| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (20)

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe they felt that development for the PS3 wasn't cost effective at this point in the console cycle? Or maybe the dev time on the PS3 SKU is longer (a la Rainbow Six Vegas on PS3), so it's a delayed ship date.

http://eat-sleep-game.com/news
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:19PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
My only question is this... how does this effect my Timesplitters 4?
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wouldn't doubt it with PS 3 development costs and low user base. According to Namco,you have to sell 500k worth of software units to break even on the Playstation 3. The XBOX 360 has already displayed that it's more than capable of shifting a million units of software.
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's ok, I'm sure Sony fans are happy with playing Home instead.
Reply

Posted: Mar 30th 2007 9:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, but there were other Star Wars games that only appeared on one console ( XBox ) - Star Wars Knights Of The Old Republic I and II. That being said, publishing a console game on one platfrom makes no economic sense in the current generation of consoles with development costs spiraling upwards. This rumor sounds totally bogus.
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:37PM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe instead of Nintendo putting a cell phone into their next DS they should put a gameboy into a watch?
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:37PM The Punisher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
THX1138 please be true! For the love of Lucas!
Reply

Posted: Mar 28th 2007 9:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
When the hell are they going to develop a Jar Jar game? There's nothing I would enjoy more than controlling that babbling frogman with a Wiimote for hours on end...
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
They can keep it. The Battlefront games are lame.
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 9:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@4, ???????????????????
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 10:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not a big fan of the series, but snagging the sequel to the best-selling Star Wars game ever is not bad for the 360.
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 11:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As far as I know I don't think any of the battlefronts apeared on the GC.
Reply

Posted: Mar 27th 2007 11:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The weird part? Battlefront II continues to be within the top 5 on PSP in sales for the states week after week. Consideirng the staying power it has there, it's suprising to me that BFIII would ignore last gen consoles.
Reply

Posted: Mar 28th 2007 12:02AM zx3junglist said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Reason for 360 awesomeness: Battlefront 2 is the most fun multiplayer I've had since halo
Reply

Posted: Mar 28th 2007 5:09AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My guess it cause of the 360 more than impressive online presentation compared to its rival, in the past the last Battlefront games suffered from severe lag problem.
Reply

Posted: Mar 28th 2007 8:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, if it is going to be on the Xbox 360, there's still a chance it could also be on the PC, considering that a)it's a game that's better suited to it, and b) Microsoft wants as many games under the Games for Windows brand that they'll not likely pass up an opportunity.

Though they better not make it Vista only...
Reply

Posted: Mar 28th 2007 9:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I guess no one mentions anything about PC gamers... It seems that Lucasarts is turning away from PC gaming since its latest releases are for "next-gen consoles only" (see force unleashed).
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2007 7:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@17: But then, KotOR and KotOR2 were meant to be primarily PC games (KotOR was at least, according to BioWare).

On the subject of SWBF3 being 360-only:
I hate how PC is being abandoned and labelled as "last-gen". That is ridiculous. Crysis, for example, is going to be one of the most amazing graphics-quality games ever, even including Gears of War and Mass Effect, and guess what? PC only. Because PCs are always moving forward. Leaving the PC market behind is unwise because inevitably PCs are overtaking the 360. A computer than could play Crysis on full maxed settings would need to have more graphics power than a 360, guaranteed.
Reply

Posted: Apr 25th 2007 11:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Just as long as Battlefront 3 comes out on the Original Xbox as well I'm happy. Otherwise im gonna have to go and buy a new console straight away.
Reply

Posted: May 25th 2007 6:41AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The reason why this is an Xbox 360 Exclusive is because the 360 might just be the only console really capable of handling the FULL experiance of this.The PS3 is all graphics,the reason they do not sell so much is because people love Good Graphics AND Good Gameplay.The 360 is power.The PS3 barely has better graphics that the 360 and its' power is good but no were nerar the 360's.The wii is great but Star Wars Battlfront 3 is really too powerfull for it.This is not a RUMOR,its' a fact.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW