Ben-DutkaAs some of you already know, Platinum Games has chosen the PlayStation 3 as the lead platform for their ambitious new shooter, Vanquish .
But do you know why ? When you hear the surprisingly simple explanation from Resident Evil creator Shinji Mikami, you'll realize it has an oddly sensible tone…you might sit and think for a moment and then go, "well, yeah, that sounds logical." According to a recent PSM3 interview with Mikami as noted by CVG , Platinum doesn't want to trip and stumble with the PS3 again. They let Sega handle the Bayonetta port and that didn't turn out too well, so obviously, the team doesn't want to lose the respect of PS3 owners. And therefore, they chose the PS3 as the lead dev platform for Vanquish specifically because they don't know as much about it. Said Mikami:
"The team knows less about making games for PS3 than Xbox 360, so we thought the sensible thing to do was to make the game on PS3 first then move it over to Xbox. If we can get Vanquish to a certain standard on PS3, we can make Xbox the same."
See? There's a good bit of logic there: focus on your weakness, get better at it, and hold your strength in reserve because it'll be there when you need it. So if they initially strive to make Vanquish great on the PS3, they won't have any problem pumping out a 360 version because they're more familiar with Microsoft's hardware. Obviously, the challenge of creating nearly identical versions for both platforms still remains, but it appears they're taking a better approach this time around.
Related Game(s): Vanquish
There is an expression that many of the most successful people in the world appear to live by.
"Make your weakness your strength."
Sounds like the folks at Platinum recognize this too.
Before anyone starts in with the "but if it's great on ps3 it will be too good for the 360" crap I just want to say good on them. I fully agree that if they are well versed with the 360 architecture and how it works then replicating what they do on the PS3 is the easier and more sensible route.
Just as if Naughty Dog were to go and make a multiplatform it would only make sense for them to start with what they didn't know and then they could easily reproduce the effort on their more familiar architecture.
"Before anyone starts in with the "but if it's great on ps3 it will be too good for the 360" crap"
But there IS a reason that thought entered your mind 🙂
Disagree big time here.
While that may work for the developer, it does nothing for me, the consumer.
I would have not wanted to see Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, and especially God of War 3 as games featured on the 360.
Building a game for both system is a compromise somewhere. The 360 does not have the BluRay or mandatory HDD install. That alone is enough reason for me to believe a multiplatfom title will always be inferior to a PS3 exclusive.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 3/17/2010 1:30:28 PM
Let me add this as well.
I just recently spent 6-8 hours with Forza 3. If this is the definitive racing experience on the 360, (which by the way is by all indications, HALF the game GT5 will be) all I have to say, is I'll take my games with Blu tint please.
GOW3 has opened my eyes (burned them actually) to a degree in which I thought wasn't possible.
maxpontiac, if by inferior you mean technically and/or content-wise, then you have a point. but if youre judging the game solely on gameplay merits, then it doesnt matter what format the game is on.
Of course I am speaking of content. 400 cars sounds like alot, but when you see the DLC that's up for 400MS here and there, you realise what's going on.
Lack of space, and an attempt to make money. Both in which GT5 will not be having an issue with.
The gameplay is an issue (huge) for players such as myself. The Forza community is not where it should be. Online a few weeks ago, there was only 1000 people on. Plus, not sure how much time you spent on the forums there, but thread closures, and failure to deliver the goods has cost that game. The PI system is broken, the RWD cars do not handle correctly, and the game itself is compromised by the constant engine conversion fiasco (look at the leaderboards). Shall I discuss how upgrading a car in F3 can actually make a car worse??
There is a reason WRC, NASCAR, and Super GT signed with GT. Funny thing is, I have a feeling PD isn't even done yet..
I think you missed my point entirely. I am not saying I want to see devs like Naughty Dog go multiplat. I am saying that if a developer is going to make a multiplat game then they should develop on the system they know the least about first and make the game shine there and then port to something they know well. That only makes sense. Obviously exclusive games on either system will be better than multiplat games because the developer can focus on one system and utilise it completely.
But, do you disagree that if a game is made multiplat and developed first on the developers weaker or less versed system then when it comes time to port over they will be able to do it better on the system they know the most about?
Anyway, this is a day late in response so no one will probably read it. Just thought I would clarify what is obviously being misread.
This is the Shinj at work here. Hes the only reason i have interest in this game. The more he speaks, the more i listen. 🙂
In seriousness, this is a good change. These needs to happen with all multiplat devs.
well, yeah, that sounds logical.
Wise words are being spoken here. Valve, are you listening?
Absolutely not, but in a strange way I think Valve probably has some sort of arrangement with Microsoft and I don't mean that Microsoft is slipping them cash under the table but in the way that Valve has been a developer for a very long time now and mainly has been on PC and well when you are talking PC games for the most part you are talking Windows not Linux, Unix, or Mac. To me more than "The PS3 is too hard" it is likely that the two companies have just developed a type of symbiosis over the years and now instead of coming out and saying, "Yeah we are pretty much a 2nd party developer for Microsoft" they make erroneous excuses as to not lose face if they ever do decided to branch out.
Eventually we'll see Valve on the PS3 bandwagon.
They'll come around..
…and when they do, we'll push them off!
Well if I'm not mistaken, Valve was started by a bunch of ex-Microsoft employees back in the mid 1990s. The strange thing, though, is now they have started supporting the Mac. Either the PS3 isn't too far behind, or they really have some strange vendetta against Sony. The only thing you could say I'm really looking forward to from them is Portal 2, and if I really need it, I'll just get it for PC. I just really find it annoying that they refuse to consider the PS3, especially now that they support Mac.
Gabe Newell, GDC recipient of a Pioneer Award. Not sure how that works. Anyway, he has single-handedly and without any real reason burnt all the bridges that lead to PS3 owners pockets, by opening up his big mouth and spouting crap and opinion from an uneducated viewpoint. A stupid tit and bad businessman that makes.
I love reading this type of news.
I believe a game should be made with the PS3 in mind first.
When done, port it over to the 360, and ship it with 3 discs.
End of story..
It doesn't look like they're going to push the ps3 though (like God of War III, FFXIII, etc.)… just to a "certain" standard. Perhaps that standard is where the the 360 can have the game all in one DVD.
The problem I have with multiplatform is this: remember how last generation games developed for both the ps2 and xbox were always that bit better looking on the xbox. And developers loved to stress this point, how the xbox let them do x, y and z more easily than the ps2.
Well roles now reversed hardware wise, yet most developers continue to suck up to Microsoft and like to make multiplatorms 'identical'.
It is not the 360 hardware as such which is holding back ps3 multiplatform titles, it is the attitude of developers.
And that sucks most of all…
Is there a Z button on the XBox controller? 😛
Glad to hear they are going with the PS3 as the lead. I will have to keep an eye out for this one, I like sci-fi so will have to see how this one shapes out.
I just wish they didn't care about alienating 360 owners and not cut content from the PS3 version.
Last edited by vicious54 on 3/17/2010 2:23:39 PM
I was interested in Bayonetta, and the fact that the xbox version of the game got a 90/100 on Metacritic tells me it was a really good game. Of course, they gave us an absolutely horse**** port of it.
So now they're coming out with a shooter, which I'm not even remotely interested in, but promising us a good version.
Gee…thanks a lot.
Japanese devs making sense? When did this start happening? Now if only they could understand 360 exclusive JRPGs aren't exactly working.
The problem with this approach is that the ps3 can do things the 360 cant, just based on raw computing power. So if they make the game incredible on the ps3 they might not be able to port it to the 360 very well. Just look at FF13. It looks damn gorgeous on ps3 but the 360 has lower resolution in-game graphics and super-compressed cutscenes that just look terrible in comparison.
Also, I've always wondered. What is a "port" exactly? Is it similar to copying and pasting? I always thought that "port" is like a "rushed" version of the lead so that they can release both version simultaneously for marketing reasons.
Well in any case, it's better this way than if the 360 is lead. The 360 should be much easier to adapt and port from the ps3, since they know the structure of the 360 that much better.
Because of this, unless it's really pushing the ps3,360 players don't have as much of a loss as the ps3 players do, if the 360 is lead console.
Last edited by daus26 on 3/17/2010 3:49:40 PM
Can't edit, but that last sentence is suppose to say, .."360 players probably don't have as much of a loss if ps3 is the lead console, as the ps3 players do when the 360 is lead console."
Im no programmer, but from what i understand 'porting' involves taking the source code from one console and modifying it so it works on the other. In other words, taking the code for a 360 game and tweaking it until it runs on the ps3.
The proper way to do it is to code both games from the ground up completely separate from each other so each is optimized for its respective hardware. This costs a lot more money and time and requires your developers to know their way around both consoles fairly well.
So porting is like buying 2 bags of spiral pasta and cutting one up to resemble macaroni. Sure it works, and looks close enough, but if you want the best results you would just buy a bag of each.
And to clarify in case anyone is wondering, i am by no means trying to bash the 360 in my first post. The ps3 is plainly a more powerful machine and that can cause problems when writing a game. No matter what way you do it someone is getting screwed. To be honest, i'd rather have the weaker console get the weaker game instead of the other way around for once. One good thing SE did with FF13…
Last edited by NoSmokingBandit on 3/17/2010 6:41:35 PM
The bottom line is that the 360 is, in many ways, just a big, beefier PC. Hence all 360 games come out on PC. It's pretty logical for Microsoft to give an easy step to develop on their console.
Since Sony doesn't own an entire platform for computers like Microsoft, they're more free to make whatever they want. Hence the PS3 is a supercomputer with a weird architecture and hence the first year crap.
I would say that porting is less like changing the pasta and more like: you've already cooked a really big dinner for a party, but then you find out that some guests are allergic to an ingredient in some of your dishes. Rather than cook an entire new meal, why not just replace the dishes in question?
(I am a computer science guy, but I'm just a sophomore in college, so my assertions may not be entirely true.)
Now if only a certain developer, oh the hell with it, VALVE would take notes on what these develpers with minimal PS3 experience do, then they wouldn't need to give an apology every 3 months to its community.
I agree, but Valve only has one good game every decade, so i just get Half Life for pc.
wait platinum have logic?
wow, i guess you do learn a new thing everyday!
sounds good to me. Now if other companies learn from this, that will be the best thing for me, as I don't really go for shooters.
As long as it doesn't suck more than the 360 version.
I don't care much for this kind of game anyways.
Last edited by FullmetalX10 on 3/18/2010 5:39:48 AM
Return of the Single player! Hell yeah and PS3 as the lead thats a good way to become familiar even tho they should of figured it out before but its awesome they are taking the time now. Maybe even an exclusive by them in the future??
SEGA BRING YAKUZA 4 Stateside!
yes!
and add english voices and add a marker when your looking for someone on the map and id buy it in a instant!
yakuza 3 has a brilliant story, and gameplay is fun but its destroyed by the tidiness.
you have to find someone but there is nothing telling you where they are, so you just walk around staring at buildings for half a hour.
REAL FUN!!!!!!!!