Microsoft: Xbox 360 CAN Run Metal Gear Solid

On a technicaly level MGS 4 could run better on the Xbox 360 and look far better because of the hardware in the 360 lets not forget the GPU in the 360 is technically superior to the one in the PS3 and lets not forget more memory is available in the 360 than the PS3 too.

Wait a minute a MS employee states an MS machine could run MGS4 and that's a nail in the PS3's coffin?! What were you expecting him to say? "No the 360 can't run it and won't get it so go by a PS3 please"?! Why should his word be any more trusted than when Jack Tretton said it's impossible?

This is classic MS marketing - they've seen blogs touting the rumour again, thanks to some random Konami employees translated japanese statement about the fact 360 fanboys would want to see it on 360 - so now they issue a statement to cause some FUD in the mind of potential PS3 adopters!

Is it me or is MS far more concerned with ensuring the PS3 fails than it is ensuring the 360 is successful? It wouldn't surpirse me if MS would happily pay $50M to bring this year-old PS3 release to the 360, but if I owned a 360 I'd much rather them spend their cash on compelling 1st party titles rather than old PS franchises, exclusive DLC and exclusive Game Demos....

It's classic 360 fanboys too - when it came out on PS3 it was "doesn't matter, it's a sh*t game anyway, 360 owners like playing games not watching them", but when there's a sniff it could come to 360, suddenly it's the most important game of the 21st Century!!! Same with installs - 360 owners claim to hate them, but then say how it's no big deal to install multi-disc games on the HDD thanks to the new install functionality of the coming update!

Until I hear it from Kojima (or even someone SENIOR in Konami) I will not believe it - it's just more mud (or rather FUD) slinging from MS and it's seemingly endless supply of internet minions that blog about it.

This title needed to sell 1M copies in it's launch period to break even - in it's first 10 weeks it sold 3.5M copies, and god knows what that's grown to since - there is no reason to spend further money *trying* to port it (unless MS ponies up enough bags of cash).

Kojima himself has said from the horses mouth that he couldn't make it on XBox - so I'm more inclined to believe him than any other random nobody. In comparison the Devs behind Gears of War II could "easily" be released on PS3 but their publishers (i.e. Microsoft) wouldn't like it!!!

The PS2 owned the last generation, and by comparison the Gamecube and Xbox were failures, it stands to reason that ANY third-party sequel to a previous gen game is highly likely to have been a former PS exclusive franchise - this is not news or bad in anyway for the PS3 (they still get it too remember!).

It happens just as much to 360 third-party franchises - Lost Planet, Bioshock, Eternal Sonata, Ninja Gaiden (the original one), Mass Effect (rumoured), Left 4 Dead (rumoured), Dead Rising (rumoured). Geometry Wars, etc etc etc. - But why does no one bat an eyelid at these???

Why does everyone assume that the "death of 3rd-party exclusives" will be the death of the PS3? That would be the PS3 from Sony with around 23 active 1st party developers? Yet for some reason they think the garden is rosey for the 360, that would be the 360 from MS with around 3 activer 1st party developers!!!

SS4 you seem to have forgotten that Kojima said that MGS4 was optimised for the PS3 and therefore to run it on the 360 would require it to look, erm, not as good shall we say.

BTW, add up the components of both machines and you'll find the PS3 is more powerful. Believe it or not, a GPU doesn't make a console.

I'm gonna have to stick with "Doesn't matter." As for the installs, they aren't even remotely comparable. In PC terms, the PS3 installs some files, the 360 will be a FULL install, with the game disc required only for verification and no reads from the disc while actually playing.

I can't help but laugh at your serious lack of knowledge hypertails, Kojima himself stated that MGS 4 could run on the Xbox 360 perfectly fine, for him it was about the storage.

Err yes a GPU does make a console just like a graphics card makes a PC because without it you cant do f**k all.

Sony were hoping their uber CELL which is ONLY a processor could process all the graphics but they were wrong, they needed a GPU and opted for an off the shelf s**tty 7800 series however developers are having to use software to get similar results as the 360 which does it all via hardware.

The PS3 is more powerful on paper yes only because of the CPU, but have we seen this power? No, the CPU can only process the data the developers give it via the games and there are limitations such as the GPU in the PS3 where the CELL has to takeover and memory where the PS3 has less to offer than the 360.

who gives a flying f**k which is more powerful and which has better graphics? good graphics a good game doesn't make.

Wow, i'm impressed, you actually called me by my name. Not 'Hypertwat' or something else like you've done in the past. But then you say that I have a serious lack of knowledge. Ok.

I know full well that the GPU in the PS3 is less powerful than the 360's GPU. But you have COMPLETELY misunderstood what I was saying. No, a GPU does NOT make a console. Why? Because if you have one console with a s**t load of ram, s**t hot processor, etc, and another that has a better GPU, same ram, but less powerful processor, which do you think is more powerful? Its obviously the first example, being the PS3, because everything else in the hardware is better. I'm NOT saying that the 360 isn't powerful... i'm just saying that, in terms of how much power each console has, the PS3 has a slight advantage. And yes, we have yet to see more games make use of the PS3's power (MGS4 is an exception, and I know not the only one before you say anything) which is incredibly frustrating when PS3 owners like me get things like crappy multiformat versions... or Haze.

And for the record, Kojima did say that it's optimised for PS3. Go look on Google.

Also, what is it with you? Can't you try to be, oh, I don't know... less of an ass hole?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not jumping in this on either side, but you're making an obvious error in your logic.

Its not about the CPU, the GPU, or the RAM. Its about how they all work together. I'm no expert, and I strongly suspect you aren't either, but your argument seems to boil down to: "Well, the PS3 looks better on paper." Now even if this is true, and the "paper" evaluation of the capabilities of component parts of both consoles finds the PS3 with a clear advantage, that doesn't necessarily translate into real-world results.

Your example also fails to account for bottlenecks. You could have the better CPU, and the same amount of RAM(true?), but if your GPU isn't up to handling what they're shoving at it...its obvious that you're not only "wasting" potential power, but that a system with a lesser CPU, but whose design doesn't suffer from such a bottleneck, could outperform it when push comes to shove.

Better games are the ultimate litmus test, and right now the paper isn't turning Sony's color.

The PS3’s graphics (to me) look sharper, and cleaner than the 360’s. Maybe the PS3 is working in 1080p, rather than up-scaling from 720p, or maybe my TV is better set up for the SONY. On the other hand, the 360 seems to use more, and make better use of various graphics affects. However, I don’t think there’s much in it between the two consoles, however much you and SS4 bitch about it. Of far more importance is how much time and money developers are going to invest in games for the different consoles, so if a console is hard to program, has the smaller install base and a lower attach rate then it’s going to show in the games, especially multi format.

The history of MGS on Xbox is that it’ll get there in the end but it might not be that good a conversion, just a cheap rework to grab the folk who don’t own a Play Station.

haha what a joke

The 360's processor is too weak to handle the game at the same resolution.

The 360 CPU is too weak? That's why it can do games like Bioshock, Gears, COD 4 etc...I can name soo many PS3 ports that look and run like s**t Half Life 2 is a prime example as is The Darkness.

PREY was an awesome game perhaps the GPU in the PS3 was too weak to handle it...

The PS3 CPU is overkill but couple with the memory in the system its bottlenecking with the DDR and the XDR memory so whats the point?

The 360 CPU is designed for gaming, its more than capable and that's why the 360 has far more games and far more support and far more exclusives than the PS3.

Face it this gen the PS3 is finished.

anygame on any hardware got over it

Get over it, the Wii is weeing over both the PS3 & the 360. So tell me, what mighty CPU & GPU lurks at the heart of the all conquering Wii?

I dunno, but from my POV, it looks like the Wii is winning only on hardware sales...in NorAm at least 360 software sales look strong, with the 360 looking like it has a clear advantage over the Wii in multiplatform titles for both consoles, and enough sales of other games to match Nintendo's first party title sales...so they're selling twice as many Wii's but selling fewer games? I'm not sure you can put the Calvin sticker on the back of Nintendo's truck yet.

see Zero Punctuation's treatment of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed for the Wii.