What guy from the random internet? Did you miss where I named companies who never had a problem? I guess Kojima was wrong when he said the complete opposite while developing MGS4,which was better than EA's entire catalogue.lol you just ignored everything I said because I killed your argument.Also Square worked more on the Xbox 360 than the PS3,but had no issue making FF13 which was only good technically.

Yeah, as we can see with Star Wars Battlefront or the new Need for Speed.

You are the random guy from the Internet.

And I could pull tons of comments from lots of developers regarding the shitty state that was making PS3 games. Also, MGS4 was garbage. Hot, stinky garbage. See how opinions work? It was also an exclusive game :)

Also, I didn't ignore anything. There's simply no need to respond to silly emotional name calling against the dev, or irrelevant stuff about companies you admit mostly made exclusive games.

Your argument is based off what this guy says and I am giving you examples of other developers who have worked on multiple platforms.Most of the developers who complained are not even good developers and that is a fact.I could careless about your opinion on MGS4,I am just using your weak logic against you since you think this guy knows so much because he worked on the console,but ignore other devs I mentioned who praised it and never had an issue with development,That is where you lack logic and have a double standard.He struggled,but others didn't which is my point and he sounded emotional using the word "retarded" so spare me.

End/

1) The examples you listed, you said that they didn't complain, but that doesn't mean they didn't find it hard. Those companies you mentioned are Japanese and Japanese companies rarely get into those flamming comments like criticizing a company they work for. I mean, maybe it was easy for them to develop games for PS3 but if they don't say it the situation remains a question mark. If you could provide links with those companies saying developing for the PS3 was a breeze you could be totally right. A third party dev complaining about the PS3 is as valid as a third party dev saying it wasn't hard. When I say you could quote devs saying PS3 development wasn't difficult I say so without knowing whether such statements were said last gen, I honestly don't remember.

2) Metal Gear Solid 4 is game of the forever! :D

3) Remit to #1. You named Kojima but that was an exclusive like the guy above said. If it was a simultanious game being developed for other platforms and Kojima saying that, in comparison, PS3 development wasn't that hard, then his comment could be brought to argument.

4) The word "retarded" was used in this context to refer to "slowing down", instead of an insult.

I like that this dev said that PS3 complicated architecture slowed down the industry because that recognizes how vital it is for Sony to make things smooth in order to influence positively the whole industry. ;)

Just gonna stop reading at the bolded. I am not basing it off what this guy says, I'm basing it off what this guy says and the example of other devs that I used in my first post. Hope that helps.

Mr Puggsly said: Imaginedvl said: ethomaz said: After the mess the Frostbite was on PS4/Xbone/PC I have to disagree... they didn't know what they are talking about Quite an analysis here... OP: Nobody can really argue that the Cell was over complicated for nothing. Even Sony dropped it after all. I would say that it did not help the industry at least and for some dev. studio it was effectively a pain in the ass (or add. costs) I remember seeing an article where Ubisoft claimed the PS3 processor is actually more capable than the PS4 processor. So why didn't Sony just use it for PS4? That could have made PS3 BC on PS4 relatively easy as well! Well I'm guessing because Sony agreed the Cell was a pain in the ass and not worth using again.

PS2 had weird instruction issue on both (CPU/GPU) side. This made porting the game to another console very difficult, and was done intentionally. Developer really don't have a choice on which console and/or hardware they have to work for. Those who funds the project makes the decision.

For Cell, Sony probably didn't wanted to spend money for developing newer version of architecture. They have to update Cell with current processing technology (~20nm) and they have to redesign front-end to utilize GDDR5. (Otherwise, they are stuck with Rambus Ram, or DDR2.)

Also, appeasing to developers includes supporting Out of Order execution.

Of course it was overly complicated, and it was a stupid design choice, but to say it significantly held back the industry? Hyperbole.

I hear ya, but I still think GPU was the primary issue given its limitations. Many games designed for PS2 came to Gamecube and Xbox, they often looked like PS2 games as well.

It evident developers did not like working with the Cell, so that alone is a good reason to move away from it.

That's why 360 had all the technically superior exclusives.. Right?

Cell was a bad idea and Sony paid the price but these guys are blowing it way out of proportion. nd mastered the cell after their first game and making the switch to PS4 hasn't been half arsed in anyway uncharted 4 is the most impressive game we've seen.