CVG: Team Bondi has confirmed that L.A Noire was ported from PS3 to Xbox 360 during development, and suggested that most third-party multiplatform studios are opting to use Sony's console as their lead platform.
i think we all knew this for a while now since it was gonna be ps3 exclusive when they first started it.
Its the part where it suggests most 3rd party studios are using ps3 as lead platform and porting down. Sounds like ps2 all over again, except in those times devs were porting up from the ps2 to the other platforms.
@Meerkat That's why devs always started with 360..... Nice troll comment......I totally didn't notice :/
Generally,in these times,PS3 is lead platform or with big titles(R*,Activision and Ubi),they are developed simultaneously. Problem with porting on PS3 is that you have to rework shaders from 360 and you always end up with ~30 megs less so you have to cut down some things.
PS3 lead games are showing to be very beneficial for both consoles. Look at Castlevania LoS and Vanquish. They are solid on both systems and are two of the best looking and playing multiplats this generation.
oh boy, hopefully it won't be glitchy or filled with bugs.
Supremacy why? Did you have to say porting down? When a game is made on 360 and put on Ps3, we say, Port OVER! Why did you have to say DOWN... ... so sad... Just asking for trouble!
That explains why the game is so big!
The funny thing about the PS3 is that it has incredible processing capabilities, however the CPU only has access to half the RAM. The GPU of course has the other half. You can even go out of your way to get the GPU to utilize the CPU RAM through the use of a kernel... but these days, a lot of your RAM is being used by the CPU. AI is very expensive. The PS3 forces you to cram your code efficiency down to half your RAM. The GPU RAM is usually not utilized too heavily, if your level designs are thought out. You end up having games where the CPU barely gets by without running out of memory, and the GPU RAM is only half used. So you boost the texture pool, and that's why you are seeing PS3 games with better looking textures. The 360 on the other hand, has one RAM location that is shared. Once you get your game working on the PS3 RAM constraints, you are good to go with the 360. Of course, the PS3 CPU and RAM itself are technically much better... the RAM size was a vital flaw in their design. You will not see games hitting the "full potential" of the PS3, since most of the GPU RAM is barely taxed. If the PS3 had 512 RAM for CPU, and 256 RAM for GPU with the ability to share the CPU RAM. The 360 would have had trouble competing. They had the year advantage, and RAM isn't overly expensive when made in bulk amounts. I'm not sure what the thinking was with this. With that said, it has sort of raised the bar for developing on PS3, so you get games from studios that are actually trying to better themselves more avidly.
it is given fact. IBM did a benchmark testing and PS3 performed THREE times the number. This explains why UC2 looks so amazing.
@DualConsoleOwner Do you have a link you can message me for that, I'd like to see it. If it was strictly number crunching, the PS3 might win 7:1. For games however, it shouldn't be that far apart... so I'd like to see how they tested it. thanks
Well i usually don't reply to my own comments, but it seems i might have upset a few people with this comment. The fact is, the ps3 is the superior console if you want to get technical i can sit here and do that. But instead i would agreed with you this once AAACE5. I shouldn't have said port down, i should have said port over because for the most part this is true with most intended Multiplatform games which is port over and not port down for the purpose of equal results across both platforms and in some cases even pc as well. And i apologize for that. However the cell is what makes the ps3 superior to the rest of the consoles out there. Even ps3's ram is more advanced its just stripped in half giving the 360 that 512 over it.Look this is the cell by itself http://www.youtube.com/watc... Had Sony try and match that number then just imagine where the games would be, then you could really say we wont need a ps4 for a while. Here is a word from the dogs themselves http://www.youtube.com/watc... for anyone interested in this argument.
It is easy to see why you need to lead on the PS3. The darn thing is so limited that if you took any liberties while programming on the Xbox 360, the program wouldn't work on the PS3! You always start with the most stringent system if you want parity. Otherwise, you end up with ports to the PS3 like the Orange Box.
The only multi-plat devs that still port from 360 are activision, capcom and bethesda
You forgot to mention they're making the biggest games out there.
And? That doesn't make them auto-matically good games. Or equal. There's better games as a whole made by other developers and there's even better games made exclusively for the ps3. Fact is deny it if you wish. The PS3 is a powerful console, the exclusives prove this. Everytime PS3 is used as the lead it asways results in much fairer or equal multi-plat games. Because the developers learn how to code for the PS3 properly and then it's an easier job to port over to 360. The developers still leading with the 360 are all the developers who are to lazy to take time out to up their skills, which results in poor ports. It's harder to port from 360 to ps3, this is fact.
And you see how well those games work on the PS3. The 360 version works but the PS3 usually ends up as crap. When games a made on the PS3 and ported down to the 360 those games usually run equal to each other. It is a lot easier to do all your coding on the PS3 then port to the 360. There is a lot more work involved if you do it the other way around, and tends to end up as crap.
It is easy to see why you need to lead on the PS3. The darn thing is so limited that if you took any liberties while programming on the Xbox 360, the program wouldn't work on the PS3!
I didn't realize these guys were Psygnosis back in the day. Shadow of the Beast FTW! Edit: I just saw Meerkat's feeble attempt at trolling above. Serves me right for clicking on it. "It's always easier to start with the lowest common denominator." Just goes to show his ignorance. The exact opposite is true. It's always easier to adjust your project down rather then up. Keep that in mind when you're trying to find which disk you have to swap next on the 360.
psygnosis and shadow of the beast all in one comment you dude deserve a bubble.
I had Shadow of the Beast on Amiga. Sweet Jebus, that game was HARD! Shadow of the Beast 2 was even tougher. Demon's Souls (have platinum) seemed like a breeze compared to those games.
It's not really these guys that were psygnosis. That may be a guy who used to work for them but psygnosis is actually studio Liverpool, the guys that give us wipeout. they had to change their name because of Sony but those are the oldschool fellas that helped make rockstars first success, lemmings!!.
@above: correct and that one guy moved to Sony London and developed the Getaway before moving to Australia to form Team Bondi. Rockstar North used to be DMA Design
While it means it will run well on the PS3. The game has still suffered from being on the 360 as well. The earlier stuff was far more impressive than the current state of the game. The game could have looked like Infamous/Killzone/God Of War/Uncharted2/MGS4 etc... but now it looks like underwhelming. Like mafia/unreal engine or something. Could have used a full BR disc as well with 7 years of content. The cell could have kicked some serious ass with stream loading locations like Infamous. Compare early screens to the ones just released. Its just good developers are learning Leading on the PS3 = good products for gamers. Not a shoddy port.
I'm really wondering how rockstar is going to make GTA5 it's such a huge question mark. If it's on the 360 too is GTA5 going to end up only partial free roaming like LANoire? The only solution for GTA5 I can see is for the 360 version of the game to come with a 16gb flash drive.
Yay! Greywulf is back! /s inFamous and MGS4 were not impressive. LA Noire looks vastly better than either of those games. Quite a few multiplats, in fact, look better than those games. Delusional much?
I hope GTA5 is on PS3 only then port 1 year later for 360 with lots of disks
The blu-ray disc is full for LA Noire. The motion-cap stuff takes up a massive amount of space, apparently. That's why it's on more than one disc for the 360. I agree with the point that an exclusive generally performs better on one platform than a multiplat. However, it goes both ways- 360 exclusives normally look better than multiplats too. If you only concentrate on one platform, you'd have to be a poor developer not to make it better than if you had to limit yourself to the weaknesses of BOTH PS3 and 360, rather than one of them. The PS3 is a stronger console, but because it does certain things differently, both console's have different weaknesses. Which sucks for most multiplats. Games like Burnout Paradise, Arkham Asylum and Bioshock prove that multiplats don't always suffer though.
If the ps4 uses the same architecture from the cell then It'll really help those companies that took the time to learn from it. Then there would probably not be as many problems with multi platform games; considering how hard it was in the beginning to work with the ps3.
Why did you disagree? Care to explain why? Please don't give me that excuse,"because everyone has their opinion."
finally!!! if they use ps3 as lead all 360 ports will be great.
I don't know why your getting disagrees, I thought it was common knowledge that it was so much easier to port from PS3 to 360 than vice versa
Most Xbox360 ports are actually fine. It's the other way around. It seems when they use the PS3 as the lead platform, both versions in most cases turn out solid. The sticking point is most game developers find it so easy to get the Xbox360 version up and running, they do the Xbox360 version first because less time is spent and less man power and money is saved by them doing this. It's a hard decision especially for smaller game studios that don't have large budgets or are funded to spend the extra time needed to make the PS3 the lead platform in some cases. @limewax It is easier to port to the Xbox360 from the PS3, but its not easier to FIRST develop the game on the PS3 than it is for the Xbox360.
Uh, no. Developers need to start developing on each platform simultaneously. No ports. e.g. Crytek with their CryEngine 3, Simultaneously developing on all three platforms in real time.
Yeah but the main problem with that is that each console is different. I mean, they don't release at the same time. If Wii 2 comes in 2012, the next Xbox in 2013 and PS4 in 2014, how the hell are developers supposed to adapt to each one and make a universal engine? It won't work unless the consoles have the same structure, which would make their existence kind of pointless. What Crytek did is very good, but it happened at the end of these consoles' life cycle and won't necessarily work when next-gen comes.
@ Croash, The games were going to be different regardless due to Live vs PSN and difference with controllers. For most like myself we game on the 360 for multiplats so concern about which version is better then what is irrelevant. For people that only own one of the consoles don't even think twice if the other version is better than the other unless they want to troll about it on their favorite console. The rest couldn't care less since they were picking up that version anyway.
Was this not common knowledge? L.A Noire at one point was a PS3 exclusive. "I think it was an obvious decision. We'd always been -- apart from Psygnosis which was for Sony -- we always made multiplatform stuff. But essentially, for some 10 years at Sony, we were an internal shop. We knew the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 stuff pretty well, and for us it was a change. But for Rockstar they'd done a lot of that." That sums it up pretty well ;)
So technically, we're getting a fully PS3 powered game. How many times do devs go all out on the PS3 with a multi-platform game? Or did they have to lessen it for the PS3 to port it 360? LA noire takes up an entire single layer BR disc. It doesn't happen too often. I'm curious.
. If they could fill those lots of data to make the game better graphically / sound / game-play, why not.
YES! PS3 all the way!
Didn't this use to be a PS3 exclusive?
That's logical. It's easier to scale down than up.
Why do you have disagree ? it's just a fact. wow, i understand, look at the denial xfans team and their multiaccounts here, so pathetic...always the same lies and delusional/denial state "bububu it's not more powerfull, i have a ps3, i swear upon my life that you can make uncharted 2 on 360" ..so pathetic :) they don't have a single game on par with gow, lbp, kz, unchatred heavy rain, but they are sure it can be possible (even if the 360 is easier to work with, and maxed out since gears 2) jocosta, starchild, xtstationtroll, and others blind fans, please, stop lying to others, and yourself..it's so 2006. a new one : "Funny as **** PS3 CANT match 360 lead. 360 CAN match PS3 lead. " funny as *** 360 can't match ps3 exclusives, since 2007 (and ps3 is not maxed out)
there nothing new here. it was a ps3 exclusive.
Most multiplatform games are doing this. Its easier for developers. PS3 HD games then port it to 360 Sub-HD game.
The irony is some Rockstar games end up being subhd on the PS3 and not the Xbox360...other games from Capcom etc.
this means 360 getting the short end of the stick now
@Jetlian, how is the 360 now getting the short end of the stick if they both look the same??The only reason people may want to pick up the ps3 version of L.A. Noire over the 360 is because the 360 version comes on 3 discs. That is not due to the ps3 being lead platform I might add.
It might also have to do with the exclusive content on the PS3 version. But I do agree that 1 disk versus 3 disks might factor in.
They look the same but don't sound the same. It's interesting that almost nobody mentions how superior PS3/BD is in terms of producing surround, uncompressed sound and music in games. Probably most 360 users have their consoles connected to cheap headphones or something. The only place I see that mentioned are Digital Foundry comparisons.
I only hope more devs follow suit. That way we PS3 owners can get extremely good quality games and we wont have to suffer another bayonetta. Besides the 360 is easy as heck to develop for so porting a game from the PS3 to it should be a snap. Now porting a game from a engine designed for the PS3 is a different story. Heres proof of my claim. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... This happen like i said because the white engine was designed in the beginning for the PS3s hardware. Which is why squareenix had to rebuild the engine for the 360. Sort of like what happens to unreal games.
Could be ported from NES. I don't care. As long as the gameplay remains the same, bring it on!
LOL, that's awesome! ...the ported from NES part.
Forget that, I just want to walk into game and see a new NES game advertised. It would be brilliant.
Funny as **** PS3 CANT match 360 lead. 360 CAN match PS3 lead.
Final Fantasy XIII looked amazing on the 360!
when you actually work hard on the ps3, you will get results. because they worked on the ps3 first, they got alot out of it and all they have to do is port it to the xbox 360 which is weaker. now, if the game was made for the xbox 360 first, it would have been a disaster for the ps3. it would have just been another lazy port.
You do realize what you just said makes no sense?So porting from weaker system to more powerful one you are in deep ****,but porting from more powerful to weaker is great since the weaker one will look the same.Is it me or N4G is becoming synonymy for illogic? Until this gen more powerful system was always getting better ports,even when it was much more complicated(see dreamcast>PS2) but sudenly in this gen things have changed and in some,completely illogical situation,"more powerful" system can't handle the port from a "weaker one" and vica versa it works like charm.Huh? P.S You will see the situation when BF3 gets released...Doing deferred shading and occlusion and frostum culling on SPUs(that even some first party devs are not working) probably won't help it to be superior to 360 version.
It does make sense in this case. The PS3 is known to be more difficult to program for. The 360 is as easy and familiar as it gets. If you make the easy version and try to fit it onto the difficult machine, there will be many issues. If you make the difficult version first, the transition back to the easy version is, well, easy. Doing the hard part first makes the easy part that much easier. Edit: The reason it won't be "superior" is the same as it has been this entire generation. Developers try to make games as similar as possible without attempting to utilize either machine's advantages. If they worked with each machine's strengths you would find more games looking more like their exclusive counterparts.
From what I've read on this stuff, there's a lot of Devs that comment on the fact 360 has better debugging software, which makes it easier to develop there. You create a game that's got holes are all over the place and it's inefficiently programmed, the 360 will be able to handle that and bring it up and running - the PS3 won't. So if you didn't design for the PS3 in mind, you're going to have to redo a whole bunch of the design to work on the PS3 - or you can straight port as much as possible and end up with a poor performing PS3 port. Developing on the PS3 is more difficult but if you want a game that runs well on BOTH systems you have to start there.
you do realise the 360 version doesnt perform as well as the PS3 version right? making your comment untrue? :L
360 cant even run a game like uncharted 1 and uncharted 2 god of war 3 or even metal gear solid4 same with ffvs 13 or better heavy rain. so wheres 360 match to the ps3 as far as i see the 360 dosent even come close to what ps3 offers. all the 360 does just holds gaming back and gimping games like tekken 6 gta 4 ff13 name aa few already for you?
Who cares if the 360 can't play those games. Mostly the only people who say they games are great are ps3 fanboys. The highest selling game to date is black ops, and its highly superior on the 360. Why you dumbasses argue over this, I'm going back to playing some online multiplayer
So you are telling me that devs like ND and GG, given the budget and time, could not make Uncharted, Killzone, etc. run just fine on the 360? I find it hard to believe that its impossible, given that those games aren't nearly as impressive as you seem to think they are.
@xstation79 The Sales = Quality argument, good stuff.. It's well known that massive sales often come when a game caters to more casual players - sure there's quality but it doesn't mean the game will hold the attention of someone with higher intellectual prowess. You also have to factor in the case where a console doesn't have a lot of competition for that one game, thus making it the game everyone buys. Black Ops did come out better on 360, I agree. I really fail to see how one can jump to the conclusion that a marginal difference in one game is a strong argument for classifying the 360 a superior console with its lack of high-quality exclusive games.
As much as you wish that was true, sorry it's not! When you look at it unbias-ly, it all comes down to perception! And perception is nothing more than a "Subjective veiwpoint". Which means can be interpreted differentially dependant on the individual! But in your case, it's more so your obsessive attachment or, fanboyistic idea-olgy for your piece of plastic of choice.
Has the 360 match KZ2 (yes 2, not 3) yet?...or Uncharted 2?... come on Wayne...try harder next time...