bit-gamer.net

Uncharted 2 would be impossible on Xbox 360

Uncharted 2 would be impossible on Xbox 360

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves would be impossible to recreate on the Xbox 360, claim developer Naughty Dog.

Naughty Dog co-president Christophe Balestra has claimed that upcoming Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is only possible on the PlayStation 3 (among consoles, we presume) and that the Xbox 360 would be incapable of running the game.

"I guarantee that this game couldn't be working on Xbox 360. It would be impossible. I'm 100 per cent sure of this," Balestra told Ars Technica.

Balestra said that the main reason the game wouldn't work on the Xbox 360 is because it needs the Blu-Ray drive to work, claiming that every single bit of the 25GB disc had been crammed with game data.

"You can play the entire game without loading. We don't require an install. We're doing all the post-processing effects on the SPUs [Synergistic Processing Units]. The quality of the depth of field we have, you can't do that on the Xbox. We've invested a lot of time maximising the power of the machine," added Balestra.

"That's our job, to make the PS3 shine," he said. He's right, of course - Naughty Dog is owned by Sony.

Comparing the sequel to the previous game, Balestra said that Uncharted 2 uses the entire potential of the PlayStation 3, while Uncharted: Drakes Fortune only used around 30 - 40 percent.

Do you buy Balestra's claims? Let us know in the forums.

44 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
do_it_anyway 28th August 2009, 11:18 Quote
So, some games developers say that the PS3 is impossible to code for and there is no future for it.
Then a games producer owned by SONY says that the PS3 is the dogs danglies and the other consoles are useless.
Sounds like a knee jerk counter attack.

But I, being a PS3 owner, am buying into it wholeheartedly.
My PS3 doesn't suck after all. Yay!
OWNED66 28th August 2009, 11:20 Quote
meh
pc ownes all
Bauul 28th August 2009, 11:28 Quote
So according to Balestra this will be the pinical of PS3 technical gaming possibilities? Kind of pisses of Sony's claim that part of the PS3's 10-year life span is the fact people will still be unlocking new potential years from now.

Claiming the only reason Uncharted 2 is imposible on the 360 is down to Blu-Ray is a bit dumb. It wouldn't be hard to a) texture/movie compress or b) use multiple DVDs and a HDD install. Sounds very much like a pro-PS3 knee-jerk reaction following all the recent negative press.
Er-El 28th August 2009, 11:37 Quote
Because we all know how intricately familiar this long-time Naughty Dog developer is with developing on the the Xbox 360...
sandys 28th August 2009, 11:40 Quote
Marketing spin, they will say the same when Uncharted 3 comes out, which will of course be another jump as they figure out how to eek more of the architecture.

The key thing to note I guess is that they are able to improve on what has gone before, which was quite impressive, meaning the hardware does have potential that many aren't tapping into, not many high profile sequels on the same console hardware provide much of a jump in anything be it gameplay or graphics, preferring to play safe and provide more of the same, from what I've read Naughty dog are tackling both, should be good.

What's also good is that they share their source code with other first/third party devs which bodes well for future games too.
bogie170 28th August 2009, 11:45 Quote
10 year life span is a load of dogs testicles. Just think how far ahead the PC will be in 7 or so years time!
l3v1ck 28th August 2009, 11:50 Quote
Given that a few developers have recently said that the PS3 is both underpowered and hard to code for, I'm surprised this guy is saying that it'll run on the PS3 but not the Xbox.
Skiddywinks 28th August 2009, 11:53 Quote
For ****'s sake. I mean really. What a stupid claim. If he had said impossible in its present form, then he would have something. Just like Gears is impossible on the PS3, in its current form. It would not be impossible to make any console exclusive game on any other console. It would just require a few tweaks and changes here and there.
Mentai 28th August 2009, 11:55 Quote
id said that the 360 was to put Rage on without an HDD and bluray, butt they worked around it. Saying that it would be impossible to make Uncharted 2 run seems a bit ludicrous.
dolphin-promotions 28th August 2009, 12:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogie170
10 year life span is a load of dogs testicles. Just think how far ahead the PC will be in 7 or so years time!

Well according to NVidia GPUs will be 570x more powerful in 6 years time.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/08/27/nvidia-predicts-570-times-performance-boost/1
sandys 28th August 2009, 12:14 Quote
The NV chip can be as powerful as they like but unless it goes in a locked down platform like a console you'll probably not be able to play anything but WoW on it due to publisher piracy concerns and the shift away from PC
Zeus-Nolan 28th August 2009, 13:17 Quote
it would be nice for them to do this on pc aswel but at least i have a ps3 so i can't complain
Veles 28th August 2009, 13:57 Quote
I don't buy it, games on the PS3 that have their BDs filled just have lots of repeated data because the seek times are terrible.
Da_Rude_Baboon 28th August 2009, 13:59 Quote
The graphical analysis on Digital Foundry (eurogamer.net) indicates it is a true generational leap in graphic quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Foundry
In short then? This is exciting stuff, a generational leap in video that comes at a time when Naughty Dog's competitors have still yet to match the technical accomplishments of its first PS3 title . Bearing in mind the length and breadth of both technical and gameplay marvels in the first game, we can only imagine just how good the sequel is going to be.

The first game was great and the sequel is looking even better.
perplekks45 28th August 2009, 15:46 Quote
May I summarize?

Blah.

The End

It is impossible because they don't care about using a different approach for a pretty different architecture. Give them a bigger budget and more time and I bet they could make it work.
wafflesomd 28th August 2009, 17:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon
The graphical analysis on Digital Foundry (eurogamer.net) indicates it is a true generational leap in graphic quality.



The first game was great and the sequel is looking even better.

Gotta agree.

It really is a visually impressive game. Though it could use some more intense AA. That's what bugs me about mots console games, so jagged.
erratum1 28th August 2009, 17:40 Quote
They could have put it on multiple dvd's and then installed on the 360's harddrive. It's naughtydogs job to big up the ps3. Just like epic with the 360.

Still impressive that's it's apparently a 25gb game.
[PUNK] crompers 28th August 2009, 20:41 Quote
frankly i dont need this marketing bumph to get excited about this game, just watch a gameplay video it looks incredible.
chumbucket843 28th August 2009, 21:59 Quote
it is a solid fact hardware on the 360 is faster than the ps3 although not by a noticeable margin. anyone who is payed by sony to use those SPE's will say this.
Elton 28th August 2009, 22:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by chumbucket843
it is a solid fact hardware on the 360 is faster than the ps3 although not by a noticeable margin. anyone who is payed by sony to use those SPE's will say this.

I don't even think this statement matters as consoles are now holding back PC games.
perplekks45 28th August 2009, 22:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elton
I don't even think this statement matters as consoles HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AND ALWAYS WILL BE holding back PC games.
Fixed that for you. ;)
SMIFFYDUDE 29th August 2009, 01:34 Quote
Glorified tech demo
Elton 29th August 2009, 01:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Fixed that for you. ;)

Fair enough, but back in 2004 PC graphics weren't so limited by consoles. 5 years later, there's bits and bobs added, but nothing nearing revolutionary. That said, Graphics still take a back seat to gameplay.

Hence my addiction to AOE2 LAN.
rollo 29th August 2009, 11:47 Quote
best looking game on consoles is wipeout hd ( play on hd tv and you will see what i mean)

Console games are now 3-4 generations behind current pc hardware. And it will only get worse. Multiple dvds for a game should not be needed in this day and age. Still wondering how many dvds final fantasy 13 will arive on.
sandys 29th August 2009, 20:16 Quote
Get the Wipeout Fury addon DLC, it gets even better :eek: such a great title, a real bargain price.
perplekks45 29th August 2009, 21:54 Quote
Every time a new generation of consoles is introduced they hardly limit PCs. But until the next time there is no or hardly any development in the console market [hardware] and at some point the games can't be optimized any more to get that marginal better looking game. PCs evolve and evolve and evolve.

Every day after release is a little bit closer to death for a console. Same goes for graphics cards in PCs, and for CPUs and the likes. But it's easier to replace them in a PC, eh? :)
Star*Dagger 30th August 2009, 11:24 Quote
PC games will always be better because we can spend 3000 euros on a system whereas the consoles are around 1/10th that.
I have a blu-ray burner in my pc and a blu-ray player in my laptop.
I have the 4870 x2 space heater in my desktop, and will soon be throwing another one in there, since they are so cheap now. How many consoles can hope to have 4 (!!!!) gpus?!

Advantage PC, as always.

Yours in PC Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger
Awoken 30th August 2009, 12:03 Quote
Elite was written in 22k and produced a virtual 3D universe. I am very skeptical that a well coded piece of work would require that amount of space and that amount of power.
perplekks45 30th August 2009, 13:34 Quote
I guess it's mainly uncompressed textures and the likes that use that much space.
liratheal 30th August 2009, 21:29 Quote
This seems, if anything, entirely expected.

Naughty Dog are in Sonys pocket, they're probably well provided for (In terms of dev kits and tech support) thanks to their many years of Sony dedication.

It's probably (Infact, I'd say it most certainly is) true, but frankly. Who gives a toss? those that do own a PS3, and those that don't probably, well, don't.
rembo666 30th August 2009, 22:04 Quote
As far as I'm concerned, it's another point AGAINST PS3. Nobody ever said that PS3 is not a powerful system. The problem with PS3 is that you have to write the game specifically for it. While Uncharted 2 come out as the best looking game ever, it still does not prove that it makes business sense to write games form PS3--it's still cheaper to write games for a CPU with multiple identical cores than having to worry about which core to feed what. Sorry, not impressed, sticking with my PC as always.
s1n1s 31st August 2009, 03:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger
PC games will always be better because we can spend 3000 euros on a system whereas the consoles are around 1/10th that.
I have a blu-ray burner in my pc and a blu-ray player in my laptop.
I have the 4870 x2 space heater in my desktop, and will soon be throwing another one in there, since they are so cheap now. How many consoles can hope to have 4 (!!!!) gpus?!

Advantage PC, as always.

Yours in PC Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger

I don't see what your getting at here because that's dumb most people I know with a pc don't spend much more than £1000(€1,135.77) on their pc but yes we can spend that much but not many people do.

the game does look very good
mikeuk2004 31st August 2009, 09:28 Quote
3000 euros fro a PC? just to play a game, thats stupid and shows some people have more money than sence and dont understand the true value of money.

I bet these people still live with their mum and when they move out reality will hit them.

Familys cant spend 3000 for a pc for their kids. Thats why consoles were invented, cheap entertainment system. With the 360 and PS3 looking so good, sony and ms should now concerntrate on making games than a new system.
perplekks45 31st August 2009, 11:55 Quote
Next Xbox should be there by next year [5 year life cycle] but they're pushing out that silly movement tracking thing of which I forgot the name.
Next PS3 should arrive in 2011.

Plenty of time to develop new games, eh?
mr00Awesome 31st August 2009, 12:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Next Xbox should be there by next year [5 year life cycle] but they're pushing out that silly movement tracking thing of which I forgot the name.
Next PS3 should arrive in 2011.

Plenty of time to develop new games, eh?

I though Project Natal was going to "revive" the Xbox so they didn't have to produce another console so soon?
Skiddywinks 31st August 2009, 12:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr00Awesome
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Next Xbox should be there by next year [5 year life cycle] but they're pushing out that silly movement tracking thing of which I forgot the name.
Next PS3 should arrive in 2011.

Plenty of time to develop new games, eh?

I though Project Natal was going to "revive" the Xbox so they didn't have to produce another console so soon?

Both MS and Sony are looking for a 10 year life cycle. Which is, quite frankly, ludicrous.
perplekks45 31st August 2009, 15:13 Quote
That's why I assumed half of that. ;)

Though the PS2 is still going strong after 9 years.
s1n1s 31st August 2009, 15:53 Quote
I've heard that the next xbox is meant to be coming in 2012
perplekks45 31st August 2009, 17:55 Quote
A 7 year scheme? Interesting.
Anakha 31st August 2009, 18:58 Quote
They say that they're using the SPEs to do post-processing effects. That's fine, everyone else uses Shaders. And it just goes to show how limiting those SPEs (with their 64kb of memory) really are.

1 slow CPU core (with lots of fast CPU-only memory bandwidth, but VERY slow VRAM access), 8 RISC SPEs, with 64kb memory and nothing else, and 1 medium-speed GPU with slow VRAM access and no main RAM access makes for a poor-performing system.
perplekks45 31st August 2009, 19:37 Quote
I wouldn't say the PS3 is "a poor-performing system", but maybe that's just me. :p
Timmy_the_tortoise 1st September 2009, 20:30 Quote
Needs a blu ray drive, eh? Can't fit it on a DVD-9? Well, they need better compression then, show-off dicks.

The fact that Sony owns Naughty Dog kind of makes his claims useless, since he's been paid to say this crap to hype up the PS3.

Just so you all know, I own a PS3.. but as far as gaming is concerned, it's not a patch on my 360.
Quote:
That's why I assumed half of that. ;)

Though the PS2 is still going strong after 9 years.

Sony have always had a 10 year plan with their consoles, releasing a new console around halfway through each lifespan. The PS1 was released in 1995/6 (not sure which), then the PS2 came out in 2000, and the PS1 went on until 2005/6 and so the PS2 will be phased out in 2010. Then I assume the PS4 will come out in 2011/2012 with the PS3 being phased out in 2016.

That's just my guess though. I just noticed the pattern emerging.
dyzophoria 1st September 2009, 20:50 Quote
maximized everything eh? that I have to see.. developers should really just keep their mouths shut and just develop games imho
mclean007 24th September 2009, 15:13 Quote
Why does every console have to turn into a "my hardware is better than yours" fanboy war? For the record, I have a PS3. I'm very happy with it. For the price I consider it a bargain - it gives me a very good quality Blu-ray player and DVD upscaler, a DLNA media player, and a very capable HD gaming machine. It is also rock solid reliable, near silent, never crashes, updates itself automatically and happily over the internet, and generally sits there looking pretty and being an unobtrusive, low maintenance entertainment machine.

I am confident I made the right choice, but I'm not going to go bashing people who prefer to game on another platform, be it Xbox 360, PC or something else. Yes, PCs have undoubtedly surged ahead in raw processing horsepower now, as was inevitable, but in terms of raw value, ease of use, and good all round fun, I'd take a PS3 hooked up to a 40" TV in the lounge over a PC in the spare room any day of the week. As for PS3 vs Xbox 360, it is absurd to say "it is a solid fact hardware on the 360 is faster than the ps3". We are talking about two very different architectures here, with different performance characteristics but ultimately very similar overall processing power. Multiformat games typically look near identical on both, some are better on Xbox, some on PS3, but generally nothing in it. Unless you have a real affinity for one or other console's exclusive titles, I don't think you can really make a call on gaming prowess. For me, Blu-ray, build quality, aesthetics and noise were the issues that swung it in favour of PS3, but like I said, to each his own, right?

Back on topic, Uncharted: DF was a brilliant game. Perhaps not the best graphics in the world ever from a technical standpoint, but beautiful artwork and animation, good pacing, voice acting, difficulty and plot, a really enjoyable experience. And that, at the end of the day, is what matters. I am MASSIVELY excited about the sequel - it looks awesome. I'm sure someone one day will produce a technically superior game on PS3 or X360, but so what?
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums