Good old EA. All of their games are gimped as i know it. How will they gimp it further ? !

All of You praise EA, if they released the predictions about 2008 hardware sales.

EA so go back to making SNES games...It's not that hard to "gimp" 16 bit graphics.

At least they were fun back then.

Can they say the same about the PS3 version? Can they say that it will fully utilize Blu-ray, Cell and HDD capabilities? If it doesn't, then the PS3 version is indeed gimped! And that is thanks to the 360.

They are talking too much, I'd rather to see them working and finishing games running well on xbox 360 and PS3. And WII too.

Wow.. so.. the PS3's hardware still cant make games right? ::rolls eyes:: Yet.. Uncharted puts every other console game to shame TECHNICALLY.

These devs are getting ridiculous now. Call up infinity ward EA, a real developer. These idiots sound like the same people that had problems with the PS2.

As if they didn't see a learning curve coming with NEW technology?

That is what you call being slow and ignorant. When other developers do it why cant they do it. There really is no excuse to not do a good or excellent job on making a game on the PS3. The xbox dev team are probably happy because they will do what they always do but the PS3 team is like "but I dont want to learn new stuff" "hey guys since they made us work and learn at the same time, lets just do what we can, i dont feel like learning anything new". How can EA allow such a poor statement to be made. They say PS3 will sell very well in 2008 and yet they dont want to put an effort to learn for themselves how to work with the great console they talk so good about. Very unprofesional and just shows how lazy they are.

"the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "PS3 can't do it".

LOL...that sentence should say: "the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "EA DEVELOPMENT TEAM can't do it on the PS3".

Seriously, EA gets no money from me untill they get their act together. Only game worthy is Burnout Paradise...but I count that more like a Criterion game not EA!

once they get some of these old projects out of the way.

I can see the EA sports games this year leading on Ps3

There's no suprises here.
E.A hires a whole host of old school PC programmers, and no doubt wants them to reuse subroutines they've been using for years, and gets them programming for 2 years on an xbox 360 before saying, 'oh - BTW guys, we also need it on PS3, just run a quick convertion will you?' Its pathetic and why every E.A. developed title on the PS3 is an absolute disaster. Criterion still have some independance so they were at least spared the routine ineptitude with which EA handles is development teams.

I know, I used to work for Bullfrog and we were absorbed by E.A., so I watched first hand as all the creativity and talent that had been bullfrog, got systamatically destroyed and subsumed by the corporate monstrosity that is EA... It will be another 2 years before EA can produce anything on PS3 worrth playing, and they'll only achieve it by buying a team that have already learnt how to program properly..

Just look at Heav sword , I think its uncompetance to use 50 GB for only 7 hours of gaming while other games (ps3 and 360) use FAR less space for bigger , better and longer games.Its just FAR harder to make good games on PS3.Its not that they are lazy(ea)
Perfect example : All of you mention Insomniac , most of you can only mention ONE develloper who actually handles the cell.If devs were lazy there would be more names of good devs coming out your mouth and not only Insomniac (either than square and Konami they aint alot )

LOL

David Moore anyone!!!!!!!!!!

"He said: "Sony has seen the game so they know that that's what they want out of us. But I can absolutely assure you that the PS3 and the 360 will be the same. We're not going to gimp the 360 because the PS3 can't do it. We're going to optimise the crap out of it and make the PS3 really good, sort of like Burnout." "

Sounds good to me, why is everyone complaining?

Infinity ward split up into teams for COD4 ; one for ps3 and one for 360. makes alot of sense and the game came out great. specifically, the ps3 team had a long time to develop on and learn the ps3 hardware. if you take one team, do the game on one console, then switch to go do it on the other.........sounds to me like somethings gonna go SNAFU. I smell a delay on this one.

wait nevermind. i dont know what that is I smell : P

Thanks for doing the PS3 community a favor. You have highlighted your efforts (or lack therof) for the platform. This reads in big bold flashing lights PS3 Owners...DONT BUY THIS!

As has been seen time and time again, the developers are the issue, NOT the platform.

To be honest this game looks like crap. It appears that the development team has realised this, and is now attempting to drum up some press with some diatribe about gimping versions. I got news for you guys, from the trailers I have seen...both versions are GIMPED. The game looks like a$$. Crap animation, shoddy textures, horrid game models (the aliens look retarded), and what is with the lead characters suit (it looks like a reject from the Bioshick big daddy casting call). Are those louvers for ventilation? haha nice!!

As a parting note, how is a game that pits the main character in space, on a derelict spacecraft, fighting aliens, on a mission of survial...one of the most interesting IPs of 2008? Are you fing serious? I have a feeling I have seen this plot somewhere before...

Who cares?
This is going to be another B title that is better off being rented then purchased. Does it really matter? How many decent titles does EA put out any more? Most of them are not in house games but companies like Criterion that make good games. And we all know how that title turned out.

It's EA's problem if they are behind the times, not Sony's.

I just bought Burnout and I fell totally in love with the game,, im getting even more pissed off in Paradise than in COD4. All I gotta say is that I'm not buying this game now from what I heard. Its a no go if the lead is on the 360. Its a fact that anything that comes ported from the xbox is crap.

i have no respect on any developer that would put down ANY platform's capabilities. that to me, is not professional and tells me they lack the wits and dislike challenges. each platform is different but each can display amazing results if one would only put aside any bias and concentrate on making a game as good as it can be regardless of which platform it is for or how hard it is to do so.

EA how much dumber can your devs get? they have had time to get to know the PS3 and it seems as if they take 1 step forward(or none) and 5 steps back. get your sh!t together EA.

they led on 360 and are now trying to defend that decision, and the PS3 will sadly probably suffer.

spend 2 years developing a game for a 360 then "a month or two" trying to butcher it into a PS3 like all other 360 led cross platform dev... just because the tools are probably a bit easier to use.

It's amazing to me that after seeing Uncharted and UT3 and hearing about the planned 60 players online for Resistance 2 that anyone would release a statement like this. I would be ashamed as a developer. What it really says is that they don't know how to program for the system.

Yeh... 2 say one console can do something when the other can't is abit whack.

They both have the horsepower 2 push equal games, they just need someone 2 teach them.

It will flop in sales. When will EA learn to make the PS3 the lead platform like they did with Burnout? And look at the sales of that game - it's doing magic for them with the PS3 sales.

People know whats quality, and if this game is sub-par on the PlayStation 3, then the consumers will know about it.

I was looking forward to this game but not anymore, sounds like it's gonna be another lame EA PS3 port.

"It (the PS3) can't handle the physics as well. I mean it can, you just have to get at it."

That statement right there basically proves they are just plain lazy, or too stupid to understand or maybe it's a combination of both.

they know how to make any other games has any one seen them make any other games besides out of all the sports games that and yes I know the Mafia the Godfather but big whoop I guess they'll only be good at sports nothing special it amazes me that they can make there money by using the same old tech that they have been using out of these years like in the last generation and they still keep getting money its the same ol crap that they've been putting out since the last gen people need to stop buying there crap!.

EA? LOL I haven't bought a game from them since NFSU:2

If Dead Space is gimped in anyway it's the Xbox 360's fault,just look at GTA IV;)

they wont gimp it? i wasn't even aware that they had to gimp it

no game has ever been "gimped" for the ps3, it's just devs having difficulties with the new hardware

EA had better up their game if they are going to be the most powerful publisher in the world

the ps3 isnt weaker then the 360 its just to obvious ea isnt capable of adopting a new system even tough its out on themarket for quite some time now.

pathetic

Sometimes someone isn't informed correctly and a silly misquote makes news.

Anyway, he said the game will be the same on both consoles. So what's the problem?

Question to those here that believe they know more than developers...

First, before you all get on the hate mode... this is known to be a fact.. here you can read it yourself: http://www.innerbits.com/bl...

"Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

This article also break down the PS3 vs Xbox 360 memory footprint:
http://ozymandias.com/archi...

base on the last article... that means that PS3 developer have 73MB less than xbox 360 developer that they can use for their games...

I know most of you believe that Available System Memory is not as important as Disc or CPU power.. and that you can run Crysis on a PC with a 32 Cell processors and a 200GB blu-ray disc and only a 32MB GPU.... lol... but the reality never changed... GPU and Ram are as important if not more important than anything on a console... This is why Gears runs on the xbox 360 without the need of the cell or blu-ray... Textures, game assets, etc MUST FIRST BE LOADED INTO MEMORY BEFORE THEY CAN BE USED.... THIS IS WHY SOME GAMES WILL NOT RUN ON THE XBOX 360 OR THE PS3 and only on PC with 1-2GB of Memory.

I still don't understand why people keep talking about Kill Zone 2 when trying to make their point that the PS3 or the xbox 360 can handle it.... It depends on the specific game and the resources is using... you don't know how this game will be designed or how much memory each level requires...

Let me give you an example:

If a PC game like crysis has a map so big that requires 800MB of RAM... if this game is ever ported to the xbox 360 or the PS3 developer would have to a) Dumb down all the textures or game assets to fit within the limits of available PS3 and xbox 360 memory.

Do you understand? It does not matter that the xbox 360 or the PS3 have faster CPUs or GPUs... it's a memory restriction...

Now developers creating games like COD4, Kill Zone 2, Gears and other games that may look better than most games design their games to not exceed this memory limitations... How? Making Smaller levels, smaller maps, reusing lots of textures and game assets.... Removing vehicles ala COD4.... limiting the mission size or adding cut scenes while loading needed textures and game assets for the area they are about to enter.

So, please PS3 fans... I have shown articles that prove that the xbox 360 currently give developers more Memory(73MB) so developers can load their textures and game assets... of course in paper both consoles offer the 512MB memory... and I'm not going to get into the fact that the PS3 has split memory... and the xbox 360 has unified... but on the simple fact of what's available to developers...

My question to you is.... since developer have more memory available on the xbox 360 than the PS3... do you understand now why EA is talking about 'gimp' the xbox 360 version? because it's a fact that it can happen... if EA wants this game to run on the PS3 and they using the xbox 360 as a lead platform... they better not use that extra 73MB the xbox 360 gives them...
unless you can prove to me that Blu-ray or the Cell have MEMORY developers can use.

That's what EA is talking about... not that the PS3 can't run beautiful games who where designed for a)The PS3 memory limits, b)xbox 360 memory limits or c)both...

Why else do you think MMOs don't look like Kill Zone 2 or COD4? Can Sony dev make a game with open ended maps like Obvlibion games and still have them look like Kill Zone 2?

EA's bad ripoff of RE4. this and Dark Sector are the "trial run" of RE4 clones.

And the lack of HDD gimps games, not Blu-ray or the cell processor.

Oh dear, EA and the Unreal Engine 3. That is a recipe for a very Sh*tty Port.

Electronic Arts is developing this game. I think that speaks for itself.

What the heck kind of dev openly admits to being a puss when it comes to making games? I guess the answer to that is EA... Somebody needs to tell EA to shut up and put out.

Last-gen Xbox & Gamecube owners had to suffer sometimes because the Ps2 was the lead platform. Atleast we don't have to worry about EA gimping 360 games just because sony used a non-gaming centric CPU (Cell). As a 360 owner, I certainly don't want my games ported from the slightly inferior ps3. Who knows if a dev will be lazy and not utilize the 360's power.

For me to write this game off already as a product that EA will assuredly screw up in the end?

I -want- to believe that they wont absolutely suck at developing Dead Space but with the attitude presented in the article I just cant see myself having much faith in this dev team.

Also, just for the record: "If the PS3 version is gimped it isnt because the PS3 version "can't do it" it's because the dev team cant program it"

Honestly, I've had my ps3 for 2 months now and have only turned it on maybe 5 times. I played Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, R&C, ROFM, and Lair. None of those games can hold my attention like my 360 games do. I am not a fanboy, I wish I could enjoy my ps3.

You guys make comments on the development of a game and you aren't developers. Just because Insomniac did something and Infiniti Ward did something, doesn't mean that all devs are using the same tools, techniques and coding on every game they make. If development was the same on every game, there would never be delays. Stop acting like you know anything about the game development process because it always changes across the board. It's not as simple as calling Insomniac in for help. Does Insomniac know anything about what engine they are using for Dead Space? Probably not.

oh EA, you guys are amazing on bringing in Mediocrity to the Gaming Industry dont you?

They can hardly make any game run smooth regardless of platform.

Why EA hasn`t learned more from Criterion`s development proses of making the PS3 version first and then port to 360, since they actually own the company, is beyond me. Guess it`s all about the money (and that people keep buying crappy unfortunately) :(

If the PS3 installbase keeps going up one would think they would have to take better care of their products, but being EA i would be more surpried if that actually happened because they havn`t made a great game in ages themselves (not counting Burnout etc here).

Hope they get Dead Space to run equally good on both (but i`m not sure it will happen), the game looks interesting actually.

It seems EA becomes more incompetent with every passing day. Anyway hopefully they will do as they have said and make Dead Space the same for both platforms.

Why am I a clown , just because I said the truth and it hurts you? Any honest PS3 owner wil tell you they beat that game in less than 8 hours.Why cant you just admit that sony games are not perfect? hALO solo campaign is 6 hours long Im not calling you a clown because its true thats all.
For real I think youre the clown Not only the media but PS3 owners themselves will tell you that 50gb for a 7 hour game with great graphics aint no feat.Halo is far longer than heavenly sword with the multiplayer and stuff and its on a DVD.So tell me wheres the waste , Heavsword using all that space or Halo using the DVD.
Once again you showed that you were a clown because you believe anything that will come out of sonys mouth and use anything sony supporters will use to bash the 360.If you ever played Halo online you wouldnt even bash the game.Anyway only a clown can recognize another clown.
Oh yeah I bet you played Halo 3 at a friends place right ?Or you have a 360 ? I thought they all RROD ? So how did you play it since all 360s break down the second you switch it on.
Man youre a clown amongst the clowns

I bet INsomniac dont handle the cell properly cuz Uncharted holds on 50gb bluray for 8 hours of gameplay.
Maybe Uncharted was a launch game too...

Its a fact, more available memory and better graphics GPU and a better CPU in the 360.

I guess blu-ray is the only future for Sony...Which hopefully dies too.

multiplat dev's cant make much money if their software only sells on one console. This is a smart move, but the game better be damn good.

Killzone 2

Of course you need blu ray and 50 GB to have 20 min CONSOLE GAME installation.. thats really next gen, haha.

longer loading times? you mean 4 seconds right? Do you thing your comment was intelligent? I dont think so...

Hey, the ps3 has 10 years life.. so buy a 1TB harddrive cause in future you will have 500gb games installed, i hope you dont need to deinstall them if you want to download a demo, lol.

Open ya stupid eyes and just agree that CONSOLE games installtion suxx hard!

They should take notes from Burn out and COD4 devs.

Since when has there been fear that the PS3 will "gimp" the 360? It has always been the other way. Everyone fears what a 360 to PS3 port will do to a game and these EA devs are just confirming worst fears. My advice. Do not pre-order the PS3 version of Dead Space. I smell another Madden 08/Orange Box/ every EA game except Burnout Paradise.

if PS3 owners are convinced that it is superior then the 360 for gaming, then get used to the feeling of having games ported from an inferior machine this gen. I accepted it last gen owning an xbox and getting crappy ports that could have looked a hellava lot better if they were made with the Xbox as the lead platform.

and a question for ps3 owners about Uncharted. I know its a great game and has great graphcs. But why is it that so many ps3 owners claim that it has the best graphics to date on a console?!? I've read many reviews and never did any critic make that assuption. So why do you guys keep saying it? is it because the more you say it, the more you will actually beleive it?

Anyways, to date best graphics of a console game would have to be COD4...IMO. (gears held that title for along time)

how all you crybabies give EA sh*t, "real devs like Insomniac and Infinity Ward blah..blah". Do you fangirls realize how much money and help Insomniac gets from Sony for their 1st party games? A LOT. As for Infinity Ward, well...do you really want EA taking advice from THEM? With the disaster that is COD 4 multiplayer?

"the development team won't "gimp" the 360 version because the "PS3 can't do it""

LMFAO. O-U-C-H.

Wait. Let me guess. Another "lazy dev", right? LMFAO!!!! Just face it, the only games that "seem" to "take advantage" of the PS3rd, are games which won't be made on 360 to begin with (meaning, you'll never see just how gimped the PS3rd version truly was compared to its 360 counterpart).

O-U-C-H.

ravenguard88, I don't know whether future PS3 games will actually look that much better than future 360 games (no one can predict the future), but there's no contest when it comes to technical specs.

The Cell processor is about twice as powerful as the 360's 3 CPUs. No argument about that.

The PS3 has the same amount of RAM as the 360, albeit at a higher speed, but not significantly.

The RSX is more or less as powerful as the Xenon, but an ability of the RSX is that it can actually use the Cell in order to help it render more efficiently. This hasn't been done by any developer as of yet.

I don't want to argue with you or anything, You just sound like you have the wrong idea about the PS3. Hell, University professors have been using clusters of PS3s to aid in research to do with protein misfolding, like Alzheimer's, most known types of cancer, etc. (Google the Folding@Home project for details).
They use PS3s to recreate the folding of a protein molecule in a nanosecond (one millionth of a second). This would take a single CPU 30 years to recreate, but when they break up these into 'work units', and distribute them to PS3 owners, they can make pretty efficient progress; a PS3 takes, at most, six to eight hours to recreate a nanosecond of folding, because the Cell uses all of the SPE's (Synergystic Processing Units) simultaneously in order to carry out the calculations needed for the process.

Most importantly to you, though, is that it means that games will be better. This is a gaming site, and we are gamers, after all.

I'm gonna shut up now, because I sound like I'm on commision from Sony or something, lol :)

LJ folding@home is completely different from running game code!! nobody it taking anything away from the PS3 but the system just isnt what sony claimed it would be. they basically stole E3 2005 from MS with lies an target renders.

now is this the first time that sony has made wild claims about system performance that didnt happen. the PS1 was a super computer according to sony, the PS2 was a super computer that could produce toy story graphics an could be used by the MILITARY, they even tried to push the chip in the PS2 in the science department like their doing with the cell, but at the end of the day the PS2 was still outperformed by the GAMECUBE!! now here were go again, sony making these wild claims about ALL THIS POWER thats locked away in the PS3, an that its WAY more powerful than many super computers. an again many people fell for sony an their MARKETING. basically ALL LAST YEAR the PS3 was outperformed by this supposedly weaker 360 system, but there was an excuse, THE PS3 IS NEW AN NOBODY KNOWS HOW TO WORK IT. well how long is that excuse gonna last!!

last thing EVERYBODY knows, but all of a sudden have forgot about it, they know developers build games for the L C D, that way they know if this game runs fine on the weakest system they KNOW FOR SURE that it will run fine on the stronger system. NOW!! sony PROMISED so much POWER with the PS3 that developers were making the 360 lead get the game running good then easily port it to the PS3, but they were having problems making that work, ported games didnt run well on the PS3, BUT when a dev builds a game for the PS3 as lead they easily port that game to the 360 an make it run equal. now some one explain that to me!!

sorry for the long post!!

At least EA is trying.

so first @Panzefaust.

I have no idea what you are talking about with CoD4. There was one period in time around christmas when the servers were overloaded but since january the servers have been fine. You must have a really shtty ISP. I mean really, don't try to bash the game because your ISP sucks.

Now do you guys know why windows vista struggles to run on your computer when you have 1GB of ram? Because the devs take the "easy and cheap" way out. If people take the time to utilize code EFFICIENTLY like with the PS3..then the result is greater. If you guys want devs to be lazy and release lack luster games that could have been way better if they would actually work at it..then we wouldn't be waiting for 4D.

So, EA won't 'gimp' 360 Dead Space despite tough PS3 dev? Correction: EA wants to slack off make it nice and cheap and not give us the BEST GAME that they can. Both the 360 and the PS3 could be making some AMAZING games right now...if we didn't promote this lazy developing. And that's a fact.

Crappy EA developers. They suck so hard that bleeps. Go learns from dudes who have the right to call themselve developers.

IF EA IS AS GOOD AS THEY SAY THEY ARE THEY WILL GET TO IT AND GET IT GOOD -BESIDES LOOK AT THE FIRST PARTY GAMES NOTHING CAN BEAT THEM

with FNR3 and AC the PS#3 was the lead platform?

They will be equal... that was the point of this. PS3>Junkbox 180.

They are both Lead versions... no ports.... we know the PS3 is harder to develop for now... and will be for a couple more years... Its new.... but like he said.... THE TIDES ARE CHANGING BOTS. This game looks sweet and both consoles will get good versions. LOL its only a good thing.

I hope the PS3 "port" plays similar to the 360 version. Still in the discussion about quality versus budget, there has to be some sort of middle ground. Charging 60 dollars for a "next gen" experience only to get last gen gameplay with some souped up graphics is a terrible way to justify paying that much money for any game (especially if the game is buggy as hell).

Like I said before...many developers are complaining about the ps3 and giving us 360 owners delays or under developed games. If it wasn't for the ps3, I would be playing GTA4 months ago. Thanks alot Sony.

Dude just STFU what does a storage media got to do with a game being longer or shorter.Because Blu-Ray holds more space don't mean games are going to be longer Sony never said this & i don't know where you xbots get this from.I will take a 7 or 8 hour game any day if the Game play is awesome.Blu-Ray is still new & has a much longer life than DVD-9.I would be very worried if dev's was maxing out BD which only one game is rumor to come close to doing it MGS4.If you knew what you was talking about then you would know that audio takes up alot of space on any game.

So they're not going to "gimp" the 360 version by "toning it down" the the PS3 level? Apparently EA is being run by a bunch of simpletons these days or at the very least they have some lazy programmers. I guess they missed the recent graphics test that showed the 360 taking twice as long as the PS3 to complete, though I suspect that test was probably rigged to a degree.

If EA wasn't so money hungry they should just make this a 360 exclusive. I think 360 fans need to get used to the "being reassured that the PS3 won't gimp the 360 version", unfortunately it probably will when it comes to EA.

It amazes me how all you guys who know nothing at all about programming a game says that EA is lazy all they have to do is utilize the spu's which I am sure is easier said than done. It's a fact that the PS3 is hard to program for it's also a fact that the business of any game company is to make money. At this point in the PS3 cycle why spend more money making a game on a system that people don't buy many games for when you can spend less money and time making a game on a system that will sell double or triple the amount of games. You guys point to Konami when its a FACT that their soccer game was a mess on the PS3 compared to the 360 version and let me tell you something that you guys know but won't admit MGS4 has been delayed time and time again because they are having a hard time programming on the PS3. Grand Theft Auto IV we all know has been delayed because of the PS3 but because of contract issues the 360 version was also delayed. Now this is where it gets tricky, trying to satisfy a Sony Fanboy if they release a game at the same time on both system and the PS3 version is not equal or better you guys say the devs are lazy then if they release a game on the 360 3-6 months before the PS3 version you guys still complain. The Problem is not the devs it's you Sony Cryboys! WWWWAAAAA WWWWAAAAA WWWWAAAAAAA!!!!!!

The ps3 is sooo cash.

If it wern't for the PS3rd we Xbox owners could be playing this game by June, but no we have to wait for the Waitstation 3 to catch up as always.

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

facts 360 the more powerful system

EA SUCKSSSSSSSSSSSS

SKATE. is the best game they have ever put out and it is SO unpolished.

It would seem the PS3 development is holding the 360 and it's gamers back. 360 owners always have to wait for them to finish up with the PS3 while the 360 version sits and collects dust. How many more devs will it take for people to realize that the PS3 is hard to dev for?

"fill rate" that popped up time and time again, but they are ither lazy or the "devs" don't know how to "dev" <---? they make our games

Games are already delayed enough as it is, there is no reason why everyone else has to wait for the guy in the back of the line to "catch up". I don't go down to the DMV to wait 4hrs in line just to be told I have to wait another 4hrs for the last guy.

Who's EA?
What's Dead space?

the basic package of the 360 is better for games and more powerful/efficient than the PS3.

When games are made in the typical CPU/GPU format, then the 360 wins every time because it is more efficient and has more USABLE power.

If you take a game made in the typical, PC based, CPU/GPU fashion like for 360 to PS3, it will not run as well b/c the base CPU (sans the SPU's) and GPU of the PS3 is not as capable.

It takes having to maximize code with the SPU's to get it to run as good.

Some companies have the time and money to do it, others are all about making a quick buck (EA), so, it's no frigging wonder.

If everything is optimized on PS3, it very might possibly outperform the 360, but the only way we'll likely see it is with 1st party titles. And even then, they are just breaking the surface of multicore development on 360 and there are other unexplored regions of 360 processing like MEMEXPORT and the Tesselation unit. I doubt we'll ever see the PS3 completely outperform the 360. I'm Sorry, i know i'll get disagrees and whined at, but honestly, doesn't it make sense??

If nothing is wrong with the ps3's architecture then why is EVERYONE complain about development problems. There should be no complaints at all.

I will never buy an EA game as long as I live. Seriously...it's why I didn't even buy The Orange Box for PS3...F*ck EA and their n00bness.

Terrible. EA is worse than Microsoft. They buy out the competition and are in it for the money and nothing else. They could care less whether they produce a crap game, just as long as it sells. That is all they care about. Look at Madden 08 for the PS3. They thought it was a great game... cause it sold well, but man that game sucked..

It's ignorant to think that EA is making the PS3 gimped on purpose. They would not benefit anything from it.

Many of you claim that Insomniac, Naughty dog etc have no problem making games on the PS3. How many multi platform games have they made? They have only made PS3 exclusives. I mean, none of us know what these developers would be able to produce on the 360.

What I'm saying is that no one can know for sure wether the problem lies with the developer or the hardware.

I'd say it's the money. Not all devs can afford to make PS3 the lead version. Criterion had the resources, and it brought great results in Burnout Paradise.

Another question is: Why does it cost more to develop games for the PS3? Is it a smart move to make a console that's very hard for developers to figure out? In one sense, yes. You force the devs to use it as lead platform in order to get the best results. But since the 360 has a larger installbase, it's a question of which crowd the developer thinks it can get the most money from.

ok its time for bluray to set up and bring there weapons out

send in the 200 gig blu ray disk lol its coming

u no what GTA dev should say the same about this game to x box owners
Gta team feel limited cause of the x box when they could do a lot lot more on the ps3 and they no that thats why Gta 5 will be exclusive to Ps3

@EA dev
i mean why bother making this game for the ps3 if its going to be dumbed down

whats the point of this EA team making anything for ps3

I have to big up the burnout team and thats about it

Dev are taking note to ps3 now
and people who say wait its better than having games that looked Rushed

Look at halo 3 i am sure they could of done a lot better if they gave it more time
Maybe we would of seen something New

Interesting statements. I wonder why just a week ago I believe it was the president of EA stated that he liked the results of Burnout Paradise and that it makes more sense to lead on the PS3 then port to the 360 for multi-plat games.
Albert Einstein defined being crazy as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
My question would be if they know that leading on the PS3 yields better results for all formats, and I am sure they don't want to lose business on the PS3, then why do they sabotage themselves by leading on the 360 and then having to delay or having an inferior PS3 version? It's like they are working hard not to get my money.
This game seemed promising too, but with talk like this I am sure this will be another EA gem that will not be getting my money.
I swear for the most successful video game company they sure make some a$$ backwards decisions. Oh well, guess MGS4, and R2 will have to do.
How can they seriously look at games like Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, COD 4 or even their own Burnout Paradise and then make excuses about the PS3 being hard to develop for?

Just buckle down and develop. Why is it that every new generation there are always that few that have to be dragged into the new generation kicking and screaming. Its the nature of the industry, things change and you have to adapt. If there were no games on the PS3 that were excellent then their argument would be more valid but now there is no excuse. They really need to put up or shut up.

When EA still makes more money off PS2 than next gen. consoles.

The best is yet to come.

i think most people are missing the point the tide is turning the man said which means sales of ps3, hence why ps3 will be ea,s leading platform from now on because of the huge gap in sales of hardware in the eu japan and the closing gap in america

i think the guy who wrote it took the frase "we wont gimp 360, because the ps3 cant" all out of proportion, what he meant was the ps3 version can be made to look awesome just aswell as 360.

a very misleading interview.

but the proof is in the pudding we will just have to wait and see how it goes. the game actually looks like cold fear in space.

EA just a bunch of mercenaries! I haven´t bought any EA game of this new generation, because they haven´t embraced the PS3 like they should. And yes its true, how can a dev company like EA say its hard to develop for the PS3 and in the other hand you have other developers half as big as EA making great games and then again EA comes early this month to say, "PS3 will vanish 360".... use to like EA and I got nothing against 360 owners, is not like I expected better games on PS3 or a big difference but at least same quality, in the near future when PS3 becomes a matture product I guess that EA will be delivering less quiality games or content to 360, this is what EA is! $$$$$$$$$ = care shi...bout customers

EA just a bunch of mercenaries! I haven´t bought any EA game of this new generation, because they haven´t embraced the PS3 like they should. And yes its true, how can a dev company like EA say its hard to develop for the PS3 and in the other hand you have other developers half as big as EA making great games and then again EA comes early this month to say, "PS3 will vanish 360".... use to like EA and I got nothing against 360 owners, is not like I expected better games on PS3 or a big difference but at least same quality, in the near future when PS3 becomes a matture product I guess that EA will be delivering less quiality games or content to 360, this is what EA is! $$$$$$$$$ = care shi...bout customers