Recently an article went up over at Eurogamer on the PS3’s online functionality come launch.
Basically, Insomniac’s Ted Price revealed that what is arguably Sony’s biggest launch title, Resistance: Fall of Man would not be using the integrated buddy list, chat services, etc. that Sony developed as part of the PlayStation 3. Instead the game would be using similar services developed in-house by Insomniac which would not integrate with other titles. This means, while you may have all of your friends added to the PS3 console itself, you’re required to reenter these same individuals in Resistance‘s online services.
According to Insomniac, the reason for this non-integration between the two online systems is a result of Sony not providing the libraries necessary for the developers to utilize the PS3’s online features in a timely fashion. Not only has this caused Insomniac added stress with having to develop their own online system, but most (if not all) of the PS3 launch titles with network functionality will also have this problem as well. It seems that Sony’s decision to include an API for network functionality occurred too late in the development cycle for many launch titles, so having Live like functionality, such as seeing what your friends are playing and sending them messages that they can listen to in-game, won’t be fully realized until the second wave of PS3 titles.
I don’t think many people realize this fact and are expecting the PS3 to operate much the same way as the 360 online. On the other hand, I guess the limited network functionality of the PS3 is much better than what was offered for network enabled games on the PlayStation 2.
What do you guys think? Will this initial lack of integration hurt the PS3, or is this really a non-issue to gamers?
This just sounds like more bash-Sony press to me. Doesn’t sound like that big of a deal at all- so you’ll have to re-enter your buddy list across the first wave of games, big deal. It’ll get fixed soon enough- every new console launch has these smallish design quirks because they rush the process to get it out before it’s truly ready. Of course, I’m a casual online console gamer and really don’t care about this kinda of thing. The PS2 online was fine for me- all’s I want to do is connect and play the damn game lol.
My only concern is of this causing developers to put extra time into making an online system of their own, which may take away some of their time to put some final polish on their game for launch.
Just another screw up on Sony’s purported road to console dominance. And don’t forget, Matt, that Sony has created the bad press all by themselves. I’ve never seen so much arrogance and self-importance from a company that wants people to shell out $600 for their console, especially after some of the shady practices they’ve showed.
Sorry Matt, but this just fuels the fire for “bash-Sony press.”
Yes, I agree. Sony has made some bad moves, no doubt, and that has in turn made them an easy target. But I also think a lot of things have been blown way out of proportion just to bash on them.
also, remember… that $600 console is made to last throught a few console cycles, doesn’t make you pay for an add on to watch movies and will probably have some genre-defining original titles on it once more developers get used to the hardware. all three every game companies have shot themselves in the feet during the fast 12 years of new systems and unfortunately, they’ll continue to do so until they all realize that the majority of gamers would rather wait and pick up a system that’s as foolproof as possible as opposed to queueing up for long waits that might not get them a system at all.
this ‘console wars’ nonsense stinks, folks… i just want good systems and games when they’re ready, no matter where they’re coming from.