Garnett said:
Million said:
frybread said:
That would be a stupid business move.
You want the lead platform to be the same as the biggest seller. PS3 as the lead platform will continue to be rare this gen. In some cases it's financially wise to skip PS3 altogether, as Valve has begun doing.
|
you think ignoring 20 million ps3's is more cost effective than porting a game ? debating with you is a waste of time.
Garnett said:
Million said:
colonelstubbs said:
Companies will also optimize the version expected to sell more, usually the 360 version |
That doesn't weaken the case for ps3 > > 360 ports .
Garnett said:
Million said:
i think developers are reversing it , more multiplats are equal or superior on the ps3. Development of many games take years so the change isn't as fast as many would like.
|
PS3 ported to 360 means the game will have to use what 360 (CPU wise)can use and be under 7 gigs.Therefore 3rd partys wont be using any real part of teh PS3.
|
your post makes no sense (logic wise)
|
What dosent make sense? Let me try to explain it :p The 360 DVD can only use 6.8 gigs therefore Blue Ray is useless since companys want to save money,The PS3 cpu is stronger than 360 CPU,so they would have to make the game have within 360 CPU limit from the bat,so either way PS3 is getting ripped off..
|
when leading on the ps3 you'd still take into concideration the limitations of the 360(dvd,no manndatory hdd install etc) in pre production stages making some degrades or sacrifices if neccasery.
|
Yea but either way the PS3 still is getting a port really,there not gonna be using any part of the PS3,which is very sad.
|
i see what you mean but we just have to accept that's the nature of multi-platform development , it wont stop multi-plats from getting better though , the standard always improve. thank god for excclusives eh ?
