Let me get this straight..Every Dev is lazy??

Because that is all I hear when a game isn't as good as people thought it was going to be......which is almost every game.

But at the risk of being labeled a fanboy, "Lazy Devs" really seems to be the battle cry of a certain group on system wars.

I assume the Wii is that system? Well if a game like Farcry(great game on PC and Xbox) gets ported over to the Wii and is watered down so much that it hurts to look at and the game has half@$$ed controls, its lazy devs. MP3 looks great and controls well, and Retro put some time in to making that shooter, Ubisoft did not with Farcry. jfkunrendered

I haven't heard sheep cry "lazy devs" since around June.

The cows u mean?? They cry lazy devs when a game is bad/choppy/broken, and wont admit that just maybe its the messed up ps3 hardware at fault. It should be sheep crying as they suffer the greatest number of lazy ps2 and psp ports, but sheep are not as insecure so kudos to them :0

Well if you look at Drakes Fortune or Motostorm, or Cod4, And Ratchet and Clank on the PS3, than look at others. You know its not the system. And the Wii should be great, but lets face it. With more power than any machine of last gen. Why dont we see Halo 2 like graphics on it yet! Instead of RE4 and Zelda TP ports? But they will come around.truenextgen

Most sheep will say MP3 looks better than Halo 2, but I don't really think so. I think they look pretty much the same. But Super Mario Galaxy looks great. At first glance it looks exactly like Sunshine, but you start to notice all the bright colors and particles and it looks great.

Ok, so it is not the Wii? Well if it's PS3 I wouldn't know because after PSP I won't give Sony anything.jfkunrendered

Their being lazy on both. Lazy in terms of they wont school themselves on the system yet. But with the Wii shooting threw the roof, and the PS3 on pace to take over second. Their gonna have to.

The cows u mean?? They cry lazy devs when a game is bad/choppy/broken, and wont admit that just maybe its the messed up ps3 hardware at fault. It should be sheep crying as they suffer the greatest number of lazy ps2 and psp ports, but sheep are not as insecure so kudos to them :0

Bazfrag

Cows are insecure?

Is that why after ME flopped, the only whining threads you saw were cows pretending that the lems were creating a huge uproar? Even when there was a pretty universal acceptance on their part?

Or was that mad cow disease acting up?

Well if you look at Drakes Fortune or Motostorm, or Cod4, And Ratchet and Clank on the PS3, than look at others. You know its not the system. And the Wii should be great, but lets face it. With more power than any machine of last gen. Why dont we see Halo 2 like graphics on it yet! Instead of RE4 and Zelda TP ports? But they will come around.truenextgen

no, it can be done, but they have to put in an insane extra amount of time to get the same result as on 360.

For them time IS money. it's not a coincidence that most early good PS3 gamesare short or lack content.

But maybe they are getting to know the hardware by now....

I think Lazy devs is used for Ubisoft and other devs that bring games out on the Wii with crap controls well many others have superb controls. Also on the PS3 and 360 when you have horrid frame rates.wooooode

The cows u mean?? They cry lazy devs when a game is bad/choppy/broken, and wont admit that just maybe its the messed up ps3 hardware at fault. It should be sheep crying as they suffer the greatest number of lazy ps2 and psp ports, but sheep are not as insecure so kudos to them :0

Bazfrag

THat is sort of a chicken-or-egg arguement though. Just because the PS3 hardware is difficult, does that mean developers trying to dump quick ports onto it can't be called lazy? Isn't it reasonable to call those devs that complain about the PS3 hardware because it isn't exactly like a PC "lazy".

We get it. The PS3 hardware is different from anything people have seen before. New is hard. Programming in a way you haven't had to program before is hard. LEarning is hard sometimes...get over it.

I'm sorry, but every developer who has worked with the PS3 from the ground up, or had a specific team who works with the PS3 for optimizing ports (ie. COD4) have praised the hardware. It has only been those devs who want to quickly dump ports onto the PS3 without doing any optimization, that seem to be complaining. Too me, that sounds like laziness. If they want to convince people they aren't lazy, then take some time to make a game for the PS3, or at least learn how to properly port your 360 game to PS3. If you LEARN it properly and still hate it...then that is fine. At least you tried.

However, I find it extremely disingenuous when ANY developer, regardless of whether they are working with PS3, 360 or Wii, doesn't makeor optimize their game properly for the intended console, then has the audacity to complain because not all the consoles are exactly the same. Because that is essentially what they are complaining about...that not all the consoles are exactly the same, with the exact same hardware and exactly like the PC in every way. That is basically the heart of their complaint. Frankly, I'm glad all the consoles are different.

[QUOTE="truenextgen"]Well if you look at Drakes Fortune or Motostorm, or Cod4, And Ratchet and Clank on the PS3, than look at others. You know its not the system. And the Wii should be great, but lets face it. With more power than any machine of last gen. Why dont we see Halo 2 like graphics on it yet! Instead of RE4 and Zelda TP ports? But they will come around.jfkunrendered

Most sheep will say MP3 looks better than Halo 2, but I don't really think so. I think they look pretty much the same. But Super Mario Galaxy looks great. At first glance it looks exactly like Sunshine, but you start to notice all the bright colors and particles and it looks great.

Yea but you know that thing can do more. People treat it like its below last Gen standards. And we were doing some good 3D worlds last gen. 2008 will tell alot threw these systems thow, their still so new. I mean we can say lazy, but than again we have to remember they both are still vary new. And the one is vary technical and new so?

I'm pretty sure Dev's aren't lazy. Deadlines are probably the main reason for sub-par ports and games.
With PS3 I'm pretty sure Dev's are running out of time as they are finding it harder to code for, seems to be the general consensus.
Burnsmiesta

That would be a good reason the fact that it is new and the programmers are still learning.

Because that is all I hear when a game isn't as good as people thought it was going to be......which is almost every game.

But at the risk of being labeled a fanboy, "Lazy Devs" really seems to be the battle cry of a certain group on system wars.

nocode81

It's just that PS3 is harder to code for and multiplatform developers have a deadline. Specially developers who make sport games like Madden or NBA. They don't have to time to tweak the game so it could go 100% hand-in-hand along side with the hardware.

[QUOTE="Bazfrag"]

The cows u mean?? They cry lazy devs when a game is bad/choppy/broken, and wont admit that just maybe its the messed up ps3 hardware at fault. It should be sheep crying as they suffer the greatest number of lazy ps2 and psp ports, but sheep are not as insecure so kudos to them :0

ZIMdoom

THat is sort of a chicken-or-egg arguement though. Just because the PS3 hardware is difficult, does that mean developers trying to dump quick ports onto it can't be called lazy? Isn't it reasonable to call those devs that complain about the PS3 hardware because it isn't exactly like a PC "lazy".

We get it. The PS3 hardware is different from anything people have seen before. New is hard. Programming in a way you haven't had to program before is hard. LEarning is hard sometimes...get over it.

I'm sorry, but every developer who has worked with the PS3 from the ground up, or had a specific team who works with the PS3 for optimizing ports (ie. COD4) have praised the hardware. It has only been those devs who want to quickly dump ports onto the PS3 without doing any optimization, that seem to be complaining. Too me, that sounds like laziness. If they want to convince people they aren't lazy, then take some time to make a game for the PS3, or at least learn how to properly port your 360 game to PS3. If you LEARN it properly and still hate it...then that is fine. At least you tried.

However, I find it extremely disingenuous when ANY developer, regardless of whether they are working with PS3, 360 or Wii, doesn't makeor optimize their game properly for the intended console, then has the audacity to complain because not all the consoles are exactly the same. Because that is essentially what they are complaining about...that not all the consoles are exactly the same, with the exact same hardware and exactly like the PC in every way. That is basically the heart of their complaint. Frankly, I'm glad all the consoles are different.

I assume the Wii is that system? Well if a game like Farcry(great game on PC and Xbox) gets ported over to the Wii and is watered down so much that it hurts to look at and the game has half@$$ed controls, its lazy devs. MP3 looks great and controls well, and Retro put some time in to making that shooter, Ubisoft did not with Farcry. jfkunrendered

Dude he is talking about the PS3.

THat is sort of a chicken-or-egg arguement though. Just because the PS3 hardware is difficult, does that mean developers trying to dump quick ports onto it can't be called lazy? Isn't it reasonable to call those devs that complain about the PS3 hardware because it isn't exactly like a PC "lazy".ZIMdoom

Isnt it also reasonable to point out to Sony how they made a poor decision with their hardware? Can you really jutisfy all these complaintsas being "lazyness" when this issue was never reallly brought up in previous generations to this degree?

We get it. The PS3 hardware is different from anything people have seen before. New is hard. Programming in a way you haven't had to program before is hard. LEarning is hard sometimes...get over it.ZIMdoom

Im sorry, but when something is costing you several hundred thousands of dollars extra due to unecessary difficulty, its a little hard to just "get over it." Might helping pay that bill next time? i dont think so.

I'm sorry, but every developer who has worked with the PS3 from the ground up, or had a specific team who works with the PS3 for optimizing ports (ie. COD4) have praised the hardware. It has only been those devs who want to quickly dump ports onto the PS3 without doing any optimization, that seem to be complaining. Too me, that sounds like laziness. If they want to convince people they aren't lazy, then take some time to make a game for the PS3, or at least learn how to properly port your 360 game to PS3. If you LEARN it properly and still hate it...then that is fine. At least you tried.ZIMdoom

Yet i really cant fnd evidence of almost any programmer praising the PS3, regardless of the circumstance - and they are the ones that have to deal with the hardware.

However, I find it extremely disingenuous when ANY developer, regardless of whether they are working with PS3, 360 or Wii, doesn't makeor optimize their game properly for the intended console, then has the audacity to complain because not all the consoles are exactly the same. Because that is essentially what they are complaining about...that not all the consoles are exactly the same, with the exact same hardware and exactly like the PC in every way. That is basically the heart of their complaint. Frankly, I'm glad all the consoles are different.ZIMdoom

I find it rather disingenuous that the decision Sony made was solely based on the fact that they wanted to prove that they had a bigger **** than the other guy with almost no regard to the concerns of developers. Well, on paper Sony certainly proved they had stronger hardware.... whats it matter when almost no one's using anywhere near its theoretical values? PS3 optimzed or not, the games arent exactly looking much better than what the 360 is offering.

Isnt the Wii different? Yet, i really dont hear any developers complaining about it. Because the real heart of the complaint isnt that the PS3 is different than the PC. Its the fact that its different without actually making anything better for the developers. They have to put in more work to get the same results. What kind of an idiot would want to pay more money to get the same thing?

Its not a matter of being lazy, it is the amount of money and time the developer is given to make a port.

To make sure that games are the same they should produce them for the PS3 first then port it to the 360. It is much easier and cheaper.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]THat is sort of a chicken-or-egg arguement though. Just because the PS3 hardware is difficult, does that mean developers trying to dump quick ports onto it can't be called lazy? Isn't it reasonable to call those devs that complain about the PS3 hardware because it isn't exactly like a PC "lazy".XaosII

Isnt it also reasonable to point out to Sony how they made a poor decision with their hardware? Can you really jutisfy all these complaintsas being "lazyness" when this issue was never reallly brought up in previous generations to this degree?

We get it. The PS3 hardware is different from anything people have seen before. New is hard. Programming in a way you haven't had to program before is hard. LEarning is hard sometimes...get over it.ZIMdoom

Im sorry, but when something is costing you several hundred thousands of dollars extra due to unecessary difficulty, its a little hard to just "get over it." Might helping pay that bill next time? i dont think so.

I'm sorry, but every developer who has worked with the PS3 from the ground up, or had a specific team who works with the PS3 for optimizing ports (ie. COD4) have praised the hardware. It has only been those devs who want to quickly dump ports onto the PS3 without doing any optimization, that seem to be complaining. Too me, that sounds like laziness. If they want to convince people they aren't lazy, then take some time to make a game for the PS3, or at least learn how to properly port your 360 game to PS3. If you LEARN it properly and still hate it...then that is fine. At least you tried.ZIMdoom

Yet i really cant fnd evidence of almost any programmer praising the PS3, regardless of the circumstance - and they are the ones that have to deal with the hardware.

However, I find it extremely disingenuous when ANY developer, regardless of whether they are working with PS3, 360 or Wii, doesn't makeor optimize their game properly for the intended console, then has the audacity to complain because not all the consoles are exactly the same. Because that is essentially what they are complaining about...that not all the consoles are exactly the same, with the exact same hardware and exactly like the PC in every way. That is basically the heart of their complaint. Frankly, I'm glad all the consoles are different.ZIMdoom

I find it rather disingenuous that the decision Sony made was solely based on the fact that they wanted to prove that they had a bigger **** than the other guy with almost no regard to the concerns of developers. Well, on paper Sony certainly proved they had stronger hardware.... whats it matter when almost no one's using anywhere near its theoretical values? PS3 optimzed or not, the games arent exactly looking much better than what the 360 is offering.

Isnt the Wii different? Yet, i really dont hear any developers complaining about it. Because the real heart of the complaint isnt that the PS3 is different than the PC. Its the fact that its different without actually making anything better for the developers. They have to put in more work to get the same results. What kind of an idiot would want to pay more money to get the same thing?

You know what they say about fools and their money. ;)

Isnt it also reasonable to point out to Sony how they made a poor decision with their hardware? Can you really jutisfy all these complaintsas being "lazyness" when this issue was never reallly brought up in previous generations to this degree?

Im sorry, but when something is costing you several hundred thousands of dollars extra due to unecessary difficulty, its a little hard to just "get over it." Might helping pay that bill next time? i dont think so.

Yet i really cant fnd evidence of almost any programmer praising the PS3, regardless of the circumstance - and they are the ones that have to deal with the hardware.

I find it rather disingenuous that the decision Sony made was solely based on the fact that they wanted to prove that they had a bigger **** than the other guy with almost no regard to the concerns of developers. Well, on paper Sony certainly proved they had stronger hardware.... whats it matter when almost no one's using anywhere near its theoretical values? PS3 optimzed or not, the games arent exactly looking much better than what the 360 is offering.

Isnt the Wii different? Yet, i really dont hear any developers complaining about it. Because the real heart of the complaint isnt that the PS3 is different than the PC. Its the fact that its different without actually making anything better for the developers. They have to put in more work to get the same results. What kind of an idiot would want to pay more money to get the same thing?

XaosII

I agree with the whole cost issue. I agree that Sony made some stupid decisions. What I disagree with is the developers who don't have the time or money to make that quick port the publisher wants to the PS3, turn around and then say the PS3 hardware sucks and it's the hardware's fault. To me, that is just as oversimplified as the "lazy devs" comments. There is some truth to it, no doubt, but there is no denying that there are many issues that create this problem.

Having said that, you will never see or hear me say that Sony focusing on new types of hardware is a bad thing. That trying to innovate how games are made or how hardware works is a bad thing. Personally, I have long believed that the PC style way of doing things has always been very innefficient and actually discourages pushing hardware to the limits.

My point is simple. If developers/publishers/etc aren't going to take the time to learn how the hardware SHOULD work...regardless of the reason...then they shouldn't make blanket statements bashing the hardware they don't understand. Just state the facts, it's more challenging, costs more, and they didn't have the time or money to learn it properly. But they don't do that because no PR department would let those statements pass becuase it implies they didn't do their best.

what?

cod4 and assassin's creed clearly show that it is posible for identical versoins of multiplats to be released simeltaniously.

if any other dev's screw up, it's clearly their own fault

Because that is all I hear when a game isn't as good as people thought it was going to be......which is almost every game.

But at the risk of being labeled a fanboy, "Lazy Devs" really seems to be the battle cry of a certain group on system wars.

nocode81

That happens everytime a multiplat is done on360 then the worse version is the PS3 version. People go off saying ''Teh lazy dev:cry:''

THat is sort of a chicken-or-egg arguement though. Just because the PS3 hardware is difficult, does that mean developers trying to dump quick ports onto it can't be called lazy? Isn't it reasonable to call those devs that complain about the PS3 hardware because it isn't exactly like a PC "lazy".

We get it. The PS3 hardware is different from anything people have seen before. New is hard. Programming in a way you haven't had to program before is hard. LEarning is hard sometimes...get over it.

I'm sorry, but every developer who has worked with the PS3 from the ground up, or had a specific team who works with the PS3 for optimizing ports (ie. COD4) have praised the hardware. It has only been those devs who want to quickly dump ports onto the PS3 without doing any optimization, that seem to be complaining. Too me, that sounds like laziness. If they want to convince people they aren't lazy, then take some time to make a game for the PS3, or at least learn how to properly port your 360 game to PS3. If you LEARN it properly and still hate it...then that is fine. At least you tried.

However, I find it extremely disingenuous when ANY developer, regardless of whether they are working with PS3, 360 or Wii, doesn't makeor optimize their game properly for the intended console, then has the audacity to complain because not all the consoles are exactly the same. Because that is essentially what they are complaining about...that not all the consoles are exactly the same, with the exact same hardware and exactly like the PC in every way. That is basically the heart of their complaint. Frankly, I'm glad all the consoles are different.

ZIMdoom

I agree but for the most part i don't think thats how it's going to work in the developer studios. Cranking out games means money so they will always look for ways to do this as quick as possible. So to simplify the development process the studios will likely try to abstract the hardware. This abstration will take care of all the optimizations for each console so the game devs can just concentrate on building the game. With this generation though, the hardware is drastically different so the abstraction layer will take quite a bit of time to get to a point where it effiencient to use. I can't say they are doing this for sure but i work in the hardware industry and this is basially how things go when you have to develop for multiple platforms

Any of you ever heard of exceptionto the rule? Just because ps3 has handful of good games does not mean that every other developer is just lazy. Maybe just mabye it just means that a lot more money and man power/time went into those games. when you have handful of good games and 100 bellow average games it just shows that the problem is not with developers but with the hardware.

It's like some so so atheletes few times a year might have amazing performance but for majority of the year they are just ok players. Same thing with ps3 for majority of games they are bellow average but there will be games here and there that will stand out.

I own a PS3 and I don't think it's because devs are lazy, I think it's just lack of experience with the hardware, new technology, time, budget, etc.

Aren't all new gens like that for the most part?