Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 Ultimate Edition News for PS3

Exclusive: EA explains no PS3 Red Alert 3

NewsPublish Date 28/07/2008 - 5:00pm GMT+1

PS3 'very exotic and tough to develop for', but there is hope.

Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 Ultimate Edition screenshot

EA has explained why there are currently no plans to release a PS3 version of hotly anticipated PC and Xbox 360 RTS Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, saying Sony's console is "very exotic and tough to develop for".

Red Alert 3, the first Red Alert game in seven years, had been slated for a PC, 360 and PS3 release when it was first announced. However publisher EA put the PS3 version on hold with no explanation - until now.

When VideoGamer.com visited EA's UK HQ for some hands-on with the title, EALA producer Amer Ajami told us that when development began the developer found that its game engine wasn't suited to the PS3.

He said: "We actually announced a PS3 version early on but that was when we were still doing a lot of technical exploration of the architecture. 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."

However, there is still hope for PS3-owning Red Alert fans. Ajami told us that EALA "might go back and do something with the PS3 later on".

While you're waiting, make sure you check out our in-depth hands-on preview of the PC version of Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 right here.

New stuff to check out

View all 26 Comments

Comments

To add your comment, please login or register

User Comments

honorio

i am waiting for it, i will wait, but some how get to the limit of this playstation 3, use all that extra technology to do it impressive.

Posted 02:46 on 28 December 2008

Kolani

It's easy to program for if you program for it, not with the plans to write a PC version that you're going to dump a 360 port of it.

If you'll look at the developers that claim that the PS3 is difficult to program for, you'll see that most of them are writing a multiplatform game, otherwise known as programming a PC version for use as 360 Shovelware.

Posted 01:48 on 23 November 2008

EZou

Excuse me, but are we blaming a game dev. company for not wanting to produce a game for a certain platform. I think that you made your choices to buy PS3, then stick with them when there are no EA for them, and YOU stop whining, boycott EA, or just shut up..

Posted 16:32 on 17 September 2008

ea sucks

if ea couldnt develop the game then dont open your mouth and say your releasing it what a bunch of morons, i think the guys at ea should go back to school and learn

Posted 01:34 on 14 September 2008

jo

any "good" game programmer (i.e. John Carmack, id Software) would tell you that a good game engine is one that is scaleable. if EA can't be bothered to make their games run, or even run smoothly on the PS3 then it is complete negligence and laziness on their part and it shows. it shows that EA are not using efficient code as the basis for their game engines if their game engines are not scaleable. it's probably the reason why the sports games they release annually never actually "look" graphically any better. it just is if it ain't broke don't fix it mentallity and change the line-up names to reflect the new season be it football or basketball etc. slap on a new looking menu and add a few little touches... here and there... it makes me wonder - what do they do in the year between the releases? do they chill out for 6 months and then think - shizz - we gotta mop up nba live 09 quickly, let's get to it! bull-frickin-shizz man!!! as with the majority of their games they are rushed to the shelves and nine times out of ten the ps3 equivalent runs worse than the xbox 360 counterpart and gets a worse review on ign - "duh... figures" we all say. it is just EA, being "EA" - Electronic "Arts"??? nope. Electronic "Arse" - yep. i think they should tidy up their code and not resort to mundane techniques and maybe, just maybe, they won't be complaining that the ps3 is difficult to program for... unless of course they didn't try or bother, they just said "nah can't be bothered!" which is as i explained earlier, sums up EA completely. they make lots of money from every other platform so it don't matter right??? hahaha let's see how far they go with that mentalilty before people lose trust in them... oh they already have. whoops!

Posted 22:26 on 04 September 2008

agentdark64

The likely cause of the reason as to why EA aren't developing this on PS3 compared to X BOX is due to the graphics architecture. Put it this way, XBOX 360 uses Direct3D - a Microsoft product for its communication to the video hardware. This same product is available on the PC which the red alert 3 makes use of. PS3 on the other hand does not have Direct3D, but a similar system. That means everything has to be converted to use the graphics API provided by Sony which is extra work and the conversion won't necessary be perfect to fine detail. I'm guessing EA don't have the resources and patience for this.

Posted 10:55 on 03 August 2008

kyrpä

EA sucks anyway, and this new red alert will suck anyway. So no problem. If i have to play this in some point, i knowl how im gonna get my copy roflmao.

Posted 12:50 on 30 July 2008

Schumuckster

Actually, once PS3 userbase and development experience has caught up enough, some publishers will be prepared to do a little gimping on the 360, as it won't pay to spend big bucks maximising for a particular platform.

Once the the lowest common denominator is good enough, develop for that.

Where there are particular technical issues, as there are with this, that's not really an option though.

Posted 18:50 on 29 July 2008

Schmuckster

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.

Posted 18:28 on 29 July 2008

Dooley

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.

Posted 07:19 on 29 July 2008

NyTeMair

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! ;)

Posted 07:17 on 29 July 2008

Handwipe

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.

Posted 06:10 on 29 July 2008

LORD__MAXIMUS

meant programmers not programs lolz

Posted 04:55 on 29 July 2008

LORD__MAXIMUS

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

Posted 04:54 on 29 July 2008

Axe99

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!

Posted 22:38 on 28 July 2008

Show Older Comments