if BOP was PS3 exclusive only...

[stealth finger]

Originally Posted by InfiniteStates

Lot's of things should have been in lot's of games out the box. But feature creep is a dangerous thing in game development. I cited BF: BC as an example because the XBox patch limit is the excuse the producer gave on the EA forums for lack of clan support.

well thats the first i've heard of that. Last thing i heard was Gordan Van Dyke saying they decided to take clan out and replace it with that stupid squad system and that clan support may be brought back in the future. It would seem counter productive to limit the amount of patches that can be released. look at MW2 thats had like 5 already. Its a money thing.

[SimonSays132]

Originally Posted by Houndstone Hawk

I'm an owner of PS3 & 360 consoles & at the moment, the 360 will always have the edge on multiplatform games, for some reason unknown to me. My experiences include titles such as Ghostbusters (awful graphics on PS3), Call of Juarez 2 (PS3 version unplayable due to frequent & random loading times that would freeze gameplay for up to 4 seconds), Birds of Prey & NFS Shift(Horrendous screen tearing in PS3 version only). Even titles like Dragon Age, Oblivion & Fallout 3 are far more smoother running on the 360. These are only my experiences as I've had both copies on both systems for testing. I'm not saying the PS3's a bad machine; it shows it's potential on it's dedicated titles like Uncharted 2 & Killzone 2 but it really doesn't seem to do port titles very well.

I agree with your PC multiplay analogy; it's all about the setup & the hardware used but, at the moment I really don't think the 360 is holding back the PS3 on titles like Birds of Prey when it falls so short with other cross-platform titles. Shame. PS3's a tidy console & it has the potential to be great.

The thing is about graphics on both consoles is that they are pretty much the same. The differance is that the PS3 can't process information as quick as the 360 making the frame rate much lower, and it shows. It also has worse anti-aliasing(google it if you don't know what it is) which to me is a big problem. Naughty Dog eliminated these issues but if you look carefully there is a small problem with antialising.
I know PS3 fanboys won't believe me about their precious "better" graphics being smashed but it's true. PS3 does have MUCH better lighting though. Games are MUCH harder to make on PS3 so a lot of games are now switching to multi-platform games instead of doing exclusives for the PS3.

[InfiniteStates]

Originally Posted by SimonSays132

The differance is that the PS3 can't process information as quick as the 360 making the frame rate much lower, and it shows.

That's only true on badly/lazily engineered cross-platform games.

[Buggins]

Originally Posted by hypertek

I know this may upset a few xbox 360 guys, but im just taking a guess that this game could have had more content. Ps3 games fit on blueray, which is like over 50gb of space, as opposed to the 360 which is limited to dvd size content which is much smaller.

I think either game could have took more advantage of the hard drive installation capabilities of the consoles now.

Perhaps the devs would have gave us more content, cockpits for all planes and what not, and more plane information etc, the Hanger content seems like it was put together last minute.

The game is cool, I just finished the single player campaign, and I feel like theres not much left besides play multiplayer in hopes to catch a game with alot of guys. And than i see the PC version Wings of Prey and how it seems like its going to have more content, leaves me kinda wondering if I should have skipped this PS3 purchase and waited for the PC version. Well hopefully it wasnt a mistake, as with the PS3 console version, I can have quick pick up dog fights etc, where as PC sims usually takes a lil longer to setup and be more serious (pc sims, you usually get your ass handed by the guy who is playing on better equipment/has better immersion in the game) etc.

Facepalm.. What a load of B.S.

[stealth finger]

Originally Posted by hypertek

I know this may upset a few xbox 360 guys, but im just taking a guess that this game could have had more content. Ps3 games fit on blueray, which is like over 50gb of space, as opposed to the 360 which is limited to dvd size content which is much smaller.

Theres alot of reasons why its not as simple as that, not least of all is blu-rays pathetic read speed next to dvd. It's all well and good having 50gb of storage but if you cant get it off the disc then its useless. Pretty much all empty space on a blu-ray disc has to be filled with redundant data to reduce load times coupled with the mandatory installs on ps3. Maybe in a couple of years or next gen but not now.

Besides when I installed Il-2 on xbox its like 3.3 gigs so they still had 6 more they couldve used but didn't

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-13817_7-6462511-2.html