By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nsanity on 04 September 2011
Edit Thread
littlejudas said:
Booh! said:
littlejudas said:
Booh! said:
Nsanity said:

Dont Sony have a similar policy?

http://www.1up.com/news/quakecon-carmack-dishes-dirt-sony


No.

You completely missed the point, if the ps3 version of your game is, for whatever reason, even a little better or bigger than the x360 version, you have to gimp it or otherwise M$ could not allow your game on their consoles. If your ps3 game, for whatever reason, is completed, but your x360 version of it has encountered some development problem and is not ready, you cannot release it on ps3 or your x360 version could be refused by M$.

This policy has nothing to do with the request of more contents and more polishing if the game was already released on other platforms. This policy ends the argument "multiplats are better on x360 because it's easier to develop for", it was just M$ mobbing the developers.


So a recent policy that was just instigated a month or two ago is the only reason PS3 can't run multiplatform games properly, and all that stuff from Carmack, Crytek, Bethesda and Epic about the PS3 having less memory or a slower GPU or a slower drive speed or being hard to program was just a deep cover 5 year project to hide this policy? [citation needed]

Carmack said that the ps3 version would be better because he could use uncompressed textures. This policy was enacted when XBL was created.


You have some dated info there. He said at Quakecon last month, the 360 and PS3 versions are approximately 22GB and with a full installation, he would go with the 360 version. Plus you will need to provide a link to confirm that this policy was enacted 9 years ago and explain why 1) Sony is only complaining about this now 2) How they managed to subvert it previously, since if as you claim this policy has been active since 2002, how did Sony get extras for Dead Space 2, Mafia 2, Batman: AA etc.

My thoughts exactly.