I'd like to see this game on the PS3. If they dont want it to be known of course they're gonna deny it.
I'm sure something will come along but it is already too late. They'll try their best because it has the Valve name attached to it and it gives them a bad reputation with some but it's not gonna be worth anything now.
The title definitely doesnt fit with the tone of the article at all, that even goes for the CVG article title. In no way did I come away with them being "worried" about the PS3 except for before they started working with it hearing the horror stories from other devs.
In the end I think I'd say they're impressed with what it does, and how much they've been able to get out of it. Its also refreshing to see some 3rd party dev using the SPUs, since many dont do it.
Since when was an opinion news?
Microsoft better cover themselves on this one. They keep saying "The better experience is on the X360" and have yet to say "Hey you'll need a HDD in your machine so dont buy a Core SKU and you'll need a XBL account." They have yet to do that (as far as I've seen). In the end, I think they're gonna piss off the average consumer that walks into the store, buys into this extra content spin and walks away with a Core system and no XBL subscription. Then when the content releas...
Nice spin on a fire sale.
Hearing this makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Wont believe anything until its announced by Rockstar, but IF this is true.. no sandbox co-op? That sorta turns out to be a disappointment. That's what I figured they'd do for online play, a 4 person sandbox type enviroment.
They'll sell it to Sony, so why even leave in the first place?
Its made up of former Sony employees, they know what to expect from Sony, and they still have two more PS3 games to make after the PS3 Twisted Metal game. So they'll be working with them for 6 years to come (if each game takes 2 years), so I dont see who else will buy them (I'm sure people will want to but they'll give Sony the upper hand because of their closeness).
Reminds me of the media coverage of a certain football game that just happened and now they're cleaning up their mess with massive butt kissing after giving the other team no chance.
Sorta see a similarity here..
Anyone with a brain already knew this.
Maybe fun gameplay? My guess is that will be saved for the sequel.
Anyways, why add all this to the PC? Why not just release it as DLC for the console versions? The PC specs for this game are completely insane and are worse than Crysis in some categories.
That's because this game came out years ago.
Instead of just pumping more units into the game they should of used the engine, upgraded it and made a new Stronghold game in 2D. They're only doing this because they're last two games in 3D were complete garbage.
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 were working on R2 before R1 was even on the shelves. On their last podcast they said before their games are even on the shelves they're already working on the next thing. And I believe they have two teams, one for Resistance and one for Rachet.
i was wondering where the comment went..
hopefully blizzard reads this.
Why would I want to do that if I could get it on the PS3? The only game I would even want on PC is SC2 and I'm not forking over money for another computer since I just bought a new laptop last year for college, but it wont be able to run it like I'd want it to.
Why does a game need multiplayer?
Starting to really hate the trend of a good games being knocked for having no multiplayer (Bioshock, Uncharted).
I believe they're gonna have a trailer at GDC. Just seems that's what it's adding up to, cause I think on the latest Fullmoon Podcast they were joking around about some video for GDC.