Epic "would love Gears of War on PS3"
- Thread starter MatParker116
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I would like it on the PS3 not just because I like to main it where I can, but I've found the controls on the game smoother than the X360
I own Fight Night Round 4 for both X360 and PS3, and have played the same modes on both. I love the game both ways, don't get me wrong, however, on X360, sometimes I feel like I'm not 100% in control of my moves, what I thought was a jab, or sure was the right gesture isn't, and it leaves me a little upset. However, on PS3, while not 100% in control, I feel like I know what move I'm going to use before I use it, and feel more in control, thus having more fun w/ the game.
While this isn't true for all games, I personally find the PS3 controls stronger, which is a big reason for me to use it over the 360
I own Fight Night Round 4 for both X360 and PS3, and have played the same modes on both. I love the game both ways, don't get me wrong, however, on X360, sometimes I feel like I'm not 100% in control of my moves, what I thought was a jab, or sure was the right gesture isn't, and it leaves me a little upset. However, on PS3, while not 100% in control, I feel like I know what move I'm going to use before I use it, and feel more in control, thus having more fun w/ the game.
While this isn't true for all games, I personally find the PS3 controls stronger, which is a big reason for me to use it over the 360
That would be fun to have on the PS3. Means I could play online with my friends again and not have to worry about my stupid NAT not letting my join my friends' parties or even being able to talk to them. Probably not going to happen though. Then again, Mass Effect 2 got on the PS3, so perhaps there is hope.
Well obviously if you release for all 3 systems you get more money.MaxPowers666 said:
My point is that if your going to have an exclusive, your going to make more money on it if you go for 360 and PC because they are essentially the same system.
The problem for the Ps3 is that it uses an entirely different architecture type, and therefore requires completely different code.
This means that you need to have a separate development cycle for the PS3. This is also why a lot of companies choose one type or the other and dont always make for both unless its a huge release.
As much as I'd like to see this appear on PS3, PS3 is losing nothing by not having it. Mass Effect 2 on the other hand was a superb cross over, its an experience that cannot go amiss, Gears to me is just a run and gun to sum it up, its fun online, but I can't say it was the greatest experience I've ever had and unfortunatly, its the sort of game that unless you're really into it, you'll start to find it repetitive after the first game, besides the tweaks and upgrades. I don't find it's plot interesting or compelling, the gore and chaos is fun for a while, but like bulletstorm starts to wear thin, characters weren't particularly memorable to me, so I think my only favourite aspect and the part I'd like to see on PS3 is the multiplayer.
I personally think third party exclusives are meaningless, but I think there is a need for first party exclusives, I'd rather not a console that is exactly the same as all the others, it becomes pointless, people like to compare, this is why we have different cars, different houses, tvs, gardens etc. Things get boring if we all have the same thing.
I think theres more to the exclusivity concept then you are willing to take in, exclusives aren't JUST to attract users to the console, they are also a means of marketing, Ninetendo has learnt to do this well. Xbox made a name for itself purely by riding on the back of Halo, until 360 and its new games took over. Even to this day one Halo game outsells PS3 exclusives and some Nintendo exclusives, why? Because it is a flagship title, which is why Microsoft wants it to keep going on and on forever, so I'm not sure where you got the idea that exclusives are meaningless.darkcommanderq said:
I personally think third party exclusives are meaningless, but I think there is a need for first party exclusives, I'd rather not a console that is exactly the same as all the others, it becomes pointless, people like to compare, this is why we have different cars, different houses, tvs, gardens etc. Things get boring if we all have the same thing.
I just hate exclusives because because the reason why they exist is to make money. I also see the number of exclusives for the PS3 that they proudly brag about in press releases as a highly negative thing.pulse2 said:
Exclusives mean to me that the console sucks and the only way the company can get people to buy it is though exclusive games.
I also am not naive, and I know that there not going away any time soon. If ever. Thats why I refuse to buy anything from sony. Its the only way I have of expressing my utter contempt for the company that I used to love on my PS2.
The irony being, of course, that multiplatform games make more money. Not exclusives. MS has just as many exclusives. And they only do it because they throw money at it. Sony might have exclusives but at least it doesn't pay for most of them.darkcommanderq said:
Exclusives are to make money :/ But they are also there to sway potential buyers over to PS3, in my case it worked, so it can't all be a bad thing, I keep my PS3 because of the exclusives it has, I bought it because it had games I couldn't get on PC, Wii or 360, so is that so bad if it works?darkcommanderq said:
I wouldn't say it highlights the weaknesses of the consoles either, because by that statement, it would be fair to say that all consoles got to where they are today purely on the basis of exclusives, like to say, Nintendo is only successful because of Mario or 360 is only successful because of Halo and Gears. If thats the case, then you may even have a slight point, Gears and Halo are both amongst the top selling and top played titles on 360, so what does that say? Does that mean 360 sucks? No, it doesn't it just means that exclusives are popular, heck, if Microsoft announced that it was going to make Halo multiplat tomorrow to Wii and PS3, see if thier shares and fanbase don't drop, I'm 100% certain they would.
All it takes is one good game on the other system that you really want to sway you into buying it which is why PS3 is right behind 360 worldwide. Face it though, 360, Wii and PS3 all have features besides exclusives that make them superb consoles, exclusives just help to sway gamers, because thats what gamers want, 'games'.
Seriously? You don't want Gears of War on the PS3 because you don't like it? It does no harm to you if it's added to the PS3 library, and there are plenty of PS3 owners who would like access to it.MaxPowers666 said:
-.- thats the entire point though, If every title were cross platform then there wouldnt be much point in there being several consoles. The PS3 exclusives are a great lineup of games which actually pursuaded me to buy a PS3 after i got my 360darkcommanderq said:
I wouldn't mind Gears of War on the PS3. Heck, free online multiplayer.
But hey, they're contracted with one of the biggest developer killers of this time.
But hey, they're contracted with one of the biggest developer killers of this time.
especially on gears, having co op and horde mode cross platforms?Wolfram01 said:
Epic = epic fucking win.
i think there would be too much replayability to last 3 console generations..they'd be ruined.
Then you caved and gave sony money because of proprietary marketing. If you can live with the BS that buying a sony product comes with go for it. However sony is not going to change its behavior until people stop buying there products.The_Blue_Rider said:
There is no single game on any system that I will go and buy a new system for. When I console shop I buy the system that I think will have the most titles period. This generation its the 360. If I had had money to buy a PS3 at the time I got my 360 I would have just built a gaming PC. (Which I did later when I had more money).
I dont even understand why sony blew there firm grounding in that position with the ps2. To many changes to quickly I quess.
Yes it is. You paid 600+ bucks that you wouldnt have had to pay, had the developers made the game cross platform.pulse2 said:
Dont get me wrong, I think halo and gears should be made cross platform to. But all of you who keep quoting me keep forgetting one simple fact. Its just not easy to make games for the 360 AND Ps3. You have to rewrite the dam game for each console.
One of the biggest reasons that the Ps3 has so many exclusives is because once you decide to make a game on it, unless your game is getting a huge cash injection (like movie games), you probably wont be able to afford developing the same game AGAIN for 360 and Pc.
I just dont see how 10-20 hours of gameplay per Ps3 Exclusive could possibly be worth 600+ bucks for a new console and games, when you could just play a game 'like' it on 360, or Pc.
If you bought a PS3 when they first came out because you just really liked the console fine.
While I don't completely disagree with what points you are trying to make I wanted to point out that you are completely wrong about porting Gears to the PC. I thought it was common knowledge by now but the 360 and PS3 both share a PowerPC core which basically means that they are technically more alike; which also means they are *NOT* x86 in even the broadest sense. I could also point out that Microsoft aped Sony and Toshiba by hiring IBM to build their processor from the same early draft of the Cell but that is another discussion entirely.darkcommanderq said:
Oh and btw PC port of Gears probably wont happen this late in the production cycle, just sayin'.
Yeah I did forget the 360 was powerPC, but at least its an established processor that people have been writing games on for many years before they choose to run with it. The PS3 uses the Cell which is not a typical powerPC, which I also thought was common knowledge.spider-dork said:
As far as a Gears to PC port goes, Im sure the newer gears wont be ported to Pc just because studios dont like the PC ne more. I was simply saying that they could really easily if they wanted to. (There writing and testing it on PCs....)
Although the Pc port for the first gears was done by people can fly, after the 360 version was already out, so you never know.
Unreal Engine 3 games usually don't look better on the PS3, if anything they usually look worse. However Epic has shown that they themselves are good at working on the PS3 with the work they did on UT3. That said, I still don't expect the PS3 to benefit, except perhaps for getting keyboard and mouse support.unabomberman said:
Maybe because so far i have seen nothing wrong with Sony? Because i happen to enjoy their exclusive line up of games? The same way i also enjoy the 360's exclusives?darkcommanderq said:
Look i can understand the way you feel but im not going to change my opinion on Sony just because you tell me that their exclusives are bad, Sony have consistently delivered me quality experiences, and i will keep buying as long as it entertains me, simple as that