Ghostbuster discussion - PS3's low quality and why Sony are publishing it.

[RobertR1]

Okay, let me add to that then.

Since when does lead platform equate to "superior" version? If you write your code for one platform, and it runs, and then run that code on another platform, and it runs better, does that mean the "ported" platform is now your lead platform?

Now, I can't comment on their actual development process, none of us can, really, however, I still think that "lead platform" is too broad a term to generalize something that you cannot really quantify.

In ref to the PS3 doing double the objects, that's entirely possible. That really doesn't have an impact on texture resolution or resolution in general, does it? I'd say they probably had the engine up, ran some tests, and noticed that the PS3 could handle more on screen objects w/out slowdown. That doesn't mean they had the video memory available to them to match the 360's texture resolution.

Shifty Thanks for the info I hadn't had a chance to dip into the IQ threads, nor have I booted up my version (PS3). I'll comment on all that stuff once I've played it myself. While direct feed screen grabs can certainly reveal a lot of things, everyone's set up can have different results. Hopefully the lower resolution doesn't bother me too much! Thanks again bud.

You asked and I showed you. End of story. The rest is just hurdling technicalities to be "right."

 

[draconian]

So going by your logic because of a poor port, Atari out of goodwill decided to give Sony an exclusive deal in a large territory where the 360 software sells well. If anything, Sony probably got a decent deal out of it because of the publication mess the game went through and decided to jump on the chance. Free/goodwill, I don't think so.

Well, I don't know. If sony paid for this exclusivity, they need their head checked. Ghostbusters is not GTA, COD:4, or any thing else. It's a licensed game that will probably do mediocre sales.

 

[Need 2 Know]

Well, I don't know. If sony paid for this exclusivity, they need their head checked. Ghostbusters is not GTA, COD:4, or any thing else. It's a licensed game that will probably do mediocre sales.

Thats I would like answered, also when the game was shown to Sony (if it was) surely they would have seen themselves that the game is clearly not up standards.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Thanks for the explanations all! One quick and hopefully not too inflammatory a question, please remember I'm actually asking this as a question and it's not meant to be a flame in any way, but it was my understanding that the PS3 was technically a slightly superior platform to the 360 so why does it need to be downscaled for it?

If I'm wrong about the PS3/360 thing please just let me know, I'm a console noob and I'm really just curious about the answer.

 

[makattack]

Well, I don't know. If sony paid for this exclusivity, they need their head checked. Ghostbusters is not GTA, COD:4, or any thing else. It's a licensed game that will probably do mediocre sales.

I've met many marketing folks who throw was seems logical out with the trash... It may be a decision made by whoever decided a movie/DVD tie-in release was needed. Business people and engineers rarely have the same schedule in my experience.

 

[tha_con]

You asked and I showed you. End of story. The rest is just hurdling technicalities to be "right."

I'm not trying to be "right", just trying to engage in some refreshing dicussion. After all, I don't think any of us here at B3D have talked about this sort of thing before (defining "lead platform", etc). Or at least we haven't given it much talk.

I just don't think that "lead platform" necessarily suggests it will be the superior version. In fact, I think all that "lead platform" really tells us is that they have dedicated a larger portion of their development team to that specific platform, which could also suggest that it's more difficult to work with, and the other platforms can attain similar (or better) resulsts with less work.

While I understand the frustration from PS3 only owners, I don't necessarily think this is game breaking for them. Again, I haven't played it yet for myself, so I'll reserve judgement, but if it is that bad, I will certainly post up my impressions for all to read

Sorry if I offended you bud!

 

[Need 2 Know]

I just don't think that "lead platform" necessarily suggests it will be the superior version. In fact, I think all that "lead platform" really tells us is that they have dedicated a larger portion of their development team to that specific platform, which could also suggest that it's more difficult to work with, and the other platforms can attain similar (or better) resulsts with less work.

Interesting theory but looking at Criterion ( Burnout Paradise) which used the PS3 as the lead cant we see and I could be wrong that the PS3 was a slightly better version.

Off topic - when can I see you on Resistance 2 so I can own ya.

 

[Scott_Arm]

But if you pick one platform as your lead, implying you're putting the majority, however slight, of your effort into it, shouldn't you expect the results to be at least equal to the secondary platforms?

The graphical differences may not be a deal breaker for most people, but the differences are very striking when looking at those screenshots. There was quite a bit of talk leading up to release that seemed to imply the PS3 version would be "better."

 

[Mboojigga]

Like Robert1 has posted they have stated on the links and when they showed it on Gametrailers tv show that it was the lead sku for the development. What boggles my mind is that not only is it 540 res but also requires a 4gb install that doesn't offer any advantages like load times for the PS3 version over the 360.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thanks for the explanations all! One quick and hopefully not too inflammatory a question, please remember I'm actually asking this as a question and it's not meant to be a flame in any way, but it was my understanding that the PS3 was technically a slightly superior platform to the 360 so why does it need to be downscaled for it?

That there's fightin' talk!

Technically each has advantages/disadvantages. Looking at the glut of content out for both at this time, we can expect similar results, though typically PS3 is at an IQ disadvantage in multiplatform titles with a little less AA or slightly rougher framerate, but all in all they are producing very similar results. Certainly one would expect a lot more parity between titles than this! It's almost as though the PS3 version is a PS2 port rather than XB360 port!

 

[digitalwanderer]

Ah, so Sony did this port sort of as a respectful nod to the PS2? I get it now.

It's a respect thing, that's cool...I'm still getting the PC version though. Do any of the consoles have decent AA yet, like at least 4xAA?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Ah, so Sony did this port sort of as a respectful nod to the PS2? I get it now.

Whoa, not at all. Sony didn't make this port. The game was a multiplatform title developed by Terminal Reality to be published by Activision Blizzard. They dropped it and Atari picked it up. Then in a bizarre twist, SCEE nabbed the publishing rights to Europe only creating a timed-PlayStation-exclusive over here.

Some muse that the ActiBlizz decision is based on this port being a bit pants.

Here's an interview with VP of sales and marketting (so ignore all technical talk ). Apparently the engine is being licensed to other developers. Hmmmm...

 

[obonicus]

If I'm wrong about the PS3/360 thing please just let me know, I'm a console noob and I'm really just curious about the answer.

There's a long-buried thread in this very forum that has a lot of input from devs on the hurdles with porting to PS3. The short, mostly incontestable story is that Cell and lack of unified shaders on PS3 makes PS3 the more challenging platform to code on. Whether more difficult = less capable is much more contentious and there's no consensus. It may be why PS3 versions are inferior, or it may that the PS3's lower install-base means that fewer resources are assigned to it. Though there's actually a conspiracy theory started here that devs saying good things about the PS3 are doing damage-control, and that in fact the 360 version of games is being gimped to ensure parity.

Terminal Reality isn't really known as an incredible dev-house, but they were focusing on the PS3 which is the common-knowledge (and therefore possibly wrong) theory running about how multiplatform development should work to reach parity.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Whoa, not at all. Sony didn't make this port. The game was a multiplatform title developed by Terminal Reality to be published by Activision Blizzard. They dropped it and Atari picked it up. Then in a bizarre twist, SCEE nabbed the publishing rights to Europe only creating a timed-PlayStation-exclusive over here.

Some muse that the ActiBlizz decision is based on this port being a bit pants.

Here's an interview with VP of sales and marketting (so ignore all technical talk ). Apparently the engine is being licensed to other developers. Hmmmm...

Wow, that is fucked up! Thanks Shifty, this is some seriously interesting drama.

 

[Need 2 Know]

There's a long-buried thread in this very forum that has a lot of input from devs on the hurdles with porting to PS3. The short, mostly incontestable story is that Cell and lack of unified shaders on PS3 makes PS3 the more challenging platform to code on. Whether more difficult = less capable is much more contentious and there's no consensus. It may be why PS3 versions are inferior, or it may that the PS3's lower install-base means that fewer resources are assigned to it. Though there's actually a conspiracy theory started here that devs saying good things about the PS3 are doing damage-control, and that in fact the 360 version of games is being gimped to ensure parity.

Terminal Velocity isn't really known as an incredible dev-house, but they were focusing on the PS3 which is the common-knowledge (and therefore possibly wrong) theory running about how multiplatform development should work to reach parity.

Dont you mean Terminal Reality

 

[digitalwanderer]

From that PR interview Shifty linked:

The Infernal Engine is designed around scaling on multiple CPUs and SPUs and the PlayStation 3 has a ton of SPUs that game developers don't typically take full advantage of, whereas our engine is built from the ground up to scale to the platform. Our engine works great on the PS3 which is relatively unique because we designed the engine for consoles originally, not for the PC. It still works great on the PC but because we took a different path than our contemporaries we get a lot better performance out of the PlayStation 3.

Uhm, isn't that sort of pouring salt in the wound?

 

[assurdum]

Thanks for the explanations all! One quick and hopefully not too inflammatory a question, please remember I'm actually asking this as a question and it's not meant to be a flame in any way, but it was my understanding that the PS3 was technically a slightly superior platform to the 360 so why does it need to be downscaled for it?

If I'm wrong about the PS3/360 thing please just let me know, I'm a console noob and I'm really just curious about the answer.

In theory ps3 has just a little bit 'power' (Carmak too said that) but in practice the architecture is too intricate and 360 is the best to have concrete results and more faster. The only way too see the better on the ps3 is in the first parties titles however.

 

[zed]

like I said when I heard the title was announced
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1092940&postcount=2
though its debatable if they have improved

 

[Tap In]

wow... I co,completely forgot about the Unified shader feature of Xenos

I wonder how much of an impact (along with a bit more unified memory) that has on cross platform titles?

 

[tha_con]

But if you pick one platform as your lead, implying you're putting the majority, however slight, of your effort into it, shouldn't you expect the results to be at least equal to the secondary platforms?

The graphical differences may not be a deal breaker for most people, but the differences are very striking when looking at those screenshots. There was quite a bit of talk leading up to release that seemed to imply the PS3 version would be "better."

I think there are too many variables involved to really say a "lead" platform should be better (or equal).

For instance, if the development studio has a small team, limited resources, and suffers from multiple publishing deals gone sour, then perhaps that could hinder their ability to create a product that is equal across all platforms.

It is entirely possible that Terminal Reality, while a good studio, isn't capable of creating the same game on both platforms, be it technical ability (which I doubt) or budget (which I think is the root problem here).

Now, I'm just "guessing", but I'd say the situation was more like this:

o Terminal Reality starts their Next Gen Ghostbusters project on 360

o Terminal Reality picks up a publishing deal with Activision (starts dev on PS3)

o Finds that working w/PS3 and then moving to 360 works better than working on 360 and then moving to PS3 (note: This does not mean PS3 would be the better product).


It is entirely possible that they devoted more people to the PS3 development because it ultimately sped up the development process (since it would be easy to adapt that to 360). Again, this doesn't mean that the PS3 version would be best.

Now while some of their statements can be interpreted many ways, I think it's best to just take them at face value instead of digging into them.

If they say their engine works great on PS3, then that's all they've said. They haven't said it looks better, or runs better, on PS3.

If they say that their engine could potentially do more on PS3 for moving objects, then that's all they've said. They havne't said the texture resolution would be higher, or it would be better visually.

Again, even with the points that RobertR1 posted, Terminal Reality never ever stated that the PS3 version was their "lead SKU" (which is a silly term IMO, too broad) or that the PS3 version would be better, equal, etc.

All they said was that their engine worked well on the PS3 (which is to say it ran w/out much modification because their engine can scale to different hardware types) and that they were impressed with some of the things the engine could do on that hardware.

So, I still think people are making too much out of this (way too much) and taking a lot of things ridiculously out of context. While it makes for good dicussion, I think it's somewhat misguided (and also contains a lot of misinformation).