Microsoft does CES - every keynote story listed
Sony stands firm of 10-year PS3 life claim
UGO assures 1UP's been left alone - all details
October 15th, 2008 @ 15:30
Speaking to Techradar, Future mag editors Jon Hicks and Dan Dawkins have expressed little shock at potential Konami plans to being MGS4 to 360.
“After the massive success of GTA IV on Xbox 360, and the recent announcement of previously Playstation exclusives Final Fantasy and Tekken 6 coming to the platform, it’d be no surprise for Konami to follow suit,” said OXM editor Hicks.
“The huge install base of the console, particularly in the US, means it’s missing out on lots of customers by sticking to the PS3. Of course, Konami has ported MGS for other platforms before – the real news would be if it launched the next game in the series on the Xbox as well as the PS3.”
PSM3 editor Dawkins added: “Capcom have already sounded the death knell for third-party exclusives, since the rising costs of next-gen development, and the relatively small user bases of both consoles, mean they make no financial sense.
“Will MGS4 go to Xbox 360? If pressed, I’d say yes, almost certainly ,” says the PlayStation mag Editor, “though Konami may release it as a ‘vanilla’ port with zero enhancements at the same time as they confirm the extended edition for PS3, a bit like MGS3 Subsistence.”
More through the link.
Del.icio.us | Digg | Share on Facebook
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
If this were to happen it would be a major blow for ps3.
Everybody said it couldn’t be done on 360 because of DVD limitations.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Sounds unlikely that they’d go for a vanilla 360 port at the same time as an extended one for PS3. The PS2 version of Substance came about as a direct result of them working on the Xbox version, did it not?
I think it’d be more likely to see an enhanced “MGS4 Subsidence” or something launch for the 360, with any enhanced features hitting the PS3 as DLC at the same time or soon afterwards.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
This will happen, one way or another.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
It shouldn’t be a surprise. It’s no difference to the original Xbox getting MGS2.
Even the Gamecube got MGS1.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
And of course it doesn’t have to stop with the 360. There was a PC version of MGS2 as well, remember.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
reask, totally extreme suggestion but multiple disks.
I’d just like to see the porting team (won’t be KojiPro), the port and if 360 could match the graphics.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Maybe I’m wrong about that no pudding but I can remember reading on various sites it could only be done on ps3 because of blue ray capacity.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
PUD: Just get the COD4 developers on it. They’d sort it pretty quickly.
reask: If you want to use 1 disc it’s only possible on the PS3. Basically comes down to that.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
What makes you think the 360 couldn’t match the graphics, Pud? Given that the 360 has the slight graphical edge, and all.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Where are you getting that “slight graphical edge” thing Blerk? I’ve seen no evidence of that.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
360 would match the graphics. I think the game would probably have to come on multiple discs though (I haven’t yet played MGS4 so I’m not sure).
October 15th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Seems like Silicon Knights should nab conversion rights if you ask me…
..assuming anonymous Konami Rep’s “We’re considering the possibility..” equates to “COMING IN 2009!” as all the gun-jumpers seem to think.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
@Psycho: I was under the impression that they were both pretty much on-par, except the 360 chip was better for antialiasing and the odd special effect. When I said ’slight’, I meant ’slight’.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Oh, you mean the actual graphics hardware rather than the complete package.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Ah, yes. I was talking in general.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
@Psychotext I would have to agree with you, there is no evidence of any graphical edge, yes the PS3 has 256Mb of ram for it’s GPU and 256mb for the CPU, and the 360 has 512Mb shared between the GPU and CPU, first party Sony games look just as good as anything on 360.
When Sony help devs to get the most out of the PS3 the graphics really shine, when they shun Sony’s help the graphical fidelity seems to take a hit.
If Sony can get reps to all the devs working on PS3 games and show them how they can utilise the machien to it’s full capabilities the dividing line will not only blur, but I predict that PS3 games will start to look better than their 360 counterparts.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
PS3 may have the BluRays but the 360 has the magical quality of having lots of people owning one.
October 15th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Eregol, all the platform manufacturers have diverse and thriving developer support networks. Admittedly, they don’t make very exciting reading to some people but they serve their purpose very well (And have done for generations).
Also, Insomniac’s Nocturnal Initiative is a very well received developer endeavour from a very capable developer.
Tiger, define “lots”
October 15th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
@Psychotext “Where are you getting that “slight graphical edge” thing Blerk? I’ve seen no evidence of that.”
LOL, Hello… how about all major cross platform releases, including those where the PS3 had been the lead development platform like Virtua Fighter 5 and Burnout.
The jaggie-station as I like to call it still has major memory/OS footprint issues and porting top it from any other platform remains a pain in the arse, just look at the mangled wreck that is called Bioshock PS3… four teams to port it, and they still could not match the 360/PC version… jeezus what a mindfuck…
And ohh dont get me started on the blurriness/overlay/field merging that Sony calls anti-aliasing.
October 15th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
@Blerk
I know nothing technically, and I will not get into that, but the most graphically impressive 360 games have been on the UE3 engine, which really isn’t that impressive anymore.
Whereas upcomign KZ2 for exmaple looks astounding. I just don’t see it being done on the 360 without a downgrade. Colour me skeptical about FFXIII on 360 too.
The announcement was made in a granduer fashion a fortnight post discussion and I really can’t wait to see how that port tunrs out if they don’t dumb the PS3 version down.
October 15th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
mortiferus: Cross platform stuff… yes. But since when were they a good indication of the power of the platforms? These machines only really shine when they get full attention with exclusive titles.
Pud: For the amount of time KZ2 has been in development for, nothing should look like it. Spend that much time and that much money on a 360 game and you’d get similar results.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
There is no way you are going to port MGS4 to the 360 without losing half the game or putting it on 5 dvd’s. The game has a 5 gig install base as it is, not to mention it takes up a full double density blue ray disk. Kojima has said it a thousand times, I feel bad for 360 owners getting a port of this because it wont do the game justice. Konami will look into it, but its probably gonna die there
October 15th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
The “Graphical edge” is there…
PS3 chip based on a Nvidia 7600 - 7800 PC architecture.
360 is licensed Ati tech custom built for console.
The CELL CPU is more powerful than the 360 CPU though.
360 has the unified shaders which the RSX lack.
Nvidia didnt have that till 8800 series.
If you google 360 GPU vs RSX there a some really good articles out there.
http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.php?tid=19237
What is sad is that in games you havent really seen
a 360 game that couldnt be done on a PS3, except in texture size. PS3 really has to compress to fit in 256mb ram
360 has the benefit of 512 unified memory.
This is why PS3 textures are slightly less sharp or warmer.
Not being a fanboy, it really is a better GPU, with Sony having the better CPU. Kind of the same situation with
the PS2 actually.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
@No_PUDding Killzone 2 has been in development for ages and has been gradually downgraded to during development. Its composition engine/deffered shading engine is nothing unique and could be ported to 360.
Quite honestly outside of BD-ROM’s space advantage and its SPU/Cell FPU numbers, which have proven to be worthless for gaming, the 360 has the PS3 beat.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
DocBooch: That’s exactly why you’d stick it on 5 dvds. One for each act, swap a disc each act instead of waiting for the install.
5 dvds would cost a little more than a dual layer blu-ray (only a dollar or so based on the last set of numbers I saw)… but packaging would be a complete and utter bitch. They’d probably have to sell it in a pretty unique case and price accordingly.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Nobody outside the development team and their publisher knows how long games are in development for.
I know of a game that’s been in development for nigh-on three years and is yet to be announced.
Far Cry 2 was in development over 18 months before the first whiff of a teaser was ever given.
There is stuff going on RIGHT NOW that you won’t see until some of you reach the other side of puberty. Just imagine!
Furthermore, development time is as completely a fucked up way of judging a game’s worth as how many hours of play it has.
Seriously people, you’re so fucking wrapped up on which piece of silicon is running a piece of software you’ll make some absolutely hilarious arguments to sound justified in your claims.
Here’s the kicker: MOST STUFF IS DEVELOPED ON PCS RUNNING LINUX OR UNIX
October 15th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Oh and on the BD-disk thing.
Lost Odyssey is a graphical tour de force, and
uses 4 DVD’s to play the game. If they can spread
that game out across 4 disks, no reason why they can’t
do MGS4. Plus the NXE will allow you to install to
HD so if you have a big enough drive, not much of an issue.
Lost Odyssey was no problem, swapping disks no big deal.
I don’t know if I would use that NXE feature.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Oh, guys, just so you know: an Xbox 360 dual layer DVD has a total of about 6.8gb of space available for data storage. Microsoft reserve the rest for.. erm.. god knows. They don’t actually say.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
I am sorry but until I see an exmaple of a game pulling off KZ2 graphics on the 360, I do not believe it.
Why did that not happen with Halo 3?
Why do other games not look as impressive. Time and money are one thing, but even Resistance 2 looks graphically better than most games on the 360.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Shatner: Sometimes we know exactly how long games have been in development for, how much has been spent on them, how many people have been redirected from other teams to go and assist on them, how many other projects got cancelled because of them. How much internal strife has been caused by them…
But you’re right - using it to judge a games worth is pointless. Using it as a benchmark of what others can achieve without the same budget and timescales is pointless too.
Oh, and the rest of the DL disk is reserved for security (lol, that worked).
Pud: You might as well ask why it didn’t happen with Resistance, or Haze, or Lair, or Heavenly Sword. Oh, and you need your eyes tested if you think resistance 2 is a graphical powerhouse. Take a look at the vids we’ve seen rather than the bullshots.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Oh, and for the love of god please don’t bother arguing with me Shatner. I’m neither Pat nor Morriss, I can’t be arsed.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Yes… The recent videos are excellent, maybe you need your eyes tested.
Artistically it’s an awful mess, but graphically it’s superb.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
@No_PUDding ohh that one is easy, Gears of War 2. Unlike KZ2 it’s a shinning example of what a real-time engine engine can and should do.
Halo 3 was what it was by design. It did not feature a from scratch renderer for 360, but it still did a bang up job. No disappointment at all there.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Resistance was a launch title, Heavenly Sword was virtually a launch title, and looked superb aswell.
Haze obviosuly festered in develpment hell a little while too long, it’s not as if the game itself was good either. And Lair, like many you haven’t even played the game (it looks stunning), nor have you played the others.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
@No_Pudding. “resistance 2 is a graphical powerhouse”.
Your kidding right. Seriously now, it looks barely a notch above the first, which was solid but not good looking.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Mortiferus if you seriosuly think that then you are delusional.
KZ2 developed from the ground up, Gears 2 based on a pre-existing engine.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Pud: I picked those games specifically because I’ve played (albeit very briefly in some cases) every single one of them.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
And Heavenly Sword I have not seen anything as good looking on the 360.
Just watch this R2 vid maybe you haven’t seen it:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/40347.html
October 15th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Re HS: You seen anything with as fucked up a frame rate and tearing on the 360 either?
(I have… I’m just wondering if you know it)
…and yeah, I’ve seen pretty much everything out there on R2 (check gamersyde for much higher quality vids). It’s not doing anything COD4, Gears 2 or Far Cry 2 isn’t doing.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Resistance 2 looks good, but no OMG impressive.
I think the multiplatform game Legendary looks better
October 15th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Psychotext you really need to see the difference between art direction and technically impressive graphics. Far Cry 2 looks graphically awful. CoD4 is stunning and art direction goes to support the superb engine, and Gears 2 is great too, and the art direction is superb in that also, but the UE3 engine is really not that impressive technically anymore.
And you are totally right HS did suffer from those things, it’s a great point, because it goes to
Anyway, let me put it this way, I think the aesthetic of Resistance 2 is ass. I am not buying the game. It looks awful to me. Gears 2 will do as little for me as Gears did, but I can see the artistic direction is far superior. But technically, what Resistance 2 is doing is amazing. And the graphics are truly superb.
It really hurts SOME people credibility here when they say it isn’t head and shoulders above the original. The particle effects and dustiness is amazing.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
I honestly don’t see what’s so impressive about it, not from a technical point of view, not in the videos I’ve seen anyway. Maybe there’s a specific scene you can point me to.
Oh, and you’re too quick to dismiss Gears just because it’s built on UE3. Which is odd really, because you’re talking up Resistance 2, which is built on the Resistance 1 engine with enhancements (texture streaming, detail maps, lighting system etc). You might even say it hurts SOME people’s credibility…
Yes, I know that was low.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
“Sometimes we know exactly how long games have been in development for..”
No. You know what they tell you. That’s not necessarily the full picture.
“Oh, and for the love of god please don’t bother arguing with me Shatner. I’m neither Pat nor Morriss, I can’t be arsed.”
I practice equal oppurtinities. I don’t discriminate (pat) and I don’t reply based on who says something, I reply based on what was said. If what was said contradicts what I know then I’ll respond accordingly.
This comments section is going into fanboy apocalypse anyway. The crap being spouted on both sides is lolsome.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I wasn’t a big fan of the first Gears, but graphicly the next game looks impressive. The reason, the ability to have tons of enemies and characters on the screen at the same time. I’ll rent it first and see if it’s a buy for me.
What I don’t like about the Unreal Engine 3 is how
lazy developers are with it. So many games have that
Gears high contrast and texture look, I wish they would
do more with it.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
“Yes, I know that was low.
”
Would have been if it made any sense. UE3 is a rather ugly engine other than it’s lighting, and it’s clear the PS3 can use it, and will use it as effectively as the 360 if it’s the lead platform (Mirrors Edge anyone?).
I am quick to dismiss Gears because the graphical increase between Gears and Gear 2 is nonexistent, while Resistance and Resistance 2 there is a much larger jump in graphics. Certainly in texture detail in those Gamekyo vids.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
That’ll do pig, that’ll do.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Was about to say Lord of the Flies… But… Babe Pig in the City?
October 15th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
” am quick to dismiss Gears because the graphical increase between Gears and Gear 2 is nonexistent,”
umm, tons more characters on screen, much better lighting, more objects, but engine look mostly remains the same.
All this about resistance, when legendary looks better
October 15th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
On paper the 360’s gpu does have slightly more grunt, but you’re getting games that look like Killzone 2 and Uncharted, because PS3 can use Cell’s SPU’s to add a lot of post processing effects, which kick it all up a notch.
For anyone interested, you can read:
http://www.guerrilla-games.com/publications/dr_kz2_rsx_dev07.pdf
Which pretty much describes how Guerilla are using PS3 to make KZ2 look like it does.
October 16th, 2008 at 8:09 am
It’s interesting to see everyone using KZ2 as an example of ‘brilliant’ graphics when as far as I can tell it’s grey and bland and terribly uninteresting. Stuff like Uncharted and Motorstorm are much better examples.
October 16th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Blerk,
I’m working on the assumption that, like many many many many many many many games, what they’ve shown you is stuff from one environment. Uncharted - we saw nothing but jungle and walls but there was more to it than that. MGS4 was all Middle East but it was far more varied. Bioshock was.. oh. No, Bioshock was pretty much all the same.
Going on the first Killzone I would expect to see some considerable variety in the environment.
October 16th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Well, you’ve certainly got the advantage there. I found the original Killzone so dull I couldn’t be arsed to complete the demo.
October 16th, 2008 at 8:29 am
Your loss. Killzone definitely had issues with it but I played it through to the end and it was a very solid FPS. It was clearly hampered by the restrictions of the host machine (30 fps or less and some very repetitive audio signposting) but it really blossomed and showed good variety. That you could play through the levels as a different character with different disciplines was also a novel effort that all the naysayers who barely touched the game before making authoritative comments against it ever noticed.
I only played through the game a couple of years back when I was going through my last gen collection and checking out all the games I never gave proper time to. You wouldn’t BELIEVE how much Gears of War owes to Manhunt’s cover system. Shocking!