PS3 leaked footage

madrab

http://www.doubleviking.com/static-13040.html

Sgt. Politeness

woah.

hairball

woohoo..more overendered footage of the same stuff we always see on these movies...deciedly un-impressive...show us some new and innovative games please sony, instead of of cool technical demos.

Gonzo

really wish i could see some proper footage sony....

steviec

Thats what E3 is for.

Those were technical demoes being shown to games developers at GDC, what do you expect. I still find them pretty promising though.

projectmayhem

GDC isn't for consumers, it's for developers. that game with the plane zooming around (warhawk) wasn't a tech demo anyway, it was a level he was playing on stage (with a ps2 controller i may add)

hairball

steviec wrote:

Thats what E3 is for.

Those were technical demoes being shown to games developers at GDC, what do you expect. I still find them pretty promising though.

I'm aware they were tech demos, it's what they were tech demos for i'm questioning, imean what do people honestly expect sony to come up with this time around?
me? i reckon rehashes of the same old crap for the most part, undoubtedly prettier looking crap, but still the usual suspects with maybe an odd gem like
'..colossus' thrown in here or there.
PSP ANYONE?

steviec

hairball wrote:

I'm aware they were tech demos, it's what they were tech demos for i'm questioning, imean what do people honestly expect sony to come up with this time around?
me? i reckon rehashes of the same old crap for the most part, undoubtedly prettier looking crap, but still the usual suspects with maybe an odd gem like
'..colossus' thrown in here or there.
PSP ANYONE?

They were tech demoes showing what the hardware was capable of. The intended audience was game developers, the people who actually make the games. Physics and destructable environments are a big theme Sony have been going with, because its really the next logical step forward with the new hardware. There's no reason for every single game not to have realistic physics. In some cases it'll just be for effect, but half life 2 showed the potential effect it can have on gameplay in the right hands.

I'm not sure how you can equate tech demoes with poor gameplay exactly? Technology and gameplay aren't exactly mutually exclusive. The hardware is there to give the game creators as many tools as possible at their disposal to make good games.

Lord Oz

Games on the PS3 are going to cost a fortune to develop. I think they'll end up alienating the smaller developers. They'll probably end up working on Revolution/PC games. That said, the PS3's visuals are amazing, but I bet the games won't look that good when they're released.

Dont be at yourself

How will it be cheaper to make games for PC than Playstation3, licensing fees aside (which are comparable to PS2 fees)?

flogen

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

How will it be cheaper to make games for PC than Playstation3, licensing fees aside (which are comparable to PS2 fees)?

Maybe he's refering to the developers of games like "Barbie eats a shoe" and "Spongebob squarepants gets molested" rather than high-end developers...

GrumPy

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

How will it be cheaper to make games for PC than Playstation3, licensing fees aside (which are comparable to PS2 fees)?

The cell processor, and it's unique-ness, would undoubtably be harder to programe than a pc/360 game, I'd say. But give it a few years, and the'll eventually have games running at there best.

projectmayhem

Irish GrumPy wrote:

The cell processor, and it's unique-ness, would undoubtably be harder to programe than a pc/360 game, I'd say. But give it a few years, and the'll eventually have games running at there best.

it always takes a year or two before devs learn the machines properly, and this time sony shipped ps3 devkits with 3 engines (havok, unreal3 and ageia) and bought SN Systems (people who made compillers for loads of consoles over the years) to aid the devs... sure, it'll be harder then standard PC architecture, but that's only because it's different. they've plenty of help along the way

hairball

steviec wrote:

I'm not sure how you can equate tech demoes with poor gameplay exactly?

I'm not equating tech demos with poor gameply..i'm equating sony with rehashing.

projectmayhem

hairball wrote:

i'm equating sony with rehashing.

have i made a point? that's just 1 franchise on 1 system made by 1 company. it goes on all the time. equating sony with rehashing is like equating man utd with football

hairball

point taken, and its a fair one, all of em do it but i do think at least nintendo try to innovate as well as rehash.
If you really wanted to make a point show most of the psps catalogue.

BlitzKrieg

not impressed.


but i havnt been impressed with any of the 3 upcoming consoles.

Lord Oz

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

How will it be cheaper to make games for PC than Playstation3, licensing fees aside (which are comparable to PS2 fees)?

Example: Galactic Civilizations 2.

Ri_Nollaig

BlitzKrieg wrote:

not impressed.


but i havnt been impressed with any of the 3 upcoming consoles.

well what are you excepting ? virtual reality ?

jesus_thats_gre

Irish GrumPy wrote:

The cell processor, and it's unique-ness, would undoubtably be harder to programe than a pc/360 game, I'd say. But give it a few years, and the'll eventually have games running at there best.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060225-6265.html

If IBM pull this off then the PS3's development costs should be kept down.

Dont be at yourself

Yeah, the Playstation brand plays host to the most rehashed, old ideas in gaming. Sure I forgot that games like Rez, Freak Out, Singstar, Katamari Damacy, Eye Toy, Guitar Freaks, Ico, SOTC etc etc etc all appeared exclusively on other consoles, right?

BlitzKrieg

well what are you excepting ? virtual reality ?

no...but neither the buisness plan nor the actual games of any the consoles have appealled to me.

Revolution -as wonderful and unique the new controller is, it mostly looks like a pain in the arse nad i havnt seen a comfortable, easy use for it yet. i've tried sitting there holding my remote trying to understand what it will feel like holding this controller, all it made me think was that it will either be horrible uncomfortable or expecting far too much commitment from the gamer. Think of the havoc that could happen if you have to quickly scratch your balls or take a quick slug of a drink. Sure you can pause...but it makes the whole feeling of playing games much more "formal"

Of course there's also the games, which for the revolution we havnt heard much beyond the backward compatablilty and the downloadables. Which isnt enough to make me really excited.


Xbox-360: Pisses me off more then actually not impresses. Before its launch my opinion was of the 3 consoles it was the most pratically designed. It actually felt next gen to me because they had gone and expanded the areas the Xbox excelled at. Xbox live and better customization of the console making it feel like it was yours. That really appealled to me. IT wasnt the graphics that impressed me, it was how it was all brilliantly tied into this neat package (the menu button on the remote) The whole community approach Sega tried with the Dreamcast was now almost a reality with the xbox360.

But its the games that kick it straight in the gooleys. There was nothing beyond maybe project gothem street racer 3 that really tried to push the xbox live feature to the next level. The games for the most part have been all lacklustre. Hence a disapointment.



Now the PS3.

They're alot of words going around that it is embracing the same things as the xbox360. better network support, a hard drive, numerous ports for oh so many features. To me it looks like a mess cause i dont feel them pushing anything. I mean the PS2 they pushed that it was now more then just a console. The same with the PSP, i could see gameplans with those two. But the PS3 just feels like anything microsoft or nintendo say they have, sony just shouts back that they got it TOO!!! and its BETTER!!! which ok, yippee its gonna be great. But its not exciting me nor am i impressed. But to be fair it is the furthest off of the 3 consoles. But so far i'm not impressed.

On the games front. Yes the PS2 has been the console for many an original games, but in sony's campaign for the ps3, that strength isnt really brought up, the killer aces that sony show off are still the titles which are 'safe' sequels. I know its not all of them. But thats where alot of emphasize is put on.



Overall nothing has made me want to buy a new console, the simple fact that people are naming off better games still coming to the ps2 (katamari i love you!) and even the original xbox when the 360 is out, shows that this generation is not making the same impact as the previous one did. When the PS2 and Dreamcast hit, quality AAA titles for the N64 and PS1 dried up very bloody quickly.

flogen

BlitzKrieg wrote:

Think of the havoc that could happen if you have to quickly scratch your balls or take a quick slug of a drink. Sure you can pause...but it makes the whole feeling of playing games much more "formal"

Generally if I need to scratch my balls and/or have a drink I need to pause a game anyway, given that both my hands are needed to control any controller/keyboard... it's either that or get the sh*t kicked out of me in Halo 2 while I stand perfectly still (Or use my spare hand to aimlessly run around hoping I can get away just long enough until my other hand is free again).

If anything the Rev offers the wonderous ability of multitasking, I could sit there with my revmote in one hand and a can/my balls in the other (although I imagine most of the games will use the analogue stick or something else instead)

Frankly I'm bored of the inter-console bickering; not that I think it's pointless but it is when two out of three of the machines have yet to debut... If sony release a video the fanboys will say it's superb and shows how the 360 sucks and the MS heads will say it's obviously prerendered. Interestingly Nintendo's decision to go a different route has managed to pull them out of a lot of this bickering, at least on a graphical level, saying that even the hardcorest of Ninty fans have their doubts about the Red Steel screenies that are doing the rounds at the moment.
When the three machines are available at Christmas (assuming they all have some level of decent software support), then it will be easier to say what is better than what, until then we're just all revealing our inbuilt biases; had those Red Steel clips been for the PS3 I wouldn't have thought much of them as I am sceptical of anything Sony say until I see it, even though I still don't believe them 100% I'm willing to give nintendo a little bit more sway on them though.

GrumPy

PS3 will sell the most units, nintendo rev will have the more interesting games, 360 will dominate online play with consoles.

Retr0gamer

If you had of said the same to me that the PSP would beat the Nintendo DS hands down in handheld console sales about 12 months ago I would have agreed with you. However now the DS is way ahead of the PSP. I'd say wait and see. If nintendo and microsoft play this well they could knock Sony from the top spot. A low 360 and an even lower Revolution price could really damage Sonys sales at christmas especially if there is a shortage of PS3 consoles which there almost certainly will be.

sprinkles

Retr0gamer wrote:

If you had of said the same to me that the PSP would beat the Nintendo DS hands down in handheld console sales about 12 months ago I would have agreed with you. However now the DS is way ahead of the PSP. I'd say wait and see. If nintendo and microsoft play this well they could knock Sony from the top spot. A low 360 and an even lower Revolution price could really damage Sonys sales at christmas especially if there is a shortage of PS3 consoles which there almost certainly will be.

I agree. Couple that with Microsaoft having a back catalogue that will stretch a over a year at that stage (next gen games) I think SOny will find it very difficult to regain it's dominant position.

I'm more looking forward to the Revolution though, I mean the PS3 won't be able to do anything more than the 360 in terms of interaction and inovation. The rev will definately have the niche and if the controller is used properly by game dev's then I think it will be the rebirth of gaming.


PS: Didn anyone lese notice the demo shown in the first post was shown on a samsung tv. And here I was thinking the Bravia was the best

LookingFor

I posted most of these, and at better quality, some time ago on the Playstation forum:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054911340

Oh, and whomever is complaining about Sony rehashing really needs to wake up. I think nearly half the titles Sony alone has announced for PS3 are original properties. Sony invests a lot in original IP, moreso I'd say that either of the other platform holders. Think of Lair, Heavenly Sword, Eyedentify, LA Noire, Monster Carnival, Angel Rings, Motorstorm, Resistance etc. While we don't know a lot about many of these titles, they have been announced.

sprinkles wrote:

I mean the PS3 won't be able to do anything more than the 360 in terms of interaction and inovation.

Depends how you define "interaction". I think it's fairly clear PS3 has a notable advantage over 360 when it comes to physics, for example.

I think broadly speaking, PS3 offers a wider pallette to developers to work with. Innovation and game quality are a function of developer talent, but all else being equal, better technical capability should allow for better games.

GrumPy

LookingFor wrote:

Depends how you define "interaction". I think it's fairly clear PS3 has a notable advantage over 360 when it comes to physics, for example.

I think broadly speaking, PS3 offers a wider pallette to developers to work with.

But will third party developers take hold of the cell, and make uber cool physics, when there games are released on all platforms? I doubt it. Sure, sony titles, and exclusive games will prolly undoubtably after a while use the cell in all it's glory, but I seriously doubt EA, ubisoft, etc.. are gonna work that extra bit hard to make a guy falling of a building in splinter cell4 look more realistic than it's 360/rev couterpart. And considering the amount of third party games on both the xbox, and ps2, it's safe to say most games will be third party.

sprinkles

LookingFor wrote:

Depends how you define "interaction". I think it's fairly clear PS3 has a notable advantage over 360 when it comes to physics, for example.

I think broadly speaking, PS3 offers a wider pallette to developers to work with. Innovation and game quality are a function of developer talent, but all else being equal, better technical capability should allow for better games.

I define interaction the means by which I can influence and dictate what happens in the game. I have spent more enjoyable hours rubbing and tapping the little screen on my ds than I have with a joypad in my hand because I find it a break from the norm.

Of course the machine is mearly the tools with which the dev's create the enjoyment but my point is that the tools can be more intuitive. Boosting the graphics engine, processor speed, etc etc, can leed to prettier, more complex games which can challenge you on new levels but your still in the same position, whith the same number of buttons to press. No difference. It's a hard tast for the dev's to challenge a group of people who have played that game countless times in the same manner.

Think of Lair, Heavenly Sword, Eyedentify, LA Noire, Monster Carnival, Angel Rings, Motorstorm, Resistance etc. While we don't know a lot about many of these titles, they have been announced.

Exactly we don't know anything about them. I'm sure Nintendo and Microsoft could list of an equally obscure list of games that they will be releasing.

hairball

yeh you know grumpy's right, it may not actually be sony, nintendo or MS's fault( or their care for that matter), it is what the 3rd parties choose to do with the hardware and i'm afraid, my belief is that the big studios(for the most part, there are always exceptions) choose time and again to take the easy way out.
I'm fully awake thanks very much, and that's how i forsee it at the moment, i'd love to be proved wrong and i hope i will...let's see then

LookingFor

Irish GrumPy wrote:

But will third party developers take hold of the cell, and make uber cool physics, when there games are released on all platforms? I doubt it.

I don't know if I would. Middleware (AGEIA/Havok) makes it easy to turn things up or down on different platforms. Mark Rein from Epic made the heavy suggestion that they'd be able to get more out of PS3 with regard to physics, in UT2007, for example.

I also get the impression that PS3 will be the lead platform on a lot of console titles, for third parties.

sprinkles wrote:

Of course the machine is mearly the tools with which the dev's create the enjoyment but my point is that the tools can be more intuitive. Boosting the graphics engine, processor speed, etc etc, can leed to prettier, more complex games which can challenge you on new levels but your still in the same position, whith the same number of buttons to press. No
difference.

I think part of interaction is the feedback you get on that. Which something like processing power is directly relevant to.

I think on interface, specifically, though, it's easy to overlook the fairly radical push Sony has made with the likes of eyetoy, long before Rev was a twinkle in Nintendo's eye. And they'll continue to evolve that. Unfortunately the biggest stumbling block for eyetoy right now - asides from technicalities and the cost of infrared cameras if you wanted 3d motion detection etc. - is that it's not a standard part of the machine, it's an optional complementary interface. Sony hasn't made that kind of leap yet, but they certainly haven't neglected that area either.

sprinkles wrote:

Exactly we don't know anything about them. I'm sure Nintendo and Microsoft could list of an equally obscure list of games that they will be releasing.

So now original IPs are destined to obscurity? Seriously, publishers can't win. Take some interest in them, and maybe they'll provide more. All I know is that many of the titles I mentioned from Sony are big budget games, and the investment on their part is huge.

I will say, though, that Sony's own portfolio seems more heavily weighted toward original games than the others, at least last time I checked. They're all doing fairly well, though, that I know of (which doesn't cover Nintendo since they've barely announced anything yet).

sprinkles

LookingFor wrote:

I think part of interaction is the feedback you get on that. Which something like processing power is directly relevant to.

I think on interface, specifically, though, it's easy to overlook the fairly radical push Sony has made with the likes of eyetoy, long before Rev was a twinkle in Nintendo's eye. And they'll continue to evolve that. Unfortunately the biggest stumbling block for eyetoy right now - asides from technicalities and the cost of infrared cameras if you wanted 3d motion detection etc. - is that it's not a standard part of the machine, it's an optional complementary interface. Sony hasn't made that kind of leap yet, but they certainly haven't neglected that area either.

That's the problem. They are afraid to take that leap. I agree they made a great effort with the eye toy, but followed it up with no real big hitting game that used it. It was a party game piece. The problem is highlighted with the PSP v DS. Great graphics, big screen, USB link, Multimedia, etc etc and yet the ds with games with simple graphics but unique interaction wins hands down in terms of playability. I have both and the ds is never out of arms reach, my psp.....well I'd have to look for it.

Brains over Braun. Give the dev a little more to play with than raw power. Make them think.

So now original IPs are destined to obscurity? Seriously, publishers can't win. Take some interest in them, and maybe they'll provide more. All I know is that many of the titles I mentioned from Sony are big budget games, and the investment on their part is huge.

I will say, though, that Sony's own portfolio seems more heavily weighted toward original games than the others, at least last time I checked. They're all doing fairly well, though, that I know of (which doesn't cover Nintendo since they've barely announced anything yet).

Original IP's are certainly not destined to obscurity but you seriously can't expect me to get excited about a list of games noone knows anything about other than they aren't sequels to current gen games. If you took a minute before jumping to your assessment you'd see that my point was the names in your list are obscure. Nintendo or MS could release a similar list, I wouldn't know which was which. That is not to say that they won't be good games. I'm sure there was a similar list of original titles released coming up to the launch of the PS2.

And in fairness Sony does take the angle of producing original ideas, unfortunatly the other devs don'talways share the dream. That's a problem I think/hope that the revolution will address.

flogen

LookingFor wrote:

I also get the impression that PS3 will be the lead platform on a lot of console titles, for third parties.

I don't think that will effect the point being made; if a dev company isn't bothered about doing super-precise physics they just won't do them, regardless of the primary machine they work on.

I think part of interaction is the feedback you get on that. Which something like processing power is directly relevant to.

Once a machine has the power to do what it promises to do then interaction has nothing to do with what's under the hood; I mean, the interaction on a DS is probably better than that of a PS3 because there are more unique ways to interact with it (from a standalone point of view, of course the ps3 is going to have plenty of addons you can buy like eyetoy).

I think on interface, specifically, though, it's easy to overlook the fairly radical push Sony has made with the likes of eyetoy, long before Rev was a twinkle in Nintendo's eye.

According to Nintendo they've been developing the Rev since they GC launched...

And they'll continue to evolve that. Unfortunately the biggest stumbling block for eyetoy right now - asides from technicalities and the cost of infrared cameras if you wanted 3d motion detection etc. - is that it's not a standard part of the machine, it's an optional complementary interface. Sony hasn't made that kind of leap yet, but they certainly haven't neglected that area either.

Yeah; the original rumours that the 360 would ship with a camera showed promise like this, and it does cause some problems.
IMO Nintendo face their own depending on the amount of extra connections they create for the revmote... I hope they carefully licence them and don't end up with each game made having a completely different addon controller... too many extras and the machine will flop, regardless of its standalone price.

So now original IPs are destined to obscurity? Seriously, publishers can't win. Take some interest in them, and maybe they'll provide more. All I know is that many of the titles I mentioned from Sony are big budget games, and the investment on their part is huge.

I will say, though, that Sony's own portfolio seems more heavily weighted toward original games than the others, at least last time I checked. They're all doing fairly well, though, that I know of (which doesn't cover Nintendo since they've barely announced anything yet).

Frankly the New IP/old IP debate is annoying, who cares if the characters are the same, did they develop the game at all? I mean, GTA 3 is the same basic game as GTA 1 and 2, but there's simply no comparison between the quality of Gameplay; the same goes for the leap made between Super Mario World and Mario 64... same IP, totally different game.

Ronan|Raven

The dreamcast is making a comeback in Japan!

Dont be at yourself

The dreamcast is making a comeback in Japan!

Ah yes, but a game catalogue consisting of 90% hentai will only shift so many machines!

GrumPy

LookingFor wrote:

I don't know if I would. Middleware (AGEIA/Havok) makes it easy to turn things up or down on different platforms. Mark Rein from Epic made the heavy suggestion that they'd be able to get more out of PS3 with regard to physics, in UT2007, for example.

I also get the impression that PS3 will be the lead platform on a lot of console titles, for third parties.

I'm sorry man, but I cannot visualise the two largest third party developers such as EA and ubisoft, making the ps3 version slightly more impressive in regards to realism of physics. And wouldn't the large companys find it easier to get there games to run on xbox, and 360? considering there basically pc arcitechture anyway. Prolly even run smoother, third party games, till they fully use the cell correctly. And thats only if they intend too. I know if I was head of activision/ea etc... I wouln't be telling my workers to spend more time on the ps3 versions physics engine because they could.

Dont be at yourself

The largest companies like EA extensively use middleware (didn't they buy renderware or something a while back?) which makes cross-platform development less of a pain. That said, the XBox has quite a power advantage in the last round, and yet there was very little to seperate multi-platform games, as, inevitably, games would need to be designed with less powerful PS2 in mind, market-leader as it was.

Perhaps if PS3 steals a significant lead from the 360, things will be different this time.

impr0v

sprinkles wrote:

PS: Didn anyone lese notice the demo shown in the first post was shown on a samsung tv. And here I was thinking the Bravia was the best

OT but Samsung TeeVees and Sony's Bravia line are made in a joint-owned factory in Korea, which they are currently expanding.

Link

Vegeta

Irish GrumPy wrote:

I'm sorry man, but I cannot visualise the two largest third party developers such as EA and ubisoft, making the ps3 version slightly more impressive in regards to realism of physics. And wouldn't the large companys find it easier to get there games to run on xbox, and 360? considering there basically pc arcitechture anyway. Prolly even run smoother, third party games, till they fully use the cell correctly. And thats only if they intend too. I know if I was head of activision/ea etc... I wouln't be telling my workers to spend more time on the ps3 versions physics engine because they could.

Lucky you're not the head of ea or activision, Sony are current market leaders in the industry. Why would you tell your devs not to work on the market leaders hardware, doesn't make any business sense.

You're obviously a fan of xbox + 360 which is cool as I also enjoy some games on those consoles but the PS3 will have features that the 360 wont have. Just like the xbox had better graphics n textures as compared to the PS2 counter parts.

Think of PC games aswell do developers design games so they will run identically on everyones PC, NO they allow them to be run at various settings depending on hardware installed.

Also Oblivion on the 360 is already pushing the system, the frame rate issues, the slow down if you have loads of items in your inventory. The fact they removed some lighting features in the game. It does look really nice in a town when there is no loadin but in the outside world on a fast horse then problems become very clear.

tallaghtdave

i still think microsoft has adult gaming conqured.
but we will have to see for ourselfs .
im always wondering to they LEAK footage on purpose.accidently lol.
the wait in on,

flogen

Irish GrumPy wrote:

I'm sorry man, but I cannot visualise the two largest third party developers such as EA and ubisoft, making the ps3 version slightly more impressive in regards to realism of physics. And wouldn't the large companys find it easier to get there games to run on xbox, and 360? considering there basically pc arcitechture anyway. Prolly even run smoother, third party games, till they fully use the cell correctly. And thats only if they intend too. I know if I was head of activision/ea etc... I wouln't be telling my workers to spend more time on the ps3 versions physics engine because they could.

I think EA will go to the money, ie the most popular machine... I think for a year or two that won't be too clear cut but at the same time I don't think either machine will be very different from each other.

In fairness to Ubisoft, they're a little bit more considerate when it comes to games than EA; take the new Splinter Cell for example where they have three seperate teams working on the nextgen, oldgen and handheld versions of the game, rather than making lazy ports.

flogen

Vegeta wrote:

Also Oblivion on the 360 is already pushing the system, the frame rate issues, the slow down if you have loads of items in your inventory. The fact they removed some lighting features in the game. It does look really nice in a town when there is no loadin but in the outside world on a fast horse then problems become very clear.

I don't know enough to say that it's the case here but a lot of those types of issues in the oldgen were overcome with inventive coding, I'd be surprised if the xbox360 has peaked this early as most consoles don't show their best work until the last 2 years of their lifespan.

GrumPy

flogen wrote:

I think EA will go to the money, ie the most popular machine...

EA will go with EVERY machine.... next gen bond/potter/fifa will be on ps3/rev/360 and look almost identical.

GrumPy

Vegeta wrote:

Lucky you're not the head of ea or activision, Sony are current market leaders in the industry. Why would you tell your devs not to work on the market leaders hardware, doesn't make any business sense.

EA are money hungry animals. They will release a multiplatform game on the snes if they thought it was viable. My point was, they make a game, say fifa 2007, they release it on ps2, ps3, xbox, xbox 360, rev, psp, pc and god knows.

Unlike ubisoft, the'll go for the aul' port trick, and the 360/ps3/and rev version will all look, and run identical in almost all cases bar the rev, as HD wont happen. Either way, I still cant see EA/activision/ubisoft, three of the biggest third party developers in the industry, making the ball physics in fifa look, and act more realistically on the ps3, then the 360 and rev counter parts, simply because the cell can kick out better physics.

flogen

Irish GrumPy wrote:

EA will go with EVERY machine.... next gen bond/potter/fifa will be on ps3/rev/360 and look almost identical.

But they'll design a game to the level of the biggest seller and then make whatever adjustments the HAVE to make for the others, so if the ps3 is the biggest seller and the most powerful, they'll just turn everything down for the 360 version.

I can't wait to see their bullsh*t attempts to phone in revmote support... menu browsing and special "point remote at screen now" attacks

GrumPy

flogen wrote:

But they'll design a game to the level of the biggest seller and then make whatever adjustments the HAVE to make for the others, so if the ps3 is the biggest seller and the most powerful, they'll just turn everything down for the 360 version.

I can't wait to see their bullsh*t attempts to phone in revmote support... menu browsing and special "point remote at screen now" attacks

wrong, the'll make it run on the 360 first (because its less powerful) , and the ps3 version will look identical.

Think black on the current gen, looks the same on the xbox, as ps2, because it was designed with the least powerful console in mind. EA again mind you.

Vegeta

flogen wrote:

But they'll design a game to the level of the biggest seller and then make whatever adjustments the HAVE to make for the others, so if the ps3 is the biggest seller and the most powerful, they'll just turn everything down for the 360 version.

I can't wait to see their bullsh*t attempts to phone in revmote support... menu browsing and special "point remote at screen now" attacks

I agree here I think they will develop for most popular machine as they are money hungry and just turn it down for everything else

steviec

In the case of multiplatform games I'd say PS3 and 360 will be almost identical. PS3 might have a smoother framerate, better draw distance, things like that, but I don't see major wholesale changes to any games. I'll be interested to see how they handle revolution conversions though. EA were about the only company left who still released gamecube ports of multiplatform games in this generation, if the rev doesn't sell well it may not be viable to make a port at all.

Squaddy

Irish GrumPy wrote:

wrong, the'll make it run on the 360 first (because its less powerful) , and the ps3 version will look identical.

Think black on the current gen, looks the same on the xbox, as ps2, because it was designed with the least powerful console in mind. EA again mind you.

I have to agree with Grumpy here. guys dont forget its EA.

Lets stop thinking about the games point of view for a sec, ok, Ea are a business and like all businesses they have to maximise profit and cut costs where its possible (and as we know it they do a lot of it!) so if they develop a game and they launch it on all consoles. Lets just say they launch it on the 360 first (which is less powerful than the PS3 so pep say we dont know yet) I doubt they will make it better for the PS3 costing more money and discriminating customers that own 360, Revolution etc.

People are going to buy the game anyway becausse its Ea.

Correct me if im wrong....

LookingFor

flogen wrote:

I don't think that will effect the point being made; if a dev company isn't bothered about doing super-precise physics they just won't do them, regardless of the primary machine they work on.

Lead platforms tend to define the technical direction games go in. PS3 games will likely skew toward the "physics heavy".

flogen wrote:

According to Nintendo they've been developing the Rev since they GC launched...

And Sony was working on eyetoy for some years in advance of its 2003 release. We could go back and forth on this, both have R&Ded on interface for a long time.

Irish GrumPy wrote:

I'm sorry man, but I cannot visualise the two largest third party developers such as EA and ubisoft, making the ps3 version slightly more impressive in regards to realism of physics.

The likes of Ubi are already doing it for bloody PhysX chips, with an install base in the single-digit thousands, probably - I think they'll find more incentive in the PS3 install base to at least do likewise! (Have a look at AGEIA's site for a look at optimisations done for GRAW on PC with and without the PhysX card). In fact, work done in PC versions of games to support things like PhysX or HavokFX could transfer over to PS3 quite well, and vice versa.

Irish GrumPy wrote:

And wouldn't the large companys find it easier to get there games to run on xbox, and 360? considering there basically pc arcitechture anyway.

They're not, though. 360's CPU carries many of the same pitfalls as PS3's, even if not the same scale of parallelism to contend with.

360 is easier to dev for, or at least that seems to be the impression given, but that's not solely a determining factor in what a lead platform is or isn't. (Obviously, PS2 was a bitch to code for, but it was by far and away the lead platform of choice).

Irish GrumPy wrote:

I wouln't be telling my workers to spend more time on the ps3 versions physics engine because they could.

Most companies will use multiplatform middleware - the likes of AGEIA and Havok will spend the time on the individual engines on each platform. Although I guess later on, some enterprising companies will go beyond that and code their own, as middleware is rarely wholly optimal for a specific platform.

projectmayhem

LookingFor wrote:

Most companies will use multiplatform middleware - the likes of AGEIA and Havok will spend the time on the individual engines on each platform. Although I guess later on, some enterprising companies will go beyond that and code their own, as middleware is rarely wholly optimal for a specific platform.

spot on. EA and Ubisoft have bought up licesnes for havok, ageia and renderware for next gen whereas sony's AAA devs like rockstar and guerilla have been given extra cash injection from sony to work on custom engines.

(to avoid any confusion i said AAA devs, not devs owned by sony)