ok apparently you guys aren't smart enought to realise that FFXIII is a japanese rpg and xbox360 is american made. why does that add up well lets see xbox 360 sales in japan are horrible about 5% of japnese own a xbox360 the rest own ps3 ps2 and gamecube and wii.
now heres another thing main game is ps3 exclisive why. i read in game informer or a website that ffxiii is using a new engine for the graphics called white engine which is being made to run off of cell 4 out of 7 spe's. meaning if this game where to ever go on 360 they would have to remake the core engine for the graphics thjus seeing a kill in graphics and expect a later date like late 2008 - mid 2009. it would cost too much money to re-create (read their reason why they won't remake on ffvii you'll understand). no taken that info they would now have to design game disc switching points to allow the disc to be change (cost more money) then they would have to spend more money on the multiple disc which will be at least two and maybe 3 (just to let you know it will cost more money).
now all this would cost them in the 500,000-1,000,000 just so it would go on to 360 and it will divert them from making other games and other ff series.
that being said to an idiot who said ps3 uses 25gb discs no they use 50 gb discs.
also microsofts new 360 (just a bigger hdd nothing else other than being black) has decided to remove the hddvd drive so they will be using dvd 9 which is you know only 8.5 gb formated to about 7.9 gb.
now i happen to know that enchanted arms for ps3 was 16gb and since ffxii graphics murder them i would actually say it will be at least a 25 gb game and that would mean 4 disc for xbox 360.
ohh and um blu-ray having slow load times are you an idiot if its not formated right then yes. i only ever came across one game that had poor rate and that was sonic but that was a direct port without being reworked to run properly for blu-ray. and blu-ray has a faster read/wright head than dvds. so read up on finance technology and stuff before posting hopefull marks
also at the bottom of the very first post (the story) it says ffxiii (which is the parent story) is exclusive to ps3. so for all you people who believe 360 is god its not.
also every port from 360 to ps3 so far(sonic, enchanted arms, ac4) all had more content and all had same graphic (the ones that came to ps3) and some had better (ps3 to 360). but all of the ps3 games hold more contect then 360.
also i happen to hold an extreme amout of knowledge on computers (due to A+, html scripting and a bunch of others, and financial info from being a supervisor at a retail store, and from my brother who has a bachlor's in finance, he teaches me stuff about finance).
also i meant to say something else but i can't find the edit tab lol. basically when the hddvd games comes out xbox 360 will most likely be using a 2 layer hddvd but guess what it still dosen'r compare to the two layer blue ray ps3 is using. each layer of an hd dvd is only 15 gb and so far there is only up to a three layer disc which is not fully functional but in the testing stages. so at most if xbox 360 can get is 45 gb. no lets look at blue ray. each layer of blue ray is 25 gb. and sony has declared to use a two layer disc which is 50 gb. but you wanna know something toshiba made a fully functioning 6 layer blue ray disck that can store up to 200 gb of info. so yeah blue ray is a little bit more expensive but your getting your moneys worth.
ok hear goes im gonna get bashed but im going to bash first. i am a so called fan boy of sony. why? you may ask. cause their products are one of the best. i own sony cd plays (2). sony psp, sony mp3 player, sony tv, sony head phones, ps2, psx, psOne.
all you bitching bout ps2 problems look at when xbox came out. it didb't have a fan, your cpu melted one you. i have a second shipment ps2 and it runs just as good as the day i got it.
now technical stuff with ps3. blue ray pwns dvd 9 which is a dual layer dvd 8.5 gigs. blue ray has 50 gigs of data. hmm comparison 8.5 or 50 hmmm. when you look at this xbox has to sacrifice a lot more if they want a long running game while ps3 dosen't.
gameplay length, and graphics share one medium. so you have to choose do you want awsome graphic and a short game or do you want a long game but shitty graphics, or do you compromise and make a game that has simi good graphics and a medium lengh game. all of these are factors in choosing the medium. ps3 can off a 90hr game and have spectacular graphics while if 360 tried that the graphics would blow. now rendering ps3 is 60fps (frames per-second) but can go up to 120fps if you have the tv to do it with. 360 has only 60fps.
now people get a brain. read specs. about everything from non bias sites and you'll learn a lot more. ps3 dosen't have rumble for two reasons 1 it will interfear with the sixaxis. and 2 the real main reason. sony was sude for having a rumble in their ps2 controller.
now all you people well its an expensive game console. first off sony dosen't regard this a game console. why? cause its not. its a computer entertaiment system. if you want a console go buy the wii. oh by the way wii only good function you can buy and dl older nintendo games for it. other than that its really gamecube 1.5. its grapics aren't true next gen. oh and that coment about wii is from a non bias magazine made by ebgames.
now xbox360 supposed more powerful video card. true the have more pipelines i belive 48. but if your about 20 years old or at least 14 years you should know that quanity isn't always better. whats better is the more pwerful 24 pipelines ps3 has. oh heres the true processoing powers
"Processing Power:
How do the two systems compare when looking at brute processing power? The PS3 uses a Cell processor with a PowerPC-based core with seven synergistic processing units while the Xbox comes with a Custom IBM PowerPC CPU with three dual-threaded cores that can handle six total threads at a time.
An important comparison to look at is the number of dot product calculations per second the systems can perform. The reason this number is important is because it is used extensively during gameplay in 3d math to calculate various things such as vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. Both systems are clocked at 3.2 Ghz. The PS3 can handle 51-billion dot product operations per second and the Xbox can handle 33.6." taken from http://www.thetechzone.com/?m=show&id=306&page=2
online capabiltis for ps3 i don't really give a damn. im not planing on buying an online game.
oh supposedly blu tooth is better than the 2.4 ghz rf contollers that xbox360 has.
hmm and personnally i like ps because of the rpgs which every other system lacks. my main type of games are rpgs and 90% of my ps2 collection of games are rpgs.
also you get blue-ray for 500 or 600 dollars. so even if you don't like ps3 you can get a pretty cheap blue ray player. in the US blue ray players cost $1000. hmmm so yeah i'll take the cheaper ps3 over that anyday. ohh and another thing xbox360 in the final run will cost you more than ps3. if you want the hd dvd games that with becaoming out for xbox360 next year you will have to cough up another $200. and another thing blue ray will most likely be the next main form of movies although it could be another dvd+r and dvd-r thing. because one blue ray has the backing of like 7 movie companies that are only making blue ray movies and one company which i believe is disney that fully backs hd dvd and like three other companys who make movies for both formats.
ohh to the idiot that said sony used nothing new. are you retarded or something. last time i check cell was not around untill sony's president said he wanted a chip that acts likes human cells to three comapnies. sony, toshiba and ibm. he said this about the time of ps2 launch. and cells finished product was earlier this year but plans on maiking its release debut on the ps3.hmmm the nvidia rsx card is also a completely new design although got its background from their latest card. then sixaxis, memory stick duo which by far beats the living hell out of xbox's memory card 4 gigs or 64mb hmmm.
now another processing comparision ps3 has 2tflops while xbox360 only has 1tflops.
did any of you ps3 haters actually read the spec for ps3 or just make stupid assumptions, which over half of you did.
oh and get this cell is basically a 7 core processor. the 7 spe run independently of each other making more caluculations than xbox360s 3 core. so seriously read up on things before you start showing how ignorant you are. oh and for the stupid ones (basically all 360 fansboys) ignorant means you don't know anything about the topic.
Final Fantasy XIII series 'not exclusive to PS3 and mobile,' 360 ports still nonexistent
Apr 21st 2007 3:59AM (Joystiq)now heres another thing main game is ps3 exclisive why. i read in game informer or a website that ffxiii is using a new engine for the graphics called white engine which is being made to run off of cell 4 out of 7 spe's. meaning if this game where to ever go on 360 they would have to remake the core engine for the graphics thjus seeing a kill in graphics and expect a later date like late 2008 - mid 2009. it would cost too much money to re-create (read their reason why they won't remake on ffvii you'll understand). no taken that info they would now have to design game disc switching points to allow the disc to be change (cost more money) then they would have to spend more money on the multiple disc which will be at least two and maybe 3 (just to let you know it will cost more money).
now all this would cost them in the 500,000-1,000,000 just so it would go on to 360 and it will divert them from making other games and other ff series.
that being said to an idiot who said ps3 uses 25gb discs no they use 50 gb discs.
also microsofts new 360 (just a bigger hdd nothing else other than being black) has decided to remove the hddvd drive so they will be using dvd 9 which is you know only 8.5 gb formated to about 7.9 gb.
now i happen to know that enchanted arms for ps3 was 16gb and since ffxii graphics murder them i would actually say it will be at least a 25 gb game and that would mean 4 disc for xbox 360.
ohh and um blu-ray having slow load times are you an idiot if its not formated right then yes. i only ever came across one game that had poor rate and that was sonic but that was a direct port without being reworked to run properly for blu-ray. and blu-ray has a faster read/wright head than dvds. so read up on finance technology and stuff before posting hopefull marks
also at the bottom of the very first post (the story) it says ffxiii (which is the parent story) is exclusive to ps3. so for all you people who believe 360 is god its not.
also every port from 360 to ps3 so far(sonic, enchanted arms, ac4) all had more content and all had same graphic (the ones that came to ps3) and some had better (ps3 to 360). but all of the ps3 games hold more contect then 360.
also i happen to hold an extreme amout of knowledge on computers (due to A+, html scripting and a bunch of others, and financial info from being a supervisor at a retail store, and from my brother who has a bachlor's in finance, he teaches me stuff about finance).
Some interesting facts about the PS3
Nov 13th 2006 2:51AM (Engadget)Some interesting facts about the PS3
Nov 13th 2006 2:41AM (Engadget)all you bitching bout ps2 problems look at when xbox came out. it didb't have a fan, your cpu melted one you. i have a second shipment ps2 and it runs just as good as the day i got it.
now technical stuff with ps3. blue ray pwns dvd 9 which is a dual layer dvd 8.5 gigs. blue ray has 50 gigs of data. hmm comparison 8.5 or 50 hmmm. when you look at this xbox has to sacrifice a lot more if they want a long running game while ps3 dosen't.
gameplay length, and graphics share one medium. so you have to choose do you want awsome graphic and a short game or do you want a long game but shitty graphics, or do you compromise and make a game that has simi good graphics and a medium lengh game. all of these are factors in choosing the medium. ps3 can off a 90hr game and have spectacular graphics while if 360 tried that the graphics would blow. now rendering ps3 is 60fps (frames per-second) but can go up to 120fps if you have the tv to do it with. 360 has only 60fps.
now people get a brain. read specs. about everything from non bias sites and you'll learn a lot more. ps3 dosen't have rumble for two reasons 1 it will interfear with the sixaxis. and 2 the real main reason. sony was sude for having a rumble in their ps2 controller.
now all you people well its an expensive game console. first off sony dosen't regard this a game console. why? cause its not. its a computer entertaiment system. if you want a console go buy the wii. oh by the way wii only good function you can buy and dl older nintendo games for it. other than that its really gamecube 1.5. its grapics aren't true next gen. oh and that coment about wii is from a non bias magazine made by ebgames.
now xbox360 supposed more powerful video card. true the have more pipelines i belive 48. but if your about 20 years old or at least 14 years you should know that quanity isn't always better. whats better is the more pwerful 24 pipelines ps3 has. oh heres the true processoing powers
"Processing Power:
How do the two systems compare when looking at brute processing power? The PS3 uses a Cell processor with a PowerPC-based core with seven synergistic processing units while the Xbox comes with a Custom IBM PowerPC CPU with three dual-threaded cores that can handle six total threads at a time.
An important comparison to look at is the number of dot product calculations per second the systems can perform. The reason this number is important is because it is used extensively during gameplay in 3d math to calculate various things such as vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. Both systems are clocked at 3.2 Ghz. The PS3 can handle 51-billion dot product operations per second and the Xbox can handle 33.6." taken from http://www.thetechzone.com/?m=show&id=306&page=2
online capabiltis for ps3 i don't really give a damn. im not planing on buying an online game.
oh supposedly blu tooth is better than the 2.4 ghz rf contollers that xbox360 has.
hmm and personnally i like ps because of the rpgs which every other system lacks. my main type of games are rpgs and 90% of my ps2 collection of games are rpgs.
also you get blue-ray for 500 or 600 dollars. so even if you don't like ps3 you can get a pretty cheap blue ray player. in the US blue ray players cost $1000. hmmm so yeah i'll take the cheaper ps3 over that anyday. ohh and another thing xbox360 in the final run will cost you more than ps3. if you want the hd dvd games that with becaoming out for xbox360 next year you will have to cough up another $200. and another thing blue ray will most likely be the next main form of movies although it could be another dvd+r and dvd-r thing. because one blue ray has the backing of like 7 movie companies that are only making blue ray movies and one company which i believe is disney that fully backs hd dvd and like three other companys who make movies for both formats.
ohh to the idiot that said sony used nothing new. are you retarded or something. last time i check cell was not around untill sony's president said he wanted a chip that acts likes human cells to three comapnies. sony, toshiba and ibm. he said this about the time of ps2 launch. and cells finished product was earlier this year but plans on maiking its release debut on the ps3.hmmm the nvidia rsx card is also a completely new design although got its background from their latest card. then sixaxis, memory stick duo which by far beats the living hell out of xbox's memory card 4 gigs or 64mb hmmm.
now another processing comparision ps3 has 2tflops while xbox360 only has 1tflops.
did any of you ps3 haters actually read the spec for ps3 or just make stupid assumptions, which over half of you did.
oh and get this cell is basically a 7 core processor. the 7 spe run independently of each other making more caluculations than xbox360s 3 core. so seriously read up on things before you start showing how ignorant you are. oh and for the stupid ones (basically all 360 fansboys) ignorant means you don't know anything about the topic.