Sony: Developers aren't "fully utilizing" PS3 yet - Blu-ray Forum

Snake_XRS · 06-01-2010, 07:57 PM

Very interesting article, without a heavy dose BS propaganda. I've never seen anyone explain why Sony's systems have such a steep developmental learning curve, but what was said makes perfect sense.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20006158-17.html

richieb1971 · 06-01-2010, 10:14 PM

There is a flip side to that coin. If the system was easier to program the variety of games that could be made, along with the risk factor involved would encourage smaller teams to get on board.

As it stands PS3 is geared towards tech nerds of 50+ people with hefty bank balances. Although Uncharted is an accomplished and professional game, it lacks variety in its gameplay. All you do is shoot for 99% of the game which to me is an arcade game stretched out to 8 hours of game.

The other thing that bothers me about the article is that technically speaking you could get a lot more out of the console, but make a lesser game. GOW3 was technically brilliant, but I didn't like it as much as 1 or 2. It felt recycled and flat lined with me. The director/producer failed imo because he kept on banging on about how much they could squeeze out of the PS3 without actually wondering if any of it would allure the player into that world that had been created. GT5 is another title that pushes the PS3 to the limits, but I hate playing it. I played GT1 and beat it, all the sequels are just remakes with more polygons and higher resolutions. Even if the game suddenly became real life, I wouldn't feel any more attracted to it.

Its the lesser known games like Infamous and Modnation racers that have scored high with me. Take away the reality, add more game.

RAZGRIZ-1 · 06-01-2010, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

There is a flip side to that coin. If the system was easier to program the variety of games that could be made, along with the risk factor involved would encourage smaller teams to get on board.

As it stands PS3 is geared towards tech nerds of 50+ people with hefty bank balances. Although Uncharted is an accomplished and professional game, it lacks variety in its gameplay. All you do is shoot for 99% of the game which to me is an arcade game stretched out to 8 hours of game.

The other thing that bothers me about the article is that technically speaking you could get a lot more out of the console, but make a lesser game. GOW3 was technically brilliant, but I didn't like it as much as 1 or 2. It felt recycled and flat lined with me. The director/producer failed imo because he kept on banging on about how much they could squeeze out of the PS3 without actually wondering if any of it would allure the player into that world that had been created. GT5 is another title that pushes the PS3 to the limits, but I hate playing it. I played GT1 and beat it, all the sequels are just remakes with more polygons and higher resolutions. Even if the game suddenly became real life, I wouldn't feel any more attracted to it.

Its the lesser known games like Infamous and Modnation racers that have scored high with me. Take away the reality, add more game.

I think you have Uncharted confused with Modern Warfare.

Euribo · 06-02-2010, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kakashi Sensai

I think you have Uncharted confused with Modern Warfare.

Exactly. You definitely don't just "shoot guns" 99 percent of the time. As for CoD, you shoot guns for 100 percent of the time.

steelcity24 · 06-02-2010, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lbloodojunkieg

Exactly. You definitely don't just "shoot guns" 99 percent of the time. As for CoD, you shoot guns for 100 percent of the time.

Right on. If Uncharted is 99% gun shooting, that sure is a very hefty 1% that I spent climbing snowy mountains and icy caves, solving ancient puzzles, wandering around museums, climbing trains on the edge of cliffs, enjoying a nice train ride while being shot at from helicopters, etc etc etc....

Havok83 · 06-02-2010, 03:03 AM

why do people still care about this stuff?

Ascended_Saiyan · 06-02-2010, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

There is a flip side to that coin. If the system was easier to program the variety of games that could be made, along with the risk factor involved would encourage smaller teams to get on board.

As it stands PS3 is geared towards tech nerds of 50+ people with hefty bank balances. Although Uncharted is an accomplished and professional game, it lacks variety in its gameplay. All you do is shoot for 99% of the game which to me is an arcade game stretched out to 8 hours of game.

The other thing that bothers me about the article is that technically speaking you could get a lot more out of the console, but make a lesser game. GOW3 was technically brilliant, but I didn't like it as much as 1 or 2. It felt recycled and flat lined with me. The director/producer failed imo because he kept on banging on about how much they could squeeze out of the PS3 without actually wondering if any of it would allure the player into that world that had been created. GT5 is another title that pushes the PS3 to the limits, but I hate playing it. I played GT1 and beat it, all the sequels are just remakes with more polygons and higher resolutions. Even if the game suddenly became real life, I wouldn't feel any more attracted to it.

Its the lesser known games like Infamous and Modnation racers that have scored high with me. Take away the reality, add more game.

What I think people don't really seem to get is that processors WILL look like this in the near future. Cell-like designs are already on certain companies' road maps. These software issues HAVE to be dealt with at some point. What's the use of delaying the inevitable?

Also, you are in the minority with the underlined portion. It's always better to appeal to the masses than the minority, when sales is the goal. Another thing is that GT5 isn't out yet. How did you get to play it? GT5:P doesn't even have the same physics engine as GT5.

richieb1971 · 06-02-2010, 04:47 AM

With Uncharted 2, I definitely felt like I'd seen all there was to see by 75% of the way through it. I turned it off, shelved it and never put it on again. I got to the bit after the driving bit on a mountain side hideout. Infamous was far and away the better game, because you had choices all of the time. You could run, hide, shoot, climb, use special weapons. It felt more like a game. I certainly don't think uncharted is a bad game, but almost every level you saw waves and waves and waves of men running towards you with guns. Its very action packed. But seriously, I must have shot 3000 people in my game and they only killed me about 10 times. Its just silly. Its not like he's got super powers. And that guy who hired all that army must be ashamed they can't kill one guy in a T-shirt. At least Infamous gives the player the belief that he's super human. That aside, games that require head shots all the way through the game are repetitive. If you like that sort of thing then great. I can take it for a while, but with nothing new on the table after 75% of the way in.. A bit sad really. And what was the point of going to that mountain anyway? I climbed and risked my life, only to be packing my bags and moving on, there was nothing there and the game didn't even explain it.

GT5 is a technical demo. No I haven't played it. But its not entertaining to me. Going round and round a track which I have to race 50 times to afford some Ferrari specific race when I don't own a Ferrari is plain ridiculous. If thats fun to you, you guys need some help. I needed medication playing part 4, it went on for weeks doing the same crap. Those endurance races will drain power stations I'm telling you.

But seriously, people need to ask themselves if whats important is the fun factor, or the technical factor. If you want the BEST Graphics ever, then just wait 10 more years and all games will look photo realistic. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will all reach that point eventually. So what is everyone going to play then? According to Hirai whats his name, the life cycle of a console is justified by the developers ability to untap unknown potential from a console using gimmicky code. Well, one day you won't have to do that and games will play exactly the same as they do now. Run n gun, brrmm brrrmm, jump jump, dodge dodge.. When all is said and done, its the fun factor thats important now, not the graphics. Modnation racers is fun and has much more addrenalin, heart pounding finishes than GT5 could ever have. Thats because its a game.

Ascended_Saiyan · 06-02-2010, 05:53 AM

The critics just don't agree with you. A lot of gamers don't agree with you. Your UC2 assessment is a minority assessment and that's fine. You should just understand that. You killed 3000 enemies and only died 10 times, huh? Why don't you up the difficulty level?

Ok, racing simulation isn't your cup of tea. Fine. That's not a reflection on the game. It's more of a reflection on you. The core racing experience of GT hasn't really changed.

It's about fun factor AND technical factor. With the PS3, you can have BOTH! The review scores back this up. The TOP award winning games for the past 2 years were PS3 exclusives. Also, the top graphical games for the past 2 or 3 years were PS3 exclusives. Look at the gameplay review scores for MLB: The Show, Killzone 2, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, LittleBigPlanet, etc. What do the reviews say? What do a great deal of the game owners say? What publisher has the highest rated games on average? Hint: I believe it's the publisher that also releases the top graphical games.

Bottom line: Don't try to make it seem like it's an either/or thing, when it comes to gaming. Just because there are great graphics doesn't mean the game with be good and vice versa.

RAZGRIZ-1 · 06-02-2010, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Havok83

why do people still care about this stuff?

blu_world · 06-02-2010, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Havok83

why do people still care about this stuff?

because people Know the ps3 is the superior system of all & it didn't even touch the surface of it's full capabilities yet.

Ascended_Saiyan · 06-02-2010, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blu_world

because people Know the ps3 is the superior system of all & it didn't even touch the surface of it's full capabilities yet.

Well, to be fair, the surface has been touched. I think they're finally getting close to the end (gaming-wise). However, the PS3 is extremely flexible. The mixing of different rendering styles could severely change the look of games, but it's not written in stone.

EDIT: I think people care because a lot of people spent years being subject to X360 owner's snideness. Those people thought the X360 was more powerful. Then, they thought it was equally as powerful. Now, more and more, the evidence of a huge power gap is becoming overpowering.

Also, people like knowing that there is more to come from they console. People like gifts that keep on giving more than gifts that, basically, stop giving.

richieb1971 · 06-02-2010, 09:59 AM

My argument translates to -

Why bother about upping the graphics if the experience is going to be exactly the same? In uncharted 3, another 10000 guys will come running at you with guns, if they don't improve that aspect of the game, its a failure.

GT5, if they don't improve anything but the graphics, to me its a failure. I already played all 4 of the previous games and to me the upgrading doesn't seem fitting. Baby steps.

Sequels will nearly always get high scores because everyone loves them. But how is doing the same thing again and again and again tapping in to the system? Surely making something fresh is tapping the imagination, which last I heard was bigger pool of bytes.

Playstation move has the potential to be more ground breaking than anything the machine can do graphically. I haven't been impressed with graphics since the Playstation > Dreamcast era. Because simply put, its baby steps marketted as GIANT steps of mankind..

I preferred Dead Space to UC2.. At least there was a variety of enemies and an atmosphere. You got to upgrade your suit and shoot upside down.. Lots more imagination and variety. Variety doesn't make a game, but it helps.

Bageara · 06-02-2010, 10:44 AM

wow man, You arent impressed by nothing, i feel sorry for you gaming must really suck for you these days, why bother

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

My argument translates to -

Why bother about upping the graphics if the experience is going to be exactly the same? In uncharted 3, another 10000 guys will come running at you with guns, if they don't improve that aspect of the game, its a failure.

GT5, if they don't improve anything but the graphics, to me its a failure. I already played all 4 of the previous games and to me the upgrading doesn't seem fitting. Baby steps.

Sequels will nearly always get high scores because everyone loves them. But how is doing the same thing again and again and again tapping in to the system? Surely making something fresh is tapping the imagination, which last I heard was bigger pool of bytes.

Playstation move has the potential to be more ground breaking than anything the machine can do graphically. I haven't been impressed with graphics since the Playstation > Dreamcast era. Because simply put, its baby steps marketted as GIANT steps of mankind..

I preferred Dead Space to UC2.. At least there was a variety of enemies and an atmosphere. You got to upgrade your suit and shoot upside down.. Lots more imagination and variety. Variety doesn't make a game, but it helps.

Kyo28 · 06-02-2010, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

My argument translates to - ...

I'll agree that game mechanics and innovation are just as important as upping graphics.

However, it's hard to improve upon something that has already a near-perfect game mechanic. Take GT5 for example. This is widely known as the best race simulator (not arcade racer!). I've watched the production diaries of the dev team and they have extensively tested various cars in-game with professional car racers who also drive those cars in real life, for a living, to get the 'feel' as close as possible to the actual driving experience. Baby steps in advancement? Perhaps, but that only means they've already reached such a high level of realism it's hard to make it any better ... at least with current technology. Perhaps you prefer arcade racers over racing simulators, like I also do, but that doesn't take away the technical prowess (both visual as well as game mechanic wise) of GT5.

As for games like Uncharted, I can understand someone prefers a game that has less gunslinging in it (I can imagine you wouldn't touch the Call of Duty game series with a 10-foot pole for that same reason). I think you must've been very disappointed by Resident Evil 5 as well then, seeing how it's more action oriented than the previous iterations. I'm afraid that it's a trend to go more action-oriented in all kinds of games (including JPRG's which go more and more towards real-time than turn-based). However, some games I might suggestion if you prefer less gun and more brain or platform:
- Heavy Rain
- The Secret of Monkey Island (re-releasing on PSN)
- Eye of Judgment (superb strategy game with a unique interface. If you like innovation, you might want to give this one a go. I adored it as I'm also quite anti-FPS)
- Final Fantasy XIII: real-time combat but still
- Trash Panic: really fun and frantic puzzle game with a unique twist

Although I must say, I'm puzzled at your remark where you state that Dead Space is better than UC2. I think as far as variation in environments and environmental puzzles go, UC2 definitely has the upper hand. I think Dead Space is also more 'shooter' oriented seeing how in UC2 you can also resort to hand-to-hand combat. Again, I can understand a person wanting less shooting action, as I'm not much of an FPS'er myself, but saying you enjoy Dead Space while not like UC2 for those reasons strikes me as ... odd.

Terjyn · 06-02-2010, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

My argument translates to -

Sounds to me like you are just worn out on gaming altogether, because by your standards nothing can impress you.

I don't think you even realize just how big those "baby steps" you keep referring to are. They are far bigger than the Dreamcast Playstation era you refer to, just for some reason you are jaded and don't see them as such.

Al_The_Strange · 06-02-2010, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Why bother about upping the graphics if the experience is going to be exactly the same?

While most games probably will continue to fill a given niche, type, genre, etc, there's no telling what innovations are on the horizon. The next biggest game (be it a sequel or original) could be the best gaming experience in a lifetime, who knows?

But it sounds like your mind is already made up; you've played one game, you've played them all! Might as well give up gaming, if you're predetermined to be dissapointed.

fsavoie · 06-02-2010, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

My argument translates to -

Why bother about upping the graphics if the experience is going to be exactly the same? In uncharted 3, another 10000 guys will come running at you with guns, if they don't improve that aspect of the game, its a failure.

GT5, if they don't improve anything but the graphics, to me its a failure. I already played all 4 of the previous games and to me the upgrading doesn't seem fitting. Baby steps.

Sequels will nearly always get high scores because everyone loves them. But how is doing the same thing again and again and again tapping in to the system? Surely making something fresh is tapping the imagination, which last I heard was bigger pool of bytes.

Playstation move has the potential to be more ground breaking than anything the machine can do graphically. I haven't been impressed with graphics since the Playstation > Dreamcast era. Because simply put, its baby steps marketted as GIANT steps of mankind..

I preferred Dead Space to UC2.. At least there was a variety of enemies and an atmosphere. You got to upgrade your suit and shoot upside down.. Lots more imagination and variety. Variety doesn't make a game, but it helps.

Uncharted was very innovative for me because when I've played that game I've felt in a big budget movie. Its very fun, to care about character and the story. I agress that graphic is not all, but it helps the game being more immersive. If you really want something new, try Heavy Rain, you can't have a "newer" experience better than with that game.

Warjack Prime · 06-02-2010, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Although Uncharted is an accomplished and professional game, it lacks variety in its gameplay. All you do is shoot for 99% of the game which to me is an arcade game stretched out to 8 hours of game.

I disagree. I've played through that game and there was quite a bit of platforming involved in which the player interacted with the environment, as well as strategy at some points when taking on multiple enemies. Let's also not forget about the multi-player.

On the other hand, regarding your quote about Infamous, I felt there was too much focus on running around completing errands from one corner of the city to another, with the same snipers shooting at you from impossible distances. I probably would have liked it more if it had the polish of Uncharted 2 though.

I guess what I'm saying is, anyone who doesn't think Uncharted 2 is the greatest game ever is wrong.

agoofykindasuperman · 06-02-2010, 03:13 PM

If you think that graphics being improved are not giant leaps then just take a step back to years ago when the first computer generated graphics were created. If you've ever seen an interview with any of the folks at Pixar you should get the idea of just how monumental those slight improvements really are.
I seen one interview where an animator for Pixar says that during the early days, when they first created the Luxo lamp animation with the lamp hopping across the floor, everybody looks at that as something very simple, however he wanted to jump up and shout to everybody; "you have no idea how many hours that took!"

What I'm saying is, some improvements may not look like much on the surface, but to the creators they are great achievements in their minds.

06-01-2010, 07:57 PM	#1
Snake_XRS Blu-ray Guru Member since:May 2009 Location:Chicago	Sony: Developers aren't "fully utilizing" PS3 yet Very interesting article, without a heavy dose BS propaganda. I've never seen anyone explain why Sony's systems have such a steep developmental learning curve, but what was said makes perfect sense. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20006158-17.html

06-01-2010, 10:14 PM	#2
richieb1971 Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Aug 2007 4K collection:89 Blu-ray collection:706 Trading Score:16	There is a flip side to that coin. If the system was easier to program the variety of games that could be made, along with the risk factor involved would encourage smaller teams to get on board. As it stands PS3 is geared towards tech nerds of 50+ people with hefty bank balances. Although Uncharted is an accomplished and professional game, it lacks variety in its gameplay. All you do is shoot for 99% of the game which to me is an arcade game stretched out to 8 hours of game. The other thing that bothers me about the article is that technically speaking you could get a lot more out of the console, but make a lesser game. GOW3 was technically brilliant, but I didn't like it as much as 1 or 2. It felt recycled and flat lined with me. The director/producer failed imo because he kept on banging on about how much they could squeeze out of the PS3 without actually wondering if any of it would allure the player into that world that had been created. GT5 is another title that pushes the PS3 to the limits, but I hate playing it. I played GT1 and beat it, all the sequels are just remakes with more polygons and higher resolutions. Even if the game suddenly became real life, I wouldn't feel any more attracted to it. Its the lesser known games like Infamous and Modnation racers that have scored high with me. Take away the reality, add more game.

06-02-2010, 03:03 AM	#6
Havok83 Blu-ray Champion Member since:Sep 2007 Blu-ray collection:147 Trading Score:6	why do people still care about this stuff?

06-02-2010, 04:47 AM	#8
richieb1971 Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Aug 2007 4K collection:89 Blu-ray collection:706 Trading Score:16	With Uncharted 2, I definitely felt like I'd seen all there was to see by 75% of the way through it. I turned it off, shelved it and never put it on again. I got to the bit after the driving bit on a mountain side hideout. Infamous was far and away the better game, because you had choices all of the time. You could run, hide, shoot, climb, use special weapons. It felt more like a game. I certainly don't think uncharted is a bad game, but almost every level you saw waves and waves and waves of men running towards you with guns. Its very action packed. But seriously, I must have shot 3000 people in my game and they only killed me about 10 times. Its just silly. Its not like he's got super powers. And that guy who hired all that army must be ashamed they can't kill one guy in a T-shirt. At least Infamous gives the player the belief that he's super human. That aside, games that require head shots all the way through the game are repetitive. If you like that sort of thing then great. I can take it for a while, but with nothing new on the table after 75% of the way in.. A bit sad really. And what was the point of going to that mountain anyway? I climbed and risked my life, only to be packing my bags and moving on, there was nothing there and the game didn't even explain it. GT5 is a technical demo. No I haven't played it. But its not entertaining to me. Going round and round a track which I have to race 50 times to afford some Ferrari specific race when I don't own a Ferrari is plain ridiculous. If thats fun to you, you guys need some help. I needed medication playing part 4, it went on for weeks doing the same crap. Those endurance races will drain power stations I'm telling you. But seriously, people need to ask themselves if whats important is the fun factor, or the technical factor. If you want the BEST Graphics ever, then just wait 10 more years and all games will look photo realistic. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will all reach that point eventually. So what is everyone going to play then? According to Hirai whats his name, the life cycle of a console is justified by the developers ability to untap unknown potential from a console using gimmicky code. Well, one day you won't have to do that and games will play exactly the same as they do now. Run n gun, brrmm brrrmm, jump jump, dodge dodge.. When all is said and done, its the fun factor thats important now, not the graphics. Modnation racers is fun and has much more addrenalin, heart pounding finishes than GT5 could ever have. Thats because its a game.

06-02-2010, 05:53 AM	#9
Ascended_Saiyan Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Sep 2006 Location:Atlanta, Georgia Blu-ray collection:608 Trading Score:1	The critics just don't agree with you. A lot of gamers don't agree with you. Your UC2 assessment is a minority assessment and that's fine. You should just understand that. You killed 3000 enemies and only died 10 times, huh? Why don't you up the difficulty level? Ok, racing simulation isn't your cup of tea. Fine. That's not a reflection on the game. It's more of a reflection on you. The core racing experience of GT hasn't really changed. It's about fun factor AND technical factor. With the PS3, you can have BOTH! The review scores back this up. The TOP award winning games for the past 2 years were PS3 exclusives. Also, the top graphical games for the past 2 or 3 years were PS3 exclusives. Look at the gameplay review scores for MLB: The Show, Killzone 2, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, LittleBigPlanet, etc. What do the reviews say? What do a great deal of the game owners say? What publisher has the highest rated games on average? Hint: I believe it's the publisher that also releases the top graphical games. Bottom line: Don't try to make it seem like it's an either/or thing, when it comes to gaming. Just because there are great graphics doesn't mean the game with be good and vice versa.

06-02-2010, 09:59 AM	#13
richieb1971 Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Aug 2007 4K collection:89 Blu-ray collection:706 Trading Score:16	My argument translates to - Why bother about upping the graphics if the experience is going to be exactly the same? In uncharted 3, another 10000 guys will come running at you with guns, if they don't improve that aspect of the game, its a failure. GT5, if they don't improve anything but the graphics, to me its a failure. I already played all 4 of the previous games and to me the upgrading doesn't seem fitting. Baby steps. Sequels will nearly always get high scores because everyone loves them. But how is doing the same thing again and again and again tapping in to the system? Surely making something fresh is tapping the imagination, which last I heard was bigger pool of bytes. Playstation move has the potential to be more ground breaking than anything the machine can do graphically. I haven't been impressed with graphics since the Playstation > Dreamcast era. Because simply put, its baby steps marketted as GIANT steps of mankind.. I preferred Dead Space to UC2.. At least there was a variety of enemies and an atmosphere. You got to upgrade your suit and shoot upside down.. Lots more imagination and variety. Variety doesn't make a game, but it helps.

06-02-2010, 03:13 PM	#20
agoofykindasuperman Blu-ray Knight Top contributor Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Toronto, Canada Home Theater Gallery:27 4K collection:618 Blu-ray collection:2041 Blu-ray reviews:1 Trading Score:178	If you think that graphics being improved are not giant leaps then just take a step back to years ago when the first computer generated graphics were created. If you've ever seen an interview with any of the folks at Pixar you should get the idea of just how monumental those slight improvements really are. I seen one interview where an animator for Pixar says that during the early days, when they first created the Luxo lamp animation with the lamp hopping across the floor, everybody looks at that as something very simple, however he wanted to jump up and shout to everybody; "you have no idea how many hours that took!" What I'm saying is, some improvements may not look like much on the surface, but to the creators they are great achievements in their minds.

Best PS3 Game Deals