Wednesday 31-Oct-2007 2:34 PM "It would be a waste if we didn't have a sequel" says Naughty Dog boss, promising its next game will push the PS3 further
Considering the subtitle, it's a bit of a no-brainer that Naughty Dog plans to make more vine-swinging adventure games after Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. Just in case you didn't think so, Naughty Dog co-president Christophe Balestra has gone and put it in words...
"Crash was a franchise, Jak & Daxter was a franchise and yes of course Uncharted will be a franchise," he told Opposable Thumbs. "It takes a lot of effort to create a universe like Uncharted and there is so much more we want to do. It would be a waste if we didn't have a sequel to make it even better than the first one."
On the technical capabilities of the PlayStation 3, Balestra says the already-gorgeous Drake's Fortune is only using "30 percent" of the Cell's power, so the inevitable follow-up should look even better. "We already have very sophisticated technology and we'll push to the next level for our next game," he said.
The Naughty Dog co-boss goes on to admit that some developers are finding PS3 development tricky, but says SCE is helping the best it can.
"I think the PS3 is the machine of the future, the transition might not be super easy but Sony knows and is helping third-party developers. If you look at other industries we just have to deal with a multicore processor and in companies like Google programmers probably deal with thousands of machines, so in terms of complexity I think it's totally manageable."
We're enjoying the game so far so a sequel certainly isn't news we'd turn our noses at. Plus, are we the only ones that think Jak & Daxter's getting a bit tired now? Give us more Uncharted instead.
Drake's Fortune is out on December 7. Look for our review around then.
Drake's Fortune is only using "30 percent" of the Cell's power,
Blimey! Uncharted looks beautiful - I wonder what it'd look like if it used 100% of Cell's power...........
If your ok to wait around 5/6 years then you too will see the full force of the Cell's power.
Jargon, jargon, blah, blah, blah.
All Devs are the same, XBox, Sony, Nintendo. "Hell yeah, were going to revolutionize the whole FPS experience.", "At this stage were only using half what the machine can do."
Dont listen to them, they have to bum their games up.
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
It's the same with all processors it's just how it works. Thanks to task manager you may notice that your PC spikes at 100% quite often. During games however the PC is probably at around 40-60% usage if that and some spikages will occur.
As the video system gets older and more things are rendered in software when new tricks come into play that the PS3 was designed before that is where the CPU will truly shine. As it stands sure the CPU is being used at around 30% but how much strain is the GPU under? When the Cell is finally used at 100% will the GPU even be able to keep up? All this matters down the line.
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
Drake's Fortune is only using "30 percent" of the Cell's power,
Blimey! Uncharted looks beautiful - I wonder what it'd look like if it used 100% of Cell's power...........
If your ok to wait around 5/6 years then you too will see the full force of the Cell's power.
Jargon, jargon, blah, blah, blah.
All Devs are the same, XBox, Sony, Nintendo. "Hell yeah, were going to revolutionize the whole FPS experience.", "At this stage were only using half what the machine can do."
Dont listen to them, they have to bum their games up.
hey, i just so happen to like a little bit of longevity with my systems. you have no idea how much it p**sed me off when i bought my XBox towards the end of 2003, just for Microsoft to ditch it in favor of the 360 not even two years later. Sony may be a lot of things, but their systems have had staying power (PSOne lasted at least five years, and PS2 is still kicking after seven). i'd be willing to wait another couple of years to see its potential; thats better than having to shell out $500 ever few years for a new system.
PowerPC, which the XBox 360's processor, the Wii's processor, the GameCube's processor, and pre-2006 Apple Mac processors are all based on wasn't designed for video games. MIPS, which the Nintendo 64's processor, the Playstation's processor, the Playstation 2's processor, and the PSP's processor are all based on, wasn't designed for video games. x86, which all IBM-PC Compatible processors and the XBox's processor are based on, wasn't designed for video games. ARM, which the Nintendo DS' processor is based on, wasn't designed for video games. So what exactly is your point?
Incidentally, pretty much the only processor ever made that *was* designed from the ground up with video games in mind was the SuperH, originally developed for the Sega 32X and Saturn and later used in the Dreamcast. Even the processors used by the NES, the SNES, the Gameboy, the Mega Drive, the Master System, the PC Engine, the ZX Spectrum, the Commodore 64, the Amstrad CPC, etc were based on microarchitecture not intended for video games. In fact, other than the Mega Drive the processors of all of those (plus many more, including the BBC Micro and Apple I-III) are derivates of the same microarchitecture, the MOS Technology 6502
""are we the only ones who are bored of Jak and Daxter?" Yes you are. Although Uncharted looks awesome, I miss Jak from Jak 3, and hope that Naughty Dog follow insomniac and alternate between franchises
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
really? i thought you would have really liked this game... yawn
""are we the only ones who are bored of Jak and Daxter?" Yes you are. Although Uncharted looks awesome, I miss Jak from Jak 3, and hope that Naughty Dog follow insomniac and alternate between franchises
I agree, i WANT more Jack and Daxter my mates already said hed be forced to buy a ps3 if they made a J&D game for it. Although they did finish it in terms of story they finished it i still loved the games and another one with rachet and clank visuals would be amazing.
PowerPC, which the XBox 360's processor, the Wii's processor, the GameCube's processor, and pre-2006 Apple Mac processors are all based on wasn't designed for video games. MIPS, which the Nintendo 64's processor, the Playstation's processor, the Playstation 2's processor, and the PSP's processor are all based on, wasn't designed for video games. x86, which all IBM-PC Compatible processors and the XBox's processor are based on, wasn't designed for video games. ARM, which the Nintendo DS' processor is based on, wasn't designed for video games. So what exactly is your point?
Incidentally, pretty much the only processor ever made that *was* designed from the ground up with video games in mind was the SuperH, originally developed for the Sega 32X and Saturn and later used in the Dreamcast. Even the processors used by the NES, the SNES, the Gameboy, the Mega Drive, the Master System, the PC Engine, the ZX Spectrum, the Commodore 64, the Amstrad CPC, etc were based on microarchitecture not intended for video games. In fact, other than the Mega Drive the processors of all of those (plus many more, including the BBC Micro and Apple I-III) are derivates of the same microarchitecture, the MOS Technology 6502
Quite true, the CPU in the Megadrive and Amiga have been in quite a few printers over the years. Likewise with the NES and SMS CPU. That's why the older printers used to be so darned expensive. Thankfully today's CPUs are powerful enough to act on behalf of the printer which is why we now have Ł20 printers readily available.
The orginal x86 design was meant to run Lotus spreadsheets and word processors not play Doom. That was just an added bonus
I don't know why people always knock the developers of games like Drakes fortune..if you all remember how GTA3 looked on PS2, and was seen as revolutionary (graphics wise) and to push the boundaries of how big a game could be, and then you compare it to San Andreas, and it was graphically, way superior, and was on a huge scale...even though it used the exact same engine as GTA3.. so why shouldn't we believe them when they say they have only tapped into 30% of the power so far...this is only a first generation title and the sequel will undoubtably look way better too...
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
really? i thought you would have really liked this game... yawn
I just said it looks good, although you can't 'like' a game until you've played it... I don't even know why I waste my time responding to fanboys who only take notice of the parts of someone's post that they want to... Its like reading the Gamespot forums...
Also, by the statement I made about the Cell, true, alot of porcessors aren't made specifically for consoles but what I actually mean't was that it doesn't benefit games in the way Sony would have you believe and even if it did, the fact PS3 only has 256MB RAM means there's already a limit to what can be achieved.
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
really? i thought you would have really liked this game... yawn
I just said it looks good, although you can't 'like' a game until you've played it... I don't even know why I waste my time responding to fanboys who only take notice of the parts of someone's post that they want to... Its like reading the Gamespot forums...
Also, by the statement I made about the Cell, true, alot of porcessors aren't made specifically for consoles but what I actually mean't was that it doesn't benefit games in the way Sony would have you believe and even if it did, the fact PS3 only has 256MB RAM means there's already a limit to what can be achieved.
WHAT!!! How dare you say something bad about the PS3? It's the best I tell you the best!!
Just kidding I'm not a fanboy that seems to be the kind of reaction you get around here though. Slowly these forums are catching up to the Gamespot ones.
I remember someone posted a slight criticism of the PS2 in Gamespot. 30 mins later there were 30 anti-xbox posts complete with pics of bill gates with horns in his head. I mean please! The stupid things are entertainment devices and we owe each company nothing.
What are we gonna argue over next the best make of TV? If that's the case Matsui FTW!
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
really? i thought you would have really liked this game... yawn
I just said it looks good, although you can't 'like' a game until you've played it... I don't even know why I waste my time responding to fanboys who only take notice of the parts of someone's post that they want to... Its like reading the Gamespot forums...
Also, by the statement I made about the Cell, true, alot of porcessors aren't made specifically for consoles but what I actually mean't was that it doesn't benefit games in the way Sony would have you believe and even if it did, the fact PS3 only has 256MB RAM means there's already a limit to what can be achieved.
WHAT!!! How dare you say something bad about the PS3? It's the best I tell you the best!!
Just kidding I'm not a fanboy that seems to be the kind of reaction you get around here though. Slowly these forums are catching up to the Gamespot ones.
I remember someone posted a slight criticism of the PS2 in Gamespot. 30 mins later there were 30 anti-xbox posts complete with pics of bill gates with horns in his head. I mean please! The stupid things are entertainment devices and we owe each company nothing.
What are we gonna argue over next the best make of TV? If that's the case Matsui FTW!
Cell isn't designed for video games... Anyway, while the game does look good its not a system selling and doesn't show huge potential like the Jak and Daxter series did. Personally I thought it looked like one of those games that wouldn't have a sequel and everyone would just forget about after a few months.
really? i thought you would have really liked this game... yawn
I just said it looks good, although you can't 'like' a game until you've played it... I don't even know why I waste my time responding to fanboys who only take notice of the parts of someone's post that they want to... Its like reading the Gamespot forums...
Also, by the statement I made about the Cell, true, alot of porcessors aren't made specifically for consoles but what I actually mean't was that it doesn't benefit games in the way Sony would have you believe and even if it did, the fact PS3 only has 256MB RAM means there's already a limit to what can be achieved.
WHAT!!! How dare you say something bad about the PS3? It's the best I tell you the best!!
Just kidding I'm not a fanboy that seems to be the kind of reaction you get around here though. Slowly these forums are catching up to the Gamespot ones.
I remember someone posted a slight criticism of the PS2 in Gamespot. 30 mins later there were 30 anti-xbox posts complete with pics of bill gates with horns in his head. I mean please! The stupid things are entertainment devices and we owe each company nothing.
What are we gonna argue over next the best make of TV? If that's the case Matsui FTW!
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
yawn
.
