Lord Flashheart said:
Yakuzaice said:
Lord Flashheart said:
Yakuzaice said:
Lord Flashheart said:
Yakuzaice said:
Lord Flashheart said:
@MikeB U2 took two years because the had laid the ground work with U1.
A better comparison for development time would have been GT5 not a sequel.
You are as good as spin as Selnor but without the personality. |
Uncharted 1 didn't take 5 years either though. Jak 3 came out in '04, Jak X in '05, and Uncharted released in '07
|
Gears one didn't take five years neither did 2. Whats your point.
One 360 game did. Doesn't mean you can draw comparison with a game that didn't and say look how long that took.
Like I said compare it to GT5 not a sequel. Or God of War 3 how long did that take? Heavy Rain? maybe this is revenge for all the times 360 owners have ridiculed how long it takes a Ps3 game to come out but doesn't change the facts no matter how much you spin it.
|
Not sure why you keep bringing up other games. MikeB was comparing Uncharted 2 and Alan Wake development times. You argued that the comparison wasn't fair because Uncharted was a sequel. When I mention that the first Uncharted took nowhere near 5 years you just bring up GT5 and Gears of War.
As for God of War 3, it came out 3 years after God of War 2.
|
So he can bring up other games to make unfair comparisons.
I understand.
I can't do the same or ask he uses a game with a comparable dev time?
I understand. I'm in the wrong.
|
MikeB didn't first bring up Uncharted 2, the article and Selnor did. The development time tangent was somewhat odd, but your comment didn't make any more sense. You complained that using a sequel was unfair, and yet ignored the original game. Then you brought up Gears for no apparent reason. Nobody said that every 360 game takes 5 years. You might have had a point if Remedy had done Gears and Naughty Dog had done Gran Turismo 5. The discussion was comparing the graphics of Uncharted 2 and Alan Wake, and thus the talent Naughty Dog and Remedy have with working on their respective systems.
|
You brought up Jak 3 and X so I bought up two games that didn't take long to release. Why did you bring them up?
Selnor never mentioned dev times for U2. MikeB did and it was out of place. If he wants to make comapirsons on dev times he should pick more comparable games. How is that difficult to understand? I didn't ignore the first one. I mentioned it in the first post? I don't have someone else who hasn't read the whole conversation have I? the discussion I was in was about dev times as started by MikeB so have a go at him?Who implied that every 360 game takes 5 years?
have you actually read the replies or just skimmed them? Again what is your point?
/exasterbated
|
I would have thought the U2 comparison was... well, comparable. They're both 3rd-person games, both exclusive to there respective system and both are considerred to be visually advanced. And the Jak games are relevant to the discussion as Naughty Dog developed those games, suggesting it took them a little over 2 years before before U1, and another 2 years before U2 "perfected" the formula.
I'm guessing the point MikeB was trying to make was that Digital Foundry have found that Alan Wake isn't quite as visually stunning as it's been hyped up to be, even with the 5 yr dev time, whilst ND's 2 games are seen as the visual console standards (of their times) and have only taken 4 yrs. So, either PS3 > 360 or that ND > Remedy for this select and very specific case.
Of course, if we look at the article in a bit more depth we can see why the game took 5 yrs. Firstly, it was orginally on both PC and 360 before becomming 360 exlclusive, it was originally going to be sandbox but had to change mid-way for design reasons and not mentioned in the article that is worth noting in this development comparison is that Remedy is smaller than Naughty Dog.
