Images of SmackDown vs. Raw 2009

Commented on 2008-03-30 01:37:01 In reply to Jin187

Posted by Jin187

PS3 version is a disgrace, how long is this gonna continue??? PS3 has been out for almost 18months now, the "new hardware" is no longer an excuse now, this is embarrasing.

I knew from the start the PS3 wouldn't be a lot more powerfull then the Xbox 360, if at all, because it was known to have a comparable GPU and memory configuration.. The socalled super hightech more powerfull Cell CPU doesn't do much for it's games, as CPU's hardly ever do (expect for maybe heavy RTS games).. Uptil now I've been proven right, and I don't see that changing anymore.. I don't believe all the marketing blabla from Sony, the games have to speak for themselfs.. I would only buy a PS3 if I wanted to play it's exclusive games (mainly Japanese made games), or wanted a relative cheap Blu-ray player for my HD movies, other then that I see no reason to buy one if you already own a Xbox 360..

Being a old skool PC gamer I've always found the gameconsolemaker's marketing laughable, yet so many (console fanboys) always believe them.. Their always great technical stories about 25x more power, terraflops, and new hardware that will only get better to program for etc.. It's all such BS.. And now that there's 2 comparable competitors on the consolemarket the truth about their hardware marketing shows itself.. Before it was only comparable with the PC which was (and is) always more expensive and in never ending development with new hardware, so logical always more powerfull and not very comparable, now that excuse is gone..

In reply to

[quote=Jin187]PS3 version is a disgrace, how long is this gonna continue??? PS3 has been out for almost 18months now, the "new hardware" is no longer an excuse now, this is embarrasing.[/quote]I knew from the start the PS3 wouldn't be a lot more powerfull then the Xbox 360, if at all, because it was known to have a comparable GPU and memory configuration.. The socalled super hightech more powerfull Cell CPU doesn't do much for it's games, as CPU's hardly ever do (expect for maybe heavy RTS games).. Uptil now I've been proven right, and I don't see that changing anymore.. I don't believe all the marketing blabla from Sony, the games have to speak for themselfs.. I would only buy a PS3 if I wanted to play it's exclusive games (mainly Japanese made games), or wanted a relative cheap Blu-ray player for my HD movies, other then that I see no reason to buy one if you already own a Xbox 360..

Being a old skool PC gamer I've always found the gameconsolemaker's marketing laughable, yet so many (console fanboys) always believe them.. Their always great technical stories about 25x more power, terraflops, and new hardware that will only get better to program for etc.. It's all such BS.. And now that there's 2 comparable competitors on the consolemarket the truth about their hardware marketing shows itself.. Before it was only comparable with the PC which was (and is) always more expensive and in never ending development with new hardware, so logical always more powerfull and not very comparable, now that excuse is gone..

Corellianrogue

Commented on 2008-03-30 05:28:18 In reply to Cream

Posted by Cream

Yeah but look at the crowd in the 360 images, There is no way the 360 is that much better than the PS3. Don't get me wrong I'm a complete 360 freak(look at my sig), but I'm also realistic and there is no way the 360 would look that much better than the PS3 end of....

The problem isn't that the Xbox360 version looks too good to be true (it really does look like the screenshots, check out the videos on IGN) it's that the PS3 version looks REALLY bad.

In reply to

Drsw36

Commented on 2008-03-30 06:12:44

People seem to forget that most multi console game are made on 360 first then ported on PS3. PS3 port almost (with a few exeptsion) look worst.

However if you compared a PS3 exclusive with a 360 exclusive you'll see that the PS3 can do much better things then the 360.

Its just that developers never try hard for 360 to ps3 port. Its a shame.

In reply to

XSAVAGE

Commented on 2008-03-30 07:27:18

wow , on march 30 2009 i guess we will see

"Images of SmackDown vs. Raw 2010"

March 30 2010

"Images of SmackDown vs. Raw 2011"

and so on , you get the idea.

In reply to

DLuv

Commented on 2008-03-30 11:30:49

The supposed PS3 screenies could possibly be from the Wii version of the game. But regardless of which version those horrible screens are, WWE has to get rid of THQ and Jakks asap and switch to a developer that is able and willing to build the franchise from scratch for new consoles. What Jakks has been delivering for the last couple of years is simply ridiculous. For years now they´ve put constantly even less effort into their yearly updates than some EA devs have in their sports games. The engine, the animations, the whole look of the game has not changed since the first game on the PS2. The only thing they´ve upgraded for next-gen are some (not all) textures, the crowd etc.

If you look at the TNA game that Midway is developing and which is running on UEIII you can see how a wrestling game in 2008 should look like.

Not that I´m a big wrestling fan anymore (i used to be until 6 years ago though) but please look for new developers and a new publisher. I think even EA could help the franchise a lot in the terrible state it is right now.

In reply to

The supposed PS3 screenies could possibly be from the Wii version of the game. But regardless of which version those horrible screens are, WWE has to get rid of THQ and Jakks asap and switch to a developer that is able and willing to build the franchise from scratch for new consoles. What Jakks has been delivering for the last couple of years is simply ridiculous. For years now they´ve put constantly even less effort into their yearly updates than some EA devs have in their sports games. The engine, the animations, the whole look of the game has not changed since the first game on the PS2. The only thing they´ve upgraded for next-gen are some (not all) textures, the crowd etc.

If you look at the TNA game that Midway is developing and which is running on UEIII you can see how a wrestling game in 2008 should look like.

Not that I´m a big wrestling fan anymore (i used to be until 6 years ago though) but please look for new developers and a new publisher. I think even EA  could help the franchise a lot in the terrible state it is right now.

DLuv

Commented on 2008-03-30 13:22:28

Of course I meant Yukes and not Jakks ;)

In reply to

Inflatable

Commented on 2008-03-30 14:40:58 In reply to Drsw36

Posted by Drsw36

People seem to forget that most multi console game are made on 360 first then ported on PS3. PS3 port almost (with a few exeptsion) look worst.

However if you compared a PS3 exclusive with a 360 exclusive you'll see that the PS3 can do much better things then the 360.

Its just that developers never try hard for 360 to ps3 port. Its a shame.

You care to name a few of those PS3 exclusives that look much better then anything on the Xbox 360? Because I haven't seen a PS3 exclusive yet that couldn't run on the Xbox 360 aswell with the same graphics..

Besides all that it's completly useless to make such a claim as exclusive games can never be compared to another platform's version, since they're exclusive to only 1 platform, doh! And a claim that cannot be checked is worthless..

Excuses excuses excuses.. When will people accept the fact that the PS3 is not a lot more powerfull then the Xbox 360, if at all.. I guess some never will (and I should stop caring about it).. It's not weaker either, so why care?

In reply to

[quote=Drsw36]People seem to forget that most multi console game are made on 360 first then ported on PS3. PS3 port almost (with a few exeptsion) look worst.

However if you compared a PS3 exclusive with a 360 exclusive you'll see that the PS3 can do much better things then the 360.

Its just that developers never try hard for 360 to ps3 port. Its a shame.[/quote]You care to name a few of those PS3 exclusives that look much better then anything on the Xbox 360? Because I haven't seen a PS3 exclusive yet that couldn't run on the Xbox 360 aswell with the same graphics..

Besides all that it's completly useless to make such a claim as exclusive games can never be compared to another platform's version, since they're exclusive to only 1 platform, doh! And a claim that cannot be checked is worthless..

Excuses excuses excuses.. When will people accept the fact that the PS3 is not a lot more powerfull then the Xbox 360, if at all.. I guess some never will (and I should stop caring about it).. It's not weaker either, so why care?

WinterSnowblind

Commented on 2008-03-30 16:08:26 In reply to Drsw36

Posted by Drsw36

People seem to forget that most multi console game are made on 360 first then ported on PS3. PS3 port almost (with a few exeptsion) look worst.

However if you compared a PS3 exclusive with a 360 exclusive you'll see that the PS3 can do much better things then the 360.

Its just that developers never try hard for 360 to ps3 port. Its a shame.

Sorry, but I do own both consoles and I can't think of a single PS3 exclusive that looks dramatically better than any 360 game, if anything I'd say the opposite is true. Even Uncharted looks no where near as good as a lot of people claim, I'd say it's about on par with Halo 3 (which is commonly criticised for not looking that great, for some bizarre reason)

In reply to

DLuv

Commented on 2008-03-30 16:36:47

Uncharted is one of the best looking console games to date. I will not however judge if´s THE best looking console game. I think it has probably the sharpest textures of any next-gen console game. Halo 3 was looking pretty bland and got rightfully criticised for that. Actually it´s quite funny that thus far Microsoft´s in-house teams have done a lot worse visually on their own console than third-party devs like Epic. I think no in-house MS title has so far been visually impressive.

BTW I think this game is one of the worst choices to discuss which console can produce better looking games. Even on the 360 screens it looks like high-resolution PS2 crap. I think it looks even worse than last year´s installment.

In reply to

Inflatable

Commented on 2008-03-30 16:56:55 In reply to DLuv

Posted by DLuv

Actually it´s quite funny that thus far Microsoft´s in-house teams have done a lot worse visually on their own console than third-party devs like Epic. I think no in-house MS title has so far been visually impressive.

Gears of War was produced under the label of MS Gamestudios, so officially a 1st party game I guess.. Or is that 2nd party?

But who cares if it's inhouse or a 'hired' outside studio? MS has released plenty of good looking games under their own label on the Xbox 360 sofar I think.. And in the end it doesn't matter who makes the games, 1st, 2nd, or 3rd party, aslong as they are great I'm happy.. With Sony it's the same, they also don't make a lot of games themselfs, most Sony labeled games are made by bought or hired studio's aswell.. Only Nintendo really makes a lot themselfs afaik..

In reply to

R3V0LV3R

Commented on 2008-03-30 16:57:48 In reply to Inflatable

Posted by Inflatable

You care to name a few of those PS3 exclusives that look much better then anything on the Xbox 360? Because I haven't seen a PS3 exclusive yet that couldn't run on the Xbox 360 aswell with the same graphics..

Besides all that it's completly useless to make such a claim as exclusive games can never be compared to another platform's version, since they're exclusive to only 1 platform, doh! And a claim that cannot be checked is worthless..

Excuses excuses excuses.. When will people accept the fact that the PS3 is not a lot more powerfull then the Xbox 360, if at all.. I guess some never will (and I should stop caring about it).. It's not weaker either, so why care?

i agree the ps3 and 360 are on par with different areas stronger on 360 and others of ps3. also about ps3 exclusives being much better looking that is not true, the best visual game out now is COD4 and thats multiplatform so how can any state that ps3 is most powerful

In reply to

FormlessLikeWater

Commented on 2008-03-30 18:43:06

AKI needs to start making wrestling games again....

In reply to

most_hated

Commented on 2008-03-30 19:35:21

Its all subjective. Nobody can say what the best looking game is, because the best looking game is different for almost everybody. How the hell can you state the "BEST" visual game is COD4, I can name plenty of games I think looks better than CoD4. People always say Gears of War looks amazing, but I don't think so.

Fact is the GPU in 360 is way ahead of PS3's and the console is a lot easier to develop for, so its no surprise that 360 constantly puts out better looking multi-platform games.

In reply to

omegaheat

Commented on 2008-03-30 20:07:36 In reply to Jin187

Posted by Jin187

PS3 version is a disgrace, how long is this gonna continue??? PS3 has been out for almost 18months now, the "new hardware" is no longer an excuse now, this is embarrasing.

As long as people keep buying into the crap that "PS3 hasn't reached it's full potential yet. As soon as developers come to grips with the hardware, we will see the power of Playstation3". So after a year and half, the guys at Sony decide to come up with another excuse that the reason multiplatform titles perform slightly better on the Xbox360 is because it's difficult to port games from the Xbox360 to PS3 than vice versa. Now, I'm no computer programmer or techy, but in all my years of reading about game hardware, this is the first that I've ever heard of supposedly weaker hardware causing supposedly superior hardware to struggle when porting a game over. It's ludicrous. And if anyone buys into that bullshit they're just plain naive. Hell, even the games that are exclusive to the PS3 don't look superior to Xbox360 titles. Two numbers people ( 256/256 ram) Nuff said. I must admit though that there must be some kind of mistake with those PS3 screenshots. There embarrassing.

In reply to

[quote=Jin187]PS3 version is a disgrace, how long is this gonna continue??? PS3 has been out for almost 18months now, the "new hardware" is no longer an excuse now, this is embarrasing.[/quote]
As long as people keep buying into the crap that "PS3 hasn't reached it's full potential yet.  As soon as developers come to grips with the hardware, we will see the power of Playstation3".  So after a year and half, the guys at Sony decide to come up with another excuse that the reason multiplatform titles perform slightly better on the Xbox360 is because it's difficult to port games from the Xbox360 to PS3 than vice versa.  Now, I'm no computer programmer or techy, but in all my years of reading about game hardware, this is the first that I've ever heard of supposedly weaker hardware causing supposedly superior hardware to struggle when porting a game over.  It's ludicrous.  And if anyone buys into that bullshit they're just plain naive.  Hell, even the games that are exclusive to the PS3 don't look superior to Xbox360 titles.  Two numbers people ( 256/256 ram) Nuff said.  I must admit though that there must be some kind of mistake with those PS3 screenshots.  There embarrassing.

Cream

Commented on 2008-03-30 20:18:27

Lets not make this into a 360 is better than PS3 war. The fact is those 'ps3' are dreadful for what ever reason. the PS3 is capable of much better than that. So there can only be 3 conclusions.
1. They're not PS3 screens and either PS2 or Wii images
2. The game is far more developed on the 360 and the PS3 will improve dramatically
3. THQ and JAKKS Pacific are complete retards and couldn't develop a PS3 game if there life depended upon it.

In reply to

omegaheat

Commented on 2008-03-30 20:26:00 In reply to Cream

Posted by Cream

Lets not make this into a 360 is better than PS3 war. The fact is those 'ps3' are dreadful for what ever reason. the PS3 is capable of much better than that. So there can only be 3 conclusions.
1. They're not PS3 screens and either PS2 or Wii images
2. The game is far more developed on the 360 and the PS3 will improve dramatically
3. THQ and JAKKS Pacific are complete retards and couldn't develop a PS3 game if there life depended upon it.

Fair enough LOL

In reply to

FormlessLikeWater

Commented on 2008-03-30 20:46:57 In reply to omegaheat

Posted by omegaheat

As long as people keep buying into the crap that "PS3 hasn't reached it's full potential yet. As soon as developers come to grips with the hardware, we will see the power of Playstation3". So after a year and half, the guys at Sony decide to come up with another excuse that the reason multiplatform titles perform slightly better on the Xbox360 is because it's difficult to port games from the Xbox360 to PS3 than vice versa. Now, I'm no computer programmer or techy, but in all my years of reading about game hardware, this is the first that I've ever heard of supposedly weaker hardware causing supposedly superior hardware to struggle when porting a game over. It's ludicrous. And if anyone buys into that bullshit they're just plain naive. Hell, even the games that are exclusive to the PS3 don't look superior to Xbox360 titles. Two numbers people ( 256/256 ram) Nuff said. I must admit though that there must be some kind of mistake with those PS3 screenshots. There embarrassing.

They've been saying the 360 was easier to develop for since the beginning of this console generation, where have you been? Please stop talking out of your ass.

In reply to

[quote=omegaheat]
As long as people keep buying into the crap that "PS3 hasn't reached it's full potential yet.  As soon as developers come to grips with the hardware, we will see the power of Playstation3".  So after a year and half, the guys at Sony decide to come up with another excuse that the reason multiplatform titles perform slightly better on the Xbox360 is because it's difficult to port games from the Xbox360 to PS3 than vice versa.  Now, I'm no computer programmer or techy, but in all my years of reading about game hardware, this is the first that I've ever heard of supposedly weaker hardware causing supposedly superior hardware to struggle when porting a game over.  It's ludicrous.  And if anyone buys into that bullshit they're just plain naive.  Hell, even the games that are exclusive to the PS3 don't look superior to Xbox360 titles.  Two numbers people ( 256/256 ram) Nuff said.  I must admit though that there must be some kind of mistake with those PS3 screenshots.  There embarrassing.[/quote]

They've been saying the 360 was easier to develop for since the beginning of this console generation, where have you been? Please stop talking out of your ass.

Tinks

Commented on 2008-03-30 21:54:02

Sony systems are always hard to dev for, same goes for PS2
PS2 was also touted as being more powerful than Dreamcast, but that wasn't really true either

History repeats itself

In reply to

2PintsOfInsulin

Commented on 2008-03-30 23:26:19

Hah, ditch all this current-gen crap and do a nice port of Fire-Pro Wrestling D instead. Now THAT was a wrestling game!

In reply to

Corellianrogue

Commented on 2008-03-31 00:11:46

The PS3 shots definitely aren't Wii shots by mistake, I think the Wii version looks better, lol!:

Edit: How do you embed screenshots?

Here's a link to some anyway: http://uk.wii.ign.com/dor/objects/14242659/wwe-sma...

In reply to

WinterSnowblind

Commented on 2008-03-31 02:40:55 In reply to DLuv

Posted by DLuv

Uncharted is one of the best looking console games to date. I will not however judge if´s THE best looking console game. I think it has probably the sharpest textures of any next-gen console game. Halo 3 was looking pretty bland and got rightfully criticised for that. Actually it´s quite funny that thus far Microsoft´s in-house teams have done a lot worse visually on their own console than third-party devs like Epic. I think no in-house MS title has so far been visually impressive.

I fail to see how anyone can consider Halo 3 bland, especially in comparasion to Uncharted, as the majority of Halo 3 took place in a foresty areas, with some great looking landscapes. With the exception of some poor character models, it easily looks as nice as Uncharted, which is hugely overrated, graphics wise.

In reply to

GangstaNip

Commented on 2008-03-31 04:53:25

All i know is that i bought 2007, it was good and i expected good things from the next one, then 2008 came around and regretted buying it.

In reply to

GangstaNip

Commented on 2008-03-31 04:57:17

wow the PS3 shots look horrendous, gotta be a mistake somewhere

In reply to

Ronsauce

Commented on 2008-03-31 06:08:06 In reply to WinterSnowblind

Posted by WinterSnowblind

I fail to see how anyone can consider Halo 3 bland, especially in comparasion to Uncharted, as the majority of Halo 3 took place in a foresty areas, with some great looking landscapes. With the exception of some poor character models, it easily looks as nice as Uncharted, which is hugely overrated, graphics wise.

I can't comment on Uncharted as I haven't played it, but I will agree that Halo 3 looks anything but bland. I got back into playing a lot of it lately, and for me, it's the best looking game on the 360. I'll stress it again...*for me*

In reply to

2PintsOfInsulin

Commented on 2008-03-31 10:31:46

Halo 3 is a great-looking game, even my fiance (who is more damning on graphics than any one of you) said she loved the forest graphics (then followed by "If only you didn't have to shoot people..." but hey...).

It seems like Uncharted is the PS3 crowd's calling card when it comes to screenshot comparisons, and unjustifiably so by the looks of things. It's good, but it ain't that good. Yes, I have played it.

:o)

In reply to

Images of SmackDown vs. Raw 2009

5 PS3 Images

4 X360 Images

All comments (58)

Baby Steps

Silent Hill f

Ghost of Yōtei

Our PC video of Daemon X Machina: Titanic Scion

Our PC video of NBA 2K26

Our Switch video of Shuten Order