Devil May Cry 4 Going Multi-platform! (Xbox 360/PS3/PC) *Confirmed

Believe me, Sony has been working on the tools you think they should have been working on, for as long as you think they should have been working on them. Games take years to make, and so do the tools that enable them.

 

That's the thing though, what's being discussed here are tools Sony is developing such that they can hand them off to devs and basically say: why don't you use this, it's painless and will improve your game. Case in point, SPURS, that multi-platform devs seem pretty warm to these days with its new availability to them. The tools available go beyond that as well of course, and it's not all about graphics and PQ alone.

Your Xbox/PS2 example isn't perfect either because although you mention that XBox games really didn't get any extra loving, the truth is that as the gen went on, devs did go ahead and bother to achieve a better game, since the requirements for taking advatange of the memory - for instance - were so so easy to do.

Now I'm not saying a dev house will change the fundamental game mechanics to better suit the PS3, but then again I *am* saying that nor will dev houses be so reluctant as to not just simply turn the key when a turnkey solution presents itself. Remember that XBox and PS2 were fundamentaly different platforms as well; PS3 and 360 are both on the Power CPU/DX9 paradigm, so development flexibility between the two is increased via their commonalities.

I agree that a multiplatform game with an engine tuned to a certain architecture over another is not going to max these things out; such of course is the premise of the entire thread. But just as Framework favors PC/360, and PSSG favors PS3, that doesn't mean that a great game for both platforms cannot be created. In DIRT's case, I think that they used the tools to exploit the development areas those tools emphasize, and to the extent that PS3 might have been able to take it further in certain cases, probably just scaled it to a uniform cross-console experience. Who knows - not us until the game comes out (or I interview them), but the tools themselves definitely do allow for 'more' on the PS3 (in that the Cell is well-suited to the aforementioned tasks).

 

On the topic of exclusives (this thread should almost be renamed the, "Exclusives Discussions Thread") it seems that Star Wars Battlefront III is going to be a (timed) exclusive. From Playstation World magazine (from Xboxyde)

Free Radical... woot! I wonder where Haze fits into this. Anyhow, probably a development time schedule exclusive, and as SWBF is an online focused game that will be biggest in NA it makes sense to hit the 360 first.

 

'Timed exclusive' could end up a new misnomer in a way. Rather than being an actual timed exclusive, perhaps they are having to spend more time developing the PS3 version, so stagger the release? Is that more sense than holding back release of the XB360 version for 6+ months while the PS3 version is completed?

 

Surely..

Isn't the whole point of a timed exclusive so that the game in question is announced as exclusive to one platform and any announcements of release on other platforms would be witheld until the said time period had ellapsed?

It seems a bit pointless to directly announce the game as timed exclusive for multi-plat..?

Personally I think alot of the time the exclusivity of the title is disclosed, it is in fact defined not by the developer/publisher/platform-holder but by the media's interpretation of the press release..

Sometimes when a title is exclusive to a platform it's not because the developer has some kind of secret agreement but because they either lack the resources to develop the title for multiple platforms concurrently, the publisher doesn't believe the game has good sales potential on other platforms or possibly the developers don't wish to see the quality of the game suffer, had it been developed on an inferior platform or by an outsourced team..

 

Not that I disagree with you, but: how do you explain MS's tools in comparison?
Xenon and Xenos were both unfinished until a few months from release.

I realize the cell is very different from other architectures but the gpu isn't and the cell has been done for years. I would have thought Dev Tools could have started development before the final chip rolled off the assembly. (It was their design afterall) Perhaps they did start developing these tool sets very early (maybe even prior to final cell). But if so, it doesn't seem this development got the proper priority initially.

How many devs are using xb360 as the lead plat based on the tools alone? The userbase just re-enforces this action. It is surprising to me to still see devs saying they need more time on their ps3 multiplat games due to release months from now.

I think Joshua is spot on with Cell arch. It will pay-off in the ps4 gen (if Sony plays their cards right).

 

That is a pretty bold claim.

It's like saying, the PS3 developers will be morons compared to the PS2 developers, in the sense they will not be able to exploit the PS3 hardware.

 

Not at all. I don't think the difference will be big enough to make a difference this gen. Nextgen (ps4) may be a different story. The arch scales very well where others are a bit more challenging.

Speaking to this gen though on multiplat games, I anticipate at most a similar difference to ps2 vs xb ports. Some being slightly improved on xb, but not enough to encourage mass exodus.

 

I guess it's all a matter of opinion.
When I look under the hood of Cell I see plenty more of horse power compared to Xenon, and I see a 6 times larger storage media in the PS3, I find it highly unlikely those capablities will not be exploited during it's life cycle, but hey I can be wrong.

 

1st party I expect some nice efforts that do exploit cell+BR, but not multiplats.

 

OK, but will not mulitplat titles always be constrained by the least common denominator?

 

But despite the superior storage space for BD discs the machine is still limited when it comes to the RAM amount (same for xbox360). So yes they could have a lot of different textures and objects but they still limited to ~512MB RAM and the use of HDD cache. Very limited of course unless they whant pauses/load stuttering all the time.

 

DVD - yes you are correct.

 

Game engines like UE3 are already pretty good at streaming maps dynamically during game play and will only get better, so your point is pretty moot.

 

The Wii has a DVD.
And duplicating data may do wonders to load times, at the same time as more high resolution content can be stored, so no need to downplay blu-ray.

I was thinking more about your claim that the Cell may suddenly be better exploited in the PS4, why would it's use still not be constrained in mulitplat titles?

 

But still 512MB RAM is 512MB RAM and a HDD is far slower. Also if your'e going to have lots of unique textures/objects displayed at the same time on a frame then you can't have them in the HDD unless you whant delayed texture rendering like in Halo2.

 

True, However this content must still be stored in ram to be used in game. This aspect is identical on both xb360 and ps3 consoles. FYI

No no no ... I'm not saying ps4 version of cell will unlock some magical power to enable a multigenerational leap over ps3. I'm saying cell will scale better than other architectures so in comparison to other consoles nextgen it can be a huge edge for ps4. Depends on how Sony plays their cards and what MS/N answer with.

Usage of cell this gen will be limited by two factors: limited tools and limited userbase.

IMO

 

I explain them by saying that Micrsoft is a multi-billion dollar company focused for the most part soley on software - I think that advantage/difference is pretty self-evident.

Cell is easier to program for (relatively) than the EmotionEngine was, to say nothing of the RSX vs the GS, and the tools for PS3 are already better than the tools for PS2 ever were. So it's important that you put these things in context.

If you think that the EE/GS combo stepped up in larger and larger ways among smart devs who knew how to use it in creating some of the late-gen PS2 games, then I assure you Cell will be easier to tap than that, and have more headroom to boot in terms of differentiating late gen games from early gen.

 

That does not necesserilly mean all assets need to be identical, some assets size could be constrained by the RAM size, some by the disk size if we go beyond DVD.[/quote]

I don't think Cell needs to scale better than the competition if it just scales in proportion to the current situation it will be more than sufficient, I think you are underestamating the Cell. IMO

And I guess we will see within a few years if the developers fail to exploit it as you predict.

 

Interesting - thanks for the insight.

I'm sure they will. But as it is, ports to ps3 are currently lagging. I expect a big improvement, but I also expect xb360 and Wii software to also improve.

Overall, not enough to sway enough gamers for devs to truly take advantage of ps3 in multiplats. (target platform)

IMO