 uses an entire core for audio and the 360 uses only part of one, it's hard to see what he's getting at. Due to architecture, both are doing the same thing! You wouldn't want to waste a whole multithreading core on audio alone, and you would want a dedicated SPE running audio; that'd be normal in each case.

The PS3 is plenty capable, and it's being doing better of the last few months. I certainly don't think that has anything to do with what this guy is saying. LOL

And yet, Infinity Ward and Rockstar North managed to make 2 awesome, and identical, versions of excellent games just fine...

/Points at GTA

Rockstar did it.

Lolghostbustersgamedevs,lamedevs.

Of course the real question is... does more objects on screen equal more fun? If so I bet we could make PacMan *really* rock if there were 200 ghosts on the screen at once. Seriously, there are what, 5 at a time now? No wonder it's so boring...

99% of the people in this thread don't know how the Cell really works, so I don't know why all you guys are arguing about how hard it is to do multi-threading and parallelism and such. If the 360 has three cores that run 2 threads each, I'd say the 360 is doing a lot of multi-threaded vector processing, too.

Architecturally, the SPEs in the Cell chip are very similar to the VMX units in the 360's CPU cores. They even share many instructions. The major difference is that in the 360, vector results are cached in the core's cache, while the SPEs have local memory and require the programmer to shuffle results around over a proprietary bus. Think of the 360 as a 3-liter naturally aspirated car engine, and the PS3 as 2-liter engine with a turbo. There's advantages and disadvantages with both approaches, but the two are not really that different in principle. Remember, both of these "engines" were designed by IBM.

Take Randel's comment for what it is: spin. Unless you spend more time writing software than playing with it, shut up about how hard it is to program the damn chips, and just wait for the games to come out.

And stop geeking us out and throwing all these specs and crap at everyone.

I know the PS3 is NOT significantly powerful than the 360. At the end, i want to see amazing looking games, something the "weak" ps2 was able to do.

appealing, i buy it.