Devil May Cry 4 Going Multi-platform! (Xbox 360/PS3/PC) *Confirmed
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
Your idea will make them go bunkrupt for sure. Btw We havent heard of T6 going to 360 yet
Although I agree with your points when you say "lost them all except" what do you mean? Which these games were?
djskribbles
Legend
from the articles i've read, LBP got a standing ovation. and i also mentioned that i've seen several people (mainly casual gamers) say they were very excited about LBP, and tempted them to buy a ps3 even though they had no intention of doing so before. Home had something to do with it to."Whoah"..does not equal "I will buy the game."
I haven't heard any masses of gamers say they'll buy a PS3 to play LBP, 1 or 2 sure, but this is the internet so even that means absolutely nothing.
I think we should get back on topic now...
I should have been more specific. I really meant the PS3 hopeful buyers who want to get the system because it'll play all those cool new versions of the games they liked on the PS2. That's a significant portion of the market, and while it doesn't "hurt" them, it doesn't make it very attractive to remain a hopeful PS3 buyer.
djskribbles
Legend
i didn't necessarily say it will sell systems. we weren't discussing this in the first place, so i don't know why you brought that up. i simply said that this game will possibly be a hit judging by the overall responses to the game.I haven't heard any masses of gamers say they'll buy a PS3 to play LBP, 1 or 2 sure, but this is the internet so even that means absolutely nothing.
I think we should get back on topic now...
The damage control and system lists wars in this thread are all colors of awesome, GAF-style without the animated gifs. Funny how it was "PS3 is going to be the main choice for 3rd party titles, just like PS1 and PS2 before", and now it's "oh well, this generation will be decided on 1st party anyway. Have you seen LBP ?".
DMC used to be listed pretty near the top of every single "list war" post as one of the reasons to get a PS3, and now it's "Oh, well, the series sales are not so hot anymore, so Capcom is whoring it out; no big deal.". Losing that and Ace Combat the same day has to hurt at Sony HQ.
Yes, DMC is a title that appeals mostly to a niche demographic. But a large part of the of the PS2's appeal was how it provided quality titles for many niches, at a pretty good price. PS3 is bleeding exclusives left and right in those niches, to a console that can provide a similar experience at a cheaper price. Phil Harrisson (I think) said it in a recent interview, they lost the GTA4 timed exclusive because PS3 userbase was too small to sustain the title. Considering GTA is one of the most mainstream/casual experiences of last gen, what does that interview say about the PS3 userbase to the publishers of all those hardcore niches titles ?
Between the 360 headstart, the better SW tools, and the so-so PS3 sales (although a couple extra months will give us a better picture, especially with EU included), I wouldn't be surprised to see most 3rd party niche titles with a Western appeal be developed with 360 as the lead platform, with little to no extra dev time for PS3. The absolute best case would be games including extra features taking advantage of the PS3 specificities (standard HDD, BR drive, Cell), the average case will be game looking exactly the same on both platforms, and there will a significant number of games actually looking worse (choppy framerate...) on the PS3 because publishers won't invest enough dev time to optimize for the peculiarities of Cell.
1st party offerings will pick up some of the slack, true, but Sony runs the risk of being like Nintendo if their 1st/2nd party efforts are too good compared to the competition.
DMC used to be listed pretty near the top of every single "list war" post as one of the reasons to get a PS3, and now it's "Oh, well, the series sales are not so hot anymore, so Capcom is whoring it out; no big deal.". Losing that and Ace Combat the same day has to hurt at Sony HQ.
Yes, DMC is a title that appeals mostly to a niche demographic. But a large part of the of the PS2's appeal was how it provided quality titles for many niches, at a pretty good price. PS3 is bleeding exclusives left and right in those niches, to a console that can provide a similar experience at a cheaper price. Phil Harrisson (I think) said it in a recent interview, they lost the GTA4 timed exclusive because PS3 userbase was too small to sustain the title. Considering GTA is one of the most mainstream/casual experiences of last gen, what does that interview say about the PS3 userbase to the publishers of all those hardcore niches titles ?
Between the 360 headstart, the better SW tools, and the so-so PS3 sales (although a couple extra months will give us a better picture, especially with EU included), I wouldn't be surprised to see most 3rd party niche titles with a Western appeal be developed with 360 as the lead platform, with little to no extra dev time for PS3. The absolute best case would be games including extra features taking advantage of the PS3 specificities (standard HDD, BR drive, Cell), the average case will be game looking exactly the same on both platforms, and there will a significant number of games actually looking worse (choppy framerate...) on the PS3 because publishers won't invest enough dev time to optimize for the peculiarities of Cell.
1st party offerings will pick up some of the slack, true, but Sony runs the risk of being like Nintendo if their 1st/2nd party efforts are too good compared to the competition.
archangelmorph
Veteran
Well I suppose that's it then!
Case closed!
Woe is me to all those PS3 early adoptors!! You're all gonna get shafted with sub-par games from third parties!!!
You might as well sell up now & go back to your PS2's while you have the chance!!!!
[/sarcasm]
Seriously these "doom and gloom" posts are getting a bit tired now don't you think..
My random musings...
First, on the "multiplatform = bad" crowd. It can be, no doubt. But there is also this: Multiplatform means potentially more sales. If you sell more units you can invest more into the game. So there are benefits to multiplatform that can improve a game and compensate for lack of focus.
For example, DMC sales have trended downward in Japan, so NA was going to be a vital market for this product. DMC also has to face Heavenly Sword and NG Sigma on the PS3. As a project accountant how much money do you put into this title knowing that the PS3 doesn't have a large NA install base and most game sales are done in the first couple months following release? Financially this would be shakey at best. By moving this to the PC/360 you have now expanded your potential consumer base by 10M+ consumers. Sure, you may lose some diehards who are ticked off at losing an exclusive or the "Nintendo" syndrom where multiplatform games don't tend to sell well on Nintendo consoles, but hitting a much bigger market and one possibly with less competition in the genre should mean a large increase in sales. Based on 360 fan reaction and Capcom's 360 successes I would say it is a safe bet DMC4 on the PS3/360 will sell more than a PS3 exclusive DMC4. So as a bean counter I feel a little more comfortable giving the team more resources to make a better game knowing it has a greater potential to sell well. The fact the Framework engine already has 2 games out the door on the 360 should also ease development costs so as a bean counter I go and ask the boss for a raise
Second... GTAIV, Assassin's Creed, Unreal Tournament 2007, Virtua Fighters 5, Mercanaries 2, and so forth. Exclusives, Perceived Exclusives, or last gen Exclusives of some sort... perceptually Sony has lost significant ground from last gen in regards to their hold on the market. And while they still may be the leader in console software exclusivity and major IPs the fact is people are drawn to "trends". e.g. Company A has 100 exclusives and Company B has 10 exclusives. If Company A loses 10 exclusives and Company B loses 1 exclusive it is 10% for each, but perception wise Company A has been hit bigger. And in some ways this is true as Company B has seen a larger relative jump in new software, but in the grand scheme of things Company A is still in good shape... lest perception which can feed this cycle. I think in the broader picture Sony has made a couple key missteps (price being the central one) that has had a tendancy to feed these trends, even if skewed in the grand scheme of things which act as a form of self fulfilling prophecy. The market is fickle and when at the top there really isn't anywhere to go but...
I think we have seen 2 things happen.
1. Sony has used some marketing exclusives to promote their platform. UT2007 is an example; clearly a PC game as well (if not first) and very likely to be a 360 game as looong rumored. AC as well; there has been talk about Ubi trying to work something out with Sony and it fell through but the fact is MS announced it at X05 and I have a hard time believing MS would announce a game and then Sony would get a jab at snatching it away. I think Sony had entered an exclusivity period to talk about the game and it worked as a lot of people thought it exclusive and a compelling reason to purchase a PS3. Of course in ACs case I think the results were more negative than positive.
2. Sony has lost some [timed] exclusives due to MS's market share and the slower than expected PS3 sales.
Btw, the cross marketing goes both ways. GTAIV is an example of MS hyping a cross platform game, but slightly different of course as it was never a MS exclusive and gets hypes only due to the significance it means to the industry and their portfolio (i.e. getting one of the 3 biggest names in the industries to ship day 1 is a big coup).
Out of the box online support on launch day.
Very true. I agree I personally felt and expressed before we knew the specs of any of the consoles that art, and not technology, would be the primary element in what next gen games looked best. I think we are beginning to enter a zone where the hardware is more abstract and talent and tools become the primary forces in regards to software complexity and quality.
I am not Laa-Yosh, but my answer would be no.
Putting aside the fact software is what makes hardware go and market forces influencing development budgets to design and deploy complex software designs I don't think the SPEs will offer gameplay only possible on SPEs. I believe this for two reasons. The first is that games are a product of systems and not specific features and the hardware isn't as far apart as most thing, even in worse case scenarios. While local stores can offer performance higher in select scenarios much higher than even the flops metrics so loved on these forums the end of the day is that gains are often offset by losses on any platform. And where this dovetails with gameplay is that, like graphics, you can do a lot of scaling. e.g. LOD was discussed in the Edge thread, but this isn't just a graphics technique. As Minty mentioned a long time ago, lets say the PS3 is ripping the 360 in cloth physics and at the end of the day, all gains and losses aside, the PS3 is pulling ahead 2x due to cloth physics. So the programmer may have to cut down on percision, say take the 200x200 cloth on the PS3 and make it a 141x141 grid on the 360. You could go quite extreme with this example, but I have a hard time seeing gamplay that is impossible on Xenon. Slower? Definately yes. Less complex? Yes. Undoable? No. And that is point two, namely that we have seen some ports of games that surely should NOT have been possible on weaker hardware happen. Corners were cut and a lot was invested in making it happen but publishers have figured ways to get titles to work when push comes to shove on pretty different hardware.
The last gen (GCN/PS2/Xbox) had some pretty big differences in hardware. Looking at the processors, memory, and storage mediums and you would think that we would have seen many ground breaking gameplay implimentations not possible on the other platforms. For the life of me I really cannot think of a single game on any of the consoles that could NOT be done on the other systems when, in theory, the lack of memory (PS2, GCN), lack of large storage (PS2, GCN), low peak flop performance (Xbox, GCN), small optical media (GCN), and so forth should have been major contraints. They did lead to some cut back quality and such, but did not forbear any gameplay.
There is only 1 technology last generation that altered gameplay that could not be had on one console over the others, and that was online. And that was mainly a market choice as the GCN could have had more online access and the PS2 could have supported it even more as well (although many games did).
I do not see areas where the SPEs will open up gameplay not feasible on the Xbox 360 system.
I could be wrong of course. But the software thus far isn't showing it and with market trends it will be squarely on Sony's shoulders to deliver this revolutionary gameplay experience. My money is on the PS4 where I think software development will catch up as well as code base to begin really pushing SPEs in ways traditional CPUs cannot. If I am wrong I owe you a nickle
And it is the consumers who provide the cash to fund ambitious projects.
I think thwat Dual's complaint was that the PS3's potential suffers. The potential of the PS3 has been a major point brought up by a lot of posters about why they bought the PS3 and when they see events that tarnish that perceived potential it has them re-evaluate the perceived potential of their purchase. Every gamers mileage will vary. e.g. for myself this move doesn't decrease the PS3's potential nor increase the 360's potential for me at all, although abstractly it does confirm my perception that the market is leveling out and that the PS3 and 360 are on more level ground with publishers than last generation.
In feel more validated than weird I just try to read the market signs and in doing so I got a nasty green X label on my forehead! 
I agree it has been 1st party vs. 1st party, but as another already pointed out in this thread another factor is when each company believed next gen started (i.e. when they began investing in that 1st party software). It seems pretty clear to me that Sony and MS had totally different ideas about when next gen "started" in terms of sales and consumer adoption, even when the other would enter the market. Of course much of this was dictated by MS wanting out of last gen and Sony enjoying the windfall of a massive and well deserved victory.
First, on the "multiplatform = bad" crowd. It can be, no doubt. But there is also this: Multiplatform means potentially more sales. If you sell more units you can invest more into the game. So there are benefits to multiplatform that can improve a game and compensate for lack of focus.
For example, DMC sales have trended downward in Japan, so NA was going to be a vital market for this product. DMC also has to face Heavenly Sword and NG Sigma on the PS3. As a project accountant how much money do you put into this title knowing that the PS3 doesn't have a large NA install base and most game sales are done in the first couple months following release? Financially this would be shakey at best. By moving this to the PC/360 you have now expanded your potential consumer base by 10M+ consumers. Sure, you may lose some diehards who are ticked off at losing an exclusive or the "Nintendo" syndrom where multiplatform games don't tend to sell well on Nintendo consoles, but hitting a much bigger market and one possibly with less competition in the genre should mean a large increase in sales. Based on 360 fan reaction and Capcom's 360 successes I would say it is a safe bet DMC4 on the PS3/360 will sell more than a PS3 exclusive DMC4. So as a bean counter I feel a little more comfortable giving the team more resources to make a better game knowing it has a greater potential to sell well. The fact the Framework engine already has 2 games out the door on the 360 should also ease development costs so as a bean counter I go and ask the boss for a raise
Second... GTAIV, Assassin's Creed, Unreal Tournament 2007, Virtua Fighters 5, Mercanaries 2, and so forth. Exclusives, Perceived Exclusives, or last gen Exclusives of some sort... perceptually Sony has lost significant ground from last gen in regards to their hold on the market. And while they still may be the leader in console software exclusivity and major IPs the fact is people are drawn to "trends". e.g. Company A has 100 exclusives and Company B has 10 exclusives. If Company A loses 10 exclusives and Company B loses 1 exclusive it is 10% for each, but perception wise Company A has been hit bigger. And in some ways this is true as Company B has seen a larger relative jump in new software, but in the grand scheme of things Company A is still in good shape... lest perception which can feed this cycle. I think in the broader picture Sony has made a couple key missteps (price being the central one) that has had a tendancy to feed these trends, even if skewed in the grand scheme of things which act as a form of self fulfilling prophecy. The market is fickle and when at the top there really isn't anywhere to go but...
I think we have seen 2 things happen.
1. Sony has used some marketing exclusives to promote their platform. UT2007 is an example; clearly a PC game as well (if not first) and very likely to be a 360 game as looong rumored. AC as well; there has been talk about Ubi trying to work something out with Sony and it fell through but the fact is MS announced it at X05 and I have a hard time believing MS would announce a game and then Sony would get a jab at snatching it away. I think Sony had entered an exclusivity period to talk about the game and it worked as a lot of people thought it exclusive and a compelling reason to purchase a PS3. Of course in ACs case I think the results were more negative than positive.
2. Sony has lost some [timed] exclusives due to MS's market share and the slower than expected PS3 sales.
Btw, the cross marketing goes both ways. GTAIV is an example of MS hyping a cross platform game, but slightly different of course as it was never a MS exclusive and gets hypes only due to the significance it means to the industry and their portfolio (i.e. getting one of the 3 biggest names in the industries to ship day 1 is a big coup).
Out of the box online support on launch day.
Very true. I agree I personally felt and expressed before we knew the specs of any of the consoles that art, and not technology, would be the primary element in what next gen games looked best. I think we are beginning to enter a zone where the hardware is more abstract and talent and tools become the primary forces in regards to software complexity and quality.
I am not Laa-Yosh, but my answer would be no.
Putting aside the fact software is what makes hardware go and market forces influencing development budgets to design and deploy complex software designs I don't think the SPEs will offer gameplay only possible on SPEs. I believe this for two reasons. The first is that games are a product of systems and not specific features and the hardware isn't as far apart as most thing, even in worse case scenarios. While local stores can offer performance higher in select scenarios much higher than even the flops metrics so loved on these forums the end of the day is that gains are often offset by losses on any platform. And where this dovetails with gameplay is that, like graphics, you can do a lot of scaling. e.g. LOD was discussed in the Edge thread, but this isn't just a graphics technique. As Minty mentioned a long time ago, lets say the PS3 is ripping the 360 in cloth physics and at the end of the day, all gains and losses aside, the PS3 is pulling ahead 2x due to cloth physics. So the programmer may have to cut down on percision, say take the 200x200 cloth on the PS3 and make it a 141x141 grid on the 360. You could go quite extreme with this example, but I have a hard time seeing gamplay that is impossible on Xenon. Slower? Definately yes. Less complex? Yes. Undoable? No. And that is point two, namely that we have seen some ports of games that surely should NOT have been possible on weaker hardware happen. Corners were cut and a lot was invested in making it happen but publishers have figured ways to get titles to work when push comes to shove on pretty different hardware.
The last gen (GCN/PS2/Xbox) had some pretty big differences in hardware. Looking at the processors, memory, and storage mediums and you would think that we would have seen many ground breaking gameplay implimentations not possible on the other platforms. For the life of me I really cannot think of a single game on any of the consoles that could NOT be done on the other systems when, in theory, the lack of memory (PS2, GCN), lack of large storage (PS2, GCN), low peak flop performance (Xbox, GCN), small optical media (GCN), and so forth should have been major contraints. They did lead to some cut back quality and such, but did not forbear any gameplay.
There is only 1 technology last generation that altered gameplay that could not be had on one console over the others, and that was online. And that was mainly a market choice as the GCN could have had more online access and the PS2 could have supported it even more as well (although many games did).
I do not see areas where the SPEs will open up gameplay not feasible on the Xbox 360 system.
I could be wrong of course. But the software thus far isn't showing it and with market trends it will be squarely on Sony's shoulders to deliver this revolutionary gameplay experience. My money is on the PS4 where I think software development will catch up as well as code base to begin really pushing SPEs in ways traditional CPUs cannot. If I am wrong I owe you a nickle
And it is the consumers who provide the cash to fund ambitious projects.
I think thwat Dual's complaint was that the PS3's potential suffers. The potential of the PS3 has been a major point brought up by a lot of posters about why they bought the PS3 and when they see events that tarnish that perceived potential it has them re-evaluate the perceived potential of their purchase. Every gamers mileage will vary. e.g. for myself this move doesn't decrease the PS3's potential nor increase the 360's potential for me at all, although abstractly it does confirm my perception that the market is leveling out and that the PS3 and 360 are on more level ground with publishers than last generation.
In feel more validated than weird
I just try to read the market signs and in doing so I got a nasty green X label on my forehead! I agree it has been 1st party vs. 1st party, but as another already pointed out in this thread another factor is when each company believed next gen started (i.e. when they began investing in that 1st party software). It seems pretty clear to me that Sony and MS had totally different ideas about when next gen "started" in terms of sales and consumer adoption, even when the other would enter the market. Of course much of this was dictated by MS wanting out of last gen and Sony enjoying the windfall of a massive and well deserved victory.I thought his post was well thought out with cause-effect related conclusions--even if we disagree with his cause-effect relationship. Corwin's post was hardly, "The sky is falling for the PS3" but more of an assessment that the expectations voiced by many that the PS2 would continue on its path of utter dominance in regards to publisher attention has seemingly shifted to a more neutral position, possibly even one leaning toward the 360 as a lead platform. Even if one disagrees his points are worth discussing as there is some evidence to indicate some of these factors may be occuring at least with some publishers.
The fact that Sony has seen a number of exclusive or semi-exclusive franchises migrate to Sony's biggest competitor is certainly a reason to take another look at the market and the PS3's role at this point. Things can change in many directions but the flow at this point does seem to be trending strongly more toward equalibrium than away. How this impacts Sony is a matter of interpretation and how important these titles are, how large the impact is, and how the market has changed in general. If they are in the grand scheme of things only a small number of titles and the market has shifted toward exclusive, 1st party titles as key selling points as well as technical features (BDR) and services then someone could see the relative impact of this differently.
But all points well worth exploring. I don't see the need for every time someone says something that can be perceived negatively toward a company as gfetting labeled "doom and gloom". I have questions about Wiis longterm viability as a market leader for gamers but that doesn't mean I am doom and gloom about Wii, quite the opposite.
http://videogamerx.gamedonga.co.kr/bbs/view.php?id=vx01&no=13713
They are the same clip as TGS 06 demo build,but PS Store released them yesterday.
ftp://gruint.korea.com/gruint/videogamerx/news/200703/0321/devil_may_cry_4_promotion_movie_b.wmv
ftp://gruint.korea.com/gruint/videogamerx/news/200703/0321/devil_may_cry_4_promotion_movie_a.wmv
Looks awesome,terrific quality.(Esp. on the church stage,nice lighting and art style)
I think Devil May Cry 4 could beat Lost Planet in graphic,which is an acclaimed title without doubt.
They are the same clip as TGS 06 demo build,but PS Store released them yesterday.
ftp://gruint.korea.com/gruint/videogamerx/news/200703/0321/devil_may_cry_4_promotion_movie_b.wmv
ftp://gruint.korea.com/gruint/videogamerx/news/200703/0321/devil_may_cry_4_promotion_movie_a.wmv
Looks awesome,terrific quality.(Esp. on the church stage,nice lighting and art style)
I think Devil May Cry 4 could beat Lost Planet in graphic,which is an acclaimed title without doubt.
Last edited by a moderator:
djskribbles
Legend
wow... i CANNOT wait for this game. those are the first high res videos i've seen, and i'm blown away.
thanks for the vids!
I agree. Actually it may be already better looking. Simply beautiful what the Jap devs can achieve in a limited time.
I always adored them for the art direction and great work on their opwn developed engines
Oh but that's the thing, I do see the HDD as vital for the next gen gaming experience.It's $300 for the core, unless you consider wireless game pads and Hdd's to be necessary for playing games.
Fixed (short version)
And I bet that you back in the days used the HDD as a reason to prefer the original xBox over the PS2.
Why choose cloth physics among all physics, is the 2x figure based on any tests?
Rigid body physics is more apparent and it affects gameplay.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=17744&type=wmv&pl=game
As for game play, Little Big Planet is one of the examples of physics-based game play where all user-created objects have physical properties.
Which port do you mean exactly? If you meant DMC4 that'd be a surprise for me.
Johnny_wallace34
Banned
stunning. look great.
archangelmorph
Veteran
I'm assuming a good example would have been Far Cry for the Wii..
Although judging from the quality of this game, I'm not sure whether anyone could realistically say the experience of playing the game on the Wii compared to the PC is even close enough to say the game was "successfully" translated to the weaker platform since even factors which largely affected not just the visuals but gameplay, were stripped down/out..
"it may go multiplat, but thats a long ways away and sony can catch up in sales."
How are they going to catch up in sales being 6-8 million consoles down and under selling the 360 per month? What glorious event is going to happen to jump start PS3 sales without a huge price cut?
There are a lot of factors in reality staring at us now.
PS3 sales are slipping monthly closely after launch and not being supply constrained.
Multi-plat titles have more features and overall have looked and run better on the 360 version.
Why are people somehow assuming PS3 sales are going to leap frog the 360 all of a sudden?
Why are people assuming that devs will magically unlock the PS3 and then graphics and physics will leap frog 360 even though reality of actual games has shown us the opposite?
Until something tangible is shown on either front as in real evidence I don't understand those that keep bringing these things up? It seems if your trumping these factors you bought into the Sony hype that has so far been one of Sony's downfalls this gen.
How are they going to catch up in sales being 6-8 million consoles down and under selling the 360 per month? What glorious event is going to happen to jump start PS3 sales without a huge price cut?
There are a lot of factors in reality staring at us now.
PS3 sales are slipping monthly closely after launch and not being supply constrained.
Multi-plat titles have more features and overall have looked and run better on the 360 version.
Why are people somehow assuming PS3 sales are going to leap frog the 360 all of a sudden?
Why are people assuming that devs will magically unlock the PS3 and then graphics and physics will leap frog 360 even though reality of actual games has shown us the opposite?
Until something tangible is shown on either front as in real evidence I don't understand those that keep bringing these things up? It seems if your trumping these factors you bought into the Sony hype that has so far been one of Sony's downfalls this gen.
I have no problem with being put on record for saying this:
The PS3 will outsell the other consoles, it will be tough but it will get there, Europe and Japan is in the bag, Sony "hating" USA will be tough but that is mostly question of price.
There will be PS3 games that will outshine the games from the Competition, thinking that the consoles are "about equal" in power is just plain wrong. Will it be every title? no, as it can be clearly seen from these forums, some developers just can´t be bothered or just isn´t up to learning something else than their primary platform.
Similar threads
