Network now...NEWS
Mass Effect 2 "Multiplatform"
In talking about big titles for EA's next fiscal year, CEO John Riccitiello dropped hints about the future of the epic space-themed RPG franchise Mass Effect.
"[In Q4], BioWare will release Mass Effect 2 on multiple platforms," he said during a Tuesday earnings call.
The original 2007 Mass Effect was initially an Xbox 360 exclusive published by Microsoft Game Studios. EA's acquisition of BioWare opened up rumors that the franchise could go multiplatform.
Mass Effect later appeared on PC.
Riccitiello did not specifically mention the PS3 in his statement, but the nature of EA as a multiplatform third-party publisher would suggest that "multiple platforms" would include Sony's machine in the equation.
Multiple calls into EA and BioWare were unanswered as of press time.
[UPDATE] A rep for EA said in a phone call that the company could not get into specifics about what Riccitiello meant by his "multiple platform" comment.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Lets hope they make it on the PS3 so it can be a complete and fully realised game as I'm fed up of getting a game that uses a small amount of space on a blu ray why not fill the disc and just downgrade the graphics and put it on multi dvds for the xbox?
Why downgrade the graphics? So far, I believe the 360 is perfectly capable of handling any "fully realized" PS3 title's graphics. Storage capacity is one thing, so multiple dvd's will be needed at some point. But graphics-wise, both systems are beasts.
I think djpolofish doesn't understand that the only advantage to having a larger storage media, is storing media assets (textures, sound files, etc) uncompressed. Which is a negligible advantage as existing compression algorithms offer pretty great storage space vs quality ratios, where most people would not notice the difference.
Now what would improve the graphic quality visibly would be higher resolution assets, but then the machines would need better hardware specs (most notably RAM) for them to truly improve the eye candy factor.
Well then quick call the developers of red faction and tell them there wrong, you can save the future of gaming..... do it man!
I think you should not make comments about anything technical that you do not understand, let alone interpreting the statements of a professional.
Obviously you did not understand what I was saying, to break it down in simpler terms (which will probably still be lost on you), significant graphical improvements in games are heavily tied to the console's RAM. There are tricks used to make things look better, whether it's optimizing the memory usage or the art style (the artists making things look better within the technical constraints). But in the end, RAM dictates the real time application possibilities.
All I’m getting is developer quotes and this one for pc world but no one is telling why the PS3 graphics are better. But don’t worry I’m persistent I will answer you.
When the PS3 was launched, Sony boasted about the system's 3.2-GHz cell processor capable of a supercomputer-like 208 billion floating-point operations per second. Although the games looked fine, only now are developers really starting to take advantage of the power of the cell CPU, the 550-GHz nVidia graphics, and the RSX Reality Synthesizer GPU. This is where the PS3 will start to pull away from the Wii and even the Xbox 360.
You shouldn't post "quotes" you don't understand. Start off by explaining why floating point number crunching is significant when it comes to games? If you can't explain why certain hardware specs/theoretical performance benchmarks are significant, then it's a pointless post.
It's pretty much like saying the Genesis was superior to the SNES because of "Blast Processing"; it's marketing spiel without giving context and explanation.
No there is a difference in graphics as game developers have already said they have pushed the 360 to its limits where as killzone only uses 60% of the PS3s raw power. Here have a quote.
Rick White: Yeah, we’ve got it to the point where we can’t even put an extra vehicle into a world, because it’ll blow the memory. Every little change we make we have to be hyper-critical about it because it could just bring the whole system down. We evaluate every little change in the game, and then we run our tools on it to make sure it isn’t going to break the game and then we move forward, so it really is about pushing the engine as far as we can, and pushing the hardware as far as we can, and then looking at what is the next set of hardware that’s going to come out. Where can we take it then? You know we’re already thinking about if we had XYZ X number of years from now, what would we do with our engine?
Could this really be the first sign that the Xbox 360 has reached its pinnacle? If so, it’s a worrying trend for Microsoft and Xbox 360 players because neither the Wii or PS3 seem to have reached their tipping points in terms of technology at this point.
Way to take a quote completely out of context.... Notice his statements revolve around the topic of "memory", which I assure you is referring to RAM, not the storage medium's capacity.
From a purely hardware spec point of view the 360 has a slight advantage over the PS3 as far as RAM goes. I had something typed up explaining/detailing the differences in each console's memory architecture, but that's besides the point. The point is that "quote" doesn't support your implied point, the comment does not touch on any processing architecture or storage media differences.
what about the 400gb blu-ray will that fit on a dvd?
I think you misunderstand how computers/consoles work.
Let me try to put it as simply as I can, files from the storage medium (dvd/blu ray/hard disk/etc) need to be loaded into the systems RAM when those files are being used by the "application" that's running. Anything in RAM can be accessed and retrieved very quickly, compared to DVDs/Blu Rays/CD-Roms.
More often than not, any "Loading" screens you see in games, the bulk of that time the console is transferring files from the DVD/Blu-Ray/Harddrive to the RAM.
Just let it go, man.
Thus having a huge 50gig-400gig disc wouldn't give as much of an advantage if you're still limited to only 500mb of RAM (or 256x2 in the PS3). That doesn't take disc streaming, HDD caching, or pure HDD installs into account since the transfer speeds from the HDD to RAM is faster than DVD-9/BluRay transfer speeds.
I know this is sorta off topic, but I hope the next wave of systems goes all out and has 2 gigs of RAM and huge HDDs (500gig to terabyte) for full retail game digital or hard installs. That's just wishful thinking on my part though.
400gig bluray? Are you talking about Panasonics proprietary 400gig disc? I don't believe that uses bluray tech.
Pioneer first introduced its unicorn-like 16-layer 400GB Blu-ray Disc, we weren't sure if the thing would make it beyond the drawing board, let alone be compatible with existing BD decks. Over at the IT Month Fair in Taipei, Pioneer showed up to showcase the capacious disc, and better still, a DigiTimes report asserts that these are indeed compatible with Blu-ray readers already on the market. Currently, the 400GB disc is slated to hit mass production sometime between now and 2010, and yes it works on the PS3
Thanks for the info.
EA own the publishing rights for the Mass Effect IP. Therefore they really should bring the first game to the PS3, because releasing the second game without being able to play the first game on the same system is pointless.
Although I haven't actually played Mass Effect it recieved really good reviews across the board and it was also one of the 360's high points. EA's decision to go multi platform didn't come as a surprise to me at all. As Nickgamertag01 adequetly put, so long as the release dates for each platform don't affect one another then this could definatley pay off big time for the 'new' EA.
Mass Effect is one of the few RPGs I have bought and played all the way to completion in recent years. Awesome game, and I can't wait for its sequel on the PC. Hopefully they'll make the side quests better and make the game run well on my PC. I haven't talked to BioWare about the latter thing but I'm sure they're bound to understand ;).
BioWare is one of my favorite developers and Mass Effect one of my favorite games of the past few years despite a few technical problems (elevator rides).
BTW, Teamxbox (an IGN subsidiary) has updated this article stating the EA PR has clarified the statement and is only confirming PC and 360 versions now. I suspect this will end up being a timed exclusive or possibly end up having exclusive DLC for 360 which might explain the mixed messages.
mass effect 2 was one, if not the best game i ever played on pc. it had nice graphics, awesome art style, incredibly imersive music and sound, the story was like.. something i can't describe in words and the gameplay was so much fun. the only two things that i think could have been improved a little bit were the level design and the % of combat versus dialog ingame. i wish there would have been more fighting. playing as a vanguard for example is just too easy and fast even on the harest dificulty. i managed to finish the game in 7 to 8 hours but with no additional secondary quests completed. even so, it was well worth it's money. bioware, as usual, since baldur's gate and until now, remains the best game developer in the world, thank you so much for mass effect and all the games that u made for us. thank you! cheers! ;)
"mass effect 2 was one, if not the best game i ever played on pc."
Not played many games then....
Mass Effect was OK, but just OK, it certainly wasn't the masterpiece some idiots were banging on about at the time of the games release.
Mass Effect 2 will need to improve massively over the first game. There was so many aspects of the first game that ruined the experience for me personally, like the hidious slowdown, graphical hitches i.e. textures that would load very late, and way too many load screens, etc.
There are better role-playing games out there, but lets hope Bioware get it "right" for the second title.
Hmm, I guess we 360 owners can call foul like the PS3 owners have with about 12 of PS3's titles.
I actually don't have a problem with Mass Effect 2 coming to the PS3 (assuming "Multiplatform" means more than just 360/PC) as long as the PS3 port doesn't delay or hinder the 360 version at all. I can't imagine being a PS3 owner knowing the non-asian versions of FFXIII will be delayed so the 360 version can be finished. If that happened with Mass Effect 2 I'd be rather annoyed, too.
If Sony wanted to compete, they'd pay EA a bucket of money for an exclusive window for this particular game.
Brian
www.brianwoods.com
Brain,
From EA's viewpoint, that would have to be tons of money that Sony doesn't have right now. The 360 has a larger installed base in the U.S. and I don't think a company cutting employees and closing studios will bypass the largest installed base and highest attach rate for timed PS3-exclusivity.
When EA bought Bioware it was inevitable Mass Effect 2 was going to be multiplatform. For the PS3 version i hope EA implement a keyboard/mouse interface like the PC version or make it optional at least.
Why other PS3 FPS's and RTS titles don't have keyboard/mouse interface optional is madness on the developers part, because it's not as if Sony have a "control pad interface only" policy like MS for 360 games.
It's almost criminal that Killzone 2 didn't have such an option. The game would've been better as well.
What's even more surprising are the number of RTS games that have gone console exclusive for 360 only, given the fact that they could port over the PC controls option to PS3 as you have stated. Universe at War, Battle for Middle Earth, and some of the C&C games spring to mind that only came out for 360.
RTS games lick balls on consoles so I doubt many people are that bothered.
I can't say personally but it seems from review scores that RTS games on consoles are starting to pick up, and some have even received high scores. I'm not a fan of RTS games and haven't played any PC or console RTS games so I can't compare but it seems unfair to claim they lick balls when the reviews are there.
Maybe the PS3 of Mass Effect (if it exists) will have both the first and second one on the same disc? I too see them releasing the first one, even if they do release them seperately. Maybe they'll release Mass Effect 1 on PS3 to build some hype for the second one prior to the second one's release? Or not at all as someone mentioned above that it's still only confirmed as a 360/PC release.
Oh Nick; couldn't let something that could be perceived as challenge to a possible advantage to your precious system go uncontested could you?
If someone posted something that said that Shane Kim's shit stank I'm sure you'd jump straight in to explain how it smells of strawberries and summer meadows. Oh defender of the faith you.
I was defending RTSs on consoles not specifically the 360 (did I even say 360 or just console RTSs? And I know the PC faithful love their mouse and keyboard set-up so I think they may be a bit harsh on the console RTS set-up). And c'mon Arron, I've backed way off lately cut me some slack! ^^
No, I wouldn't say Shane Kim's shit smelled like strawberries and summer meadows, but with a keyboard and mouse I bet it smells much better.
Edit: Arron, I looked back at my comment and not only did I not specify the 360 but I said consoles (plural) I wasn't defending the 360 bro, just console RTSs in general. Give me a break.
I don't think you can blame any regular readers of this site for dismissing you as an Xbox fanboy and assuming that every single comment you make has a pro-Xbox agenda/subtext.
Give US a break.
Understood, but not reading a post thoroughly when replying and "assuming" I'm talking about the 360 is just irresponsible.
So you're basically saying because I defend my console of choice from time to time means I should be subject to ridicule regardless of the content of my actual posts? Nice.
I guess the phrase "you reap what you sow" is appropriate.
Maybe they'll release Mass Effect 1 on PS3 to build some hype for the second one prior to the second one's release? Or not at all as someone mentioned above that it's still only confirmed as a 360/PC release.
Honestly, if EA don't release the first ME on the PS3, then they shouldn't release the second game at all on the system as it would just create inconsistencies to the narrative on the PS3 platform.
That makes a lot more sense. Although I think there have been a few games that had a sequel that came out on the PS3 when the original never did. Who knows?
Going back one generation, Metal Gear: Subsistence on the original Xbox from the Playstation from Nintendo. Even further back, Final Fantasy from Nintendo (FF - FFVI) to Sony (FFVII-FFXII) to Nintendo (FFIV remake-DS) Sony (Crisis Core-PSP) and Microsoft FFXIII. Other mutliplat-for-the-first-time games.
Beautiful Katamari
Tekken 6
Virtua Fighter 5
Devil May Cry 4
Ninja Gaiden Sigma - An expansion on black with extra stuff so it kind-of counts
Granted, most of these games went from the PS to Microsoft but still, it's not unprecented..