PS3 "a pain in the ass to work on"

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 19 July, 2011

Darksiders 2 dev explains why.

Sony's PlayStation 3 has been described as a "pain in the ass" to make games for - nearly five years after its launch.

Marvin Donald, game director at Darksiders II developer Vigil, told Eurogamer the studio is forced to do "wacky stuff" on Sony's console.

"It's a pain in the ass to work on," he said. "Five years later, getting used to it? That means it's a pain in the ass.

"I'm not an engineer, but I hear about it all the time. We have to do wacky stuff with the way we manage memory."

During the PS3's early life it was dogged by shoddy ports of multi-platform games.

At the time some developers complained about the complexity of the hardware, and suggested it would take time to wrap their heads around the systems under the hood.

In 2009 then Sony Computer Entertainment chairman Kaz Hirai claimed the PlayStation 3 was intentionally difficult to program for in order to ensure that the console met its promised ten year life cycle.

"It's hard to program for, and a lot of people see the negatives of it, but if you flip that around, it means the hardware has a lot more to offer," Hirai explained.

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?"

Donald explained that the cause of Vigil's PS3 headache has to do with the memory management.

"Even as an artist, it's like, OK, my textures are too big, I'm in trouble because I checked in something that's making the 360 crash because it's a 2048 when it really should just be a 1024, or even smaller.

"But on the PlayStation 3, the assets go into different categories, and if one of those categories becomes too bloated it'll crash the system. It's a little bit more sensitive on the PS3 in that regard. There are some things you just can't do, or you have to do differently. Yeah, it's a pain."

Fresh Darksiders 2 footage.

It should be noted that there is no suggestion here that the PS3 version of action adventure game Darksiders 2, which is over a year from release, will be inferior to the PC, Wii U or Xbox 360 versions.

Meanwhile, some have speculated that the next-generation of consoles, including the inevitable PlayStation 4, is right around the corner.

They promise vastly advanced visuals, but will the PS4 also prove to be easier to create games for than its predecessor?

"They have to do things their way," Donald said. "Somebody over there is going to think it's better. And it's really just different, which makes it a pain for everyone to port games back and forth. But, whatever. We'll see."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (74) Latest comment 10 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • captain_Carl #1 10 months ago

    Did i go to sleep and wake up back in 2006?

  • Mister-Wario #2 10 months ago

    Is it really? Because I've played a few multiplatform titles on PS3 and they've worked just as well as their 360 counterparts. The PS3 may be difficult to program for but most developers today seem to managing alright with it. The days of Bayonetta are behind us, and the differences between most console versions nowadays are negligible if the Face-offs on this site are anything to go by.

  • onyxbox #3 10 months ago

    Zzzzzz... at least Darksiders didn't have 70% screen tear on PS3.

    AAA... my arse ;)

  • cheeky_BILLY #4 10 months ago

    agreed. the PS3 isn't easy from what i've heard, but other devs have managed it.sure your not just rubbish?

  • Tiberius_Gracchus #5 10 months ago

    This is the story all gaming sites dream of - guaranteed traffic.
    Let battle commence!

  • Shikasama #6 10 months ago

    Just because versions are equal doesn't mean it wasn't a pain in the arse to make it that way.

  • MrLovePump #7 10 months ago

    I dont buy sonys answer that they made it difficult to program for on purpose. Why would you want to detract devs from making great games by making fighting the hardware such a prominent part of the development process. If you wanted to ensure improvement over the gen you would do it with the phased introduction of apis to do better AA or whatever.

  • karooo #8 10 months ago

    Robert stop making negative PS3 news! You fanboy. Oh it's someone else :o

  • DarkMoon #9 10 months ago

    Errr wasn't the 360 version that needed a patch when the 1st game came out?

  • Paul_cz #10 10 months ago

    PS3 sucks ass when it comes to memory. There is 256MB for video and 256MB for data, and that is it. On X360 at least you get 512MB and YOU (the dev) get to decide how much gets used on what. That is why PS3 ports usually suck and why the only really good looking PS3 games are its exclusives made by inhouse studios.

    PC of course, everyone has 2+ GB, no restrictions..

  • CrispyXUK64 #11 10 months ago

    AAA? Lol!

  • riceNpea #12 10 months ago

    a bad workman blames his tools.

    and David Haye lost the fight because he had a broken toe.

  • RodHull #13 10 months ago

    PS3 is a tricky customer. I couldn't get mine to connect online throughout May, and none of my CD-i discs work in it.

  • Jamiesan #14 10 months ago

    Everyone knows by now that the PS3 is hard to program for. What surprised me is reading Kaz's reasoning. If Sony themselves don't want the system to reach it's potential until 95% of the way into it's lifecycle, then why should I buy one until that point?

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #15 10 months ago

    Shame you think he would of taken the opportunity to talk about his upcoming game, rather than try and talk about technical aspects of making games for a PS3 when hes not even an engineer.

    Maybe darksiders 2 aint worth talking about then? shame as i enjoyed the first one.

  • MavSkipper #16 10 months ago

    Meh... first thing that came to mind was "but, but, but... we don't have enough memory". Well... I guess I was spot on.

  • rudedudejude #17 10 months ago

    I have always managed fine on 640KB. I don't see why anyone would ever need to use more than that tbh.

  • Darren #18 10 months ago

    The PS2 was and the PS3 is a bitch to code for because Sony gave little thought to the design of the consoles or the needs of the developers who had to code for them. Even the PS3's operating system is a bit of a mess, though on the surface the XMB looks minimalistic and appealing. In comparison, Microsoft consulted with developers for both of their Xboxes and it shows in both their hardware design (not manufacture quality obviously!!!) and the ease at which developers learnt to code for them.

    IMO, Sony would do well to take notes from Microsoft about how to design a games console but I bet they'll still make the same old mistakes and some new ones with the PS4.

  • effinjamie #19 10 months ago

    SDF HO!

  • StolenGlory #20 10 months ago

    "Poor excuse for making a shit game.

    Talk to Naughty Dog."

    Yeah a first/second party developer probably isn't the best or certainly most fair comparison to make when it comes to dick-measuring who gets the most out of the console given their additional ties and grace with Sony.
    Edited by StolenGlory at 19/07/11 @ 18:08

  • Skooch #21 10 months ago

    Ultimately Sony are a hardware company and Microsoft are a software company, so it's no surprise that the PS3 is harder to code for but the Xbox is less robust hardware-wise.

    This isn't rocket science and has been common knowledge since the first Xbox.

    As a side note, Kaz's comment is just ridiculous but his wages are paid for by Sony so he has to twist it somehow doesn't he.

  • Machiavellian #22 10 months ago

    Shame you think he would of taken the opportunity to talk about his upcoming game, rather than try and talk about technical aspects of making games for a PS3 when hes not even an engineer.

    Have you considered the question that was asked the developer instead. Do you think developers just call or write to EG to complain about how difficult it is to code for the PS3. I am sure he was asked a direct question and this was one of his responses. Not knowing the question or the context, you cannot really make in conclusion on the statement.
    Edited by Machiavellian at 19/07/11 @ 18:18

  • jambii267 #23 10 months ago

    You can get better performance out of a easy to program for console too, just compare Halo Reach's visuals to Halo 3's.

    Kaz was talking rubbish.

  • Machiavellian #24 10 months ago

    Poor excuse for making a shit game.

    Talk to Naughty Dog.

    Interesting people keep using Naughty Dog as the standard bearer for coding for the PS3. People forget that Naughty Dog took 3 years to create their PS3 engine. Tell me how many game developers have 3 years to code just the engine for their games. Yes, during that Time NG learned a lot but it's not something every developer will have, especially Multi-plat. Time is money for a developer and wasting 3 years trying to learn all the difficult pieces isn't something that most developers have capital for.

  • bluetoothion #25 10 months ago

    While it might be PR to cover console deficiencies i like Sony's approach to make developers work for the results even a bit more than they would have, it makes it easier for us to see who is committed to justifying the price asked on the shelves simple.
    everyone is struggling under the same restrictions, while others nag....NG shows how its done even if PS3 is a major pain after all.

  • menage #26 10 months ago

    I love my PS3, but dev-friendly hardware never was Sony's prio, god knows why.

    And some of these defenses are fucking moronic. "Then I know who put the effort in"?????? They could have used that time to make the game better instead of dicking around with the architercture.

    I like playing games not someone elses test of skill, jeez.
    Edited by menage at 19/07/11 @ 18:25

  • immateriaux #27 10 months ago

    "I did something on one platform but when I went to a different platform, it wasn't the same" says shocked noob game director before puzzling over why his MS Word CD won't install on this Linux thing he found in the office.

  • Deckard1 #28 10 months ago

    Hoe dare he yalk about the PS3 like that! HOW DARE HE!!!!!!

  • darc #29 10 months ago

    "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?"

    This is the kind of insane logic that gets Sony in trouble. Read this twice and it basically says, we want our console to do LESS than it is capable for the first 8 or so years. Of course any console WILL do less than it's capable of in its early years, as a matter of course, but nobody *engineers* that in. It's just a f*ing ridiculous argument.

    I own a PS3 and I love it, and I truly love some of the games that have been exclusive to the platform, but Sony gets a lot of things really backwards, and trying to deny that (and negging posts like Darren's without a making a decent counterpoint) is just denial. It seems like a weird expenditure of one's energy to be in denial of someone *else's* mistakes.
    Edited by darc at 19/07/11 @ 18:38

  • bluetoothion #30 10 months ago

    I was trying to find a plus point to the approach actually....not that i wouldn't prefer them having more time and more resources

    BUT BUT BUT

    if i m asked the same price for a BAD PORT at the same time another developer outperfoms their game with ease on the same machine....its a clear indication that either they didn't have the time/resources or didn't care to wait to.....so either way its a price/work relation

  • JP #31 10 months ago

    EG: "2048" and "1024" are the correct (square) dimensions for textures, not "20x48" and "10x24".

  • MrLovePump #32 10 months ago

    Awkward hardware restricts creativity. End of.

  • Sharzam #33 10 months ago

    To the comment the PC has 2GB+ to play with and talking how 360 has 512mb, you are forgetting that PC memory is not unifed like the 360. So we have 1GB from the video card and then 3GB for data transfer (assuming 1GB for the OS) or more on some systems, which is roughly how the PS3 handles it.

    Either way thourgh we got tons of the stuff to play with :)

    Also i wonder as modern PC CPUs gain additional cores such as AMD X6 or the i7 with hyperthreading, if on some level PC architecture is getting closer to the PS3 and away from the 360. I know traditionally its been a case that the 360 and PC are simlier but as pointed out with the memory, if PS3 is actually closer. Assuming that a PC is the easiest to code can lessons be carried over to the PS3.

    Random thought of the day.

    This is negated by the fact that if programming for the PC you can just resort to chucking brute force at the problem, although not ideal it can sometimes be an option.
    Edited by Sharzam at 19/07/11 @ 18:50

  • betrayerofhope #34 10 months ago

    *looks at darksiders 2*

    *then looks at god of war*

    No wonder.

  • betrayerofhope #35 10 months ago

    the ps3 xdr memory is fast high bandwidth memory. message to darksiders dev. learn to use it efficiently fools!

    maybe you should beg sony santa monica for some help

  • Alex_976 #36 10 months ago

    I remember the Saturn being hard to code for. That didn't end to well did it.
    Only the first parties will put the effort in.

  • Quak #37 10 months ago

    Sure, that's why Sega made the Saturn a bitch to develop for as well - it was all part of a cunning plan to future-proof it.

    What a stupid thing to say. The console is difficult to program as a result of all the different processing units; it has fuck all to do with any kind of artificial desire to future-proof. Having 10 years of great-looking games would have been better than having 8 years of great-looking games and 2 years of shit.

  • wingZero21 #38 10 months ago

    Another m$ promotion how much did you get for this one?...

    cheers

    wingZero

  • Gastrian #39 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 17:56:43 13-04-2012

  • super_monty #40 10 months ago

    @Gastrian an intelligent comment on Eurogamer - unusual!!!!!!!

  • Lonewolf2002 #41 10 months ago

    Sahrzam "Also i wonder as modern PC CPUs gain additional cores such as AMD X6 or the i7 with hyperthreading, if on some level PC architecture is getting closer to the PS3 and away from the 360"

    Not at all, the SPU's in the cell are not technically cores as in Quad core etc CPU's, as SPU's are not technically their own core. There is much about this on the internet/wikipedia which is rather boring but does explain it quite well (better than i ever will anyway). So the PC, at least for now will be totally different beast to the PS3.

  • arremelle #42 10 months ago

    I am picturing Sony sending out 1 page of the dev kit manual per month to all the studios :)

  • DoucheVader #43 10 months ago

    Funny this dev produced Darksiders and the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions looked identical, but the Xbox 360 version suffered from significant frame tearing.

    [link url=http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head-darksiders-wrath-of-war/
    ]http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head-dar...[/link]

    Since when has it become acceptable to bitch about the platforms you have to code on to the press? If you don't like the PS3 don't program for it.

    UPDATE: LOL at your Xbox 360 homos. Negatively voting me down for pointing out the awful screen tearing that DS1 had on the X360. Don't shoot the messenger, I left the link for you to see for yourself.

    I guess what all these multplatform developers are trying to say is they don't have the level of talent you will find in a Sony Studio. :)
    Edited by DoucheVader at 19/07/11 @ 22:13

  • Teamallstar #44 10 months ago

    News flash: "the PS3 is a massive failure..." I think we already knew this.

    250 million PS2s sold
    48 million PS3s sold

    Consumers don't like the console, it's dashboard or the lack of functionality, not to mention the game pad made for japanese children with deformed hands.

    Game makers don't like designing games for it.

    Well done Sony.

  • DoucheVader #45 10 months ago

    @jambii267

    Yeah but comparing the raw computing horsepower of the PS3 and Xbox 360 reveals about double the computational performance in the PS3's favor. So while you can always optimize and make stuff run better, having that additional computational headroom leaves more room for the developers on PS3.

  • DrStrangelove #46 10 months ago

    "It's hard to program for, and a lot of people see the negatives of it, but if you flip that around, it means the hardware has a lot more to offer," Hirai explained.

    It might seem depressing to sell less consoles than Nintendo, but if you flip that around, it means you have more Playstations for yourself in your storage.

  • captain_theCaptain #47 10 months ago

    shit too many words
    guess now we know why the multiplat. games look like shit compared to 360 ones.

  • miiiguel #48 10 months ago

    I demand a petition for a Darksiders 2 boycott. PSers of the world, unite!
    Edited by miiiguel at 19/07/11 @ 20:16

  • Machiavellian #49 10 months ago

    As others have said this is really nothing new. To get the same performance on the PS3 compared to the 360, developers have to work much harder. If time permit developers are able to go that extra mile and dig even more performance out of the PS3.

    I do wonder with all the big players and new players that might also be in the pipe (google, Apple), having a console that is hard to develop for would be smart. With so many options developers have for making games and earning a living, the system that gives the most benefit and the least amount of effort might be where the developers go.

  • Gastrian #50 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 17:56:43 13-04-2012

  • Quak #51 10 months ago

    I think some here are missing the point. Whether developers have found ways around the PS3's limitation doesn't alter the fact that the PS3 is a bitch to develop for. The only criticism I'd have is that he's only saying what everyone has already known for several years. Welcome to the party, Marv - better late than never I guess.

  • kinth #52 10 months ago

    "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?"

    hahah so they intentionally made it hard to program for so people can't use it's full power untill they've had 5-8 years worth of programming experience on it, and they did that to drag out the consoles life span ?

    what a load of shit.

  • bladdard #53 10 months ago

    To be fair Microsoft has a massive advantage because direct-x has been around for years well over a decade before they even created a console, this translates to an extensive library of dev tools and masses of developer experience on tap. The PS3 doesn't have the direct-x advantage and with Sony giving it a bit of a mad architecture with ridiculous memory bottlenecks devs were always going to find it a bit of a bitch but most are over it by now.

    When the PS4 and Xbox 720 come around the Sony console will still be harder to develop for. Direct-x was a genius moment of inspiration, developers are already creating games on a PC using direct-x 12 which will directly port when the next xbox arrives which should give the Xbox 720 a good library of launch titles.
    Edited by bladdard at 19/07/11 @ 21:44

  • Cjail #54 10 months ago

    The real pain in the ass is that after 5 years form the PS3 release we still have to hear this kind of s**t!

  • BulletTheory05 #55 10 months ago

    Wah, wah, wah!

    Spend time getting to grips with it, instead of talking to the press then.

    If you don't like it, GTFO
    Edited by BulletTheory05 at 19/07/11 @ 22:03

  • DoucheVader #56 10 months ago

    @Teamallstar "250 million PS2s sold 48 million PS3s sold

    Consumers don't like the console, it's dashboard or the lack of functionality, not to mention the game pad made for japanese children with deformed hands. Game makers don't like designing games for it. Well done Sony. "

    Spoken like a true card carrying Xbox 360 fanboy asshole. Seriously your numbers are not even right. There is only a few million units between the Xbox 360 and the PS3 and if you count all the RRODs you likely have a larger PS3 install base. Not bad for a system that came out a year later and didn't have anything compelling for another year or two after that. YEP, Microsoft completely wasted that early lead they had. (Well done Microsoft)

    How you like them Apples assface?

    Edited by DoucheVader at 19/07/11 @ 22:10

  • Badassbab #57 10 months ago

    PS3 is best developed on it's own. When it comes to multi-platform it is a pain. Even the ones where the PS3 version is better or equal to the 360 variant I bet it took a lot more time and effort to get it up to scratch. PS3 memory allocation being one of the main culprits.

    360- Unified memory. 512MB plus 10MB EDRAM. Framebuffer usually fits within the EDRAM (I know this can have a detrimental effect on the graphics in some cases but lot's of bandwidth is available). OS takes up 32MB so developers have 480MB to dish out between the video and main ram.

    PS3- 256MB VRAM and 256 main RAM (which is very fast). OS takes up 50MB (down from a staggering 120MB in the early days). 7MB from VRAM and 43MB from the main RAM. So developers are left with 249MB VRAM and 213MB main RAM. Now deduct the frame buffer from the VRAM (which depends on the game- exclusives usually take up between 20-30MB) and the developers have even less VRAM.

    There are other things but I wouldn't call them issues just exotic hardware for the time that needs to be tamed. The Cell with it's single core processor and SPU's. Blu ray drive.The RSX GPU is an issue though.

    If a developer does put in the time and effort then the PS3 can have really good looking multi-plat games. UE3 has definitely been better optimised to run on PS3, recent face offs prove this.

  • Badassbab #58 10 months ago

    DoucheVader

    Darksiders was patched on 360 soon after to cap the frame rate and hence much less screen tearing. Just like the PS3 version.

  • vizzini #59 10 months ago

    EG: Marvin Donald, game director at Darksiders II developer Vigil, told Eurogamer the studio is forced to do "wacky stuff" on Sony's console.
    &
    Marvin Donald: "I'm not an engineer, but I hear about it all the time. We have to do wacky stuff with the way we manage memory."

    This is the reason why so many high budget games flop so badly. You wouldn't let a person direct a blockbuster film, if they weren't skilled in film making, so why on earth is anyone without software engineering skills still directing games?

    Last generation many complained about adding networking because it was an alien discipline many developers were unfamiliar with (at a protocol & paradigm level), and like programming, you can't just get good instantly without the experience of learning from mistakes over a couple of years.

    Parallel programming is just an extension of these difficult disciplines, and significantly harder if data modelling (from SSADM) was another discipline they didn't bother to learn before thinking they had the know-how to design and then implement multi platform games; including on a console system with 6x high performance synergistic processing units cores.

    The future of all parallel programming is that more stringent and robust software design will be required(on all platforms) and the days of single core, GPU and large memory are over, as Carmack said some years back.

    As multi-core CPUs scale by the number of Cores, PC development isn't fully utilising them in most cases, unlike PS3 exclusives, and are instead still relying way too much on the GPU performance and memory.

    Saying the PS3's a pain in the ass, is tantamount to admitting you don't engineer your software.

  • Badassbab #60 10 months ago

    Flanker,

    Darksiders on PC is basically a console port. Hardly pushing a gaming rig.

  • ps3juggalo #61 10 months ago

    The flip side of easy to develop for = SHOVELWARE.

  • Badassbab #62 10 months ago

    vizzini

    You're absolutely wrong when you say GPU and lot's of RAM no longer matter. Yes multi-core programming is the future and both the 360 and PS3 have multi-core processors so programmers have been utilising this for years now. But GPU and lot's of RAM will always matter. All compliment each other. There are things the GPU's will always do better then CPU's and the more RAM available the better for more texture versatility, faster load times and enhanced rendering. Consoles are becoming more like a set top box so more RAM will be crucial.

  • JorgeLuisBorges #63 10 months ago

    I don't know about ps3 development - but u remember trying to build websites fir Internet explorer 5 and 6. At the end of the day it took a lot of time to get things working properly on Internet explorer, things that were fine in all other browsers. The end result looked the same, but it cost the client more money which they could have spent on an even better website.

    Now transpose that to ps3 development and you should see why you should be annoyed on behalf of these developers who find ps3 a pain in the ass, not berating them - they're trying to make their games as good as they possibly can be.

  • Spekingur #64 10 months ago

    I think that everyone here on the forums that are shouting at the developers in the article to 'learn-2-code' should perhaps take it up on themselves to try and code for the PS3 themselves. You know, to show the developer in question the error of their ways.

    @Machiavellian: "...the system that gives the most benefit and the least amount of effort might be where the developers go..." This is true. By all measures it should be the PCs (no matter the OS) and it is but the market is very crowded. We are already seeing developers flocking to mobile gaming (iOS and Android) and I wouldn't be surprised that mobile gaming will be the new Wii phenomenon - meaning, where casual gamers spend their time and dime.

    @vizzini: To take your movie analogy; a director can tell you that this current lighting isn't good, make it brighter. An engineer makes it brighter. It may not be neccessary for the director to know every detail of the light-bulb that makes the set brighter.

  • bluetoothion #65 10 months ago

    Both PS2 and PS3 share that approach by Sony.....regardless the reason behind it, i think it makes better programmers in the end...having to tackle and circumvent all console limitations.... they might not like it but since they are here to milk the fattest cow let them work for it. Its easy to say they need an easier console...but history shows than having as pc with 32MB ram and 4 of which was Vram never gave you a GoW2 level of game and they were always request for more power and more conviences to something that a PS2 could do, they just wouldn't work hard enough to give it to you sooner.

    For PS3 as long as i don't see Cell and SPUs utilised it means the games get less attention than possible... that won't mean games will be definitively better looking or overall but at least you cast away the benefit of ones doubt. if they can pull off an UC3 on PS3
    then Darksiders has little to no excuse looking so ''different'' in comparison.

    resourses and middleware might be extemelly imprortant but in the end all developers have the same pain in the ass....Naughty dog and Guerilla games have the same amount of RAM as the Darksiders guy so i don't see how it justifies them much.

  • TheUndertaker85 #66 10 months ago

    I really love this quote...

    "They have to do things their way," Donald said. "Somebody over there is going to think it's better. And it's really just different, which makes it a pain for everyone to port games back and forth. But, whatever. We'll see."

    Then maybe developers shouldn't be focused on simply making ports? I think with that one little bit that developer really shot that game in the foot, no matter how good the first is supposed to be. When you admit that you're just simply porting from one system to another, consumers realize that means problems. If you really want your product to sell well on any consoles involved, why not just work on the versions separately? Sure it takes more time but many would admit this much. If all game developers worked with console strengths such as using the Cell on the PS3 version to a bigger extent, your title would be more sound all around and have greater sales.

  • Snake_2011 #67 10 months ago

    Teamallstar you obviously have no clue lol.

  • Lemming81 #68 10 months ago

    "I'm not an engineer, but I hear about it all the time. "


    Key sentence here, people. He doesn't know first-hand, and is only going off what some engineer has grumbled about - probably after they got a bollocking for not meeting a deadline.

    Let's not forget that the X360 version of Darksiders needed a patch to fix screen-tearing - something which would seem strange given the above statement.

    This game is also using the same engine, so it makes even less sense that they'd be hitting the same hurdles they were 3 years ago.


    I can appreciate it probably does take a different thought process to develop a game on the ps3 compared to another console, but I suspect saying it's harder is just lazy short-hand for 'we had to think a minute'.

  • metamorphic #69 10 months ago

    "Marvin Donald, game director at Darksiders II developer Vigil,"
    lolwat? Who the hell is this guy? Guys ripped off every other fantasy game imaginable for their mediocre game.

  • teabagger #70 10 months ago

    "I'm not an engineer, but I hear about it all the time...."

    Oh please...
    Edited by teabagger at 20/07/11 @ 09:02

  • 5h1nj1 #71 10 months ago

    quote: "there is no suggestion here that the PS3 version of action adventure game Darksiders 2, which is over a year from release, will be inferior to the PC..."

    Of course will the PS3 version be inferior to the PC version. What is he talking about? O_o
    That's why we have expensive PCs.

  • gandhimaster #72 10 months ago

    @DoucheVader

    to be fair, the sales figures of PS2 v PS3 was the point Teamallstar was making, not v the 360. Even when PS3 sales overtake 360 ones this gen, which i believe they will, it wont hide the fact that Sony made many mistakes this year that allowed MS to be competitive when in reality, they shouldnt have even been close.

    the 360 should have failed badly due to the hardware faults, but everything else they did (up until kinect) was almost flawless and Sony now have a major problem. MS will launch their new console before Sony again, this time around PS4 or whatever will have to take developers into consideration. One more gen where Sony makes a console that goes against everything developers want and it will almost certainly finish them.

    on a related note, the vita has already made all the same mistakes as the psp, it should have been download only, they shouldnt have made it so powerful that all of a sudden its delayed and will end up being no more than a portable PS3. which sounds great but thats not what developers will want, portable gaming is not about horsepower.

  • sourc0r #73 10 months ago

    to those pointing at the fact that the 360 version of Darksiders was the one suffering from screen tear: the framerate was unlocked. THAT is the only fucking reason. so please cut the crap..

    well, it's not exactly news, i mean people have been complaining about the lack of memory since the PS3 was born..

  • TechnicPuppet #74 10 months ago

    In conclusion, the PS3 is holding the Xbox 360 back.