90-strong PS3 port team 'doing really well now' despite experiencing 'a little trouble' at beginning.
The Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of upcoming console-only RTS Tom Clancy's EndWar will be "identical" when the game launches this October or November, despite the PS3 port team experiencing "a little trouble at the beginning" of the game's development.
EndWar, a near future strategy game which can be played completely through voice command only, is due out on both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 simultaneously this October or November. Despite the fact that the lead version is on the Xbox 360 and that the development team found the Unreal Engine 3 "a great fit" with Microsoft's console, Julian Gerighty, editorial content director at Ubisoft Shanghai revealed to VideoGamer.com at Ubidays last week that the dedicated 80 or 90 strong PS3 team "is doing really well now" with the port.
Gerighty said: "Because we have to have feature parity there's no difference in features. The way we've developed it was with Unreal 3 and we found it a really great fit with Xbox 360. PS3 team had a little trouble at the beginning but they're doing really well now. The lead version is the 360. They'll be identical when they finally launch."
He added: "There's a whole separate team of another 80, 90 guys working on it. It's really decent. And all they have to do is port it. It's a big team."
Check out our hands-on impressions of Tom Clancy's EndWar right here.
Tom Clancy's EndWar: Launch Trailer05 Nov 2008
Tom Clancy's EndWar: Theatre of War Trailer02 Oct 2008
» Go to 's original post
» Go to 's original post
» Go to 's original post
» Go to 's original post
that why.
360 alredy used showed all 100% of what it can do and ps3 only showed 40% so u do the math PS3 will get even better.
PS3 is third in the console race?thats not true ps3 is kicking ass in USA and in the world so get your facts right SteveO.
» Go to 's original post
PS3 currently is last in the console race that IS a fact. Xbox has twice as much memory which is why ps3 can't handle games like command and conquer 3, that IS a fact. PS3 has the most powerful processor but not the using 40% is nothing to be proud of because developers have said before it will be lucky to reach 50% to 60% because of the shortcuts used in development. i.e. RAM. forcing them to burn memory to the disk which slows down framerates and forces users to download large chunks of memory to their hard drives i.e. Devil may cry.
Any wonder why xbox is number 1 with developers
» Go to 's original post
360 does in fact have 10mb of embedded ed flash ram but that is irrelevant in comparison because the ps3's unique architecture eradicates thee need for it.
» Go to 's original post
» Go to 's original post
COD4 was made on ps3 not 360 and that why is better than halo3.
the 360's Xenos has a unified pipeline, that means that each of the 48 shaders can do either pixel or vertex operations. This means that generally the Xenons can be pushed to the "MAX", with all 48 shaders busy, rather than on the PS3 where some of its fixed shaders are likely to be unused YET and "surpass Xenons."
The PS3 was designed for the SPE's to supplement graphical processing, so the PS3 is capable of producing better graphics than the Xbox 360.
the ram is the same u tard tard,and ps3 has a faster ram than 360
all FACT,not BS like u,u'll see just whait till xmas and 2009.
oh and gta has better graphics on ps3 than 360 it has been confirmed by IGN and a lot of sites.
» Go to 's original post
The PS3 must be an absolute dog to develop for, or else Ubisoft employees are very very lazy.
» Go to 's original post
Each console should have the quality they both deserve! I agree that if the versions were not a port, each console would have a better version. Argh! Il be crossing this off my list im afraid until devs give console owners what they want!
» Go to 's original post
PS3 jealous. Stop crying you idiots. YOU come on moaning about ports. If Ps3 is that good as YOU say then why are the top devs using the 360 as a majority. You can say all you want about ps3 just getting used to it. So why dont they just work with it then.
You should be happy that now with next gen consoles we can get games like this. All you do is try to find a reason to slate the 360. Stop being so narrow minded and enjoy the games you get, if you think ps3 is soo good dont you think that most devs would have started using it by now NO because the ps3 set - up is too time consuming and cost more. ITs all about COST at the end of the day. Fanboys are sad sad people. That goes for 360 and ps3 and wii owners. Well maybe not WII people cause they seem to be happy with what they got. why cant 360 and ps3 people be like that.
» Go to 's original post
Cell can only write on 256, simple, which means ps3 has 256 of ram. 360 cannot only do 50%-50% for cpu and gpu, but it can do limitless ways, such as 30%-70%or 70%-30%, with the same performance cost. ps3 does have faster ram, but that speed will be useless when the ram is in overload,making it have to use something called Virtual memory, and i have expierienced this, its really bad especailly during gameplay,
thus, 360 ram can be used in many different ways, ps3 can only use 256 for system(CELL) 256 for gpu(RSX), if one of these banks dont have enough ram for a specific task, then ps3 will suffer greatly while 360 can be something like 256-256 or 300-212 or 212-300..... in so many differnt ways that has the exact same performance with eachother,
This is why developers still at this stage prefer xbox
» Go to 's original post
In 2 - 3 years time xbox will be releasing their next generation console and Dell are also speculating about making one. I can't see how ps3 claim that their console will be future proof against the new generation when they have so much competition in the current gerneration??
It looks like developers have already hedged their bets and do not see the point in wasting their time with the cell.
» Go to 's original post
just be quiet your burning your self realy bad.
u dont know crap about ps3 OR 360.
» Go to 's original post
So if you take total units sold by PlayStation 154 million for both respective systems and it would be 254 M if you count he original PlayStation sales. That leaves MS at 44 Million for the last two gens. Nintendo at 50 Million for the last two gens and PlayStation at 154 so even if you combine N and MS total at 94 Million that means Sony is still ahead 60 million and that's still more than either of their total units sold.
So lets not try to make points about who is selling more product because Sony will always win.
Post Comment
Login or register to reply to this topic
Create a new account or login to take part in this topic discussion.