Far Cry 2 : 3 developers working on xbox360 version , 14 working on ps3 version!

so can someone explain how does it effect us gamers if a companyhas more devs working for the PS3 title rather than on the Xbox360 version??

Lemmings seem to have run out of sad excuses to bash the PS3, and are now using RIDICULOUS ones :)

Also until the game is released none of us can know which version (PS3 / 360) will be the best... its been a while now that multiplats are of equal quality, with minor differences in favour of both sides.. practically meaning version run/look identical

it just means ps3 version will be bettermingo123

maybe.. but it's ubisoft we're talking about :P

it just means ps3 version will be bettermingo123

I have to say I have seen some serious fanboyism, but you sir tip the hat. how the hell does that mean it will be better? It means its harder to port so they need more people. How in any of that, do you get, that that will make it better? All it means is it take 14 people on the ps3 to do a 3 man job on the 360.

Stop feeding out of the bottle Sony gave you and realize they are just as full of it as M$. Embrace gaming in general not just Sony's BS.

This is my main gripe with the PS3 so many developers find it hard to port or create games for it... I mean WTH sony should have known that 70% of the PS2 library where multiplatform games.

Still not as bad as RROD but its close enough...(orange box).

[QUOTE="mingo123"]it just means ps3 version will be betterShrinekeeper

I have to say I have seen some serious fanboyism, but you sir tip the hat. how the hell does that mean it will be better? It means its harder to port so they need more people. How in any of that, do you get, that that will make it better? All it means is it take 14 people on the ps3 to do a 3 man job on the 360.

Stop feeding out of the bottle Sony gave you and realize they are just as full of it as M$. Embrace gaming in general not just Sony's BS.

nah, all it means is 14 people are really optimizing for ps3, while 360 will get lame unoptimized pc port

Its ubi, and they are making a PC game and porting it. The ps3 is hard to work with and I wouldn't be suprised if the 360 version works out better. We are talking about Ubisoft :(.

I hope the ps3 and 360 version both workout though, it would be cool if they have all the features of the pc version.

[QUOTE="Shrinekeeper"]

[QUOTE="mingo123"]it just means ps3 version will be bettermingo123

I have to say I have seen some serious fanboyism, but you sir tip the hat. how the hell does that mean it will be better? It means its harder to port so they need more people. How in any of that, do you get, that that will make it better? All it means is it take 14 people on the ps3 to do a 3 man job on the 360.

Stop feeding out of the bottle Sony gave you and realize they are just as full of it as M$. Embrace gaming in general not just Sony's BS.

nah, all it means is 14 people are really optimizing for ps3, while 360 will get lame unoptimized pc port

yea your right it take 14 people to optimize for the PS3 what 3 people can optimize for the 360.

but I do know what you were trying to say and WOW your well I dont really wanna say it .... idiot.

Sony must have handed you a really F***ing huge bottle to feed off of, to be so blind.

[QUOTE="Eltroz"]Sounds like another miltiplat will be better on the 360. is anyone even shocked?sirk1264

This article meant nothing about which multiplat will be better. If anything the PC version will be the best version.

Guys, you are all missing the point entirely. The question is not which port is going to be better or not. The point is that Ubi needs to have 14 developers working on the PS3 version and only 4 on the xbox360, because its harder to develop on the PS3. Requiring 4x the amount of manpower to develop for the PS3 should be a royal embarrasment for Sony.

Yet I would still put money on the 360 having the superior version.

Sony really shot themselves in the foot with the ULTIMATE hardware that NOBODY can program for...

Cool, i did alot of research about deciding wether it was the better choice to the 8800gt, and i was tipped of that the 9600gt would be better for the future so i just went for it. They're both great cards though, you'll have fun playing any game on high settings with both cards.

mustaf_nur89

Who ever tipped you should be destroyed... 10-20% more performance for less than £10, doesn't take a genius to work out the "better choice".

[QUOTE="Shrinekeeper"]

[QUOTE="mingo123"]it just means ps3 version will be bettermingo123

I have to say I have seen some serious fanboyism, but you sir tip the hat. how the hell does that mean it will be better? It means its harder to port so they need more people. How in any of that, do you get, that that will make it better? All it means is it take 14 people on the ps3 to do a 3 man job on the 360.

Stop feeding out of the bottle Sony gave you and realize they are just as full of it as M$. Embrace gaming in general not just Sony's BS.

nah, all it means is 14 people are really optimizing for ps3, while 360 will get lame unoptimized pc port

[QUOTE="IDateWhiteChick"]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey Sony! Ever hear of a little thing called "ease of development?" I hear that it helps with the AAA multiplats, and also with AAA exclusives. I also hear that it tends to help reduce the number of flops. Too bad you don't know much about that. At least you know how to trojan horse an unneeded media format to your loyal customters who would go to any length to buy your "dis-ease of development" console.

ermacness

Might want to check your key there, seems to be stuck kid. Each console has some design flaws. The 360's cooling and the PS3's hardware. It's like they designed the hardware without even thinking how dev's would code for it.

Far Cry 2 uses a proprietary engine that was built from the ground up for the game. The developers told me that about 175 people worked on creating the engine and then the game for the PC. Currently that team is working to build in DX10 support, though it wasn't ready when I had a chance to look at it.

Because the engine was built to work on a PC, bringing the game, with all of its bells and whistles, over to the Xbox 360 was a relatively easy affair, the developers told me. Afterall, they said, the Xbox 360 is essentially a computer. In fact they only have three people working on the team that is porting the game over.

The Playstation 3? Not quite as simple an affair. They have a team of 14 working on that port, mostly because of the "difficulties" of working with the Playstation 3's unique architecture.

http://kotaku.com/5011439/far-cry-2-dev-and-port-teams-range-from-175-to-three

MojondeVACA

Hey you know what? that's fine, as long as they do good and cows don't **** it's all good. they ARE consoles right? 360 just has an edge due to it being made by MS

so can someone explain how does it effect us gamers if a companyhas more devs working for the PS3 title rather than on the Xbox360 version??

Malta_1980

Also, being that the 360 version will sell at least 2x what the PS3 version will sell (going by historical data on multiplats), this is a shining example of why the PS3 is a waste of time for devs. They literally have to pay over 3 times the number of employees to get hopefully the same (but not likely) result as the 360 version. They are spending a lot of money for something that will not even give them the rate of return that the 360 can offer in sales. They will likely work on it until it is "passable" and then get it off their hands, because time + more employees == expensive.

[QUOTE="PS_John"]

I'd rather have 14 people working on the ps3 version than 3 people, it means the PS3 version will probably run better

Lets put it this way, who would be a better soccer team? A team of 14 players or 3? Nuff said

PS3 > 360 version

IDateWhiteChick

LOL.

Also, being that the 360 version will sell at least 2x what the PS3 version will sell (going by historical data on multiplats), this is a shining example of why the PS3 is a waste of time for devs. They literally have to pay over 3 times the number of employees to get hopefully the same (but not likely) result as the 360 version. They are spending a lot of money for something that will not even give them the rate of return that the 360 can offer in sales. They will likely work on it until it is "passable" and then get it off their hands, because time + more employees == expensive.

[QUOTE="mingo123"][QUOTE="Shrinekeeper"]

[QUOTE="mingo123"]it just means ps3 version will be betterNedemis

I have to say I have seen some serious fanboyism, but you sir tip the hat. how the hell does that mean it will be better? It means its harder to port so they need more people. How in any of that, do you get, that that will make it better? All it means is it take 14 people on the ps3 to do a 3 man job on the 360.

Stop feeding out of the bottle Sony gave you and realize they are just as full of it as M$. Embrace gaming in general not just Sony's BS.

nah, all it means is 14 people are really optimizing for ps3, while 360 will get lame unoptimized pc port

Exactly!! Here is what happened:

- they ran the game on 360 hardware, it worked almost fine. They said "let's put 3 guys on it to iron out the game, and we are good. The other 14 people in our team can start working on the new Tom Clancy IP"

- they ran the game on PS3 hardware, and it straight up didn't work at all. They said "uh oh, we better put the other 14 people to get this working in time for the 360 release! Stop all work on anything else until this is done!"

I might have exaggerated a little bit, but it probably went more or less like this.

So would someone care to tell me, is this tech demo running on PC??

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34524.html

Because I'm not sure if PS360 are capable of that?!

So would someone care to tell me, is this tech demo running on PC??

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34524.html

Because I'm not sure if PS360 are capable of that?!

GnR-SLaSh

it probably is, but console versions look pretty identical to that :shock:

[QUOTE="GnR-SLaSh"]

So would someone care to tell me, is this tech demo running on PC??

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34524.html

Because I'm not sure if PS360 are capable of that?!

mingo123

it probably is, but console versions look pretty identical to that :shock:

Haven't seen any footage before that, but quite frankly that is wow..

[QUOTE="GnR-SLaSh"]

So would someone care to tell me, is this tech demo running on PC??

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34524.html

Because I'm not sure if PS360 are capable of that?!

mingo123

it probably is, but console versions look pretty identical to that :shock:

mingo... according to the devs you are wrong.

The Devs have said that the PC has up to Very High settings. Very High will run on A Core 2 Duo, 2GB of RAM and an 8800 GTS 640 MB according to them at 1280x1024 resolution with 30 FPS.

The console versions of the game are equivilant to the High settings running at 720p with 30 FPS. The PC mentioned above has been said to run the game at High settings at 1920x1080 resolution getting more than 30 FPS.

The console versions still set a new standard for graphics on console but they WILL NOT match the PC version.

[QUOTE="mingo123"][QUOTE="GnR-SLaSh"]

So would someone care to tell me, is this tech demo running on PC??

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34524.html

Because I'm not sure if PS360 are capable of that?!

horrowhip

it probably is, but console versions look pretty identical to that :shock:

mingo... according to the devs you are wrong.

The Devs have said that the PC has up to Very High settings. Very High will run on A Core 2 Duo, 2GB of RAM and an 8800 GTS 640 MB according to them at 1280x1024 resolution with 30 FPS.

The console versions of the game are equivilant to the High settings running at 720p with 30 FPS. The PC mentioned above has been said to run the game at High settings at 1920x1080 resolution getting more than 30 FPS.

The console versions still set a new standard for graphics on console but they WILL NOT match the PC version.

but console version still look close to the tech demo

but console version still look close to the tech demomingo123

sort of...

As the laws of diminishing returns start to come into effect, differences will be smaller but actual tech requirements grow.

The closer to realism games get, the more tech it will be required to elevate graphics to the next level.

The console versions have weaker textures, more aliasing issues, noticable screen tearing, and other issues that need to be resolved. Don't get me wrong they look great, but you are kidding yourself if you think they actually match up in a side by side comparison. The lighting is not quite as good, and the environmental effects are less impressive(mainly the water. Looks fantastic but if you compare, the water definitely isn't quite as good).

It just isn't as polished.

It is sort of like the difference between Crysis High settings and Crysis Very High settings.

High beats any other game out there. Very High CRUSHES any other game out there. And it all comes down to the small details. Textures, lighting, effects, everything. It just comes together on the Very High settings to produce a truly amazing scene. The game is fantastic looking on High but anyone who has played on Very High can tell you that it is an entirely different experience on Very High. In Video's, that doesn't come out. The only things you really notice are the god rays and the slightly different lighting. The trees get darker and more realistic lighting. But, when you play, you see little things. Like parallax occlusion mapping and other texture improvements.

And Far Cry 2 has its own effects. Tom's Hardware Germany had a story on those effects

http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/0/61596/original/Far-Cry-2-Advanced-Indirect-Lighting-1.jpg

http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/1/61597/original/Far-Cry-2-Advanced-Indirect-Lighting-2.jpg

http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/3/61599/original/Far-Cry-2-Plant-Details.jpg

Those are things that only the PC version will have.

PC games and 360 games use the same programming language. Not surprising really.

Please dont dumb down the PC version
jg4xchamp

What is there too downgrade? FC was never anything special aside from being 1 of the many PC benchmark utilities a la Far Crysis. We all know how the original FC turned out on consoles, it actually provided a better experience overall.

More devs working on PS3. awesome news ^_^

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Please dont dumb down the PC version
Pro_wrestler

What is there too downgrade? FC was never anything special aside from being 1 of the many PC benchmark utilities a la Far Crysis. We all know how the original FC turned out on consoles, it actually provided a better experience overall.

no. Stop being a console fanboy. Seriously, you fanboy shows so obviously that it isn't even funny.

Both Crysis and Far Cry were AAA games in both graphics AND gameplay.

And Far Cry Instincts was a seriously dumbed down and worse version of Far Cry. For what it was, it did it very well but it WAS NOT a better experience than Far Cry's first 1/2. Far Cry may have been half a game but that half a game was amazing. And Crysis may have been 3/4 of a game but the entire first 3/4 of it was amazing. And even the ending was a solid experience. it wasn't "Crysis" but it was a solid game.

If you want to be a fanboy, fine but you must know that you are wrong.

More devs working on PS3. awesome news ^_^

Bloodseeker23

Seriously though, maybe Ubisoft is more interested in what fun and possibilities they can explore with the PS3. I highly doubt that it's a matter of needing more manpower to handle the PS3's complex architecture. If that was the case, 4 or 5 devs would probably have been enough.

[QUOTE="Bloodseeker23"]

More devs working on PS3. awesome news ^_^

nervmeister

Seriously though, maybe Ubisoft is more interested in what fun and possibilities they can explore with the PS3. I highly doubt that it's a matter of needing more manpower to handle the PS3's complex architecture. If that was the case, 4 or 5 devs would probably have been enough.

no. All those extra people are just to convert the engine from DX9 to OpenGL 2.

Not exactly an easy task for 4-5 people... They aren't exploring any possibilities, the two consoles will run the game identically. The video of the two versions shows exactly that...

As the laws of Uncanny Valley start to come into effect, differences will be smaller but actual tech requirements grow.horrowhip

[QUOTE="nervmeister"][QUOTE="Bloodseeker23"]

More devs working on PS3. awesome news ^_^

horrowhip

Seriously though, maybe Ubisoft is more interested in what fun and possibilities they can explore with the PS3. I highly doubt that it's a matter of needing more manpower to handle the PS3's complex architecture. If that was the case, 4 or 5 devs would probably have been enough.

no. All those extra people are just to convert the engine from DX9 to OpenGL 2.

Not exactly an easy task for 4-5 people... They aren't exploring any possibilities, the two consoles will run the game identically. The video of the two versions shows exactly that...

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Please dont dumb down the PC version
horrowhip

What is there too downgrade? FC was never anything special aside from being 1 of the many PC benchmark utilities a la Far Crysis. We all know how the original FC turned out on consoles, it actually provided a better experience overall.

no. Stop being a console fanboy. Seriously, you fanboy shows so obviously that it isn't even funny.

Both Crysis and Far Cry were AAA games in both graphics AND gameplay.

And Far Cry Instincts was a seriously dumbed down and worse version of Far Cry. For what it was, it did it very well but it WAS NOT a better experience than Far Cry's first 1/2. Far Cry may have been half a game but that half a game was amazing. And Crysis may have been 3/4 of a game but the entire first 3/4 of it was amazing. And even the ending was a solid experience. it wasn't "Crysis" but it was a solid game.

If you want to be a fanboy, fine but you must know that you are wrong.

Stop being a PC fanboy:| Far Cry is like I said, nothing special. Boring and unimaginative just like Crysis, they're both just standard.. Jack Carver is the cheesiest protagonist in any FPS in recent memory. Even the main character in that generic FPS TimeShift was more memorable and had way more character mostly due to the fact he had controll over time but that doesn't change perception that he was overall more enjoyable to play with.

um...does it matter? just get whatever version you can jesus....fanboysdarkmagician06

[QUOTE="horrowhip"] As the laws of Uncanny Valley start to come into effect, differences will be smaller but actual tech requirements grow.lowe0

yes. Sorry.

Stop being a PC fanboy:| Far Cry is like I said, nothing special. Boring and unimaginative just like Crysis, they're both just standard.. Jack Carver is the cheesiest protagonist in any FPS in recent memory. Even the main character in that generic FPS TimeShift was more memorable and had way more character mostly due to the fact he had controll over time but that doesn't change perception that he was overall more enjoyable to play with.

Stupid AI, Cheesy narrative, Lifeless multiplayer, No replay value despite them hyping "open endedness"..just like Crysis. The best thing about both of them is that they ship with an SDK for you to make a completely new game :shock:

Pro_wrestler

Just an FYI but Crysis won Shooter of the Year for a good reason.

And yes, Far Cry was cheesy, and didn't have good MP but the AI was decent and the game was open ended, at least much more so than any other FPS at the time.

And Crysis may have been cheesy as well but the MP was decent, if shallow. But the AI was better than any other game out there. the AI was brilliant. And don't post those videos of the glitches because it will just prove that you never played Crysis...

Crysis has way more replay value than any other FPS around.

Sounds like another miltiplat will be better on the 360. is anyone even shocked?Eltroz

did you even read the article or are u just making stuff up as u go?

I heard alone in dark 5 devs said they have to dealy ps3 version six months after xb360 and pc version.

because the game currently running poorly on ps3.

[QUOTE="Nedemis"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="sirk1264"]

[QUOTE="Eltroz"]Sounds like another miltiplat will be better on the 360. is anyone even shocked?IDateWhiteChick

This article meant nothing about which multiplat will be better. If anything the PC version will be the best version.

They read it how they want it.

Serious Question: Why do people really believe the "Cell" hype? The PS3 has been released for 19-20 months (Nov 2006, if I am not mistaken), and developers have been working on PS3 games for far longer than that, and this so called "power of the cell" has still not been "unlocked," even by the greatest game developers in the entire world. In a few months it will have been out at retail for 2 full years. If we have not seen this "power" unlocked, we probably never will. At least not much before the next generation is released in 2010-2011.

You act as though Sony is the only company to try and hype their system up so it sells more than its competition. You must be too young to remember the total bull that was 'blast processing'. The PS3 is very powerful, there is no denying it. Sony just focused too much on hardware, and not enough on software support.