FFXIV PS3 delay down to “memory,” says Square Enix

The PlayStation 3 version of MMO Final Fantasy XIV was delayed due to “memory” issues, producer Hiromichi Tanaka told VG247.

The story is too old to be commented.
DA_SHREDDER3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

I still dont see why Sony couldn't just add at least 1 gig of memory for the system? Dumb asses. LOL,

BrianG3995d ago

I question things like this to sometimes, but when it comes down to it consoles don't ever have as much ram as your typical gaming PC. And when you compare Sony's choice of ram for the PS3 to other consoles, they didn't do any worse, they even chose XDR ram, which is faster then what most of us have in are typically computers.

rroded3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

even a gig couldnt add that much to the cost of the console rit...

still this is the first dev teem ive heard bitch bout this n we all know what squenix's word is worth.

Reibooi3995d ago


This is also the first team who is dedicated to getting the best looking(graphically of course) MMO of all time running on a console. No small feat.

Considering from what we have heard the games zones are MASSIVE to the point of being bigger then any zone we have ever seen in a single player or MMO game before(with maybe a few exceptions)

That being the case memory plays an important role and you can't deny that.

DarkTower8053995d ago

Unless you wanted the PS3 to cost $100 more, I wouldn't complain about it. There's plenty muscle left in the current console, but I'm sure Sony is starting to see the limitations of the current memory and will rectify that next gen.

3995d ago
Dragun6193995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

PS3 has 512MB of RAM (256mb of GDDR3 at 700mhz for video and 256Mb of XDR for system)
The Cell chip has 256MB of completely sharable RAM
and The GPU (RSX) has 256MB of dedicated RAM

I think PS3's Ram is good for this gen, SE just needs more time to re optimize the game for PS3.
I mean They're porting a PC MMO to the PS3. They're gonna have some issues with memory.

Sony did unlock an additional 70mb of ram earlier this year though.

ProjectVulcan3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

When sony opted to go with a 128 bit bus for RSX they really locked themselves into 256mb of video memory/256 system. The next stop up would have been 512/512. Plus XDR memory is not cheap, it gave CELL really huge read/write memory bandwidth for a CPU. Only the latest consumer Core i7 and AMD phenom 2 processors can match this memory bandwidth performance with DDR3...

Realistically the only way sony could have increased the amount of memory in PS3 usefully without costing so much was to make RSX a 192bit GPU, then sony would have had the option for 384mb video memory/384 system memory. This would have also made RSX a fair bit faster too, but sony obviously chose to keep the costs down, it was already an expensive machine to manufacture....

@Dragun619 That article title isnt so great but fundamentally true. Since the machine was launched sony have been releasing more and more memory back to developers that the operating system had reserved for future functions. Initially sony reserved a massive chunk but it shrank gradually over time as they added new functions and found memory going spare (it was never 70mb all in one go) until the OS reached the state where it uses 43mb system memory and 7mb video memory.

Currently PS3 when running has a total of 462mb free for developers to work with, and 360 has 480+10mb EDRAM free for the the framebuffer for developers.

SilentNegotiator3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

Keep in mind that RAM has gotten a LOT cheaper in the last 4/5 years.

Consoles ALWAYS start showing weakness in memory towards the end of generations.
I'm telling ya...2012, PS4.

Plus, it seems as though FF14 was built for the PC first. It's releasing first, already has a beta....

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3995d ago
mushroomwig3995d ago

Production costs, that's why.

Remember all those people complaining about the price of the PS3 at launch? Just think what it would of been like if the price was higher, having "at least 1 gig" of memory would of raised the price.

jack_burt0n3995d ago

They probably dont have the skill to build a hdd cache and stream in order to get maximum through the ps3s system memory, when a company like square enix talk about console specific development take it with a pinch of salt.

Building a system like that would buckle the pc version because the memory speeds would be too slow so you would literally have to build the engine twice, for all we know ff14 could be running on ps3 with just the ppe LOL.

dabri53995d ago

The idea of streaming stuff off the hdd in the distance is that on screen at any given time there is still only the amount of action/detail/objects that the systems memory can handle. As you move forward, the new stuff is streamed in.

With MMOs, you could be in a single town with hundreds of people all around you at any given time. It is this reason that the streaming technique doesn't necessarily solve all the issues with MMO memory use.

jack_burt0n3995d ago


Yeah you are right, but surely it makes more sense for them to have built an engine with SOE by all development teams pooling their resources getting the tech right to start with, and then building the game. It just seems that if you are hitting snags like memory issues at this point its not likely to be smooth sailing from now on unfortunately.

Montoya3995d ago

Um, other games have proved the some how some way you can get by the memory restrictions. I could name a bunch of games.......but I won`t.

dabri53995d ago

And all of those games have fixed camera/ restricted/ limited areas with a limited amount of stuff on screen.

This is an MMO, wide open world, Tons of enemies and people on screen at once. It's just a different type of game. MMO's have always and will always be memory intensive. It's part of their design.

Montoya3995d ago

As much as I agree I respectfully disagree. If you look at something like Motorstorm:A / Killzone 3/LBP 1/2 has ALOT going on the screen at once. But yes, MMOs have the potential to be more stuff going on. But even say something like Killzone 2 online, when some drops a "spawn point" right @ the "bomb" you "hold" it`s more going on on-screen than I have ever seen in my life. 32 people in a room throwing grenade, launching rockets, transforming,`s crazy and not many would have thought that would have been possible considering the PS3s memory "problem". But like I said I know what your saying.

Reibooi3995d ago


And SE is doing just that. Finding a way around the memory restrictions. I don't know about you but I haven't heard them say "Oh well not enough memory we give up" No they are working at it and are going to make it work. They are not resting on their lurals they are doing everything they can to get the game running on the PS3 which is quite commendable as some studios would probably just cancel a version that was giving them issues outright.

Montoya3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

I agree 100% they have done a great job at find ways around it and really should be praised for it. SE will find a way if they know what good for them...LOL.

Off-topic: I can`t wait for Versus.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3995d ago
mrmikew20183995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

I think you mean 1 gig of RAM, the blu-ray disc can hold 50 gig of memory last time I checked. I could be wrong though.

dabri53995d ago

lol, I think you are the only one that assumed he meant disk space.

chrisgay3995d ago

RAM stands for Random Access Memory, which I'm sure is what he was referring to.

hoops3995d ago

Because the cost at the time would have pushed the console to well over $650+ at launch. Thats why.

RedDead3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

1gb can be as low as 20. It's a small price to pay for such an improvement.

@ Montoya. Most of them are not open world games. S-E want this game to look stunning and be open world, it's very hard to do both with a low amount of memory.

@ Holdmedownma2008. RAM=RandomAccessMEMORY. So he's right in saying memory, you can say memory aswell if you like instead of RAM.

EDIT:: I wouldn't have minded if Ps3 was an extra 50 or so, over 500 is too much to pay for a console. They sorta shot themselves in the foot, just like MS used consoles that don't use hard drives at all. 360 should have always had Harddrives and they know they made a dumb mistake.

I got a 400 euro 80Gb ps3. Paying 600 is a bit much imo

Dannehkins3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

As already mentioned, the PS3 uses a different kind of a RAM which you would usually associate with your standard computer. It's fast and it is also expensive. I think adding an extra gig might of just tipped it over the mark in terms of price and it would of bombed.

I say expensive, it is probably cheap now considering how long the PS3 has been on the market, but it might of been a different matter when the PS3 was first manufactured.

kevnb3995d ago

I mean they made it they way they had too, microsoft made the standard. It would be much weaker if they could of got away with it.

Also funny ps3 fanboys going on about xdr ram, speed of ram makes so much less difference than quantity.

Dannehkins3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

If that was the case, then they would include DDR2 and DDR3 into the PlayStation 3, but they didn't. Hold on, kevnb said that speed makes less difference in comparison to quantity...

To be fair kevnb, you're no tech specialist. You're a person on the internet. I trust the judgement of qualified individuals more so than you. I don't pretend to understand the RAM used in the PlayStation 3, I just know that it is fast. Maybe you should stop pretending as though you are someone who is all knowing when it comes down to hardware. Just a little tip. ;)

Mizz_mai3995d ago

because....people still wouldnt be able to afford them.......simple when you think about it....

bjornbear3995d ago

2006 hardware + first real MMO running on it

must be a few hurdles to cross on this, but i don't doubt with optimization and time these problems will be overcome =)

Snakefist303995d ago

That’s pure B.S. They delayed it because they’re still in talks with MS and they want to release both console versions simultaneously.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 3995d ago
FiftyFourPointTwo3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

Just admit that you're already secretly working on the 360 version. No one's gonna be surprised.

Omega43995d ago

They were MS just choose to reject it.

SuperStrokey11233995d ago

No, MS wouldnt allow a more open xboxlive. That was what killed it, not that MS didnt want it.

mightydog013995d ago

Omega 4, Your comment is stupid, how old are you 10yrs my guess, you talking gibberish

versusALL3995d ago

First time this gen, I heard a dev. say PS3 doesn't have enough memory. Never thought I see the day.

mushroomwig3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

Isn't that obvious though? The PS3 hardware is from 2005/2006, of course it'll be limited compared to todays standard.

It can't be that much of an issue though, considering there are games like Uncharted 2 out there for the system.

Lord Gunchrote3995d ago

A couple of games have already taxed the PS360. GTA 4, Red Dead, Killzone etc...Crysis 2 is pushing them to their limits too. Its been going on really...

Jazz41083995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

I have been saying it all along if you look at my comments. I have said Sonys issue was going with the split memory and thats why devs are having trouble with there framerate and thats also why you see so many mandatory installs and thats also to do with the slow reading bluray player.

M4ndat0ry_1nstall3995d ago

I'm guessing these "memory" issues are to do with RAM.

I wander how much stuff will have to be cut due to these "memory" issues? Or can the "Cell" do memory too.

In before: Lazy devs, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, etc...

- Mandatory Install

SmokeyMcBear3995d ago

actually, the cell can do memory, each spu has its own memory available. Its why utilization of all the spu's is critital. It is the sole reason why games like those you mentioned above are possible.

metsgaming3995d ago

wow 10 bubbles, i think thats the most ive seen so far.

mmoracerules3995d ago

o.o bubbles galore!!! Have some more on the house :D

SmokeyMcBear3995d ago

yeah.. that's right.. take it all in.

palaeomerus3995d ago

No, the cell cannot do memory. It's a processor. The SPU's use the tiny amount of fast "memory" they have to talk to each other the main core. That's all that "memory" can do. It can't serve as more RAM for the system.

frjoethesecond3995d ago

Everyone give this guy bubbles. Lets see how high they can go.

jack_burt0n3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

smoky bear is correct you can setup the spu's to literally stream cache to memory and seeing as the ps3 has a mandatory hdd it can be massive.

he is a mod lol.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3995d ago
Redempteur3995d ago

"The PS3 is holding back the PC version"


the pc version is released before .it's on track without delays ... what is holding bakc the pc version ? nothing silly !!

ReBurn3995d ago

That was a thinly veiled reference to the equally lame "360 is holding back the PS3" argument we've seen on this board for the last couple of years. It pops up every single time a developer doesn't put the same amount of effort into the PS3 version of a game that they put into the 360 version.

It's pretty much a meme now.

Redempteur3995d ago

memes works when they are correctly used ..

koehler833995d ago

It will be a mandatory install.. It will probably run entirely off the HDD in fact. FFXI did and it was great. No disc needed. Less power used.

Jazz41083995d ago

The ps3 is alsso the reason we are not playing Portal 2 on the 360 right now as its holding up the development when it was announced as many sites have said the 360 version and pc were almost done.

yewles13995d ago

Have fun with no steam features on the 360 version. XD

Poseidon3995d ago Show
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3995d ago
Dellis3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

This is the main reason developers don't support PS3

it has a weird Ram situation where it is divided

we all heard of that before right, well devs until this

day have said to hell with dealing with that and they just

port over games created on 360/PC.

Optical_Matrix3995d ago

In the past eight months I've seen Virtua Tennis 4, Ninokuni, Disgaea 4, Tales of Graces F, Mass Effect 2 port, Infamous 2, Killzone 3, Motorstorm 3, Little Big Planet 2, New Tales of, A.C.E.R, Ape Escape 4, Resistance 3, R&C All 4 One all announced for the PS3. I know some are 1st party but wtf do you mean developers don't support 3. It's got the most support this year and next out of all 3 current gen systems.

On topic: I Swear this is old news? But I'm glad it got delayed. I don't have too much time for an MMO when I start first year at uni in a month. But in the end, I imagine the port will be superb (hopefully). And it will most likely all run off of the HDD.

Poseidon3995d ago (Edited 3995d ago )

like valve? ea? there jumping board. it just takes more talent and ps3 exclusives show more quality than multiplats fact.

mrmikew20183995d ago

Mainly only PC developers been doing that, but if you look at other studios like Visceral Games, Eidos, Vigil Games, etc. They figure it out, so why can't a million dollar studio like Square-Enix figure it out?

WLPowell3995d ago Show