I dont think so somehow. By develpoing on the 360 its easier to port to other systems thanks to its more traditional architecture it doesnt make any sense to make a game on the PS3 and then spend alot of time and money trying to get it to work on other systems. Not to mention in our current economic climate its jus a damn site cheaper to make a game on a 360 and up to this current point in time when a game is released on both 360 and PS3 the trend is that the 360 version sells more. Im sorry Mr Maguire it just doesnt make good bussiness sense at this time to be doing things the way you mention.

...I'm sorry, I don't buy this. Sony if you want this kind of stick you need to be pushing developers harder, Say for instance, games like Bioshock, although released first on the 360, why didn't they make this look 10 times better when porting it over to PS3. If the 360 is so inferior Sony do something about it. Push developers harder to make PS3 games look better. Don't just "believe" third party developers are going to start using the PS3 as the lead platform.

They said the same thing two year ago.

They said the same thing one year ago.

We're still waiting !

If you're making a PS3 and a 360 game, it would be easier to do the PS3 game first.

This is just because the majority of headaches you are going to get are on PS3, so you may as well deal with them alongside the regular problems you're going to have.

When you port to 360 it'll be a doddle. For some reason, Sony are promoting this as a good thing for them ...but it's not. It's just evidence that PS3 is a bitch to program.

The question actually is ...is it worth making a PS3 version?

mate if you knew anything about both machines you'd know that spec wise the Ps3 has the higher spec and in theory the ability to produce the better looking games.
i'm not going to throw names and figures about because it's pointless.
and before you say i'm a fan boy, i don't own 1 sony product well apart from my phone.
sony will produce the best games on both consoles at somepoint, but by that time they would have shot themselves in the foot 100 times with refusing to drop the price, on both their machine and the dev kit neeeded to make games on it.
everyone wants this machine just not everyone is willing to pay their price.

You can get some good stuff out of a PS3, but it difficult to do because it's a pain to get all 7 cores to play nice together and the GPU can be a bottleneck.

Even if it's potential was met and the PS3 was clearly better, would it be worth spending more time and money on the PS3 version?

You'll find that the PS3 version would be held back by the 360 version, because that will be the lead platform since it's in more homes (just like the PS2) and easy to convert to.

It's harder to port from 360 to the ps3 than the ps3 to the 360 which is why ea has switched to the ps3 as the lead platform for new games like mirrors edge.

At the end of the day though developers will want games to look identically so they reap as much profit as possible.

ha ha dear me, why do you care so much, just love your 360 and leave sony too it, 2 words come to mind here

Sorry Jack - your comments are fanboyish to the extreme. I'm going to remove them.

Good lord, MCV. How about some ANALYSIS or some QUESTIONING instead of just running the press release like it's proper news?

Sure, I'll ask Ray to pop over now shall I, Jesus?

Incidentally, if you actually click on the links you'll find the quotes come from an interview with Videogamer and not a press release.

lol, nice reply Ben@MCV :D

Two words: Wishful Thinking. When the 360 is outselling the PS3 in Japan, questions must be asked!

Firstly fair enough Ben I went a bit too far.

Everyone remember when PS2 games that were ported to Xbox 1 always looked better graphically?

Well if the PS3 is according to this Sony rep superior to the PS3 why aren't developers making better ports from the 360 to the PS3 on the so-called 'superior hardware'?

Its because there is nothing in the PS3 the developers can do to make the game look or run better its simple as that. What the PS3 can do the 360 can do as well.

It is be possible to do ...it's just a pain in the backside to do it.

...sorry, I don't know why I'm responding to a message that will disappear.

We've all known this for a long time, why is this news?

Its taking a long time for it to actually happen though.

Im sick and tired of poor 360 ports.

Developers are sticking to what they know best - Direct X architecture.

It will only take one developer to start development on the PS3 and port from there - once that happens, the rest will follow.

Gaming will move forward on that day.

One of my mates is a games programmer for both XBOX 360 and Playstation 3 and he says it is easier to code games for the 360 than the PS3. Dream on Maguire!!!
Hmmm strange the above statement is from a Sony exec!
Somewhat biased perhaps!? Lick it!!!

Game developers quote the relative power of the PS3's RSX GPU as being something of the order of 1.5 to 4 times slower that the GPU in the 360 in real game situations (forget benchmarks thanks).
Its very hard to see how that is a downgrade. Take a look at some of the reviews of Fallout 3.
The PS3 CPU has a higher spec, but its very hard to get good results from it - all the work you do is PS3 specific, and its long, hard optimisation work.

Looks like we have found the replacement for Jonathon Ross for the British Comedy Awards, Step forward Ray!!!

The PS3 is totally screwed.

I don't think so Tim! Fallout 3 springs to mind, LOL. Sony and PS3 are choking on their own BS.

Is this the guy that cited Mirrors Edge as "proof of the benefits"? If it is, then I wonder why the demo runs worse on my PS3@720p than it does on my 360@1080p?

Going to be highly amusing when the first PS3 led game runs better on the ported machine. Makes you wonder what the excuse is going to be then. :D

The problem with his argument is that there have been plenty of shabby PS3 exclusives that they cannot use porting to hide behind. So if teams developing solely for the PS3 can't make it appear "technically superior", where does he get the basis of his argument from?

It's about time they started to accept what the "clued-up" people in this industry already knew. Both machines are pretty much identical. Both machines have highlights and flaws.

Ray Maguire should stop being a corporate fanboy, set a professional example and shut up about things he doesn't understand but has been told to say.

But then this is Sony talking, the company that told us PS3 was "The true HD next-gen console" and worth working longer for. All I can say is that I'm glad I still work till 5 o'clock.

Just buy both machines,it saves the hassle-now how about some new Vectrex games?You know you want them,eh eh?

Sorry, but multi format games have always been "lowest common denominator" whereas the weakest console is the primary developed machine and then more powerful consoles have the odd special effect, shiny surface, higher res or extra detail on them.

It's been happening since the Mega Drive days, and one of the reason why the Dreamcast bombed, all PS1 ports.

Well I don't really care which platform they use as the primary for dev, who does. As long as the games get made does it really matter! They can program it on a C64 for all that it matters!!!

However, if you start getting a considerable difference in features and the like between a game release on one console compared to another (like Mr Sony is suggesting in the full article) then there'd better be a price difference to match. I'm not paying the same £40 for a one version of a game when the other version has considerably more. That just wouldn't be fair to the gamers. Anyway, if they're talking about dev on the leading setup shouldn't that be a PC. A top end gaming PC wipes the florr with all consoles and always will!

The PS3 is like a Ferrari with wheels made out of ice. It's technically very powerful, but none of that matters if you can put that power down on the road.
As a developer I'd say we're more likely to continue developing first on the 360 simply because it's easier to prototype new ideas on the 360. Getting things up and running fast is where the 360 has a clear advantage over the PS3 and so much of development relies on quickly prototyping and iterating on new ideas.

You shouldn't lead on PC for console games because its performance characteristics, throughput bottlenecks and entire architecture are completely different to both PS3 and 360.

Sony boast about developers leading PS3 as if its a good thing - as some people here correctly identify, that is in fact because its the more difficult and performance constrained machine. GPU side its out and out slower; CPU side, its a completely different architecture with non-generalised memory access on the SPUs.

What that means in practice is titles leading on PS3 are equally good on 360, but could have been better, especially rendering-wise.

Oh belt up Maguire, it's getting boring. Sony have been spinning the same rubbish since the consoles inception. "PS3 can do this, PS3 is going to be able to do that" and so on, and yet we haven't seen one shred of evidence of the consoles 'apparent' super technology. All Sony are doing here, (and have constantly done since the PS3's launch), is preach to the ignorance of the general public in the hope that they'll swallow all this nonsense.

Here'a an idea, Sony, instead of constantly telling us what the PS3 can do why not actually show us what it can do?

People have 'lead' platforms still? Most games now are developed at the same time on all platforms. Sony are talking out of their arse as per usual.

Larry, the reason the DC died was nothing to do with the ps1 ports, there really weren't that many of them, the problem was everyone thought the ps2 was going to be so much better and it offered the DVD drive. Additionaly Sega actualy sold a fair amount of the machine but they simply didn't have the cash to carry on. Everyone swallowed Sonys cobblers - remember the faked shots of the getaway that were photoshopped piccys of west london?
Regarding conversion in the MD era, as the snes ran much slower than the MD but had the bespoke sprite scaler most games really weren't just conversions, each had it's own issues and limits, the snes one being more colourful but the MD ones running faster and many times being better to play. Much of the time the games were actually pretty different.
Stay off the sauce Guru Larry ;-)

my best mate had PS3 because of all the BS sony said about it and it drove him insane the fact that my 360 which was about 50% cheaper ran smoother and was just a better al round console
i think the PS3 would have been great but sony should have held back in dev and not tried to make a console that would stun the world and jsut made one that had everythign the 360 has just make it run nicer and make the visuals a little better than the 360s but no they went for the console of god and was it worth the extra wait no
the only thing that the wait did was allow the 360 the fly ahead and get games that made great bundle deals the PS3 and sony aren't going to be able to bring themselves back because MS has the resources to match everything they release and make it easier to use or run etc so they can just peg the PS3
unless sony sort out the BS and sort out the fact the 360 is smoother
and NO im not a fan boy i had PS3 i got it because of the F1 games, oblivion, ridge racer seven and couple other games but it drove me insane so i traded it for an elite and im glad i did

Sony wanted to have the killer machine and set out well - Blu-ray, wireless, up to 7 controls etc. but the problem was not in the spec of the machine - but in the development of the gpu - then to compound the situation they didnt do what MS did - give developers all the tools (maybe they dont know how to get the best themselves).

Everyone loves to bash MS but this is what they do very well - they document and they allow ppl to build on their knowledge - I just bought a PS3 becuz of Blu-ray - I cant justify buying any game other than Metal Gear and I still havent bought it due to Fallout, Fable and now Gears.

I seriously doubt that Sony can deliver this round (so they should stop talking and start producing) - They need like 5-10 killer games in the next 2 years. I am still waiting on GT3, Killzone2 well not really but Sony loyalist are.

Maybe they follow MS (vista) and short-circuit the PS3 but I hope not because I want to play and not just watch movies!!!

http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/~buy-xanax-no-rx - xanax http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/~buy-tramadol-no-rx - tramadol http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/~buy-valium-online - valium http://cgi3.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=buy-ambien-online-without-prescription-buy-ambien-10mg-5mg - ambien http://cgi3.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=buy-xanax-online-buy-xanax-2mg-1mg - xanax http://cgi3.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=buy-fioricet-online-without-prescription-buy-fioricet-cod - fioricet http://connections.blackboard.com/people/50273d6fc2 - tamiflu http://tapestry.formos.com/wiki/display/~buy-tamiflu-winthout-prescription - tamiflu http://boinc.vanderbilt.edu/CSB/view_profile.php?userid=5324 - ambien http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/~ativan4r5r - ativan http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/~buy-ambien-without-prescription - ambien
middletown endeavors weve psychology neuendorf automodule placelondon