G4 is previewing LBP soon(street fight too)

link? Channel? XD
 
bah >.> I'm too lazy to look through the guide.

Edit: Found it :P boo commercial
 
Last edited:
InFamous looks fun :P Mercenaries 2 looks.. HAWTNESS!! OMG NUCLEAR STRIKE XD

Edit: By the way, did anyone notice that so many of the games they showed (non exclusives) were played on the PS3 for G4TV? lol. I'm just curious why :P is it that the PS3 versions are better or is it that they are more done? Is it that Sony has some marketing in that? Is it producer biased? Is it just coincidence? :P
 
Last edited:
Elemmire said:
InFamous looks fun :P Mercenaries 2 looks.. HAWTNESS!! OMG NUCLEAR STRIKE XD

Edit: By the way, did anyone notice that so many of the games they showed (non exclusives) were played on the PS3 for G4TV? lol. I'm just curious why :P is it that the PS3 versions are better or is it that they are more done? Is it that Sony has some marketing in that? Is it producer biased? Is it just coincidence? :P
Click to expand...

Ele i would bet if i were not Sony somehow involved in the marketing... Then it would just be a coincidence. I would even just lean towards the later from the start. We already know most multiplats are more crisp on 360, there are some exceptions. It has nothing to do with bashing PS3. You could argue maybe times are changing... I would still think not. There are too many facts which lean towards a multi plat looking, playing smoother on 360.

EDIT: Amid, unless you payed for 2 copies of one game i dont see how you could compare anything. Sure you can say a PS3 exclusive looks better then a 360 exclusive... or the other way around. There is no comparison there tho technically since the game is exclusive in the first place. Take the Madden series for example, there are clear facts of why the 360s version is better... PS3- 30 FPS. 360- 60FPS. These are the comparison types you get from multiplats. We all know PS3 is the stronger machine on paper... The fact that its easier to dev on 360 and more familiar make it look comparable in power, better in some ways.
 
Last edited:
TheOsyris said:
Ele i would bet if i were not Sony somehow involved in the marketing... Then it would just be a coincidence. I would even just lean towards the later from the start. We already know most multiplats are more crisp on 360, there are some exceptions. It has nothing to do with bashing PS3. You could argue maybe times are changing... I would still think not. There are too many facts which lean towards a multi plat looking, playing smoother on 360.
Click to expand...

that's why I'm wondering cause I thought the 360 versions were just fine and generally I've noticed that most developers, when showin off a multi-plat game, show it on the most popular system that it's on, and we all know that 360 has more popularity than PS3 sooooo that's why I'm wondering why a grand majority of the multi-plats were showed on PS3 hmm (I know FFXIII so far was because they haven't started on 360 versions.. but that's cause they weren't planning PS3/360 from the starts where as mercenaries 2, Dead Space, etc were and I noticed them playing it on PS3 to show it off).
 
It may just be bs but I heard most, or at least more, multiplatform developers are using the PS3 as the primary device and then porting it to the 360. Supposedly it is easier to take a game from the PS3 and get it running smoothly on the 360 than visa-versa.

True or false? I know not.
 
That seems false to me.. I mean earlier it was that the PS3 was a tough thing to program on cause it was so new and different though.. who knows.. maybe through Sony aiding developers in getting used to their system (as Resistance creator's have said :P) it's become easier.
 
Elemmire said:
That seems false to me.. I mean earlier it was that the PS3 was a tough thing to program on cause it was so new and different though.. who knows.. maybe through Sony aiding developers in getting used to their system (as Resistance creator's have said :P) it's become easier.
Click to expand...

Iirc, it would be false, and its the reason that Star Wars: Force Unleashed was delayed. The devs were having trouble with getting to know the PS3's cell processor or something like that.

I've been enjoying watching E3 on G4 since that girl, that isn't Olivia Munn, stopped being such a huge idiot everything.
 
Kurgon said:
It may just be bs but I heard most, or at least more, multiplatform developers are using the PS3 as the primary device and then porting it to the 360. Supposedly it is easier to take a game from the PS3 and get it running smoothly on the 360 than visa-versa.

True or false? I know not.
Click to expand...
It's false, the two are so different that a straight port isn't really possible. A lot of the crap developers have to go through just to get games to run on the PS3 wouldn't be necessary for it to run on the 360 and would probably hinder it's performance on the 360. A PS3 -> 360 port would be much easier than the other way around, since the PS3 is two bitches and a half to program for, but very few games would be a port to the 360 and not a separate build.

Sony's first party developers aren't having as many problems making games for it any more since they're part of the same company, but the third-party developers aren't doing nearly as well.

Amidamaru said:
I believe a PS3 can get more out of a game(performance wise) than any other console. I've compared games in my house and I see differences.
Click to expand...
For things that just require processing power(particle effects, physics, etc), yeah, it can. Textures and other graphics, it can't, since the PS3 has much less available memory for graphics than the 360; although the PS3 uses some little effects to try to hide their texture differences. And now Anttaru will post more bullshit about how the PS3 looks so much better than the 360, and how it theoretically has more memory on paper.
 
Last edited:
Makelith said:
I've been enjoying watching E3 on G4 since that girl, that isn't Olivia Munn, stopped being such a huge idiot everything.
Click to expand...

Morgan Webb, Olivia Munn, and a kiddy tub full of body oil... I'd pay good money for this, top fuckin' dollar.
 
Bajaratt said:
Sony's first party developers aren't having as many problems making games for it any more since they're part of the same company, but the third-party developers aren't doing nearly as well.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true, I mean.. Insomniac is actually not first party iirc, they are a company of their own and they just focus only one system.. generally a third party that focuses on ONE system for a game will make a better quality game than a company that tries to whore up the industry :P much like Rockstar used to focus on Playstation only and so they only worked on the Playstation game and then ported well after it was released. It's easier for the producer to focus on one platform. Granted PS3 is different compared to previous systems so there is a need to learn with it which adds production time but it seems that a game focused on one system is always going to be a better quality game than one on multiplatform simultaneous release from the start.

So if it really is easier to make a PS3 game and port it to 360.. why wouldn't companies focus on the PS3 version first, get it perfect, release it, and port 360 later? That's easily answered :P cause 360 has the user numbers that PS3 doesn't with the power to run their game as well so simultaneous release but usually a poorer quality than what I think would be if they just focused on ONE system, perfected the gameplay mechanics, characters, story and then just port it to the other. But, hey, whatever works. Though why not make it 360 exclusive? Well lots of PS3 owners out there and the PS3 does offer some more power that is REALLY interesting to people wanting to try and get a hold of... soo.. good to make games for it as well.

I really wish that Sony and Microsoft would settle something though, so multi-plat games could have multiplayer from PS3 working with Multiplayer from 360... example being Call of Duty 4 where 360 players and PS3 players could play together online... though that might hinder Microsoft's value since they lead online right now.. but it would prolly really fuck Nintendo over the most XD While only being good for Sony, so I guess Sony would have to really shell out the bigger deal on their part to make it worth Microsoft's effort. I only wish that cause a few friends of PS3s and a few others have 360s soo.. it'd be fun to all play together when we can't meet up and play at another's house :P
 
Last edited:
Elemmire said:
Not necessarily true, I mean.. Insomniac is actually not first party iirc, they are a company of their own and they just focus only one system..
Click to expand...
Insomniac is first party.

generally a third party that focuses on ONE system for a game will make a better quality game than a company that tries to whore up the industry
Click to expand...
While generally true(specializing vs diversifying), this is also no longer as feasible of an option economically, since no one console owns 80% of the market like the last generation.

So if it really is easier to make a PS3 game and port it to 360.. why wouldn't companies focus on the PS3 version first, get it perfect, release it, and port 360 later?That's easily answered :P cause 360 has the user numbers that PS3 doesn't with the power to run their game as well so simultaneous release but usually a poorer quality than what I think would be if they just focused on ONE system, perfected the gameplay mechanics, characters, story and then just port it to the other. But, hey, whatever works. Though why not make it 360 exclusive? Well lots of PS3 owners out there and the PS3 does offer some more power that is REALLY interesting to people wanting to try and get a hold of... soo.. good to make games for it as well.
Click to expand...
Why don't they make it 360 only? The exact same reason it's not PS3 only, neither console is dominating the market. The Wii is dominating in sales(even in june, lol), but it still only makes up about 45% of the total consoles sold.

The other answer is that it would drastically increase the development cost of games. If you're doing all of them at once, you're using your resources on multiple builds simultaneously, so you're getting way more bang for your buck because of the massive amount of overlap. If you build one version, then go onto the next platform, that overlap disappears, and you're going to spend significantly more money developing the new version.

It'd also piss off the fans, the consumers. PS3 version of "Widget 2: the revenge" comes out in November 2008, but they announce that they're making it for 360 and it'll be out in May of 2009. The PS3 fans are happy, because they get to play it now, but the 360 fans are mad because they have to wait 6 months. As the deadline gets closer, the company announces new content to appease the 360 players, which in turn pisses off the PS3 fans, since they either don't get the content, or they pay for it via PSN. Not everyone would be pissed off, but enough would.
 
Wow, haven't done a double post in years.
 
Yeah, Insomniac is definitely first party. Sony basically owns them.

Baj is totally correct though. It's not economically viable to stay exclusive anymore unless you are a first party developer, or you are getting paid a shitload of money to stay exclusive.

And yes, the PS3 is an incredibly tough machine to develop for as a third party, which is why the game is normally made for the 360 and then ported to the PS3. If they did it the other way around, it would take longer and probably cost more.
 
Last edited:
Insomniac isn't first party, they could develop for any system they want. They aren't under the Sony company, they are an independent developer as far as I've read. I mean, even from their site...

"Founded in 1994, Insomniac Games is an independent game developer based in beautiful downtown Burbank, where the sun shines just about 365 days a year. Prior to starting Insomniac Games, CEO/President Ted Price spent a few years as controller of a start-up medical company, where he decided that life in games must be easier. (He was wrong…) Fortunately, he found two very talented programmers, Alex and Brian Hastings, and together they laid the foundation for the company’s first success, Disruptor. "

key being Independent game developer :P I mean, doesn't that mean they could develop a game on another console. Perhaps they have a contract with Sony much as Squaresoft had a contract with Sony before that expired... (that is why Crystal Chronicles was under another name for the developer iir). But I don't think they would even need it since Insomniac seem happy with Sony lol.

Now, Naughty Dogs is first party since it's a subsidiary of Sony Computer Entertainment but, from what I can tell about Insomniac, Insomniac isn't but does work closely with Sony.

Now, if you're talking about the IPs, I think Sony DOES own Ratchet And Clank and such, but not the Company itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top