Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by PrivateRyan 2658d ago | news

Volition: We struggled with PS3 Red Faction

OXM UK reports that Volition Inc needed to draft in help from Sony to get Red Faction: Guerilla up to speed with the Xbox 360 version.

Associate Producer Sean Kennedy tells OXM UK that the problem was that the PlayStation3 has less memory to work with than the Xbox 360, which is why the extra help from Sony was needed. (PS3, Red Faction: Guerrilla, Xbox 360)

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 3 »
Hellsvacancy  +   2658d ago
Wot a load of Bollocks
Im not a game programmer or anythin like that but wot i dont get is how come the Ps3 has such great lookin titles like Uncharted ,Mgs4, killzone 2 etc so y cant other devs be able to to the same?

Are they lazy

Can sumbody please explain
BIoodmask  +   2658d ago
I'm sure that a neutral third party would say things in an interview just to make you angry. One would think they know a little bit more about programming for all the different consoles than you and most of the people on this website.

Most threads that I read the comments on usually have at least one person calling developers lazy. It is almost expected now. Just because you think certain games look appealing has nothing to do with a consoles capabilities. That is solely your opinion.
#1.1 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(46) | Disagree(37) | Report | Reply
thor  +   2658d ago
It's not that the devs are "lazy" per-se - they've just designed their engine with a lot of memory useage. Memory is one of the key things that can speed up performance of a PC, everyone knows this. Yet the PS3 is lacking in memory compared to the 360 (I think the OS takes up more & one of the GPU/CPU doesn't have access to all the memory).

The GPU in the PS3 is comparable in speed to the 360's GPU.
The Cell in the PS3 beats out the 360's CPU by a long way, but it doesn't handle multitasking well - you need to handle the sending of code fragments and shuffling different processes around YOURSELF instead of the processor just interlacing the threads.
The blu-ray drive in the PS3 is slightly slower than the top speed of a DVD-9 but it doesn't make much difference.

The memory in the PS3 is inadequate and THIS is the reason devs have problems. This is the main reason for problems with PS3 versions of games, especially open world games like Fallout 3 and now this. It's difficult to reduce memory consumption and then you end up needing to compress your data and decompress it on-the-fly using the SPUs - but then you need something to organise the processes that run on the SPUs and it will take a LOT of work.

The reason that a lot of games have a mandatory install on PS3 is to speed up the loading/streaming of data - it's not that the blu-ray drive is slow it's that more data needs to be streamed in more rapidly because there's not enough space in the memory.
thereapersson  +   2658d ago
The problem here isn't the PS3's lack of ram; it's the Developers' lack of experimenting with the type of RAM in the PS3
The PS3 uses XDR ram, while the 360 uses a more standard RAM type that we are used to seeing in everyday PC's (GDDR3).

(taken from Wikipedia)

XDR DRAM or extreme data rate dynamic random access memory is a high-performance RAM interface and successor to the Rambus RDRAM it is based on, competing with the rival DDR2 SDRAM and GDDR4 technology. XDR was designed to be effective in small, high-bandwidth consumer systems, high-performance memory applications, and high-end GPUs. It eliminates the unusually high latency problems that plagued early forms of RDRAM. Also, the XDR DRAM have heavy emphasis on per pin bandwidth, which can benefit further cost control on PCB production. This is because fewer lanes are needed for the same amount of bandwidth. Rambus owns the rights to the technology. XDR is used by Sony in the PlayStation 3 console.[1]


If developers would start optimizing games for the high-performance architecture of the PS3 (i.e. making games lead platform on the PS3), we would see less of these problems. Hell, EA of all companies have done it (Dead Space, Mirror's Edge), so what is the problem here?
#1.3 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(35) | Disagree(15) | Report | Reply
Robearboy  +   2658d ago
I dont think the devs are lazy, they are simply finding the architecture of the cell difficult to understand, a bit like someone who has worked with ferarri's for 30 years and are then given a Porche to fix up, they will be teething troubles
thor  +   2658d ago

The XDR should have a higher speed than the DDR in the 360. I read somewhere that the PS3's OS takes a load more RAM than the 360's OS. Furthermore, the 360 has 512MB of shared RAM that can be accessed by both the CPU and GPU whereas the Cell can only access 256MB of XDR - and about 64MB of that is taken up by the OS. You can see where the problems arise.
Software_Lover  +   2658d ago
LOOK at Dev time and the studio
Everyone of those games you mentioned are exclusive and the dev time, especially KZ2, even MGS4, was a long process. Im sure they had more resources on hand than a 3rd party dev. But now that they have their problem fixed, Im sure when they make another game for the ps3 it wont be that much of a problem if any.
jtucker78  +   2658d ago
RE: 1.2

How come you don't have more bubbles thor?
Intelligently and articulately written with no biased opinions.

Bubs up.
#1.7 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Foolsjoker  +   2658d ago
The PS3 while yes uses different ram, it is actually the problem of multi-threading. The XBOX has 1 lump sum of memory to use, the PS3 has multiple smaller bits. So if you create your game just throwing everything into RAM your going to have issues with conversion, as you are not allocating memory you are just dumping. So converting it to a PS3 is a pain as you need to get multiple threads to be organized to amount to the total of the XBOX. While this seems like it is weaker, it is actually smarter as the strain of slowdowns and ability to handle more processes unobstructed becomes of great value.

Basically, the Dev's just didn't plan out their coding or they were lazy and didn't bother to read the "how to code for PS3 book"...hahaha
Agent VX  +   2658d ago
OMG!!! Here we go again... The PS3 is not the hardware super weight that Sony touted about. It is a fixed piece of hardware that will never get stronger, it horsepower is locked. The only thing they can improve on is how it is programmed.

First of all, the Bluray and Cell are expensive pieces of hardware solely due to the fact that they aren't mainstream mass produced items and not from them being some super duper electronic device. So in order for Sony able to keep the PS3 in the realm of mainstream consumer price index, they had to cut certain items or go with less expensive pieces of hardware. This was done by given the PS3 a older less performing video card and a less effective memory architecture. The decision to go with a cheaper less effective videocard and memory architecture is the sole reason why the PS3 struggles with games the 360 handles with ease in some cases.

Don't let fanboys fool you, most developers that aren't in bed with Sony, all say the same thing, the PS3 has significant performance issue with video rendering and memory related issues, never mind the slow read speeds of Bluray which is why you have so many GB's installs on the PS3.

Sony has had a strong history on overstating the performance of their gaming consoles and failing to deliver. The PS3 has kept this tradition strong, and developers are all saying the same thing. Also, any game that is out on the PS3 can easily be ran by the 360, so don't let the fanboys fools you with their usual Uncharted, MGS 4 and Rachet and Clank lies, these titles can be easily ran by the 360 and arne't graphically masterpieces like they say.

To clarify, the PS3 and 360 when you take in account all their strengths and weaknesses perform very similar. It really comes down to what games you like more. An up to date PC always smokes consoles!!!
spandexxking  +   2658d ago
Volition manged fine on the Ps3 version of Saints Row 2.
EDIT: so volition didnt make saints row 2 for ps3 my bad/sarcasm
#1.10 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Nicolator   2658d ago | Spam
hay  +   2658d ago
It's understandable that when lead platform is PC/Xbox360 devs will have difficulties programming for PS3 cause of architectural differences.
thereapersson  +   2658d ago
I remember the original Red Faction on PS2.
Wasn't the PS2 a hard system to develop for back in the day? Back when there was no XBOX, and it was just the PS2, I remember how good the first Red Faction was. Volition didn't seem to have any trouble developing for a "new and complicated" system like the Emotion Engine was.

My how times have changed!
tordavis  +   2658d ago
"Im not a game programmer or anythin..."

Stopped reading right there!
PS3CELLGRILL  +   2658d ago
I didn't want to get in this flame bait but all the games like MGS4,KZ2,UC,and GT5 were all funded by sony so those game gonna look better than most,developing and getting good results from PS3 want hurt big company's like EA but smaller company's it will,the PS3 was sony way to stay ahead of the 3rd party games like nintendo and it back fire on them because they're games will never sell like nintendo,so quit blaming the dev unless u are funding the cost to develop for this difficult machine. love PS3 forever best console ever hope that get me some bubbles hey im with the majority
Darkseider  +   2658d ago
Lazy Devs
The answer to this? LAZY DEVS.


If they designed their engine to use a lot of memory, time for a redesign. Write elegant code that uses a small footprint instead of hacked crap that kinda works but is bloated to no end. There is no excuse for that other than laziness plain and simple.

@Agent VX

The hardware in the PS3 is indeed superior from a processor and memory standpoint. The problem is devs code for the greatest common denominator on a console, XBox 360, which is essentially a x86 pinned PC under the hood. They use sloppy coding just as they would on a standard x86 game PC to get the job done. Unfortunately that is not the CORRECT way to code anything.


Sitting on a couch, eh? Here is one of the examples I use on my resume.

I know code. I also know when devs are lazy and let me assure you. This is a prime example of LAZY devs.

This is just a prime example of developers not willing to RTFM. It is a shame when they go out and say they are pushing limits of the PS3/XBox 360 when there are examples of much better games on both. They created the engine and the game for a PC w/ gobs of memory. In doing so coded it like absolute crap and then tried shoving their 5 lbs. of sh*t into a 3 pound bag. It just doesn't work like that hence, LAZY DEVS.
#1.16 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(20) | Report | Reply
gameraxis  +   2658d ago
anyone know that saying...
just cause U can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...
well i know, the ps3 sucks... whatever I'm not here to fan flames, but clearly it got fixed when the sony guy came in... and sometimes when a developer says "were pushing these systems to the max" its just the max that they know how to push it, and not an accurate measurement of the system...

granted, its harder, we all get it, but don't hint that its impossible

prowiew  +   2658d ago
to hellsvacancy:

Thats because all those games you mention probably got help from sony.
Theyre first party.
SuperM  +   2658d ago
@ Agent VX
Have you ever played GT5 prolouge? ever seen it in action? No? thought so... The only game i have on pc that is comparable to GT5 in graphics is Crysis. Nothing on the 360 can compete with it, period.

Oh and you are absolutely right about one point. The ps3 is a fixed piece of hardware that is not going to improve. Only developers can improve. The same can ofcourse be said about the 360. The only difference is that on the 360 developers are saying they are starting to push the hardware to the limit. On the ps3 developers are saying they are still only using a small part of the potential. Example being Naughty dog who said they only use about a third of the ps3's power in Uncharted which is one of the best looking console games on the market. Im not going to argue about uncharted looking better then all 360 games because i know how fanboys will respond to that, but atleast i can say there is nothing on 360 that is graphically superior to uncharted. Again if thats only a third of what the ps3 can do its no question whos going to have the best looking games in the future.
mandrake  +   2658d ago
First, let's clear up some of the FUD here before it spreads and gains a life of its own.

A basic fact that any seasoned PC Gamer will tell you is that the speed of the RAM is not as important as the total amount of RAM. Check out the test results here:

For those of you who are too lazy to read, the bottom line is: it is better to have more RAM than faster RAM (if you can't have both). This axiom should be true up to 4 gigabytes.

Second, a more personal note. I read a lot of you kids calling devs "lazy" or "ignorant" and I used to get a huge kick out of emailing quotes from here to the code gnomes downstairs at work. It was funny at first but it's really old now. So take my word for it: you jokers have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE about what you are talking about. The sad thing is, since this whole console war began, you have had more than enough time to educate yourselves so that you could discuss programming issues more intelligently, but you obviously didn't seize the opportunity. We are already tired of laughing at you, yet you are still as dumb as the day this whole thing started. If anybody has shown themselves to be lazy or ignorant, it's you people. Our devs are some of the most hardworking people I've ever met, and today, Friday, I have the unenviable task of telling a good number of them, one by one, that they are being let go. I'm sick to my stomach to have to do this then come here and read your brainfarts, but unfortunately, that too is part of my job.

Since I'm here already, let's try to clear awat some more crap. The lower memory cap on the PS3 is not the insurmountable bottleneck that some 360 fanboys would have you believe, but the workaround is an absolute b!tch to implement if you are starting from code that was originally written for the 360. And, of course, it is easier to "optimize" (whatever that means) on a system with more RAM than one with less, irrespective of how supposedly freakin fast the cpu is. Which brings up a second point. I can't speak for the other houses, but this whole business about "it's easier to lead on the PS3 then port to the 360 than the other way around" is pure, absolute bunk. "Porting" (if you even understand what that word means) is equally difficult in either direction. Work on the 360 version does tend to get done much more quickly, but I swear, it's not because it is esier to "port" to. Whether we do the 360 version first or last, it always goes gold in less time and with less kicking and screaming than the PS3 version. Make of that what you will.

So there. Have a nice day. Because I sure as hell won't.
Man_of_the_year  +   2658d ago
Well not every developer can take 5+ years to develope a game - and GT5 is only only on 1 console as well so all efforts can be focused on the one console....

your argument is reaching
#1.21 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
SuperM  +   2658d ago
Did uncharted take 5 years to develop? nope, neither did GT5 prologue. The only reason GT5 takes long time to develop is all the content that is put into the game. And also that polyphony digital has been involved with other things outside the game while developing. For example designing the user interface of the dashboard on the Nissan GTR.

I think Insomniac is the definitive proof that developing on ps3 doesnt have to be time consuming. 1 game each year for the ps3 + a smaller psn ratchet game. There will always be some games that take longer to make, nomather what system. Need i mention Alan Wake, or perhaps even Too Human?
#1.22 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
solidt12  +   2658d ago
Neither the PS3 or 360's ram technology is inferior, just different. The 360's ram design is based on technology that is widely known and the PS3's technology is based on newer architecture. They both work just fine they are just alot different from each other so devs need to know two different architectures well to make one good game now and that is what they are complaining about. If I was a developer I would be excited to learn something new but idunno so people just look at it as a job and a pay check.
Pain  +   2658d ago
PS3 lead Platform = problem solved
didn't they get the memo?
vidoardes  +   2658d ago
Wow Mandrake, I have to congratulate you. You really know how to sound like you know what your talking about, when you quite clearly dont have a single first f***ing clue.

Designing a multi-platform title to work on one system then trying to force that to work on another system is lazy, it is sloppy, but it is cheap (and produces crappy results unless it is poured over for a long time, liek Bioshock or Oblivion). You have to develop the code with all systems in mind or you will always produce crap, because you wanna rush out a port (which is what happens 99% of the time in the games industry).

What does always prove true is that games that start on the PS3 and get ported out produce much better quality than the other way around. Games that are developed concurrently (i.e Burout Paradise) are equally as great on both systems.

The RAM in PS3 is niether inferior nor supirior, just differant, and it would help if 12 year old boys liek yourself would stop pretending like they know differant and telling everyone so
inane   2658d ago | Spam
The Lazy One  +   2658d ago
@lost prophet...
I like how you called him out, then completely agreed with him.

He never said it was worse, he said it was harder to work with. He actually made a point of saying it wasn't worse.
power of Green  +   2658d ago
The devs that are making or made those games you mentioned are talented, what you said doesn't mean those devs could not make a better product on the 360(if there were 360 versions of those titles).

I bet the 360 version will be better despite what they say.(PS3 is inferior)
Ju  +   2658d ago
@LostProphet. Give the man a rest. If what he says is true, he'll have a nightmare day today. And believe me, I know. Been there, done that.

But let me tell you, who are you guys to call these guys out being lazy. WTF.

While I personally think there's more potential in the PS3, I would agree its also more challenging.

The CELL is a monster. Using a massive parallel system is a challenge to debug. If you know what a race condition is then you can up this a bit more if you run multiple independent HW units which are completely autonomous. It is already tricky to do this on a coherent system with multiple cores where you can at least have dev tools to simply set a break points and a debugger allows you to simply stop all threads and cores, but going the extra mile, and doing this with a couple of SPUs is just one level beyond. I couldn't do it, but I also don't have the right tools. I could only use a best guess approach, which is simply not good enough if you want to push the envelope.

Most people will get a brain freeze when there are more then 3 threads running and something goes wrong. Its not their fault, this technology is simply extreme challenging. No degree in the world will help you there. I remember the days I had trouble to memorize a 6502, something which would read like a table of contents compared to a 1000 pages book the current tech is. People didn't turn out to be super humans just because the book got bigger. Its unlike more challenging.

So, please, don't call them lazy. There are different ways to approach the problems, exclusives are one way, but if you support more then one platform, there must be a common denominator in your design. Not an easy task.
#1.29 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
c-redz  +   2658d ago
cry me a river!!!! other people work just as hard and have to fire people as well. Welcome to the Sh**y economy! But make the game good and your job gets better and brighter simple, so if they port crap well they get crap!!!!! Simple each system can make a great game, so do it work and shut up. the proof is in the pudding!!!!!
power of Green  +   2658d ago
Ferrari project(360)

Ferrari Project(360)

"Hi all, I went to Blimey yesterday and met Ian , nice guy and free drinks! Ian made me sign an NDA so I can’t go into any details… but I tried the Ferrari game, all i can say is Holy moly, the gfx are better than Gran turismo, the lighting was spot on, the real time reflections on the car were amazing, the general effects are just a new level"

The 360 hardare is pulling off much more effects and physics all at once.
Ju  +   2658d ago
@PoG, did you just want to underline the lower polycount in Ferrari Project or what's your intention here ? (take very close look at all the round edges, pleeeassse).
vdesai  +   2658d ago
They are not lazy they just are unfamiliar with the base (architecture is not the correct word for this article) of the PS3. The way to work with smaller amounts of high speed ram is to send your data to the processor clear the cache and send new data and this can be done in an instant of time which is not noticeable. This is why the XDR ram was used it makes multi-threading much simpler because its basically a number crunching monster, first the ram is loaded with "stuff" then the "stuff" is sent through the system bus to the processor or the GPU but since the ram for the GPU is completely dedicated there is not need to worry about that so we worry about splitting the data up now into separate threads, this par of the system should always be in the ram, you can't just talk about hardware because you need to talk about software correctly I think they kept objects that are redundant in the ram while the game was on, this is good programing the conventional way but not the way if you want to conserve memory. Devs also have a hard time grasping multi-threading because it takes allot of work to manage each thread, I believe the amount of work increases exponentially per cor o/ cpu. That is why the Xbox is a much more conventional machine because it only has 3 cores and the PS3 has 7 dedicated to gaming. This is why it is much smarter to get a 3.0GHz processor right now over a 1.5GHz dual core.
cherrypie  +   2658d ago
"The GPU in the PS3 is comparable in speed to the 360's GPU"

It is well accepted that the Xbox 360 GPU is superior to the PS3s.

And, the Cell is only superior if a dev takes *a lot* of time and effort to write code to take advantage of it.

That *time and effort* costs money.
vdesai  +   2658d ago
How so could you tell me why its thought to be superior.
SkyGamer  +   2658d ago
You have remember that the rsx in the ps3 is essentially a stripped down 7800 sli with 256mb of memory. The graphics uses the old architecture where as the Xenos uses UNIFIED SHADERS and has 10MB embedded eDRAM. Plus the cell cpu is a REALLY fast SINGLE CORE processor but lacks the three INDIVIDUAL cores plus DUAL THREAD that the X360 has.

X360 is more like a PC so when a dev devs a game for pc, X360, there are similar and easier to code for. Now you throw in the ps3 which uses a different method of programming and they almost have to reinvent the wheel to get the game on the ps3. So in a devs mind, you have two similar markets with higher userbase, all of your games will be based around that and sloppy seconds for whatever else. Like last gen when ps2 dominated, the devs put that first and all else had sloppy seconds. That is why it was hard to distinguish any differences from multi-plat games and sometimes the ps2 looking better.

Now you have games that were meant for ps3 only and not even pc, the devs can focus all their manpower in learning that curve and hence you have games like MGS4, (even if it did take an ungodly amount of time, resources and money to make that game).
vdesai  +   2658d ago
No the cell is not a really fast single core, it has more then twice as many cores as the 360 your off your rocker.
Lord Xire  +   2658d ago
The Cell only has one General Purpose Core while the 360 has 3.

That's what I think he was trying to point out.

There also Multi Threaded.

Those SPE's in the Cell are so hyped and overestimated.
Software_Lover  +   2658d ago
How much power is full power lol
at 1.19 SuperM

I absolutely hate it with a passion when devs state that they aren't using the full POWER of a system. And that comment you made just made me angry. Not with you of course.

1/3 the power of the ps3? If they know they are only using 1/3 the power then they know how much the full potential is. People eat this crap up. Same with the 360. We aren't touching the full capabilities. Who gives a crap. Just make a good game and no one will care if the console is MAXED OUT or not.

And do any of you actually know what maxed out mean? Graphics? Coding? Processor scheduling? No you nor do I know. That's just a bunch of BS devs use to make the hardware manufacturers (Microsoft/Sony) look good. And to appease the fanboys.
Be Reasonable  +   2658d ago
Jesus guys, for the last time, Dead Space wasn't lead on PS3. It never was. It was ported over to the PS3 a little more than 6 months ago, and they made sure that it was up to par with the 360 version which was lead.

To people wondering why Volition needed help with the memory usage is because there's A LOT going on the on the screen and in the machine. There's explosions, enemies, gunfire, and everything is destructible and it uses a real time structural calculation system. It's hard on the CPU and memory.
#1.40 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
thewhoopimen  +   2658d ago
Nice try POG with your ferrari project. Except when you look at pics like this:
And see angles on the wheels b/c of low polycount you pretty much throw much of your credibility (along with the blogger's) into the dumbass bin.

Oh ya... the carbon fibre on the ferrari project is laughably unrealistic looking.

This is realistic:

Look at this carbon fiber ferrari: http://ferrarituning.files....
The trim on the bottom.
Omegasyde  +   2658d ago
Someone Explain this please
Volition says that the PS3 can push better graphics earlier this year:


Also we go through this same stupid argument every MONTH. PS3 and 360 have the same amount of memory. The 360 ram isn't split, the PS3 is. Both systems can utilize all available RAM for processing graphics minus the OS usage (Xbox Bar and XMB). The only plus to the PS3 is that the Cell can render graphics. Look at Example:

Also these guys are rookies, and haven't had a great game since the original red faction. Let alone Saints Row 1 and 2 weren't pushing graphics or anything gameplay wise either. Thier publisher is THQ which is one of the worse. They love shovel ware too.

Hezeus H. Christy. See you guys at the end of November when the same topic pops back up for the 3523532532 time. Maybe N4g can mix it up with which console has the better HDD, controller, contrast option, audio channels, etc......
cherrypie  +   2658d ago
Yes, *EVERYONE* please re-look at those Ferrari Project and GT5 shots. Look again. Take your time...
1.41 - @POG
Nice try POG with your ferrari project. Except when you look at pics like this:

It looks *fantastic*, where I'll invite you to notice the carbon fiber is not being front-lit; the rear of that car is in low-light.

"And see angles on the wheels b/c of low polycount you pretty much throw much of your credibility (along with the blogger's) into the dumbass bin."

Are you blind? Are you really trying to suggest that their is "low poly count" on the wheels of that pic?

Then, as evidence of GT5's superior poly-count, you show this:

"This is realistic:

Can you *see*? Look at that (front-left tyre (nearest)) mechanic's flame-suit, around his shoulders, then, look at the helmet on the farthest (front-right tyre) mechanic! What were you saying about "low polycount"?

Further, that particular GT5 shot is in the menu-system; often the autos are pre-rendered in such locations. The *mechanics* look ridiculously bad. Are you *blind*?

Also, I'll have you note that the carbon-fiber in *that* shot is being lit from the front, directly.

"Look at this carbon fiber ferrari: http://ferrarituning.files....
The trim on the bottom."

That is a *photo* of a Ferarri with CF trim; from neither game - what is your PONIT?

Wow, has your zealotry-sickness made you blind?
jaysquared  +   2658d ago
No matter how you Sony fans look at it the PS3 this gen was like the Xbox last gen. Even though the Xbox was more powerfull than the PS2 third party devs didn't take full advantage of it. What was the point when they knew the PS2 was their moneymaker. Same thing this gen but this time opposite. The PS3 is more powerful and has better potential than the 360 but the fact the 360 has a larger install base mostly made up of GAMERS then whats the point of taking full advantage of the PS3s powers when they know they are going to sell twice as many games on the 360. Face the facts Sony fans! Whats even more sad is the games that was suppose to show the power of the PS3, which are the first party games & exclusives, are not leaps and bounds over 360 games. Sad truth if you bought into the hype by Sony!
karlostomy  +   2658d ago
@ jaysquared
That's not quite correct.

Undoubtedly the xbox1 was more powerful than the ps2.

But what you neglect to mention is the fact that ALL the multiplats were better on the xbox1 than the ps2.

There was no excuses, no blaming developers, no waiting and waiting.
There was just better results on the xbox.

That is why the xbox is said to be more powerful than the ps2.

Contrast this to the current gen.
The ps3 can't match the 360, yet everyone refuses to believe Sony's superiority hype.

It just don't add up.
INehalemEXI  +   2658d ago
Just to clarify the misconceptions I read up there.

360/Xenon has 3 multi thread cores/PPE's= 6 hardware threads

PS3/Cell BE has 1 multi thread core/PPE + 7 available SPE's= 9 hardware threads


RSX clocks @ 550 MHZ

Xenos clocks @ 500 MHZ

the Xenos has the onboard edram dedicated to AA


PS3 RAM is in 2 chunks of 256 MB one of these is XDR clocked @ 3.2 ghz it is the fastest memory in a console the cell only has access to 1 chunk RSX has access to both which is 2x 256=512.

360 has unified 512 MB RAM. The issue of split RAM vs Unified has pros and cons.

Ultimately PS3 Mobo has the largest/fastest bandwidth. The system has a significant advantage in terms of Floating point calculations per second as well.

DVD x12 speed is faster then 2x blu ray half of the time it reads at the same speed then it reads faster as it goes to the mid-outer parts of the disc. Blu ray reads at the same speed anywhere on the disc, however blu ray has 5 times the capacity.

I would not call the devs lazy they are just not fully educated on PS3 programming yet. Time = Money and every game has a budget so if it takes them extra time to code for PS3 thats going to cause issues.

The PS3 is a beast if the programming is taking advantage of its resources. If its programmed for like its a traditional chipset then it may end up looking inferior. As quite a few multi-plats have shown.

Trust me I own both machines and there is no 360 game that rivals PS3's exclusives. 360 has hit a graphical plateau ....wheather this is due to its guts or a lack of unique engines driving its games im unsure. UE3 is overused especially on 360 thats one thing Im sure on.
#1.46 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
thewhoopimen  +   2657d ago
Yes cherrypie, Why don't we take another look at that exact same wheels. Please look at the wheel on the right and don't tell me you can't see polygonal angles. Now lets take a look at GT5 Prologue wheels.

Do tell me how much angle you see in that pic. And then tell me the difference in detail between just tires.

Now tell me again who is delusional.

And if you guys still think the Ferrari's carbon fibre looks realistic, I invite you to think again.
hfaze  +   2657d ago
It's not completely un-believeable...
You're talking about two RADICALLY different architectures. The 360 is more like a PC in how you develop for it, and the PS3 is more like a vector processing supercomputer.

Both architectures have their pluses and minuses. Although the 360 CURRENTLY has the ease-of-programming factor going for it, the PS3 architecture has more staying power with its higher-end CPU and RAM.

As the PS3 SDK evolves, it will become far more easy to develop for (just take a look at the PS2 and how developers were saying it was difficult to code for at first... Now pretty much any studio can crank out PS2 games in no-time flat).

Although Volition is currently complaining about the PS3's memory allocation, it just means that they are not used to architecture yet. Even though they ran into some issues and had to hire some Sony developers to get it done, they achieved what they were after.

Not to mention, look at the source... Official XBox Magazine (UK), 'nuff said. ;-)
#1.48 (Edited 2657d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Hellsvacancy  +   2658d ago
360 lovers will love this article
theKiller  +   2658d ago
they will do.

but i say its good that they r suffering because nothing comes easy, if they didnt suffer then the game will suck or that they have a genius team like insomniac
Sir_Ken_Kutaragi  +   2658d ago
Members that have given this story their approval.
green (2) - 27m ago
Jenzo (2) - 39m ago
BIoodmask (4) - 40m ago
Jamegohanssj5 (2) - 49m ago
Monobrow (1) - 52m ago

More like -
Volition: We struggled with the xBox 360's Red Faction, because it uses Last-Gen Technology. We wanted to do so much more. So we had to make it look average on both Consoles because of the xBox 360!!! ;-D
(That should wind-up the xBot RATS on this!!!) ;)
#2.2 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
sunnygrg  +   2658d ago
I thought pp and mart would be there to approve this article too.

On topic, what kind of game is Red faction? Sorry for the ignorance but I am too busy with LBP right now to care about the world.
ultimolu  +   2658d ago
They sure do.

Once again they get teh superioooorz copy!11111

Developers need to make the PS3 the leader development so there's no problem between both platforms! If developers like Insomniac and Guerrilla could make games THIS amazingly well, then obviously they're doing something right!

That way we can play games, be happy, and not have a pissing contest over graphics. It has nothing to do with the damn console war.

Even better, they can ask Sony developers for help understanding the development!

Good grief, if they're gonna f*ck up on this game, they might as well make it a 360 exclusive and not give PS3 owners a sh*tty ass port.
#2.4 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Yoma  +   2658d ago
Wait.. I can't belive this.. Guerilla? Look at kZ2 and they have problem with the ps3 version now? :o
Sir_Ken_Kutaragi  +   2658d ago
The game should be slightly renamed to -
'Red Faction: Guerrilla Games are 100% better than our games'!!! ;-D

'Red Faction 1 + 2' are FPS. Think this one isn't tho.
'Red Faction 2' was good tho. You could rename the Multi-player Bots in that game...Hmm...i got a few xBots names on this i could change the game Bots names to!!! Killing Spree!!! ;-D
#2.6 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
SSCOOLCHEA  +   2658d ago
for one think the devs are idiots to be saying this . For one it makes them look like they have no clue to make games . If the ps3 first party games are solid why are they so stupid . hey dumbazz call naughty and insomniac they should give you some tips .

ps.... thats why i dont buy multiplat games . it has to be exclusive to the ps3 or a first party game for me to pick it up . anything multi gets dumb down .
#2.7 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
ravinshield  +   2658d ago
this aint nothing new, we already know the ps3 is heavy garbage
Kain81  +   2658d ago
Oh iam sure that this game will be Awesome on PS3
yoghurt  +   2658d ago
poor developers, less memory - that's such an old excuse, they both have the same its just laid out differently, and ps3 has all the spu processes to handle some of the work. Just need to get to grips with it don't they
xwabbit  +   2658d ago
If people would actually read the specs on the 3 consoles you would know ps3 is the one with most ram LOL but people are so retarded and developers dont even know the systems they are working on rofl ? wow developers are amazing sometimes.
Bzone24  +   2658d ago
What I find funny is that people like you seem to think they know so much more than the developers that actually make games for these consoles. rofl Wow, fanboys are amazing sometimes.
xwabbit   2658d ago | Spam
inane   2658d ago | Spam
xwabbit  +   2658d ago
ps3 ram
256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz -CPU

Unified architecture

What do you notice?
ps3 256 mb ram CPU ram operates at 3.2 GHz.
360's 512mb shared ram operates at 700 MHz.

-This is an example of how ps3 creates more with little. Clearly the ps3's 256mb CPU Ram operates way faster than the xbox360
.Even if 360's Ram in unified.

Ps3 CPU ram beats xbox360's CPU ram. The better ram, the faster, and better performance. Ps3 will be faster, and have better performance than the 360.

xbox360 shares its ram.
This slows down 360's CPU. Like intergrated G-cards do with Computers. Intergrated G-cards share the computers ram, i know i have one.
cherrypie  +   2658d ago

For those who *dont* know, this will help you understand how 512MB != 512MB:

The answer? When all 512MB isnt available to the game because yMB is being comsumed by the OS *AND IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE GAME*.

That yMB on the PS3 is MUCH greater than on the Xbox 360. So, while both have "512MB", the Xbox 360 has more available to the game programmer.

"a total of 96MB is reserved for the system on PS3....9MB is required for friends lists (and 60MB for in-game commerce!). If those numbers are correct, a PS3 title using friends lists functionality has 512-96-9 = 407MB available, 73MB less than an Xbox 360 title using the same features."

Get it?
#4.6 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Zeevious  +   2658d ago
Please, Cherry...Join Developers In 2008
There are few things I find more annoying than someone wasting EVERYONES time with old...outdated...un-researched 'Fact-like' information.

Thanks so much for those PRE-RELEASE 2006 OS v0.87 specs...They're so 'Fact-ish' I'm certain any CURRENT developer would be substantially awed at the minimal & 360-PS3 comparable amount of memory the CURRENT OS uses...the 2.5x one used today.

What exactly is with you Cult of the Console members intentionally overlooking current facts while distorting and using long-outdated, 360 or PS3 'facts' ?

Have you heard about this little thing called 'kom-pi-tish-uhn' and how this brand-new 2008 innovation is good for EVERY GAMER?

If you DIDN'T know your April 2006 PRE-RELEASE 1.0 Firmware memory requirements have nothing to do with current OS memory your ignorance invalidates you as a credible source.

If you DID know your April 2006 'Facts' have NOTHING to do with current OS memory your intentions invalidate you as a credible source.

Either way, thanks for this Console Cult Edition of:

"I Can't Believe It's Not Facts" *

* Made with real facts . . . Just a touch.


Get it?
#4.7 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
yoghurt  +   2658d ago
and "pushing the ps3 and 360 to the limits" no, its more like "pushing our development skills to the limits". We all know that the ps3 (and 360?) are no where near their limits
Darkseider  +   2658d ago
Holy crap! Someone else see's the light! You sir get a bubble for stating the truth. Yes it has indeed pushed their developement skills to the limit. Unfortunately that limit as exhibited by this article is short is a very low bar and they need help in the "how to" dept.
Man_of_the_year  +   2658d ago
But we haven't seen the game how do you know that they're not pushing the systems to their 2 guys are just speculating that they are not pushing the systems to their limits...
Ren  +   2658d ago
Like ejacu......i mean speculating.
Hellsvacancy  +   2658d ago
Where in my comment did i type the word "Lie" now i rememeber y i put u on my ignore list
Jamegohanssj5  +   2658d ago
James: I struggled to buy this game. Then I just stopped and didn't buy it at all.

xaviertooth  +   2658d ago
so when sony helped them, they added more memory on the console? or they don't have the skills to do it?

@Hellsvacancy: sure they do, because they love incompetent developers.
Capt CHAOS  +   2658d ago
Skills and time. People keep calling the devs lazy..
But they do this for a living, If they can spend 100 man days on a game on the 360 and sell 1 million copies, why spend 140 man days on a PS3 title to sell 500k copies?
na2ru1  +   2658d ago
Rob0g0rilla  +   2658d ago
This game pushes the PS3 and 360 to there limits?
Yeah right. The graphics are terrible. I was in the 360 beta and they weren't impressive at all for a game that pushes the system to the limit. I'll be surprised if this game gets above an 80%. The jet pack was cool and so was the hammer, but this game's online and graphics are total crap that's doing a terrible job pushing the system to it's limit.
I might buy it when it's 10 bucks at gamestop for the single player if it's any good.
#9 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
smothtiger  +   2658d ago
I think it has to do with so much of the environment were destructible. Almost everything were calculating in real time how to be blown to bits.
MiloGarret  +   2658d ago
Say what!?! I thought the Beta was awesome, me and my girlfriend who also played, together with some buddies of mine can't wait for this game to come out.
Hellsvacancy  +   2658d ago
"So when sony helped them, they added more memory on the console? or they don't have the skills to do it"

Lol Fantastic - bubbles

Same to u Killer
InMyOpinion  +   2658d ago
If someone gave Volition 50 million dollars and 3 more years of development time they might get it on par with the 360 version.
Hellsvacancy  +   2658d ago
@Thor - thanks brother
I undersatnd things a little (and i mean little) bit better now

Thanks for sharing
thor  +   2658d ago
You're welcome.

It's just that there's so much criticism flying about surrounding the PS3's blu-ray drive and graphics card that people don't realise the main reasons for the problems are the lack of memory and the fact that the cell is NOT a 6-core processor - it's a 1-core processor with some SPEs that effectively need programming as you go.
thereapersson  +   2658d ago
I gave you a bubble for your well-written responses, Thor.
But just for everyone else:

Note that the relationship between cores and threads is a common source of confusion. The PPE core is dual threaded and manifests in software as two independent threads of execution while each active SPE manifests as a single thread. In the PlayStation 3 configuration as described by Sony, the Cell processor provides nine independent threads of execution.
BURLY  +   2658d ago
There seems to be some confusion about the PS3's Cell processor and what makes up a "Core" how about I give it a go :)
The 360’s operating system only uses 3% CPU time on Core1 and Core2, whereas nothing is reserved on Core0. The 360 has 3 "true" cores as defined by most sources - in that each core has it's own accessible memory cache in which to draw from. Each of these cores is called a dual-core CPU in that each core has 2 processors that (unlike most "dual-core" CPU's found in PC's at that time) can calculate threads of instructions simultaneously.

The Cell CPU in the PS3 is considered by most to be a single core CPU with 8 processors because it shares all of its memory across the board. At E3 in 2005, Sony officially unveiled the PS3 and claimed that their Cell processor would be capable of 200 GFLOPS. The "Cell" processor was co-developed with IBM and the following link is IBM's own unbiased test results (also known as IBM’s "white paper's"):

...Based on IBM's own white papers; it is easy to verify that the Cell processor does indeed have a theoretical peak of 201 GFLOP’s (Figure 5) – running 8 SPE’s at 25.12 GFLOP’s apiece (Table 2). However when physically tested: only 155.5 GFLOP’s were actually achieved (Table 4) with a total efficiency rate of 75.9% (Table 4).

Of course this didn't stop Sony from sticking to the theoretical figure, when comparing the Cell to the 360's proven and actual CPU benchmarks ...but that's only half the story...

...Since the PS3 will only use 7 SPE’s due to manufacturing yield issues, the theoretical peak for the PS3’s processor will be 176 GFLOP’s, at 25.12 GFLOP’s apiece and assuming the same 75.9% efficiency, we could easily interpolate the PS3’s Cell to be capable of 133.6 GFLOP’s.

Let's keep going, shall we?

...The PS3 constantly reserves 1 SPE for running its operating system. Removing this SPE from the equation, we could easily interpolate that the PS3’s Cell is only capable of 114.4 GFLOP’s for in-game purposes!

Adjusting the 360's proven 115.2 GFLOP's to account for the minuscule amount that is used by the operating system still wouldn't diminish the fact that Sony severely overstated the relative power of the Cell processor in an attempt to get their legion of loyal fans to "Buy-in" to the notion that it would be worth the wait while they could ready their Bluray Trojan horse.

Furthermore, a GFLOP's comparison is also playing into Sony's court because although it is a measure that still holds well for comparing pre-fixed computations involving physics, etc, is really as useful as the “bit” (there’s a throw back for ya) when it comes to the important tasks now performed by the CPU in next-gen games. Thus, in the general purpose departments the Cell will not fare as well as the CPU in the 360 because there is simply more memory for each “true” core to act as an independent and flexible mediator. Hence we have seen comments like Ubisoft’s (i.e. Assassin’s Creed and Splinter Cell teams, etc.) that the 360’s CPU is superior in the A.I. department ...etc, etc.

Any ways I have been somewhat itching to go into an INSANE amount of detail but that would just make me INSANE and is also the reason why I very rarely comment, ...I could see that you were trying though (like I am) and sometimes that’s what it takes to get me to come out. PS: We are all learning here so always best not to take things to personally - I find. Peace out y’all.
Common Sense  +   2658d ago
You're so biased
90 nm process[2], 65 nm process upgrade in 2007[3] (codenamed "Falcon"), possible 45 nm process dated around 2008.[4]
165 million transistors
Three symmetrical cores, each two way SMT-capable and clocked at 3.2 GHz[2]
SIMD: VMX128 with 2× (128×128 bit) register files for each core.[2]
1 MiB L2 cache[2] (lockable by the GPU) running at half-speed (1.6 GHz) with a 256-bit bus
51.2 gigabytes per second of L2 memory bandwidth (256 bit × 1600 MHz)
21.6 GB/s Front-Side Bus[2]
Dot product performance: 9.6 billion per second
115.2 GFLOPS THEORETICAL peak performance
Restricted to In-order code execution[2]
ROM storing Microsoft's Secure Bootloader
Big endian architecture.

Theoretical output for the PS3 is 201 GFLOPs
Theoretical output for the Xenon is 115.6GFLOPS

Neither is going to reach theoretical performance.

So don't give me that bull crap. Even Microsoft won't say the Xenon is more powerful because they know it's not. IBM designed both and the Cell is IBM's baby. That's why they use it for their most powerful supercomputer, Roadrunner.
BURLY  +   2658d ago
Re: Common Sense / Actually Microsoft did claim that the Xenon CPU was more powerful than the Cell in terms of next-gen game development...
Actually, you are incorrect in saying that: “Microsoft won't say the Xenon is more powerful because they know it's not” because in 2005 (shortly after Sony’s E3 press conference and the announcement of their over-bloated specs on the Cell processor) they issued the following press release:

In this press release Microsoft essentially illustrates the fact that game development is 80% integer calculations and only 20% GFLOP, or floating point calculations and as such they PURPOSELY decided to go with a CPU that was 3x more powerful than the Cell with respect to integer calculations and accordingly examined why GFLOP’s is an extremely poor measure of next-gen CPU performance.

Furthermore, when we are talking about “theoretical peak performance” numbers between the Cell and the Xenon CPU’s one must take into account that the Xenon’s “theoretical peak performance” numbers were based on actual testing of far more proven technology and as such is semantically more akin to the actual test efficiency numbers of the Cell processor in IBM’s white pages:

Thus, the “theoretical peak performance” of the Cell as marketed to you by Sony is far more semantically akin to PIE IN THE SKY because unlike the Xenon “peak theoretical performance” numbers they were based on UNTESTED efficiency rates and basic design notes. Thus, although your very general analysis that all CPU’s will function within its “peak performance” parameters is correct, one of your figures is essentially an apple and the other one is an orange! This is why I specifically noted that the 360’s GFLOP performance was “proven” because relatively speaking it represented numbers more in-line with the adjusted efficiency numbers in IBM’s white pages than it does to the PIE IN THE SKY that the hardcore and indoctrinated Sony fanboys always seems to be orbiting.

Furthermore, Microsoft has also defended this reality in multiple interviews and the key thing here to understand why Microsoft wasn’t as pronounced in proclaiming the virtues of the Xenon CPU was because they had the First Mover Advantage and as such they didn’t have to use (what is referred to in marketing) as “Buy-in Theory” in order to convince people to hold off and wait to buy a more expensive piece of hardware further down the line – like Sony did. I’d go into more detail here about the Cell and why developers are not lazy but rather as to why the Cell processor was an awful choice for a CPU in a gaming console. I mean it is a floating point, streaming media monster and that is good for what? ...Playing Bluray movies?

...Unfortunately though I have got to go to work now but I’ll check in later. Until then don’t believe everything you hear in wiki-land because it will never give you the whole story – just the sound bites!
Darkseider  +   2658d ago
No matter how much you would like to propose that the processor in the XBox is superior you my friend are wrong. The Cell Broadband Engine from a performance standpoint is hands down more powerful than any processor currently available on the market today, PERIOD. Whether it is the XBox 360, AMD's or Intel's biggest or baddest. Hence the reason it is being used to do research grade simulations at MIT "Project Gravity Well" which is 16x PS3s networked as a cluster and doing blackhole simulations.

As a matter of fact the architecture of the Cell/PS3 is so impressive MIT actually has a course on programming it and utilizing the Cell. So please I beg of you try not to compare any other processor out there to the Cell, PowerXCell 8i or the upcoming Cell 2. It is the most exciting advancement in processor technology since the DEC Alpha from the early 90s.
Lord Xire  +   2658d ago

Too bad we only care about games.

As Burly was pointing out..that for Video Games...the Cell is not the best processor and the Xenos is stronger.

many people including my professor have said that the Ps3 specs only look good on paper.
cherrypie  +   2658d ago
"it's a 1-core processor with some SPEs that effectively need programming as you go."

...not to mention that up to 2.5 of the SPEs are unavailable to the game; reserved by the OS...

oh, nevermind. yes, the PS3 is a supercomptuer from the future... just like sony PR says...
cherrypie  +   2658d ago
PS3 was built for Sony's RIAA & MPAA priorities
"the Cell and why developers are not lazy but rather as to why the Cell processor was an awful choice for a CPU in a gaming console"

Perhaps you'd like to comment on Sony's reason for splitting the memory?

I have read, and would accept as reality, that splitting the memory was for security during BluRay movie play-back.

During bluray playback, the CPU is unable to access the GPU memory, preventing piracy.

So, the PS3's design decisions were driven by Sony's MPAA priorities.

For those who dont remember;

"If the RIAA doesn't zap Napster, Sony certainly will.

"The [music] industry will take whatever steps it needs to protect itself and protect its revenue streams," Heckler said. "It will not lose that revenue stream, no matter what."

Fair enough, you might think. That is after all the reason behind the RIAA's legal action against Napster, though it's nice to have an industry executive admit that the case is about control of "revenue streams". Sony Pictures Entertainment operates alongside Sony Music Entertainment, an RIAA member.

"Sony is going to take aggressive steps to stop this. We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source - we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [ISP]. We will firewall it at your PC.

"These strategies," Heckler told conference attendees, "are being aggressively pursued because there is simply too much at stake."

Particularly for Sony, which is aggressive basing its digital content strategy around the ability to sell music and movies into the home via broadband Net connections and (ideally) PlayStation 2 consoles."
TheColbertinator  +   2658d ago
Thank God Volition remembered this game.With Saints Row 2 out of the way,I might enjoy this
SL1M DADDY  +   2658d ago
So what...
Is this game suposed to be awesome? Sure the first two were good but they were nothing to write home about. This has been a rental on my list since it was announced but surely not worth the price of 60 bucks.
felidae  +   2658d ago
what's up with the devs these days?

Red Faction should perform good on all systems!

Fishy Fingers  +   2658d ago
Well as long as Sony stepped up and provided some assistance there shouldn't be an issue, which I'm sure they did as they're often happy to lend a helping hand to a developer.

Just send over a guy from Guerrilla Games technical team. Try telling him split memory is a problem.
byeGollum  +   2658d ago
they did - & sony came to the rescue - moving along
h41544  +   2658d ago
why the article is in xbox site not a ps3 site (its a ps3 problem )?
thereapersson  +   2658d ago
Because the game is multiplatform
h41544  +   2658d ago
just to make xbox fans happy
pornflakes  +   2658d ago
of course for ps3 owners this devs are lazy, like 90% of the other ones.

LBP 160k in first week USA... haha

Good that dead Space didnt beat it.

This game wont save you guys.
dale1  +   2658d ago
whats with the 160k for lbp in the first week all about, didn,t know npd reported to you first
pornflakes  +   2658d ago
fool man, even if NPD will report 50% more than vgchartz it still would be ONLY CRAPY 220k!

Hell man, GoW2 will sell 1 Million on first day.

LBP is a fail for all Sony Fans. Now we wait for the next excuses of the Sony midgets. Cant wait for Japan sales like 20k for only 1 week, LOL.

Sony already lost this console war. No UBBER graphics.. i mean KX2 with 4 years in dev.. hum.. this game should be 2 times better than COD4 not only a little bit better. Its not the power sony promised us!
harpua  +   2658d ago
lol, do you really think people expect an objective comment from you at this point? your opinion of been diluted to nothing.
dale1  +   2658d ago
vg chartz ha ha ha ha ha ha ha rofl vg chartz
pixelsword  +   2658d ago
Not lazy, but ignorant... very ignorant.
The PS3's strength isn't in it's memory like most computers, but it's parallel processing: if properly used, you can make a very high-resolution game with huge levels: the best examples would be GT5, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, and if you got the chance to play the Betas, Killzone 2 and Resistance 2.

I don't see how a company like Violation "can't get it" while a previously perceived "two-pump chump" of a company like Ninja Theory made one of the most technically impressive games for the PS3 in 2007.

Well, maybe I can see how: for the most part, you can throw away a lot of programming staples and the PS3 is basically a free-for-all; the ones who "get it" first will make the better games. Length in the industry is irrelevant.

If you want an easy in to the games industry, a small, but efficient PS3 game would be your best bet.
#24 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
Bathyj  +   2658d ago
Keep in mind this is only their first gen game. Devs like Ubi and EA had problems at the start.

I said over a year ago, you can either get help now and reap the benifits later, or pretend the problem will go away and do nothing, and then you will forever be playing catch up to the devs that did there homework at the start like Insominac.

Think of it like driving. You can break early into a corner, take it smoothly and then be the first to get back up to top speed, or you can break late, take the corner out of control and you will leave the corner slowly and be last up to top speed.

These devs arent lazy, there just trying to do the work now, that they should have done in the start. Iyts not like Sony hasn't extended their help to everyone.
Lucreto  +   2658d ago
Is it just me or is it just PC developers that are having trouble with the PS3. It you are a console developer they have little trouble with the PS3. Look at Uncharted, Killzone 2 and Resistance 2.

PC development is easier as you can throw Ram at it and spread it around. The 360 is the same. But the PS3 is more of a obsessive compulsive. Everything needs its own place filed correctly and more efficiently.

edit: If you are disagreeing with me where is the counter argument?
#26 (Edited 2658d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Dante43  +   2658d ago
Lol now we know that , that magazine is Xbox fanboys, LOL
Michael Jackson  +   2658d ago
PS3 users: We struggled with buying Volition Red Faction
Fixed. :)
dolomite  +   2658d ago
ShinnokDrako  +   2658d ago
Really hope that next Playstation will get a lot of memory, so programmers stop using that as an excuse.
Tbh i'm playing so many wonderful titles (beta and not) that i'm wondering to myself: how those ppl made so great thing with "so little" memory?
Then i found the answer: they managed to program on a PS3, others can't. Good Sony helped them, but i fear this version of RF will be inferior again... hope not
BrianC6234  +   2658d ago
The PS2 was limited on memory too but everyone learned how to work with it. The PS3 has as much memory as the 360 it's just used differently. You don't develop games the same way for both consoles. That's the secret. It's a well known fact now that if you make the game for the PS3 it's very easy to port to the 360 but not the other way around. I don't think Sony can put enough memory in their consoles to make some people happy though. Consoles are always limited on RAM. The only reason you don't hear this problem with the 360 is it's like PC games right now but the 360 has its own problems.
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Overwatch Closed Beta – Round 2 Commencing

10m ago - The second Overwatch Closed Beta is now underway in the US and Europe, but what exactly has chang... | PC

MOP: Operation Cleanup sweeping onto PS Vita

12m ago - Today the Mexican developer announce that they are bringing MOP: Operation Cleanup to PS Vita. | PS Vita

Track the Release Date for PlayStation VR

Now - Sony is yet to reveal the exact release date for PlayStation VR. Start tracking it now using | Promoted post

An Interview with Educational Game Developer, Immersed Games | Bit Cultures

16m ago - Ashley from Bit Cultures writes: "On Facebook alone countless simulation games are available – on... | Industry

Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth Review | CoinOpTV

22m ago - Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth is a classic turn-based JRPG set in an anime Digimon universe out now... | PS4

Crashlands Review – Crafting Given Structure

1h ago - Developer Butterscotch Shenanigans has constructed a twist on the familiar crafting experience, a... | Crashlands