Midway developer endorses PS3 as lead platform

[Havok83]

Mike Bilder, studio head behind Stranglehold, thinks developing first on PS3 and subsequently on Xbox 360 would avoid the delays and frame rate issues of the former without compromising the quality of the latter.

Getting code "game-ready" for PS3 is more difficult than either Xbox 360 or PC says Bilder in an interview with Gamasutra. The statement affirms a previous admission made by Sony in August.

"If your game starts on Xbox 360 you will have to re-engineer aspects of the game to run properly on PS3. This means additional effort," Sony told us.

The solution, according to Bilder, is to first develop on PS3, then port to Xbox and PC without any loss in quality.

"With the PS3 and the 360, it's certainly more of a level playing field, so I don't think it's necessarily a negative to put the PS3 first. But it does help mitigate some of that risk in frame rate, memory, technology, just the hardware differences."

Many third-party PS3 games have so far been plagued with frame rate issues and irregular delays when compared to their Xbox 360 and PC counterparts. To combat this, Sony has extended its own internal resources to partner developers.

http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=144588

 

[hippie_hunter]

Frankly the man is right. It's much easier to port from the Playstation 3 to the Xbox 360, than porting from the Xbox 360 to Playstation 3. If companies want to do multiplatforming right, this is the way to do it.

 

[Havok83]

Frankly the man is right. It's much easier to port from the Playstation 3 to the Xbox 360, than porting from the Xbox 360 to Playstation 3. If companies want to do multiplatforming right, this is the way to do it.

exactly. It only makes more sense since the PS3 is more difficult to develop for. Once they got that down, it shouldnt be too hard to port it over to the 360 bc most of the work is done by then.

 

[sandwraith]

The head of Valve and Sega probably think otherwise. They seem to outright hate the PS3

 

[DorkyFresh]

the problem is that the level of difficulty that it takes to develop games for the PS3 is too high for a lot of developers' frustration threshold. there are developers that aren't used to dealing with complicated dev kits.

i do think that Bilder has the right mindset though. if you ARE going to make multiplatform games for this generation then they need to focus on perfecting it on the PS3 first so that it's easy to translate over to the 360 later.

 

[GFreeman]

What does Midway do?

 

[WhatsHisFace]

Stranglehold. 7.0 at Gamespot.

 

[hippie_hunter]

What does Midway do?

Mortal Kombat mostly

 

[블라스]

Stranglehold is awesome!!!!!

Well, I don't know....I bought the Collector's Edition, but I don't have a 360

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

But that was the same problem with the PS2.
I remember reading that it was already hard to make games for the PS2.
Sony should have learned by now....

Let´s be honest about it, last generation, the PS2 reigned alone (the xbox was a newcomer and the gamecube as it´s own "universe").
That´s not true anymore, so, it can very well bite them in the ass and see less and less dev making games for the PS3.
Midway might be alone on this for all we know, and the rest may be tired of having such a hard time making games for the PS3.

Hope that doesn´t happen, for sony and gamers sake.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Stranglehold. 7.0 at Gamespot.

Oh WHF, don't you know that most people don't take Gamespot seriously. They tend to either underrate (Ratchet and Clank Future, Twilight Princess, and Metal Gear Solid 3) or overrate (Grand Theft Auto) their games

 

[Timstuff]

The last game that got a 10 there was Tony Hawk 3. That tells something right there IMO.

 

[Jerry!]

Well then what online site can be used as a credible source then? It seems that when anyone every brings up a website's review of a game, another person instantly shoots it down by saying they underrate or overrate or have a bias or something. So what is one that we can all agree on?

 

[Fenrir]

The amount of whiny fanboys always jumping on Gamespot over review scores is hilarious. Of course, they have given unimpressive scores to a number of REAL gaming gems like Deus Ex and even System Shock 2 (8.2 and 8.5?! WTF?!) and like all gaming websites and publications, they have a certain margin of error which I am prepared to accept considering the fact that GENERALLY speaking their reviews are pretty much no-nonsense spot on, and in my opinion, are still the most trustworthy source for reviews online (1UP is little more than consisting of a bunch of self-righteous smartasses, IGN is way too lenient, Gamepro is a joke and so on...).

This habit of some of you people harping on Gamespot shows how unforgivingly childish you can be. :

 

[Fenrir]

Oh WHF, don't you know that most people don't take Gamespot seriously.

Oh really? And how'd ya figure that out champ? You actually took a survey? Any statistical finding to back that brainfart of yours? Because last I heard, it is STILL one of the most well-known and premiere online gaming websites and a couple of loudmouth crybabies screaming foul over seemingly "unfair" scores of their favorite games hasn't changed that so far.

 

[Spidey17]

Fenrir I think you forgot to take your meds today. You're being even more of a *****e than usual.

 

[GFreeman]

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=www.gamespot.com

Seems like lots and lots of people are still listening to gamespot

EDIT: Apparently, it's the most popular "big" games website on top of it all.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

Gamespot and GameTrailers are honestly the only reviews I take into consideration when making a purchase.

 

[Jerry!]

I just don't like how it takes Gamespot so much longer to put up their reviews of games. Especially highly anticipated titles. Other than that, I don't really have a problem with them.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

I think they do it to get a good idea of that lasting impression of the game. If they reviewed it based off the novelty and not how the novelty relates to the game (Bioshock) they could have given it a 9.5 or a 10.0 and not the 9.0 which I, in hindsight, believe it deserves.

Same goes for SplinterCell. I flipped when they gave it an 8.6. Now that time has passed though, I agree with the score.

 

[Jerry!]

The lasting impression over a couple days? Okay...

 

[WhatsHisFace]

They're the closest things to "professional game reviewers" we have. One play through isn't enough. I'm glad they take their time if it makes for a more accurate review.

 

[Fenrir]

Fenrir I think you forgot to take your meds today. You're being even more of a *****e than usual.

You got a problem with that, punk?

 

[Spidey17]

Yes, I told them you have to be forced, but they thought you were being good enough to take your meds by yourself. Shows what doctors know.

 

[hippy fascist]

I'd rather sites underrated games than overrated them

By giving a simply great game 10/10 you instantly remove any ability to tell the difference between that game and anything better

10/10 should be reserved for PERFECT games only, and to be honest I can't actually think of ANY game ever made that deserves 10/10 every game has flaws