Dark Sector may be the mutiplatform Gears of War

by Nick Doerr { Jun 26th 2007 at 1:00PM }

We've taken our jabs at Dark Sector before, but when it all comes down to it, we've gotten the impression from other people's hands-on with the game that it's actually something to look out for. In fact, it's been likened to Gears of War, which was apparently some game for the 360. We kid, we know what it is. IGN had a hands-on of the game and said "Digital Extremes, really, really likes Gears of War. Dark Sector plays and feels almost exactly like it -- right down to its cinematic storytelling, control scheme and visual style." There's even a context-sensitive action that controls the cover mechanics, as well as a shaky-cam when you bust into a sprint. Another major influence, both PSU and IGN report, is the similarity to Resident Evil 4's over-the-shoulder camera and aiming system.

While you get a small arsenal of weaponry, the Glaive is what sets the game apart from the ones it draws influence from. Not only can it destroy enemies in quick, painful stylings, not only can it get powered up by a bevy of elements, not only does it have a built-in light source and solve puzzles, but it can ... wait, that's about it. It's awesome, though. Every other weapon you pick up can be upgraded, a la Resident Evil 4. Your main character can also be powered up, a la KOTOR, with new abilities and powers.

Enemy AI? Brilliant, says IGN and brilliant at times says PSU. Graphics? Well, the game is being built on the PS3 as the primary platform and ported elsewhere, so we know we'll be getting the best game we can get as far as multiplatform titles go. What's more, is we've got some more info about this game coming to us later tonight. Stay tuned, as we'll give you some more details you might just find intriguing.

[Thanks, Justin!]

Tags: Dark Sector, DarkSector, Digital Extremes, DigitalExtremes, PlayStation 3, Playstation3, PS3, Sony

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

eddyk @ Jun 26th 2007 1:27PM

Damn, what a pressure, I hope the game will actually look better on PS3, since I can build a game on my 4 years old computer as a primary platform, and then port it to a high end computer !! Pressure !

Stef Geiger @ Jun 26th 2007 1:34PM

I don't get it, if the PS3 is their lead development system, then it should theoretically be the most far along and best looking, yet so far we've only ever seen video from the 360 build (as evidenced by the "Press B button" prompts etc). It's not an encouraging thing when they keep the PS3 build hidden till the last minute...

Troy @ Jun 26th 2007 2:00PM

i like cheese :)

jason @ Jun 26th 2007 2:28PM

@2

Its easier to make games first on the 360 thats why PS3 get multiplatform games later

upz @ Jun 26th 2007 2:29PM

It's very encouraging to see developers starting to use PS3 as the lead platform more and more days. It'll be great news for PS3 owners if this catches on.

Then again, Stef brings up a good point in the 360 build being the one shown. Let's hope PSU's explanation that they didn't have a PS3 test unit on hand is the true explanation for this.

Travis @ Jun 26th 2007 2:33PM

@jason

Like Stef said, the PS3 is the lead platform. That means they are developing on the PS3 and porting to 360. So that's apparently not the reason they're showing on the 360, in fact the PS3 version (again, as Stef said) should be further ahead than the 360 version.

I find it worrying as well that games are often demoed on the 360 instead of the PS3. Another example of this is GTA4, which is consistently previewed to game reviewers on 360 hardware.

The PSU article seemed to blame it on PS3 test units being "hard to come by", but that seems a bit odd since PS3 hardware is definitely in abundance.

mccomber @ Jun 26th 2007 2:35PM

"Its easier to make games first on the 360 thats why PS3 get multiplatform games later"

Pay attention much?

WebMaster @ Jun 26th 2007 3:04PM

Not to be Captain Obvious, however, the 360 also has a much bigger install base, therefore it's much more likely a dev will make their money back on the 360 and they can push their PS3 game back until they feel they can make their money back on the PS3, as we've all seen; hence more often then not, the 360 is the lead platform. Not withstanding the fact it is easier to program for, and has been out a year longer.

Steve @ Jun 26th 2007 6:12PM

Doesn't look half-bad!

http://www.ps3nuts.com

jas @ Jun 26th 2007 3:56PM

Gee, how about this.. after X number of games PROVING that the 360 has the better version, added to that that EVERY multiplatform game is first previewed on the 360, that the 360 is the better/best looking/more graphically powerful system.

Done and done.

mccomber @ Jun 26th 2007 3:29PM

@WebMaster, see post #6.
We all know that normally the 360 has been the lead platform with development of new titles for the whopping half-year the ps3 has been available, but that seems to be changing; in the case of Dark Sector, it's being touted as the lead platform but isn't exactly be shown as such. I'm (safely) assuming the test ps3 hardware isn't exactly the same as ps3, so it's not like they can just bring along a unit off the shelf, so their explanation makes a smidgen of sense. I would think however that if that platform is the strongest one, that's the one you'd use to show off your wares, and you'd make sure to have the hardware for it available to you.

Hence, wtf.

Roarrr @ Jun 26th 2007 3:57PM

@ jason
Not a day goes by without one of your MS trolling comments. Well done. Now you look stupid. again. and again and again.

Roarrr @ Jun 26th 2007 4:00PM

@ jas/jason.
Dude. Give it a break. No for real. Whopy do for you. Do you want a medal or something?

jas @ Jun 26th 2007 4:20PM

What's wrong? Your bite not as powerful as your 'roarrr'. Fitting, since that's the mantra of the PS3 and Sony - overhype and underdeliver as always.

BTW, I bought a brand new car last November and I've yet to drive it. I'm hoping to get it out of the garage for the first time, sometime this fall.

I can't wait!!!

Stef Geiger @ Jun 26th 2007 4:31PM

Jas: I don't like to get into flame wars, but what the hell. You made a cute little metaphor with your whole "buying a car and not driving it for months" bit, so you're clearly knocking the PS3 for not having had any really great titles till a year after its launch. I think that's pretty foolish, seeing as the 360 didn't have a really great title till Gears came out, which was... oh, a YEAR after the system launched! And what, now, 1.5 years after launch, there's, GOW, Forza and R6 Vegas.

Can't you just go troll elsewhere? I wouldn't even bother stepping in, except your comment about the 360 "being the better system" etc actually didn't really address the topic at hand. Go post your Sony hating comments on the 360 forums - I promise we won't bug you there.

jas @ Jun 26th 2007 4:45PM

1) The 360 had PLENTY of great launch titles.
Perfect Dark and Kameo were truly nex-gen games and would be heraleded if they were exclusive or launch titles on the PS3. Call of Duty 2 was a 9.0+ title in every way. Even though it took some time for the devs to work out the online bugs, it still is a better game than COD3. If you consider GRAW in the launch window, it can be 'tit-for-tat' if comparing to Resistance. Project Gotham 3 has better graphics than Forza and the all important in-car view.

TRUTH: The "Gears is the only good game" is a f-ing cop-out by PS3 fanboys such as yourself. The 360 has system sellers in EVERY category.

2) Topic at hand.. Dark Sector is a lead platform game for the PS3, but release gameplay shows the 360. That's telling enough (without explanation), but what the hell.

a) All multi-platform release trailers (even the highly anticipated GTA4 are ALL SHOWN ON THE 360. Do you think the devs are REALLY going to NOT display the BEST VERSION??

b) All multi-platform games release so far are either tit-for-tat in comparision to the PS3 or better on the 360. (Here comes your Oblivion comment). Sorry, but the Bethesda said that AFTER THEIR EXTRA YEAR of improving the game, the SAME improvements are available for the 360/PC.

c) Virtua Fighter - this lead platformed PS3 game is being greatly improved upon for the 360 version to come out soon. I guess the devs found 'power' that didn't exist on the PS3. Huh?

Stef Geiger @ Jun 26th 2007 4:56PM

Say what you will, Gears is the only title on the 360 that looks remotely worthwhile to me.

And yes, obviously these days games tend to look a little nicer on the 360, but it's really too soon to say "it's the best system" because of that. We all know that developers have been working with the hardware longer, so of course games on the 360 look better right now. Give it 6 months, a year, then we'll see which system is more capable in the graphics department.

Bangbang... @ Jun 26th 2007 4:58PM

"think that's pretty foolish, seeing as the 360 didn't have a really great title till Gears came out, which was... oh, a YEAR after the system launched!"

Right... because COD2, GRAW, Condemned ,Oblivion, Fight Night3, PGR3, and Dead Rising all sucked ass.
The sad part, is that the games i listed are just the Great games that showed up on the 360 during the first 6 months. I could list at least 7 other good games and about 5 crappy games. So yea, the 360 had games, and the majority of them were good.

I understand that Jason is a troll and it's annoying, but if you dont respond to him, he'll move on to the next post. you called him out on a subject that he is right on. The 6 months into the 360s life, it had plenty of good games and a handful of great ones. 6 months into the ps3s life and we are still waiting for its potential to be unlocked.

On that note:has ubisoft shipped R6: Vegas for the ps3? Its been almost a year.

Dahk @ Jun 26th 2007 5:00PM

@ jas

And likewise, as said by many of the devs, the PS3 doesn't even have a limit yet to how much power it can harness.

It has been stated time-and-time again that the 360 is easier to DEVELOP FOR. However, the PORTING to PS3 has always been crappy as mentioned by the many examples seen.

Devs are saying that though the PS3 is much more difficult to develop for, however its easier to port to 360. (THUS the abundance of games going multi-platform after being named exclusive). And games that have been PORTED to 360 FROM PS3 have a good thing going for them as stated by Nick's and everyone else's dozens of articles.

THEREFORE, games that are being developed ON the PS3 have much better success of being a good game on ALL platforms. There should NOT be a difference, and there has not been one yet so far.

Dark Sector has been STATED as being developed on PS3. THEREFORE the game has good potential to be good on ALL PLATFORMS.

Shizen.

Andy @ Jun 26th 2007 5:18PM

Some good points but I bought a PS3 to save my with online fees. $60 bucks are year (Canadian dollars) is expensive. Even over the short lifespan Microsoft products last.

360 does have the porting advantage because games that are built on 360 stay on 360 or look bad on PS3. And games that are built on PS3 can be easily ported to 360 and look the same(or better...or worse)

In the end all platforms have their strengths and weaknesses. Dark Sector looks awesome.

Stef Geiger @ Jun 26th 2007 5:23PM

"And likewise, as said by many of the devs, the PS3 doesn't even have a limit yet to how much power it can harness."

While I'm all in favor of recognizing Sony's technology, let's not be foolish here. To say that the thing's power is currently "unlimited" is ridiculous. It's technology. It has performance limits. Performance limits that even we mere humans can comprehend. All those developers saying "the power is limitless" are just throwing Sony some good press. The system is no different from any other that's been released - developers will hit the glass ceiling with what they can do with it, and then two years later the PS4 will come along.

mccomber @ Jun 26th 2007 5:34PM

"Virtua Fighter - this lead platformed PS3 game is being greatly improved upon for the 360 version to come out soon. I guess the devs found 'power' that didn't exist on the PS3. Huh?"

Greatly improved? You mean better anti-aliasing and fog effects, with AI improved upon using data basically compiled AFTER the ps3 version was released? It's the same deal as Oblivion, they developer is taking the time to improve the engine as they port it. Besides, it wasn't developed for the ps3, it was developed for the Lindbergh arcade board, then ported to the ps3.

Basically, I think most of us agree with your basic point about ports, and how it applies to Dark Sector; if the ps3 is the lead platform, which means it SHOULD be the version that is furthest along currently, why is it being shown on the 360? Right now, the 360 is easier to develop for, because they are more familiar with it. More and more devs are saying the ps3 has more potential, and more and more, the ports to the ps3 from the 360 are looking basically identical. That whole advantage of development would seem to be slowly dissipating, and when/if it does, the more capable system will get the better games.
You make some good points about the titles the 360 had to start, but none were really system sellers until Gears came along. That title is STILL the only "system seller" it has until this fall when both console's games really start to come out in force. Right now, of the games available on the 360, only Dead Rising and Gears stand out to me as games I'd buy the system to play.

BlackBeltJones @ Jun 26th 2007 5:43PM

Yeah COD2 was great at launch, it's single player is much better than COD3. Though 3's multiplayer was cool because of the jobs system and vehicles they added.

Now by comparable to RE4 does that mean that you can't move and shoot as well or just the camera?

pete @ Jun 26th 2007 6:01PM

i had a launch 360 and kameo and condemned where not that great at all. fight night 3 was great though!! gun was fun two, although it was out on last gen systmes it was still fun,and graw and deadrising took a while to land on the 360 by the time they were out i had clucked it on craigslist. so 360 launch was not as great as all you 360 fanboys make it out to be, neither was teh ps3, hell neither was the ps2 launch, but just like the ps2 the ps3 is having great shit drop this fall and then on.

pete @ Jun 26th 2007 6:02PM

oh and cod2 was real cool too, multiplayer sucked ass. and halo 2 is always fun. last gen but fun.

Hmmm @ Jun 26th 2007 6:47PM

(the game is being built on the PS3 as the primary platform and ported elsewhere)

You know what the Funny thing would be, If it still looks better on the XBOX 360

PS!CHO @ Jun 26th 2007 7:51PM

I hope this game is good, considering it was in the making even before the 360 came out. And guys, just let Jason say what he wants, because when FFXIII and MGS4 come out, hes going to look pretty idiotic trying to say "They could do that on 360!". I wonder... MGS4 on 360... would it be on 14 DVDs or 15?

Dahk @ Jun 26th 2007 7:52PM

Lol @ Hmmm.

Alright I shall agree that if it has noticeable difference, I will rethink my thoughts =).

And yeah... that would actually be funny.

manic @ Jun 26th 2007 7:54PM

I sense the idiots in this page.

'It would be funny if it looked better on the 360 version'.

Not it won't. Why? It'll be a direct port.

WebMaster @ Jun 26th 2007 8:23PM

@mccumbor

"We all know that normally the 360 has been the lead platform with development of new titles for the whopping half-year the ps3 has been available, but that seems to be changing"

Really? Please show me some links substantiating that claim on multiplatform games. As an owner of both systems, I've seen the 360 be the lead platform over the PS3 more often then not.

As I MENTIONED in my post, there are obvious reasons for this, however, the reasons do not change the fact.

upz @ Jun 26th 2007 10:00PM

Ah Webmaster...The self proclaimed Mr. "Telling It Like It Is."

mccomber is talking about a changing trend, not an already occurant phenomenon. Dark Sector and Haze come to mind as examples of this shift in tide. Perhaps Factor 5's comment about starting out on PS3 to optimize your multiplatform appeal is being taken to heart.

mccomber, I was about to chime in, but you took the words out of my mouth.

hakuta @ Jun 26th 2007 10:57PM

i thought this quote might pretain SOMEHOW to this whole graphics debate:

"...there is actually one excellent method of measuring the 3D performance of a GPU; it's called Polygon Performance; the larger amount of polygons that can be displayed per second, the better.

Polygons are often referred to as triangles, because a triangle is the form of polygons that requires the smallest amount of dedicated vertices. It would take at least three vertices to create one true triangular polygon. There are times when it actually takes more than three vertices to create a polygon, in order to show the true effect of a 3D image.

According to the specifications of the ATI Xenos GPU, it gives the Xbox 360 the ability to display 500,000,000 polygons per second.

According to the specifications of the Nvidia RSX GPU, it gives the PS3 the ability to display only 275,000,000 polygons per second.

If you want proof that is quite easy to find, just look on the boxes of the videogame systems.

Proof that the Xbox 360 has far superior polygon performance can be seen in quite a few games in particular.

One of the best examples really can be seen when you look at the way F.E.A.R. on the Xbox 360 and PC won awards for graphics and gameplay. But the PS3 version of F.E.A.R. almost looks like you are playing it on a system from last generation because it has such a choppy framerate and lacks so many features.

MLB 2K7 is another game. In a recent Gamespot comparison, the editors specifically pointed out how important it is to consider a framerate in addition, not just a still screenshot. When you look at the screenshots, the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of MLB 2K7 look virtually identical. If you look carefully you will see the Xbox 360 version does have “little things” that look better and take up polygons. For example, fans sitting down in the background are more detailed in the Xbox 360 version of the game. When you play the game, and see it in motion, you quickly see that the Playstation 3 can't keep up with the action; that's why the framerate starts to get really choppy and move into slow-motion.

The best-looking exclusive games on the Xbox 360, such as Gears of War, Lost Planet, and Crackdown are quite a bit more impressive than PS3 exclusive games.

For example, when Motorstorm was reviewed it was said that, "Graphics are not the strength of the game." Motorstorm also suffers from framerate problems quite often, and it was around that time when the PS3 started to get an "Official Reputation for Having Framerate Problems."

Resistance: FOM is a game that has received mixed reviews where the reviewers very often say things like, "The game is good, but it's not a killer-app, and the graphics aren't especially impressive."

So, there is obviously quite a difference in polygon performance between the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

One other really good example people talk about can be found when you compare Ridge Racer 6 on the Xbox 360 to Ridge Racer 7 on the PS3. Many of the tracks are the same in both versions, so it is easy to do a comparison.

First, Ridge Racer 6 on the Xbox 360 has a perfectly smooth framerate at all times, while the PS3's Ridge Racer 7 gets choppy at times in the same spots.

Second, is the way there are missing sailboats in the PS3 version. That is a lack of detail that you might not notice at first, but after a few laps you notice something is missing. Then you realize what it is and you think to yourself, "Hey, those sailboats aren't there anymore."

Third, is the way water under the bridges moves with nice looking waves on the Xbox 360 version. Each of those little waves is made up of polygons, and each of those polygons is displayed 60 times each second. But with the PS3 version, the waves don't move at all. The water in the PS3 version is just one textured polygon that shows the image of water, but doesn't have enough polygons for waves to move.

In addition to polygon performance, the GPU handles lighting. The lighting and shading on the Xbox 360 GPU is so much greater than the PS3 GPU that I'm sure virtually everyone has seen it for themselves. One look at big differences in games like Ridge Racer, even bigger differences in games like Fight Night Round 3, or the HUGE differences in games like Tony Hawk Skating Project 8, and you will INSTANTLY see the superiority of the Xbox 360 GPU when it comes to lighting and shading. If you want proof of that lighting situation, though, Gamespot has a nice comparison that shows how much better the Xbox 360 lighting and shading is.

I hope I was able to do a good job of helping you out. But the fact is the information about the Xbox 360 GPU superiority has been known for a very long time.

The Xbox 360 GPU really was WAY ahead of its time. The Xenos GPU was released inside the Xbox 360 in November of 2005. The Xenos GPU is based on the same Unified Shader design that Windows Vista is, and Windows Vista wasn't released until January 30, 2007!

But the PS3 GPU is based on four-year old, non-customized GPU technology. The PS3 wasn't even supposed to have a GPU in its original design. Originally the PS3 was supposed to have two Cell processors, but no GPU. Then Sony saw the awesome performance of the Xbox 360, and they were forced to quickly redesign the PS3. This is almost exactly the same thing that happened to the Sega Saturn. Both the PS3 and the Sega Saturn ended up redesigned, overpriced, and underperforming.

As far as what you said about the way Floating Point math calculations relate to Physics, you would be 100% correct if the PS3 CPU didn't have to worry about Graphics, Sound, and Artificial Intelligence. Generally speaking, Graphics are the most important, followed by Sound and Artificial Intelligence. Real-time physics are often considered the least important part of a videogame.

There is one main reason why the Physics aspect of the PS3 is rarely used in videogames: The design architecture of the Playstation 3 does NOT give the developers the ability to use the Physics ability of the PS3 while playing games in the same way that it does when games are not being played. There is a very simple reason for this.

The Cell CPU of the PS3 has one main CPU, and seven sub-processors that are referred to as SPEs. Originally Sony planned on using two Cell processors, each with eight SPEs, but for cost cutting reasons the PS3 ended up with only one Cell CPU and it was a lower-quality model with only 7 SPEs. Here's where it gets interesting:

The Playstation 3 CPU has only two threads to send signals to the SPE sub-processors. Each SPE receives signals from the CPU through a Thread. This means the PS3 has seven SPEs, each of which tends to be devoted to something special, but only two of those SPEs can receive signals at a time. It's a very inefficient process that is difficult for developers to take advantage of; it's literally like trying to juggle seven balls (SPEs) with only two arms (CPU threads).

This means when a videogame ISN’T being played, and Physics calculations need to be made, the PS3 could constantly use the SPE dedicated to Physics at all times, because there would be virtually no need for graphics or sound technology.

But when a videogame is being played, there are always needs for graphic related signals, and commands from the CPU to SPE chips related to Artificial Intelligence. PS3 Physics during a videogame represent only a very small fraction of what PS3 Physics performance represents when a videogame isn't being used in the PS3 system.

The Xbox 360 has three CPUs, each with two threads, for a total of six threads dedicated for use in any way the developers want; they are able to use this form of General Purpose CPU power to do exactly what they want at any time; the Xbox 360 developers are not dependent on whether or not an SPE happens to be available. This means the Xbox 360 developers can do things like devote an entire CPU with two whole Threads to nothing but Artificial Intelligence. That is something Tecmo has said they will be doing with Ninja Gaiden 2 for the Xbox 360.

Virtua Fighter 5 is another example of how the Xbox 360 design architecture is far superior to the PS3. The Artificial Intelligence in the Xbox 360 version is much better than the PS3 version. It's like that with a lot of games--even Ubisoft has said for quite a while now that Assassins Creed will have noticeably better Artificial Intelligence on the Xbox 360.

Well, I hope I was able to help you out and provide useful technical information. I need to get going, but if you have other questions, please feel free to ask.

Posted at 4:35PM on Jun 23rd 2007 by Lion"

mccomber @ Jun 26th 2007 11:07PM

"Assassins Creed will have noticeably better Artificial Intelligence on the Xbox 360."

If I see that one more time, I'm going to lose it. That was contradicted by Ubisoft themselves a long, long time ago.
Also, way to copy and paste hakuta, there are so many things in there that aren't even true or are just speculation and opinion that it makes the whole damn thing irrelevant, but you wouldn't know because you didn't even write the damn thing.

hakuta @ Jun 26th 2007 11:28PM

ah, mccomber, there is also much that does make sense.
like the part where the PS3 was to have multiple cell processors and opted for just one. ever opened a PS3 lately?

anyway, much of this is on the net, just look around. it does make a sound reason as to

a)why it takes so damn long for a PS3 port to surface.

b)why the port is of inferior quality when it does surface.

c)why most developers opt to work with the 360 dev kits in the beginning. (Silent Hill 5 hasn't even touched a PS3 dev kit. The Collective doesn't know how to work it.)

d)why games like Dark Sector and GTA IV and http://www.xboxygen.com/index.php?file=News&op=suite&news_id=4634
are being shown on the xbox 360 first and not the PS3.

bottom line: the 360 is easier to develop for with better results. it's a shame that so many 360s die these days tho. =D

mccomber @ Jun 27th 2007 1:04AM

The 360 is easier... now. Hell, it may be easier for some time to come; it may stay that way through this generation. But that has nothing to do with potential, which is, again, the word we keep hearing from developers.

Besides, games like The Darkness and reportedly Rainbow Six Vegas are basically identical to their 360 siblings. Both are arguably more complex titles than some of the games that have given the ps3 fits (FEAR, I'm looking at you) which are much more likely due to a lazy port than lack of ability from the ps3. The Darkness is also a game that was mostly shown on the 360, so it doesn't always mean that not seeing the ps3 version means that it's fallen behind.
Other games that have come to us lately have also fared much better on the trip from 360 to ps3, with technical differences so minor they are hardly noticeable, let alone enough to cause someone to choose one version over another. Virtua Tennis 3, Def Jam Icon, Armored Core 4... some developers seem to be figuring out how to take care of the problems that existed.

You can quote all the tech talk and opinion piece from obviously biased xbox sources you want, but the fact remains that many of the people making the games are, more often than not, pointing out the "right now" faults of the ps3, but also praising what they believe will be possible with the system. Luckily, the right now problems are all things that can be fixed, while that potential has just started to be shown.

upz @ Jun 27th 2007 12:50PM

Hakuta, you really expect to post this on a PS3 board and not have it come across someone who has a counterpoint for every single one of your points? We could argue all day long, but let's just let E3 and the latest crop of games do the talking.

Oh and for the record, Motorstorm has one of the most consistent framerates of any game this generation. Unlike, say, the cutscenes in Gears, which slow to a snail's pace when more than two models are shown in the same frame.