GW coming to the PS3?

they shold sell for ps3 if theyre going to make it for a console at all. all the xbox retards are too caught up with halo 3 anyway

The PS3 vs XBox arguments are like the GW vs WoW: No one cares.

I can't see GW working on PS3. Then again, 8 buttons close together, 8 skills, it might actually be easier.

here's a video interview that answers a lot of questions put forth in this thread. No mention of guild wars, only Tabula Rasa in this clip. He clearly states that they will be doing some of the current NCSoft games for the PS3, but it'll be about a year before anything is released.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/clips/garri...hip-279993.php


oh, and definitely nothing from NCSoft going to the 360, so arguing over it is a moot point.

Its the truth though. Consoles = Computers for dummies.

If you want true gaming, you get a beastly PC. Crysis, Bioshock, CoD4, Orange Box, all PC FTW

The problem with dumbing down games has nothing to do with consoles being unable to handle complex games, its that the people who commonly play on consoles need them to be simpler and easier and aren't used to playing anything else. A few good examples I can think of:

Daggerfall: Incredibly good rpg for its time. (buggy as hell though lol!)
Morrowind: Far smaller, large amount of the complexity of Daggerfall cut out from it, yet people playing xbox still complain about it being too complex.
Oblivion: Gameplay and character advancement is practically non-existent, even smaller and more dumbed down, not good for much more then a graphics demo.

System shock 1&2: Very good games, mostly fps with some rpg elements.
Bioshock: Story is basically exactly the same as system shock 2 would be if it happened in the 1960s, incredibly simplified system with inventory gutted out completely, and the game is so accommodating in its difficulty that a 2 year old could kill the last boss with the wrench on the toughest difficulty level by random button mashing.

On the other hand, I can think of at least one game that transferred pretty well: Battle for Middle earth 2 far surpassed the first in gameplay while simultaneously getting on the xbox. The only problems were the xbox wasn't powerful enough to run it and you ended up with lower unit and player limit, and from what I hear it still lags.

I think GW2 could be made into a good game for both the PS3 and PC, but I doubt its going to happen.

And all on PS3 and 360 too and will run better than on systems costing the same amount. It doesnt really matter though cause they are aimed at different audiences

It would be a good move for tapping into a largely unreached player base in terms of MMORPGs... smart. However, I doubt that it will happen just because a mouse and keyboard is so essential to game.

The thing is, we can play about 80% of all console games on PC, (you can make it to fit the keyboard) but hardly any PC related games can be played on the console. So it is never gonna happen unless Anet suddenly turn dumb somehow.

If they made GW or WoW or others for the console the great thing would be it would severely limit the developers ability to abuse the customer base i.e making them their personnel beta testers. Nor would they be able to just nerf on a whim as it would think it would be much more difficult to constantly patch and make changes to a console version vs a PC version.

instead of asking how ignorant can you get i will be polite and ask this simple question.

the game is played from your hard drive not the DVD player as the DVD player is so slow by comparison and used for the install only ( try it....remove the DVD and it still plays)

the hard drive would be updated just as it is now so how would there be any limit at all on nerfs or updates?

PS3 supports generic USB and Bluetooth Keyboards


I'm not saying GW is coming to PS3 - but Jeff Strain has made it clear *its not hard*


Jeff Strain interview from 02/2006
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14931

GuildWars on PS3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kMnoE77Hi2I

I can tell you while playing in FFXI, it was annoying having to team up with somebody that was using a console. You did meet a few very rare excellent console players but most of the time it was a miserable experience in a game where team mates really can't be slack at their jobs.

The reason I think they could make it for the PS3 is that apparently the PS3 is going to have mouse/keyboard control support for games pretty soon (Epic were planning to put it in UT3 originally but decided not to because of time constraints). If that happens there is no real reason why GW2 wouldn't work just as well on a PS3 as it does on a PC, and would be both good and bad from my own point of view. Good because a PS3 is cheaper than a new gaming PC, bad because I'd have to buy one of the damn things (I've already got a 360).

Oh... My... God...

it works!!!

As far as bluray vs hd-dvd goes, in terms of player sales Bluray is winning by a long way. Something like 85% of its sales are PS3s - in terms of standalone players (ie excluding the 360 HD-DVD addon and the PS3) sales for both formats are actually garbage

Considering the fact that the players are still expensive, the new DVDs cost ten dollars more than a regular dvd, and the fact that there aren't that many movies that actually need the extra resolution, this isn't a surprise to me.

"Rockstar creative vice president Dan Houser has admitted that bringing the next iteration of GTA to the Xbox 360 is more challenging because there's no guarantee of a hard drive in every unit and disc space is limited to DVD instead of Blu-ray."

Until now.

Yeah, because everyone is happy with their 360.

Sure why not. It would be good for NcSoft/Arenanet to put Guild Wars on console for the extra profit.

I believe the game they are bringing out is Tabula Rasa

or something else altogether
http://www.massively.com/2008/01/04/...pe-working-on/

Some very unique/beautiful concept art in there, nice find.

Core game assets like skill balances pose no challenge to port, Anet could still hook up their random number generator to pump out skill changes like they do now just as well on a PS3. If anything a console (with a hard drive of course) would be easier to patch for certain things since the hardware doesn't change, which cuts down on testing across different systems.

Win.

It's possible to do, you can use a keyboard and mouse with the ps3, I'm typing this mssg on my ps3 now and UT3 supports all the keyboard/mouse/mod features , and it has a hard drive so it could DL patches and such, but only thing i would be worried about if they did "dumb" it down.

PS for the Blu-ray-HD-DVD argument, warner bros is going blu-ray exclusive, so thats a a blow and to whoever said LOTR exclusive for HD-DVD, IDK about that now

PSS Age I'd stop now if i was you...

Unfortunately that'll probably never happen... but we can hope

i have to say, id kind of be ok with this idea. i would hate gw as it is now on a console, but if they changed the in-fight systems work so that its more concentrated on physical fighting rather than skills interacting with one another, i think it could be kind of cool. and about this arguement, i like 360 better than ps3, because i dont have to pay an extra $200 for the damn blu-ray disk (not to mention buying blu-rays), and because i think they have better game selection. if gw were to make it to a console, i think it should be 360, ps3, and/or wii (wii could get pretty intense )

Consoles = Computers for people who want standardized hardware without compatibility/requirement hassles, don't need the extra functionality of a computer (because they probably already have a computer powerful enough to perpetuate ten year old internet memes and porn) and would rather pay a price that's subsidized by the manufacturer. That's most people. only one game you list is a PC exclusive and only because few people are stupid enough to pay the money necessary to play it at decent visuals.

You should read Penny Arcade some time.

Arenanet (or anyone else) can't afford not to develop for consoles these days, as that's just where most people are. The consumer-oriented roles of the PC are being commoditized, and this generation of consoles have pretty much everything they need to complete the process.

Believe it or not (and it's fairly hard to believe) but Sony actually gave the option to install a different OS on the PS3. This is Sony we're talking about. They've been surprisingly open with the PS3.

yes it fails in its marketing, but its one hell of a good engine ^^

Very stereotypical. Morrowind sold very well on the Xbox and it was virtually untouched from the PC version. Yes, there were complaints about it being too complex, but I find it puzzling why you'd pin all of those complaints on the console crowd. Those were common complaints even before the Xbox version was released.

The game basically through you off a ship and told you to "go" with little to no other explination on how to play the game. As much as I personally loved Morrowind, a lot of people didn't like the lack of direction. Obviously, to help it sell better, Oblivion added a whole tonne of features to make things easier for these players.

Pinning all of these problems on console owners seems extremely narrow minded and ignorant.

I think you'll also find many of the problems for GTA IV were caused by the PS3. HDD not being supplied with the 360 has never been much of a problem, there have already been a number of games that simply state "HDD required on the front of the box.

As for the blu-ray argument, I still don't buy it. Huge games like Oblivion, Crysis, Mass Effect, etc, all easily fit onto one single DVD. I don't see the point where we need a bigger disc format, especially with compression methods becoming more effective all the time.

Talk about beating a dead horse. A lot of people have had problems with their 360, but Microsoft have since completely replaced the parts used to make the machines, and every unit that does malfunction is replaced for free. Why don't we through in some jabs here about the Xbox console being too large, or the controller being too big while you're at it?

These problems are hardly uncommon for consoles either, if you remember back to the days of the Dreamcast and PS2 you may notice they had equally bad malfunction rates, if not worse. Nintendo are the only company I would ever trust to make 100% reliable products, and I believe the only reason the PS3 was able to avoid similar issues was due to the massive delay, to avoid directly competing with the launch of the 360 and Wii, where as Microsoft rushed their console out for Christmas, and while that may have resulted in these problems, it undoubedly gave them a massive advantage.

Wether you buy it or not makes no difference - it is the announced reason for the delay. And yes, they have cited that development for the PS3 has been an issue - each console has their evils. But not having the space for the game is more of a problem than not being used to developing for cell technology.

You're bitching about well known problems for the PS3, and giving me shit about beating a dead horse? Excuse me if I laugh.

It's possible that NCsoft were looking into following in the footsteps of Square's multi-platform success of Final Fantasy XI, but I doubt they'd pick Guild Wars.
Perhaps one of the games will be Aion.

I wasn't attacking the PS3, I was only defending the 360. I happen to quite like the console, I just dislike their choice to use blu-ray, I feel it unnecessarily increased the cost of the console, which should primarily be used to play GAMES.

IMO, Nintendo got things right when they decided to make a console that actually focuses on good old fashioned gameplay, rather than these silly extras.

I don't own a PS3, I have a 360, but I understand why Sony choose the Blue-ray format.
They unfortunately believed blue-ray would become the mainstream with the introduction of HD movies.
They are paying for that misprediction. Blue-ray technology is battling it out with HD DVD and is not the mainsteam yet, therefore it's production costs are still way too high.
However, the PS3 is technically the beefier hardware. It may actually make a comeback and many already believe it's starting to happen, although gradually.

Whoever actually believes that a PS3 is less powerful in regards to process power then ANY PC needs to be beaten with a wet leather belt....

CELL BBE > You

The PC I just got a day ago is more powerful than a PS3.

My computer runs Crysis maxed without skipping a beat and is still using only a small fraction of it's resources.

Crytek specifically tested the 360 and the PS3 and determined that neither could handle Crysis as far as processing power and graphics power go. (And they lack the mouse and keyboard.) Therefore if the 360 and PS3 cannot run Crysis, and my PC can, then my PC is more powerful than either of them, which means PCs are better. Yes, it is a bleeding edge PC, but still it is a good example of the current available hardware.

(Even if we ignore this, I compared the stats of a PS3's components to my computer's components and mine does outstrip the PS3. I also gain the benefits of a large TV by hooking up a 1080p samsung hdtv to my computer. My Logitech G7 wireless laser gaming mouse and Logitech G15 gaming keyboard far outstrip any controller in performance. My sound card is linked to a professional music speaker setup. Consoles have no edge at all on my rig.)

And I'll say this on hardware difficulties: Handling a PC is not hard if you have a brain and basic education. For people who don't, or who were brought up without computers and never bothered to learn, I can see the problems. But getting a Red Ring Of Death on a 360 is going to screw you over no matter what you know.

My point? Keep the games on PC, it's where they belong.

...if you only count floating point math performance, which the PS3 indeed does much better than a regular CPU.

However many, possibly most, PC's beat the PS3 wrt general computation, and if money is no object you can upgrade your computer to vastly outperform PS3's also in floating point with a card like Tesla C870 GPU.

I have only ever played Guild Wars with a Sony Playstation 2 controller via USB adapter and KB/M gamepad emulation software, and it does work very well. It took 12 tries, and many hours, to get a control layout that I am happy with, but GW is definitely playable with a gamepad. It's very easy for me to move, spin the camera, cycle targets, call targets, and then execute skills all at the same time. Although I do have to stop moving for a fraction of a second to activate skills 1-4 since I mapped those to the D-Pad along with the arrow keys. PS2 controller has 16 buttons available if you use the D-Pad directions and L3, R3, which I do. I also dedicate one trigger to change the funtion of the buttons so I can nearly double that.

There's actually a thread over in community works for using an XBox360 gamepad with GW, so a small hanful of people already play this game without KB/M. I vastly prefer my controls to the layout in that thread.

In some ways, I think it may be easier with a gamepad than a KB/M to learn to play, as long as you have a good control layout. KB/M is superior in the end, once you learn to play, and is pretty much required for serious PvP, and for the most advanced styles of play. Keyboard is obviously required for chat. I have a wireless keyboard for that. I can think of several examples of play I could not do well: Monk(not interesting to me), minion master/bomber, and Hero battles, or controlling my character + 3 heroes at once. None of those styles of play interest me, nor does PvP.

GW does not need to be "dumbed down" to port over to a console. Besides, if they share servers, you can just roll the console folks in PvP, and not invite them to your team. It could be just another PvP exclusion from teams, like we already have(rank, etc.).

Couple things I would like to say here. Neither Sony or Microsoft make money from their systems, they get a cut from game sales to keep their gaming devision afloat until the price of technology comes down enough to turn a profit off of console sales (and first party games where they get the cut from being on their system, their game, and they publish it). In fact Microsoft never made a profit from the original xbox, or if they did it wasn't until the very end, while Sony has been making profits off of the PS2 for a while (and still are as it is still selling well even with the "next gen" consoles). Funny thing about Mass Effect (I don't know if it is true, I don't have a 360 or the game) but the official strategy guide for the game is thinner than the one for Final Fantasy 12 so logically there is less to do in it than in FF12. But like I said, I don't own the game or played it. Maybe that was Nintendo's intent, but it takes developers to figure that out and most games on the Wii tend to have you waiving your arms around like a jack @$$ to do anything. If I want that I can go to a gym and save myself a lot of money. More games need to be like Super Mario Galaxy where the controls are a compliment instead of the game play.

As for blu-ray, Sony knew they would be able to push extra consoles by putting it in there because it would be the cheapest blu-ray player on the market and I think it is a safe bet it worked. And if that person bought a few games to go along with it, all the better (wouldn't be to far of a stretch to think someone with one might pick up Madden or NBA Live to play on their fancy HDTV). As for games, when Activision says they have terabytes of explosions stored on their hard drives for use in future Call of Duty games, it isn't to hard to believe that Call of Duty 5 will be pushing the 360s dvd9s since Call of Duty 4 was over 6 gigs and the only knock on it was that the story was to short (which would obviously be something they would want to improve on in the next game) and the 25 gigs that blu-ray offers would seem more appealing then.

You're all crazy if you don't want it to come to wii imo.

It'd make me play my ranger more!