Irrational Games never released a game on PlayStation 2, and this might be the reason why - the BioShock creator thought Sony's console was "a pain in the butt" to develop for.
I would have to disagree a bit there, as there are a ton of games on the ps2. But then again, its crappy gpu might have stopped them there.
Alot of people thought the PS3 was a pain in the butt.
And? Still a lot of people thinks PS3 sucks, so? I don't understand what you've tried to do in here putting PS3 in PS2 article.
@Rafa PS3 sucks!? You obviously don't own one.
Pain in the butt =/= sucks. I think he meant that PS2/PS3 are alike. Hard to develop for but with potential. I have read developers stating PS3 is actually easier to develop for than the PS2.
Apparently ps3 console exclusives say otherwise, and not only talk the talk but walk the walk. But everyone is entitled to their opinion. About the article: "Irrational" is the key word of this article, and the first word that comes to mind concerning this article. The huge ps2 game library alone refutes the claim that the ps2 was hard to develop for, because if the ps2 was so hard to develop for then why was there so many games developed for the console? When developing games every console or pc has development problems in one way or the other, what do you expect irrational games that developing games for various platforms will be easy?. Again the key word is "Irrational" of what I can think of to sum up this article.
has not played God of War GT4 Champions Jak R&C SOTC SH2
It had good graphics, but like PS3, Sony could achieve the same or better graphics and design it to be more developer friendly. PS3 has taken a huge hit this gen because MP still often looks worse despite the thing being more powerful. PS3 came out a year later, every game should look better, all they needed was a PC architecture with more ram and a better graphics card than 360, or just a better card. The thing did cost Sony over $800 to manufacture. Devs could have used primarily the same code for 360/PS3/PC and PS3s added power would automatically present itself graphically without added fuss and expsense.
The PS2 was not meant to be shoved in the butt...you should make games on that...of course you get pain in the butt
yep. PS2 is not a sex toy Irrational.
and the slim ps2 is a whole lot less painfull
Not Irrational, apparently - the team stuck to releasing PC games until the launch of BioShock on Xbox 360 in 2007. 360-PC. abc-123
Well, you missed out on reaching out to the biggest fanbase of any console, ever. How stupid of you. It`s not like I care, I played well over 150 amazing PS2 games and didn`t miss you one bit :)
sounds like you took that personally i really dont understand the visceral attachment people make to consoles
PS2 was DEFINITELY the hardest platform to develop for.Its gpu was such a crap that it was almost indescribable,it did not even have vertex units,all that work was done on VUs from EE.Harder to develop than ps3,definitely.
And yet we hear more complaints of developing on the PS3 then it was on the PS2. -End statement
It was the most popular platform for its time by a wide margin. To say in hindsight you couldn't be bothered to make a game for it, especially when you also weren't touching the other consoles, were only known for making a FPS which are in no way common today, does not make you sound smart.
If it was literally nothing or nothing memberable, what's the point of saying anything?
They made SWAT 4 which is probably the best tactical shooter up to date.
Freedom Force was a lot of fun. And while it was released a little bit before the PS2, System shock 2 was a pretty good game.
was arguably their best game ever wish they made that for ps2.
Sooo... PS3 is a pain in the ass to NT and PS2 was a pain in the ass to IR. Are Sony platforms JUST A BIG PAIN IN THE ASS FOR DEVELOPERS? I still want a PS3, though.
basically it comes down to them using unknown architectures for their systems. The drawback is that it takes developers time to learn and adjust, the positive aspect is that once figured out we get great looking games (as shown by PS2 and now PS3).
its also the reason why ps2 BC needs to be emulated and why the ps4 probably wont play ps3 games unless the architecture is similar.
What difference does it make? The Ps2's time has come and gone. It was a super successful console with hundreds of awesome games, that's all that's important now.
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.