A NASCAR developer on developing games for PS3:
"The truth is the PS3's tools and the way it works just sucks. The truth is they are both virtually the same in terms of hardware when it comes to how powerful they are, maybe the PS3 has a few different things that makes it a bit more advance, and Sony has this idea that it is designed for optimal development but that's a load of crap. In the last generation we would make the game for PS2 and then port it over to Xbox, but because Xbox was easier to develop for, we could actually enhance the title a little if we wanted to. The case with this generation is different, now we make the game for 360 first and then port it over to PS3, but we really don't have the time to mess with how the PS3 works to really add to much more. It will change in the future, but for now it sucks."
Alex S. from Link-Cable writes: "When it comes to video game lineups none get as much as attention as the launch lineup that accompany a new piece of hardware. But what about the last games? That's the topic for this week's Top 10 as we'll be looking at the very last games to grace their respective consoles. "
I remember buying FFIX on PSN because I was looking for swan song PS1 titles to enjoy on PS3
10 Years Ago This Month: Sony's sales pitch as the powerful system took a hit when EA had to explain why Madden 08 on PS3 was noticeably worse than the Xbox 360 version.
The cpu was hard to work for 3rd party, butt the cell was really powerfull and fast. It wasnt just pr or secret sauce. Uc2 and killzone 2 were amazing. But 3rd party want money. They also problems with the ram. Only first party was able to make huge jumps from first gen games to second gen. It was an expensive console but the tech was much more powefull at launch then this gen.
Wasn't this already established in 2006? Online Sony's first party studios took advantage of the cell.
" was PS3 hard to Develop for?"
Here we go again , they been saying this since mid 2006-2007ish . of course the CPU was hard to work with but the Cell was fast and powerful .
Next year Article : " was PS4 to Easy Develop for ?" slow day in office ?
P.S . over last few years N4G been Repeating same subject matter with Slightly different title, same old subject .
I would hate to be a writer busting my brain to come up with a New lie to draw readers interest end up repeating 2006 article again .
I would not say "hard" to develope... but it went against the norm and it also threatened a well established pc archetype of which many in the pc business was against. Not with ill intent, but to try and change the way digital hardware works... it is huge mountain to climb against a well established pc design.
A lot of third party studios kind of just did not try because they did not want to support the change.
It went beyond just gaming with the backlash of sonys cell design.
Sony has always tried to push innovation and sometimes they miss or go to far against the norm and fail. Like betamax vs VHS. Betamax was the superior hardware but they lost that battle as well.
It is why Microsoft created the competition. They were getting beat in so many ways and their monopoly was getting threatened by everyone. Apple, Google, etc etc. Microsoft had to fight back to try save their dwindling sales. Lose the hardware, you lose the os.
Luke looks at the most influential features of Madden on the PS3 and Xbox 360.
Well, someone should tell EA The way you work on your games sucks way more. "EA, It Sucks!" new EA moto. I hate really them. PS3 is certianly way different than 360 and more so than PS2 was to Xbox but if PS3 is such a hard machine to work on then how come devs of GRAW2 had no problem and Criterion, the team behind Burnout made Paradise on PS3 as lead platform and had no problem? Or how 2K Sports games can run at 60fps on both platforms?
Because EA sucks. Sorry for my angry rant but I've had it with EA's BS, trying to cover up their laziness.
what was the EA again? oh those lazy bastards!
Blame Sony they are the ones who made the hardware not developer friendly. Which is completely their fault. Maybe they should have focused on great development tools instead of making sure they got the Bluray drive in the PS3. Priorities..eh??
The developers of GRAW2 did have a problem that is why the game was delayed over 6 months. As well as RS3:Vegas almost a year.
All-Pro also runs at 30FPS on the PS3 which is made by 2K. The games that can run at 60 FPS on both systems is probably bc they are not processor intense.
You guys constantly place the blame on developers being lazy. Paid off...BlahBla Blah. Face the facts. The machines are about equal in power except the PS3 architecture is a major headache for developers.
IE, it will take more resources and development time to get "the same" results on PS3 as 360. Notice I didn't say "better" results. And for almost all 3rd parties it isn't woth it bc the PS3 install base is so small thus they will see minimal revenue. Thus PS3 fans will continue to get the "crumbs" of jumbled code and/or crappy ports= Blame Sony not anyone else.
Things will change, PS3 will lead if they want to get games out in time. Right now EA is making easy money on half baked games.
Flame bait.
Who cares about Splinter Cell and EA games they suck :P (Except for Burnout and Battlefield)