EA won't 'gimp' 360 Dead Space despite tough PS3 dev

The executive producer of EA's new sci-fi horror game Dead Space has told VideoGamer.com that the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "PS3 can't do it".

Speaking at an event in London today, where VideoGamer.com got some hands-on time with what's looking like one of 2008's most interesting new IPs, Glen Schofield said that currently the development team is leading on the 360, but will switch to the PS3 in a "month or two".

He stressed that both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 versions of the game will "be the same" when it's eventually released, planned for late 2008.

[Relcom]

If they can't figure this out here is what to do. Call Insomnia and ask for help. They make AAA game in 1 year that look and play great!

Problem solved

[Lifendz]

COD4 did it, Naughty Dog did it, and Insomniac is taking it to places we've never seen. EA, this is not going to fly. Yes 360 has the larger installed base but does that mean you put the PS3 version of games on the backburner? Not cool. I'd rather there wasn't even a PS3 version if we're going to get inferior ports or have to listen to Devs b!tch about how hard it is to develop on the system.

[aftrdark21]

I think you should copy/paste that reply in every thread where EA complains about developing for the PS3.

Bubbles!

[Cwalat]

MAKE THE GAME ON PS3 FIRST, THEN PORT IT TO 360,
that way, BOTH will be identical,

EA, is one of the biggest devs out there, how the fuukk can u guys come out lookin like pile of noobs ?

[gamesR4fun]

that their better with the 360 and not that the 360 is better than the ps3....
"What happened was the 360 came out a year ahead, so we started developing early on it. Then all of a sudden it was the lead SKU. So it won for two years. For two years it was the one we were just working on. And so our knowledge base is around that. Now you see the tide is starting to turn especially in Europe. So it's really just engineering catching up with it."

Kinda sad tho when so many other devs are able to tap it so well already... So either they have a bunch of retards working for them or they just havnt put enough resources into tapping the new tech in the ps3.....
Kinda sad when you think about 50% of their sales are coming from Sony. Over 300 mil sold on the ps2 alone.... You'd think it be in their own interest to put some money in the ps3....

[ruibing]

As of right now, I've completely stopped purchasing EA games. The last one I bought last year was Rock Band. I really don't like the idea of supporting developers that one moment pats a console on the back at the same time trying to trip it.

For sports, I turn to 2K and Sony. For FPS, I turn to Insomniac, Infinity Ward, and Epic. Basically for whatever genre EA tries to venture in, there is always a better alternative.

[MikeGdaGod]

never heard of this game

[prowiew]

Keep in mind that for third party to make great games they need to have support from sony. I think thats been the biggest problem. Every sony game looks amazing, but third party games has been struggling. Sony need to step it up in their support and tools. Obiously insomniac, naughty dog, etc. has 100% support from sony.

[Salvadore]

Geez, aren't these guys responsible for great titles like Army of Two and Burnout?

[Sarick]

the media eats this stuff up and spits it back out to joe public.

Reviews and such prove that they've not taken the PS3 userbase seriously. This in turn makes people not buy their games on the PS3.

EA needs to wake up and do a few great games that aren't just equal quality but better by using as much as the PS3 power they can tweek out of it.

They've been making the 360 verions superior because the PS3 versions where ports.

Stop for a moment if you make the games without thinking "if we add this much detail will it make us redo the engine so the other console can adapt to it." Your only setting yourself up for failure if you limit the potential for the sake of equality if your using the lowest common denominator technology specification as a guideline.

EA your like a painter painting a floor. Instead of painting from the inside to the outside your painting from the outside to the inside trapping yourselves in the middle of wet paint.

This is why your ports are so inferior on the PS3. The media knows this, Customers know this and you know this. That's why the 360 versions sale better and will continue to sale better untill you give people a reason to buy PS3 versions because they utilise the PS3'S potential.

1.0 So the answer to your question "So why is everyone complaining"

Because EA talks the talk but people doubt they'll walk the walk, talk is cheap.

[ravinash]

I really, really, really, really hope that they pull it off as I would prefer to have it for the PS3.
This looks like such a great game.

I don't know why people are getting upset about something that has not been completed yet....I'll be up set if it comes out and its below standard. But if they are only changing over the PS3 now as the lead to develop for, then its going to be another year before this comes out.
By that time if EA has any standing in the computer game business then they would have sorted out their PS3 woes......I hope.

[Bubble Buddy]

It's true, Insomniac has few guys there and produce much much better games than EA. Screw live for EA all about 2k now for nba.

[fusionboxer]

Whether or not you support the ps3 or 360, the fact that EA cannot make great games has been known for quite some time.

They have a ton of workers, many bases all over the US and world, but can't seem to somehow put resources or time into learning how to program for a specific console when it's not just a hobby, but their job.

I mean great that they're going to try to push the game to it's full potential on the 360, but it's obvious to almost every developer out there at this point that the ps3 can be pushed farther then any console out right now just based on specs alone. It really just shows who has talent and who doesn't within the industry and if this particular developer can't create a solid playstation title then they've already lost one customer and possibly the respect of their colleagues at GDC this year.

[hades07]

EA needs two seperate development teams for the 360 and PS3. Have all the same artwork and textures and designs and everything for both games but specific people for each system. I say this because both systems are so different from what I remember. The 360 has a unified archtecture with shared ram for all of the system processes whereas the PS3's architecture is more seperated with dedicated ram for the system video card, etc. Obviously both systems have their strentghs and weaknesses. The 360 a more streamlined GPU-CPU so it can produce better particle effects and sometimes textures, whereas the PS3 has a more powerful CPU which helps it have better physic effects. So why dont they add more particle effects and whatever else to the 360 version, and more Physics effect and whatnot for the PS3 version. I know this will create even more comparison-fanboy non sense for people to post on N4G, but in the end it will be better for the owners of each system to take advantage of each of their strengths instead of leaving their strengths out and just going with the lowest common denominator.

[Anego Montoya FTMFW]

gimped.

like GT5, RFOM2, KILLZONE 2.

that kinda gimped?

PS.

I approved this cause, this is SO FUNNY it`s newsworthy.

LOL.

[aftrdark21]

I laughed when I read the title

[aftrdark21]

The "phantom" disagree is showing up again...

[Anego Montoya FTMFW]

the ghost of N4G loves to disagree w/ me.

[sak500]

@ 2
How are these games you listed above? Did u finish them all or just started playing?

[mesh1]

hahahahahahahahah thank good i can read some real news from E.A who are more qualified than the fanboys on this thread i rather hear the truth from them than the lies from you the are telling the truth.

[LJWooly]

wrong place, sorry :)

[Skerj]

Yes, everyone knows porting 360 code to PS3 works wonders. ..

[Anego Montoya FTMFW]

is beyond me.

@skerj

agreed.

the LEARNING CURVE period is OVER.

2008 FTW.

[Skerj]

I don't know, but I hope they're right in the article when they talk about moving the code over and optimizing. Shoddy ass ports will not be tolerated in 08, especially around the time Resistance 2 is launching.

[mighty_douche]

Skerj, thats news to me.... lol...

anyway, i thiought this game was Capcom? maybe im confusing it for something else.

[DTClown]

are the devs who don't learn the newer, more powerful hardware. Otherwards, EA is gimped! EA, all you have to do is look at your own Criterian (Burnout Paradise) to see how multi-platform games should be developed. (PS3 lead platform)

[rushbd]

Good old EA. All of their games are gimped as i know it. How will they gimp it further ? !

[power of Green]

EA owns many studio's you talk as if its one team working on every game lol.

[LJWooly]

Burnout, Skate, Rock Band are three great titles from EA.

Burnout: Disappointed some of the 'hardcore' Burnout fans with a new approach, but still a very solid racer indeed.

Skate: Blows the competition (Tony Hawks) out of the water, by adding a huge dose of innovation that the genre's been needing for a while now.

Rock Band: Guitar Hero, but with three instruments rather than just one. It's also undoubtedly better in every way, apart from visuals (but they don't matter, it's about music).

EA have made some great games, but their problem is they're greedy. They see which console (the 360) has the bigger install base as of now, and instantly treat it with more respect, so PS3 owners feel shafted, which just isn't cool.

[jalutaja]

All of You praise EA, if they released the predictions about 2008 hardware sales.

[aftrdark21]

EA so go back to making SNES games...It's not that hard to "gimp" 16 bit graphics.

At least they were fun back then.

[bootsielon]

Can they say the same about the PS3 version? Can they say that it will fully utilize Blu-ray, Cell and HDD capabilities? If it doesn't, then the PS3 version is indeed gimped! And that is thanks to the 360.

[Ju]

I don't even know, what he's trying to say "We're not going to gimp the 360 because the PS3 can't do it". Can someone translate that? So, what, is he saying, they don't "gimp" the 360 version because he thinks the PS3 can't do it ? Or what does that mean?

And then he says: "Pretty soon in a month or two we will switch and lead on the PS3". So they make the PS3 the lead platform ? So, what now? Do they even have a working PS3 version running so far ? Oh boy, if they haven't I would suspect a nice awakening for them. Good by 2008 release, IMO.

But I see, that's a producer. Not that this guy would know how SW dev. works. Sounds like marketing bubbles to me. I got the feeling he has no clue what he's talking about. Some executive might have told him that Burnout worked great, so they have to do the same way now...

[wageslave]

I dont know if you understand, I believe you do not.

Regarding the PS3's CPU: That is exactly what this article is telling you. They are going to have to do a lot of CPU specific coding to optimize the game to run on the PS3 as well as Xbox 360.

They are being forced to do cell-specific coding to overcome its design. They arent doing it so they can realize some kind of 4D graphics, they are doing it because they must. If they do not spend more time and money on the PS3 version, it wont perform.

[Sarick]

It seems EAs excuse is blame the PS3 first. Design it for the 360 then try and emulate it on the PS3.

Get it out quickly by designing it on 360 first or take time making it better on the PS3 first.

Why bother if you can make a rough sketch on the 360 then prt it over using only the main core on the PS3.

You all do realise Oblivion wasn't even designed to take advantage of the cell. It used the core to produce a stunning game. Based on reviews it looked and played better on the PS3. So think about this before you listen to this PS3 can't do it.

Sounds like they know the PS3 version won't be ported well. Instead of making the 360 equal quality (gimping it) or making optimizations to the PS3 version. Their leaving it as is so it appears as the 360 has superior hardware to get it rushed out. In fact it's because they refuse to invest any more time or money in correctly porting it to the PS3.

[Silver360]

Fill rate is hard to get at. It is easier on the 360. That both versions will be the same. They will work to make the PS3 version as good looking as the 360 version. Remember it is easier and cheaper to make games for the 360...

[Ju]

Well, he said this:

"I'm from an artist background.:

and then he continued:

"But from a developer point of view it's called the Fill Rate. It (the PS3) can't handle the physics as well. I mean it can, you just have to get at it. Just more and more engineering. Special effects are tough. It's a beautiful machine and it is very powerful. It's just it's not as easy to develop for right now."

I would say, if you an artist, let the SW talk to the engineers. This is hear say, and while I do not argue this is completely wrong, it isn't right either.

This is BS talk, which people, content with standard multi threaded programming are used to, are complaining about. But that's just one side of the story. As stated many times before, the CELL is NOT a coherent multi core cpu, instead it uses 6 (available) cores, which are good on large data, non branching code. Something, which AI and Physics is not written in, to some extend. So, sure, they are right. If they try to port this PPU code straight over to a different architecture. That won't work.

What some studios do, for example, is, they use dynamic scaling of AI routines, which means, big crowds, which usually are in the distance, are calculated with lesser accuracy on the SPUs, while close characters (enemies) run on the PPU (to utilize better branch prediction, or more sophisticated routines, etc).

Same about fill rate. Later PS3 games do vertex pre-processing and reduction, using the fill rate more efficient. Rendering lesser triangles, effectively.

And there are a ton of other things to consider. Spawning multiple threads across the SPUs won't help, either. On the 360, you would simply break things into pieces and make sure a proper scheduler spawns your thread across your cores (kind of), but that very same approach won't work on the CELL. SRAM management will play a fundamental role here. A context switch in the SPU is way more expensive then say on a coherent multicore, so you'd want to design that properly.

The good thing, and that is what some devs have stated, is, if you design this that way in the first place, it is way easier to backport this to a coherent machine (the 360). Simply because the original design has to be much more thought true or optimized, which also benefits the other machine. That's the same thing like C++ (or Java) programmers calling c'tors and d'tors like crazy without even realizing the every (dynamic) instance of an object kills the memory subsystem, especially in a high performance application - but true, C++ (or Java) is so much more convenient to program in then, say C. But on the other hand, using an already efficient C code in C++ (or Java) will benefit those applications as well.

Now, to the said. Even if they'll make the PS3 their lead platform, and even if they have already design a lot with parallel executions in place, it doesn't mean, you can simply port that. That's why I mentioned if they haven't any code running yet, they are up for a nice surprise when they'll reach that point. Often you can throw that code away and can start from scratch. While the concepts my hold, the code often does not.

[venum]

They are talking too much, I'd rather to see them working and finishing games running well on xbox 360 and PS3. And WII too.

[JOLLY1]

I am sorry it is off topic.

[Blademask]

Wow.. so.. the PS3's hardware still cant make games right? ::rolls eyes:: Yet.. Uncharted puts every other console game to shame TECHNICALLY.

These devs are getting ridiculous now. Call up infinity ward EA, a real developer. These idiots sound like the same people that had problems with the PS2.

As if they didn't see a learning curve coming with NEW technology?

[rexor0717]

I agree that the PS3 is as or more powerful than the 360. I want to see any game in the market on consoles compare to Uncharted. Im not talking about gameplay, just GRAPHICS. Thats right, graphics. Please, show me.
So how can a PS3 version be gimped?

[sak500]

edit wrong place

[sak500]

The graphics are plain and bland. Only colorful thats it. Lot of popins etc. Whats so special about this game? Maybe for you guys who have only played games with 3 colors before

[TruthBTold]

That is what you call being slow and ignorant. When other developers do it why cant they do it. There really is no excuse to not do a good or excellent job on making a game on the PS3. The xbox dev team are probably happy because they will do what they always do but the PS3 team is like "but I dont want to learn new stuff" "hey guys since they made us work and learn at the same time, lets just do what we can, i dont feel like learning anything new". How can EA allow such a poor statement to be made. They say PS3 will sell very well in 2008 and yet they dont want to put an effort to learn for themselves how to work with the great console they talk so good about. Very unprofesional and just shows how lazy they are.

[sak500]

The other developers had no choice but to make it on ps3 since that was the only platform they were working one. So how much sales did they get out of working so hard for years? You be the judge. THese EA guys have lots of overheads and they want to make games which dont require lots of resources and time since they need to recoup their investment quickly. Hence comes the 360 platform they have been making games on for last 2 years, and getting plenty of sales. If you own EA what would u do?

[blusoops]

"the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "PS3 can't do it".

LOL...that sentence should say: "the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "EA DEVELOPMENT TEAM can't do it on the PS3".

Seriously, EA gets no money from me untill they get their act together. Only game worthy is Burnout Paradise...but I count that more like a Criterion game not EA!

[niall77]

once they get some of these old projects out of the way.

I can see the EA sports games this year leading on Ps3

[titntin]

There's no suprises here.
E.A hires a whole host of old school PC programmers, and no doubt wants them to reuse subroutines they've been using for years, and gets them programming for 2 years on an xbox 360 before saying, 'oh - BTW guys, we also need it on PS3, just run a quick convertion will you?' Its pathetic and why every E.A. developed title on the PS3 is an absolute disaster. Criterion still have some independance so they were at least spared the routine ineptitude with which EA handles is development teams.

I know, I used to work for Bullfrog and we were absorbed by E.A., so I watched first hand as all the creativity and talent that had been bullfrog, got systamatically destroyed and subsumed by the corporate monstrosity that is EA... It will be another 2 years before EA can produce anything on PS3 worrth playing, and they'll only achieve it by buying a team that have already learnt how to program properly..

[mighty_douche]

You have anything to do with the Populous games then? ahhh that takes me back to my Amiga days.....

[Ju]

Well, the good thing, and that might have hit some high ups on the head, is that with Criterion they have an absolute PS3 force in their portfolio, now. What's more, this game runs great on the PS3 (and in my opinion better), and also sells great on the PS3 (and the 360). So, this might have lead to rethinking their strategies and maybe an order to their studios - or questioning those - to copy Criterion's approach. Especially, the opinion to use the PS3 as a lead and backport to the 360 has been wide spread outside of EA and now also got confirmed inside. And before anyone qualifies this as a fanpost, the opinion also often claims, this approach leads to a more efficient 360 version.

[jackdoe]

Criterion is a great developer. The only degradation that occurs between a Ps3 to 360 port is slight screen tearing, and you know what? You won't even fvcking notice it. Much better ways to make multiformat games, at least if you want to make money. There was a reason why EA made so little on the PS3 last year. Fvcked up ports like Orange Box, MoH AB, Madden 08, etc. You don't notice screen tear. You DO notice frame rate issues up the wazoo, long load times, and texture problems. Those things kill sales.

[titntin]

@mighty_douche
lol at the disagree's!

No mate I wasn't there for the original populous, though I did contribute to 'populous the beggining'. My first ever game was for the Amiga - a 3D racing title rather like 'Virtua racing'.:)

They were the days. I could be the entire art team just by myself!
Nowadays you hire a specialist who 'just models eyebrows'!!! :) Bah!

[LaChance]

Just look at Heav sword , I think its uncompetance to use 50 GB for only 7 hours of gaming while other games (ps3 and 360) use FAR less space for bigger , better and longer games.Its just FAR harder to make good games on PS3.Its not that they are lazy(ea)
Perfect example : All of you mention Insomniac , most of you can only mention ONE develloper who actually handles the cell.If devs were lazy there would be more names of good devs coming out your mouth and not only Insomniac (either than square and Konami they aint alot )

[Pain]

cell mabey that for ther pertty colors n what not but Blu-ray on other hand.....

Gears of war vs RFOM......
Gears 8 hours
RFOM ug i lost count after 15 hours..

[ruibing]

Well, on the top of my head I can think of Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Ninja Theory, Infinity Ward, Codemasters, Polyphony Digital, and Evolution Studios.

[joevfx]

heavleny sword was bascically a release game teh devs didnt have the full knowledge of the PS3 architecture liek they do now. in fact first gen game s on the Ps3 looked WAY better hten 1st gen game son the 360. EA is just a bunch of telentless money grubbing whores. all they care about is gettign a game ot as quickly and easly as possible ( cuttign any corners they can) just to make money faster. tell EA to talk about the PS3 "problems" to infinity ward, naughty dog, epic, and guerilla....

[Snukadaman]

Whats even funnier is you people are naming first party developers..that sony helped personally....most developers are not getting this extra help with sonys personal developers....Its been more then a year now and you still cant see that some developers are still having problems developing ps3 multiplatform games....granted..those first party developers are making great games...but when it comes too multiplatform they cant keep up with the xbox..open your eyes.

[GETPWNED]

You stupid n00b. Please tell me what overall game length has to do with anything at all other than available development time and resources? Please enlighten us. Because the last time I checked, the better-looking / playing / sounding Gears of War may indeed be a tad bit "shorter" than the sub-par Resistance, but what does that have to do with available disc space? The only reason Resistance takes-up 50 gigs is because the one game disc stores all languages. If resistance really needed all that space, then why does Gears look much better? Please explain that one. If Epic had the available development time, Gears could have been 40+ hours, no problem. Storing instances of 3D geometry and material shaders takes-up absolutely no extra disc space. Or perhaps you'd like to explain to us how Oblivion, a 200+ hour game, is only 5 gigs? Really, don't be a stupid fanboy. It's embarrassing to read.

[Xbox is the BEST]

RFOM sucks something with the aiming that they need to fix.

[JBaby343]

The "tad bit shorter" are you serious? I beat gears in just under 5 hours (I've heard others do it faster) where as I stopped counting with resistance at 12 hours. How is more than twice the length "a tad shorter?" I'll give it to you that gears does look better but it certainly doesn't play better. The shooting mechanics suck. The cover system was great but the guns were lifeless and did not feel at all like shooting. They felt like spit wads and half the time you couldn't tell if you were hitting the guy. I hated the feel of shooting in that game because there was no feel.

If they could make it longer I suspect they would have because with all the crap Heavenly Sword took for being short (took me 9 hours) it was still almost twice the length of Gears. I'm actually afraid Gears 2 will be as short as Gears 1 because I want to like it but it just did not impress me outside of the visuals. Also can they please figure out how to put more than 2-3 enemies on the screen because the "cover, pop up shoot, cover" with 3 guys is just too easy. Longer draw distances too please.

You two are as stupid as lachance.

[ThaGeNeCySt]

LOL

[Willio]

you got disagree for laughing? lol wtf

[Nykamari]

David Moore anyone!!!!!!!!!!

[ThaGeNeCySt]

Peter*

[ThaGeNeCySt]

"He said: "Sony has seen the game so they know that that's what they want out of us. But I can absolutely assure you that the PS3 and the 360 will be the same. We're not going to gimp the 360 because the PS3 can't do it. We're going to optimise the crap out of it and make the PS3 really good, sort of like Burnout." "

Sounds good to me, why is everyone complaining?

[Nykamari]

Thanks for the correction

[Ju]

I'm not complaining, I just got the feeling they got ordered to do so. Its not that they came up with the idea themselves. But maybe not. Its just my impression.

[jackdoe]

Just bad vibes, especially given EA's track record. When they actually admit they are having trouble, you know the port will end up like sh!t.

[i Shank u]

Infinity ward split up into teams for COD4 ; one for ps3 and one for 360. makes alot of sense and the game came out great. specifically, the ps3 team had a long time to develop on and learn the ps3 hardware. if you take one team, do the game on one console, then switch to go do it on the other.........sounds to me like somethings gonna go SNAFU. I smell a delay on this one.

wait nevermind. i dont know what that is I smell : P

[pswi60]

EA gimps ps3 multiplatform games cause "they can't do it"

if anyone reads the article, this guys says something about Fill Rate, the ps3 not being able to do the physics, but it can, you just have to work at it.

So, again, EA is saying they don't want to work at ps3 development because it's new to them and they've been deving on the 360 for 2 years.

Please vote with your wallets, do not buy EA games until they embrace ps3 development and really learn what the machine can do, instead of reading off a MS press release.

[mesh1]

GIMPSTATION 3 IS A Garbage why did they make that console ? ull notice its hard to make increadibly complex game with real world looking grapics and amazing depth with the game progaming as u can see on the 360 mass effect,bioshock,halo3 all this game have deths that ive not seen on the ps3 ,most of the ps3 excl;usive all have a cartoony fake look uncharted and ive played is not a graphical showcase character model in that games nothing compared to gears of war even cod4 the ps3
can not even handle ue3 which is a realwolrd graphics engine that makes things look like real life,so we all know why its called the gimpstation 3 and why multiplats that are built on the 360 makes the game a better game .

[Nodoze]

Thanks for doing the PS3 community a favor. You have highlighted your efforts (or lack therof) for the platform. This reads in big bold flashing lights PS3 Owners...DONT BUY THIS!

As has been seen time and time again, the developers are the issue, NOT the platform.

To be honest this game looks like crap. It appears that the development team has realised this, and is now attempting to drum up some press with some diatribe about gimping versions. I got news for you guys, from the trailers I have seen...both versions are GIMPED. The game looks like a$$. Crap animation, shoddy textures, horrid game models (the aliens look retarded), and what is with the lead characters suit (it looks like a reject from the Bioshick big daddy casting call). Are those louvers for ventilation? haha nice!!

As a parting note, how is a game that pits the main character in space, on a derelict spacecraft, fighting aliens, on a mission of survial...one of the most interesting IPs of 2008? Are you fing serious? I have a feeling I have seen this plot somewhere before...

[boodybandit]

Who cares?
This is going to be another B title that is better off being rented then purchased. Does it really matter? How many decent titles does EA put out any more? Most of them are not in house games but companies like Criterion that make good games. And we all know how that title turned out.

It's EA's problem if they are behind the times, not Sony's.

[eddierivera]

I just bought Burnout and I fell totally in love with the game,, im getting even more pissed off in Paradise than in COD4. All I gotta say is that I'm not buying this game now from what I heard. Its a no go if the lead is on the 360. Its a fact that anything that comes ported from the xbox is crap.

[pwnsause]

Criterion Made the Game, not EA, EA publishes the game, EA's Dev team dont know squat about developing on PS3 hardware first, who here wants to bet that although they promised that their sports games are going to run at 60fps on PS3, the next madden for this year is going to run at 30fps again, with bad visuals on PS3, its EA. dont expect the unexpected on this one folks!

[meepmoopmeep]

i have no respect on any developer that would put down ANY platform's capabilities. that to me, is not professional and tells me they lack the wits and dislike challenges. each platform is different but each can display amazing results if one would only put aside any bias and concentrate on making a game as good as it can be regardless of which platform it is for or how hard it is to do so.

[cr33ping_death]

EA how much dumber can your devs get? they have had time to get to know the PS3 and it seems as if they take 1 step forward(or none) and 5 steps back. get your sh!t together EA.

[onyxbox]

they led on 360 and are now trying to defend that decision, and the PS3 will sadly probably suffer.

spend 2 years developing a game for a 360 then "a month or two" trying to butcher it into a PS3 like all other 360 led cross platform dev... just because the tools are probably a bit easier to use.

[General Pinky]

give them the right tools and you will get the right games...
that goes for the xbox live..give them the right features online than the game would be big...
Same can not be said about the PSN

[khellendros1]

It's amazing to me that after seeing Uncharted and UT3 and hearing about the planned 60 players online for Resistance 2 that anyone would release a statement like this. I would be ashamed as a developer. What it really says is that they don't know how to program for the system.

[OpiZA]

Yeh... 2 say one console can do something when the other can't is abit whack.

They both have the horsepower 2 push equal games, they just need someone 2 teach them.

[Meus Renaissance]

It will flop in sales. When will EA learn to make the PS3 the lead platform like they did with Burnout? And look at the sales of that game - it's doing magic for them with the PS3 sales.

People know whats quality, and if this game is sub-par on the PlayStation 3, then the consumers will know about it.

[SRuN4]

I was looking forward to this game but not anymore, sounds like it's gonna be another lame EA PS3 port.

"It (the PS3) can't handle the physics as well. I mean it can, you just have to get at it."

That statement right there basically proves they are just plain lazy, or too stupid to understand or maybe it's a combination of both.

[Says you]

they know how to make any other games has any one seen them make any other games besides out of all the sports games that and yes I know the Mafia the Godfather but big whoop I guess they'll only be good at sports nothing special it amazes me that they can make there money by using the same old tech that they have been using out of these years like in the last generation and they still keep getting money its the same ol crap that they've been putting out since the last gen people need to stop buying there crap!.

[Keowrath]

EA? LOL I haven't bought a game from them since NFSU:2

[Iron Man 2]

If Dead Space is gimped in anyway it's the Xbox 360's fault,just look at GTA IV;)

[moparful99]

Dude shut up and go eat your cheerios. Yea the 360 was the lead platform for the game because rockstar has had more time to develop on the system. Remember that sub par table tennis game that came out in 06? Yea that game was a testbed for the euphoria engine that they then coded gta iv in. This is why the 360 is the lead platform not because it plays and looks better. You dont even know whether it does or not, you're just speculating and spreading controversy. So before you open your mouth and spew innacuracies you need to analyze yourself.

[captainjy]

Wario, you freaking idiot. You know better to say this crap and you are only saying to start it up. You know damn well that the 360 is the lead platform, especially since Rockstar has had so many technical terrors with the PSFree. Face it, the PSFree is only good for watching movies and that's debateable.

[heyheyhey]

they wont gimp it? i wasn't even aware that they had to gimp it

no game has ever been "gimped" for the ps3, it's just devs having difficulties with the new hardware

EA had better up their game if they are going to be the most powerful publisher in the world

[Ghoul]

the ps3 isnt weaker then the 360 its just to obvious ea isnt capable of adopting a new system even tough its out on themarket for quite some time now.

pathetic

[LightningPS3]

Sometimes someone isn't informed correctly and a silly misquote makes news.

Anyway, he said the game will be the same on both consoles. So what's the problem?

[Bladestar]

Question to those here that believe they know more than developers...

First, before you all get on the hate mode... this is known to be a fact.. here you can read it yourself: http://www.innerbits.com/bl...

"Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

This article also break down the PS3 vs Xbox 360 memory footprint:
http://ozymandias.com/archi...

base on the last article... that means that PS3 developer have 73MB less than xbox 360 developer that they can use for their games...

I know most of you believe that Available System Memory is not as important as Disc or CPU power.. and that you can run Crysis on a PC with a 32 Cell processors and a 200GB blu-ray disc and only a 32MB GPU.... lol... but the reality never changed... GPU and Ram are as important if not more important than anything on a console... This is why Gears runs on the xbox 360 without the need of the cell or blu-ray... Textures, game assets, etc MUST FIRST BE LOADED INTO MEMORY BEFORE THEY CAN BE USED.... THIS IS WHY SOME GAMES WILL NOT RUN ON THE XBOX 360 OR THE PS3 and only on PC with 1-2GB of Memory.

I still don't understand why people keep talking about Kill Zone 2 when trying to make their point that the PS3 or the xbox 360 can handle it.... It depends on the specific game and the resources is using... you don't know how this game will be designed or how much memory each level requires...

Let me give you an example:

If a PC game like crysis has a map so big that requires 800MB of RAM... if this game is ever ported to the xbox 360 or the PS3 developer would have to a) Dumb down all the textures or game assets to fit within the limits of available PS3 and xbox 360 memory.

Do you understand? It does not matter that the xbox 360 or the PS3 have faster CPUs or GPUs... it's a memory restriction...

Now developers creating games like COD4, Kill Zone 2, Gears and other games that may look better than most games design their games to not exceed this memory limitations... How? Making Smaller levels, smaller maps, reusing lots of textures and game assets.... Removing vehicles ala COD4.... limiting the mission size or adding cut scenes while loading needed textures and game assets for the area they are about to enter.

So, please PS3 fans... I have shown articles that prove that the xbox 360 currently give developers more Memory(73MB) so developers can load their textures and game assets... of course in paper both consoles offer the 512MB memory... and I'm not going to get into the fact that the PS3 has split memory... and the xbox 360 has unified... but on the simple fact of what's available to developers...

My question to you is.... since developer have more memory available on the xbox 360 than the PS3... do you understand now why EA is talking about 'gimp' the xbox 360 version? because it's a fact that it can happen... if EA wants this game to run on the PS3 and they using the xbox 360 as a lead platform... they better not use that extra 73MB the xbox 360 gives them...
unless you can prove to me that Blu-ray or the Cell have MEMORY developers can use.

That's what EA is talking about... not that the PS3 can't run beautiful games who where designed for a)The PS3 memory limits, b)xbox 360 memory limits or c)both...

Why else do you think MMOs don't look like Kill Zone 2 or COD4? Can Sony dev make a game with open ended maps like Obvlibion games and still have them look like Kill Zone 2?

[Eamon]

hmm. Interesting.

[Jdoki]

And yet I look at Uncharted and Ratchet and all thoughts of memory footprints and bottlenecks suddenly evaporate...

[Ashta]

I don't want to seem like I'm stealing your thunder there Bladestar but I am just going to go ahead and call that article you used bogus. Not because it doesn't provide interesting information but because it's designed to be a hit piece.

The fact of the matter is that the only difference really between the two platforms is the programming architecture and EA is taking the easy way out and going with what they are more familiar with.

As for the Crysis thing....it's already being done. The CryEngine2 is going to be on display and running for both Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles at GDC. So, I don't think the argument of footprints and bottlenecks carries very far anymore. It might have a year ago when the PS3 was being trounced every day and every hour, but the fact of the matter is that we gamers have seen examples that prove the PS3 is nowhere near as limited as everyone screamed that it was a year ago.

[heyheyhey]

well done Bladestar, you made a rational comment

but you forget one thing.... the SPE's of the cell have individual cache to store extra textures and all that jazz and as we all know- cache is much faster than RAM

of course i am not saying that this makes up for the 73MB of RAM, ATM the 360 wins in terms of memory

and i say ATM because im sure Sony is working hard to minimize the XMB's RAM usage and therefore provide more to the developers

personally i think Sony knew what they wer doing when they designed the PS3, because why would anyone put in the worlds most advanced CPU and then put in crap RAM- they probably thought that they could rely on the cells cache or reducing the XMB's RAM usage in the future

although congrats on making an interesting and rational comment

[bigjclassic]

EA's bad ripoff of RE4. this and Dark Sector are the "trial run" of RE4 clones.

[bootsielon]

And the lack of HDD gimps games, not Blu-ray or the cell processor.

[InYourMom]

Did you even read the article?? Ignorance is bliss eh?

Thanks for the Reassurance EA, even though I have a feeling it will still be gimped.. Leave those crappy ports on the grill, the 360 doesn't need that.

[gamesR4fun]

Just how stupid and ignorant do you have to be in the open zone? not that I care what their saying since all of those deleted dudes are already on my ignore list lol
This is getting to be like the special Olympics of fanbois

Still nshif you deserve something special

[Neurotoxin]

Oh dear, EA and the Unreal Engine 3. That is a recipe for a very Sh*tty Port.

[Expy]

Electronic Arts is developing this game. I think that speaks for itself.

[SL1M DADDY]

What the heck kind of dev openly admits to being a puss when it comes to making games? I guess the answer to that is EA... Somebody needs to tell EA to shut up and put out.

[Genuine]

Last-gen Xbox & Gamecube owners had to suffer sometimes because the Ps2 was the lead platform. Atleast we don't have to worry about EA gimping 360 games just because sony used a non-gaming centric CPU (Cell). As a 360 owner, I certainly don't want my games ported from the slightly inferior ps3. Who knows if a dev will be lazy and not utilize the 360's power.

[Eamon]

That was one thing that seriously ticked me off.

Was that for most multi-platform games Xbox and GC version were ports.

But I think near the end game developers started working on all versions.

Although I am happy that most game developers are working on 360 first I still think it's not right to make ports for PS3. Either get the right amount and type of developers for the job or just develop for one platform.

But the only game I would not care if its a port or not is MGS4 =3

[jackdoe]

Lol. Slightly inferior PS3? Sigh.

[Willio]

EA will gimp 360 games in the future depending on the leading sales platform. Maybe 1 or 2 years from now but they will if they continue the trend to support of the highest installbase.

[Ashta]

For me to write this game off already as a product that EA will assuredly screw up in the end?

I -want- to believe that they wont absolutely suck at developing Dead Space but with the attitude presented in the article I just cant see myself having much faith in this dev team.

Also, just for the record: "If the PS3 version is gimped it isnt because the PS3 version "can't do it" it's because the dev team cant program it"

[xboxlj]

Honestly, I've had my ps3 for 2 months now and have only turned it on maybe 5 times. I played Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, R&C, ROFM, and Lair. None of those games can hold my attention like my 360 games do. I am not a fanboy, I wish I could enjoy my ps3.

[Ashta]

I hate to point this out but the problem isn't with your PS3 it is with the game choice you might be choosing. Aside from HS and Uncharted I could see why people might be turned off from some of the others, but the library for the PS3 is much larger than before so why not trying to expand out of those five single games.

I probably own about 15 games by now (at least 6 of them are PSN titles) and even though I might get bored with Motorstorm or something I still have enough variance to keep me entertained. Not to mention the fact that I can always just kick back and pop in an HD movie and relax when I want to take a break from gaming.

I understand you want to enjoy your PS3 more, but maybe you need to give it more of a chance.

[Genuine]

I understand what you are trying to say. But honestly, I don't know anyone with both 360 & Ps3, that plays or buys more games on ps3. The 360 versions of 90% of multi-plats are either the same or slightly better than the ps3's. Then you have XBL, it's the only truly next-gen online gaming network. Not mention the 360 has over 200 more titles in it's library. I can see why the 360 gets more playtime, it's a better gaming platform.

[tordavis]

You guys make comments on the development of a game and you aren't developers. Just because Insomniac did something and Infiniti Ward did something, doesn't mean that all devs are using the same tools, techniques and coding on every game they make. If development was the same on every game, there would never be delays. Stop acting like you know anything about the game development process because it always changes across the board. It's not as simple as calling Insomniac in for help. Does Insomniac know anything about what engine they are using for Dead Space? Probably not.

[Willio]

Thats true that every company has different approachs for the process of creating dev kits. But isnt it sad when EA, one of the largest company to lag behind their lesser competition when it comes to gameplay differences of multiplatforms? Furthermore, since EA is so famed for buying out their competition, why didnt they think ahead and buyout one of the companies that had interests in designing for PS3 as a lead console to learn from them?

Nonetheless, this article has only further damaged their reputation as a leading innovator for the gaming industry.

[pwnsause]

oh EA, you guys are amazing on bringing in Mediocrity to the Gaming Industry dont you?

[Maldread]

They can hardly make any game run smooth regardless of platform.

Why EA hasn`t learned more from Criterion`s development proses of making the PS3 version first and then port to 360, since they actually own the company, is beyond me. Guess it`s all about the money (and that people keep buying crappy unfortunately) :(

If the PS3 installbase keeps going up one would think they would have to take better care of their products, but being EA i would be more surpried if that actually happened because they havn`t made a great game in ages themselves (not counting Burnout etc here).

Hope they get Dead Space to run equally good on both (but i`m not sure it will happen), the game looks interesting actually.

[Genuine]

The last thing that 360 owners need is for it's games to be ported from the ps3. The ps3 is weaker for gaming applications. It's been proven time and again in multi-plats that the ps3 struggles to match the 360's performance. Is it really any suprise that the 360 has no trouble running ps3 ports? 360 is a better game console, with hardware geared towards gaming.

The ps3 is a blu-ray player, with hardware geared towards movies. Seriously, ask yourself. Sony said that the extra disc space of blu-ray is needed, but the BD- drive in the ps3 is so slow that devs use redundant data, and hefty installs for games to work up to snuff. Then they put a CPU in the ps3 that developers have openly said was "overly difficult". Lol, now that's the way to build a game machine!! Not. Oddly enough the Cell is a fantastic video image decoder.

[Willio]

"The last thing that 360 owners need is for it's games to be ported from the ps3. The ps3 is weaker for gaming applications. It's been proven time and again in multi-plats that the ps3 struggles to match the 360's performance"

I personally only own a ps3 so i can not prove this but COD4 was supposidly better than their counterpart 360 on graphics with lighting and shades. As far as i know, most if not all multi-platform games are runned on 360 as a leading console first, thus, ps3 games look inferior. This is the case for EA games because they push the game for sales before its finished.

As for developers claiming it "overly difficult" is a bit unfair. i believe all new next-gen consoles have that issue at start. A few companies claimed the opposite and stated as long as developers are willing to learn it such as Tecmo with Ninja Gaiden Sigma.

[Genuine]

You really shouldn't listen to the false propaganda fanboy groups such as Sony Protection Group and Sony Defence Force try to influence people with on various forums and especially this sony fanboy infested website. COD4 doesn't look better on ps3, and for that matter neither does Burnout. Both of those rumors were started by sony fanboys, one of those being Shane Bettenhausen (Sony's 1# media lap dog). Anything pertaining to sony, you have to be careful not to step into the bullshot.

A helpful tip: Don't listen to anything 1st party devs say (no matter which console they are talking about). In regards to sony, I would let anything they say go in one ear and out the other. They openly lie to the public.

http://boards.1up.com/zd/bo...

[Scions Wrath]

It seems EA becomes more incompetent with every passing day. Anyway hopefully they will do as they have said and make Dead Space the same for both platforms.

[LaChance]

Why am I a clown , just because I said the truth and it hurts you? Any honest PS3 owner wil tell you they beat that game in less than 8 hours.Why cant you just admit that sony games are not perfect? hALO solo campaign is 6 hours long Im not calling you a clown because its true thats all.
For real I think youre the clown Not only the media but PS3 owners themselves will tell you that 50gb for a 7 hour game with great graphics aint no feat.Halo is far longer than heavenly sword with the multiplayer and stuff and its on a DVD.So tell me wheres the waste , Heavsword using all that space or Halo using the DVD.
Once again you showed that you were a clown because you believe anything that will come out of sonys mouth and use anything sony supporters will use to bash the 360.If you ever played Halo online you wouldnt even bash the game.Anyway only a clown can recognize another clown.
Oh yeah I bet you played Halo 3 at a friends place right ?Or you have a 360 ? I thought they all RROD ? So how did you play it since all 360s break down the second you switch it on.
Man youre a clown amongst the clowns

[DJ]

Since there's no AI routines, very little scripting, no in-game/pre-rendered cinematics, and the audio is usually recycled from the single-player campaign. Sure I've got 50 hours logged on COD4, but that doesn't mean COD is 42 hours longer than Heavenly Sword; you simply can't compare Multi-player modes to Single-player modes since Multiplayer is infinitely long, while Single-player is a finite experience.

Halo 3's campaign is around 6~7 hours long, which is just a hair shorter than Heavenly Sword's campaign (and with noticeably inferior visuals and technology).

And I'm not sure where you got your info, but not all 360's get the RROD. The official statistics are that 30% of the Xenon motherboards fail within their lifetime and 10% of the Falcon motherboards fail within their lifetime. These stats are still tentative since the 360 has only been on the market for 2 years so far.

[Xbox is the BEST]

if you play Halo 3 on normal it's around 7 hours long.
Try Legendary.

[InYourMom]

"The official statistics are that 30% of the Xenon motherboards fail within their lifetime and 10% of the Falcon motherboards fail within their lifetime."

Can you show me these official statistics that %10 of the Falcon motherboards die within their lifetime?

I'm still waiting on OFFICIAL statistics about the %30, which was once officially %33, then was officially as high as %45 percent depending on which PS3 fanboy was spewing their FUD.

[Martini]

Do you always talk out of your behind or is it just today ? What is wrong with you ?

[LaChance]

I bet INsomniac dont handle the cell properly cuz Uncharted holds on 50gb bluray for 8 hours of gameplay.
Maybe Uncharted was a launch game too...

[DJ]

And is pressed on Single-layer Blu-ray discs since it's 24GB. It obviously chews through that data pretty fast since it's constantly streaming data off the disc. The demo is only about 15 minutes, and takes up well over a gigabyte worth of data.

That's the price you pay for a high quality aural and visual experience.

[moparful99]

LaChance dude stop now. You have already proven how narrowminded you are. Sony never intended for blu-ray storage to be maximized out of the gate, blu-ray is an important component in their future proof strategy. This holds evident because games will obviously grow and require much more storage as this generation fleshes out even more. Dvd9 requires so much compression in order to store a 360 game. Hell Lost odyssey requires 4 damn discs... Point is that quality of content is more important as long as capacity of disc doesnt impede on quality.

[mesh1]

@dj
dont fool your self kid uncharted visuals are mildly better than kameo an xbox release title ,uncharted has the worst character models ive seen in a hyped game gears of war makes that game look like a cartoon.

[SuperSaiyan4]

Its a fact, more available memory and better graphics GPU and a better CPU in the 360.

I guess blu-ray is the only future for Sony...Which hopefully dies too.

[davez82]

multiplat dev's cant make much money if their software only sells on one console. This is a smart move, but the game better be damn good.

[Scions Wrath]

Killzone 2

[etownone]

your kidding right?

first, your reffering to a demo made for a presentation, not the final game
second, it looks as good as COD4...and the 360 ran that just fine

[pornflakes]

Of course you need blu ray and 50 GB to have 20 min CONSOLE GAME installation.. thats really next gen, haha.

[DJ]

about having to sit through longer load times on the 360 version of DMC4, huh. And no, you can still data off of CDs and DVDs too; it just requires a standard hard drive.

[Martini]

How about 10 - 15 seconds longer loading times on the PS3 in COD 4, enjoying those ??
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
Must be because the BR drive is how many times faster at reading data than DVD drive ? Would you remind me ?

[Legion]

You're just upset because you have to download the game to your hard drive just to get comparable load times to the XBox 360 without it having to do any downloading to the HDD.

And the speed time on the Bluray is slower then that of the 12X DVD on the XBox 360. Live with it. Now if they upgraded the Bluray to say a 6X then it would speed it up. But the PS3 has one of the lowest Bluray players built in.

[pornflakes]

longer loading times? you mean 4 seconds right? Do you thing your comment was intelligent? I dont think so...

Hey, the ps3 has 10 years life.. so buy a 1TB harddrive cause in future you will have 500gb games installed, i hope you dont need to deinstall them if you want to download a demo, lol.

Open ya stupid eyes and just agree that CONSOLE games installtion suxx hard!

[snoopgg]

Just stfu please......

[Legion]

10years life?? Not with the current Bluray player they have in the PS3. It is already low of the low budget players. In a few years it will be out paced by much better Bluray players on the market that it will look comparable to a 2X DVD player and a 24X DVD player now. A joke in speed and function. 10year life my ass!!!!

[shysun]

They should take notes from Burn out and COD4 devs.

[jackdoe]

Since when has there been fear that the PS3 will "gimp" the 360? It has always been the other way. Everyone fears what a 360 to PS3 port will do to a game and these EA devs are just confirming worst fears. My advice. Do not pre-order the PS3 version of Dead Space. I smell another Madden 08/Orange Box/ every EA game except Burnout Paradise.

[Genuine]

Where you got "everyone", I'll never know. The 360 has been hammering the ps3 in hardware performance for over a year. The ps3 might be a good blu-ray player, but it's been proven that when it comes to gaming, the ps3 is lacking.

[Silver360]

GTA IV was delayed because of the PS3. Only thing that saved Sony was that contract that both versions must be released simultaneously. PS3 is just plain harder to develop for. Of course the graphics will look gorgeous with the spe's pushing data to the RSX. Makes it easier for that gpu if it doesn't have to process all the graphics data.

The thing I really want to know though is when are developers going to start using the full power of the 360. All 3 cpu's and six threads. They need to stop taking the easy way out with the extra ram they have now and make better games, better AI and better physics.

[Ju]

But that is exactly the point. By using the PS3 as the lead platform, devs are forced to come up with an efficient parallel design to utilize the SPUs. Because if they won't the game will suck. Guess what, it is way easier to port this parallel design back to a coherent architecture like the 360 and use all 3 cores. More so then going the other way round, because some devs don't use highly multi threading on the 360. That exactly the point some devs are trying to make. And that they try to say that over again, it will also lead to a better (!) 360 version. So why to you guys think this is a bad thing ? Because the PS3 gets a good version, too ? Or what ?

[etownone]

if PS3 owners are convinced that it is superior then the 360 for gaming, then get used to the feeling of having games ported from an inferior machine this gen. I accepted it last gen owning an xbox and getting crappy ports that could have looked a hellava lot better if they were made with the Xbox as the lead platform.

and a question for ps3 owners about Uncharted. I know its a great game and has great graphcs. But why is it that so many ps3 owners claim that it has the best graphics to date on a console?!? I've read many reviews and never did any critic make that assuption. So why do you guys keep saying it? is it because the more you say it, the more you will actually beleive it?

Anyways, to date best graphics of a console game would have to be COD4...IMO. (gears held that title for along time)

[Ju]

Negative, CoD4 doesn't even come close. And why are you making this statement, if all you know about Uncharted comes form videos and reviews, but not from own experience ?
The interactive environment, lightning, particles (water), animation system, number of polys on screen, draw distance, depth blur, etc. all outshine CoD4. There's nothing to argue about here.
If you think CoD4 is the best game - and I don't say its bad - wait until you put Uncharted in right after you have played the other game.

[etownone]

what i am saying is how come ONLY people that own a PS3 say uncharted has the best graphics to date.

YES, i do read reviews and see game videos online. And not one website, critic, magazine, has said uncharted has the best graphics to date on consoles. LAST YEAR many said that about Gears of War. Anyone that saw gears for the first time, whether in magazines or videos were amazed and in shock of how far graphics how come along. I've seen videos and pics, and I do not see anything that justifies best graphics for uncharted.

I mean, there are best graphics awards given out by many many websites and magazines and uncharted never wins...never even comes in second....so c'mon relax, there are some great games with amazing graphics coming to the ps3 that may end up having that title, but definitely not uncharted.

It just seems like sonyfans want to have some kind of reason to justify their ps3, or have some kind of braggin rights over 360.

[InYourMom]

I have to agree and I own Uncharted. It is a fantastic game, but the best graphics on consoles? Nope, not in my opinion.

I think you are on to something with this comment:

"It just seems like sonyfans want to have some kind of reason to justify their ps3, or have some kind of braggin rights over 360."

So many games around Uncharted on the 360 were getting great scores, GOTY nods, etc. Then you had the much hyped flop Lair, they needed something to counteract this and Uncharted was it.

[Ju]

Maybe I see it to technical. Maybe I try to analyze what I see. And I base my opinion on that. And I have not seen anything in CoD4 which makes me say, "oh, haven't seen that anywhere else". I think the visuals are great, lightning is great, too. But I see nothing outstanding in the environment. Destruction anyone ? Plats interacting with the player ? Fluid dynamics in water ? Wet cloths ? Maybe it looks pretty and that what people see, but it is the subtle details which makes the difference. But eventually its just an opinion.

BTW: I think you contradict yourself if you say "that's what Sony fanboys say just to justify the PS3". I have played both, did you ?

[ar]

"And not one website, critic, magazine, has said uncharted has the best graphics to date on consoles."

Gametrailers said so in there review.

[hardcorehippiez]

because it does! im not hating on the xbox games at all ive got forza tenchu and geow and i liked them all ( cant wait for geow2 )but cod4 which is arguably the best looking game (closely followed by geow)and even the ps3 version( which is damn close to if not the same as 360 version) are nowhere near as good looking as what uncharted is.

[Rocko]

how all you crybabies give EA sh*t, "real devs like Insomniac and Infinity Ward blah..blah". Do you fangirls realize how much money and help Insomniac gets from Sony for their 1st party games? A LOT. As for Infinity Ward, well...do you really want EA taking advice from THEM? With the disaster that is COD 4 multiplayer?

[etownone]

agreed on the part sony helping their 1st party games, but COD 4 multiplayer disaster?? i'm not going to try to understand why you would write that.

[Rocko]

Its fun to play, don't get me wrong. But thats when it WORKS. Connection errors, lag and other crap is what makes it a disaster. The fact its still not patched is unacceptable.

[LJWooly]

I haven't encountered many problems with COD4 online at all. Are you with AOL? 'Cos I used to be with AOL, and they're so crap it's unbelievable.

Of course, you might just be unlucky. Once on COD4, I shot at one guy with an M16 in Hardcore mode, and with three bursts of fire, I missed him, and killed three of my own teammates. The guy with a mic just wouldn't shut the hell up about it.

[Rocko]

AOL 5.0 FTW. Nah I have comcast. COD 4 is the only game I have trouble with. I had to change my NAT type to get past "downloading game settings", yet I still get all the problems during play that I mentioned in my previous comment. If I knew how to fix it I would. Hopefully the way overdue patch will fix it.

[wageslave]

"how much money and help Insomniac gets from Sony for their 1st party games? A LOT. "

What we are seein ghere is a pattern. One related to economics as much as the design of the PS3 vs. XBox 360 w/r/t development.

In order to get equal performance from a PS3, you have to spend more money. If you dont, you get poorer performance. Therefore, PS3 games cost more to develop.

Microsoft has *always* been about enabling others. In the days of closed systems (like Apple, IBM or Amiga (for example) MS permitted 3rd parties to write drivers so they could sell hardware in a Open ecosystem. They still make the best dev tools.

Sony has possibly made a big mistake with the PS3 by making it too esoteric for wide development.

Rumours of balooning budgets arent good. They (the developers) can't support unprofitable enterprises.

[GETPWNED]

"the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "PS3 can't do it""

LMFAO. O-U-C-H.

Wait. Let me guess. Another "lazy dev", right? LMFAO!!!! Just face it, the only games that "seem" to "take advantage" of the PS3rd, are games which won't be made on 360 to begin with (meaning, you'll never see just how gimped the PS3rd version truly was compared to its 360 counterpart).

O-U-C-H.

[InYourMom]

Ouch indeed.

Must be nice for them to conveniently always have a coup out for everything. Bad review = biased site, Bad Game = lazy dev, etc.

I bet there is some hidden PS3 fanboy "play book" made by the SDF that gives you a list of deflections in case a PS3 droid gets cornered.

[JBaby343]

With PS3 STILL having the best line-up in 2008, PS3 outselling 360 in 2007 WITHOUT those games, more and more positive articles coming out for the PS3 than 360, and new falcon chips still failing at high rates.

I'm glad to see all the 360 boys around for a positive 360 news story seeing as how you haven't had many lately. Keep hoping the PS3 version is gimped to justify waiting weeks for your console to get back to play the 360 version.

[Martini]

Now how does that foot tastes sony fanboys ?? You guys always type so much BS and then multiple developers say (do not make me find the links and embarass you even more) that a game from PS3 will run fine on 360 but not the other way around. 360 > PS3 deal with it.

[LJWooly]

ravenguard88, I don't know whether future PS3 games will actually look that much better than future 360 games (no one can predict the future), but there's no contest when it comes to technical specs.

The Cell processor is about twice as powerful as the 360's 3 CPUs. No argument about that.

The PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360, albeit at a higher speed, but not significantly.

The RSX is more or less as powerful as the Xenon, but an ability of the RSX is that it can actually use the Cell in order to help it render more efficiently. This hasn't been done by any developer as of yet.

I don't want to argue with you or anything, You just sound like you have the wrong idea about the PS3. Hell, University professors have been using clusters of PS3s to aid in research to do with protein misfolding, like Alzheimer's, most known types of cancer, etc. (Google the Folding@Home project for details).
They use PS3s to recreate the folding of a protein molecule in a nanosecond (one millionth of a second). This would take a single CPU 30 years to recreate, but when they break up these into 'work units', and distribute them to PS3 owners, they can make pretty efficient progress; a PS3 takes, at most, six to eight hours to recreate a nanosecond of folding, because the Cell uses all of the SPE's (Synergystic Processing Units) simultaneously in order to carry out the calculations needed for the process.

Most importantly to you, though, is that it means that games will be better. This is a gaming site, and we are gamers, after all.

I'm gonna shut up now, because I sound like I'm on commision from Sony or something, lol :)

[etownone]

agreed that the PS3 is powerful and a very different gaming console than the 360.

To date no games have been done that cannot be done on the 360, and no games in the forseeable future. There is ALOT of potential in the ps3 and i'm sure sooner or later we will start seeing games that can not be done on the 360 (like original xbox did with Doom3, Far Cry, and HalfLife2)

BUT!! it seems that by the time these games start coming up, the next xbox or rumers of the next xbox will be floating around...i'm hoping xmas 2009..(a new gaming console every four years is fine by me)

and by then M$ will be alot smarter and would have learned their lessons. Xbox 1 they learned that to make money they need to own the design, Xbox 360 they learned that they can not rush the design ...and the next xbox ??

[gnothe1]

LJ folding@home is completely different from running game code!! nobody it taking anything away from the PS3 but the system just isnt what sony claimed it would be. they basically stole E3 2005 from MS with lies an target renders.

now is this the first time that sony has made wild claims about system performance that didnt happen. the PS1 was a super computer according to sony, the PS2 was a super computer that could produce toy story graphics an could be used by the MILITARY, they even tried to push the chip in the PS2 in the science department like their doing with the cell, but at the end of the day the PS2 was still outperformed by the GAMECUBE!! now here were go again, sony making these wild claims about ALL THIS POWER thats locked away in the PS3, an that its WAY more powerful than many super computers. an again many people fell for sony an their MARKETING. basically ALL LAST YEAR the PS3 was outperformed by this supposedly weaker 360 system, but there was an excuse, THE PS3 IS NEW AN NOBODY KNOWS HOW TO WORK IT. well how long is that excuse gonna last!!

last thing EVERYBODY knows, but all of a sudden have forgot about it, they know developers build games for the L C D, that way they know if this game runs fine on the weakest system they KNOW FOR SURE that it will run fine on the stronger system. NOW!! sony PROMISED so much POWER with the PS3 that developers were making the 360 lead get the game running good then easily port it to the PS3, but they were having problems making that work, ported games didnt run well on the PS3, BUT when a dev builds a game for the PS3 as lead they easily port that game to the 360 an make it run equal. now some one explain that to me!!

sorry for the long post!!

[LJWooly]

I'm sorry, I wasn't very clear. I apologise for that.

I wasn't suggesting that the PS3 is better at running game code, as taht's stil pretty debatable as of now. It's just that ravenguard said the PS3 isn't much more powerful than the 360 at all, which is untrue.

Now, I wasn't saying that PS3 games will necessarily get to the level taht the 360 simply can't do them, I was just giving an example of how the PS3, in terms of raw power, wins over the 360. Not gaming, just power.

I'd also like to add that, unlike the PS1 & 2, the PS3's Cell has actually been put to good use, as it is IBM's solution to so-called 'supercomputer' processing. It is an amazing piece of technology if you look into it, and the potential is amazing; but I'm not sure most developers know enough to put it to good use yet. i hope they do, but only time will tell.

This time around, I think Sony really did look to the future, and I'm grateful for that. I'm sure MS will come up with a way to hang onto the market, but I don't know if that'll work out for them.

Gosh, the gaming industry's pretty exciting... no one knows what's going to happen after '08. I'm looking forward to finding out!

I'm not being a fanboy, if that's what you're thinking, by the way. i think all three consoles are great/crap in their own ways :)

EDIT: Holy crap, I just made myself sound like a way bad nerd with that last sentence...

[Rice]

At least EA is trying.

[Jrome]

so first @Panzefaust.

I have no idea what you are talking about with CoD4. There was one period in time around christmas when the servers were overloaded but since january the servers have been fine. You must have a really shtty ISP. I mean really, don't try to bash the game because your ISP sucks.

Now do you guys know why windows vista struggles to run on your computer when you have 1GB of ram? Because the devs take the "easy and cheap" way out. If people take the time to utilize code EFFICIENTLY like with the PS3..then the result is greater. If you guys want devs to be lazy and release lack luster games that could have been way better if they would actually work at it..then we wouldn't be waiting for 4D.

So, EA won't 'gimp' 360 Dead Space despite tough PS3 dev? Correction: EA wants to slack off make it nice and cheap and not give us the BEST GAME that they can. Both the 360 and the PS3 could be making some AMAZING games right now...if we didn't promote this lazy developing. And that's a fact.

[wageslave]

Everyone saying "they are being lazy" dont get it.

This has to do with MONEY. Not motivation.

Over and over in this forum (on this site for months and months) people say "Oh, they're lazy", these poeople do not understand that this is a situation of elemenatry forces of business.

It is about budgets. It is about recovering those budgets. When a developer releases a game that is poor quality, its because that Firm's leadership decided that it wasnt worth the business risk.

So, again, I repeat: NOT about "being lazy". It is about MONEY and BUDGETS, and design choices requiring bigger budgets to achieve the same result.

[Jrome]

You're right...it does have to do with money. Taking more money out of the consumer's pockets without having to give a quality product. Without someone making a stand NOTHING CHANGES. If we sit here and say oh it's about budget blah blah blah..then they will continue to release crap. These companies make billions in profit each year..I'm pretty sure they can afford bigger budgets.

We need to stand up and make them realise we're not standing for that anymore..we want full potential...and quality coding

[Ju]

@wageslave, you're right. Its all about money. So much, that EA starts to sell more PS3 versions then 360 version in Europe. That's why they push to use the PS3 as a lead platform. Simple. Economies. And, no, I doubt that a PS3 version costs more as soon as you have the infrastructure set up. The same can be said the other way round. If you invest into one platform to build it for the other one costs money. But as soon as you have a basic engine framework and tools setup, a big chunk goes into (asset) production. And that costs the same on both.

[Qbanboi]

Crappy EA developers. They suck so hard that bleeps. Go learns from dudes who have the right to call themselve developers.

[sonyfanonly]

IF EA IS AS GOOD AS THEY SAY THEY ARE THEY WILL GET TO IT AND GET IT GOOD -BESIDES LOOK AT THE FIRST PARTY GAMES NOTHING CAN BEAT THEM

[Xbox is the BEST]

with FNR3 and AC the PS#3 was the lead platform?

[HarryEtTubMan]

They will be equal... that was the point of this. PS3>Junkbox 180.

They are both Lead versions... no ports.... we know the PS3 is harder to develop for now... and will be for a couple more years... Its new.... but like he said.... THE TIDES ARE CHANGING BOTS. This game looks sweet and both consoles will get good versions. LOL its only a good thing.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

but he says "Right now we're leading and building and doing everything on the 360" then they will shift to the PS3. That means, TahDah! that the 360 is lead. Did you even read the f**king thing?

[SpikeSpiegel]

I hope the PS3 "port" plays similar to the 360 version. Still in the discussion about quality versus budget, there has to be some sort of middle ground. Charging 60 dollars for a "next gen" experience only to get last gen gameplay with some souped up graphics is a terrible way to justify paying that much money for any game (especially if the game is buggy as hell).

[FirstknighT]

Like I said before...many developers are complaining about the ps3 and giving us 360 owners delays or under developed games. If it wasn't for the ps3, I would be playing GTA4 months ago. Thanks alot Sony.

[NexGen76]

Dude just STFU what does a storage media got to do with a game being longer or shorter.Because Blu-Ray holds more space don't mean games are going to be longer Sony never said this & i don't know where you xbots get this from.I will take a 7 or 8 hour game any day if the Game play is awesome.Blu-Ray is still new & has a much longer life than DVD-9.I would be very worried if dev's was maxing out BD which only one game is rumor to come close to doing it MGS4.If you knew what you was talking about then you would know that audio takes up alot of space on any game.

[JeepGamer]

So they're not going to "gimp" the 360 version by "toning it down" the the PS3 level? Apparently EA is being run by a bunch of simpletons these days or at the very least they have some lazy programmers. I guess they missed the recent graphics test that showed the 360 taking twice as long as the PS3 to complete, though I suspect that test was probably rigged to a degree.

[InYourMom]

If EA wasn't so money hungry they should just make this a 360 exclusive. I think 360 fans need to get used to the "being reassured that the PS3 won't gimp the 360 version", unfortunately it probably will when it comes to EA.

[Gamingskills]

It amazes me how all you guys who know nothing at all about programming a game says that EA is lazy all they have to do is utilize the spu's which I am sure is easier said than done. It's a fact that the PS3 is hard to program for it's also a fact that the business of any game company is to make money. At this point in the PS3 cycle why spend more money making a game on a system that people don't buy many games for when you can spend less money and time making a game on a system that will sell double or triple the amount of games. You guys point to Konami when its a FACT that their soccer game was a mess on the PS3 compared to the 360 version and let me tell you something that you guys know but won't admit MGS4 has been delayed time and time again because they are having a hard time programming on the PS3. Grand Theft Auto IV we all know has been delayed because of the PS3 but because of contract issues the 360 version was also delayed. Now this is where it gets tricky, trying to satisfy a Sony Fanboy if they release a game at the same time on both system and the PS3 version is not equal or better you guys say the devs are lazy then if they release a game on the 360 3-6 months before the PS3 version you guys still complain. The Problem is not the devs it's you Sony Cryboys! WWWWAAAAA WWWWAAAAA WWWWAAAAAAA!!!!!!

[Lagbox plzfixme]

The ps3 is sooo cash.

[Lagbox plzfixme]

I know dawg, is nice.. is nice playa.

[Lagbox plzfixme]

I ain't gonna lie, it's nice

AAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW YEAAAAAHHHHH

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

That PSN realy must be a lonley place, guess it must be that whole non friends aproach Sony has gone.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

If it wern't for the PS3rd we Xbox owners could be playing this game by June, but no we have to wait for the Waitstation 3 to catch up as always.

[pshizle]

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

facts 360 the more powerful system

[Big Jim]

That 3 year old comparison has been refuted a thousand times. The 360 is not more powerfull than the PS3. If the PS3 was less powerfull then it wouldn't be able to produce the best looking console games ever made like Uncharted and Ratchet and Clank. End of story.

[Martini]

And yet the games look and run better on 360 - I wonder why ?? You just pray that none of those games you mentioned ever get ported over to the 360 for your own sake. I rest my case !

[Amnesiac]

EA SUCKSSSSSSSSSSSS

SKATE. is the best game they have ever put out and it is SO unpolished.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

It would seem the PS3 development is holding the 360 and it's gamers back. 360 owners always have to wait for them to finish up with the PS3 while the 360 version sits and collects dust. How many more devs will it take for people to realize that the PS3 is hard to dev for?

"fill rate" that popped up time and time again, but they are ither lazy or the "devs" don't know how to "dev" <---? they make our games

Games are already delayed enough as it is, there is no reason why everyone else has to wait for the guy in the back of the line to "catch up". I don't go down to the DMV to wait 4hrs in line just to be told I have to wait another 4hrs for the last guy.

[Jamegohanssj5]

Who's EA?
What's Dead space?

[sniddles]

the basic package of the 360 is better for games and more powerful/efficient than the PS3.

When games are made in the typical CPU/GPU format, then the 360 wins every time because it is more efficient and has more USABLE power.

If you take a game made in the typical, PC based, CPU/GPU fashion like for 360 to PS3, it will not run as well b/c the base CPU (sans the SPU's) and GPU of the PS3 is not as capable.

It takes having to maximize code with the SPU's to get it to run as good.

Some companies have the time and money to do it, others are all about making a quick buck (EA), so, it's no frigging wonder.

If everything is optimized on PS3, it very might possibly outperform the 360, but the only way we'll likely see it is with 1st party titles. And even then, they are just breaking the surface of multicore development on 360 and there are other unexplored regions of 360 processing like MEMEXPORT and the Tesselation unit. I doubt we'll ever see the PS3 completely outperform the 360. I'm Sorry, i know i'll get disagrees and whined at, but honestly, doesn't it make sense??

[ASSASSYN 36o]

If nothing is wrong with the ps3's architecture then why is EVERYONE complain about development problems. There should be no complaints at all.

[ScottEFresh]

I will never buy an EA game as long as I live. Seriously...it's why I didn't even buy The Orange Box for PS3...F*ck EA and their n00bness.

[RJ2000]

Terrible. EA is worse than Microsoft. They buy out the competition and are in it for the money and nothing else. They could care less whether they produce a crap game, just as long as it sells. That is all they care about. Look at Madden 08 for the PS3. They thought it was a great game... cause it sold well, but man that game sucked..

[CaliGamer]

But they are shooting themselves in the foot. Unless they straighten up and fly right when it comes to the PS3 they will have some serious backlash if it hasn't already happened.
They have never gotten any of my money but I am sure that many people are upset at EA's performance as of late.

[InMyOpinion]

It's ignorant to think that EA is making the PS3 gimped on purpose. They would not benefit anything from it.

Many of you claim that Insomniac, Naughty dog etc have no problem making games on the PS3. How many multi platform games have they made? They have only made PS3 exclusives. I mean, none of us know what these developers would be able to produce on the 360.

What I'm saying is that no one can know for sure wether the problem lies with the developer or the hardware.

I'd say it's the money. Not all devs can afford to make PS3 the lead version. Criterion had the resources, and it brought great results in Burnout Paradise.

Another question is: Why does it cost more to develop games for the PS3? Is it a smart move to make a console that's very hard for developers to figure out? In one sense, yes. You force the devs to use it as lead platform in order to get the best results. But since the 360 has a larger installbase, it's a question of which crowd the developer thinks it can get the most money from.

[sak500]

Great points +bubbles. The guy above you said its all about money, so who in this world doesnt want to make money? If we are to survive we need money. If these studios start using ps3 as a lead platform on which usually a good games comes out of 3-4 years of hard programming then what will happen to ports for other consoles? The dev cost will not be covered by selling few 100k copies.

[InMyOpinion]

Good point. +Bubbles to you as well.

As the PS3 gains more ground I'm sure EA and other third party devs will make it the lead platform in order to get identical or better versions of multiplatform games.

[THC CELL]

ok its time for bluray to set up and bring there weapons out

send in the 200 gig blu ray disk lol its coming

[THC CELL]

u no what GTA dev should say the same about this game to x box owners
Gta team feel limited cause of the x box when they could do a lot lot more on the ps3 and they no that thats why Gta 5 will be exclusive to Ps3

@EA dev
i mean why bother making this game for the ps3 if its going to be dumbed down

whats the point of this EA team making anything for ps3

I have to big up the burnout team and thats about it

Dev are taking note to ps3 now
and people who say wait its better than having games that looked Rushed

Look at halo 3 i am sure they could of done a lot better if they gave it more time
Maybe we would of seen something New

[CaliGamer]

Interesting statements. I wonder why just a week ago I believe it was the president of EA stated that he liked the results of Burnout Paradise and that it makes more sense to lead on the PS3 then port to the 360 for multi-plat games.
Albert Einstein defined being crazy as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
My question would be if they know that leading on the PS3 yields better results for all formats, and I am sure they don't want to lose business on the PS3, then why do they sabotage themselves by leading on the 360 and then having to delay or having an inferior PS3 version? It's like they are working hard not to get my money.
This game seemed promising too, but with talk like this I am sure this will be another EA gem that will not be getting my money.
I swear for the most successful video game company they sure make some a$$ backwards decisions. Oh well, guess MGS4, and R2 will have to do.
How can they seriously look at games like Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, COD 4 or even their own Burnout Paradise and then make excuses about the PS3 being hard to develop for?

Just buckle down and develop. Why is it that every new generation there are always that few that have to be dragged into the new generation kicking and screaming. Its the nature of the industry, things change and you have to adapt. If there were no games on the PS3 that were excellent then their argument would be more valid but now there is no excuse. They really need to put up or shut up.

[andron]

When EA still makes more money off PS2 than next gen. consoles.

The best is yet to come.

[dale1]

i think most people are missing the point the tide is turning the man said which means sales of ps3, hence why ps3 will be ea,s leading platform from now on because of the huge gap in sales of hardware in the eu japan and the closing gap in america

[stuntman_mike]

i think the guy who wrote it took the frase "we wont gimp 360, because the ps3 cant" all out of proportion, what he meant was the ps3 version can be made to look awesome just aswell as 360.

a very misleading interview.

but the proof is in the pudding we will just have to wait and see how it goes. the game actually looks like cold fear in space.

[RiloBunsen]

EA just a bunch of mercenaries! I haven´t bought any EA game of this new generation, because they haven´t embraced the PS3 like they should. And yes its true, how can a dev company like EA say its hard to develop for the PS3 and in the other hand you have other developers half as big as EA making great games and then again EA comes early this month to say, "PS3 will vanish 360".... use to like EA and I got nothing against 360 owners, is not like I expected better games on PS3 or a big difference but at least same quality, in the near future when PS3 becomes a matture product I guess that EA will be delivering less quiality games or content to 360, this is what EA is! $$$$$$$$$ = care shi...bout customers

[RiloBunsen]

EA just a bunch of mercenaries! I haven´t bought any EA game of this new generation, because they haven´t embraced the PS3 like they should. And yes its true, how can a dev company like EA say its hard to develop for the PS3 and in the other hand you have other developers half as big as EA making great games and then again EA comes early this month to say, "PS3 will vanish 360".... use to like EA and I got nothing against 360 owners, is not like I expected better games on PS3 or a big difference but at least same quality, in the near future when PS3 becomes a matture product I guess that EA will be delivering less quiality games or content to 360, this is what EA is! $$$$$$$$$ = care shi...bout customers