EA says PS3's fanbase not big enough; putting 360 over PS3.

[H.Cornerstone]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25857329&sid=6176890&tag=latestnews;title;1

In talking about the issue, Richtel cited analysts as saying that development for the PS3 is more challenging than for the Xbox 360 because game makers have had less time with the hardware. He also linked it to delays of the PS3 versions of games like Electronic Arts' Medal of Honor: Airborne and Skate.
Richtel revisited the topic (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/16/sony-v-microsoft-with-helmets-the-sequel/) after hearing back from EA about the issue. A representative with the publisher told the writer that as a release date nears, the company sometimes readjusts the manpower on the projects to complete the Xbox 360 version first.
With a larger installed base for Microsoft's console, the rep said it makes financial sense to get that version of a game out first and maximize potential sales. The representative also noted that in the last generation, it made more sense for the publisher to focus on PlayStation 2 versions of games over those on the Xbox because of the platform's massive installed user base.

Not shocking, as it does have a larger userbase and is easier to program for. However, I feel this is a Catch 22. You spend more time on the easier to program for and one with the larger user base game and less time on the other one. However, this could mean a lower quality game and therefore the userbase is less likely to buy an inferior version of a game or a game that could have lots of bugs or simply not as fun.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out in the next year.

[Vanigan]

Just skip EA then, hard to do if you're a football fan though. Pretty easy for me though.

Frankly, Fight Night Round 3 turned out really well on the PS3 so they're lying when they say they have no one really experienced at PS3 development.

[freshzen]

^Madden 08 is pretty meh regardless

I don't like Electronic Arts anyway, they're a very business-oriented company. They're only interested in bottom line profits. Really only make games for the masses, average joe gamers ::yawns::

[Mechafenris]

Indeed sounds like a copout to explain the shoddy Madden 08. Frankly, when you realize that Fight Night Round 3 performed better with minimal (if any) slowdown on the PS3 (reviewers noticed this... I haven't played it personally) , having Madden blow dead monkeys simply means EA is just not in charge of their faculties.

But, like it was said already in this thread... if you're not into football (or can enjoy All Pro 2k8 without "real" teams), EA is pretty much a non-player in gaming... having most of their titles be mediocre PC ports or cross-platform blandness.

No offense to those who may like EA, but they're the Wal Mart of video game publishers....

Of course all this backpedaling doesn't explain the shoddy product that is 360 Madden... ;) Adding programmers and still couldn't pull off a decent title? Talk about bad press. ;)

[H.Cornerstone]

Indeed sounds like a copout to explain the shoddy Madden 08. Frankly, when you realize that Fight Night Round 3 performed better with minimal (if any) slowdown on the PS3 (reviewers noticed this... I haven't played it personally) , having Madden blow dead monkeys simply means EA is just not in charge of their faculties.

But, like it was said already in this thread... if you're not into football (or can enjoy All Pro 2k8 without "real" teams), EA is pretty much a non-player in gaming... having most of their titles be mediocre PC ports or cross-platform blandness.

No offense to those who may like EA, but they're the Wal Mart of video game publishers....

Of course all this backpedaling doesn't explain the shoddy product that is 360 Madden... ;) Adding programmers and still couldn't pull off a decent title? Talk about bad press. ;)


Haha, yeah, I am a football fan and used to love madden, I played the crap out of 04, and 05. However, when I heard about the problems of Madden 08 I skipped it as I do not want to support their business practices.

[dpatel]

Makes sense from a business standpoint. Sucks for PS3 owners though. I wonder how many of their fanbase will actually notice these differences though. Yea they are pretty noticeable and well known to the hardcore gaming community, but the majority of EAs (and all developers') sales come from the casual masses, who may not even notice a 30FPS difference in the two versions of Madden.

[RedvsBlue]

Makes sense from a business standpoint. Sucks for PS3 owners though. I wonder how many of their fanbase will actually notice these differences though. Yea they are pretty noticeable and well known to the hardcore gaming community, but the majority of EAs (and all developers') sales come from the casual masses, who may not even notice a 30FPS difference in the two versions of Madden.
The problem though is that they will notice a six month delay in games...

[NamPaehc]

Didn't moore take a job there recently?

[dpatel]

The problem though is that they will notice a six month delay in games...

Yea. Was this the case with an EA title in the past? I don't really pay attention to most of their titles (aside from maybe Burnout, which has lost its touch lately).

[Dark Slayer120]

EA has the Time Splitters series though. EA has a lot more games then you think they do, it would be hard for me to just "skip over" since they have a few games I actually like. Time Splitters and Black for starters.

[RedvsBlue]

Yea. Was this the case with an EA title in the past? I don't really pay attention to most of their titles (aside from maybe Burnout, which has lost its touch lately).

Well the article specifically mentions Skate and Medal of Honor from EA. Then there's the Ubi delays on Rainbow Six Vegas and Ghost Recon 2. Then the mysterious delay of both versions of Half-Life 2 and GTA IV which many have attributed to coding problems with the PS3 version. More and more developers may end up just releasing the PS3 version months after the 360 versions which will lead to lower sales and possibly them deciding the PS3 versions aren't even worth the delays/problems (Fatal Inertia)...

[dpatel]

Oh.. heh, right there in the article.

I'm not so sure Half Life 2 and GTA4 can be attributed to the PS3s difficult architecture. Unless Sony made some deal with them, I can't think of one reason, from the developers point of view, as to why they would also delay the 360 versions.

As for Fatal Inertia:
http://kotaku.com/gaming/homecoming/fatal-inertia-returns-to-ps3-279577.php

Although, if there is a drastic difference between PS3/360 sales, I could see that happening down the road. Doubt this would apply to EA titles as they seem to support every single console possible.

[NamPaehc]

I can find at least 2-4 recent articles with devs praising the PS3. So this makes no sense... Oh wait, it is EA.

[H.Cornerstone]

I can find at least 2-4 recent articles with devs praising the PS3. So this makes no sense... Oh wait, it is EA.


I don't remember who it was, but I think it was the guys from media molecule who said that the PS3 is so unlike any other archetecture that if you try to do it like stuff in the past that's where you will have problems. However, if you go in with a clean slate and with a brand new sense of things, than it's easier. Also, Guy at Insomniac said it's different becasue you have to rely on the SPU's not the PPU. Either way, I guess it's a love hate realationship with the PS3.

[Tideas]

THe only thing EA is good for, is for Madden, and when their exclusive is up with the NFL, they wont matter anymore

[WiiGame]

that's pretty much a business decision. of course your going to want to develop for the more popular system because you have a bigger chance to sell more games

[Halo05]

THe only thing EA is good for, is for Madden, and when their exclusive is up with the NFL, they wont matter anymore

I have a feeling they'll try with all their might and money to renew that exclusivity into infinity.

I guess my problem with their stance is this, they're just about the biggest publisher/developer in the world. If anyone doesn't have an excuse to favor one platform over another, it's EA. They're just being lazy.

Atlus on the other hand, I don't expect to try and optimize development on a game over multiple platforms.

[Kendal]

It's over. Sony is finished! ;)

I own two EA games this generation, NBA Street Homecourt and Fight Night Round 3. I don't like roster updates or sports(like football and basketball) games. I like the NBA Street series, because it reminds me of the old NBA Jam games. FN3 was because I played the demo and liked it a lot. I can do without most of the crap EA churns out. If I want a game, I would most likely get it on my 360 anyway. Besides a couple of titles, I don't really care about EA, even if I didn't have a 360.

[The Mana Knight]

I like the NBA Street series, because it reminds me of the old NBA Jam games. Yeah, that's the only reason I like NBA Street myself.

I also like NFS (because I've been playing it for years), but that's it. Everything else by EA, I do not like or care about (especially Madden/NCAA).

[DJSteel]

EA developed for the PS2 then ported to the Xbox..so this is not surprising...the develop for the first out then port to the other consoles...

[A Happy Panda]

A lot of EA haters seem to just hate...EA Sports. I used to be big on Madden, NCAA and Live, but that was back in the day when they you know...tried. NCAA and Madden this year are actually legit games, unlike the last 2 years. Live last year was just...wow, just wow. I jumped over to 2k for basketball for 07, still debating about 08.

But you guys know EA as a whole develops a shit load of other games...so to say "oh it won't be hard for me to not buy EA games" is a huge over-statement. Here's just a list of what they're releasing/have released this year that have been internally developed (none of which are EA Sports branded games)

Command & Conquer: Tiberium Wars
Medal of Honor: Airborne
Army of Two
Need for Speed: Pro Street
Army of Two
Skate
NBA Street: Homecourt
SSX: Blur

People also forget that EA Sports also makes the NHL and Tiger Woods games....both of which are amazing series BTW. Especially T-Woods.

Also since EA publishes seriously like half of the games you see on the shelves....that makes it a bit tougher to give them money as well.

[ighosty]

The only two games i'm really interested in by EA are SKATE and army of two, both of which I was planning on playing on my 360, because of Live. So they can do whatever, as long as I get those games on time.

[Kendal]

A lot of EA haters seem to just hate...EA Sports.

Command & Conquer: Tiberium Wars - Not into RTS
Medal of Honor: Airborne - I have Call of Duty 2 and 3 on my 360, I don't need more WWII action
Army of Two - Already have Gears of War
Need for Speed: Pro Street - I haven't liked the series since NFS Hot Pursuit on PSX
Army of Two - Still have Gears of War
Skate - Looks nice, but will be in bargin bins soon enough, so they might get $20 more from me
NBA Street: Homecourt - Own it
SSX: Blur - SSX is a great series, but I have no plans on buying this

People also forget that EA Sports also makes the NHL and Tiger Woods games....both of which are amazing series BTW. Especially T-Woods.

Also since EA publishes seriously like half of the games you see on the shelves....that makes it a bit tougher to give them money as well.

I am not an EA hater, I just don't care for most of their products. You do, and that is fine. I guess I have 3 EA games, I forgot EA bought the people who make Burnout and I will be getting the next Burnout. Those games are awesome, but weren't originally an EA title, so I always forget that they are now an EA owned game franchise. Just remember that people have different tastes. Just because someone doesn't like what you like, doesn't make them automatically a hater of what you like.

[depascal22]

Thank you for bringing up Burnout.

[A Happy Panda]

I am not an EA hater, I just don't care for most of their products. You do, and that is fine. I guess I have 3 EA games, I forgot EA bought the people who make Burnout and I will be getting the next Burnout. Those games are awesome, but weren't originally an EA title, so I always forget that they are now an EA owned game franchise. Just remember that people have different tastes. Just because someone doesn't like what you like, doesn't make them automatically a hater of what you like.

Is EA disliker ok then? Sorry. A lot of people on this board love to just jump on the Hate EA bandwagon...when in truth the only games they seem to hate are the Sports game, and it's only ever Madden or NCAA.

People are like "Oh fuck EA" when in reality, like 90% of the time they only really mean "Oh fuck Madden" Which is fine. I just don't like the generalization.

I try not to have any kind of bias toward whatever developer. If they make a game I like, I'm all for it. I was going to bring up Burnout, but they're still under the Criterion name so I wasn't sure if people were going to argue that despite being owned by EA, they can still develop without EA influences (yeah right).

[SL4IN]

EA prioritizing 360 over PS3 (http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25857329) Earlier this week, New York Times writer Matt Richtel blogged about the reasons behind differences in the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 editions of some games (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/15/sony-v-microsoft-with-helmets/).
In talking about the issue, Richtel cited analysts as saying that development for the PS3 is more challenging than for the Xbox 360 because game makers have had less time with the hardware. He also linked it to delays of the PS3 versions of games like Electronic Arts' Medal of Honor: Airborne and Skate.
Richtel revisited the topic (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/16/sony-v-microsoft-with-helmets-the-sequel/) after hearing back from EA about the issue. A representative with the publisher told the writer that as a release date nears, the company sometimes readjusts the manpower on the projects to complete the Xbox 360 version first.
With a larger installed base for Microsoft's console, the rep said it makes financial sense to get that version of a game out first and maximize potential sales. The representative also noted that in the last generation, it made more sense for the publisher to focus on PlayStation 2 versions of games over those on the Xbox because of the platform's massive installed user base.

Link (http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25857329&sid=6176890&action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;2)

well given that EA's lineup over the recent years has completely been golden, they're products still sell an insane amount. what could this possibly mean for sony? with EA spending more time on the 360 versions and giving the cold shoulder to it's PS3 counterparts, how much potential profit could sony lose/microsoft gain?

discuss

[Chitown021]

Didn't the same thing happen during the first year or two with the 360? Seems like the first year and maybe even the second year that Madden was done on the 360 it was inferior to the PS2 version (included a minimal number of features and options). It makes me mad as a PS3 owner that all of the sports titles run slower on my console even though it's been touted as being so technologically superior with the cell processors and all. EA, you can get away with it this year but 09' had better be up to snuff.

[RESmonkey]

EA just sucks at making games, period. I can't recall a good EA game I have ever played. :(

[PyroGamer]

You know, EA has already screwed up with not supporting the Wii.

EA just sucks at making games, period. I can't recall a good EA game I have ever played. :(
Medal of Honor: Frontline, NBA Street, Burnout: Revenge.

EA has better average review scores than Take Two. Their average is 72%. That's also ahead of both Microsoft and Sony. Sega, Konami, THQ, Ubisoft, and Activision all have far lower scores, in the mid-60's.

It makes me mad as a PS3 owner that all of the sports titles run slower on my console even though it's been touted as being so technologically superior with the cell processors and all. EA, you can get away with it this year but 09' had better be up to snuff.
I'm absolutely positive that if you could afford a $600 PS3, you can afford to go multiplatform with a $350 Xbox 360. And with HDMI and 65nm chips out now, why the hell not?

[The Mana Knight]

And last gen, EA pretty much screwed over the original Xbox and supported PS2 over it (At one point, EA put all their PS2 games online with voice chat. Also, EA never got SSX on Xbox right).

Only thing I will buy from EA is NFS and NBA Street. I'm not into their sports (use to be a Live fan during the PS1 era, but the series went downhill).

Burnout revenge is currently developed with the PS3 as the lead platform, so I dunno about this news completely. Some devs have said, developing on the PS3 itself isn't all that bad (just different). Porting a game from 360 to PS3 is what's difficult (Going from PS3 to 360 is a lot easier).

The only games I truly see this hurting Sony for is Football, because EA has them exclusive. For basketball, NBA 2k series is starting to sell more comparable to Live (and even Sony's own NBA series picks up decent sales).

[Chitown021]

You know, EA has already screwed up with not supporting the Wii.


Medal of Honor: Frontline, NBA Street, Burnout: Revenge.

EA has better average review scores than Take Two. Their average is 72%. That's also ahead of both Microsoft and Sony. Sega, Konami, THQ, Ubisoft, and Activision all have far lower scores, in the mid-60's.


I'm absolutely positive that if you could afford a $600 PS3, you can afford to go multiplatform with a $350 Xbox 360. And with HDMI and 65nm chips out now, why the hell not?

It' not a question of affording it or not. The point is I shouldn't have to. There are several factors preventing me from buying the 360 (lack of ports on my HDTV, don't want to pay for Xbox Live, etc...).

[heavyd853]

Its a completely rational, if perhaps not so good in the long run, type of decision. I can understand the choice and don't mind, but its probably because Im not so affected by it having both a 360 and ps3.

On a side note, has anyone heard anything about the sequel to Black? That was one of my favorite games in the last year or two and the ending was set up Halo 2 style if I remember correctly.

[Rozz]

EA has also said in the past that they strongly prefer the DS over the PSP. They said people like fun, and that's why they were going to focus on the DS :lol:

[Rozz]

And last gen, EA pretty much screwed over the original Xbox and supported PS2 over it (At one point, EA put all their PS2 games online with voice chat. Also, EA never got SSX on Xbox right).

What the hell are you talking about when referring to SSX? SSX Tricky and SSX3 were perfect versions. Also, Stranger's Wrath was an Xbox exclusive, as EA said the PS2's technology could not handle it.

Also.... who used PS2 to play online?

[mtxbass1]

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149152

[NamPaehc]

To be fair... Some of those, they have the EA label on them, but only because EA published the games. EA had a lot less of a role on the developing side in some cases.

When it comes to EA it all comes down to what sells. And what sells to them is what ever is cheapest and easiest to make. And sometimes, even if that means subpar titles, low frame rates, or even numerous patch downloads right out of the box.

To me a company this size, who should be attracting top notch talent, making money hand over fist, them having "development problems" is a sad SAD joke.

But, I guess... EA isn't a pure development studio. I can cut them some slack because of that.

[The Mana Knight]

What the hell are you talking about when referring to SSX? SSX Tricky and SSX3 were perfect versions. Also, Stranger's Wrath was an Xbox exclusive, as EA said the PS2's technology could not handle it.SSX Tricky and SSX3 were both better on PS2 and GC and most everyone knows it. The PS2 SSX3 even had online.

I'm not sure you remembered, but back in 2003, EA decided to put most all their PS2 games online, with voicechat. Games like Lord of Rings (forgot which), Need for Speed Underground, SSX3, and all sports went online for PS2 while EA still didn't support XBL (until later in 2004). That's what I was talking about. EA also waited a while to bring LotR: Two Towers, MoH: Frontline, etc. to other platforms. Sled Storm 2 on PS2 never even came to Xbox/GC. The original NBA Street never came to Xbox (only GC and PS2).

Although EA sports were on Xbox, did they even take advantage of any of the Xbox features (such as bump mapping, reflective mapping, etc.)? Not really. They just did straight ports (NFL Fever looked better than any Madden until next gen started).

As for Stranger's Wrath, EA only published the game by Oddworld Inhabitants, who was developing it (who wouldn't develop on a PS console again due to having problems with Munch's Oddysee(sp)). Outside of that, that doesn't compare to how many PS2 exclusives EA gave PS2.

[KingBroly]

Why do people treat EA like their some sort of developing gods? All they do is revise stuff, which takes about a month and ship it out for almost pure profit for 95% of their games.
Soon, Rock Band will fall into this trend, and we'll be getting full priced upgrades every year. Not very inticing if you ask me.

[Rozz]

SSX Tricky and SSX3 were both better on PS2 and GC and most everyone knows it. The PS2 SSX3 even had online.

I'm not sure you remembered, but back in 2003, EA decided to put most all their PS2 games online, with voicechat. Games like Lord of Rings (forgot which), Need for Speed Underground, SSX3, and all sports went online for PS2 while EA still didn't support XBL (until later in 2004). That's what I was talking about. EA also waited a while to bring LotR: Two Towers, MoH: Frontline, etc. to other platforms. Sled Storm 2 on PS2 never even came to Xbox/GC. The original NBA Street never came to Xbox (only GC and PS2).

Although EA sports were on Xbox, did they even take advantage of any of the Xbox features (such as bump mapping, reflective mapping, etc.)? Not really. They just did straight ports (NFL Fever looked better than any Madden until next gen started).

As for Stranger's Wrath, EA only published the game by Oddworld Inhabitants, who was developing it (who wouldn't develop on a PS console again due to having problems with Munch's Oddysee(sp)). Outside of that, that doesn't compare to how many PS2 exclusives EA gave PS2.
HOW were SSX Tricky and 3 better on GC and PS2? They weren't! In fact, the GC version had less tricks due to it's controls. All three versions, when it came down to it though, were pretty much the same. You're just making up information...

During holiday 2003 PS2 supported PS2 exclusively online, but no one really played those titles and they took down online play after a year. Also, I don't believe any of those titles supported voice chat, I think Madden might have been the only one.

Stranger's Wrath was once planned for PS2 but they cancelled the version due to the inferior hardware.

[-Never4ever-]

This is pretty obvious. EA has a known history of backing the winning side since, well, ever. All they care about is making the cash, thus they go after the system that'll make them the most, while still covering all the other systems (and their asses, in the event the scene shifts and some other console emerges as top dog).

[daroga]

EA would be an easy skip for me if they hadn't gone and swallowed up Criterion and thus have the Burnout franchise dangling over me.

This is pretty much a self-fulfilling prophecy, though. "The PS3 has got a sad install base, focus on the 360!" Then, because they do that, there's less and less reasons to buy the "behind" system. Not that EA makes any games that would really be system sellers for any console, but it's certainly not helping Sony's cause any.

[Kaijufan]

EA developed for the PS2 then ported to the Xbox..so this is not surprising...the develop for the first out then port to the other consoles...
I think the reason EA's lead platform was the PS2 during the last generation was because the PS2 sold more then the Xbox, not because the PS2 came out before the Xbox.

[depascal22]

EA's following the money. Big surprise.

[akilshohen]

as much as I liked the DC, EA not publishing for it was part of it's downfall.

[Tsukento]

as much as I liked the DC, EA not publishing for it was part of it's downfall.
Yup. I still haven't forgiven EA for outright lying when they said they'd support the Dreamcast if it sold a certain amount of consoles. When it did, they backed down and still refused to make games on it.

[Jon Rose]

Sega had their own 2k line of sports shit. Sega was so irreversably hosed that it's patently ridiculous to pretend that EA mattered one way or another.

[lordxixor101]

I think everyone here might be missing the bigger picture here.

EA is a publically owned company, which means they are slaves to their quarterly reporting. Because of this, they are forced to do things that are the most profitable. So, the 360 has the console lead, so they are supporting them.

But, they are the largest 3rd party public company, so what they do, other public companies will have to follow. If your a stockholder (and for those that work in the real world, if your company is public, you know that your life revolves around the stockholders), you don't want to own stock in a company that is not trying to maximize profits. Stockholders will demand that the 360 versions (with their larger markets) be made first, absent of Sony paying to keep them even (seems to be happening with GTA IV).

This is a major step, if EA is doing it, most other companies will follow. It's looking like EA is prediting now that the 360 is winning this generation.

[DemonGamer24]

The only EA game I like is Battlefield 1942.... mainly for Desert Combat mod, which isn't even made by EA. The other Battlefields are good too.

[H.Cornerstone]

I think everyone here might be missing the bigger picture here.

EA is a publically owned company, which means they are slaves to their quarterly reporting. Because of this, they are forced to do things that are the most profitable. So, the 360 has the console lead, so they are supporting them.

But, they are the largest 3rd party public company, so what they do, other public companies will have to follow. If your a stockholder (and for those that work in the real world, if your company is public, you know that your life revolves around the stockholders), you don't want to own stock in a company that is not trying to maximize profits. Stockholders will demand that the 360 versions (with their larger markets) be made first, absent of Sony paying to keep them even (seems to be happening with GTA IV).

This is a major step, if EA is doing it, most other companies will follow. It's looking like EA is prediting now that the 360 is winning this generation.


Ahhh... what company isn't a publically owned company?

[Dr Mario Kart]

companies that arent traded? privately owned

[H.Cornerstone]

companies that arent traded? privately owned
That's my point, what publishers now a days are actually privately owned?

BTW, Whats more pathetic, the Fact that Madden on PS3 runs worse than 07 and really crappy, or the fact that it took EA 3 and a half years to figure out the 360 which is considered to be "easy" to program for?