God of War 2... next February... ON PS2

Yeah, looks like Sony’s hedging their PS3 bets pretty damn hard…

Looks like Sony doesn’t want anyone to know (yet), either!

Isn’t this kind of like Microsoft announcing “The Xbox 360 is launching this year… and early NEXT year, HALO 3 will ship… ON THE ORIGINAL XBOX! WOOHOOO!!!”

You might say, this is rumor-mongering. I bet it turns out it’s not, though…

Interesting and surprising. If true, wouldnt it indicate the PS3 aint as mighty as they want us to think it is now? Or that the system wont be out by next February?

I think Sony dropped the PSX like a hot rock once the PS2 came out, a major franchise sequel like this on PS2 in 2007 is strange.

Well in other news God Of War should be hitting the GH collection soon. I think I read that it should be with in a month or so.

Good thing I waited!

Or that they had a pretty kick-ass engine in place for PS2 already and they didn’t want to develop an entirely new one for the PS3 and give a game that had a lot of critical acclaim a 5 year hiatus (or more) while they upped the quality of the engine on the next-gen system to be as relatively stellar as it was on the PS3.

I don’t think wanting to produce a God of War quality title on the PS2 in any way means anything about the viability or availability of the PS3. Unless someone expects that this time as soon as the PS3 shows up Sony is going to summarily require all developers to drop PS2 support to force adoption?

Actually, I guess what this shows is that Sony is making money hand over fist on the PS2 and is scrambling trying to find a launch strategy for PS3 that doesn’t bankrupt them. So it’s in their interest to keep good titles pulling sales to PS2.

Which is pretty much the opposite situation to Microsoft. Microsoft is not making money on original Xbox (at least, not as much as Sony is making on PS2). So it’s in MS’s interest to push people to 360 by essentially abandoning Xbox (no first-party Xbox titles from MS this year, right?).

It does all raise the question of whether a 2007 volume launch for PS3 will really hurt Sony or not – it’s going to be an interesting balancing act for them, trying to weigh bigger upfront losses from an earlier launch (due to pricier hardware) versus a competitive disadvantage from a later launch (due to developers having had more time with the 360, and hence the games looking better there).

Cheers!
Rob

There will be high profile titles well into 2008. You don’t walk away from a nearly 100 million installed base overnight.

I’m sure they’re planning a Gran Turismo launch title for PS3 as well, which in true GT fashion will ship in 2010.

There was a ton of stuff cut out in GOW (like Icarus wings), so it’s safe to assume that GOW2 is simply all the stuff that couldn’t make it into GOW the first time. There’s always been a rumor that GOW3 would be the PS3 game, not 2.

Also, Sony already announced a GT title for PS3, just called “Vision GT.” Will probably ship in the year 3000 as expected.

And it still wont have internet play or good car AI.

As an aside, I’ve been thinking of GoW a lot lately.

You see, I’ve been “playing” Ninja Gaiden Black. I put “play” in quotes because I’m not sure that’s actually what I’m doing. Or even if its what the developer intended.

Struggle? Curse? Rage? I do all of these things with NGB. Play? Not so much.

When I experience it, rather, all I can think of, really, is how much of better game GoW is. NGB isn’t even on the same planet, really.

Can’t wait for the sequel to GoW. :)

Actually, speaking of GT, one of the other yanked-by-Sony articles on Eurogamer was an announcement of Gran Turismo 4: Online Edition, supposedly due out Q2 2006. Hopefully that means it’ll be in 5/Vision/whatever from the start.

The AI will still blow, though.

Or damage modelling.

I don’t recall where I heard this (maybe the Icons episode of GT?), so take it w/ some salt, but supposedly they don’t do damage modeling because the car manufacturers don’t want their cars to be shown all smashed up.

Does PGR have damage modeling w/ Ferraris and such?

And that’d explain why Burnout doesn’t use real cars, heh.

Yes, but it is cosmetic. There’s also real licensed cars in Forza that have damage modeling that actually degrades performance.

PGR has some simple texture changes and a few minor bends in parts of the cars to show that you’ve been bumping into things, but there’s no effect on the handling. I’ve spent 10 minutes trying to see how smashed up I can get a car only to have it come out looking like maybe a shopping cart hit it at high speed.

But yes, the reason a lot of games don’t do damage modeling is because the car manufactures don’t allow them to. Something about not wanting the public to view their cars as unsafe because they saw them wreck in a video game. They’d rather us believe that we can drive head on into a guardrail and just scuff the paint a bit.

The other reason is that it’s a lot harder to implement and harder to balance. It’s also not completely clear that it’s a desired feature, particularly with regards to a degradation in handling/speed/etc. I want it in all my racing games but little Johnny gets pissed when he hits a tree and all of a sudden can’t restart his car.

That’s the general reason for why there’s no damage modeling with real cars in the past, but car manufacturers are more lenient nowadays.

Yamauchi specifically claimed to not do damage in the GT series because it would require even more math calculations on top of the general car modeling in the game, and (this part I’m a bit hazy on, because it’s been a while since I asked this) as a result, either the hardware isn’t powerful enough to do those additional calculations or that the game would take even longer to develop (I’m pretty sure it’s the latter, but I’ve heard the former as well).

From an old IGN article:

Series producer Kazunori Yamauchi, addressing the press today, shared a few comments on what we can expect from the next main entry in the series. “So far in the Gran Turismo series,” explained Yamauchi, “we haven’t had cars crash or overturn. We believed expressing this properly to be more difficult than actually making [the cars] race. In addition to properly replicating the underside of the car, when a collision occurs we’d have to have proper shape changes based on proper physical calculations. In Gran Turismo 5, we’d like to definitely add this element. We believe it will be a big theme.”

That said, just because they’d like to do it doesn’t mean they can or will, but I’d bet even money on it.

I get a kick out of the lame excuses that get made for Gran Turismo when games like Forza do it with no problem.

GoW was good, but basically it was just a big hack-and-slash game on an epic scale. (And with one of the worst battles ever.)

NGB, although being much, much, much harder, also gives much more back the better you get. i.e. Getting really good at God of War is learning a few comobos, and realizing that you have to use magic. Getting good at NGB is learning combos, getting the movement system down, knowing your enemies and their attack patterns etc. It’s a much deeper and much more frustrating game by nature - I really wouldn’t say they’re on different planes at all.