Sony claims PS3 was made deliberately difficult to program for.

LordMarcusX

New member
Jan 29, 2009
86
0
0
I suspect what they don't want to admit is that they don't want small-time and questionable developers creating games for their console, the same mess that occurred with the Atari 2600 and admittedly would put a dent in their licensing rights, not to mention wallets. Most consoles since Atari have done this -- even Nintendo, with their whole "Seal of Approval" thing. As a kid, I distinctly remember one brainwashed (or just dumb) salesperson at a Wal-Mart advising me NOT to buy products for the NES not branded with said seal. They also included several articles throughout the mid-80s in "Nintendo Power" about the "problem" of unauthorized games and peripherals.
 

michaelleung

New member
Jan 7, 2009
44
0
0
That's what they say now... duh. This is the exact opposite of what they would have said in 2006.
 

matrix3509

New member
Sep 24, 2008
1,372
0
0
thedrop2zer0 said:
SuperFriendBFG said:
Come 5 years from now there will already be a significant advancement in hardware and it will leave the PS3 in the dust. So much for a 10 year life span.
A significant advancement in hardware does not spell the end of the PS3. Our current-gen hardware is vastly superior to last gen's, yet the PS2 is still going strong. I will go one step further by saying that once there is another advancement in hardware and the Super Xbox 720 is on the horizon, that's probably when Sony will stop supporting the PS2. At that point, I think they will add fully functioning backwards compatibility to the PS3. It may be difficult to program for, but a 10 year or greater lifecycle for the PS3 is certainly viable.
While that is certainly a good point, it becomes invalid if nobody wants to make games for the bloody thing.

Its like owning the coolest private jet in the world, but it can only run on anti-matter. Sure once it gets the anti-matter, it'll go like a bat out of hell, but who has the patience (or the lifespan) to make enough to fuel it?
 

phar

New member
Jan 29, 2009
643
0
0
Ok im really confused a bit now. There are a lot of personal swipes at Sony the company. Rather than the console..

I can easily see the PS3 lasting for 10 years.. especially with the economic conditions in JApan at the moment.

I really would like to know how many people in this thread are actually developers or not.. There is nothing wrong with the PS3 development from a lot of developers.

yeah sure 360 has a few nicer features and I do perfer any port on it for that reason. But I dont see why theres so much hate for it, it really is a really good step up for the PS2.

You have to remember the average Japanese person doesnt have a PC and things like that to get the updates and stuff the 360 wants, hence why it doesnt do well and same reason the iphone doesnt sell over there.
 

742

New member
Sep 8, 2008
631
0
0
so sony doesnt JUST hate their customers, they hate developers too. interesting. how the hell are they still in business?
 

NewGeekPhilosopher

New member
Feb 25, 2009
892
0
0
johnx61 said:
All the people complaining about Sony being arrogant for making a system that is technologically forward and requires more effort be put into game design should really re-think that point of view. Do we honestly want every system to be peddling crap like Carnival Games? It simply blows my mind how people constantly give Nintendo a pat on the back for using something that's been around for quite sometime to make a barely functional controller. Meanwhile, Sony actually puts some time, effort and money into truly making a powerful system and people rip on it for being too powerful.

I'm going to slam my head into the keyboard now, I'm not sure when I'll stop.
I actually commend Nintendo for its DS games, because frankly the Wii controls are terrible. There are so many J-RPG and Strategy games on DS to choose from, and the occasional action game like Castlevania for the core audience. Wii doesn't appeal to me because at least DS tries to work with its limitations (have you seen Ninjatown? An RTS? On a DS? Amazing fun).

I won a PS3 in a Sydney Morning Herald competition and ironically it has succeeded for me as an anime fansub watching machine rather than primarily a game console. The fact that I can do something else than play Killzone 2 on it is a plus, because (This is blasphemy, this is madness!) I have no interest in Killzone 2 or ANY FPS game for that matter. I was actually more excited about the release of Disgaea 3 in Australia than I ever will be about Killzone 2.
 

Insomniac55

New member
Dec 6, 2008
143
0
0
It really depends on what Sony is trying to say.

If they meant 'we made it difficult and puzzling to program for so that it would take ten years to figure out how to take advantage of what the hardware can do' that's bad.

If they meant 'In order to make it possible for the hardware to be properly exploited, the programming had to be complex' that's good.
 

Brotherofwill

New member
Jan 25, 2009
2,566
0
0
NickCaligo42 said:
Unfortunately they didn't lose enough of their exclusives for their plan to fail COMPLETELY.
Why are you saying unfortunatly if you like your PS3 and the games?

NickCaligo42 said:
So. Sony's plan worked.
Not really, it could have worked a lot better.

NickCaligo42 said:
Personally I wouldn't force anyone to develop for the PS3 when the 360 has equivalent capabilities, a better-designed controller, and much better development support. Microsoft also doesn't jack with their developers the way Sony jacked with Factor 5, pressuring them to make last-minute changes to games and the like. But the PS3 has the games I want on it. ALL the games I want on it. The Wii has NONE of the games I want on it other than Smash Bros. and the 360 has only SOME of the games I want. Sony can keep making all the politically incorrect quotes and stupid business decisions they want. Corporate idiocy on the part of one company isn't enough to make me stop supporting OTHER companies that I DO respect.
I'm with you here. I chose the PS3 because of games and games only. Been playing PS1+2 so I just couldn't decide against it due to MGS, Final Fantasy and the like. PS3 has all the games I like, I keep getting surprised and excited what comes around like LittleBigPlanet, Flower or even Noby Noby Boy. Only thing I always wanted to try for 360 was Braid, but now its coming to the PC so I will get it there.
Sony just keeps shooting themselves in the foot with stupid marketing but I don't give a shit if gems like Noby come around the corner and with games like GOW 3 lurking in the shadows
 

Vortigar

New member
Nov 8, 2007
862
0
0
Sony likes their gizmos and you have to take the gremlins along with it if you get one of those. They wanted the Cell processor and Blu Ray drive out there in a bid to prove this technology worked and wouldn't take no for an answer. The rest is all just trying to make the best of that decision.

My view:
It's all about cross-marketing, the Blu Ray to open up a new market over the heads of the DVD sales and the Cell processor from a research and prestige perspective (evidenced by Folding @ home).

The Cell processor bit isn't working out too well, but at least a load of enthusiasts have been able to get their hands on a cheap Cell, it's only a matter of time before they start pulling something out of the architecture (which SONY can then claim could only have come about due to them).

The Blu Ray worked a treat and bashed the HD-DVD out of the market. The games division might be making a loss on the PS3 but its made for an extra upsurge on sales in the movie division.
 

ColossusReaver

New member
Jul 4, 2008
8
0
0
wow that was an utterly futile rant about something that was said like......2 years ago. It's obvious that it's worked though, look at the 360, it's "easy to develop for" and it's basically at it's peak with the games that are out lately, even though it surprisingly can't handle them all that well what with all the glitches and problems with things like Fable II and Gears of War 2. The PS3 is alot like the PS2 in the way that it's not easy to find every possibility of engine design, Killzone 2 is one of the most stunning technical acheivements of this console generation and so is Uncharted (despite it being a first year title, and it still looks, plays, and runs better than 3/4 of the games coming out now anyway) but as with both games the developers were only on their first try with the console, Guerrilla and Naughty Dog have both said that there's a lot more to the PS3 to be unlocked and considering that God Of War 3, Heavy Rain and Uncharted 2 are slated to come out this year and look to be even more stunning technical acheivements in their own right, and we haven't even gotten to hear about Team ICO's game which will probably trump everything. Are most developers too fucking lazy to actually try developing?! It seems some people have just gotten lathargic with the advent of casual games and they just want to use pre-existing software or middleware like UE3 to make all their games without actually developing an optimised engine for the platform.

I actually never understood after playing a bunch of 360 games why there was the aura around it of it being so amazing, the controller's ok, but I don't think it's superior in anyway to the ps3 controller they're both just as flawed as each other (The dualshock 3/sixaxis has badly made triggers, doesn't conform to the hands quite that well and has the convex analog sticks, The 360 controller has a terrible d-pad, awful clicker thingies on it's shoulders, convex buttons and it's size/weight) and it's all down to opinion and taste so don't start saying that it's superior design. On the game side, I think there are some great games that are on it but it'll hit the roof development-wise so quickly and then Microsoft will be expected to make something better and that something better will have to be as hard as the PS3 because the more advanced the tech is the harder it is to find ways to make it easy to develop for. It's not so much that the PS3 is harder to develop for, it's more that developers need to figure out ways of making it easy to develop for
 

MrGFunk

New member
Oct 29, 2008
1,350
0
0
Jumplion said:
SuperFriendBFG said:
Indigo_Dingo said:
You're once again missing the context. The difference is between making something thats easy to develop for, is already known inside and out, and hits a low brick wall within 3 years, or having something that can be pushed to actually exceed the boundaries and make continual advancements.
No... Come 5 years from now there will already be a significant advancement in hardware and it will leave the PS3 in the dust. So much for a 10 year life span.
One word and a number. Actually 2 words and 1 numbers;

Playstation
Playstation 2
I was going to say wasn't development on the PS2 notoriously hard? The results achieved by some early on were impressive but for most it took some time.

To compare a release title to Okami, SOTC or God of WarII shows the progression that can be made.
 

Svenparty

New member
Jan 13, 2009
1,346
0
0
It may be difficult to program for, but I doubt Sony did it on purpose...it's a cop out excuse it's like saying that RROD is meant to be on the 360 to get gamers to play in the garden.
 

GloatingSwine

New member
Nov 10, 2007
4,544
0
0
phar said:
You have to remember the average Japanese person doesnt have a PC and things like that to get the updates and stuff the 360 wants, hence why it doesnt do well and same reason the iphone doesnt sell over there.
Are you crazy? Japan has one of the highest uptakes of in-home broadband in the world, I think only Korea and some Scandinavian countries have more online. They have more people on FTTH connections than most countries have on any broadband at all.

That's why 2009 is a big year of exclusives for Sony and why statements like the one in the OP don't really matter. If they deliver the games in '09, they beat Microsoft. If they don't, we're back where we started.
The trouble is, they could very easily deliver a strong lineup of exclusives and still not beat the competition, because they're not competing on price.
 

L33tsauce_Marty

New member
Jun 26, 2008
1,198
0
0
bad rider said:
Credit where credit is due, he has a point. If you make things difficult to program for your options get larger and more varied, whereas simple programming = simple options. That said I think Sony tends toward the extreme instead of going for the middle ground. But hey, they wanted to build a big powerful behemoth and thats what they are built.


Pretty much sums it up.
Well that is interesting. But as you see the PC which is easy to program on is about the same as the PS3.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
You're assuming it already hasn't. Killzone 2, which Guerilla said on record uses 60% of the Ps3's Graphics potential, has far outstripped anything the 360 is capable of. And God Of War II looked better than anything on the Xbox.
No, every game for the PS3 pushes it's nvidia GPU to it's maximum. Screens of PS3 games look only marginally better than 360 games and only for a few exclusives (ports actually look worse on the ps3).
The cell may be able to do more, but you'll never find out by looking at screenshots. Better physics simulation does have much potential and we may get to see this in actual play or footage of actual play.
 

DigitalSushi

a gallardo? fine, I'll take it.
Dec 24, 2008
5,718
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
You're once again missing the context. The difference is between making something thats easy to develop for, is already known inside and out, and hits a chest high wall within 3 years, or having something that can be pushed to actually exceed the boundaries and make continual advancements.
FIXED!