Final Fantasy XIV Producer Blames PS3 Delay on Console Memory Restrictions

Although the PC version of Final Fantasy XIV is set to launch next month, PlayStation 3 owners are forced to wait until March 2011. According to the MMO's producer Hiromichi Tanaka, the primary reason the title will not see simultaneous release between PC and console is because of memory (aka RAM) restrictions.

"The main reason is the memory," Tanaka told VG247 at Gamescom 2010 last week. "On the PC, they have enormous memory. For PS3, there's a restriction." According to the report, Square Enix is adjusting the memory to fit the console version but the process "took longer" than the team expected.

Memory limitations between console and PC versions are a concern for development companies. In an interview during Relic's preview event for Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine, producer Andy Lang told Shacknews that the lead platform for its upcoming title was the Xbox 360 primarily because it works as a base line for the multiplatform release.

"One of the big issues with developing on PC is that your memory is really free. You can have an 8GB box with a 1GB card and a 360 is just 512MB of RAM," Lang told Shacknews. "We had to start on a platform to make it look really good at 512MB and then maybe add to it."

Final Fantasy XIV will launch on the PC on September 30. Square Enix says it is still in talks with Microsoft to bring the title to the Xbox 360.
Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    August 24, 2010 10:06 AM

    I don't think anyone's particularly surprised by this.

    Personally, I am amused at just how far behind-the-curve the consoles have become. They were already pretty short on memory when they were first released, but nowadays, with 4GBs of RAM being bog-standard for gaming PCs, the consoles literally possess a fraction of the capacity.

    • reply
      August 24, 2010 10:24 AM

      PC memory is a hell of a lot cheaper then what they are using in the consoles. The ps3 has i think 256mb but it super fast and super expensive.

      • reply
        August 24, 2010 10:44 AM

        Uh, no, no it isn't. It's using XDR RAM, which is nothing but special-purpose RAM for the system, equivalent to DDR2 SDRAM, which is nearly a decade old technology-wise.

        It's not only not super fast, it's not super expensive, either. It's manufactured similarly to DDR2 SDRAM, which is only semi-expensive today because no one makes it anymore. If they did, you likely could quadruple the RAM in the PS3 for ~$25, at wholesale cost.

        • reply
          August 24, 2010 11:22 AM

          I don't think RAM was so cheap at the time. Nowadays you can get 8gb of flash RAM for like $5, but we're talking about 5 years ago -- that's a huge leap in production in the tech industry. And the PS3 in particular was always going to be sold at a loss, so every dollar they saved adds up to millions of dollars in the long run. If they spent ONLY $5 on more ram (at a loss), and then build 60 million PS3's, that ALONE adds up to $300,000,000 ($300 million... gone). Now imagine a $25 loss!

          Granted, they make back some of that by selling games at a premium, and peripherals and whatnot, but still, when you have to take a loss it's better to reduce one expensive component than sacrifice 4 or 5 smaller ones that would make the entire package seem less enticing. For instance, if you offer 8 USB ports (or whatever), it looks more impressive than listing off the RAM specs, which oblivious console buyers don't know anything about. I couldn't resist a shot at consolers, sorry :)

          Besides, Sony's secret weapon is the Blu-Ray player. You can stream gigs of information very easily, something the Xbox can't do, so it needs less RAM (and produces less heat, which accounts for all the RROD's).

          • reply
            August 24, 2010 12:59 PM

            You speak of the PS3's Blu-Ray player like its some special amazing piece of technology! All it is is a optical disc drive! The speeds of this PS3 driver aren't even impressive! 2x BluRay, 8x DVD and 24x CD, the Xbox 360's is even faster then that!! The Xbox 360's dvd drive is 16x DVD and 48x CD, that's twice as fast!

            • reply
              August 24, 2010 1:40 PM


            • reply
              August 24, 2010 2:25 PM

              Actually, Blu Ray is FAR FAR better than a DVD.

              The base read speed of a Blu Ray (1x) is 4.5 MB/sec.

              The base read speed of a DVD (1x) is 1.3 MB/sec.

              • reply
                August 24, 2010 3:12 PM

                So what. It's still slower then the 360 16x drive. Do the math. Of course 1x on bluray is faster then 1x on DVD.

              • reply
                August 24, 2010 5:59 PM

                So a 2x BR drive in a PS3 does 9 MB/s vs the 360's 16X DVD Drive that does 21.6 MB/s. (1x is 1.35 MB/s for a more precise count)

              • reply
                August 24, 2010 8:59 PM

                Then factor in the enormous seek times for BR and the stats start looking less impressive.

      • reply
        August 24, 2010 10:45 AM

        You're super uninformed, and super wrong!

        • reply
          August 24, 2010 10:53 AM

          Thanks for brightening my morning with a bit of laughter!

Hello, Meet Lola