digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at joystiq.com

Red Alert 3 Skipping PS3 Due to Exotic and Tough Developmet

joystiq.com — "We actually announced a PS3 version early on but that was when we were still doing a lot of technical exploration of the architecture," explained Ajami. "PS3 is a very powerful system but as you guys know it's very exotic and tough to develop for and our engine really at the time wasn't designed for PS3."

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 30, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

273 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • razorc03, on 07/30/2008, -57/+169If other devs are optimizing the PS3 (Infinity Ward, Konami, etc...) then they have no excuse.
    It's called laziness.
  • roxya, on 07/30/2008, -24/+98The strange thing is, last quarter EA made far more $ on the PS3 than the 360. I've no idea why or how, but they did.

    So why cancel / delay PS3 games?
  • desertfox236, on 07/30/2008, -28/+100Why would you buy it for a console anyway?
  • random255, on 07/30/2008, -22/+74You've got to learn how to program on the PS3 -SOMETIME- guys... after all, you create video games... why limit yourselves further?
  • LordRedSnake, on 07/30/2008, -1/+41It's called business. They may have determined that the amount of resources and man-hours required to cope with the complexity of developing for the PS3 outweighed the potential revenue that a PS3 version would bring in. After all, their management's primary responsibility is to maximize the returns for shareholders, not to release games on every platform for the sake of maximum inclusiveness.
  • LMN8R, on 07/30/2008, -7/+46It makes perfect sense. Just like C&C 3, Red Alert 3 will probably sell multiple times more on PC than it does 360. By installed base math, the 360 version would sell more than the PS3 version.

    Developing for the PC first makes the most sense, porting to the 360 is relatively easy, and a port to the PS3 would be very difficult.


    So now you're left with a situation where EA would be spending by far the most amount of effort developing a port that would easily sell the least number of copies. Maybe it wouldn't even be profitable. Why would it make any sense to continue?
  • Nathrat, on 07/30/2008, -6/+38anybody who likes fun, for starters.
  • aznpwnzor, on 07/30/2008, -3/+34true dat
    but who wants to play a freakin rts with a controller?
  • MatchStick, on 07/30/2008, -0/+23wait wait wait.... so you're saying that when you say "Some" what you ACTUALLY mean is "some"???
  • roxya, on 07/30/2008, -3/+25The source is EA themselves. They just released their 2009 Q1 report.
  • MCA2142, on 07/30/2008, -5/+25http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/07/30/ps3-raking-in- ...
  • sei0n, on 07/30/2008, -2/+22Lots of people do, but the recent, post-Westwood titles have been far from satisfying.
  • wedges, on 07/30/2008, -1/+20well COD4 for PS3 is built from the ground up for PS3, wheras this is a PC game, and it would be awfully tough to start from scratch on the PS3 version.

    i love my PS3, but I do understand it can be a pain in the ass.
  • MrPig, on 07/30/2008, -3/+21EA's Command and Conquer development team is rather small. The undertaking that is supporting the PS3 (adding OpenGL support to the engine) would be a nightmare for the already overworked team.
  • Pissoff, on 07/30/2008, -18/+36Their engine is outdated, and they're not willing to invest in the development for a game like RA3.

    Or, all the other dev shops putting out games are better than theirs.

  • Chaotyk, on 07/30/2008, -6/+23RTS games are dumb on consoles anyway. I can't imagine trying to micro without a mouse and keyboard.
  • Chirp08, on 07/30/2008, -6/+22Are you kidding? 10k's? Basically you are saying that employing a single additional programmer for one year is enough to convert that game to PS3 efficiently? Obviously they don't have the staff in place, the budget, or the time to do the port, and no business makes a decision like this without running the numbers.
  • quarryman, on 07/30/2008, -0/+15all the people that are about to bury you
  • strictnein, on 07/30/2008, -2/+17$10k's? Does that cover all of the extra hardware, testing, development, etc etc, that goes into each port? I think you're off by a factor of at least 10. If porting a game only cost $50k, every single game would be available on every single platform.
  • WhereAmI, on 07/30/2008, -13/+28Miss out on millions of dollars because they can't invest a few more 10k's of dollars?
  • otros, on 07/30/2008, -0/+14Yeah, I don't think EA is going to go anytime soon.
  • WhereAmI, on 07/30/2008, -4/+18Well hearing this they probably weren't going to do K/M support and never even thinking about mod support anyway, so I guess I'll play it on the only platform for RTS's: PC.
  • MCA2142, on 07/30/2008, -4/+17Also: http://digg.com/gaming_news/PS3_Now_EA_s_Single_Bi ...
  • PleaseJustDie, on 07/30/2008, -2/+14If they ported it to the PS3 they could allow you to use a keyboard/mouse, like how UT3 allows you to use a keyboard/mouse instead of a controller.
  • Tyrghast, on 07/30/2008, -3/+15Who the ***** cares? RTS games play better on a PC anyway.
  • inactive, on 07/30/2008, -4/+16On PS3 yes, 360 no
  • WhereAmI, on 07/30/2008, -2/+13Some (and I mean some) PS3 games (UT3) have Keyboard/Mouse and Mod support. I was hoping for RA3 they would do it but since they can't figure out howto work it on PS3 they probably weren't gonna mess with K/M and mod support.
  • briansearles, on 07/30/2008, -4/+15Of which EA and the C&C franchise has known much of since they bought out Westwood. No surprise here folks.
  • veijeri, on 07/30/2008, -0/+11CHA-CHING!
  • IamVassi, on 07/30/2008, -3/+13Hearing about Red Alert takes me back to when I use to spend countless hours playing that game on my PC back in high school

    ... remember Tanya?
  • psg188, on 07/30/2008, -3/+13SAGE is outdated? With all the upgrades it's getting I see no reason for them to make something else when it works so well. It runs efficiently and looks great.

    The quality of EA games aside, SAGE works well.
  • thebaron2, on 07/30/2008, -1/+11Who on earth said that a game available for both systems was exclusive in the first place?

    It's exclusive when it's stolen from 1 competitor and NOT made multi-platform. When the developers come out and say "We're making it for system X, but not Y" - like in this case - THEN it's exclusive.

    Looks like you're just posting a response to your own straw man.
  • KanosWRX, on 07/30/2008, -10/+20In other words someone got lazy. Not that it matters, RTS on a console are not as fun/easy to play as on a PC.
  • MRintheKeys, on 07/30/2008, -0/+9360 to PC ports and vice versa are relatively easy.
  • staticneuron, on 07/30/2008, -1/+9"and our engine really at the time wasn't designed for PS3"

    It's that simple. They aren't being lazy and this isn't a slight against the PS3.
  • fuzzynyanko, on 07/30/2008, -1/+8They actually say that porting from PS3 to 360 is easier than 360 to PS3. However, I wonder how many companies are noticing the speed that you can make a 360 game over a PS3 game.
  • 2Bnor2B, on 07/30/2008, -3/+10Sony really needs to address this. The PS3 development tools are too expensive for students and small publishers when compare to the XBox. How are people suppose to learn? They really need to fully open up the PS3 and stop being so protective. Press releases like this are not good. I am a small indie developer (translation: hobbyist) that is looking to get into consoles. Although I like the PS3, the XBox route is far more inviting.

    Side note: I also think Sony made a big mistake dropping PS2 BC.
  • Kussie, on 07/30/2008, -1/+8I suggest you check your research as well. Installing Linux on the PS3 does not let you develop for it as pet the OP intends. Also running linux on the PS3 and trying to develop for it is a waste of time as you have no direct access to any of the hardware on the system.
  • RizenBB, on 07/30/2008, -0/+7I somehow doubt that developing code for a proprietary 7 core RISC-based CPU with a one-off GPU is anything like coding for a high end gaming PC. Especially given the Wiki information on the Cell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_processor%29:

    "The architecture emphasizes efficiency/watt, prioritizes bandwidth over latency, and _favors peak computational throughput over simplicity of program code_. For these reasons, Cell is _widely regarded as a challenging environment for software development_.[5]"

    I'm sure Gabe Newell is just full of *****, though.
  • smiley2billion, on 07/30/2008, -14/+21While I agree that RTS games like this should be on the PC it says something about the mindset of developers when looking at the PS3.

    Some people are saying they're being lazy and they're "greedy". Well, it just doesn't make financial sense for them to invest dev time to something that isn't going to payback. They've got expansion packs to make, dammit.
  • projectmobius, on 07/30/2008, -5/+12its been a while and its still exotic and tough to develop on? come on. Well at least i can play it on PC which i prefer.
  • LogicBomB, on 07/30/2008, -0/+7It better ***** work smooth as silk on the 360 then. I'm tired, so ***** tired, of insane framerate and response issues with console RTS games.
  • protogenxl, on 07/30/2008, -1/+71. They are Uncertain about the market for an RTS on the PS3. They would be the first RTS on the PS3.
    2. They are not releasing it in japan therefore they are missing a large chunk of the PS3 install base.
    3. There has not been a C&C game on a Sony Console since 1998 so to say they are a bit rusty is an understatement.
    4. EA doesn't have a Dev Team with real time strategy experience outside of the Westwood team.
    5. Moving from Directx to OpenGL means a whole new engine
  • ZenMojo, on 07/30/2008, -9/+15Bethesda: "Development on the PS3 has an incredible amount of potential providing opportunities we have yet to see on any other system."

    Ajami: "Yeaaaaah. That *****'s really hard, yo. ***** that."
  • Wynner3, on 07/30/2008, -1/+7It's EA, they will have a problem with something.
  • reed311, on 07/30/2008, -1/+7There is no such thing as being lazy in a corporation like that. The bosses don't care if the workers want to make a PS3 version or not. The only thing the higher-ups care about is profits. They have obviously decided that it will not be worth their while in a financial sense to develop that game for the PS3. Maybe they need the team to use the resources towards a more profitable venture instead of adding development time onto the PS3 version, who knows.



  • terminal157, on 07/30/2008, -0/+6The people saying it's lazy need to think about that a little bit. Do you really think a bunch of programmers and their management are sitting around watching TV going, "ugh, I don't feel like it. I'm going to take a nap." Laziness just doesn't apply in a business context.
  • MWeather, on 07/30/2008, -4/+10That's odd, considering the PS3 is supposedly easier to write for than the PS2.
  • FutureGuy, on 07/30/2008, -4/+10laziness no more like economics.
  • protogenxl, on 07/30/2008, -2/+7Also the primary install base of the PS3 is japan and C&C has never been popular over there. ( I guess it is the lack of Emo androgynous 12 year olds)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 275 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.