Splinter cell conviction on 360 exclusive crap.....

T

tgg

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,151
Man I was just watching microsofts press show and saw the awesome game of splinter cell conviction and at the end the butt nut said its only on 360 exclusive. WTF damm microsoft paying everyone ahahha.

I have a gaming pc and ps3 60gig, guess I have to get a 360 lol.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure it was said to be a 360 exclusive from the time it was first announced.
 
tgg said:
Man I was just watching microsofts press show and saw the awesome game of splinter cell conviction and at the end the butt nut said its only on 360 exclusive. WTF damm microsoft paying everyone ahahha.

I have a gaming pc and ps3 60gig, guess I have to get a 360 lol.
Click to expand...

yah, welcome to 2 years ago. Console exclusives are a lame reality in every console since the atari, so what can you do. I guess I'll answer that and say buy every system like a true gamer :D
 
Lol i dont think they should have said that it could be only done on the 360. I guess its good to cover their ass when they actually mean they dont know how to code for the PS3.
 
If we listed every stupid quote about a game "not being able to be done" on the 360 or ps3 we'd have a very long and embarassing list for both sides. Splinter cell and Gears of war? Not possible on the ps3 according to their devs. Little big planet and lair not possible on the 360? Not possible according to those failures of devs. People should realize that from a technical standpoint this is stupid marketing shit, and only gets said when the games are exclusive...gee, wonder why that is.
 
Technoob said:
If we listed every stupid quote about a game "not being able to be done" on the 360 or ps3 we'd have a very long and embarassing list for both sides. Splinter cell and Gears of war? Not possible on the ps3 according to their devs. Little big planet and lair not possible on the 360? Not possible according to those failures of devs. People should realize that from a technical standpoint this is stupid marketing shit, and only gets said when the games are exclusive...gee, wonder why that is.
Click to expand...

lol
 
tirminyl said:
lol
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about bad games, I was talking about stupid statements. Anyone who thinks the 360 couldn't handle littlebigplanet graphically is an idiot, but that didn't stop the devs from saying that the game couldn't be done on the 360. Miss the point much?
 
Exactly. This marketing BS needs to stop since both systems pump out games that are very technically similar. Who the hell encoded this video for splinter cell? 500mb for a 4 minute clip?
 
WaterproofPaper said:
Exactly. This marketing BS needs to stop since both systems pump out games that are very technically similar. Who the hell encoded this video for splinter cell? 500mb for a 4 minute clip?
Click to expand...

Yeah it's kind of annoying, but worth the view
 
Looks good.. a little polish here and there and it will be a great game. I love the art direction and the cutscenes. That fisher can execute those people like crazy fast.
 
I'm glad I have a 360! :D

I wants me splinter cell!! (I just don't wanna pay $60-70 for it)

I'm probably gonna wait until this is about $20-35. Always do...
 
Technoob said:
I wasn't talking about bad games, I was talking about stupid statements. Anyone who thinks the 360 couldn't handle littlebigplanet graphically is an idiot, but that didn't stop the devs from saying that the game couldn't be done on the 360. Miss the point much?
Click to expand...

Apparently so because there was no distinction between the two when reading it for me.

I agree such statements are stupid because it is food for fanboys.
 
tirminyl said:
Apparently so because there was no distinction between the two when reading it for me.

I agree such statements are stupid because it is food for fanboys.
Click to expand...

My fault, should have been more clear and less snarky :)
 
bigdogchris said:
+1

Ubisoft and Valve do not like PS3, it's been noted and quoted online before.
Click to expand...

I have this discussion with a lot of people. Not about these developers not liking the PS3 per se, but more like individuals and companies getting comfortable on where they are at. Say if valve started putting more money into apple OSX and the PS3, wouldnt they be better developers because they can overcome more obstacles that approach them? I think this is why blizzard have a following like they do. Sure valve has a following, but not as much as blizzard. Blizzard not only have the polish, but they have the dev power to cater to everyone so they can enjoy the product that they put their hearts into.
 
WaterproofPaper said:
I have this discussion with a lot of people. Not about these developers not liking the PS3 per se, but more like individuals and companies getting comfortable on where they are at.
Click to expand...

The ps3 is a vastly different architecture and as I understand it the included tools are not as easy to work with as the 360's. That combined with it coming out a year later means developers are naturally more comfortable with the 360.

That having been said, I see no problem whatsoever with a developer not wanting to spend time and money learning a new platform when they can accomplish everything they want on one they already know very well. Time they spend learning ps3 is time not spent improving the other versions of the game...resources are not infinite.

There are probably specific technical reasons that the developers could tell you to describe why they can't do it the same on ps3, but do these even matter? "It cant happen on ps3" is just a simplified way of saying "we cant do it", not necessarily that the system can't handle it if enough time, money, and experienced developers were thrown at it.
 
A general question... can someone explain to me how this sort of thing is different to say... Insomniac providing exclusive PS3 games? Insomniac are still technically external to Sony, it's just instead of 1 game at a time, they're contracted for a period of exclusivity.

The end result is the same... but for some reason people don't get wound up about it.
 
Psychotext said:
A general question... can someone explain to me how this sort of thing is different to say... Insomniac providing exclusive PS3 games? Insomniac are still technically external to Sony, it's just instead of 1 game at a time, they're contracted for a period of exclusivity.

The end result is the same... but for some reason people don't get wound up about it.
Click to expand...

i agree but i think most people/serious fps gamers think that valve is a fucking huuuuuuge and have masses of resources and money having some of the greatest franchises of all time half life etc so they think well, they are that big why arent they porting to ps3 and making more money. ps3 users really do feel that valve hate the ps3. Also with ea doing a pretty good port of orange box on the ps3 (after patches) people think and are probably right that the engine is already optimized so why dont ea port l4d?

im not sure wether insomniac has released any games for another console for years

I dont think die hard 360/pc/wii gamers think that insomniac is a huge company as there arent many very old huge sellers they can think of

nothing would please me more than to see l4d on the ps3 as i absolutely love the game
 
Last edited:
Spaceman_Spiff said:
The ps3 is a vastly different architecture and as I understand it the included tools are not as easy to work with as the 360's. That combined with it coming out a year later means developers are naturally more comfortable with the 360.

That having been said, I see no problem whatsoever with a developer not wanting to spend time and money learning a new platform when they can accomplish everything they want on one they already know very well. Time they spend learning ps3 is time not spent improving the other versions of the game...resources are not infinite.

There are probably specific technical reasons that the developers could tell you to describe why they can't do it the same on ps3, but do these even matter? "It cant happen on ps3" is just a simplified way of saying "we cant do it", not necessarily that the system can't handle it if enough time, money, and experienced developers were thrown at it.
Click to expand...

For companies like valve and ubi that are pretty big, i dont think they would have had a problem throwing money towards PS3 development.. but for someone like gabe newell to say that the PS3 is a waste of time is just asinine. He says that every console goes through another processor every iteration, while mostly true before, isnt true for the ps3 or ps4 and beyond. Basically all hes saying is that hes too lazy to develop something that he isnt comfortable with to cater to millions of fans that might not have 360s or good PCs.

I can see money being a problem for smaller companies, but for a company like valve and ubi then it shouldnt be an issue. The return on a console that can potentially allow them to profit is worth it. But they wont ever be able to see it anymore since sales on the previous games were not so hot.
 
Basically all hes saying is that hes too lazy to develop something that he isnt comfortable with to cater to millions of fans that might not have 360s or good PCs.
Click to expand...
Well... valve doesn't have any PS3 devs, so technically he's too cheap rather than too lazy. ;)

Which is why EA would handle any porting.
 
Psychotext said:
Well... valve doesn't have any PS3 devs, so technically he's too cheap rather than too lazy. ;)

Which is why EA would handle any porting.
Click to expand...

gabe looks pretty lazy to me!!! (Sorry had to get that in!......actually no im not sorry lol!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top