Ghostbusters Developer Prefers Working On PS3 First

We've seen many developers struggle with multi-platform development this generation. Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are different technical beasts. Complications with the wildly popular Unreal Engine 3 middleware have made things even more difficult.

Terminal Reality, the studio behind the upcoming "Ghostbusters," spent a lot of time evaluating each console before moving forward with their first next-generation game, Terminal Reality president Mark Randell told MTV Multiplayer at a Sierra media event last month.

In the end, contrary to most teams this generation, they decided to make PlayStation 3 their lead development platform for "Ghostbusters." Here's why.

Randell explains the technical reason behind their decision. "The multiprocessing model of the PS3 is not a general-purpose model," said Randell. "It simultaneously uses one main processor and six specialized co-processors: the Synergetic Processing Units, or "SPU's."

That's not the case with Xbox 360 and traditional modern PCs. "[Those platforms] share a general-purpose multiprocessor coding model," he continued. "The 360 uses three general-purpose PowerPC processors, and most current PCs use between one and four Intel or AMD processors."

The end result: Terminal Reality believes that moving a "Ghostbusters" game developed on hardware with specialized processors (PS3) to general processors (Xbox 360, PC) is much easier than doing it the other way around. Many studios, however, have chosen the other way around, with the PS3 version lagging in performance up until the last few months of development. Or, as the case with a number of mulit-platform games released in 2007, never catching up.

Randell's team might spend a more time on technology early on, but the ease in porting means they avoid having one platform perform better than the other, he argues.

"We've found that writing for the PS3 first and then porting to the 360 and PC is a much simpler and more efficient procedure," he concluded.

Even though PS3 development is notoriously difficult, most projects still lead on Xbox 360. We talked to one developer doing exactly that earlier this week. Unlike Randell, he believed you just need the right team. You'll hear his thoughts on Monday.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/05/02/ghostbusters-developer-prefers-working-on-ps3-first/

Number of Next Gen games Terminal Reality has made = 0

Number of AAA Games these guys have made = 0

Number of AA Games these guys have made = 0

Yes, yes it's truly the 360 holding you back from Greatness.

I'm sure you're gonna love working with the Cell. Everyone else does.

Swing and a miss...

VG247: Why choose to lead on the PS3?

Mark Randell : Very simple reason: Ghostbusters is the property of Sony Pictures.

http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/04/28/sierra-spring-break-08-ps3-exclusivity-would-have-allowed-double-the-amount-of-objects-on-screen-says-ghostbusters-dev/

sounds like a crappy developer trying to get attention. I mean... is anyone actually interested in the ghostbuster game?? Haha... so I see this developer is actually owned by Sony. Doh... cover blown. I wish I could include that sound you get in mgs when a guard spots you :)

Basically, when Sony designed the ps3 with crazy internal workings, they were probably hoping that developers would be so hyped over the ps3 that they would want to make it the lead platform. As it stands, with the market peneration ms achieved early on, developers are not willing to dedicate all their time and resources to the ps3 and, as such, many ps3 owners are left with crappy ports.

Things may get better, in fact, they seem to be improving, but one thing that would put me off buying a PS3 is the fact that most multiplat games on the ps3 have been crap compared to their 360 conuterpart. I mean, just look at HL2:orange box and lost planet.... 2 games that were good on the PC and 360, but were awful on the ps3 thanks to crap textures and framerate issues. The ps3 was easily able to handle these games, but it is well known that porting to the ps3 never works very well - which is a problem since most games are now multi-plat,

Well, it makes sense to start on the most graphically powerful console then downscale, since the other way around is just illogical. And is this a news post, or a post boasting the industry's favor of the PS3?SpidersRMe

well all i have to say is....

Ghostbusters…
If there's somethin' strange in your neighborhood
Who ya gonna call (ghostbusters)
If it's somethin' weird an it won't look good
Who ya gonna call (ghostbusters)

I ain't afraid a no ghost
I ain't afraid a no ghost
If you're seein' things runnin' thru your head
Who can you call (ghostbusters)
An' invisible man sleepin' in your bed
Oh who ya gonna call (ghostbusters)
I ain't afraid a no ghost
I ain't afraid a no ghost
Who ya gonna call (ghostbusters)
If you're all alone pick up the phone
An call (ghostbusters)

I ain't afraid a no ghost
I hear it likes the girls
I ain't afraid a no ghost
Who you gonna call (ghostbusters)
Mm…if you've had a dose
Of a freaky ghost baby
You better call ghostbusters
Bustin' makes me feel good
I ain't afraid a no ghosts

Don't get caught alone oh no…ghostbuster
When he comes through your door
Unless you've just got some more
I think you better call ghostbusters
Ooh... who you gonna call (ghostbusters)
Who you gonna call (ghostbusters)
Ah, I think you better call (ghostbusters)

So, I dont see a big deal in that :|

Thats why it looks like an xbox game. kool-aids

I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.loftus42

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]Thats why it looks like an xbox game. loftus42

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue... for a "demo" it already looks "more than a little better" than Xbox 360's finest.

and on topic - Ghostbuster... lol... even if the game turns out to have the best grahpics of all time I'd still wouldnt buy it!

[QUOTE="SpidersRMe"]Well, it makes sense to start on the most graphically powerful console then downscale, since the other way around is just illogical. And is this a news post, or a post boasting the industry's favor of the PS3?loftus42

Exactly. This isnt an article you can use to favor Sonys PS3. They are just saying its easier to do it that way. Obviously the PS3 is more of a pain in the ***

[QUOTE="loftus42"]I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.skektek

[QUOTE="loftus42"][QUOTE="kool-aids"]Thats why it looks like an xbox game. typevuspecII

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue... for a "demo" it already looks "more than a little better" than Xbox 360's finest.

and on topic - Ghostbuster... lol... even if the game turns out to have the best grahpics of all time I'd still wouldnt buy it!

Sony owns the rights to Ghost Busters and if they don't suck up to them... They could lose their license.Truth_Hurts_U

Sony owns the rights to the Movies and other stuff not the Games, just like Sony owns the rights to James Bond but Activision owns the rights to the James Bond games now.Nintendo_Ownes7

Sony owns the rights to Ghost Busters. Anything that deals with Ghost Busters has to go through Sony. Sony can licence rights out and thats how they can make this game.

I remembered when they showed the first clip for the Ghost Busters game and Sony jumped all over them... Because they had no rights to make the game.

You guys are silly, when I sad Xbox game, I meant Xbox 1 game. kool-aids

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]You guys are silly, when I sad Xbox game, I meant Xbox 1 game. loftus42

Apologies accepted. :P

But seriously is anyone gonna buy the game?

[QUOTE="skektek"][QUOTE="loftus42"]I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.loftus42

Swing and a miss...

VG247: Why choose to lead on the PS3?

Mark Randell : Very simple reason: Ghostbusters is the property of Sony Pictures.

http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/04/28/sierra-spring-break-08-ps3-exclusivity-would-have-allowed-double-the-amount-of-objects-on-screen-says-ghostbusters-dev/

BreakingPoint8

lol, im sure that TC (with the RROD pic, thats so 2005) hasn't even read this or realised it from an unknown games company on an unreliable site openly addmiting they are being paid to say this by sony. its ludicrous. i thought we saw the end of 'teh powerz of teh cell!1!!' threads when it was established that the ps3 has comparable power to the 360 but is HARDER to program for.

I'm reading here that hes avoiding a heavy workload by developing ps3 first. That doesn't mean he prefers working with the ps3.

[QUOTE="skektek"][QUOTE="loftus42"]I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.loftus42

[QUOTE="loftus42"][QUOTE="skektek"][QUOTE="loftus42"]I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.skektek

P.S. without the Sony (or Microsoft) hype.

[QUOTE="skektek"][QUOTE="loftus42"][QUOTE="skektek"][QUOTE="loftus42"]I said this in the PS3 forum a long time ago and got moderated. I gave an example of the cell being like the OLD SX processors, if any of you remember them in the early 90s. To do physics or other intensive programming they had to add the math co-processors. the cell was like 1 SX processor with 6 math co-processors. (remember they have to disable one of the spe's at the factory to improve the yield.) the cell, of course is much more powerful then the old processors, but the general idea is the same. And this is why i got moderated: This is the reason the cell processor can not do more then two threads at a time. it is a very basic multi threaded processor. Even though it is more powerful then the 360's processor, the cell runs into a bottle neck that only allows it to sustain 2 threads at a time. while the 360 can handle three to six threads at one time. That is why you are seeing games that are not much better on the PS3 then a comparable game is on the 360. Take into account i own both the 360, and the PS3, so i have seen the best the PS3 has to offer, and I have seen the best the 360 has to offer. the only difference between the two is the amount of time the dev's are willing to put into each console. You will see parlor tricks to make the PS3's graphics better, but that depends on the RSX graphics chip being helped a little by the cell. Demonstrated by GTA4's blur effects to remove jagged edges from the graphics, while the 360 can do AA and remove the jaggies that way.loftus42

P.S. without the Sony (or Microsoft) hype.

I hate wikipedia, Not a good source because of the ability for users to edit information. I usually ignore any post regarding wikipedia. Professors in college will flunk you for using it as a resource. just FYI. But i did look through their sources and they all point to Sony. I want an independent source outside the influence of Sony. Not just saying this because it is Sony, I wouldn't trust a Microsoft source either. Just my way of keeping things clean. But thanks for the Info. You just have to take it with a grain of salt.

P.S. Not saying I don't believe you, cause if they pulled it it would be impossible to prove Your statement. But I have never seen anything on that site that wasn't at least 90% accurate, and then what was wrong is usally amended soon. besides alot of his articles are backed up by the same information on other sites. But, again, not saying that it can't happen, no one is infallible, I just trust that site more then most.

I hate wikipedia, Not a good source because of the ability for users to edit information. I usually ignore any post regarding wikipedia. Professors in college will flunk you for using it as a resource. just FYI. But i did look through their sources and they all point to Sony. I want an independent source outside the influence of Sony. Not just saying this because it is Sony, I wouldn't trust a Microsoft source either. Just my way of keeping things clean. But thanks for the Info. You just have to take it with a grain of salt.

P.S. Not saying I don't believe you, cause if they pulled it it would be impossible to prove Your statement. But I have never seen anything on that site that wasn't at least 90% accurate, and then what was wrong is usally amended soon. besides alot of his articles are backed up by the same information on other sites. But, again, not saying that it can't happen, no one is infallible, I just trust that site more then most.

loftus42

To the OP:

Those guys at Ghostbusters can't possibly be the defining voice for the developing industry. Their not. It's like saying: "We draw on super computers while everyone else is still using air brush, paints, and pencil/paper." It all depends on the artist. I've seen some amazing graphic work in my time, but I've also seen it rivaled by some amazing hand-drawn work. It does happen.

Point is, the said "superior mediums" and hardware do not necessarily equal superior games. You have to have great designers to make great games, just like you need great artists to make great art.

And as for the Ghostbuster team, I really don't see their work being anything ground-breaking or out of the ordinary on the big screen. There are tons of special effects studios that out-do them on sooo many levels. But reading through your article, they are optimistic about designing on the PS3. I say: "Good for them." But if they are going to hype the PS3 for designing superiority, then I expect their work on that system to be abolute top notch. Because if it isn't, I'm going to come back to this article and say, "well, this is what they said they could do, but then their game came out, and as it turned out, this was ALL they could do."

[QUOTE="loftus42"]

I hate wikipedia, Not a good source because of the ability for users to edit information. I usually ignore any post regarding wikipedia. Professors in college will flunk you for using it as a resource. just FYI. But i did look through their sources and they all point to Sony. I want an independent source outside the influence of Sony. Not just saying this because it is Sony, I wouldn't trust a Microsoft source either. Just my way of keeping things clean. But thanks for the Info. You just have to take it with a grain of salt.

P.S. Not saying I don't believe you, cause if they pulled it it would be impossible to prove Your statement. But I have never seen anything on that site that wasn't at least 90% accurate, and then what was wrong is usally amended soon. besides alot of his articles are backed up by the same information on other sites. But, again, not saying that it can't happen, no one is infallible, I just trust that site more then most.

skektek

I'm sure the wii team is having it the easiest. :Pgoblaa

agreed