LucasArts has admitted that its development team wasn't quite "up to speed" on PS3 in the past - particularly when creating the Star Wars: The Force Unleashed.
or having fun games *gets flame shield*
It was fun. Even the PS3 version was fun... far as I saw it was exactly the same, but with longer load times.
And a not-so-solid framerate. But i enjoyed it like hell! <3
It was a great game, absolutely played the hell outta of it.
I think the longer load times were not because blu ray reads slower, but the way in which the game loaded... To be fair, the PS3 programming language was new, and many people in the industry were not used to it. Once more developers get better at coding for it, we will see better results. We have seen some great games already, but the ps3 has more to come.
Yeah it was just built badly, you can tell when the game has a loading period just when you press start. It was exactly the same situation as Bayonettas. I believe it fully installed itself too, so it definitely wasn't because of Blurays read times. I have to say I didn't notice the inferior framerates. Seemed to run on a steady 30 to me.
The Force Unleashed 2 is better on PS3 according to Digital Foundry. "According to his figures, The Force Unleashed II's motion blur eats up 2.2ms of resources on Xbox 360 (give or take 0.4ms), while the five-SPU-powered PS3 version is much faster at 1.4ms (give or take 0.5ms). Compare this with the frame-rate upscaler, which runs at 1.5ms on 360, and 1.4ms on PS3 (again parallelised over five SPUs)." http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
just the way things are. But you may lose a bubble on this subject because people know its just the devs not fully understanding the ps3 architecture.
Developers half-assing on PS3 is not a good excuse anymore (im looking at you 2k >:( Sure people were a bit unfaimilar with the tech at the beginning, but c'mon, even Gabe has had a change in heart.
It's only taken an almost complete console cycle. Hell i think the original xbox was dead by now.
performance not on par with the other console.. no buy.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Obvious is troll is obvious.
Actually, obvious idiot is obvious idiot. What he was saying is that if it's not up to par on his console he won't buy it for that console.
I think you're right. I was being an idiot with that post. I apologize sincerely. Guess I misunderstood what he was saying. My bad.
They aren't up to speed on gaming in general, their games have sucked for years. Expect even less games as they milk SW TOR for all it's worth. "it takes a $4000 to play TFO"....look how that turned out. Terrible graphics, locked at 30 frames, you could run it on a toaster.
so i expect mlaa for force unleashed 2
I just hope they sort out the glitches the 1st one had & the lock on system (1st one needed more combos as well), Still a good game, especially if you pick it up 2nd hand although it had the potential to be great. I'll buy the SW:TFU 2 but probably not a 1st day buy. I'll wait & see how it turns out.
in other words, as Valve and others are saying.... until we saw a good ROI, we didnt give a rats tail about the PS3..... now we wished we were knew more about the PS3 hardware, since we are now in catch up mode and will loose sales on multiplat titles, if the ports suck
Not really - this is exactly what Valve etc saw in the first place. Poor ROI to start with, poor ROI later because it's a dead-end investment for the codebase *unless* Sony have be showing these companies the PS4 which is also using Cell. Now that makes more sense. "hey guys we're still using this next gen y'know.."
i havent brought anything from this company since Kotor...they should just let Bioware have the Star Wars game rights
It's not just Lucas Arts, it's over half the third party, multiplat developers for PS3. Devs get lazy with it and we don't get results on par with 360. It's really a shame considering the obvious power of the hardware on PS3 that this far into the life cycle devs still can't get simple things like framerates, texture detail and resolution right- its always the same complaints.
Get over it - PS3 was difficult to develop for at the start. Sony has made more libraries available to devs to properly utilize the Cell CPU. It was something they had to do Day 1. Some early PS3 titles suffered because of it. The "lazy dev" excuse is stupid. If it is your work to code, then you want to get the job done, and get paid for the next job. Having to spend double the time on on platform is a pain. Sony got there with the toolchain and libraries to 3rd parties, so this should now be something of the past. Just don't make the same mistake with PS4.
maybe true but I don't think so... You do have a point in that it is harder as I can think of one case (breadth first search) where cell code took 1200 lines to do what a standard hyper threaded processor could be coded to do in under 60 but the speed of the code at run time on the cell was literally 20x that of the the HT processor. So... It did take longer to develop but are the gains worth it as a developer? I would think so - as learning to properly parallel program is a "future" skill that all modern processors will require. Since that time many more serious algorithms have been developed internally and externally for the cell and parallel processors in general that have seen this level of performance increase. So either learn the skill set or be bypassed. Tools help but understanding helps more. It was pure laziness at the beginning of this gen that lead to inferior product not lack of tools. ----------------------------- ---------- @DDJ march 2007 ----------------------------- -------------
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.