So PS3 only folks, any of you walking away?

[omegaB]

honestly, although i may not have liked the choices made in ffxi at times, or the direction, i really cant say they as developers were lazy at all. lazy implies they were sitting on thier hands and not doing anything while at work. Fact is ffxi was pretty consistent with updates and made a lot of content in its lifespan, they generally fixed major bugs pretty fast and maintained the servers. They added huge and different types of content periodically. FFXI is now so full of different types of content that most of the game is ignored. newbs seldom get rank 10, people never attempt to finish assaults.

I ve seen less work from companies that only had to translate updates from other countries products 2 years previous, and people who take an extra 5 months past their own schedule to put out reasonably small content updates.

Fact is the game is late on ps3, because even if people work hard you still have a finite amount of time, and ps3 isnt as easy to develop for as a pc is, also standard practice on making a game is to make it first on PC and then specialize it to consoles, its no longer the reverse and its not simultaneous, the only thing they could have done is push back all releases, but that wouldnt make sense financially, and honestly id rather have the option of getting a pc, or trying to rig an old pc to play it on low settings thenhave to wait till march

[bluefan]

If there is limitation, it will show with the lack of graphic update each expansion. I don't think gameplay feature will ever be limited by the ps3 like they were in FFXI. The spaghethi code they used to optimize ffxi on ps2 wont come back, since the ps3 is much closer to a pc than the ps2 was.

I laughed at that.

[quannum]

NA October 28, 2003 -> NA March 23, 2004

same time frame give or take a month, assuming no delays to announced dates

[Kaylia]

I laughed at that.

Laugh if you think it's funny, but having to deal with an incredibly small amount of memory is one of the reason why there was so many "ps2 limitation" when it came to gameplay. Ps3 don't have an insane amount of ram (512mb), but it's more than enough to never cause your inventory to be capped at 80 and shit like this.

[bluefan]

Laugh if you think it's funny, but having to deal with an incredibly small amount of memory is one of the reason why there was so many "ps2 limitation" when it came to gameplay. Ps3 don't have an insane amount of ram (512mb), but it's more than enough to never cause your inventory to be capped at 80 and shit like this.

You misundestood what I was laughing about.

The PS3 is not much closer to the PC then the PS2. If anything, it's actually further from the generic x86 PC then the PS2 is. You do have at least some kind of knowledge on how the IBM Cell works, no?

And you seem to have the knowledge on just how much memory the game requires first hand. Where's your source?

[Jinko]

You misundestood what I was laughing about.

The PS3 is not much closer to the PC then the PS2. If anything, it's actually further from the generic x86 PC then the PS2 is. You do have at least some kind of knowledge on how the IBM Cell works, no?

And you seem to have the knowledge on just how much memory the game requires first hand. Where's your source?

Thats actually not true, the PS3 basically has a PC GPU and uses the opengl API, the PS2 had a fancy CPU to do its graphics processing.

Sure the Cell isn't standard in PC terms but its a lot closer than the emotion engine.

Although I don't agree with Kaylia, 512 mbs isn't that much for next gen games, and lets not forget that 256 of that is video memory.

[bluefan]

Thats actually not true, the PS3 basically has a PC GPU and uses the opengl API, the PS2 had a fancy CPU to do its graphics processing.

Sure the Cell isn't standard in PC terms but nor was the emotion engine.

The GPU was literally just tossed into the console to help developers wrap their heads around the console. Some games don't even use the GPU at all (Uncharted 2 is one of 'em I believe, and it's considered one of the best PS3 games, no?) Utilize the PS3 the way it was meant to be used, and we get a gem like Uncharted 2. Trying to stick with conventional means will only lead to half assed ports. Basically, working the Cell correctly isn't anymore closer to the PC then with the PS2 and its EE.

[Jinko]

The GPU was literally just tossed into the console to help developers wrap their heads around the console. Some games don't even use the GPU at all (Uncharted 2 is one of 'em I believe, and it's considered one of the best PS3 games, no?)

LOL where did you read this. (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/un...ell-blog-entry)

The reason the GPU was thrown in is because Sony realised after they saw what Microsoft were bringing to the table it couldn't compete with just the Cell.

Sony wouldn't have thrown in costly hardware just to make the developers lives easier, especially when they were already so much over budget and losing hand over fist per console.

Anyways getting slightly off topic.

[bluefan]

LOL where did you read this.

The reason the GPU was thrown in is because Sony realised after they saw what Microsoft were bringing to the table it couldn't compete with just the Cell.

Not what I've heard. Original design didn't include a GPU, until Sony realized hey, most developers have no clue on how to code for it. It was thrown in to help programmers, a programming bridge.

[Jinko]

They were planning on 2 Cells I believe originally (very early stages), but the Cell didn't turn out as great at GPU functions as they intended.

[bluefan]

They were planning on 2 Cells I believe originally (very early stages), but the Cell didn't turn out as great at GPU functions as they intended.

It's possible, a lot of speculation way back in those days...but yeah, we are getting off topic quite a bit

I'm just interested to see how SE deals with the memory issue. Since it's fixed, and SEs already cut down the quality of the PS3 version, wonder what else they and Sony can do. Virtual Memory? Something similar to ReadyBoost perhaps?

[Kaylia]

You misundestood what I was laughing about.

The PS3 is not much closer to the PC then the PS2. If anything, it's actually further from the generic x86 PC then the PS2 is. You do have at least some kind of knowledge on how the IBM Cell works, no?

And you seem to have the knowledge on just how much memory the game requires first hand. Where's your source?

I do, but I wasn't comparing the processor architecture since it was not the limiting factor that caused "ps2 limitation".

My source? Do you want to argue that network code and gameplay data increased tenfold since FFXI, because it did not. These aspect suffered because they had to be optimised for the ps2 to leave as much space as they could for the graphic. I'm sure it's still true to some extent, but graphic now take exponentially more space, and freeing a tiny fraction for the networks/gameplay is going to be easier this time around.

[Mizango]

This thread is great. Consolers unite!

[bluefan]

I do, but I wasn't comparing the processor architecture since it was not the limiting factor that caused "ps2 limitation".

My source? Do you want to argue that network code and gameplay data increased tenfold since FFXI, because it did not. These aspect suffered because they had to be optimised for the ps2 to leave as much space as they could for the graphic. I'm sure it's still true to some extent, but graphic now take exponentially more space, and freeing a tiny fraction for the networks/gameplay is going to be easier this time around.

So you're still on the fact that the whole memory issue is just a blatant lie by SE? And is not the reason for the PS3 delay? I'm starting to get a bit confused on your stance here.

[Vacht]

Of course they wouldn't admit it, but it would be easier to say limitations and not explore viable alternatives than to do so. Which is laziness. Naturally, who can say, none of us work for SE so no one knows.

I do know that some companies think that way though.

damn youre annoying.

Anyways, Im hoping that the beta for PS3 continues on, even if its not ready by 2010.

[Kaylia]

So you're still on the fact that the whole memory issue is just a blatant lie by SE? And is not the reason for the PS3 delay? I'm starting to get a bit confused on your stance here.

What?


[edit]
Ram and cpu will limit the graphics on ps3, it won't be an issue for the gameplay like it was for FFXI. That's all I'm saying.


Like I said in the first post that made you laugh so hard, there will be "limitation" for the graphics caused by the ps3, but we won't get bullshit like inventory cap or an ui that can't be upgraded because of it.

[bluefan]

What?


[edit]
Ram and cpu will limit the graphics on ps3, it won't be an issue for the gameplay like it was for FFXI. That's all I'm saying.


Like I said in the first post that made you laugh so hard, three will be "limitation" for the graphics caused by theps3, but we won't get bullshit like inventory cap or an ui that can't be upgraded because of it.

Ah, my mistake then. Thought that when you said "and shit like this", you meant that the RAM issue wasn't responsible for the delay.

[Elcura]

damn youre annoying.

Anyways, Im hoping that the beta for PS3 continues on, even if its not ready by 2010.

Go cry some more.

[Grey Jorildyn]

I learned something today:

Never put a MMORPG on a console.



(pssstt...someone tell SE.)

[Ezek]

I think the only console MMORPGs are FFXI and EQOA (Everquest Online Adventures). Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Article from 2008:

http://www.mmocrunch.com/2008/02/08/...s-cant-cut-it/