News: Halo 3 multiplayer "really Quake 3 from 1999", console 'depth' MIA - Strategy Informer
No Avatar Welcome!

Not a member yet? REGISTER now!

News

Halo 3 multiplayer "really Quake 3 from 1999", console 'depth' MIA
Posted: 12.11.2008 11:36 by Simon Priest Comments: 5
Splash Damage founder Paul Wedgwood has reiterated the PS3 is "more of a challenge" to develop on, compared to the "easier" 360.

He points out in his interview with Edge Online that console gamers crave the greater depth PC games offer. Consoles could be deep "but it isn't there", mainly as PC called it first.

"Arguably, and this is not to dismiss what people have achieved in the past, but Halo 3 multiplayer is really Quake 3 from 1999," said Wedgwood. "Even Call of Duty 4 is just Counter-Strike on the PC from 2001."

"So there’s an amazing amount of depth that could be present on consoles, but it isn’t there because real-time strategy games have never been successful on consoles, deep first-person shooters have never been on the consoles, and so on."

He says that Splash have been messing about with development on consoles, mainly to see where their next game is going to land platform wise. They decided to lead with the PS3 because of the greater hill to climb when they go multi-platform.

"We took a pretty loose attitude towards development at the start of the year, and just said ”let’s have fun trying out development stuff." We knew that the PS3 would be more of a challenge, so that’s the one we got going with," he explained.

Still, despite his obvious love for the PC and its games, Wedgwood doesn't think that the console gamer is in anyway 'less' in the brain department. He says he hates "the notion that “softcore” people are stupid. What a ridiculous thing to say, that because someone has a console controller in their hand, they’re somehow less intelligent than a PC player. That really frustrates me."

Click here for the interview between Paul Wedgewood and Edge Online.

Digg
N4G
Del.icio.us

User Comments

By Orv (SI Core) on Nov 12, 2008
Orv
This interview strongly backs my opinions and statements regarding the differences between console and PC platforms and exactly why the PC suffers each time a new console targeted cross-platform game is released in the genres where consoles typically fall behind.
Developing titles streamlined for the lowest common denominator, in an attempt to shave development costs, is doing a major disservice to the PC gaming audience.
By Yadkin (I just got here) on Nov 12, 2008
Yadkin
Generally, if console authors take the time to Beta their wares for PC on the PC by PC people, most of these problems would not occur. The difference between PC and the majority of consoles out there is more than just code. Technical issues abound when you have to cross a title from a singular platform to any given PC that my have dozens of unique configurations. If nothing else, Splash could indeed use the PS3 as it's foundation, however, if they don't parrallel their developement with the PC, then there will undoubtably be errors in the release for PC down the road.
By Megadeth (SI Veteran Member) on Nov 13, 2008
Megadeth
Its too expensive to develop games now to bet on a single platform. You just cant get someone to spend 20+ million on a game without going crossplatform, nobody can be asked to take that kind of risk. I dont see that as the problem, the real problem is that when console developers are making PC conversions for the first time, they want to fit PC gameplay into their format, instead of adapting console gameplay to the PC format. They believe, arrogantly, that their gameplay is "better" because console is more "successful". If they were smart they would learn from PC games, as PC has been driving innovation in gaming since the beginning. Everything new in games comes out on PC first, and that is never going to change because the PC is an open platform. Console developers resist change even while they adopt PC games and gameplay (Shooters, RPGs, RTS, MMOs).
By Orv (SI Core) on Nov 13, 2008
Orv
That is what I meant by "least common denominator" Mega, and I agree with you... except about the 20+ million. There are big publishers that can, and do, spend that kind of coin without going cross-platform (e.g Blizzard). Most simply do not want to, they want to shoot for the *Full Monty*.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on Nov 14, 2008
FoolWolf
Orv, man, I feel like I'm in your footsteps or something ;)
It backs alot of my views and thoughts as well. Consoles are like Pop music, the hip the trendy the flavour that is dead and updated to a new within a month.
PC games have the modability, fans that get stuck making maps, extras, tweaks rreally huge mods etc. the games for a PC feels like they are sometimes there to stay with you for a really long time.
Not all mind you, but certain games gives you a lot of value!