Rumor: BioWare "Could" Make Mass Effect For PS3
Posted by William on Saturday, January 5th, 2008 at 1:20 pm under Bioware, Electronic Arts, Sony, Sony
Rumors that BioWare will make Mass Effect for the PS3 have been circulating around for some time now. Keep in mind that the title above includes the word “could”. Recently, a Wedbush Morgan analyst by the name of Michael Pachter predicted that BioWare would make Mass Effect for the PS3. Pachter’s statements in the past have been strongly opposed by members of the video game industry, so there’s really no telling where he gets his information from.
There hasn’t been one single shred of credible evidence that they are working on a PS3 release and BioWare’s community coordinator recently posted some comments in the official BioWare forums that shed very little light on the subject:
“Sorry folks, this is just another rumor at this stage. *Could* BioWare make Mass Effect for the PS3 (or the PC, or some other platform) in the future? Yes we could, but we are not working on a PS3 version currently.”
Considering BioWare is owned by EA and EA has a great relationship with Sony, I think it’s probable that Mass Effect will makes it’s way to the PS3 in 2008 or 2009. A game as great as Mass Effect really needs to see some action on different consoles. For now, we can just sit back and see what happens. For now, there’s simply nothing to this rumor.
Via BioWare Forums
If you found this story interesting, why not subscribe to our RSS feed to get your daily fix of gaming news?
January 5th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
As long as Mass Effect 2 comes out for the 360, I couldn't care
January 5th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
lol.. yeah I am hoping we see ME 2 in the future. I'm guessing that will not be until 09 though.
January 5th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
[...] post by William and software by Elliott [...]
January 5th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
ME2 be worked on by Bioware, with conversion of ME by some company part of EA. EA have the rights, right? So it's entirely possible.
January 5th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Good, Mass Effect is a great game and the more people that can play it, the better. Hopefully this pans out.
January 5th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Keep in mind that while Bioware (and now EA) owns the Mass Effect IP, it is published by Microsoft, I don't see it happening.
ME2/3 maybe. But last I checked the publisher determines where it goes, since they front the money for development. And most likely the publishing contract Bioware signed with Microsoft for publishing it gives MS exclusive publishing rights. ME 2/3 we'll have to see. But at least from what I've heard, MS has "first-look" rights to publishing the sequels, so it may be their call where it goes then too. And if that's the case it will be on the 360 and maybe the PC.
January 5th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Vampire Rain was published by Microsoft.
And it's already confirmed that it'll be on the PS3.
January 5th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
That's good news
At least PS3 owners can experience this great game as well, if the rumor is true of coarse
January 5th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
fuck ps3.
i wish that bioware was never bought by EA. bioware and microsoft were doing fine making great titles exclusively for xbox. im sorry but ps3 is just a big waste of money.
January 6th, 2008 at 9:50 am
I have a 360. Who cares what console the game is on? This game raised the bar. Would I enjoy it less if they made it for the BS3 too?! No! I don't care if they make it for DS, Wii, PS3. It doesn't change anything. I'll still be looking forward to Pt. 2 as long as it doesn't get watered down EA style. EA does suck! That's what going corporate and satiating investors do, it kills the art. We'll see if Bioware can still stay innovative.
January 6th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
The framerates on the 360 can get bad enough at times.. so it will be twice as bad on the PS3 all the time, unless they toned down the incredible details.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
[...] Source: http://news.filefront.com/rumor-bioware-could-make-mass-effect-for-ps3/ [...]
January 25th, 2008 at 11:54 am
EA might be crap for the console but I think they've done pretty good with the PC Market. Battlefield 2 is one of the best online shooters ever created in my opinion although that crown has now been take by Call of Duty 4. That said I had the unfortunate opportunity to try the console version of Battlefield 2 (Battlefield: Modern Combat) and it sucked big time!!!
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:49 pm
"The framerates on the 360 can get bad enough at times.. so it will be twice as bad on the PS3 all the time, unless they toned down the incredible details."
Has it ever occured to you that the PS3 is a seven cores-power-PC monster with enormous capacity just to mention one detail, which simply means that it is a machine equal, if not even superior to the 360, also due to the fact that it hosts over one year newer technology?
So, your statement actually makes no sense at all, besides telling us that you´re just another fanboy-moron who likes to get other people irritated.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Xbox!? (lol)
May 26th, 2008 at 2:13 am
Lovenhan,
The PS3 7 core cell is not a multi power processing element chip set. It has only one PPE (power processing element). The seven cores are actually Sony's synergistic processing units/ elements, or "SPE". They only carry cache and stream data, and must first be activated by the single PPE in order to be utilized. However its main short coming is that the data must be streamed through the short pipeline that is offered by the single PPE before it is then streamed through the other SPEs. Also note that when gaming only six SPEs can be utilized, because one SPE is used solely for the OS of the PS3. The cell would be more suited if it had less SPEs and was seperatly attached to to each PPE in a multi PPE processor. The PS3 doesnt even come close to utilizing its potential. I blame Sony for this debacle they have created and the propaganda that entail it. The cell is not a monster with unsurmountable capacity in the PS3. You stating that shows your own bias.
The 360 has three PPEs, not just one like the PS3. Each has two threads, and each PPE can run independently of one another. Not only is this easier for data calculations and complex algorithmic, but it is much more efficient than a single PPE streaming off of seven SPEs. Power is nothing without efficiency.
The main difference that sets the two consoles apart is the GPUs (graphic processing units). Both systems are laughably weak compared to the PC's I build for my customers. However, there is some interesting propaganda surrounding the RSX and the Cell. Sony and so many others have stated that the Cell actually helps out with the graphic processing. When I read this for the first time I almost blacked out with laughter. Even more hilariously is the PS3 owners were boasting about how their processor helped out with graphics and the 360's didn't. Any one who builds circuit boards and computers knows that with out the CPU the GPU is useless. Every CPU in a computer helps process and stream the graphical data of the GPU. The 360 is no different. Think of it this way… The brain cannot survive without the heart, and the heart cannot beat without the brain. Commonsense should have told many that this was an over inflated quote from Sony. The sad part is Sony used the ignorance of the public to market their product.
Another thing that sets the two systems apart is the available video random access memory, or VRAM. PS3 = 256MB VRAM, 360 = 512+10MB of VRAM. There is no way around it, 256MB is 256MB and that in todays world is pathetic, especially in the sense of how Sony boasts it. Now I have seen some say that the PS3 has duel GPU's because of the separate memory that runs at 256MB, however that statement is not true. That like me saying my computer has 2GB of SLI VRAM and 64 core GPUs because I have 16GB of RAM (16×4). My computer only has 2GB of VRAM because I carry two 9800 GX2 that one at 1GB each for my GPU's. Memory is not separate GPU VRAM. The PS3 only has one GPU and is 256MB. Then I have seen some argue that the PS3 is better GPU wise because its 50MHz higher in speed. Eh… no. My old 8800 ultra was over clocked to 675MHz and it cant even compare to one of my 9800 GX2 which runs at 630MHz. Then as I said you have that small VRAM. even if it was 700MHz (which btw was what Sony first marketed it as) the 256MB GPU can not handle the work load of the 512MB.
Either way I'm waiting for Mass Effect it to come out on PC, so I can play it at a true 1920×1200 resolution, not upscaled like it is on your consoles.