digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Xbox 360 version of 'Madden NFL 08' sticks it to PS3

usatoday.com — On the surface, the releases on 360 and PlayStation 3 look identical. However, when you stack them head-to-head, it's clear which is better. Madden on 360 is fast and fluid, thanks to a sharp jump in frame rate that allows the game to move twice as fast. PS3 owners, unfortunately, are greeted with a Madden that is sluggish in comparison...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -16/+43Its pretty telling that this gets published in a National Newspaper. I've never been a big Madden fan, but I think I'll finally take the plunge on this one; I have friends who are fans, they'll enjoy it when we do beer/pizza on the weekends.
    • bigbadgoat, on 10/10/2007, -55/+12I see Microsoft is now giving you free games as well as a salary!

      Keep drinking the Juice, sir.

      The game can be as great, hard time to play it on a red-ringed console isn't it?
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -15/+22Me and all my friend's have had 360s since launch with no problems at all. Just take care it. With the longest warranty in electronic history, we don't have much to worry about. It's all much better than having a perfect console with nothing to do on it.
        • JayD16, on 10/10/2007, -19/+5You can always tell what type of people are attracted to what articles when the "My 360 is fine so you must be a moron" comments get dugg up.
          • gwolf, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I think people know what their own particular console is doing. My 360 is fine, I will base my decisions on my own experience rather than your opinions, if that's OK with you.
          • xino, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That wasn't a "My 360 is fine so you must be a moron comment". He is just saying his is fine and that you should take care of the red ring issue by using the 3 year warranty that you have with your Xbox 360.
        • PA42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10he gets dugg up because every Sony fan boy's best argument is the red ring of death and sicsu correctly states that 360 owners have a kick ass warranty. if a ps3 dies in 2 years the owner will be SOL, not a 360 owner though.
          • MWeather, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Seriously, if the only think you can make fun of is your competition's massive hardware failure rate, you're getting desperate.
          • CReyes4182, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1The key word is "if" and it wont break. What happens when the 3 year warranty is over? I got a solid system that has a 1% failure rate. Sure there aren't that many games now but sure enough there will be games. Its just a waiting game. Besides that warranty only covers the rrod. Doesn't cover the disc scratching or any of the other issues with the 360.
          • JayD16, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The extension only covers one type of failure. If it redrings then you're ok. If it the drive craps out or anything else its still only a 1 year warranty. Just because the huge flaw is covered for 3 years doesn't mean you're more protected then PS3 or Wii owners.
      • truspector, on 10/10/2007, -7/+18@bigbadgoat
        Now that the new chipsets are about to be released and everyone has a three year warranty on the old systems, what are you going to use to hate on the 360?
        • bigbadgoat, on 10/10/2007, -26/+8Any number of things. The severely over-priced accessories. The yearly fee for live. The lack of a standard hard drive. The possibility that the smaller chips still don't solve the problem? The billions of dollars they go in debt every year for their ***** console? The severely over-priced songs on Guitar Hero? Microsoft's refusal to allow Epic to give map-packs away? How many things do you want? The 9389383 different SKUs for the console?

          Any before you go ripping on Sony as a whole, this is just the Microsoft Gaming division. I really don't wanna get into the Zune of their fantastic OS known as Vista. Or any other of their shady, shady business practises.

          What gets me the most about a huge chunk of you fanboys is that you'll bitch and complain and moan about how ***** windows is, and how much you hate microsoft, and then go off and play some Halo on your ***** Xbox. Hypocrites.
          • crgnetworks, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10I think the biggest hypocrite here is you bigbadgoat.
            Your little flame sound awfully familiar to the fanboy's you mention in your post.
          • Microdot, on 10/10/2007, -7/+7so now the xbox fanboys are cheering on EA and ***** programming, just because its less ***** on their console?

            seriously people. stop fanboyism.

            EA should be scolded for the crappy job they have done, regardless of what console got the better end of the stick. end of discussion.
          • cplex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9"The billions of dollars they go in debt every year for their ***** console?"

            Let me get this straight bigbadgoat, you don't like the Microsoft games division because they've amassed debt?

            You know what, you're right! Screw Microsoft for trying to keep the console affordable and offering a three year warranty to fix the only major issue the console had. Screw them to hell! /Sarcasm
          • bigbadgoat, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2Not much good if they decide to fold their division, and cut their losses.

            You'll have a great time on your xbox live then, won't you?
          • cplex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I will have a great time on Xbox live. Because unlike the PS3 online service, it's paid for by the users. Meaning if the games division 'folds', I'll still be able to play on xbox live as long as people are still re-newing their subscriptions.

            You sir, are biased to a loss.
        • truspector, on 10/10/2007, -8/+5Let me guess. Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates gang banged your mom and then daddy blew his brains out.
      • EuphopiaB, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Could we please put the ***** 360 vs PS3 debates in the past? Both consoles have different games, appeal to different people, and have different abilities. Yea, the PS3 doesn't have many games out, and yes the 360 has hardware problems. Doesn't render either of them "crap".
        • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Every Xbox 360 with a HDMI has Version 1.1 motherboard. This board has a new layout, smaller components, and a new mounting-method for the CPU/GPU.

          The heat issues have been addressed for new console purchasers, for everyone else, Micrsoft has brought about *the best* warrenty in the electronics industry. 3 Year, Zero Cost Repair or Replacement. This issue has A) Been fixed in new boxes and B) Fixed for current owners.

          It is now FUD from the past.
        • MWeather, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4If I bought a Porsche, and I found out 30+% of them fail in their first year, it's crap.

          If I buy a Porsche, and I can't find any gas, it's still a fine automobile. I'm just an idiot for not checking to see if I could fuel the damn thing.
          • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Best example I have ever seen. For the PS3 the games are coming.... starting next month actually. For the 360, if you purchased and older one ( like I have) it has a chance of failing. There isn't a comparison.
    • cool8man, on 10/10/2007, -2/+32USA Today has the widest circulation among all newspapers in the United States and English speaking countries. They have an average circulation of about 2.25 million newspapers each day.

      "'MADDEN NFL 08'
      Score: 9 out of 10 (360); 7 out of 10 (PS3)."

      USA Today was even harsher on the PS3 version than IGN.
      • rebrad, on 10/10/2007, -9/+8From everything I've been reading lately, I expect Sony to do a Sega on the PS3 within the next year. Developers are bailing left and right. I'm sure Sony's game division could make a mint porting their stuff over to the WII.
        • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2Pay more attention to the source of what you read.
        • masterthiefster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Ironically, the PS3's lower-than-expected sales mean their losses this quarter are actually less than expected. Sony isn't just games and hardware like Sega was, they make all sorts of electronics. Even if the PS3 flops utterly they'll still be able to raise the cash to fund a "PS3 lite" or whatever to save the PlayStation brand, or they could even start afresh with a new brand.
    • elvenseven, on 10/10/2007, -17/+23Maybe because the game is PORTED and EA have something to do with it being sluggish.
      • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -12/+20Dude, if the PS3 requiers massive amounts of optimization and hand holding to keep up with the Xbox 360 versions, what do you *think* is going to continue to happen? The Games Business is ultimately about money, and if these big AAA titles are difficult to get running on the PS3, what will the publishers/developers choose to do?

        If the cross-platform titles all run (as has been the case until now, and for the forseable future) better on Xbox 360, why pay more for the PS3? The privilage of a few exclusives? This is (IMHO) one of the MAJOR anchors that is only going to get heavy, its a viscious circle that has prevented the PS3 from reaching critical mass.

        The Xbox 360 and the Wii are going to be massive sellers this Holiday, if the PS3 doenst perform, 2008 could be a pretty tough year for 3rd parties to justify bringing its titles to the PS3... further cementing the cycle.
        • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -12/+4Lol... I like that... to keep up. There is no excusing poor ports. If devs choose to stop porting over their crap then a surprising thing will happen...... there will be less sub quality games on the PS3 and more quality ones. Not to mention exclusive. I would love for devs to stop porting games.

          The exclusives will become the reason to purchase a PS3 and you are deluded to think all developers will jump ship. There is so much fud about developers jumping ship its rediculous. For almost every port you can mention I can point out an exclusive from the same company.

          If the PS3 doesn't perform in 2008? What on earth are you talking about? Because if it is games obviously you have missed on on the exclusives that are comming out this year.

          August 2007:

          August 28, 2007 - Warhawk ~ Sony Computer Entertainment

          September 2007:


          September 04, 2007 - Lair ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          September 12, 2007 - Heavenly Sword ~ Sony Computer Entertainment


          October 2007:


          October 01, 2007 - Eye of Judgment, The ~Sony Computer Entertainment
          October 01, 2007 - Hot Shots Golf 5 ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          October 02, 2007 - Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          October 04, 2007 - Elefunk ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          October 04, 2007 - PlayStation Home ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          October 09, 2007 - Folklore ~ Sony Computer Entertainment


          November 2007:


          November 13, 2007 - SingStar ~ Sony Computer Entertainment
          November 20, 2007 - Haze ~ Ubisoft
          November 20, 2007 - Time Crisis 4 ~ Namco
          November 20, 2007 - Uncharted: Drake's Fortune ~ Sony Computer Entertainment

          to me it looks like PS3 fans have alot of exclusives to look forward to. Not to mention those time exclusives and ports..... because not all PS3 owners own a 360 or would want one... so the consider the ports to be apart of their line up.

          It was said on another article that you were a paid MS commenter, I would like to believe that is an outlandish claim but some of the things you say are rather ignorant.
          • pegisys, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6it's nice list, and a huge leap over last year, but none of those exclusives are really system sellers, or have much hype surrounding them right now
          • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Holy *****! There's a Time Crisis 4? Why did no one tell me? I gotta start saving!
          • douglash2005, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Are you kidding? You should be EMBARRASSED billing that list as something to be proud about. How about you concoct the same list for the 360 and see who really has the games people want to play. Elefunk, Singstar, Time Crisis 4!?!? Give me a ***** break man!!! You're drowning and clinging to straws.
          • Verugan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Most consumers aren't this informed and will buy strictly based off of price, especiall around the holidays.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -6/+15All Pro Football 2k8 is so much fun, I doubt I'll get madden.
    • TheCount, on 10/10/2007, -16/+26I love how people are blaming the PS3 and not EA. The PS3 has the hardware to do just about anything the 360 can do, blame it on EA's developers, not Sony. I bought the game for 360 last night (I don't own a PS3, don't plan on buying one anytime soon either) and although it looks great, the fact that there are STILL no online leagues is very annoying when 2K had that stuff in their games years ago.
      • j37hr0, on 10/10/2007, -16/+23No blame it on Sony's arrogance and creating a platform that is incredibly hard to develop for. The hardware may be capable but if you have to spend 5X the resources to develop the same gameplay on system Y than system X, and add to that the installed base for system X is higher than system Y, the blame is wholly with Sony.
      • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -11/+18The trouble with development on the PS3 is coming in from every quarter. This *ISNT* an isolated opinion on this matter. Carmack said much the same thing, that the Xbox 360 has a superior development environment. The Assassins Creed team said the same thing.

        Look here; memory reserve issues for developers:
        http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060413-6600.html
        http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/02/27/ps3-online-background-downloading-the-sony-way/
        http://ozymandias.com/archive/2007/03/13/Rumored-Improvements-to-the-PS3-Online-Experience.aspx

        When Carmack said the Xbox 360 has superior developer environment, is he an ***** for prefering it? When you consider that the Developers (to a greater deal than we probably know) are Sony customers, and Sony is responsible for not making its platform competive to their needs.
        • apoc06, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4no, but he will be an azzhole in a few months when he starts trying to license out the new id tech engine by saying how great and how much easier it makes programming on the ps3.
      • unjustend, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Also the PS3 Cell chip runs physics great but is also slower to turn AI like codes. I'm sure with optimization someone could get it to be just as fast. So it didn't really surprize me to see a port that ran slower on ps3 when its mostly all AI. There was a article that had a dev complaining about it.
    • fadetoone, on 10/10/2007, -12/+10So it seems I should be reading this as "EA alienates PS3 owners."

      It's cool though, I have no need to buy a new football game every year. I got Madden 07 for $12 a few months ago and I've played it once. I'm a football fan too, so you can see how interested I am.
      • techmaster, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2The PS3 alienates PS3 owners. Don't blame Goodyear or Penzoil when a Yugo breaks down. Every company is responsible for their own faults.
    • WiZZLa, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5Visual Concepts/2K Games > EA Sports.
  • PacoDG, on 10/10/2007, -40/+7I hear the Wii version sticks it to the 360 and the PS3, no kidding either (I think it has 22 more modes of play or some crap).
    • Wiinii, on 10/10/2007, -9/+15Do you know that as much as I am Nintendo fan, I have to admit that more Nintendo fans are Nintendo FANBOYS that seem to feel compelled to say this ***** in a thread not related to the Wii at all. Don't make me call the Wii a GameCube 1.5, because the graphics and online play on the Wii are a joke.
  • truspector, on 10/10/2007, -8/+80360 - 8.7
    Wii - 8.5
    PS3 - 7.7

    I like this part: For PS3 owners, this isn't as exciting. Madden 08 runs (sometimes) at 30 frames per second. It makes a huge difference, as you lose a lot of the subtleties in the animations. There are plenty of framerate hitches that will likely frustrate players. This can cause a lag in the Hit Stick sometimes. And, let's face it, no one wants to see a runningback pause for a second in mid air as the framerate stutters. You can still play and mostly enjoy Madden, but beware that on PS3 the game does not run smoothly.

    and this one: Madden NFL 08 on PS3 is not a great game. It is a shadow of its cousin on 360. Though the feature set is identical, the drop to an unstable 30fps hurts considerably. The visuals and the gameplay suffer. If you are a real Madden nut and think you can fight through the framerate issues, Madden is an overall good game. It just doesn't run very well. If you only own a PS3 and live for Sundays, then there really is no other choice than to give Madden 08 a shot.

    and the icing on my cake: 6.5 Graphics
    The details are good, but Madden is ugly in motion. It's optimistic to call this a game that runs at 30fps. The animations don't look that great because of the lower framerate.

    edit: From IGN.com
    • bigbadgoat, on 10/10/2007, -43/+8unfortunately with consoles rrod'ing left right and center, no one will get to enjoy this game at its "great" frame rate
      • errictshunn, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14I have enjoyed it at a great frame rate. Do you only have a PS3? Sorry to hear that you probably should be more open minded. I have both and I could not be happier with my 3rd 360. While on my second PS3 I am pretty happy with it too, Mostly because I am only playing PS3 exclusives on it and do not have to deal with the poor framerates and graphical drops of the PS3 versions of games. All multiplatfom games should be played on a 360.
        • vulapine, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2"Do you only have a PS3? Sorry to hear that you probably should be more open minded."
          Interesting to equate an "open minded" attitude with having multiple consoles.
      • Tuto, on 10/10/2007, -11/+38I rather be the person that buys the console that dies, but in the end gets it repaired for free and plays the best version of a game than the douche that bought a 600 dollar blu-ray player and believed the companys hype about 4d graphics.
      • bigbadgoat, on 10/10/2007, -23/+4I bought a game console that just so happens to do a lot of ***** fantastic things besides. You bought something Microsoft effectively guaranteed you would break, with no defininitive solution in place to fix it, only hope that this smaller chip won't get warm enough to warp the mobo again.
        • truspector, on 10/10/2007, -6/+23I don't get it. The PS3 gets a ***** version of madden so you decide to attack the 360. I think we've found an SDF member. I can't wait until you kids have to go back to school.
          • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1This entire thread has 360 fans basically attacking the PS3 instead of condeming EA. So I forgive this guy for trying to lash out. ... What?.... you didn't notice the PS3 bashing you say........
          • Hermitwise, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Trolly fanboys are so enjoyable, I've been digging down his comments one by one before I block him so I don't miss anything. :D
        • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"with no defininitive solution in place to fix it"

          Did you miss the part of the extended warranty announcment, where they said they fixed the issues? specifically this part:

          "We have been following this issue closely, and with on-going testing have identified several factors that can cause a general hardware failure indicated by three flashing red lights on the console. To address this issue, and as part of our ongoing work, we have already made certain improvements to the console."

          Did you also "miss" the part about the wholly redesigned motherboards in the Xbox 360 Elite? You know, the one with the smaller components, new layout and new mounting for the CPU/GPU?

          http://www.llamma.com/xbox360/news/inside_the_xbox_360_elite.htm http://www.mainstageclothing.com/360eliteanimated.gif

          Did you miss the part that the Xbox 360 Premium is now shipping with the Elite Version 1.1 Mainboard (adding the HDMI port to Premiums)? Did you miss all this just to keep up your fanboy ranting? Perhaps now that you've been informed, you'll have caught up eh?
      • vawksel, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7Jealous you don't have a 360 I see... PS3 you have, sorry for you I feel.
      • quomen, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Why the ***** would you have 3 Xbox 360s?
    • jackpot, on 10/10/2007, -3/+34John Madden has always been ugly in motion.
    • br0ck, on 10/10/2007, -15/+8IGN makes it sound like it's a huge massive difference, but 1up has some high definition comparison videos up and they don't look all that different. http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161786 - Anyway, isn't NTSC only 30 frames per second anyway?
      • alucardx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9NTSC in the way you're thinking is in regards to Television broadcast as the INPUT. for this scenario, the Xbox/PS3 is the INPUT. These display at anywhere from 0-60FPS depending on developer, vsync, etc. All TV's (CRT, lcd, plasma, etc) in North America can display 60FPS.
      • br0ck, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3But that 60Hz is interlaced for your typical home CRT TV.. so it takes two frames to create one complete image, so that results in slightly less than 30 actual viewable images each second.
        • Vardogr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Unless you have a TV which can use progressive scan modes - such as 480p or 720p.
    • spoiled1, on 10/10/2007, -9/+7OK... Xbox 360 wins here, according to this publication.
      But how the hell the game scored 8.5 on Wii, is it FAST and FLUID like 360? A .2 point difference between scores of Wii and 360 doesn't make any sense.
      • kevin45, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9The controls for Madden do make the stale franchise fun to play. I am not a huge football fan but did pick up Madden 07 just from the Wiimote.
      • 0firefly0, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8It has unique controls, online, etc.
      • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Because IGN is most likely not comparing the wii to the 360 but judging it on its assumed limits.
      • techmaster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6It scored a little less on the Wii because although it plays just as well as the 360 version, the players are all spheres with smiley faces on them. That was good enough for an 8.0, but the shadows that the spheres cast on the ground got them up to an 8.5.
      • Renton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The Wii version has extra features, a party mode, family play, and some telewriter thing announcers use to draw circles around the guys during instant replays.
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3as long as its over 28 frames, thats the average human frame rate of our sight
      • Verugan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It can run at a quadrillion fps but that won't change my perception that it's lagging
    • DangerMouse9, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0Sounds like piss poor developers to me and not a problem with the system. It's more that they couldn't program their way out of a PS3 bag than anything else (not that I can do any better, hence why I'm not a PS3 developer).
  • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -28/+29Most people got sold on the Sony 4d graphic hype. Let the truth be told:

    http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32171
    • copaceticZ, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9why are you ps3 fanboy's digging this down don't like to hear the truth? I guess you can't handle it that the 360 is always going to be more powerful/cheaper/better than the ps3 i guess its hard to believe when the ps3 costs so much more it should be better it is better isn't it? isn't it? nope its not ever close.......
      • sinaura, on 10/10/2007, -11/+0Let's not forget the 360 fanboys who can't admit that the Wii will always be better.
        • Kajun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2not better...different

          we will have to wait and see if the developers can continue to make games that use the feature that gives the Wii its appeal. If not it will have the same comments that the PS3 is getting now.
        • WillDearborn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Actually lets not forget about the best gaming platform out there....the PC. Its constantly evolving and doesn't stand still for years at a time. Games are always the best on PC, and then get ported over. The only reason it isn't more popular is that the average person is too impatient/stupid to install a game and learn how to configure it properly.
    • volacide, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Nothing more powerful is ever cheaper in the computer hardware industry, I'm sorry.
  • fishface11, on 10/10/2007, -36/+14Ye, well the ps3 sucks anyways
    • dannyapplesauce, on 10/10/2007, -14/+8No, digg says it's cool to like the PS3 now. Didn't you get the memo?
  • iamsamsamiam, on 10/10/2007, -9/+15well maybe EA doesn't want to program for the cellprocessor because it's not profitable in terms of man hours to rewrite it to conform to work well with those asymmetric processors that Sony put in its PS3. They just kinda roll around in money with their multi platform ports and by cutting off support to older games to push you to buy the newer ones.
    • iluvatar, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8The problem isn't the cell processor it's the disproportionately weak video card.
      • Universe, on 10/10/2007, -10/+12While it is very simple to draw a conclusion based on the end-user experience with the game technology, what most people do not realize is hours of research which goes into fully understanding the hardware demands for each console. In the case of the next-generation consoles, many publishers have been developing titles for the Xbox 360 for over 3 1/2 years while everyone who publishes now for the PlayStation 3 with the exception of Sony has been developing for the PlayStation 3 for only a little over one full year. The differences in the overall knowledge of the hardware is vastly different for both consoles and, as is the case with newer technology, it is very difficult to get it right the first time.

        Rob M.
        EASPORTS Sr. Technical Support
        • strictnein, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Yes, as if someone from "EASPORTS" would come on and sign their name to a post.
    • flazz, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3yeah, the compiler should optimize for the cell, and the graphics are nvidia anyway. i don't think its an issue of EA optimizing for nvidia over nvidia.
    • fishface11, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4The argon vortex duplicators's been throttled down by Sony in order to conserve power, this is probably the reason why the ps3's core fusion cones aren't being used by the developers at EA
  • jacksons98, on 10/10/2007, -15/+35EA games barely qualify as next-gen as is and Madden hasn't done anything new in 5 years. So my question is why do people keep supporting EA? Many other companies are creating games far more complex for PS3 than Madden 08 without any issues.
    • dannyapplesauce, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15Because people want to play a game that has real football teams and doesn't suck. Blitz was a fantastic steaming pile. The new 2K series looks like it should give EA a run for it's money despite the lack of Real teams and it being centered around the use of Hall-of-Famers not in the Player's Association.
    • playhouse, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8unfortunealty, EA is buying all those developers so.....yea
    • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4Are you 12? How does this ignorant and confused drivel get modded up?

      This is the Game Business. Madden is one of the biggest games year over year because people like it -- they like it a lot. Do you sit in your bedroom listening to emo music and crying -- why the overly emotional relationship with EA? They make many games that many people like to play.

      "complex for PS3 than madden 08", tell us, you clearly have a masterful understanding of Computer Science and the Games Industry, what do you think the largets Game Publishing Company on the planet *DOESNT* have that you think they should to meet your standards?
      • MindTrigger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4People may like it, but they are still taking it in the ass for $50 (or whatever) for a barely changed game every year. I suppose EA can keep bending people over, if the masses are stupid enough to pay for it.
        • Verugan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I've been a football fan for a long time but I'm new to Madden. Why wouldn't I want to spend $50 for the only NFL licensed video game on the market?
      • catharz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2People in the USA might like it, but everywhere else in the world it isn't even real football.
  • Zoxy, on 10/10/2007, -8/+55Replay a poster got from EA:

    Thank you for your feedback regarding the issues you've found with Madden NFL 08 for the PlayStation 3 game console. While we fully understand your frustration with the limitations the technology has placed against the video frames per second of the game play on the PlayStation 3 game console, it was out intent to put out the best possible with Madden across 10 platforms. While it is very simple to draw a conclusion based on the end-user experience with the game technology, what most people do not realize is hours of research which goes into fully understanding the hardware demands for each console. In the case of the next-generation consoles, many publishers have been developing titles for the Xbox 360 for over 3 1/2 years while everyone who publishes now for the PlayStation 3 with the exception of Sony has been developing for the PlayStation 3 for only a little over one full year. The differences in the overall knowledge of the hardware is vastly different for both consoles and, as is the case with newer technology, it is very difficult to get it right the first time. As for frame-rate differences, 30 frames per second is the same for all PS 3 football games this year, not just Madden but also NCAA Football, and 2K Sports' offering as well. If you choose not to purchase the game, it is a choice fully understand and respect. Please know that I have passed your feedback and observations on to the game team and hopefully someone within their team will be able to address this matter further.

    Sincerely,

    Rob M.
    EASPORTS Sr. Technical Support

    http://n4g.com/ps3/News-59194.aspx
    • carl25, on 10/10/2007, -4/+23what ? 360 has had 3.5 years ? there's a year difference between each launch date. Unless i'm missing something
      • Brian48216, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19I think Sony had problems getting dev kits out to the developers. I dunno if it would account for another two years but it might for at least half a year additional difference...
      • DukeMojo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I imagine Microsoft allowed EA and other companies a head start on development technology of their next-gen system. Release date probably doesn't have much to do with it. That's why there are games for sale the day the system is released.
        • Kajun, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1and sony doesnt? There is at most a year difference.

          Will they ever get the full power out of a ps3 or will we see a new system before that happens...just like the original xbox.
      • spoiled1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9I think because of PowerPC CPU, they were able to head start development for Xbox on those Macs.
    • musters, on 10/10/2007, -9/+12so they are admitting that their code for the PS3 sucks?
      • Snarfy, on 10/10/2007, -8/+12Basically, yes.
      • mokkos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, they are admitting that they've been developing for 360 longer than the PS3 so that they have more familiarity with the 360 hardware. RTFComment.
    • saltinekracka20, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I dont know that I belive this...
      • gwolf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why not, other developers have had similar kinds of complaints and issues. PS3 is hard to work with and not everyone is willing to do a 4 year project to get one good game out. As I recall Sony hadn't finalized the design for the PS3 till about 3 to 6 months before launch. That hardly gives developers the confidence to want to invest real money in a project.
        • maaddmax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1For one thing the misspellings kinda give it away that its not real.
    • Verugan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0If I were EA I wouldn't even have gone into that much detail. The way that letter is written it's like they are trying to dig themselves out of a hole.
    • hordak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Translation: When we know more about how the PS3 works, it will kick the Xbox version out of the field!! :) :)
  • wedges, on 10/10/2007, -21/+9USA Today, thanks for the tabloid journalism.

    If I write a program for Windows, and then PORT it to OSX, which one do you expect to run better? Now which platform is actually better? (in this case, which is more stable and less buggy?)
    • UMDWei, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Hey fanboy... I didn't realize MS owned EA.
      • wedges, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1my post has nothing to do with microsoft, nor do i think PS3 has better graphics than 360. EA made a lazy port, and this article doesn't acknowledge that the disparities in graphics have more to do with development than hardware. There is no way Madden maxes out PS3's capabilities, nor does it max out the 360's.
        • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3People don't care. They read reviews to find out which games are better. They don't care why the PS3 has a lower framerate, just that of the 2 versions the 360 one is better.
          • gwolf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You care if you have both systems as I do.
    • flazz, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3its more like, i write a program for Solaris and port it to OSX, AIX, Linux, BSD*, etc. and then try to port it to Windows. Now which platform is actually better?

      sony has had a backwards API since the PS1.

      ironic that MS is playing ball here.
    • reed311, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8That is irrelevant. Their point is that it is inferior, no matter what reason. It's like someone running a race and then whining that the other guy won because he trained more. In the end, he still won and that's all that matters.
      • wedges, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1the point is that the article doesn't really acknowledge that the devs made the game on one platform and ported it to another. the differences in gameplay are due to poor development, not bad hardware.
        • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'll be sure to go out and buy the PS3 version with the lower framerate then, because it's the fault of the developers and not the PS3.
  • danielrh9, on 10/10/2007, -13/+3I'm sure everyone can truly look to that bastion of credibility and intelligence, USA Today.
  • jackpot, on 10/10/2007, -6/+38It's extremely disappointing from a PS3 owner's view, that every game the 360 and PS3 share, the 360 version shines through.

    http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/
    http://www.gamespot.com/features/6171831/
    • mokkos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Except Oblivion. That's probably the only 360 port that looks and plays better on the PS3. Developer CAN do good ports. It's just too time/money consuming.
      • catharz, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1And except Dirt. Codemasters have said the PS3 version will have better graphics and a better framerate.
      • masterthiefster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Oblivion wasn't a simultaneous release, however. The graphics were virtually identical between the 360 and PC versions (without INI tweaking and the like, that is) and if the PS3 release had been at the same time it would probably look identical too.

        The more systems a game is being brought to the less time there is to optimise each version to take full advantage of that platform's capabilities. The PS3 is notoriously hard to develop for, which only makes matters worse.
  • coheedcollapse, on 10/10/2007, -10/+31That's what you get when you develop for the easy console and try to port it to one that's more difficult to program for. As soon as the companies get the hang of it I'm sure it'll be fine because I've seen some beautiful, 60fps stuff on the PS3 already so I know it's not some sort of hardware holding them back.
    • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5it was developed for pc smart guy
    • Kajun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well if its that hard and not for the other systems... why would anyone, not making a ps3 exclusive ,waste the time to develope a game for it?
      • masterthiefster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Because, in the end, it results in more money as there are more consumers who have a system the game was on. The Harry Potter tie-ins, for instance, are on every current platform even if it means some of those versions are significantly different from others and thus take longer to make.
    • gwolf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3If what you saw on the PS3 was an exclusive, how will you ever know what it would have looked like on 360.
    • ddobson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It is and it isn't "hardware holding them back." It's not that the hardware is incapable of better things, it's that it's harder to make it do what you want it to as a developer.

      And "different", though not inherently inferior, has proven to be a negative in the industry to date. The Atari Jaguar had lots of hidden power, as did the Sega Saturn. In both cases it was difficult to marshal that power, so owners ended up with a handful of excellent games that showed what the hardware COULD do, and a bunch of ports that DIDN'T show that. From a consumer's perspective, results matter a lot more than potential.
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13The key isn't the graphics, it is gameplay.

    I have been frustrated time and again by bad AI, and poor control.
    • yoinkdigg, on 10/10/2007, -8/+17Read up, AI is better on 360 than PS3 also.
    • flazz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9100% true but lets not forget that graphics and art direction are part of the gameplay, especially framerate.
      • fotbr, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1But not a very important part, unless you're just a graphics whore. In which case you should just go watch a movie.

        If its above about 25 fps, the human eye sees smooth motion.
        • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I can't find the exact article that proves why the "anything above 25fps is a waste" argument is false, but I found this on wikipedia that seems to explain it...

          "The reason computer rendered video has a noticeable afterimage separation problem and camera captured video does not is that a camera shutter interrupts the light two or three times for every film frame, thus exposing the film to 2 or 3 samples at different points in time. The light can also enter for the entire time the shutter is open, thus exposing the film to a continuous sample over this time. These multiple samples are naturally interpolated together on the same frame. This leads to a small amount of motion blur between one frame and the next which allows them to smoothly transition."

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Frame_rates_in_video_games
  • esbern1, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4right so in a world where the main reason people buy the wii is b/c "Graphics dont matter!" we're gonna just go ahead and compare two games based upon graphics.
    • Phocion55, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3This has nothing to do with graphics. This has to do with gameplay and responsiveness.

      I'd rather be missing a few hundred poly's before having my game slow to 10fps.
    • beters, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Its not the graphics you dumb *****, its the weakness of the consoles ability to push out the FPS to make the game even playable.

      Still frames will look the same between the 360 and ps3, the ps3 is just not good enough to keep up with the speed. A weakness that is exactly counter to the usual claim "PS3 is a FREAKING POWERHOUSE THAT NOONE CAN COMPETE WITH!!!!!" that we get pounded over the head with from PS3 fanboys like you.

      PS3 fanboys are just plain stupid.
    • judremy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7When both systems pride themselves on being "next gen" and a big selling point of said systems IS the graphics, then yes, they are going to compare those. I'm betting the Wii version didn't get a 8.5 at IGN based on the graphics, but the gameplay. However, the alure of the PS3 and XBOX360 is the graphics, so reviews WILL center on that.
    • DukeMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6"Two" (3 actually) of the same game on competing consoles? The point is that if you own both a 360 and a PS3, the 360 version is the one to get based on a small (but significant) difference.
    • drachemorder, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Ah, but we aren't comparing the Wii version, are we?
    • ddobson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I don't think anyone has ever said, "I'm buying a Wii because graphics don't matter and I want less in that area!" What Wii owners have chosen to accept is the industry's dirty little secret -- graphics matter a lot in magazine spreads and on the back of the box. They don't matter after about 5 minutes of playing the actual game. The PS3 version is an example of how that very real difference can come home to roost.
  • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -17/+8the next 5 maddens will rock on PS3...
    • cavie2002, on 10/10/2007, -11/+13if the ps3 is even still around
    • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3can i borrow your delorean?
    • Kajun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I doubt that we see 5 more maddens on the ps3. If we do it will only be as good as the 360 version.
  • lpmiller, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6 So...what? This proves that EA was so hell bent on having every console have the same version of madden out on the same day that they didn't have the time to optimize the PS3 version. Which happens like every other year with EA, some console gets screwed on it's version. That's like reporting hey, the sky is blue. This is not a reflection of the consoles.
  • hightower77, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I'll give it a rent for the PS3 before I plunk down $60 to buy it. I have NCAA '08 and it is just fine as far as response, no lag etc. So I'll be interested to compare.
  • mpn401, on 10/10/2007, -12/+7Something tells me they wrote it for 360 first and did some kind of half-assed emulation port afterwards.
    • motabus, on 10/10/2007, -8/+8no they wrote it on a pc and ported it to everything, im so glad i dont have a ps3, fanboys digg down!!!
  • frygar, on 10/10/2007, -6/+37Madden '06 was garbage on the 360 for the exact same reasons - devs didn't know the hardware back then. Give them time, they'll figure it out.
    • vawksel, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6From all the remarks from various developers over the months since the PS3's release, I don't think "they'll figure it out".

      So the PS3's slower with poor frame rates, the 360 has hardware issues, pick your poison.

      If the deal with the PS3 is the hardware being slow, it won't be fixed. The 360 at least has a chance as its a manufacturing defect or board design layout problem, but not a chip design as the PS3 is.

      The real deal will be PS3 exclusives... Why do you think the PS2 continues to sell more than both these consoles? You think it's the PS2's graphics?
      • hightower77, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2You are giving a lot of faith to Microsoft there buddy.
    • SiL3ncer, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Simply put: The Devs at EA suck!
    • illustrick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2not really, madden '06 is more like a ps2 port, with the features stripped down because they rushed it.
  • vawksel, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Jealous you don't have a 360 I see... PS3 you have, sorry for you I feel.
    • yoinkdigg, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8I had both, had to get rid of the PS3 due to suckage.
    • 2ndrookie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Wow, did you really just submit that?
  • Flimnit, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9This has more to do with developers learning to use the new ps3 dev kit. Give it a few years and things will be different. But it really doesn't matter because madden will sell like hotcakes.
    • vawksel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9So, you are saying to buy a 360 for now, and then if the developers ever figure out how to program the ps3 correctly in a few YEARS then maybe buy it then.

      Sounds good. And if they never do "figure it out", then you're safe anyways with the 360 since people know how to actually code for it today.... Actually, they did pretty damn good from day one.

      Maybe the PS3 has more serious problems, 7 SPE's just doesn't sound good to me as a developer either.

  • RacerX2727, on 10/10/2007, -12/+3Madden has sucked for years, the only football game worth buying is NCAA 08. Also, the NFL is nothing but a bunch of drugged up, dog fighting gangsters anyway. At least the college game still has some integrity.
    • hightower77, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Really? Ask the University of Oklahoma about those clean college kids. Oh yeah, go look at the University of Miami, if that isn't integrity. I don't know what is. I can go on, but I'm bored and you probably won't get the point anyways.

      /spare
  • AnthonyC, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Although its understandable that there might be a learning curve for developing with PS3 hardware, its not an excuse to charge 60 dollars for something they even admit to being underwhelming. EA will meet their fate soon enough, 2K makes a superior product in every sport they compete in, and its a matter of time before they get NCAA and NFL rights.
    • axis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well, I have to disagree with that. Have you ever played any of 2k sports hockey games? It is ridiculous. EA's best sports game is hands down its NHL franchise, without any question. NHL2kX is gimmicky every year, sorry, they are trash. No wonder NHL2k7 went to $30 before a lot of other games for the PS3...pure crap.
  • dcthomas, on 10/10/2007, -9/+7I'm not wasting my money on Madden until EA Tiburon decides to quit half-assing the PS3 version. playstation owners generated so much of EA's revenue in the last generation, and now they just ***** us over to cut a few corners; unacceptable.
    • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2the times have changed, live with it
    • fotbr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Welcome to business.

      EA owes former purchasers nothing. Likewise, you owe EA nothing.
    • techmaster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Old and busted... New hotness... Guess which one you bought. You live and you learn.
    • ddobson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0EA did release solid Madden '08 builds on the PS2 and PSP as well. It's not like they're screwing over Playstation owners in general. Cutting corners THIS YEAR is justified given the expected PS3 sales.
  • musters, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4Basically what this says is that programmers at EA are too lazy to learn new stuff.
    Maybe that is why they reuse the same game 5 times over.
    • Vardogr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't know. If your goal is to make more money by - a.) working harder, or b.) regurgitating the same crap that people are apparently still WILLING to pay for, which are you going to do? EA smartly picked b.
  • readme, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7Sad fact: If your 360 is in a coffin headed for Texas, you get zero frame per second.
    • Phocion55, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Not much difference between 0fps and 10fps.

      Both are unplayable.
    • errictshunn, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Yeah, Thank god none of the 20 something people with Madden on my friends list have thier console in a box to Texas.
  • BLACKEAGLE, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2i am sure apple could do it better....................haha damn isheep
    • harrypl0tter, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0jeeze apple fanboy comes in here and says stupid ***** like this.....

      get a ***** life man...
  • Felekar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Ummm... It's just another in a Loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong line of Madden games.
    They've been making a new one every year for 13 years now. I mean, I'd have to say that they're nearly like those army men games that were getting made a few years ago.
    The same thing over and over and over...
    • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The army men game with the helicopter was badass...
  • nublet, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10regardless of which is better, it's madden. and madden sucks.
  • Topher06, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10We have been over this before, and the conclusion is that EA was lazy in their PS3 implementation. How could a system that offers us Killzone 2 at 60fps in glorious 1080p not be able to handle a sports game? EA also has actual Xbox360 hardware a full year before the PS3, yet created the PS3 version for the same release date? Wow, does that make sense?
    • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2because killzone has been in development for about what now 3 and a half years maybe, duh
    • fotbr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5can you imagine the uproar from the ps3 fans if the 360 version was released now, and the ps3 version was released in, oh, say, 6 months?
  • copaceticZ, on 10/10/2007, -13/+11PS3 fans when will you wake up and smell the coffee....The fact of the matter is that the ps3 will never ever ever be as good as the 360 it will only cost a little more and play blu-ray dvds for you from a gaming stand-point it doesn't have a chance its not just the dev and the port-overs its architecture is badly designed its not capable of the kind of graphics a 360 can perform you see people hear that the ps3 has so many processors it must be better but the fact of the matter is that only 1 of its processors is as good as the 3 gpu's that the 360 has the other 6 processors it has are garbage for video games. So in short if you want a blu-ray player get a ps3 if you wanna play video games get a 360 it will ALWAYS be better than the PS3 graphically. PERIOD.
    • Etchii, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2And my 2x 8800's + quad core extreme will destroy both...PERIOD and guess what...im sure someone can beat that...and someone can beat even that... then you get into university and government supercomputers.... point is theres always someone with something better and its true with things other than electronics..so get the ***** over it. PERIOD PERIOD!



      newb... PERIOD!
    • Etchii, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0 Gah the angry double click!
    • SiL3ncer, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Go outside and play or something. You are spending too much time yapping on the web.
    • ssmith2k3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1the architecture of the ps3 is badly designed?? Are you a MIT trained EE/CS PHD? lol
    • ptaylor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Tell me exactly why it's badly designed? Go into detail...

      Didn't think so...

      Isn't this the THIRD Madden for the 360 (06 -08) and the SECOND for the PS3 (07 & 08). Isn't this the first 60 fps Madden for the 360? If you're smart, you'll know where I'm going with this...

      EA tech support (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/14/ea-tech-support-explains-ps3-madden-frame-rate-issues/)
      is basically saying the same thing, if they had more time with the PS3, then 08 would be 60fps. Tiburon has an August deadline EVERY year with Madden. It cannot be pushed back to September or later (that's why 360 owners didn't favor 06 and was ho-hum on 07) so EA has to cut corners to make the deadline and this year, the PS3 got the short end of the stick.

      Once the mystery of PS3's "badly designed architecture that will always be inferior to the 360 (did I get the gist of it?)" gets understood, the 60 fps games like Call of Duty 4 coming out towards teh end of this year will be "respectable" in your and other 360 fanboys eyes, yes?

      Loser...
  • HappyScrappy, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2The game doesn't "move twice as fast", it has more frames per second.

    Kinda odd that people can WATCH football on TV on Sundays on NBC at 30fps and then when it comes to video games, somehow 60fps is needed or the game is unacceptable.
    • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9you win most moronic comment in this thread, congrats dummy
    • GSullivan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If you read the article you'll note that the PS3 can't even maintain its 30fps and stutters frequently. The 360 version, according to the article, runs not only at double the frame rate but does so with out stuttering.
  • saltinekracka20, on 10/10/2007, -8/+0Unless the two are side by side, you're not going to notice the difference. Really, you're not.
    • errictshunn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I saw it in NCAA 08. I have the PS3 version, Have the 360 version demo. The 360 Demo is A LOT smoother than the PS3 version of the game. It does not bother me but it is definitely noticeable
      • saltinekracka20, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That just proves my point. I know its a lot smoother, but its not noticiable if you dont know the difference. Its all relative baby. (fyi, I own a 360).
  • errictshunn, on 10/10/2007, -8/+12Holy ***** I guess every developer is lazy and sucks because they cannot get game to run as smoothly on the PS3. Ubisoft, EA, 2k, Activision, and Koei are all bad at making games. And just do not get what they are doing, It definitely is not the PS3's structure, everyone else is stupid and does not understand how to make games. But everyone on Digg is awesome and could develop for the PS3. I Have seen the light.
  • DanGleesacks, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Another boing PS3 / XBOX fanboy whiging argument, mines better, no mine is better, blah, blah... Zzzzzzzz....
    • saltinekracka20, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2except this one has evidence.
  • AARGH2K, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Release dates of consoles is irrevelant. When they got dev kits is. PS3 production units got pushed back due to Blu-ray/diodes. So they time spread is not as significant as the PS3 fanboys make it out to be.
    • MWeather, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2So installed hardware base isn't a factor in how many games get made for a console? Good to know. I'm going to go buy a Dreamcast.
      • AARGH2K, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wha? I'm talking lead times, what are you talking about?
    • techmaster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I love how sony forced their devs to wait on a damn blu-ray laser, when MS just handed their devs a computer with HARD DRIVES in it. You compile the software, and run it off the hard drive. But sony doesn't understand that, apparently they think the devs want to burn every test to a disc before playing it. You know, back in the 90's I never thought I'd see Microsoft "thinking outside the box" but they're really starting to do it lately.
  • SiL3ncer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Only an IDIOT will purchase this game on PS3. It is time to send EA a message, buying the PS3 version means you can expect more garbage like this.
  • deaftly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2madden was still the top selling game of last year, this should really push alot more 360's then ps3's just because usa today is a huge selling publication
  • Denzal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3'So we finally know why GTA4 and MGS4 are taking so damn long, they need to be cut down to 30fps to run on the triple. Good times.
    • techmaster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Yep. The blu-ray discs hold a lot more data than DVD's, but what good is all that data when the hardware isn't fast enough to get that data to your television in a timely manner?
  • xSEED, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3more proof ps3 sucks
  • palmerized, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6PS3 is over priced and bloated. The 360 has an advantage as it's been out a year longer, more games and is cheaper.
    • zariok, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Overpriced? Wholy fanboy.

      XBOX Premium (20GB) $349.99
      HD-DVD Player $179.99
      xbox 360 charge and play kit $14.99
      Total: 544.97

      PS3 60GB comes with Blu-Ray and rechargable controller - $499.99

      So, you were saying?
    • errictshunn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Why are you adding the HD-DVD player? 1 out of 20 360 owners have one. And if you want to be that retarded Add 39.99 for HDMI cables for the PS3. And once the 60gb is done with you are back up to 599.99. So 640.00 for the PS3. The Bottom line is if you want to play a Madden, GTA 4, CoD4, or Oblivion you can do it on 360 in HD for $349.99 on PS3 you are paying $530.00-$540.00 seeing as the PS3 does not come with component cables or an HDMI cord. Seriously fanboys will fight anything to the death regardless of how stupid they sound.
  • username9000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8To all the people that are saying this is because the developers are lazy, let me pose this question?

    Why did the single player and BOTS get ripped out of Warhawk? The dev himself said on the IGN PS3 podcast that it was because it was too hard to implement the A.I.

    This is not a developer being lazy problem, this is a PS3 is retarded to program for problem.
    • ptaylor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I wouldn't say that the developers are lazy, I would say it is because EA needs more time with the game. Didn't they have less than a year to make this game anyway? When did 07 come out? These other FPS and action games have been in production for months up to a year or more (for those that got dev kits first) and dont have an August deadline, so they can push back. EA can't afford to focus on one aspect of the game, they must polish and make the games "identical" and then work on the speed.

      EA isn't lazy, they just was under a nasty deadline and unfortunatly shafted PS3 owners. The PS3 isn't retarded, it is just a machine that has to be figured out. I remember when 06 came out for the 360. Would you say that the 360 was retarded or call EA names then? Or do you say "it's a brand new system that they have to learn to take advantage of?"
  • DeepFreezed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5pwned....

    and it's on a casual news paper
  • captainjy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Sony and PS3 suck ass. Watch the side by side comparison video of the 2 and draw your own conclusions.
  • Magnum50Cal, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I like my PS3, and I like my 360.

    Hey EA, go ***** yourself. Get your head out of your ass and make us good games. I'm sick of 07, 08, 09, and other rehashed games. Make just one, and renew it every three years. Call it "The only ***** Madden game you'll get in three years". I want real time updated rosters, I want good game modes (not the ***** I get every year), I want real music (not emo *****), I want 60 fps for all systems, I want upgraded kick ass graphics, and I want you to test the ***** out of it. Why in the hell am I running through my QB, and catching balls out of bounds and still making touchdowns?!

    Don't get mad at Sony, and don't get mad at Microsoft. Get mad at EA. This company hasn't made a good game in four years.
    • Xecuter3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You remind me of the kid in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
    • dethsesh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1EA is truely the worst. A good rule of thumb is that if it has EA's name on it, it will have little to no replay value and not live up to your expectations in almost every aspect. EA's games exist purely on hype and hopes that people will buy it in masses before the reviews come out. I have come to avoid EA games for this reason.
  • spyork, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1EA has already stated that next year the PS3 version of Madden will run at 60fps. If I remember correctly they said they will be developing for the PS3 first and then porting to the 360. I believe they said it was easier to port from the PS3 than from the 360.
  • MedHead, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Now if only the XBOX 360's defect rate didn't scare me so much, I'd actually begin to consider saving up for it. I don't think it's smart to purchase one at the moment. I still play my original PlayStation, and I'd like to be able to do the same with an XBOX 360. I don't think I'd be able to do so with the current design.
  • doshindude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2This is nothing new, Sony always does the worst job with their games compared to other consoles. the PS2 and PS3 just suck framerate-wise (the PS2 also usually sucked graphicswise too)
  • palmerized, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1OK, a follow up, I picked up this game tonight for the 360. What the hell is the fuss about? This game is garbage. The football part is OK, but announcers suck, presentation sucks, crowd is so out of the game... I don't know, just not doing it for me. I'll be taking this to EB Games tomorrow to trade it in for something more exciting.

    IMO, this doesn't hold a candle to MLB 2K7... this sports game has it all. Visuals, presentation, gameplay, etc...

    PS. Why is it in all football games, players kinda of bounce off eachother. I don't get the sense of them really hitting... it's like pinball or something. In NHL for instance, when someone gets flattened you FEEL it...
    • ddobson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I've never bought a Madden and I've played precious few other football games in twenty-five years of videogaming. The sport just doesn't work well as a game for me -- I can't identify with a particular player, I'm not a fan of any team, and I'm not great at dealing with the playbook stuff. Soccer, baseball, golf and tennis games tend to appeal more to my tastes.

      Clearly, many, many people disagree with me. :)
  • ptaylor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Which frame rate did Madden 07 have for the 360? the PS3? Why is it that Call of Duty 4 will have a 60 fps?

    Just becasue Madden 08 is 60/30 between the 360 and the PS3, it just meant that EA didn't have the time (or didn't bother to take the time) to make the code tighter for the PS3. It doesn't mean that the PS3 is a ***** product, it's just that the software is not taking full advantage of the hardware.

    When developers have a better idea of how to take advantage of the PS3 hardware and then make the quality games as proof, then comparisons can be more valid. Otherwise, you sound like idiots touting something about these systems that when you peek closer. clearly shows the age and differences in the systems.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.