The sickest game on PS3

Too bad it's exclusively for consoles. Imagine what it would be like on a PC!
 
Omg if this was on a pc and theres 256 people in one game i would sh1t myself of being too excited.
 
It's really a shame that PC users have been getting the shaft on almost every single game that's been coming out. Soon to be COD:MW2 on that list. Operation Flash Point 2, ARMA 2, COD:WAW, etc. The list goes on.
 
I dont see why they would do that. They would make so much more money if they came out for the pc. More people game on a pc.
 
It's probably going to be some shitty game sponsored by PS3 to gain some kind of competitive advantage... comparable in quality to something like FFOW perhaps?

It doesn't make sense for a developer to start such a project for the PS3 ONLY otherwise (not even Xbox360).

Let it suck.

I also didn't see people controlling vehicles. The ones they did have looked like AI (like COD4's planes and helicopters), or cutscenes... which is fail.
 
That may be true Trigger, however, lots more people pirate games on the PC compared to the console, which is why PC seems to be getting the shaft. However, while not perfect in this regard, Steam is a MUCH better tool to prevent piracy.
 
[quote1253586150=Soulzz]
That may be true Trigger, however, lots more people pirate games on the PC compared to the console, which is why PC seems to be getting the shaft. However, while not perfect in this regard, Steam is a MUCH better tool to prevent piracy.
[/quote1253586150]

You can't pirate online games, because it's much harder (if not impossible) to modify server-side key checks and other online features. I don't think anyone's playing a pirated 2142 online, not even one - and that game looks to be almost exclusively multiplayer.
 
Anyone care to explain why we lag with 64 people on a server but PS3 & XBOX 360 doesnt lag with hundreds or even millions of people on thier servers?
 
If your referring to MAG for the PS3 - that games server architecture was designed specifically for MAG. That and the developers for that game seem to give a shit about making a good product. I could be wrong, but it certainly seems that way.

As for 2142, for one, the game's net code, poor coding, and general instability.
 
Okay. Well for the record, most online PC games have been haunted with "lag". I guess it will always be that way too.

Im just saying why havent they figured out how to run a game smoothly like the consols?
 
The call of duty series doesn't have nearly as many lag issues as Battlefield.

Consoles are more money for the game developers, and until someone figures out a way to greatly limit PC piracy, it will continue to be cared for more then PC games.
 
Every game has issues with lag. I think people with Piss3's or boXes just don't complain as much. They also get official dedicated servers - which PC games mostly don't. Most PC games rely on clans / enthusiasts to host servers. L4D has been one of the few examples where there are official dedicated servers (provided by Valve).

Presumably, official dedicated servers could be better than user-managed ones?

But, like Soulzz said - every game has techniques in programming to deal with the inevitable lag of playing over the internets (aka "a series of tubes").

Most online games (including Battlefield 2142) have some predictive routines, which extrapolate the future position of a person/vehicle between the packets, so it appears more smooth than it should be. That's also why you also see vehicles continuing to roll/move into oblivion when you lose connection to a server in 2142 - their client-side predictive routine continues to roll/move a vehicle based on the last known rate of movement/roll... until it gets a new packet of where it actually is from the server.

As you can imagine, these routines (along with a lot of other aspects of the game code) can be altered in many ways, and can become arguably better or worse. For BF2142, they're not as good as Cod4's or L4D/CS:S' ones according to many people.

Personally, I think they did an OK job with 2142 as far as lag goes. The crashing of the servers and the bugs piss the hell out of me... but IMO no other game developer has managed the sheer scale and detail of 2142 successfully - so far. The lag is, sadly, something we have to deal with... especially considering the server's on the east coast (which is great for many, but not for Soulzz or me lulz).

Then again, you have to remember that the internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck.

P.S. I don't know where Soulzz got the information about Mag and how he can comment on the lag and servers while the game is not even out yet... ?! It could suck as hell - who knows.
 
wow i rarely get attracted to ps3 shooters but this looks really interesting, maybe ill get myself a ps3....
 
I own an Xbox 360 and that thing lags online in games like GoW2 online and GTAIV online. FPS slow to around 12-15ish. I have played a 100% full server on the PS3 for the game Dirt 2 and that bitch lagged like a mother when everyone came together. A full server in Dirt 2 is 8 players.
 
Yeah... I've seen on a couple of reviews of games for the X360 stuff about "low framerates" and that always brings on the lulz for me.

I mean... on PC's you go out and you buy a new video card and now the game runs fine.

On the xbox360, you can only sit there and touch your ass, basically.

In a year or two, the graphics and processing capability on the current consoles will hopefully start to look more and more dated.
 
I got the info from a developer interview I read somewhere, Heat. I'm sure some of what they said was a marketing technique to make their game appear more schnazzy.

<embed id=&quot;mymovie&quot; width=&quot;432&quot; height=&quot;362&quot; flashvars=&quot;playerMode=embedded&movieAspect=4.3&flavor=EmbeddedPlayerVersion&skin=http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/cne_flash/production/media_player/proteus/one/skins/gamespot.png&paramsURI=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamespot.com%2Fpages%2Fvideo_player%2Fxml.php%3Fid%3D6208769%26mode%3Dembedded%26width%3D432%26height%3D362&quot; wmode=&quot;transparent&quot; allowscriptaccess=&quot;always&quot; quality=&quot;high&quot; name=&quot;mymovie&quot; style=&quot;&quot; src=&quot;http://image.com.com/gamespot/image...n/media_player/proteus/one/proteus2.swf&quot; type=&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot;/>
 
After all said and done, it's all about the gameplay.

FFOW and ET:QW both sounded great on paper and didn't have what it takes in reality.

I wonder why they didn't ask them &quot;why ps3 only?&quot;

Well, whatever...
 
Eh, fuck the PS3/XBOX/Wii. If its got more buttons than the Super NES controller, I want nothing to do with it. FPS games should not controlled with your thumbs.
 
Looks like a pretty awesome game. Imagine that in a 2142 setting. I'd get a PS3 just for that. But I could only imagine the waiting line for a gunship. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top