PS3's minute RAM backfires; is Square-Enix's reason for FFXIV delay.

http://www.vg247.com/2010/08/24/ffxiv-ps3-delay-down-to-memory-says-square-enix/

---

The PlayStation 3 version of MMO Final Fantasy XIV was delayed due to "memory" issues, producer Hiromichi Tanaka told VG247.

Speaking to us at gamescom last week, the developer explained for the first time why the PS3 version was held back into March next year.

"The main reason was the memory," said Tanaka via his translator.

"On the PC, they haveenormousmemory. For PS3, there's a restriction.

"They are adjusting the memory size and customising it; it took longer then we were expecting. But we're really working hard to bring it out as soon as possible."

When asked if this was a memory issue with either the Blu-ray or HDD, Tanaka just said in English: "Memory."

In hindsight, he was probably referring to RAM issues.

Final Fantasy XIV launches at the end of next month for PC, and enters an open beta early next month.

The PS3 version lands in March 2011. Tanaka told us a 360 version was still being talked about with Microsoft.

---

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

ok i hate j-rpgs

ok i hate j-rpgs

Vader993

ok i hate j-rpgs

Vader993

Lazy devs. AAllxxjjnn

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

Nintendonly

Confirmed: Xbox 360 is better.

because that's the real, underlying point of this thread, right?

This seems to be a Sega Saturn type situation. Highly capable system, very difficult to get results out of it. This, of course, is what comes from putting the PC first in development. That was probably their biggest mistake.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. ohthemanatee

He knows.

Gawd, memory /= storage.

[QUOTE="ohthemanatee"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. hakanakumono

He knows.

i know right?

because we all know that Uncharted 2, God of War 3 and the Killzone franchise only look good because their corridor shooters.

(Killzone 3's large environments and Infamous 2's open world scheme don't count since they probably will suck.)

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

HelloMoto56

Confirmed: Xbox 360 is better.

because that's the real, underlying point of this thread, right?

Gawd, memeory /= storage. brandontwb

RAM =/= storage. Your point? Nobody in this thread said anything about hard disk space.

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

Nintendonly

[QUOTE="Vader993"]

ok i hate j-rpgs

zarshack

MMORPG are type of rpgs

*face palm* back

[QUOTE="brandontwb"]Gawd, memeory /= storage. Nintendonly

RAM =/= storage. Your point? Nobody in this thread said anything about hard disk space.

except your statement about only one of the cards being available is completely false.

Obviously. @TC, what do you mean only one of those cards is available?RavenLoud

The other 256 MB RAM card in the PS3 is dedicated to one of the processors and is unavailable for dev use.

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

Nintendonly

??? Troll Fail. Both memory banks are usable by devs. It's not PS3's specific RAM configuration that is slowing the PS3 client... it's taking a PC game that recommends at Least 4 GB RAM and making it fit into RAM 1/8 that size. If you'd have read the article you posted, you'd know that already. :roll:

some people here must seriously be joking, have you even bothered reading some of the recommended specs for ff xiv?

one of their listings recommended a 460

id love to know how many of you have that

[QUOTE="HelloMoto56"]

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

RavenLoud

Confirmed: Xbox 360 is better.

because that's the real, underlying point of this thread, right?

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development.Nintendonly

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

some people here must seriously be joking, have you even bothered reading some of the recommended specs for ff xiv? one of their listings recommended a 480i_am_interested

TC didn't read.

he simply took the standard SW formula and translated into another fail-win topic.

even if he failed utterly in accurately summarizing an article, he still succeeds in feeding another flamewar.

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

Nintendonly

Maybe its me not understanding what you're saying, but that part is rubbish, both of the ram cards are available, one is just designated to the graphic card and the other to the cpu.

And the Os footprint is not as big anymore.

and I'm pretty sure they would have the same problem on the 360 if Ram is there only problem..

the rest of you're post was great but don't miss inform..

EDIT: lol at all the people corecting TC. maybe he should research a little more before posting. :P

[QUOTE="RavenLoud"]Obviously. @TC, what do you mean only one of those cards is available?Nintendonly

The other 256 MB RAM card in the PS3 is dedicated to one of the processors and is unavailable for dev use.

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

For those of you who don't know, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB unified RAM, whereas the PS3 has 256 MB + 256 MB. Only one of those RAM cards is available to devs, and acts as one of the biggest hurdles during PS3 game development. See: Ghostbusters.

tumle

Maybe its me not understanding what you're saying, but that part is rubbish, both of the ram cards are available, one is just designated to the graphic card and the other to the cpu.

And the Os footprint is not as big anymore.

and I'm pretty sure they would have the same problem on the 360 if Ramis there only problem..

the rest of you're post was great but don't miss inform..

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

[QUOTE="RavenLoud"]Obviously. @TC, what do you mean only one of those cards is available?Nonstop-Madness

The other 256 MB RAM card in the PS3 is dedicated to one of the processors and is unavailable for dev use.

[QUOTE="Nintendonly"]

[QUOTE="RavenLoud"]Obviously. @TC, what do you mean only one of those cards is available?Nonstop-Madness

The other 256 MB RAM card in the PS3 is dedicated to one of the processors and is unavailable for dev use.

either way he never stated that it lacked memory for graphics only that it lagged memory. and It would be wherry stupid if you couldn't allocate memory to the cpu, something has to run the game engine.. and what did he think the 256 MB (Mb can never remembe always mix them up r:p ) was used for? OS?

[QUOTE="tumle"]

Maybe its me not understanding what you're saying, but that part is rubbish, both of the ram cards are available, one is just designated to the graphic card and the other to the cpu.

And the Os footprint is not as big anymore.

and I'm pretty sure they would have the same problem on the 360 if Ramis there only problem..

the rest of you're post was great but don't miss inform..

delta3074

wow.. I remember it was a larch chunk, but not that much.I think its the better way to go, taking a big portion at the beginning and narrowing it down later when things get better coded and the set features are Incorporated instead of the other way around, this way they can always ad new things with out the risk of taking up to much memory. So they have a chance to grow the OS and not be limited.

after palying ffxiii i felt sad and angry that the game was so hard and slow. i dont think i will ever be able to finish this game.and its very linear. so i really wish the next ff is better like the 12th one

[QUOTE="zarshack"]

[QUOTE="Vader993"]

ok i hate j-rpgs

Vader993

MMORPG are type of rpgs

*face palm* back

Who in their right mind would play an MMO on a console anyway?

Looking at the requirements for the PC version, I dont see how either console can run it without being severely gimped.

This seems to be a Sega Saturn type situation. Highly capable system, very difficult to get results out of it. This, of course, is what comes from putting the PC first in development. That was probably their biggest mistake.

[QUOTE="ohthemanatee"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. hakanakumono

He knows.

let me guess ps3 sucks what ever you enjoy playing games onrules

why can all OP just get to the underlying point of there threads.

Your description of ram architecture in ps3 is COMPLETELY wrong.Its not like they choose between 256 XDR and 256 Vram,its just that vram is for graphics and xdr for processing but you can use this 256 of XDR freely for graphics because of high bandwidth bus.

Lazy devs. AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="RavenLoud"][QUOTE="HelloMoto56"]

Confirmed: Xbox 360 is better.

because that's the real, underlying point of this thread, right?

delta3074

The PS3 is a super computer so its pretty obvious its the dev's fault.

Lazy devs. AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. lawlessx

PS3 is a super computer and is slowly curing cancer with folding at home, never doubt teh cell.

Oooook it's a MMO are they stupid or something! Everyone that plays MMO's knows you need RAM and a good graphics card. For them to think bringing a MMO to a console will be a walk in the park needs some serious help.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. omho88

Dude, you realize that if this was on 360 also, they would be **** about it to. 360s has a better way of using RAM, but SE is comapring it to a PC, and im sorry, a PS3 and 360 does not stand up to a PC as far as memory.

Okay so its the PS3 memory that held back this game.But what I don't understand the DC MMO seem to not be having any such problems with memory or missed out on anything about it having issues ..I don't normally say these kind of things on SW but it sounds to me like Lazy Devs.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Lazy devs. lawlessx

It is lol, either way I don't see why the big 3 couldn't just put in more RAM in their design if they wanted their consoles to last a significant amount of time.