Videogamer Exclusive: EA explains no PS3 Red Alert 3

EA has explained why there are currently no plans to release a PS3 version of hotly anticipated PC and Xbox 360 RTS Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, saying Sony's console is "very exotic and tough to develop for".

Red Alert 3, the first Red Alert game in seven years, had been slated for a PC, 360 and PS3 release when it was first announced. However publisher EA put the PS3 version on hold with no explanation - until now.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Real gamer 4 life3711d ago (Edited 3711d ago )

The ps3 gift is also its curse. :(
Its advantage is also its disadvantage.:(

Overr8ed3711d ago

Am batman... no Spierman... no superman... no PS3, yea.

jahcure3711d ago

But didn't the last C&C game flop in terms of sales on the xbox360? Again, I may be wrong and if so, correct me.

CrizzleC243711d ago

Command and Conquer has been (so far) the most fun and entertaining RTS on the 360'.

So Im not only am I hoping it makes it to Ps3 and 360 at the same time,but that we can play each other (and talk console trash)

Supreme Commander sounds pretty epic but im waiting for 90 bad reviews so that the price will drop to "college student" prices.

JasonXE3711d ago (Edited 3711d ago )

yup yup. C&C Kane's Wraith is a flop in sales. Though C&C: T.W3 went gold. Pros outweight the cons since it's easy to port and chance for another gold. The manpower needed to port to ps3 and trend in software sells for less than hype games is probably not worth it.

chasuk083711d ago

Yeh this game will also be a flop in sales for the 360 and pc, and would be an even bigger flop on the PS3. As gamers know whats a good game, and this is plain crap.

MazzingerZ3711d ago

Yeah, but that's one of the few lazy developer's left out there (Valve the other)...they don't want to modify their engines, they want to develop at the less cost possible and is understandable...don't care about the game but a shame as the PS3 supports Mouse & KY without any problem

Do you think if the PS3 didn't have any future or was a waste of time like Valve says, EPIC would have developed its version of the UnrealEngine for the PS3?...UT3 was just a excuse for that...they know more and more games are coming and they want to have their Engine ready to whoever needs it

caffman3710d ago

why put time and effort into developing for a console where its most hyped game didn't even clear 3 million sales?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3710d ago
Svtcobrastang3711d ago

It's a good thing that red alert is meant to be played on a pc anyways...but it would be nice to have at least the option for ps3 owners.

solidt123711d ago

You silverchode - you hit the nail right on the head. Its not that the engine can't run on the PS3 the problems is its not in the budget for this game to make a PS3 version. They don't have the money to hire a PS3 coder to port it. They are also stating that they don't have high hopes for this game on the PS3 so they will just take the potential sale hit.

They are Lame!!!

Ju3711d ago

I don't think it has anything to do with budget (alone). Anyone in here ever re-invented the wheel, means rewrote existing code ? I know our engine is in development since about 4+ years now. I couldn't imagine to re-write the whole damn thing because we "forgot" SPUs in the first place. Well, yeah, its a money thing. It would cost us about another 4 years with a complete new team because we couldn't simply stop working on the existing code.

I would guess strategic games engines use a very traditional approach (number of objects and conditions and relations to each other), which use a lot of branching code etc. To re-write that so it could utilize the SPUs might be tough. And, well, the PS3 does not have enough "discrete" horse power for a straight port (360 might be easier with a coherent architecture).

It can work, obviously. I am playing CiV in 1080p on my PS3 without any trouble - but I think even this game is far from optimized for the PS3. To really achieve this, they'd start over from scratch, I'd think. They will at some point. Its a pity I love strategy games and would like to see more on the PS3 - now that I have seen how well CiV plays here.

kewlkat0073711d ago (Edited 3711d ago )

Now can you guarantee that they will make this money back?

It's looking like HIGH RISK, LESS REWARDS here...

PC/360 is simple.

Ju3711d ago

Ah, come on. Even if its more expensive, that doesn't mean they are making a loss selling/producing it for the PS3. PS3 games sell as well. Ok, they might not make $2M, but you would rather give away $1M instead, hah ?

Most cost effort these days goes into art anyway and that can be shared between the platforms.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3711d ago
solidjun53711d ago

So EA pretty much re-affirmed my belief that they suck when it comes to the PS3. Honestly, why don't they just merge with Microsoft.

bluecapone3711d ago

stop bein stupid if EA does that then ps3 wont have any games to buy

MUNKYPOO3711d ago

lol @ bluecapone, i thought you said that the ps3 would'nt have any games to buy. wait a second you did, guess you the idiot. if EA joined with MS we wouldn't have as many sports games. but to say we wouldn't have any is just dumb

solidjun53711d ago

do you talk to your mom like that...apparently you do.

poopsack3711d ago

all the great first party games and the other third parties that dont suck.

solidt123711d ago

They have there limited amount of skilled PS3 coders on better games.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3711d ago
MUNKYPOO3711d ago

EA why am i not surprised?