Quake Wars dev: PS3 is a "challenge"

Splash Damage founder and Creative Director Paul Wedgwood has dropped a few interesting remarks on the competing claims of console and PC development.

Wedgwood drummed out the much-repeated line about the PlayStation 3 being tougher to develop for. "Coming from the background of a PC game developer, obviously the Xbox 360 is easier," he said. "If anything, the 360 is even easier than the PC because we don't have to optimize the hardware parts for Intel, AMD, ATI and Nvidia."

"We just have this one platform and if it runs well, it runs well the next time you boot it, irrespective of which 360 you're running it on. PS3, it's more of a challenge."

The story is too old to be commented.
Spike473658d ago

for, but use the PS3 right and you can do some pretty amazing things.

Sony Rep3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Isn't this what..usually happens when you have a completely new architecture to work with? Microprocessors and coprocessors are still relatively new. Devs aren't going to be able to optimize the PS3 when they are 1. working to make each version of a game identical, and 2. optimizing these games for the 360 and porting them to the PS3.

But, name a single multiplatform game that trumps MGS4, GT5, Uncharted, and KZ2...

Seems to me, that the best the 360 can do is rooted in these multiplatform games, and..Gears...whereas the PS3 exclusives aforementioned..trump all of those games by a wide margain.

Makes sense to me...

pavarotti3658d ago

was pure rubbish.

sony rep. no multi-plats look as good as mgs4, gt and kz2 because no 3rd party dev has 4 years dev time for any game, unless the publisher has deep pockets and wants them to take their time and make something as good as possible. don't forget, all those games are running on super game engines.

although your little dig at the 360 was pure fanboy. it does show the difference between owning lots of studios and not owning lots of studios. if you want super looking games on your platform, you have to make them yourself, you cant rely on 3rd parties to do them for you. unless you throw fortunes a them, and publish them.

Sony Rep3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Umm..GT5P, Uncharted, and MGS4 took roughly 2-3 years to complete.

The average development time span for any game...


ultimolu3658d ago


The PS2 was hard as crap to develop for too. It takes time and patience to learn the components.

SL1M DADDY3658d ago

That is was a challenge to even play their game. The game was crap no matter what system you played it on. Sorry, but if you're going to talk about a console being difficult to program for, first make a credible game then talk shop.

Danja3658d ago

Motorstorm 2

all done in one year..

Bladestar3658d ago

"The PS2 was hard as crap to develop for too. It takes time and patience to learn the components." I agree 100% on this statement... but don't forget one very important difference between PS3 and the PS2... PS2 had a huge lead over the original xbox and the GameCube... not focusing and doing wherever it takes to make a game for the PS2 was not a luxury any game developer could simply affort... That my friend it's not the case this time around... Developer can simply ignore the PS3 and make games for the PC and the xbox 360.. or simply ask another developer to port it for them like Valve does...
As a software developer I can tell you... programmer do not like when a platform is change every few years and we have to re-learn everything from scratch... remember Sony promissed the same with emotion chip and people thought that it will simply evolve.. but guess what? it was replaced by the cell.. and now developer have to start from the begining to learn it... and Sony will probably do the same for the next PS4... Sony is not a software company.. and because of that their focus is not the developer but the hardware... They do not care how difficult or effective the platform is to the developer as long as it optimized for what Sony cares... like the cell being optimized for blu-ray and multimedia capabilities...

Bottom line... don't think developer will put as much effort into the PS3 as they did now that does not have the following advances:
* Ease of development.
* Lower development cost.
* Mass market price.
* Larger install base.

it will simply not happen..

3658d ago
Kratos Spartan3658d ago

Xbox chronicler Dean Takahashi has written a piece for online blog VentureBeat detailing the Xbox 360's red rings of death saga. As he explains it, the system's high failure rate boils down to numerous factors, including the console design, poor testing in its early stages, memory issues, bad soldering, and more. Before launch, 68 out of 100 systems were coming off the assembly line non-functional, and the continual post-release additions to the system didn't help things after launch. Microsoft even stopped production cold in the first half of 2007 in an attempt to deal with the problems.
Meanwhile, Robert Deleware, a Microsoft games tester who Takahashi spoke to on the record for the article, was recently fired by the company for what it deemed a breach of his confidentiality agreement.

DevastationEve3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Did you guys ever think that maybe Sony's 10 year lifespan correlates to the time it takes for devs to finally start making good use of the hardware?

That is the most logical conslusion, since PlayStation always hits its stride late in the game. 1998-2000 were the best years in PSx's life, despite DreamCast's huge success in 1999-2000. 2003-2005 were the best years in PS2's life and it easily pulled past x360 for the first year or so of the next gen.

the formula is as follows:

first 2 years creates the majority of the install base. the beginnings of major franchises start, sales is driven highly by exclusives during this time (in that order)

next 3 years we see the 2nd installments of any major series that started that gen. muliplatform games continue to fuel monthly sales. becomes the peak of developer game cycle/game release ratio. smaller developers gain interest in console's future. major exclusives from the 1st 2 years see their next installments.

next 2 years final appearances of any major titles start to appear (usually 3rd installments). sales is driven mostly by multiplatform titles.

final 3 years the console from the next gen starts to approach, equal, and then surpass its previous console's consumer interest (in that order).

Microsoft's model is to just focus on that first half of the equation. They aren't too interested in keeping a machine on the market longer than 5-6 years. Also, they aren't phazed at all by cutting off a machine in order to propel the success of the next one. Of course, that wasn't ENTIRELY the case with Xbox. Their relationship with nVidia is what pushed them cut off Xbox, as they made it hard to pull it under $150 to compete with PS2. I doubt that Xbox 360 will have a similar fate, but I AM certain that they won't push it past 6 years.

edit: pardon me for the many edits. i just wanted it to make the most sense

3658d ago
JBaby3433658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Here is your link. I know 7 people with 360's. As of September (when the most recent one went) 5 of those 7 have had their 360s die on them and 2 of those 5 have been more than once. That's my own experience with the situation.

That means 7 out of 9 xbox 360s have failed that I PERSONALLY know of. That equates to a 78% failure rate. These aren't numbers from nowhere these are real figures. You want to call my friends and check? I'll give you their numbers. RROD is unfortunate and real.

On the article PS3 is very difficult to develop for but the rewards are massive. KZ2 proves it all.

ultimolu3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

"but don't forget one very important difference between PS3 and the PS2... PS2 had a huge lead over the original xbox and the GameCube... not focusing and doing wherever it takes to make a game for the PS2 was not a luxury any game developer could simply affort... That my friend it's not the case this time around... Developer can simply ignore the PS3 and make games for the PC and the xbox 360.. or simply ask another developer to port it for them like Valve does..."

I disagree with that. A developer cannot ignore the other system if they're in the process of making money. If that was the case, then FFXIII would have been PS3 exclusive.

I believe developers have to keep both systems in mind when developing games. That's how they make money.

A developer could ask Sony for help if they're having problems with the hardware.

If that's the case with deeloping, then I suppose 1st party developers will have to show 3rd party how it's done.

3658d ago
Oner3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Inane please read this lengthy article @ VB for the SOURCE ~

Pay close attention to the 2nd page ~

I quote

"The defect rate for the machines was an abysmal 68 percent at that point, according to several sources. That meant for every 100 machines that Microsoft’s contract manufacturers, Flextronics and Wistron, made at their factories in China, 68 didn’t work."

I have a 360 and do like it for a VERY few things but after 2 RROD's myself and NUMEROUS friends as well along with 1 person having 10+ broken 360's ALL DOCUMENTED AND VERIFIED I cannot justify spending any money in support of M$.

3658d ago
Oner3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Thanx Man, good to see people who want verifiable stuff. But there are so many who just won't beleive it no matter what proof you provide...not very mature (just watch the disagrees I get).

In addition I also have this article from a little over a year ago which states "MS admits all 360's are prone to failure and are defective"

Personally even with the updated motherboards in the newer 360's they still fail so in essence ALL 360's still have the ability to fail. That is my own view but it is a sound one. Plus I find it funny how no one questions how many of those RROD 360's just couldn't be fixed which "pads" M$'s numbers...basically there is no way there are as many working 360's as M$ touts.

JBaby3433658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Until MS actually mans-up and releases the failure rates and/or number of consoles it's all anecdotal. It's all just people saying their consoles broke. If enough people are saying it that must tell you something even if the actual figures are kept out of public sight. You don't have to believe my story but that doesn't make it untrue and while yes it's not a large enough sample size to carry statistical weight it's no less interesting and certainly tells me something and I'm sure a lot of others. Stop being such an MS fanboy and just accept that something is going on. If you want ACTUAL figures from SOURCES, write MS and tell them to release the official figures. Sony discloses their failures rates. Why doesn't MS? Yeah that's what I thought. It's all anecdotal at this point. I'm sure you won't believe oner's story of 2 RRODs because it's just anecdotal but I believe him on it. Too many people have anecdotal evidence about this for it to be ignored. Maybe you're right though... It Never Happened.

Pop your midol and chill with the attitude dude.

Oner3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Good points Jbaby. I myself also say if RROD is not that big then why do companies sell Xclamp fixes, or why there are tutorials on the towel fix or why there are hundreds of threads everywhere on suggestions on how to fix it? Let alone the vast amount of RROD videos on just Youtube alone...I mean WTH!?! How much more proof do you need when there are thousands upon thousands of videos everywhere? Additionally what about that gaming review site (forgot the specific site) having 9 RROD's or more so far!

JBaby3433658d ago

I can't stand it when some fanboy wants some kind of figures knowing there are none just so they can deny something. Love playing your 360 there are some great times to be had but obviously something's amiss with the hardware. I admit the PS2 had problems even if it never happened to me so I don't see what's so hard about admitting these things break.

Bubbles up for intelligent conversation.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 3658d ago
DavidMacDougall3658d ago

It was only a challange because they wanted to rush both versions for quick money

Liquid Dust3658d ago (Edited 3658d ago )

Its not like 360 benefited very much from being easier to develop for. 360 version had worse visuals imo and it was lacking some key gameplay aspects.

PS3/360 Comparison video, only 2 min long

The game was not that great at all anyways. Extremely rushed both versions

Fishy Fingers3658d ago

Enjoying your game was a "challenge". Regarding development, durrrr.... devs have been complaining about this since day one. Although most have wised up to the PS3 now (multiplatform games relfect that). Splash Damage are obviously going to face issues when porting a PC game. A terrible PC game.

Darkseider3658d ago

LOL!! ROFL!! oooh god that was funny.

"Enjoying your game was a "challenge"

bubble for you for making me laugh.

Lucreto3658d ago

It seems to only be a problem to PC developers. It shows how rigid PC development is that something new comes along and its a problem.

They should be saying "The PS3 provided a new challenge and broadened my experience into new ways for developing."

dirigiblebill3658d ago

Quake Wars was solid enough. Respond to the interview itself (on Edge-Online) not the headline, chaps.

Harry1903658d ago

of the reasons I dislike PC fanboys. Lack of deep games?

COD4 the console version of Counter Strike?
Halo 3 the Quake 3 of consoles?

''Wedgwood thinks console gamers are still crying out for the depth that only PC games can provide.''

Dude, perhaps when you start making quality games instead of ports, maybe then you can make such claims. Obviously, there is much more than RTS games that are deep and challenging. Did the guy ever try any of the Matsuno games? Did he ever play FF Tactics? FF12? Vagrant Story? Xenogears? Tactics Ogre? Obviously, this is a very westernized view of the videogaming world. If you have not played the games, don't bother to complain.

Resource management is deep eh? Well, that's very rich....very very rich.