The PlayStation 3 version of MMO Final Fantasy XIV was delayed due to “memory” issues, producer Hiromichi Tanaka told VG247.
I still dont see why Sony couldn't just add at least 1 gig of memory for the system? Dumb asses. LOL,
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.
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.
@rroded 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.
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.
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. @Vulcan Sony did unlock an additional 70mb of ram earlier this year though. http://www.joystiq.com/2010...
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.
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....
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.
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.
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.
@catguykyou 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.
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.
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.
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, turrets.....it`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.
@Montoya 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.
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.
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.
lol, I think you are the only one that assumed he meant disk space.
RAM stands for Random Access Memory, which I'm sure is what he was referring to.
Because the cost at the time would have pushed the console to well over $650+ at launch. Thats why.
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
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.
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.
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. ;)
because....people still wouldnt be able to afford them.......simple when you think about it....
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 =)
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.
Just admit that you're already secretly working on the 360 version. No one's gonna be surprised.
They were MS just choose to reject it.
No, MS wouldnt allow a more open xboxlive. That was what killed it, not that MS didnt want it.
Omega 4, Your comment is stupid, how old are you 10yrs my guess, you talking gibberish
First time this gen, I heard a dev. say PS3 doesn't have enough memory. Never thought I see the day.
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.
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...
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.
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
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.
wow 10 bubbles, i think thats the most ive seen so far.
HOLY BUBBLE COUNT.
o.o bubbles galore!!! Have some more on the house :D
who has 10 bubbles. Wow.
yeah.. that's right.. take it all in.
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.
Everyone give this guy bubbles. Lets see how high they can go.
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.
"The PS3 is holding back the PC version" facepalm.jpg the pc version is released before .it's on track without delays ... what is holding bakc the pc version ? nothing silly !!
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.
memes works when they are correctly used ..
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.
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.
FF13 says hi
Have fun with no steam features on the 360 version. XD
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.
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.
like valve? ea? there jumping board. it just takes more talent and ps3 exclusives show more quality than multiplats fact.
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?
Memory can be worked around, the biggest challenge will be getting a successful MMO on a console in the first place, history doesn't favour the genre on anything but PC.
Phantasy Star Online laughs hard at you!
Wow... one MMO huh, compared to just how many failed, or even were dropped before release?
thats not the genres fault its the games fault good games dont fail unless the community doesnt want that game
Yeah, even for a MMO. Its requirements are pretty dang high. Personally I say let SE take their time. Im still amazed that their actually releasing FFXIV this year on PC.
if you beleave this your wrong. so you telling me they brought out the last final fantasy game. on the ps3 no issues no downsample uncompressed. they brought out other games too and now supposidly saying we got memory problems. hmmmm another exclusive title that needs to be tryed to get knocked down. smells bit fishy. if they understood the ps3 like the first party's they realise they dont have to rely all on the memory but also the vga memory too as they work differntly and combined as one when needed. so you do get 512mb just the 360 has a set 512mb ram.
I think the guy meant to say RAM instead of memory.
yes m8 well done on correcting me. this article just got my backup so im writing too fast.
Last time I looked the game wasn't coming out on 360. So comparing the memory to the 360 is pointless. Compare the 512mg memory of the PS3 to 2GB of ram that they are saying is the minimum requirement. Yes, a PC MMORPG game requires more memory than a normal console game. Take off the fanboy goggles for a second and breath. No one is bashing the PS3 here. I'm sure they will figure it out and release the game still on PS3 looking just as good.
bullcrap.. when your having issues that causes delays, reach out to sony and sony's first parties and ask them how to handle it.. ask them how to properly use the spe's, call up your contact at sony and say, "can you connect me with someone at insomniac or naughty dog? i'd like to run a few issues by them" on the flip side of that, sony should be reaching out to all third party developers and asking them before hand if they have any concerns or issues they can assist with or maybe put them in contact with.. even early on i knew a lot of the "ps3 cant handle or do this" was crap.. epic, a company that loves microsoft more than anything.. was able to make unreal tournament 3 dance on the ps3 as well has give an optional install and allow for pc developed mods to be shared with the ps3 console. so when a dev says "i cant get unreal engine 3 to work properly on the ps3" i say you dont know what your doing. if its your own engine, then the problem may be with the engine, it may need tweaking.. run all the audio through one spe.. that's it.. that should alleviate some memory or do what kojima did, its a huge blu ray disc, copy and paste parts of maps and items all over the disc so that read and write access is faster.. its not even being a lazy developer its being a bad one when your not willing to try new things with your software but expect a piece of hardware to change.. more on topic.. it all worked out when you made ffxi with the ps2 in mind.. what changed now? oh i get it, you want it to work on the 360 so your doing it with the 360 in mind hoping you can work out your billing issues with them later and leaving the ps3 where the bulk of your fans are in the cold.. screw you SE... (by the way my ffxiv collectors edition is already pre ordered and paid for LOL)
Wow, so angry. Just because the company is struggling with getting something optimized for the system doesn't mean they are bashing the system. They didn't say the game wasn't possible on PS3, just its taking a little longer to work out the kinks. For all you know, they are working with Sony on this issue. PS, the SPE's are used to alleviate processing from the GPU. This doesn't free up memory.
if i came off angry, its just frustrating when suits make these bad moves/decisions.. what is so hard about developers talking to other developers? insomniac made a huge pdf and tutorial etc for other devs to look at to help understand the ps3.. any devs look at it? nope they just say "it dont work like pc, (scratches head) even valve is getting the source engine to run on ps3.. if valve can swallow their pride and boast significant gains on the ps3 and epic can make UT3 work, and first and second parties can.. then a company like SE, capcom etc has no reason to make these not enough resources claims.. its really frustrating watching companies like SE put blame elsewhere but themselves..