Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony PlayStation (Games)

PS3 Issues Caused GTA IV Delay? 117

Posted by Zonk
from the cue-wacky-sad-noise dept.
Dr. Eggman writes "According to statements made by Michael Pachter on Gamasutra, 'The Rockstar team had difficulty in building an exceptionally complicated game for the PS3, and failed to recognize how far away from completion the game truly was until recently.' The article goes on to describe an agreement between Rockstar and Sony not to favor the 360 by releasing their version first, necessitating the delay on the 360 as well. Pachter's comments are interesting, because all Take-Two has been willing to say is that 'technological issues' were causing the hold-up. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PS3 Issues Caused GTA IV Delay?

Comments Filter:
  • Oh i guess its to be expected. Nowhere in the article does it blame the PS3 for the delays. It specifically states BOTH systems have their technological issues that they need to work through. In typical Slashdot fashion, it is turned into an anti-ps3 article. Way to be unbiased in the news reporting once again.
    • by Carbonite (183181) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:20PM (#20102753)
      RTFA. The first paragraph of the article:

      Wedbush Morgan's Michael Pachter says Take-Two management has "stumbled badly for the first time" with the delay of GTA IV, and said that he believes difficulties porting the game to the PlayStation 3 are to blame and that the company's new green light policy appears to be a failure.
      • by sammy baby (14909) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:28PM (#20102887) Journal
        I'm reading the exact sentence you quoted, but I'm getting a different vibe from it.

        The quote says that the difficulty was specifically in porting the environment. Not "the PS3 is hard to develop for," or "we developed this in parallel on the 360 and PS3 and the PS3 version has been harder to do." Just that they developed it on one, and porting it is more difficult than they expected.

        I'm happy to blame Sony for a ton of stuff, but it's too early to lay this at their feet.
        • by Carbonite (183181) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:39PM (#20103045)
          The GP was claiming that the article never blamed the PS3 for a delay, presenting this as evidence of Zonk's bias. This simply isn't true, as the quote I provided proves. You can make the argument that Sony shouldn't be blamed for the delay, but it's obvious that they are being blamed for the delay (at least in the article).
        • by GrayCalx (597428)
          I'm happy to blame Sony for a ton of stuff, but it's too early to lay this at their feet.

          I definitely agree with you here. Even if it is a specific problem within the PS3, a delay wouldn't be Sony's fault. And while I really don't want to throw Rockstar under the bus, the issue we're seeing is a result of Rockstar having underestimated how long it would take them to get the game working, properly, on both systems.

          I'm trying to think of a good analogy here... maybe if my company made a bid on a proj
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by svnt (697929)
          Remember that this is a financial analyst [wedbushinc.com], not anyone associated with the company. While he is no doubt only responsible for a limited number of companies, little information is given about his technical background. We can most likely assume he has little to no experience in software development. For him, "porting" could very well translate to "the versions are being developed in parallel and the PS3 version is taking longer".

          But as you said, it is far too early to blame the PS3. The article even states
    • by Rayonic (462789)
      Uh, the Gamasutra article clearly blames the PS3 (right or wrong). You're just being a knee-jerk.

      Also, Take Two did say that both platforms had their difficulties, but:
      A) Perhaps they're being diplomatic.
      or
      B) It's possible that one platform's "difficulties" are more dire than the other's.
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The ENTIRE ARTICLE mentions it as being PS3 problems. At least one specific mention per paragraph.

      Reading is hard :((((((((((((((((((
    • by joshsisk (161347)
      Nowhere in the article does it blame the PS3 for the delays.

      Huh? The TITLE of the article linked is "Pachter: PS3 Port Caused GTA IV Delay" - now, that might be biased, but it's not Zonk's bias...
      • Nowhere in the article does it blame the PS3 for the delays.

        Huh? The TITLE of the article linked is "Pachter: PS3 Port Caused GTA IV Delay" - now, that might be biased, but it's not Zonk's bias...
        Hey no fair! You're using facts to support your argument. You need to be posting unsubstantiated rumors and bald faced lies! We have high standards on /.!
        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by Nephilium (684559)

          Right! I think I've got the hang of it now!

          This guy I work with has a brother who's married to the sister of the lead developer at Rockstar's cleaning man! He said the problem they're having is that the Blu-Ray system requires three sacrificed kittens for each disc. They're trying to get enough kittens in order to provide for the launch day rush. So the problem is entirely Sony's. Sony promised it would only take half a kitten.

          That work better? :)

          Nephilium

    • RTFA much? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Alzheimers (467217) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:34PM (#20102987)
      Title of the article:
      "Pachter: PS3 Port Caused GTA IV Delay"

      Quoted verbatim from the article (emphasis mine):
      "Wedbush Morgan's Michael Pachter says Take-Two management has "stumbled badly for the first time" with the delay of GTA IV, and said that he believes difficulties porting the game to the PlayStation 3 are to blame and that the company's new green light policy appears to be a failure."

      The only confusing part is how you missed all that.
      • Michael Pachter does not work for Rockstar. He's an analyst. So it's like taking my word forit that they have sharks with lazerbeams patrolling the Iraqie gulf. of here:

        "slashdots King-manic says Take-Two management has "stumbled badly for the first time" with the delay of GTA IV, and said that he believes difficulties are related to the lack of strippers in the Take two office."

        Given it's not the first time Take-two has stumbled. And it's nto a port his opinion is pretty highly suspect.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Emetophobe (878584)

        Wedbush Morgan's Michael Pachter says Take-Two management has "stumbled badly for the first time" with the delay of GTA IV, and said that he believes difficulties porting the game to the PlayStation 3 are to blame and that the company's new green light policy appears to be a failure."

        Who is this Michael Pachter and why does his opinion matter? He doesn't work for Take-Two nor is he quoting a Take-Two representitive. It's just his opinion that the PS3 is to blame for the GTA IV delay. Hardly news worthy.

        Whil

    • by Anamanaman (97418) <jc@comi c j u n k i e . c om> on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:51PM (#20103225)
      Considering the RAGE engine is initially developed for the 360 (Table Tennis), its a fair assumption to make.

      Also, Rockstar isnt the only ones having problems. Its widely known that EA sports games on PS3 are currently running at half the frame rate of the 360 version. Also, every Unreal Engine 3 based game on the PS3 this year has had major technical issues (slowdowns, glitches). Its not like its the PS3's fault. 360 was a year ahead of them, and developers are more familiar with it.

      Take Two really cant afford this slip. They are in big trouble as it is, and this might sink them (or force them to sell out to another company). They should have gone the traditional route of timed exclusive on a platform (either PS3 or 360). They would have been able to get a nice chunk of change from the console maker plus been able to completely focus on that single platform. And in 6 months they could port it to all the other systems.
      • by nschubach (922175)
        Correct me if I'm wrong here, but Microsoft touted releasing GTA this year and seemed to rub it in everyone's face that you couldn't play it on any other system this winter. So that tells me that the 360 version should be ready for release at a separate time than the PS3. Why would trouble porting to the PS3 cause them to delay a version that was already ready for the 360?

        Even if it wasn't stated to come out earlier than the PS3 version, I still don't buy the idea that Sony paid them to release at the s
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jamie(really) (678877)

      Zonk did post the article title with a question mark at the end of it, which to me implied that it was not fact, but a question. The analyst asserts that the PS3 is a port of the 360 version, and speculates that this caused the delay, and further goes on to speculate why this would also delay the 360 version. Hence the question mark in the title.

      If the PS3 version is a port of the 360, that's very interesting information. Early in the PS2 / Xbox generation, most developers made PS2 games and ported to the

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by ravenshrike (808508)
        Dude, they fucking removed flying capability cause the 360 can't support the draw rate needed. Now, it's true that flying's not THAT integral to the game, but it's quite a nice addition. That's however the biggest most clear cut example. What else did they have to gimp to support the 360's lack of ability that we don't know about?
        • Was there anything about the draw rate anywhere that I can read? I remember reading about the flying being taken out, but the reason I read was completely different.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by DaveCBio (659840)
          That's a load of crap. The GPU in the 360 is at least as powerful as the PS3 if not slightly better. Look at all the cross platform games out there and you'll see they usually look better on the 360. Not to mention EA saying that their new sport titles would be running at 60FPS on the 360 and 30FPS on the PS3. Get your facts right there pal.
    • by mattcoz (856085)
      Wait, so now it's "typical Slashdot fashion" to be pro-Microsoft? Where have I been?
  • Interesting... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by FreeKill (1020271) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:21PM (#20102757) Homepage
    If it truly is a PS3 only problem that is causing this delay, Microsoft should just throw money at Take-Two to get them to release the 360 version early. Would be a big kick to Sony. Sadly, they are probably contractually obligated though...
    • by IrquiM (471313)
      Well'we've heared earlier that TakeTwo has just as much problems trying to fit everything on DVD9 as they have difficulties programming for a new platform...

      Probably a combination of those two which are hard to get compatible or something.
      • by DaveCBio (659840)
        I know the quote you are talking about and that's not really what the R* dev said, but everyone jumped on it.
  • "Zonked" again... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Intellectual Elitist (706889) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:23PM (#20102809)
    As the first article states, it's only the uninformed opinion of a financial analyst that PS3 development difficulties were responsible for the delay. Of course, the financial analyst also believes the PS3 version is a port of the 360 version, when in fact the PS3 has always been the lead platform for the game. Shows how much his opinion is worth.

    Rockstar says they have challenges on both platforms (likely Cell development on the PS3 and stuffing everything onto a DVD-9 on the 360). Nothing to see here, folks...
    • Re:"Zonked" again... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Rayonic (462789) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:31PM (#20102943) Homepage Journal

      he PS3 has always been the lead platform for the game

      Interesting. Link?

      Wikipedia makes no mention [wikipedia.org] of this fact, though it does mention that they're using the RAGE engine [wikipedia.org] from their earlier Xbox 360 release, Table Tennis.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        Interesting. Link?

        Come on. Your UID is way too low to expect corroborating evidence on slashdot.

      • I can't find the original interview from early in the year where I read someone from Rockstar saying that, but here are some supporting [ukrebellion.com] links [gamedaily.com].
        • by DaveCBio (659840)
          So, in other words you pulled this "fact" out of your ass and have nothing to back up the statement. All signs point to the fact that you are very mistaken. Considering they demo on the 360 AND have already released a title using their new engine on the 360. For an "Intellectual Elitist" you are very short on facts to back up your assertions.
          • "Take-Two and Rockstar Games were interested in continuing their longtime relationship with Sony, in which they premiered their Grand Theft Auto games on PlayStation platforms exclusively for 6-12 months before bringing them to other systems. [...] But neither company's top executives--all extremely important figures in the games industry--could get an answer from Kutaragi. PlayStation's Japanese headquarters was effectively radio silent, and without Kutaragi's signoff, the normally independent American and
            • by DaveCBio (659840)
              In other words they wanted to, but in the end they didn't because Sony dragged their feet. So, it's more than likely they weren't very deep into the PS3 when this all went down. Considering how long it took final dev kits to get out and how much of a lead the 360 had not to mention that they have a working 360 engine. All this adds up to the fact that original intentions aside it's far more likely that the 360 is NOW the lead GTA IV platform. Your little quote doesn't prove that the PS3 was/is the lead plat
    • The only problem with the 360 that I heard was the lack of a guaranteed hard drive. The dvd is a new one for me.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dopplex (242543)
      I'm not sure it's accurate to describe the PS3 as the lead platform for the game.

      After all, the demos were shown running off of 360s, I believe. (I seem to remember MS saying as much at some point during E3)

      We've seen more evidence at this point to suggest that the 360 engine is at a demoable stage of development than we have for the PS3 engine - we've seen 360 demos, but we haven't seen PS3 demos.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Blakey Rat (99501)
      Of course, the financial analyst also believes the PS3 version is a port of the 360 version, when in fact the PS3 has always been the lead platform for the game.

      Has it? They've been demoing it on Xbox 360 this entire time, and it's using the same engine as their previous Xbox 360 game. Not that it really matters which platform is the primary development platform, but still, I've never heard that the PS3 is considered the "lead" platform by Rockstar.
    • by ch0ad (1127549)
      i have been fighting this fight on another forum earlier today... i wish people would stop taking speculation as fact just because it comes from a so called "game analyst". only r* know why, and until they say the reason for the delay was the ps3, everyone else can go fuck themselves :)

      on another game blog another analyst claimed it was the 360's lack of space on a dvd... strange how zonk posted this article instead...

      • by Kelbear (870538)
        I respect Michael Pachter's opinions most of the time. He's made some interesting commentary in the past, but has been drifting too far into blind speculation. To be fair, he's supposed to be an analyst, and he really only has to answer to his employer Wedbush Morgan. But when statements go up without reliable references to back them up, that's fast and loose reporting. Don't know if Michael Pachter should be held responsible for providing that information, or the poster for not corraborating the informatio
    • by DaveCBio (659840)
      And you know the know the PS3 is the lead platform how? Do you have "insider" information?
  • Makes sense... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ch1a (168446) on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:29PM (#20102929) Homepage
    This seems to feasible as all the press demos I've heard about have been on the 360.

    Here's [gamespy.com] one I could find on short notice.

    I'm not aware of Rockstar ever showing the press the game engine running on a PS3.

    Anybody have examples of that?
  • This just in... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GoNINzo (32266) <GoNINzo@nOspAm.yahoo.com> on Friday August 03, 2007 @12:30PM (#20102931) Homepage Journal
    Apparently, we take the opinions of analysts as news now? Especially ones that have been wrong in the past? This is the same guy who said [wordpress.com]:

    "At the end of the day, we don't play games for social interaction ... We play games to escape." Microsoft's strategy is "absolutely flawed," he said.

    I suppose he has never seen the game of World of Warcraft or any of the other games that allow you to play with your friends.

    Seriously Zonk, try to have some news objectivity. I'm sure if you dug around, you could find some analyst on the Sony payroll to say how it was the xbox360's extra content causing the holdup.
  • by TB (7206)
    If I was making a game of the size and complexity of GTA4, I would at least get some experience on the platforms first, and even if I didnt... id get first party devs in to help. The only one to blame for delays is Rockstars stupidity.
  • And all you PS3 1users can just wait until it's released.

    But it will release on xBox360 at the same time as the Wii, so it's not like you'll have long to wait to basejump off of the Space Needle onto the Grey's Anatomy hospital and jump on a skateboard at the new (being built right now) skateboard park that Bill G tried to kill.

    Due to the large number of bike paths and pedestrian corridors, there will be a lot more carnage, of course.
  • by LKM (227954) on Friday August 03, 2007 @05:10PM (#20107219) Homepage
    It's easy to forget that R* has never developed a game the size of GTA III or GTA IV from scratch. They used Renderware for their previous "big" GTAs. GTA IV is the first "modern" GTA to be developed from scratch. Sure, they used an early version of the engine in Table Tennis, but something like GTA IV is in an entirely differen league.

    My guess is that they simply underestimated what it would take to polish a game like GTA IV to a shippable version.
  • http://pc.ign.com/articles/810/810595p1.html [ign.com]

    Carmack speaks on bringing the games to multi-console setups. Remarks that "If something goes wrong, it's going to be on the PS3." He comments that he knows people flame him for saying it, but that it's still true. Microsoft takes far less memory space internally than PS3 does (a mere fraction of the amount), so it's simply a fact that PS3 is harder to port things over to.

    But maybe it's just a conspiracy against Sony...

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Working...