100% developed for the Playstation 3

  • 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Nilazz (639 posts) -

So I was watching some clips on youtube about games, and I saw I comment about Rockstar saying they were going to go back to their Playstation roots with GTA V and that the xbox 360 and pc version was going to be a ported Rockstar Leeds, making the Playstation 3 version the lead version.

Has this been confirmed OR was that guy just talking out of his ass?

#2 Posted by N7 (3677 posts) -

Hopefully it's true. Many developers have spoken out that every version turns out better if it's ported FROM the PS3 to the Xbox. There was at least one interview a long, long time ago(Around 2009 I think) where a guy got into specifics why, but I don't remember what it was. Just some technical mumbo-jumbo that I didn't understand.

#3 Posted by Mcfart (1729 posts) -

Would be weird. With next gen coming so soon, they should make for PC+new consoles then port down to 360/PS3.

#4 Posted by hoossy (939 posts) -

@N7:

Probably because programming for the PS3 is more difficult, so porting from that version to an easier platform would take less work after... and would probably loose less in translation.

#5 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

As a huge sony fan and not the biggest fan of the Xbox I'll say this.

Whatever way gives both consoles the best possible version do it. If that happens to the be the PS3 then all the power to them.

#6 Posted by DeF (4979 posts) -

here's how you know that's bullshit:

it's a comment on youtube. Rockstar hasn't said a single word about GTA V since they release the trailer last year other than that the crew from Max Payne would carry over to GTA. do you really believe they'd let something unnecessarily specific and fanboy-war-instigating like this slip out to the public?

It'd be far more believable that the game is made mainly for PC so they can do downgrades and upgrades for the current and next-gen versions. I wouldn't even be surprised if it ends up purely a next-gen title.

#7 Posted by joshthebear (2700 posts) -

I call 100% bullshit.

#8 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -

Youtube comments are a pretty reliable source of information.

#9 Posted by Rebel_Scum (775 posts) -

No source?

No hotdog!

#10 Posted by Village_Guy (2667 posts) -

That's probably a lie, usually developers port to the PS3 after making the 360 version because it the easiest way around since the 360 ports pretty easily to the PC and alright to the PS3.

Making a game on the PS3 and then porting it the 360/PC would require more work/time spent/money than the other way around I believe.

#11 Posted by Korolev (1728 posts) -

Well, truthfully, no one knows how they are developing it. You're going to have to wait to find out the truth to this question.

I hope they are developing it primarily for the PC. GTAIV was primarily made for consoles, and it did very well on those consoles..... not so good on PC. I have a gaming PC that can run the Witcher 2, Battlefield 3 and Max Payne 3 on maximum settings, smooth and clear and good.... and it STILL has trouble with GTAIV. No matter how much I upgrade my computer, GTAIV still runs badly in comparison to consoles, and that was because they did a terrible job porting it.

But if they develop GTAV for the PC first, then GTAV will turn out well for me. I have a 360 and a PS3.... but given the choice I choose to play games on my PC.

Online
#12 Posted by JordanK85 (140 posts) -

I remember when citing wikipedia as a source was looked down upon.

#13 Posted by Rebel_Scum (775 posts) -

@JordanK85 said:

I remember when citing wikipedia as a source was looked down upon.

Still is.

#14 Posted by Hunter5024 (5978 posts) -

As others have said, I've heard some developers prefer to get PS3 development done first because the Xbox and PC architecture is easier to port too so they don't have to spend the hectic last days doing the most difficult version of the game rather than focusing on other things. I believe Patrick or someone mentioned this on the Bombcast once. So I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, however it's a youtube comment, take it with all of the salt.

As far as this being a Next Gen game as some people were mentioning, I highly doubt that. I saw the trailer and if those are the graphics were in for in the Next Generation of consoles then there won't be any discernible reason to upgrade.

#15 Posted by CheapPoison (742 posts) -

Guys guys!

You know rockstar doesn't develop with the pc in mind.

And if they did i would be worried....

#16 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -
@CheapPoison

Guys guys!

You know rockstar doesn't develop with the pc in mind.

And if they did i would be worried....

Why? The Max Payne 3 port runs flawlessly.
#17 Posted by Raciend (62 posts) -

@CL60 said:

@CheapPoison

Guys guys!

You know rockstar doesn't develop with the pc in mind.

And if they did i would be worried....

Why? The Max Payne 3 port runs flawlessly.

Yeah, and the GTA 1 to San Andreas was all great on PC (much better than on consoles). GTA4 was shit on PC, so I got it on PS3, but I do 85-90% of all my gaming on PC these days so I pray that they do a propper job this time!

#18 Posted by Red12b (9085 posts) -

@CL60 said:

Youtube comments are a pretty reliable source of information.

#19 Posted by SlasherMan (1725 posts) -

Youtube comments are totally reliable, guys!

Though I do hope PC's lead this time around. I would love for GTA V's PC version to be as good as Max Payne's seems to be.

#20 Posted by avidwriter (665 posts) -

I could give less of a shit. As long as it comes out on PC I'm good.

#21 Posted by elcalavera (351 posts) -

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

#22 Posted by impartialgecko (1689 posts) -

I always cite my youtube comments.

Also: as long as it runs at 30 fps and doesn't break I couldn't care less about what lead platform GTA V is developed on

#23 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Wont happen

#24 Posted by Three0neFive (2304 posts) -

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

#25 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Raciend said:

@CL60 said:

@CheapPoison

Guys guys!

You know rockstar doesn't develop with the pc in mind.

And if they did i would be worried....

Why? The Max Payne 3 port runs flawlessly.

Yeah, and the GTA 1 to San Andreas was all great on PC (much better than on consoles). GTA4 was shit on PC, so I got it on PS3, but I do 85-90% of all my gaming on PC these days so I pray that they do a propper job this time!

was..

Now, it's the best version and was so since before EFLC was released on PC when it got DX10 support in a patch. Also, iCEnhancer says hello.

There is no way in hell Rockstar will make the PS3 the lead platform because:-

  • PS3 is end of life. One year at best left in the machine.
  • Max Payne 3's highend PC feature support is indicative of what the next consoles from Sony and MS will support.

I know people will disagree but clearly the lead platform will be PC for GTA V because Rockstar needs to look to the future beyond the current console generation.

#26 Posted by Roland_D11 (195 posts) -

@SeriouslyNow: No, GTA IV on PC is still not the best version. Even the patched version runs extremely poor on my PC (which runs anything else smoothly) and almost any PC with an ATI video card.

#27 Edited by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Roland_D11 said:

@SeriouslyNow: No, GTA IV on PC is still not the best version. Even the patched version runs extremely poor on my PC (which runs anything else smoothly) and almost any PC with an ATI video card.

You mean your PC runs it poorly. That's not the same thing at all. It is the best version. Mine runs it fine @1080P with everything maxed out and with further stress of the iCEnhancer post render effects mod. I have an Nvidia card so I can't speak to your claim personally. I do know that ATI drivers do have performance issues with other games.

#28 Posted by Raciend (62 posts) -

Well, I could get GTA4 for PC now, but damn, it is such a boring game! I couldn't get though it on PS3, so it would be a waste to spend more money on it for a PC version! I will still keep my hope up for GTA5, but I will not buy it day one. I will wait and see how the PC-community reports on the technical side of the game.

#29 Posted by Bollard (5868 posts) -

@Mcfart said:

Would be weird. With next gen coming so soon, they should make for PC+new consoles then port down to 360/PS3.

What? GTAV will come out at least a year before we see any new consoles. You cray.

Online
#30 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

Judging by how good Max Payne 3 is on PC it wouldn't surprise me if both that game and GTA V are using PC as the lead platform.

@Roland_D11 said:

@SeriouslyNow: No, GTA IV on PC is still not the best version. Even the patched version runs extremely poor on my PC (which runs anything else smoothly) and almost any PC with an ATI video card.

It is the best version, it's not as bad now as it once was, being badly optimised doesn't mean there's not plenty of people running that game at 60 FPS at 1080P+ resolutions, making it far better than the console versions which can't even maintain a steady 30 FPS at 720P. (it runs at less than 720P on PS3 too)

#31 Posted by Dad_Is_A_Zombie (1212 posts) -

I haven't heard anything about the PS3 being the lead platform and would be surprised if it were true.

#32 Posted by iAmJohn (6135 posts) -

@Three0neFive said:

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

#33 Posted by Twiggy199 (509 posts) -

Does it matter.........

#34 Posted by SpartanAmbrose (834 posts) -

@CL60 said:

Youtube comments are a pretty reliable source of information.

@SlasherMan said:

Youtube comments are totally reliable, guys!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

#35 Edited by Roland_D11 (195 posts) -

@SeriouslyNow:

I somehow knew that argument would come up. Yes, my PC runs it poorly. And if you believe the threads in the Steam forums and the Rockstar forums, almost every PC with ATI hardware runs it poorly. It just makes no sense that the graphics settings don't influnce the performance at all. I have about 15-30 fps (depending on what you see on screen) at any setting, 800x600 with no details and 1920x1080 with full details. And that on a clean Win 7 64-bit install on an SSD. As I said before, I tried for weeks to get it to run, tried mods etc. It seems to be optimized for Nvidia cards, Rockstar even promised ATI optimizations shortly after release, but the following patches didn't help.

#36 Posted by billyhoush (1195 posts) -

Rockstar did a great job with both 360 and PS3 versions of Max Payne 3 so I'm not worried. I'll be playing GTA V on my PS3 regardless.

#37 Posted by AndrewB (7691 posts) -

If somehow that was a direct quote, it would sure make me glad to be potentially buying the PC version, right? I mean, I hear their last PC port was pretty solid.

Also.

@iAmJohn said:

@Three0neFive said:

said:

Dental plan!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

said:

Dental plan!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

said:

Dental plan!...

#38 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Roland_D11 said:

@SeriouslyNow:

I have about 15-30 fps (depending on what you see on screen) at any setting, 800x600 with no details and 1920x1080 with full details.

That means you're CPU bound because variance between resolutions is insignificant. Are you running a dual core CPU perhaps? Your CPU is definitely the bottleneck.

#39 Edited by Roland_D11 (195 posts) -

@SeriouslyNow: No, I'm running a Core i7, 4GB of Ram and a Radeon HD 6870....

#40 Posted by Demoskinos (15166 posts) -

I wanna actually SEE something before I get excited about this game. But rockstar likes to play their cards very close to the vest until its near launch time.

#41 Posted by Seedofpower (3949 posts) -

@SpartanAmbrose said:

@CL60 said:

Youtube comments are a pretty reliable source of information.

@SlasherMan said:

Youtube comments are totally reliable, guys!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

YouTube comments? YouTube comments.

#42 Posted by theoldhouse (439 posts) -

Rockstar games have been slightly (slightly) better on xbox360 so it would seem unlikely.

I actually have a friend who works for Rockstar Leeds so I could ask him! But I won't relay any of that information because that would be wrong.

#43 Edited by warxsnake (2650 posts) -

multiplatform open world games are usually "lead" on PS3, however that's just a way of saying the PS3 has the least amount of memory available (135~MB) so you develop first for the console that will eventually bottleneck you, so you are safe that your game runs on that platform. And then, you add beautifications to the other versions (xbox, pc). 
  
The problem with this is not graphics of course, those are easily added to the oither version. The problem is the stripping of gameplay in open worlds because of lack of memory 

I currently work on a multiplatform open world fps lead on ps3. 

#44 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Roland_D11 said:

@SeriouslyNow: No, I'm running a Core i7, 4GB of Ram and a Radeon HD 6870....

Hmmm. Maybe Hyperthreading is getting in the way of the game. Have you tried disabling it, just to be sure?

#45 Posted by DeF (4979 posts) -

@warxsnake said:

however that's just a way of saying the PS3 has the least amount of memory available (135~MB) so you develop first for the console that will eventually bottleneck you, so you are safe that your game runs on that platform.

so on PS3 you can only use half of the 256MB XDR RAM for that stuff? the other 256 MB video RAM is just purely for visual bells and whistles then? that sounds so weird when you compare that to PCs (which you can't because of closed vs. open systems etc, I know that).

@warxsnake said:

I currently work on a multiplatform open world fps lead on ps3.

looking forward to far cry 3 :D (or is crysis 3 open world, too? don't know^^)

#46 Edited by warxsnake (2650 posts) -
@DeF: Almost half is used on the XMB. :( I really wish this is the last time I work on ps3.  
Crysis 3 like all the others will be a (big) corridor shooter. Which is why it will probably look better. They always call those games sandboxes but not really.  
 
Yeah open worlds on ps3 are hell for multiplatform development. Third person is fine since you dont need high res assets seen up close, but first person is just unforgiving.  
Imagine that everything that needs to be loaded in memory at any given time (14Km draw distance) needs to fit in 135MB of mem, that includes characters, npcs, textures, environments, scripted events, skybox, weather systems, weapons, sfx, fx, post process, simulations. A single weapon can cost upto 2MB 
 
Bringing it back to GTA, as an example, people think that classic bug in GTA where all the cars around you are your own, or when you see like 50 of the same vehicle/taxi, not really a bug, that means theres not enough mem at that instance to have any other car type, so the other cars are just instances of yours (lower cost).  
In shooters when NPCs use the same rifle you do, same deal. 
#47 Posted by DeF (4979 posts) -

@warxsnake: Is that a hard limit for memory or can you go slight over the 135MB? I ask because I notice sometimes that when I'm playing a game on PS3 and hit the PS button to enter the XMB mid-game, the XMB loads and reacts really slow with some games and with others, it loads up instantaneously and works just as fluid as if you didn't have a game running.

#48 Posted by Danteveli (1205 posts) -

Thats kinda hard to believe. Havent the ps3 version of Rockstar games sucked compared to Xbox? Plus why would you make game for console thats not as popular as competition and meke it your main target?

#49 Posted by warxsnake (2650 posts) -
@DeF: Above 135MB and you get out of mem crash. Some games dont need to use all 135MB of mem, or dont have enough loaded at that time because theres not that much there (corridor shooters, rts, 2D, etc) so they have less straining effect on the console.  
Remember that memory costs are only half the issue, the other half is rendering and framerate. 
#50 Posted by iAmJohn (6135 posts) -

@AndrewB said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Three0neFive said:

said:

Dental plan!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

said:

Dental plan!

@elcalavera said:

Jesus Christ, guys. YouTube comments.

said:

Dental plan!...

This needs to be reposted

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.