By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
darkknightkryta on 25 December 2009
Edit Thread
TRios_Zen said:
darkknightkryta said:
CommonMan said:
 

I am also a happy PS3 owner that posed this very same question, and was ripped up one side and down the other for it. I was told in no uncertain terms that it's 80% lazyness on the developers and 20% lack of understanding of the hardware. In no way can we dare hold Sony in any way responsible. Yeck. . . I wash my hands of this.

I'll go on a limb here and blame the devs.  Why?  Cause Sony told them time and time again, make the game on the PS3 first with the 360 in mind you'll have no problems porting it over.  What do they do?  Make it on the 360 and run into problems when they make their PS3 version.  I myself would figure devs would have finished up their games in the pipeline that programmed on the 360 first, but I guess not, or they in a sense are lazy and program on the 360 first to get it out of the way and run into problems on the PS3 later.  Like, I know before you could chalk up Sony cause of the CPU they put in, but ultimately, the CPU wasn't he biggest problem early on, it was the unified shader/ram vs dedicated shaders/ram.  Going from dedicated to unified works, going unified to dedicated doesn't.  But at this point in the game, there's no reason why ANY dev is starting a multiplatform game on the 360 unless Microsoft is paying for it (Fallout 3 for instance, though I recall reading this on the interwebs, could be false). 

I know I'm late responding to this (Christmas Eve travels and all...) but...  If I understand correctly, your answer is that every developer in the world should just do what Sony says...and everything will be alright, huh?

Spelled out that way...do you really believe this?  EVERYONE just listen to Sony!  You'll be good then!!  That is flat out ridiculous man, sorry.

@commonman - too bad I didn't catch that other thread, I would've at least stuck with you.

No worries about the response, this is a forum and you can respond whenever, even 10 months from now .  And who said they should listen to everything Sony says?  The one point they should is the "start on PS3 first and move to the 360", and is probably what every dev, yes in the world, should be doing.  You have a PS3 version to make, it's highly documented that going from the 360 to the PS3 is a big pain in the ass, but going the other way around is significantly easier.  Why should devs waste time, money and resources struggling to get a PS3 port of a game up and running when if they just made it on the PS3 first with the 360 in mind, would save them time, resources and more importantly money.  Disagree with me if you want, that's cool, but look at the devs that did do that? Games like Burnout, Devil May Cry, others I can't think of off the top of my head, they all started on the PS3 and moved to others.  Well Devil May Cry was made on a PC framework, but that framework was specifically designed to run 99% identicle on each other and Devil May Cry was probably working hand in hand on a PS3 since it was "exclusively on Playstation 3". Game was designed to run on the PS3 a 360 port was made late in development and came out 99% identicle.   Can you say the same for 90% of the other games with problems?  Why do you think Bayonetta has such problems?  It wasn't designed for the PS3 at all, took advantage of coding practices that's good for the 360 and horrible on the PS3 and look at how the game turned out.  I can go on with another paragraph about that too, but long story short if the game was made on the PS3 or atleast with the PS3s ram/shaders in mind there would have been no problem with that port or the majority of the ports on the PS3 for that matter.