Damn you EA, damn you down to your false-hope-giving development hell! Having never been a PC gamer, I was looking forward to a new Playstation entry. The last one I've been able to play was Red Alert for the original Playstation. And hey, it's a fun game and all but no game in the WORLD has that much replay value. :@

Saint_Imrahil

They really missed out on this one due to their laziness. It could have been cool on PS3 because of its keyboard and mouse support. It could have been virtually identical to the PC version.

OmegaWolf

Anyone playing this game on anything but the PC is nuts anyway.

As for the bitching PS3 owners comparing the game to other multiplat games and exclusive games, you have no idea how game engines work. What is pretty much being said here is they were developing their stuff on the PC, only to find they couldn't transfer that stuff easily to the PS3.

Can you imagine the anger and rage instead if they announced the game was being delayed just because of the PS3 port?

Passa

while the game wouldnt have made a big impact on the PS3, it keeps showing how Sony doesnt learn that easier development tools like XNA bring more developers to your console.

Sure give them a machine that can do all kinds of things but if you dont show them how to develop for it. Dont expect every developer to use it.

Sony is always bragging about how powerful its system is but theres no games out for it that outdo their competition in 1st or 3rd party gameplay. None have shown that their system can do 3 times more than 360 like Sony claimed when they announced the system. (MAG is not out)

as for the wii we all know its only selling so much is for the controls not games

ryuart

It's an RTS, as such it should be on PC only.

Gofthick

@okenny :): Don't be condescending. It takes a quick google to get examples of stuff like A* or Dijkstra's algorithm, and they've been done successfully in games for ages and ages, in FLASH even. In any case, you can do Starcraft style node based pathfinding for dozens of units on a 20mhz Mac IIsi just fine. Saying the AI requirements of something like c&c would be too much for the PS3 to handle is a statement plucked off the face of the moon. It's just patently ridiculous to imagine a PS3 choking on a a couple dozen units pathfinding in a game of c&c.

Sunjammer

@solidousSNK: Thats because japanese developers traditionally don't communicate anything to the outside world :P

Sunjammer

its funny how people think programmers are magic workers. if the costs are too high to justify a port then it wont be done. a business is in the business of making money, if sony designed hardware that makes it harder to make money then its going to suffer. blame them and not ea. you really think ea forgoes a market lightly? ps3 apologists just are not seeing reality for what it is. ea has plenty of talent,look at their lineup of games, no matter your view of the company they do have some talent there. as said in previous examples, many cross platform games show the ps3 to be inferior or basically equal with the 360 when it comes to actual results, so the so called superiority of its chip is questionable in the real world. clearly in cases like this it is inferior. blaming it on the magic lazy dev is just ignorant.

Justifan

@Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.: Some studios might have done it, but that doesn't change the fact that it might have cost them an arm and a leg. MGS4 was far from cheap, and Naughty Dog had to go to hell and back during Uncharted to learn the zen of Cell.

You can't expect everyone to bleed money just because you think they should.

I also doubt that everyone gets Sony's assistance and attention like the guys you mentioned. Not everyone is created equal I am sorry to say.

PixelRambo

@robinandtami: "Mere speculation"? Maybe.

But if some old monkey wizard spawned in your kitchen one morning and said that you have to bet on what will come out first (xbox "720" or PS4) and that if you fail you have to cut off one of your hands, would you keep saying like a scared kid "no one knows, it's mere speculation". Come fuckin on. The 360 came out a full year before the PS3, and let's just say that so far MS console have had cycle way shorter than Sony's. Are you going to deny that?

Also, I never said that the PS3 would still be good to go against the "720". I said that a years after FF13 would come out, the 360 would start to show some age, whereas the PS3 will still be going strong. Learn to read and start to think. You so know MS will come out with a new console first. If not don't post.

Kaneda

@shoeonmyfoot:

Considering the millions they'd have to spend developing, marketing, printing and packaging a separate game that will probably not sell as well as the other versions, your $60 is useless to them.

Ignatius

@Eumenides: What the hell? multi processor consoles aren't not new...64 was condemned for it and so was Saturn. Developers bitched back then too..."waaaaah...it's too hard to make games for it....wahhhhh....we don't understand it....waaaaaaaahhhhh...our games suck on that machine because it's toOOOoo haArD!"

Whatever...this is a profession...developers need to stop crying like bitches and man up and just learn the hardware. Insomniac did it, Incognito did it, Konami blew the doors of it with MGS4, Infinity Ward did it...Get your shit together EA and stop crying.

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.: dammit...typos...ugh, hate not having an edit button

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@Pbombas: sorry this is late and forgive me if someone else addressed this already but...
I put them in their because they're still great games regardless of their multiplatform status. What you fail to realize is many ignorant people believed such a thing was impossible also considering that the PS3 version of GTA4 runs at a better clip. Not but much but it's there and there's less pop up and clipping.

CoD4 speaks for itself. If you're going to sit here and nitpick the textures and ignore the fast, smooth framerate and the stellar gameplay that doesn't skip a beat on the PS3 then you're full of shit. I can play CoD4 on Ps3 and not give a rat's ass about the 360 version. Give me a break.

They both stay on the list.

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@Eumenides: More forgiving? I don't think this applies to the reality of the situation. Maybe it as just a poor choice of words, but I'm thinking "tee hee, it's okay, developers! We know you're working really hard and we don't mind shelling out $60 for an inferior port of last year's game with little to no bonus content of consequence. I look forward to the excuses you'll make next time as well! Here's some money for encouragement, maybe you can do better soon!" Yeah. Everyone knows that games are not cheap or easy to make, but they're sure not cheap to buy either and companies need to stop expecting the PS3 gamers to bend over and take it on lousy, late ports. It's been almost two years. Learn to use the damn hardware.

The developers keep saying, "Don't take this 360 favoritism personally! It's not! It's just business!" Damn right it's just business. If you deliver an inadequate product for me on PS3, I will not be "understanding" about it, especially when other developers can rise to the challenge and produce quality products on said complicated hardware. I will not pay full price for crap, and I'll be sure to let other consumers in my position know why they shouldn't either.

Grave

@shoeonmyfoot: Hey so was I Wait wait I sense some similarities Batman!
Golly Jeewilikers it's us from the Past!
No Robin it is simply another likeminded Playstation Fan Who similar to us will miss playing Command and Conquer Red alert 3
Golly Batman You're right.
Yes Robin, Yes I am. I'm always right Robin.
Ea's Gonna Pay Batman!
Robin Roght you are to the Batmobile!!!!
Are You gonna Hurt Peter Moore Batman.
Only If i have to Robin, Only if i have too.

Barf#1

@okenny :): lol for the idea that AI would be a stress on system resources.

MentalNote

@Kaneda: You are aware that a new MS console will come out before the end of the PS3 cycle right? Isn't that going to be hilarious? Xbox fanboys lining up to get the next MS console (read:being fucked in the ass) while others stay home to enjoy their not-outdated PS3.

Noone has announced release periods on next-gen consoles. You are going on mere speculation here. I personally don't want a 10 year console cycle. I enjoy getting new electronics. Five years is too long for my personal tastes. And of course, whether the PS3 will be outdated or not by the time the next XBox console comes out will depend upon what PC's and the next XBox are capable of by that time. The PS3 may very well end up looking like your grandma's console by then.

Can you imagine how weak the 360 will be by then? It's pretty primitive now, so it'll be just plain funny then!

Now you have just shown yourself to be a fanboi. If the 360 is "primitive" then the PS3 is just as "primitive." Most developers, and non-biased non-fanboi enthusiasts agree that the PS3 and the 360 are virtually identical in power. SOME give the PS3 a slight edge for having a more powerful processor, and SOME give the 360 a slight edge for having a more powerful GPU and more GPU RAM available.

robinandtami

@Kicken: Yes, I did, but that wasn't the first RTS, in fact, the market was exploding with them right about that time.

The Ancient Art of War and TAAWAS are generally recognized as starting the genre. So in fact, what you mean to say is both games share a common ancestor.

Blue Oyster Cultist

It's EA's way of saying "Bah, we can't be arsed". That statement permutated "Tiberium Wars" in my oppinion, by the way.

Tesla7zap

@Blue Oyster Cultist:
Did you know that Dune II, Westwood's original RTS game, inspired TA? Command and Conquer was released shortly after.

So in a sense, if Westwood had not made Dune and C&C, TA would not be around.

Kicken

Although RTS's are best on the PC, using that excuse after the system's been out for two years has some negative connotations.

kylo4

@PsycheE: Well I wouldn't argue the insane part, but no, everyone did not like the C&C line of games. I played the original until Total Annihilation came out then never looked back, C&C just couldn't match the scope.

If your going to be pissed a game isn't out for the PS3, be pissed about Mass Effect or Gears of War, not this tripe. Not to mention the ad nauseum argument that an RTS has no business on a console anyway...

Blue Oyster Cultist

@okenny :): No thats is wrong, the PS3 has very good architecture for running algorithms and ai scripts. As someone who has experience in game development, I assure you the PS3 has plenty of raw horsepower for RTS games. RTS games have always been CPU bound and the cell is incredible for doing those kinds of calculations. Screw EA if they are gonna be this lazy.

MrSatan

meh, you know what, it just really gets old now..whatever...

Red Alert 3 for PC!! Besides, I always like my strategy games in the PC

kingme

who the hell wants RTS on a console anyway? last time i tried that was the original C&C, and it sucked on PS1 i believe

Sh3rpa

Wow the haters are out today. But I'm glad there are some posts that understand the complexity of programming on the PS3. You all know who you are. Kudos to you. You make the internet a better places.

I tend to think of the 360 as a 3 piece band and the PS3 as an orchestra. It is way easier to get 3 people to harmonize than to get an entire orchestra to work together.

So the PS3 will be way more awesome once it works right? Well is a rock band better than an orchestra? No, they both have good elements, but preference comes down to tastes.

PS3 fanboys have to understand mutli processor environments are hard. There is no real good solution out there. The PC world is still trying to digest dual and quad cores. 8 cores is a little ways off and you should be more forgiving.

Eumenides

BULL
SHIT

The PS3 is not tough to develop for at all. I'm not saying a 10 year old could do it, but any company that has programmed for the ps2 can do the ps3, and what happened to all of EA's other games on the ps3?

I don't even know why I'm arguing though, RTS games belong on the PC, not consoles.

Stick34

RTS belong on PC not consoles.

tdreher

From what I've read MS's dev tools make moving a PC game to 360 pretty hastle free.

PS3's main issue in porting from PC is the cell architecture. It doesn't sync w/ modern CPUs since it's largely defendant on prefetching & the SPUs lack branching. It has lots of potential, but as Amdahl's law states it's performance is entirely based on how efficiently parallelization can be achieved.
[stanford-online.stanford.edu]

string_theory

I'm a PS3 owner and I don't give a damn. If EA are too lazy to do things properly then they wont get my money. Their loss.

Anaralia

@art_zombie:
Which is exactly the reason why they never announced C&C3 and KW for PS3, amirite?

Some people...

Kicken

@Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.:
I dont get why u put COD 4 or GTA 4 as a ps3 game done right. Cod 4 on the ps3 has textures that look mor edisgusting than the pc or xb0x 360 versions, and thats saying alot considering cod 4's textures were bad in the 1st place. And gta 4 on the ps3 had 25% less pixels on screen and was blurrier because it ran in 640p, unlike the 720p on the xbox 360. so those are bad examples of ps3 games done right, but dmc 4 and burnout paradise, games that look identical on each console, is a good example.

Pbombas

I can care less about this game and I own a PC, 360, and a PS3.

KLEPTO671

Delaystation 3 strikes again.

XbhaskarX

@Grave: good post...let me add a bit...

Capcom ported Dead Rising to Wii using the RE4 engine so that was more of a "no brainer/ el cheapo development cost" decision.

Monster Hunter on Wii is another "el cheapo/easy cash run" decsion. Personally, I think Monster hunter would have been great as a PSN download. I certainly don't look forward to Wii's terrible graphics and shitty online functionality. Unless Capcom pulls off a miracle, I may not even get the Wii Monster Hunter.

Also, regardless of what EA or any other company uses as an excuse, CoD4, GTA4, DMC4 and Burnout Paradise are a few examples of cross platform games done right on PS3 with CoD4 being the hands down best example.

EA is full of it.

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@Blue Oyster Cultist: Your insane if you didn't use direct call over 56k to play late night RA franchise.

EVERYONE loved C&C Red Alert 1/2. EVERYONE.

PsycheE

Red Alert hasn't been good since the original, as in, Westwood Studios. EA basically butchered Red Alert and turned it into Starcraft.

mlubczyk

@Methusalah: Something as simple as drawing a path for NPCs to follow in a dynamic 3D world (for example) is harder than you think.

okenny :)

I don't get why they put RTS's on consoles anyway. Didn't they learn their lesson with either C&C on the Saturn and PSX? Or even worse, SC64?

What are the sales figures like for C&C3 for the 360 anyway? I'm inclined to believe the RTS genre, unlike FPS or RPGS, will always have a much larger share of its sales on the PC.

magnakaiser

I dunno, I'm an XBox owner that won't be bothering with this anyway, mostly because the C&C games have all pretty much sucked (at least, there's always been something better available in the RTS world).

Get over it PS3 folks, this wasn't anything to look forward to anyway, you've lost nothing.

Blue Oyster Cultist

Maybe Sony might finally realize they should have made a processor intended solely for a gaming console instead of taking a processor that they had orginally intended to use in their next generation tv's for streaming image data and putting it a console where it doesnt belong to generate extra revenue that they couldn't get back otherwise. I dont know if this has been stated before, but the Cell was built for STREAMING purposes (images in Sony's TV and numbers from IBM's servers) and not branching algorithms for pathing, comparing, and various physics related tasks. So i can see why they wouldnt want to take an RTS (a game that is mostly code consisting of pathing, situational ai, and probability) and put it on the ps3. Why waste putting a game that consists of the very thing Cell wasn't meant for (in this case heavy branching and probability games like RTS's) when more money could be saved on just getting the game out on platforms that tolerate it, the 360 and PC, with their general use processors.

Pbombas

EA challenged with PS3 development? Didn't see that one coming.

I don't know what Sony can do, but they need to make the process easier for these "slow" developers. Put out some tools that would make the porting process from PC to PS3 easier. I don't think that's impossible.

LittleBigPlaneteer

Just to clarify for a few people:

The Xbox 360 has three cores in its processor, each with two hardware threads. This means it can complete six operations simultaneously. The Xbox architecture is (relatively) similar to normal PCs, and like others have mentioned before it means ports between the two platforms are relatively simple.

In comparison, the PS3 has one single-core PowerPC processor with six Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs) available to the developer (it actually has eight, but one os kept spare and one is taken for the OS). Each SPE can process up to four floating point numbers (or four 32-bit integers, or eight 16 bit integers and so on - 128 bits of data at once). This makes the SPEs great for vector processing.

The problem occurs when it comes to actually using these capabilities. Multithreaded programming is a headache in itself at times, since once you have more than one core you can't guarantee the order of instructions. This involves placing in synchronisation, buffering and so on to re-introduce order where it's needed.

The problem is, this way of programming is radically different to how people have been programming for game consoles up until now. Multithreading itself is relatively new - last generation (Xbox, PS2, GC, DC) was the first to have multi-core processors, from my understanding.

Programming for the PS3 will come with time - it just needs a combination of learning and support from Sony. Bear in mind one of EA's earlier efforts for the PS3 was the Orange Box - judging by the amount of problems there were with that and how happy people were with it, I wouldn't hold my breath for an EA game on the PS3 unless it's developed from the ground up with the PS3 in mind (which I doubt Red Alert was - more than likely they thought it'd be a 'nice thing to have' not not an essential).

Hope that's helped to clear some details up for people curious. Correct me if I'm wrong.

emcake

Simply put Ajami can go shove it up his ass... + it was always gonna b a PC game 1st, console l8r.

CMac1988

IM looking forward to World in conflict - Sovjet assault to PS3 that will be awesome!

xiked

@ƒox: Opps, what I meant that I was planning on picking it up for the PC anyway.

ƒox

"What I've always said is that bad code, and bad data design in particular, is bad on any architecture, but it's particularly bad on the PS3 because the Cell is a much more modern, much more heterogeneous design. It's much more parallel, and so requires good data design and good code. So if you're poorly designing your data and your code, then yeah, I can see why it'd be difficult to take something like that and try and manipulate it to work on the PS3, especially when people have invested a huge amount of money and time on something that basically doesn't fit a modern methodology. Yeah, it's going to be time-consuming to get that to work - if it's at all possible." - [www.neogaf.com]

If development can't or will not take advantage of the SPE in term of AI... for a game that requires AI, then there is no point in making the game.

2) Red Alert isn't coming to a Wii near you and Reggie probably wouldn't care. It's a niche genre.

3) World in Conflict and Tom Clancy: EndWar is in development for the PS3. So they could figure it out but others can't? Hmm I smell a lazy dev.

dadeisvenm

Meh, I wasn't planning on picking it up for the PC anyway. Too bad for the people who were looking to play it on the PS3 though.

ƒox

@SAKY:

Most you guys (above) are just taking a sour grapes stance. you know you'd buy it for PS3 if it had kb/m support.

Actually, no. I'm not really into RTS's anymore. But if I was, and they had M/KB support on the PS3, yeah, I would. Because then it would be the same as the PC on my 46" HDTV.

PapaBear434

@eakolb: OMG. A comment on Kotaku that is well thought out, with analogies that make sense, cogently defending an unpopular position without resorting to profanity? Are you single?

rateoforange

@sniper13x: Sure, or at least i'll try ;)

ASMP stands for "asymmetric multiprocessing" wich means that each of the processors cores is tailored to a specific set of tasks. Each core therefore has its own instruction set wich the other cores do not understand. F.ex one core might only handle I/O while another handles interrupts. There is often one(or more) master core which then outsources jobs to the other cores.

SMP stands for "symmetric multiprocessing" where all of the cores are identical and all have the same instruction sets. In this architecture all of the cores can perform the same set of tasks as the others.

The main difference in developing software for those two architectures is i think summed up pretty well in a wikipedia article:

"It is a common conception that SMP programming is much simpler as any processor in the system can complete a given task, thus a programmer just needs to simply balance the workload between processors. in an ASMP environment, a programmer has to worry about whether a processor can complete a given task and how to make the processors communicate effectively to distribute tasks."

[en.wikipedia.org])

Hope that clarifies something :P it's... pretty complicated but I reccomend reading about address spaces and the difference/tradeoffs between having shared and not-shared address spaces in a multicore processor.

BunnyJump

Listen.

360 is easier to develop for because Microsoft is a software specialist! Their system leverages all the experience in the last 10 years on .NET Framework, visual studio etc.

If you develop a game for the 360 its very close to being able to run on Vista without any effort. And the combined market for PC/360 is very good for the time it takes to develop.

If you want to include the PS3 in that you obviously get sales from the PS3 market BUT how much extra time and money does it take? is it worth it? that is the business question at hand.

An auxillary issue is that most of the game developers i know actually just genuinely dislike programming for the PS3 and unhappy devs is a bad thing.

Crankyhobo

@Kyouya: I agree it's bullshit, as it's undeniable how often this stuff happens. It's also understandable given how much time it takes to make ports like that, I'm just wondering now if they should shut their mouths and outsource some of the development to Ubisoft's EndWar team just to show them how. While I know that game isn't even out yet, and the PS3 version might just as well be crap, from what I've read and seen it looks like a solid console RTS.

CitizenInsane27

@ me: that should've read trite. My bad.
Again, I have no doubt it's tough. I couldn't do it at all. But that's a lame excuse to say in PR terms. Silence would better serve the company than this excuse.

AllegraStreit

I'm pretty sure it's that they don't want to build it for PS3 separately, which would be necessary. They just want a quick buck by porting the PC version to the 360, which is way easier and faster than anything involving the PS3. It wouldn't sell well on the PS3 anyway, and I hate to say it but it won't sell well on PC or 360 either. This game looks like trash and nothing like the good old Red Alert 2 that I loved.

Candlejack

@PapaBear434:

DOH! Read that wrong.

Red Faction does not equal Red Alert.

/hangs his head in shame
//overall point about laziness still applies

PapaBear434

@shoeonmyfoot: And save themselves many tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

zebber

This excuse really doesn't work anymore. A million other companies have figured it out, and have done incredibly well with it. Hell, even EA themselves did incredibly well with Burnout: Paradise.

This is just lazy on their part. But that's ok, Red Faction really hasn't been that great since the first one, though their "GeoMod" engine was completely cool back in the day. I would love to see more games have that kind of destructibility.

Going from one room to another via a rocket launcher was incredible fun. Even more fun was digging a tunnel under a "road," lure a bunch of guys on top of it, and setting off explosives to let them tumble into a gigantic pit.

That last one took a ton of cheat codes to get enough explosives, but man was it worth it.

PapaBear434

RTS games are native to the PC platform, so this isn't much of a surprise. They could have hired PS3 programmers, like many other companies do to port to the PS3 but probably felt the costs outweigh the benefits. I'm sure the DirectX API is second-nature to them and developing for a different architecture is like learning a foreign language.

It's kind of like Valve's mentality, except without the Sony should redo the PS3 all over again pouting.

flashtut

The excuse is lame. Why not just say "Yeah, we don't want to." At least that doesn't carry the impression of incompetance. I don't even care about Red Alert. I wouldn't buy it period. But don't expect me to be sympathetic because you've got a tricky job. If you wanna delay it, if you don't think it would sell, fine fine. Meh, from EA, that's just a load of crap. If it was a small developer, that would be another story. If you want to be respected as a developer, don't complain about developing difficulty. Bah!
I know the technical aspect is a bit tricky. I didn't mind that PA's game is taking a while to come to PSN. But with EA's money, that excuse is trie. No matter what you say, PS3 gamers are gonna be mad. Damage control is not complaining about your job, but rather just keeping your mouth shut.

AllegraStreit

I find it quite entertaining how so many of you folks think that programming for the PS3 is a simple matter of turning up the awesome. It's not like that.

There's a reason why PS3 tends to get the short end of the stick on decisions like this: of the four major platforms out there (with the entirety of PC gaming counting as the fourth), two of them are controlled by the same software vendor.

If you know anything about spoken languages, you can think of it like this. The difference between developing for the PC and developing for the X360 is kind of like comparing French and Spanish. They're both romantic language; Latin is the progenitor of both. There's a difference in the syntax, in the vocabulary, but the same approach to a task works in both environments without being completely alien.

The PS3 runs a processor unlike any other in the marketplace. What that means is that developing for the PS3 requires different approaches on different layers and you can't simply "translate" it to port it. It's not like going from French to Spanish -- it's more like going from French to Japanese. You can't just change the words and expect it to make sense. You have to rewrite the passage.

On top of that, developing in multiple environments is not a forgiving task. We're talking about high performance machines. It's unlike spoken language in that regard. If you translate something roughly, you get the idea and can move on. With video games, if you only translate it roughly the result is utter tripe. Bad frame rates, bugs, etc.

The whole point to this is just to help people understand that it's not "lazy devs" that are responsible for things like this. This is what happens when there's no standardization between two platforms. Both operate on independent paths and you can't simply repurpose all your resources to make a 360/PS3 release happen with the wave of a wand.

eakolb

So what? Another game not coming to PS3 on time or at all? If you're not used to it, you're probably a new owner. Don't worry, you'll pick up on how things work pretty quickly.

I'd be lying if I said I cared what EA did most of the time, but the handling of a lot of otherwise awesome third parties toward the system has been ridiculously frustrating. Sure, Square Enix going multiplatform with FF wasn't bad. That doesn't hurt anyone. However, taking away the PS3 simultaneously release of the Last Remnant? Oh yeah. That's some bullshit right there.

Capcom's been quite guilty in touting their multiplatform strategy lately, which conveniently only seems to apply to a) former PS3 exclusives like DMC4 b) full price, lackluster ports of 360 titles like Lost Planet that are followed 3 months later by superior half price versions on 360. Go go equality! They said for what feels like years now that Dead Rising wasn't going anywhere else. And here it is on Wii. No PS3 version in sight. That's cute. That's really cute. They still can't get it right with the digital downloads, either. The SSF2T HDR beta issue is yet another blemish on the game's embarrassing history. They tell us that good things will be coming for us, but what? Remote play? John Diamonon said some "cool stuff" was being planned for PS3 SF fans. I hope that "cool stuff" didn't consist of those two trailers and that awful SF4 theme. But of course, they couldn't give us something with real substance. Why, that'd be unfair.

While I'm still hanging on to this thing to play Aquanaut's Holiday in September, I'm not sure that I know what drives people to keep buying them, outside of MGS4 and Tekken 5 online. The new models don't have full BC, the models that do have full BC introduce a good 2-3 frames of lag upscaled and trash half the games you'd want to play with awful artifacts. Sony's laziness in certain key areas and 3rd party indifference (which sometimes feels like straight-up malice) is pushing me to the limit. Alas, the 360 fund is not growing fast enough.

Grave

I think the answer is it's not like a PC, and the PS3 doesn't have a large enough base, why work on it. This is what I'm guessing.

BrotherNick

Who else is willing to bet that microsoft just bought out another exclusive title?

desterion

@trogam: "For the record, the PC version I assume will cost 50 bucks?" To add to that argument... after a month or two the pc version will inevitably drop to $30 while the console version is still sitting at $60.

Methusalah

WOW yet another cop out. I never hear the Japanese complaining about developing in PS3.

solidousSNK

I think the gaming companies should go back to school and try some of their excuses on professors and teachers. These are supposed to be professionals, willing to learn things! What? They don't want to expand their horizons? *sigh*
For the record, the PC version I assume will cost 50 bucks? In which case, why bother getting it for a console when ts cheaper on the PC (If you have a rig that will run it.)

trogam

@BunnyJump: Can you elaborate further? Maybe this will end the back and forth bickering of fanboys. I think its just silly to expect a 3rd party to spend extra time/revenue to max out a console's "untapped" power. That's what 1st party devs are for.

sniper13x

@Kaneda: Love the funnay in your post :)

Rotmm

@Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!: just so no one miscontrues my statement.

"...RTS functionality on a K/M functional system..."

Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!

@The Count of Monte Fisto: I've never played any of the original Civs so I can't comment on it's relation to them, but Revolution is still an extremely fun game in it's own right, it's worth a try.

Klopfer123

Why would I want to buy an RTS on a console anyways.

ashman512

@Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!: mouse and keyboard is supported on the PS3, so it could very well work. I think it's going to be good on the 360 with the controller but RTS functionally and a functional system should've been a no brainer. It's like Apples and Pie. It WORKS!!!!

Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!

This "ps3 is hard to develop for" doesn't really surprise me, since it is always harder to get applications running at optimal speed on ASMP processors than on SMP processors. The asmp architecture of the Cell coupled with the fact that the cores do not share address space just makes things more difficult. But it might just be a matter of time...

BunnyJump

Build, rush, repeat process.

Anyone who has played an RTS game before has already played Red Alert 3.

DangrMaus

@KaneRobot: I'm a PS3 owner and I didn't even realize it was even announced for the console. I just heard RA3 and immediately thought "Time to double-check the specs on my machine." It's widely accepted that RTS games are best played by far on a PC. So, it's not that PS3 owners are saying "oh well, belongs on PC anyway", it's that RTS/C&C:RA fans believe that.

Shalashaska

@ComradeStalin86: I hear it too. you know the funny thing about this is the use of the word "exotic". I kinda chuckled at that one.

Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!

@okenny :): That sounds too intelligent to be the reason the ps3 version is "delayed." I much rather argue that its lazy developers...

sniper13x

too bad if EA didnt make money off ps3 owners then they arent getting my $60-70 from me....

i like C&C too, but if they say its too hard to develope for, then why is it other companies can do it?

and really the processing power on RTS isnt as bad as say....Lord of the rings Conquest errrr.....too soon?

lol EA got worst.....sorry miriam s. but the games dont do its price tag justice anymore...

lonesn1per

Why does everyone always say RTS is meant to be played solely on PC? Sure previous efforts haven't proven you wrong, but I am happy to see developers try. I'm sure that sometime there will be an excellent RTS formula for consoles that will set a new standard for console RTS's. It will probably be slightly dumbed down, but c'mon how can you blame them for trying to expand their audiences and trying to remove the barrier keeping console RTS games favored second to PC?

paeper

@Kaneda: LOL, just read your post. Good stuff. you get cool points.

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

"PS3 is a very powerful system but as you guys know it's very exotic and tough to develop for and our engine really at the time wasn't designed for PS3."

You know, by saying this, he's saying "Our developers aren't as talented as their peers at other companies."

At least...that's what I hear.

ComradeStalin86

I may have to rent it for 360 just to see how it works, but I'll be all over the PC one. Superior control scheme, more user generated content, blah blah you've heard it all before.

Also, okenny :), That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard today. Thanks for the laugh :)

Wolfers

Not a big RTS fan so this doesn't affect me much, but I agree that the genre doesn't really lend itself to a console friendly control scheme.

Off-topic, what's with all the fanboys in this topic?

chuffhoncho

God DAMMIT! That's it, i'm going out to buy a 360 again :(

Can someone remind me why I bought a PS3 again? I was led to believe they would actually be releasing some GAMES for it...!

NoHopeForMe

@Methusalah: Same, and agreed =)

Sunjammer

Judging by previous Command & Conquers I don't think the AI is any sort of bottleneck. I'm sure its just more work than they realized to port it over and they don't think they'll make the money back on the PS3 version to do it. (PC -> 360 however is much easier). But again people should be buying this for the PC anyway. (I still play DotA almost daily, love my PC RTS)

greeble

@Moosebox: agreed but the sad part about that is PS3 would allow the game to be played proper with M/kb support.

@Diesel_Power: In essence, any PC game re-released on PS3 would provide the superior controls the PC original are known for because of....wait for it....M/KB support! Some the 360 version won't have. I'm tired of hearing this bullshit of "it controls just find with dual analog..." whatever, why settle when you can have the proper controls?

@EVILSTUART: another great point and EA proves yet again that they just don't have the chops to be a "great" developer. Good...maybe...bad...probably....great, never.

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@Sunjammer: No. I don't. I write software for a living. Claiming that there is some chance the cell processor cannot handle complex AI code is ridiculous (I know you didn't make that claim, but that was the point of my post). I was just exaggerating to illustrate how unlikely okenny's theory was.

Methusalah

@Jwb0711: You are aware that a new MS console will come out before the end of the PS3 cycle right? Isn't that going to be hilarious? Xbox fanboys lining up to get the next MS console (read:being fucked in the ass) while others stay home to enjoy their not-outdated PS3.

Also, what's even more funny is this: Since FF13 is coming out on 360, I assume that MS will have to keep the 360 around for at least 3 more years. You know, until maybe a year after FF13 is released. Can you imagine how weak the 360 will be by then? It's pretty primitive now, so it'll be just plain funny then!

Kaneda

If a game is not developed for PS3, it's not because it's hard to develop. It is because it was originally developed in such a crappy manner that does not take advantage of the best system out there.

iam.gmo

I have an xbox 360 and no PS3 and I still don't understand why anyone would want to play an RTS on a console, 360 or PS3.

TheGreySpectre

Thank god! This game is a PC title. It doesn't belong on the PS3.

Diesel_Power

Talk about EA trying to change their image and make themselves not sound like an asshole but they can't help it, their foot is always in their mouth. It's just in their nature to be lazy and trying to make a buck at the same time. They spend all their money on how to get money out of gamers without actually doing the hard work and have nothing left for game development.

karateka

lol if command and conquer was still a good game i would care, but seeing as how most devs are lazy these days and probably dont want to dev for the ps3, or maybe they cant, its becoming more apparent of who the top devs are and who aren't.

EVILSTUART

Obviously to EA, developing the game for the PS3 is neither worth the time nor the revenue it would bring in. So chances are the development costs to bring it to the PS3 are far to high, meaning a redevelopment of the game engine is probably required.

Moosebox

@jiffy: You real smart!

Sunjammer

I'm starting to get really tired of this bullshit on how developers are promising it will come to the PS3 and backing out few weeks later. How about doing some exploratory research on the console if it's that complex before making an important decision? For this game, it's obviously better for the PC. However, I am talking about the principle because publishers and developers have been flip-flopping way too much that it is starting to get fucking annoying.

Is the programming hard for the PS3? Absolutely. Is it impossible? No. If it was, we would only see first party games being available for the PS3. This is not new. You've heard everyone involving in the videogame industry talking about how difficult it is to program for the PS3. That's fine. You can make that statement, but don't go announcing the game is coming to the PS3 for the sake of profits when you're uncertain that you can tap in the console's potential with the game's engine. That is just rubbish, reckless and disrepsectful.

I'll give you an interesting analogy. On one of the episodes of the Simpsons, Moe Szyslak pretends to go in his car in a crowded parking lot with no space available. He teases other drivers that he is going to vacate his parking space. In truth, he does this to see hope being sucked out of the drivers. All that remains for them is misery and frustration.

Moe = Publishers/developers

Drivers = PS3 gamers

That's what most developers/publishers are doing to PS3 fans. I didn't say all because some are very committed to the Sony's system (that includes Epic making their deadline for Unreal Tournament and the 2K team busting their asses off to port Bioshock to the PS3).

Kyouya

C&C: RE has always been my RTS of preference.

This is comming to my PC

KristenBal

So, instead of spending $60 to try it out on the PS3, I get it free, before it is available in retail from the torrents.

Thanks for that.

jiffy

@SAKY: Agreed. I would so buy this on PS3 if it had kb/m support. I remember being very sad when the canceled it. :(

Kaneda

To go off on a kind of related note: why hasn't anyone done an RTS for the Wii? One of the first things that I thought of when I saw the Wii remote was a console RTS. It works just like a mouse so I'm confused as to why no ones jumped on that.

Silent Predator

@Methusalah: And you underestimate just how freaking taxing AI is.

That said i don't think AI is why EA thought this was a tough cookie. I simply think they'd have to redo too much to break even.

Sunjammer

@Jwb0711: Are you retarded?

Fluffy22

@Jwb0711: BAAAW no Red Alertz -----> No games! My PS3 is teh DOOOMed!

@okenny :): I always knew you could travel through time, you bastard. *shakes fist*

FP_slomo788

Seriously, when will developers know how to develop for the PS3? Third party developers, mind you. I mean by the time the PS3 starts playing like it should, will it already be time for the next generation of gaming systems? Granted that's about 4 years away, so we hear. We always keep hearing about how the PS3 is a beast, which I believe. But when will the beast of the games come? You can only develop as far as the techs give you. And most developers engines run about the same. The only game that stretches anything is Crysis with it's graphics and physics (sort of).

macr0planet

theey wont work with the ps3 cuz there lazy. like everyone else who says that its difficult. quit being a baby and give the game to the people.

mouse5050

So there are still people doubting wether the PS3 is hard to dev for or not? Nobody's saying it's easy, anywhere.

Personally, i always thought it would make more business sense to architect your game to be relatively easy to port among the MAJORITY of the consoles and then if you really expected it to make economic sense, port to the PS3 (which would typically require a whole bunch of refactoring).

Sounds to me like EA simply don't feel like the investment would be worth it.

Sunjammer

@Jwb0711:
It's happening, all over the world in fact. Ps3 is outselling 360 in most major markets.

That said, I'm renting this game for my 360, might be fun for a week or so. But this bullsh!t excuse of "Hard to develop for" has got to go.

There are lot's of companies willing to invest the time and effort it takes to make an amazing PS3 game. So all the Sony bashing can stop. My PS3 is my Home Entertainment center, 320 gigs of Movies, TV shows, and all the freedom I want to upgrade and stream. My 360 isn't used right now, it's hooked up, but unused until Fable 2 and Star Ocean come out.

Glasspaper

world in conflict looks look super really good and its coming out for PS3.

Gitarooman

@Jwb0711: Wow. I'm so glad I have a PC since I'll be playing this RTS on it and not on any of my consoles. Oh, and I'll be paying less for it as well. Oh, Oh, and I don't have to pay to play it online. Oh, Oh, Oh, and I don't have to listen to people shout out rcial slurs and curse every 2 seconds. RTS on PC FTW

Lachoy

In short : we can't justify the manpower/money to develop for this system because it takes too long

Disdain

I'd buy this for the PS3 IF it had kb/ mouse support like Unreal.

Most you guys (above) are just taking a sour grapes stance. you know you'd buy it for PS3 if it had kb/m support.

SAKY

@okenny :): Hate to disagree with you there, but I'm sure my high-school graphing calculator had enough power necessary (slight exaggeration) to handle the execution of the AI and statistical code involved with any rts (new command and conquer included) that's ever been released or will be released in the near future. You underestimate the capabilities of modern technology.

Methusalah

Or maybe install base at the time wasn't big enough to warrant the extra costs, time and manpower required to port the game.

Fabrice

It is kind of a shame that it isn't coming to PS3 considering the PS3 has full keyboard/mouse support. Oh well, I guess I'll just play it on low settings on my PC.

Spenze

It's a bit pathetic when a representative from a company like EA uses the PS3 is 'tough to develop for' as an excuse. Especially when we've seen dev's with less resources do such good jobs.

ReignFury

This is actually very easy to understand. EA is probably focusing on PC development as the main platform. A port to the 360 is fairly straightforward, and not very manpower intensive. The PS3 version would require quite a bit of recoding, and thus, more money. Money they don't want to spend.

Should you care? Probably not.

PissedPS3Fan

@OkayOctane: in a nut shell the PS3 is a proprietary archetecture. Granted, many past consoles have had the same issues, PS2 comes to mind. XBOX and 360 contained compontents and designs more similar to a PC.

It takes time for developers to aquaint themselves with hardware like the PS3 but this EA, they are huge and have already developed software for PS3. : \

SAKY

@KaneRobot:
Funny.

In other news, I hope the hardcore Playstation fan realizes that the Kutaragi approach is the problem here. With him out, hopefully the PS4 will be something that is more approachable for the development community.

DARTH_TIGRIS

@Jwb0711: ?

Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!

My friend up at Berkeley will vouch for how hard the Ps3 is to program.

pcgecko85

there goes another developer with a cheap excuse... (-_-)

Shad0X

come on just tell us MS payed you to say "hard to develop" alibi *wink* Seriously i coudnt care less, as its going out for the PC is all that matters anyway

LoganForge

EA and PS3...not surprised.

Might huh?
I'll throw that "might" into my bag of Duke Nukem bag of "I'll believe when I see it."

Jun581 won't give you tree fiddy!!

"Me not know how to make work. Me like boogers. HEEHEEHURURHUR!"

kagai

I would have loved to play it on console with mouse/keyboard controls. :-(
The "hard to develop for" excuse is also slightly amusing coming from such a giant company with so many resources.

El-Suave

@OkayOctane: Forgot to add, If there are any people with experience in games development, I'd appreciate your knowledge. On my above question/statement.

OkayOctane

Heh, a category 5 'Whoops' on their part. 'Sorry, we forgot that X360 and PS3 are apples to oranges and didn't anticipate what just about every 3rd party developer has commented on since 2006.'

And I believe that a RTS could definitely work on a console... Just no one has figured out HOW yet.

art_zombie

@danielgary: I agree, I have a PS3 and I'd buy it on the PC anyway. I also eye the new Civ console game suspiciously whenever I pass it in the store.

The Count of Monte Fisto

Might have sumthing to do with the fact that the PS3 is a beast to develop for. Still, I wouldn't worry too much about it, its a bitch of a game to play on a controller anyway :o(

Connobi

I called this months ago (sometime back in 20007) where I stated that many RTS games will be having problems with development on the PS3. I reasoned that that though the CELL is powerful, there probably wasn't enough horse power for the branching AI and statistical operations required for most RTS (stressing Real-Time here). This are branch intensive operations which is just not as efficient on a processor optimized for streaming. I think there will be more of this sort of news coming. It's not really an excuse on the developers part, they just didn't want to make a game that couldn't offer the same experience as other comparable platforms.

okenny :)

Wow. Im so glad i didn't buy a PS3, but got a 360 instead.
Where is this great comeback PS3 owners keep talking about? NOWHERE.

Jwb0711

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (etc)

But yes, I've heard this "difficult to develop for" statement a couple of times now, can someone explain what it is exactly that is so difficult or time consuming? It's a new system, surely every developer has to learn how to develop for new systems.

OkayOctane

Actual quote from EA "It to haaaaaaaard :("

Fluffy22

@tsukasa1288: Agreed, RTS should stay on the PC. That whole genre really shines with a KB&M.

darknessgp

Pre-programmed responses are go!

PS3 fans = Who cares? It belongs on PC, I don't want it, blah blah blah

X360 fans = HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (etc)

KaneRobot

I'm a 360 owner, and so am inclined to have a good laugh about this. However, since this is an RTS, it belongs on PC only. I won't be handing over my $60 for it and PS3 owners shouldn't be upset either. It's just better on PC.

DaPress

"PS3 is a very powerful system but as you guys know it's very exotic and tough to develop for and our engine really at the time wasn't designed for PS3."

That translates to... "It's different" It'd hardly tough to develop for, it's just they don't have experience with stuff like cell processors.

darknessgp

I will play it on PC.... playing an RTS on a console is against nature and will make baby jesus sad

symphony_of_the_night

As a PS3 owner I couldn't care less since RTS games are always best on PC. Honestly I never gave any though to buying this on a console.

greeble

If they can't be bother to develop for the ps3 who cares...good riddance. Just they don't make any money from ps3 owners...if they're OK with it. I'm ok with it. Plenty of games out there.

karateka

red alert, along with all other rts games for that matter, belong on the pc. though it is quite strange that a company as large as ea is able to use the "to hard to develop for" excuse.

tsukasa1288

well i was going to buy it for ps3 so i guess they lose out on my 60 bucks

shoeonmyfoot

EA wants to make money? NO WAI!

NorthernAvengeR

Well...this really isn't that big of a deal. They could probably skip the 360 version as well. Just focus on the PC for this game please.

danielgary

@Kaneda:
No, this is what you said. Why soft pedal it after you are shown to be wrong?

Also, what's even more funny is this: Since FF13 is coming out on 360, I assume that MS will have to keep the 360 around for at least 3 more years. You know, until maybe a year after FF13 is released. Can you imagine how weak the 360 will be by then? It's pretty primitive now, so it'll be just plain funny then!

This is just plain fanboi bullshit. Do you even own both consoles? If you did, like I do, you would realize there is no great differential in power between the two consoles. I personally played GTA IV on both consoles. and would actually have to give the edge to the 360 version. If the 360 will be "weak" by time FF13 comes out, so will the PS3.

robinandtami

@SAKY: Wait, Unreal Tournament III does KB/M support? I'm buying that shit.

And I'd buy this shit too, if it did as well. Sorry EA, guess I'll just take that $60 with your name on it, roll up the bills, and smoke them.

Narsil

@Silent Predator: You know, I've been saying that for a while but no one listens. The Wii can do a lot more than what is being shoveled into it. RTS,light gun games, point and click adventures, FPS and basically anything you cold imagine for it. Though fighting games might be tricky.
Also RTS games for the DS would be good too.

Why can't EA dumb down the graphics or make a spinoff Red alert for the Wii? That's way better than any other console controller.

Netnavi

Westwood would have made a PS3 version.. but then again, Westwood would have made a decent game to begin with.

Scuba Steve

Meh, who the fuck cares. RTS's are for PC plain and simple

JellyDoodle

@Methusalah: Not to mention the cell is great at crunching numbers, and doing more than one task at once.

sereal

@mcool93:

Command & Conquer 3 just for the 360 was in the TOP 10 for the May 6th - June 2nd NPD sales charts (and it came out on the 9th of May).

That's the top ten overall in game sales my friend, not just 360 games.

Shandy706

I'm getting it for the PC, but I have a feeling it would take forever to optimize this game for the PS3. The hardware, as everyone and their brother knows, just isn't up to par in some places (GPU/RAM)....while it's WAY over par in others (CELL).

Even some of the PS3 exclusive games suffer from some freak stuff...like jaggy shadows, or textures here and there that are a muddy mess. I loved MGS4, but even the textures on some trees, rocks, other surroundings, etc...occasionally looked like they were ripped from the Wii or PS2 and were enough to distract me for a moment.

#*^(! RAM

Shandy706

Command and conquer doesn't sell well on consoles, and with the PS3 haven't a much smaller user base than the 360, there's really no reason to release on the PS3 at this moment. Aside from fanboys being happy that 360 lost an exclusive, PS3 fanboys won't buy this game anyway

mcool93

I'm going to be that guy here.

Red Alert/C&C has a strong pedigree on the PC. Each new game in the series seems to be a slight iteration on the previous game's engine. One could argue that the newest Red Alert is as indigenous to the PC as the original C&C.

If you want Red Alert on your console, make its infrastructure/development tools similar to a PCs.

Besides, regardless of the advances in the console world, RTS games still feel mighty awkward and foreign with console controllers. (I do understand the irony inherent in this statement, seeing as the PS3 has shown a lot more support for keyboard/mouse input than the Xbox 360.)

crapsh00t

@robinandtami: "If the 360 will be "weak" by time FF13 comes out, so will the PS3."

Er. No? By then the PS3 will have Team Ico's games, GT5 with more cars than a DVD can handle, MAG and others I don't care about.

Kaneda

@tsukasa1288:
They probably don't think it's worth it. PS3 owners rarely buy games anyway :P

magictroll

>And another game falls to the old "tough to develop for" excuse.

So the fact that it's taking possibly double the number of people working on a PS3 version for what usually ends up being a lesser number of sales than on the 360 is an excuse? There may be plans on both consoles to end up with a title that creates profit, but perhaps there's better rates of profit if those same people working on a port is shifted elsewhere. The number of workers is finite in one way or another, and unless the future profit is greater by fulfilling some obligation I don't see EA's choice as a bad thing.

muu

I wouldn't dare to say Command and Conquer is just another game. It's one of the most important franchises in the industry.

You know I think PS3 is the new Sega Saturn of this generation. It fails to successfully differentiate from competence in a sense Sony promises. Xbox 360 looks to close graphically, Xbox 360 versions look a little better.

1) Console has been expensive for a considerable time

2) PS3 architecture is original, modern and revolutionary but not necessarily more efficient in the real world. Remember Sega Saturn? it featured 2 parallel processors sharing the same bus. (long time ago it was considered revolutionary)

3)If system is complicated to program for, then you will need an army of geniuses or freaks to work for you (as you prefer to call them), which means you will require more money, time and work.

4) Most multiplatform games run slower and with less detail on PS3, not because developers are lazy. Thats FALSE. Reason is Xbox 360 has an unified memory (RAM) architecture which makes programming easier since programmers can choose how much they can assign to GPU and CPU. On PS3 things are radically different (2 separate pools) and typically either the CPU or GPU run out of RAM. That's why SONY says if you make a game from the ground up for Sony PS3 then games will run better on PS3 and will also run on the competence without a problem. Of course if you develop for a restrictive console (PS3) and port it to a considerably less restrictive console (Xbox) game will run. Duh!

5) SPE's are a joke, they are super cheap super bad processors capable of doing very little sort of tasks efficiently, if they were capable of doing half of Sony's claims, believe when I say PS3 would be significantly more powerful in the real world than Xbox 360. Some games will take advantage of Cell BBE, but believe when I say it will cost millions of dollars more (Killzone 2).

heirdt

@Sunjammer:

its not a matter of it being "possible", its a matter of whether its worth while in this case. many things are possible, but once financial viability is considered it becomes rather different.

@Netnavi:
"dumbing it down" for the wii would probably also involve significant effort, esp to get it working with the controller in a novel way, and dealing with such a game in standard definition would be unpleasant. i'm not sure they'd want to hurt the brand that way.

Justifan

It seems to me that many of you are missing the point. It is not that the developers are lazy and saying "If they got "X" game to work on the PS3 why can't they get this one. The answer is EXTREMELY SIMPLE: Different Engines. Different engines for different games. When they designed the new burnout engine for the generation of console in which we are in now, they probably kept the PS3 in mind. Provided they built a new engine. Either way, RA3 isn't exactly a big market competitor such as burnout and other franchises. Why put time and money to rebuild/make the engine compatible with the PS3 when you just stand to lose?
Just because another developer built a game for the PS3 does not mean they didn't have a difficult time with it, it just means they built it for the PS3 from the ground up, probably. I'm not defending EA. I won't even buy a game with the EA logo on it. unless it is used. I will not give them my money.

Cochese

EDIT:

@OkayOctane: Its less that its difficult to develop for and more that its difficult to develop in parallel with other systems. The PS3 architechture Is designed for data parrallelism where as all of the other systems are designed with process parrallelism *in mind*. Meaning its they dont think the significant investment in the engine is worth the sales they expect from the PS3.

I would rather they just focus on the lead platform.

Pandaschreck

@OkayOctane: Its less that its difficult to develop for and more that its difficult to develop in parallel with other systems. The PS3 architechture Is designed for data parrallelism where as all of the other systems are designed with process parrallelism. Meaning its they dont think the significant investment in the engine is worth the sales they expect from the PS3.

I would rather they just focus on the lead platform.

Pandaschreck

Because the system is no longer viable? i.e. it's not exactly going to be a moneymaker?

Frank

I.E.> "we are too lazy and don't wanna learn to develope for anything other than the PC and the XBOX PCixty."

Well, that's okay, my pc can handle all the xbox exclusives ANYWAYS!!

thirstypilgrim97