Uncharted Only Uses a Third Of PS3 Processing Power

this is a good game HOWEVER there is one problem, it came out of the PS3 instead of the Xbox, I own both systems and without a shadow of a dought I've never wasted £400 + on anything so crap. This game didnt need a blue-ray disc for a start it would have fitted onto a DVD, where is the two player co-op or online co-op (you probably would have got that on the 360) and most of all achievements.

BASICALLY if you dont own an xbox then get this game if you DO own an xbox then what the hell are you wasting for time and money for when theres mass effect, blacksite (which has been deplayed on the PS£ till next year), guiter hero 3 (just better on the 360) rock band, Call of Duty 4 .... etc etc etc etc etc

SuperSatan and Knives85 or whatever your names are... you are both speaking through your arse.

If you don't like PS3, sell it and stick with 360. I'm tired of hearing the bleating of people who can't see that this console, the PS3, is future-proofed. It's still early in the life-cycle of PS3 and there is so, so, so much more to come. If you can't see that, go be smug somewhere else because in a year's time you'll be kicking yourself for how utterly backwards your words have been.

PS3 is a fantastic console. You're both just wrong, just plain stupid and wrong. I'm sick of saying it. Go be wrong elsewhere, you sound like idiots. If the future really doesn't matter to you, perhaps you should kill yourselves now and save us listening to your wrong whining every single moment of every day.

Bloody fanboys. 360 has some good games but there is no way in Hell that it's better than PS3 in terms of potential. I'm just sick of impatient Microsoft-blinded uneducated kids stamping their feet and behaving like spoiled little t**ts. Just sell your PS3s and move on. You're VERY, VERY DULL PEOPLE.

I have been hearing this bullcrap 'potential' and 'future proof' crap since the day the bastard came out and what do we have? 5hr and 8hr games using up 25gb of space...

If PS3 games need that kind of space now then how much space is a decent RPG going to need? 100gb?

There is no such thing as 'future proof' hell if it was so future proof then I feel sorry for the 40gb PS3 owners.

Those that only have a PS3 are blessed when at least 1 game is released for the PS3 like Uncharted Drake: Misfortune...It only got high reviews because it was the only game to be released for the PS3 in ages and being exclusive...The game looks like a cartoon and plays like crap yet it gets high reviews most likely because Sony said 'look guys we dont have many games please here is some bribery and give it high reviews'

When Xbox 360 titles are released they do VERY well - look at Japan, Lost Odyssey sold 40k in its first day, Uncharted sold 7k....

In fact the only thing with the PS3 is it that its fully loaded with hardware, when I want to play what little it has it feels more like a media device that can play games as well rather than being a games console. The 360 on the other hand feels a games console 100% and on top of that has many media features hell I can even download SONY BMG music!!!! Which I cant on the PS3 LMFAO!

Overall the PS3 is at the bottom pile this gen, sure it has MGS4 and FF13 as its exclusives but when you have games like Fable 2, Ninja Gaiden 2, PGR franchise, Too Human, Mass Effect those are what I call top games.

Bwah Hah Hah Hah...My God...its like going back in a time machine...your rant sounds suspiciously similar to one defending the Xbox (Original Recipie) against PS2 fanboys, who kept shoving the PS2's immense catalog in the face of anyone who dared to point out that the Xbox was a superior machine.

The prime differences being that the Xbox was a MUCH better machine than the PS2, even at its launch (PS3 vs. 360, not so much) and the Xbox actually had a few games worth owning, most notably Halo. Which is more than the PS3 can say at this point. A game on the level of Halo they don't have. The few really good games are too short and/or have limited replay value...possible exception being Rachet and Klank...but good as R&K might be, Senator, they're no Halo. (file all "Halo is overrated" replys under "Not half as overrated as GoldenEye, sister")

An expensive, "future-proofed" console, that has s**t for games right now but "...just you wait and see", hunh, sounds like the smart money would be doing just that...waiting and seeing...'course, if you actually want to play some games in the present, the Wii and 360 are ready and able to provide you with gaming goodness. Now. Then again, if you don't buy a PS3 now, no telling what features the one you eventually purchase might be lacking...

You must be one hell of a Sony fanboy, cuz you have tons of optimism about the PS3's future for a self proclaimed "miserable old cynic".

look dude, Bently is an ass, and a Sony fanboy, if not quite as big a Sony fanboy as you are a MS fanboy and I agree with much of what you're saying here, except Uncharted is probably quite as good as the review states and this bit where you piss on my leg and tell me its raining...



Fable 2? Fable was thinly veiled, rushed out the door crap, I'll believe Fable 2 is anything more than crap when I get my grubby paws on it, not before.

Ninja Gaiden 2, prolly super solid...

PGR is garbage, Kudos are an abomination. Forza is what goes straight up against Sony's flagship GT franchise and kicks it in the teeth. But perhaps I'm a bit harsh...

Too Human, don't care.

Mass Effect...where do I begin...Mass Effect would be a stellar effort from a noob dev. I like it less and less the more I play it...its flaws glare at me like Gollum, and I have The Precious...still, at least theres no one named Cloud or Sephiroth...unless some ass named their character that...I find it difficult to believe they even did QA...if they did...who did it? zombies? The Paragon/Renegade mechanic is poorly implemented, tacked on, and useless. This game needed some serious attention before it was ready to be released into the wild, and didn't get it...its almost broken. The more I play it the more it screams out to me "I'm not finished! Don't look at me!". Example: when jaunting down to a planet in the Mako, first you get a loading screen...then you pick your squad...then another loading screen... Now, there is absolutely NOTHING involved with picking your squad which justifies an extra loading screen...its a static 2d screen, the images are static, and never change.

I just played Uncharted, and the play/Graphics are excellent. The best I have seen so far on all consoles type. The game is short, but I have not completed all my medal collection and bonuses.

The Frame rate is fantastic on my setup. Also having a PS3 vs a Xbox 360 is not a question which one is better, it is more which appeals to me and what I have spend. The Blu-ray and the up conversion are marvelous. The ability for me to do PSP to PS3 interactivity is also a plus.

Overall, I am waiting for Lost Planets, PS3 edition, as my last memory of that game is on a Xbox 360, that I have returned due to RRoD after 3 days of play. I basically give up on Xbox 360 after returning it twice within a week.

I agree that fanboys in general should die a death. Like the games you like, sell the ones you don't... To be fair though, you're not exactly coming across as an objective fellow yourself. Maybe I'm wrong, just an observation I noted with that post.

To debate something else, I'm not sure if Sony's 'future proof' theory will work out quite as they plan it to be. The games consumer market (hell, any consumer market) are fickle and despite any arguments to the contrary they will believe that new technology will be better than existing tech by default. Even when the power of PS3 is completely tapped and matching next generation rival consoles, I think added bells and whistles and the overall smell of 'new' will draw gamers to the next Microsoft or Nintendo hardware.

If you need an example just look at the Dreamcast, arguably the greatest console of the 128-bit generation (yes, I'm factoring XBOX, PS2 and Gamecube into this) and only lasted two and a half years - the games SEGA were chucking out were multiple times better than any launch title on PS2 (in fact Dead or Alive 2 was superior on the Dreamcast) but the hype of a new PlayStation coupled with the fact that it was just something new (and I'm sure SEGA's marketing cockups couldn't have helped) made it die a very painful death.


Ah, but have you actually played it?

As for your argument, it took more than a whole year for the PS2 to get any legitimate games on its back - Metal Gear Solid 2 was the first real game to own on the console and it was released 16 months after the PS2 was. So potentially the same could happen to the PS3; I wouldn't rule it out just yet (particularly since SEGA's Gallian Chronicles and Ryu Ga Gotoku Kenzan is making me want the console alone).

Only difference really to take into account into my argument is that the PS2 actually sold...

Yes I played Uncharted...For like 2mins...Sorry but there isnt anything great about that from my personal opinion.

Its easy to sound like a fanboy when you rant on about one machine being better than the other but how can I possibly be a fanboy when I know exactly what the 360 has and the PS3 has and can easily tell anyone which has more games and better services?

I mean I turn on the PS3, I put that light pad in my hand, I go to the PSN and guess what...Same rubbish nothing new, I look at what is available games wise...Hardly anything worth shouting about...I go online with the PS3...Well had to go buy an aftermarket headset and well online its terrible...Tekken only lets you play against Europeans...No cross game invites, no in game voice chat with players from other games, no in game messages pics or voice messages pretty much its a drab.

Now when I stick the 360 on boom online, friends active, messaging service, MSN, picture & voice messages, video chat IN certain games, cross game invites, amazing interface, plenty of stuff on the market place, great pad for all sorts of games. Huge selection of games, console is cheaper than a PS3, has media support.

I could go on and on.

At present there is no reason to own a PS3, especially the degraded model.

Perhaps its worth buying one when this 'untapped power' truely shows? Or when it shows its truer potential?

I say this, if you are a gamer and love gaming get the 360 over a PS3 - although if your a fanboy of either then do what you want.

I wont sell my PS3 because I like its hardware, and its a good thing I got the 60gb! Anyhow what it boils down to is those looking to get a games console dont want to be bored out of their skull, they might want a great online service with plenty of content and like tomorrow want to download movies - get the XBOX 360 and maybe get a PS3 later on.

Oh and Lost Planet on the PS3? Omg have you seen the screenshots?? I really hope it doesnt look like that when its released.

"supersaiyan4" - Thanks so much for the in depth review on Uncharted. Wow, you played it for 2 minutes. You should review games for a living or maybe going down on Bill Gates is your career. Uncharted is a great game. The reviews have been great. Check out the video review on ign.com. The editor said it was the most fun he had all year playing a video game.

Regarding the PS store, it's updated every Thursday with new content and planning to start movies and music. XBOX 360 is more advanced online but Sony is catching up and NOT charging for online services/play.

I hope you have time to read this and not attending to your red ring of death on your xbox.

>>I mean I turn on the PS3, I put that "light" pad in my hand, I go to the PSN and guess what

You wake up ?

************** Newsflash !! ****************


YOU DON'T OWN A PS3 !

ON TOPIC:

I've seen a lot of discussion about this type of thing, where a game is only using X% of the playstation's power. The problem is that the cell is not a perfect game processor design, and a real game will NEVER use 100% of the Cell processing power.

There are only so many concurrant independant threads that can be running in a game, too much of a game engine design is interdependant. Therefore, even if you DID find away to chop your game up in to use all the SPUs, most of them would be waiting around for data from another thread.

I would guess that for a game, we will see the MOST of the cell used around 50-60%.

If you only played it for 2 minutes then of course there isn't going to be anything great about it. 2 minutes doesn't even get you to the log balancing bit at the beginning of the demo.

I played the demo when I had a chance to get on a PS3, and although I've not played the game (but nobbled the demo) I really liked it. Sure, it doesn't exactly do anything new (but then again does Halo or Gears of War?) but I really found myself enjoying it. Doesn't mean to say you have to as well or anything, but the game doesn't really get into gear until at least halfway through the demo I played when I ended up having to outwit guerillas.

Sure, you might not like the game, but saying it's as rubbish as it is with such broad generalisation offers the view that you've played enough of it to provide an informed opinion. This isn't true.

I'm so sick of the "Cell" Processor. What, How'd, Why did....Im stuttering for words. Intel and AMD are the fastest Procs out there right now with AMD lagging considerably. I'm sick of hearing " oh this game doesn't use even a 1/10th of what the PS3 can do. Well why the hell are you only using that much. If the PS3 is sooooo advanced why don't they utilize the power. PS3 is far from future proof. Its just as good as the 360. One thing to think about that nobody has mentioned much or at all the i've seen is the GPU. Has Sony and everybody else forgot about that? What is an all powerful CPU when the GPU bottlenecks half way into the CPU. Why do you think Intel and AMD haven't utilized 8 cores yet? By the time they do, im sure PS3 will be outdated and obsolete because they'll find a better way of using 8 cells in a proc. This marketing (which is all it is) is really wearing on me.

both of u are idiots. first off uncharted has about 30 gigs of game data on the disc, resistance is 18, and gran turismo 5 will probably push the 50 gig dual-layer limit. no ways could these games have been made similarly for the xbox 360, since dvd's are only 9 gigs. think about how much longer halo 3 could ve been!! people finished it in 6 hours for gods sake!! and pretty soon theres gonna be downloadable maps and extra's, for a price, because they couldnt fit it on the disc. Heavenly Sword is beautiful, and Uncharted has easily out-done any 360 title when comparing graphics. if u think the 360 has better graphics, then all i can say is take a look at any gran turismo 5 video. 86% people cant tell the difference between the DEMO and real life. Mark, do you think perfect dark zero uses the 360 as well as say halo 3? i didnt think so, u need to give developers time to learn the machine. and while we are talking about perfect dark zero, compare that to resistance or motorstorm, both blow any 360 launch title out of the water. all i can say is for those of us who bought a ps3, great things to come.

It's called 'compression', look it up.

Most likely Uncharted isn't even compressed (why would it have to, you can get something like 50Gig on a Blu-Ray), and if it's "only using a third of the PS3's power" there's no need to be using 30Gig other than the simple fact that the space is there. Especially considering Uncharted is incredibly short - I wouldn't know if it's comparable to something like Halo 3 in terms of completion (maybe someone can help me out) but you can get equally short games on PS3 with 30Gigs. You could argue that at least Halo 3 is being economic with the size, being able to fit on a mere 9Gigs.

the 360 is currently the superior choice by far when going for a 'hardcore' console, its got so many good games in comparison to the ps3 and great online features. If you really want to play warhawk or uncharted or whatever that much, or you just have more dosh than sense, fair enough buy a ps3. but dont let your silly sony fanboy ways cheat you out of playing some great games, games far better than anything youll get on ps3 for a good while, on the 360! I can be a bit nintendo fanboyish, but f**k me if i dont have a 360 under my telly and plans to get a ps3 as soon as it gets some excellent games

I hope you aren't suggesting Svend is a Sony fanboy...its common knowledge that Svend is, in fact, a SEGA fanboy, and has been accused of being the MS partisan among the SPOnG staff.

im not calling svend anything, but ps3 and xbox are aimed at the same market, with the same type of games, so to own only the ps3 when the xbox is superior by a country mile in price, online and catalogue of games.. :P

i find it funny how this game, ratchet, and heavenly sword could not have been made on your "3-fix-me's" they dont have enough power in there,,,,go figure that out

SuperSaiyan4, it would help if you and others like you knew what your talking about technologically when making posts like this. Transfer rates for optical drives of different types shouldn't be directly compared to each other. Look at the following CD transfer rate chart from wikipedia:
Transfer Speed Megabytes/s Megabits/s Mebibits/s
1x 0.15 1.2 1.1444
2x 0.3 2.4 2.2888
4x 0.6 4.8 4.5776
8x 1.2 9.6 9.1553
10x 1.5 12.0 11.4441
12x 1.8 14.4 13.7329
20x 3.0 24.0 22.8882
32x 4.8 38.4 36.6211
36x 5.4 43.2 41.1987
40x 6.0 48.0 45.7764
48x 7.2 57.6 54.9316
50x 7.5 60.0 57.2205
52x 7.8 62.4 59.5093

For a DVD, 1x is 1352.54KB/second (that's a bit over the 9x CD drive speeds). Following the convention, 2x for a DVD drive is 2,705KB/second, 4x is 5,410KB/second, 8x is 10,820KB/second, and 16x would be 21,640KB/second.

A blu-ray at 2x is approx 72megabits/s. Slightly slower than a 12x DVDROM but plenty fast for the rotational speed and writing speed of the cheap HDD in consoles, which are 4200rpm w/2MB cache. Yes it could be faster for loading into RAM, but again this is true of every console that has a HDD.

As for your comment on co-op and multi-play? This is up to the devs you idiot. Look at COD4, it is the same on both systems, both have on-line play and neither has a co-op mode.

These console wars are retarded. Neither is better, they are different. They are MEANT to be different. Each has pros and cons, get over it.