Exclusive: EA explains no PS3 Red Alert 3

Wow look at all you babies crying because your beloved ps3 is hard to develop for. You might as well get used to it because its not going to change. It's not EA's fault, it's sony's. EA is in the business to...

• 

  Omen wrote at 18:24 on 28 July 2008

  my ass.
  everytime EA make a bettre game foe 360 or M$ they have the same eccusess.
  "IS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR"
  than why aren't the oder companies whinening about it and make better looking games than EA shit company.
  everybody know EA is a shit company.

• 

  OMEN wrote at 18:26 on 28 July 2008

  i meant "excuses"

• 

  Anonymous wrote at 18:44 on 28 July 2008

  BULLSHIT.
  
  That's a poor excuse. Developers need to learn how to take risks and even ask Sony for help. What's wrong with asking for some help?

• 

  RecoN wrote at 19:26 on 28 July 2008

  FFS! how many pussys are going to moan on its difficult! How you think M$ and Sony made it this far in the industry, certainly not moaning about it!
  
  Im gettin pissed off with this! Infinity ward did it with success, maybe these game devs should re think there career as game devs if they cant cope!

• 

  Tempes V wrote at 19:54 on 28 July 2008

  there greedy *******s trying to collect on every last cent

• 

  Some dude wrote at 20:07 on 28 July 2008

  This game isn't ready for the PS3 anyways. From the looks of it, the game would probably run just fine on the PS2.

• 

  alfgold wrote at 20:27 on 28 July 2008

  You guys can look this up and confirm it: about a year ago, a top xbox department executive left MS for some "faimily reasons" and joined EA. So it is very obvious that EA's productions are control by MS. So you PS3 gamers can forget about any good games come out from EA for your console anymore.

• 

  Well... wrote at 20:30 on 28 July 2008

  This just in : Sony = Shit.

• 

  DaEmph wrote at 20:33 on 28 July 2008

  Wow...EA is still on that bullshit about the PS3 "hard to program for".....they seriously need to GTFO out the business if you are not willing to keep up and learn new technology. This is why they gets no respect for crying like babies when a challenge arises. This is why I admire devs that are willing to put the time and effort in to make sure a PS3 game is exceptional, EA are bunch of quitters.

• 

  BriMan wrote at 20:50 on 28 July 2008

  EA sucks !! They have gone way downhill the last few years !! Time to give up all these sports licenses, action games, command & conquer and lwet someone develop that has more knowledge than these guys on how to program !! Looks like EA's programmers never even made it through techinical college !!

• 

  Enos88 wrote at 21:57 on 28 July 2008

  God EA, just go sit in the corner and say nuthing. I and hopefully every one is sick to death of there rehash of the same game and whining and most of all there pour quality in there games. I say stop buying in to them and stop buying there games. they have **** with the industry for to long. its not sony or Microsoft's fault an don't blame god or apples in the meting. stop buying EA games.

• 

  Axe99 wrote at 22:38 on 28 July 2008

  It's worth noting that it seems to be an issue of development approach rather than technical difficulty - Criterion, Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Incognito and many others seem to be able to produce games at a good clip with normal numbers of staff - it just seems like EALA is using a model that only suits the 360/current PC architecture, rather than a broader approach that also encompasses the PS3 (once understood - which the above developers seem to have achieved just fine). It's funny, with everyone talking about the future of computing being multi-core and scalability by core, that EA and many developers seem to be sticking to current (ie, outdated in the not-too-distant future) development techniques. One of the benefits of getting up to speed with the PS3 is developing game engines that will be better suited to the future of computing - still, EA being a little behind the curve isn't exactly a new thing, and with World in Conflict and Endwar coming out (and the superlative Civilisation:Revolution already available), us strategy fans on the PS3 have some good games to keep us happy. Not that we wouldn't pick up Red Alert if it wasn't available, but we clearly can't if it isn't!

• 

  LORD__MAXIMUS wrote at 04:54 on 29 July 2008

  I CAN NOT STAND EA ANYMORE!!!
  
  go hire some real god damn programs not dudes that make one god damn engine and sit on their asses for the next thirty titles

• 

  LORD__MAXIMUS wrote at 04:55 on 29 July 2008

  meant programmers not programs lolz

• 

  Handwipe wrote at 06:10 on 29 July 2008

  Wow look at all you babies crying because your beloved ps3 is hard to develop for. You might as well get used to it because its not going to change. It's not EA's fault, it's sony's. EA is in the business to make money, just like any other company. If they think it is a bad business move to waste money and resources to develop a game on a console with a retarded design then good for them. Being profitable is how companies stay in business. If you don't like it then get a 360 or upgrade your PC. Look at the big picture and stop your goddamn whining.

• 

  NyTeMair wrote at 07:17 on 29 July 2008

  Handywipe, sounds like you are the whiner. I happen to own all the consoles and PC, you are obviously a 360 fanboy, and isn't it odd that the PS3 can be developed for by most everyone else? EA is at times simply lazy, and certainly not making this an issue of 'good business.' More to the point they are simply porting a pc to 360 design model.
  
  Now have a nice day! ;)

• 

  Dooley wrote at 07:19 on 29 July 2008

  And look at the ponce who thinks he gets to tell it like it is.
  The PS3 isn't difficult to develop for. It's different to develop for. It's not like the technology we've had for the past twenty generations of Need for Speed and Madden, so naturally, EA and phuqwitz like Asswipe get to make excuses and commentary that borders on preternatural retardation.
  
  In five years time, when there are no single core processors in existence, you can rest assured EA will re-release ALL the C&C games and repackage Red Alert 3 for us poor shmucks...
  
  I don't play strategy games on console. I'm not a loser who makes excuses for his console choice.
  I play with a keyboard and mouse, and I play strategy games on PC.
  I don't **** around with sticks in first person shooters either. The ignorant and youthful haven't a clue.

• 

  Schmuckster wrote at 18:28 on 29 July 2008

  Dooley: "The PS3 isn't difficult to develop for. It's different to develop for."
  
  Right. How different do you find programming fast, branch heavy AI code for hundreds or thousands of units when you can't rely on OoOE or a cache?
  
  Dooley: "In five years time, when there are no single core processors in existence, you can rest assured EA will re-release ALL the C&C games and repackage Red Alert 3 for us poor shmucks..."
  
  You think it's just about multithreading? Cell isn't like multicore processors in the PC or even the 360.
  
  Sony forgot that the PS3 was going to be used in the real world by real programmers, and that it was **SHOCK** going to running multiplatform games. Most publishers aren't going to be willing to gimp 360 games so they look as good on the PS3, and they are going to put their development dollars where the biggest returns are.

[  1 | 2 | Next Page »  ]

Name:      Register Free (Why?)

Write your comment in English here.

Verify:   Type these characters into the text box (you can register to skip this step in the future):