PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: GmanJoe on October 17, 2005, 07:13:08 AM
-
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/9503/Developers-Migrating-from-PS3-to-Xbox-360-Development/
Developers Migrating from PS3 to Xbox 360 Development?
By: César A. Berardini - "Cesar"
Oct. 12th, 2005 2:06 pm
PS3Today.com and PS3Focus.com have reported a recent Japanese article about PS3 developer support, which has an insider source claiming that the initial investment for PS3 software development it at least ¥2 billion (U$S 17.6 million), and that figure does not include the actual development costs associated directly with the title.
This initial investment, according to this insider source, is "nothing but a nightmare for many Japanese software development companies."
The article also reveals that the prevailing rumor in Japanese game development circles is that many companies may end up developing for the Xbox 360, which will lower R&D costs since the system shares many similarities with Windows game development, allowing developers to release a single title on both platforms.
-
If they can\'t afford 17 million to get into the game, thne they probably suck.
-
Lower prices equal more crap!
-
Well, sometimes the newbie company with the innovating idea are small time companies. Sorta like how PSX was able to get so much good games along with the thousands of crap ones. Kinda like how Square had "Final Fantasy", nearly bankrupt, they made what they thought was their "final" game.
Think of it as mining for diamonds. Out of tons of dirt, you\'ll find a few diamonds. :) Maybe this is what MS is hoping for.
PS3 will get mostly the big collossal productions though. :)
-
this is from teamxbox, who probably stole it from the theinquirer.net :rolleyes:
and yeah, please take all the poor, crap developers.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Well, sometimes the newbie company with the innovating idea are small time companies.
In theory. But an idea without the money to execute it anyway is no good. A small time developer with a good idea needs the big time development money that a decent publisher might provide. Pull that off and the development costs aren\'t as big a deal anymore.
And the game would still be a make or break title for the developer a la Square\'s Final Fantasy, to share your example.
-Dan
-
Yeah, I remember having to wade through the muddy waters of PSX games. So much crap titles! Sega Saturn was getting mostly gems...few games...but damn some good ones!
-
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
Lower prices equal more crap!
Whereas higher prices equal less of EVERYTHING.
-
So games like Katamari Damacy should cost $17 million dollars to make? This will also hinder some up and coming developers.
Get some sense guys.
-
I don\'t think any game should cost that much, personally. But, what do I know, heh.
-Dan
-
So games like Katamari Damacy should cost $17 million dollars to make?
if they would have the budget to make the game bigger, contain more levels, and run better?
sure
i beat katamari damancy in two sittings, we love katamari in one
-
Originally posted by mm
if they would have the budget to make the game bigger, contain more levels, and run better?
$17 Million Dollars
-
errr, EA isn\'t poor..... there will still be crap titles.
-
^^hahaha
-
Originally posted by mm
this is from teamxbox, who probably stole it from the theinquirer.net :rolleyes:
and yeah, please take all the poor, crap developers.
This was in the news almost two weeks ago now, and you can follow the Team Xbox link to the original Japanese source.
As for the news, the PS3 has been unanimously declared more challenging to develop for, and with rising development costs it takes no stretch of the imagination to think there might be some truth to this. What I think is that you\'ll see alot of third party games developed on the Xbox 360 and ported over to the PS3, but not very many leaving Sony\'s camp all together.
Also, two previously exclusive PS3 games, Brothers in Arms and Assassin, have recently been added to the 360 roster as well.
-
easy to port to a PC clone
/shrug
-
To weigh in on a related sort of issue, the easy ports to PC is why I didn\'t get an XboX last time, and why I won\'t get a 360. I\'ll spend my money on ONE system, and the rest of the games I\'ll get on PC.
Been enjoying Fable and Halo for a while now. :p
-
uhm isn\'t ps3 supposed to be easier to program for than ps2?...in any case i\'m not worried about this....same thing was said of the ps2 and it ended up putting out some solid titles...so whatever...
-
hahaha the fall of sony has began:laughing:
-
Originally posted by mm
easy to port to a PC clone
/shrug
Yeah, no kidding. :/
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
hahaha the fall of sony has began:laughing:
BEGUN!! WHAT ARE YOU SOME KIND OF ENGRISH DUMBFUCK?
-
Originally posted by FatalXception
To weigh in on a related sort of issue, the easy ports to PC is why I didn\'t get an XboX last time, and why I won\'t get a 360. I\'ll spend my money on ONE system, and the rest of the games I\'ll get on PC.
Been enjoying Fable and Halo for a while now. :p
oh sweet
Are you playing Jade Empire and Jet Grind Radio Future on your PC too?
lol xbox is a pc lolololo
-
Originally posted by clips
uhm isn\'t ps3 supposed to be easier to program for than ps2?...in any case i\'m not worried about this....same thing was said of the ps2 and it ended up putting out some solid titles...so whatever...
It didn\'t cost a $17 million to make a PS2 game.
I remember when MGS2 was about to come out and the magazines were talking about how Konami spent a whopping $20 million dollars to make it.
-
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
Lower prices equal more crap!
Ahm if lower price is a result of lower cost it doesnt necessarily equal more crap
-
QuDDus, you couldn\'t possibly be that ignorant
-
Originally posted by Riku
As for the news, the PS3 has been unanimously declared more challenging to develop for
Hmm, that\'s funny. I could have sworn I read someone saying the opposite thing. Bet it\'s all hype though. I mean, who cared that PS2 was harder to develop for? It still got a buttload of games. I don\'t care about dev sob stories.
-
$17million is the current projected cost. Hopefully, there will be more tools to help cut the cost by the time PS3 dev kits are sent.
I remember there were similar interviews, in fact, one of them from the GT creator himself, about the cost of investments for the PS2 games. He said initially, it\'ll be the major game developers who\'d be making games for the PS2.
Yet, within 2 years of the PS2\'s debut, there were a lot of games already in production from smaller developers.
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Hmm, that\'s funny. I could have sworn I read someone saying the opposite thing. Bet it\'s all hype though. I mean, who cared that PS2 was harder to develop for? It still got a buttload of games. I don\'t care about dev sob stories.
Yeah I ve heard that PS3 isnt as difficult to develop for as some are making it look like.
But if its true I think you might care about what developers say.When PS2 was released it had such a growing userbase that it was impossible to ignore.PS2 was the only console available for a whole year too.It was the only console developers could sell a backetload of copies on.
Now though XBOX360 will be released sooner, it already has a huge support from developers (as well as Japanese developers),its easy to develop for and there are many that care a lot about it.It is expected that it will sell a lot.
PS3 wont be alone and things are showing that performance wont be miles better from XBOX360\'s
Dont forget how Sega shot theirselves on the foot with the Sega Saturn.
They released an expensive hardware that made Sega struggle to cover their costs, they didnt have much flexibility on the console\'s price, it was extremely hard to develop on, not enough library tools available for it, saturn programming wasnt as familiar with c++ as PS1 was etc.
The result were revenues that didnt cover costs and costy game development and programming headaches made developers shift to PS1.
At the end Saturn gamers lost and they cared.
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Hmm, that\'s funny. I could have sworn I read someone saying the opposite thing. Bet it\'s all hype though. I mean, who cared that PS2 was harder to develop for? It still got a buttload of games. I don\'t care about dev sob stories.
I should have been more clear. It\'s more challenging to develop for than the Xbox 360.
The PS2 did enjoy alot of developer support but back then it was contending against a dying system (DC), a Nintendo console (not competition), and the new comer (Xbox). This time Nintendo has a new spin and Microsoft has managed to create a huge buzz and get more developer support than I imagined they ever would its second go-round.
Like I said though, the PS3 will still enjoy alot of support, if not the most. It\'s just that in making the PS3 more challenging it made it all the easier for developers to consider Xbox 360 development.
/shrugs
-
Originally posted by mm
QuDDus, you couldn\'t possibly be that ignorant
Naw I\'m just stirring up flames.
-
I think he\'s referring to your usage of the word "began".
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
I think he\'s referring to your usage of the word "began".
you know what? Fuck off
-
???
I\'m not the one that brought it up. Avatarr and mm did. I honestly don\'t care.
-
hehehehe. :p
Okay okay, lemme jump in on the main wagon. 17 million bucks just get started is an extremely high figure. This information is by no means official and I think it stands on purdy shaky ground. But let\'s just say that it\'s true: 17 million bucks is fucking massive, especially in the game development industry.
I mean fuck, the full license for Unreal 3 is $750,000. That can buy you a delapidated house here in Sydney. A project with this engine would cost that + team member\'s salaries for maybe two years. 12 people at 50K/year each... that\'s another $1,200,000. $1,950,000 for a game. But with this $17 million, you haven\'t even started anything! No engine, no salaries, no nothing!
If this really were true only the really big guys would be able to get in. And 17 million being 17 million, the big guys will want to make sure that they get their money back. To do this, they\'re going to stick to established franchies, tried and true genres, etc. etc. There is no incentive to innovate and what you\'ll end up with is stagnation. Same shit, different smell, type of thing.
-
Here\'s a comment about which system is easier to develop for by the way.
id Software comments on the Xbox 360 (http://www.majornelson.com/2005/10/18/id-software-comments-on-the-xbox-360/)
The four key owners of id Software were on G4tv last night, and they had some interesting quotes that I thought I’d highlight in case you missed them:
John Carmack: “Xbox 360 has far and away the best development tools”
John Carmack: “[talks about software development support]…and the hardware is comparable”
Geoff: “So you don’t think PS3 is going to more powerful [than Xbox 360]?”
John Carmack: “PS3 is probably marginally more powerful, in terms of raw flops and graphic operations, but that’s not really the best way to look at things. When you look at these development cycles that stretch over years and years, being 20% easier to develop on is much more important than being 20% more powerful.”
John Carmack: “I make little nitpicky decisions about say, well, I prefer the symmetric approach that MS has over the asymmetric Cell approach, but you can do great games on either one of them, and I make fundamental decisions based on development tools and depth of documentation, which Microsoft has been superior on.”
I\'m sure someone here is going to find a way to make this look stupid or laugh at it with a stupid smiley, but hey, do whatever with this information.
-
John Carmack: “btw, microsoft sent me a check earlier for 34 million dollars to port quake 4 to xbox 360. like my hat? it\'s made of money! oh, xbox 360 is easier to code for and some shit like that"
-
Ahm...I thought Sony made sure that developers would have the appropriate tools that will make development easy btw.
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=34506&highlight=opengl
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=35548&highlight=opengl
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=34405&highlight=opengl
-
Originally posted by Soul Reaver
I\'m sure someone here is going to find a way to make this look stupid or laugh at it with a stupid smiley, but hey, do whatever with this information.
hi5 to me for being right
huzzah
-
Meh Sony just isn\'t a software company. As much as I hate MS, I have 300% more confidence in them to provide better development tools than in Sony.
-
oh, so they\'ve provided delelopment tools for consoles more than once before?
-
Why are we arguing you know nothing is going to compare to the vibrator controller wielding Revolution.
-
The Nintendo Revolution is the only console I\'m lining up for.
-
Originally posted by mm
oh, so they\'ve provided delelopment tools for consoles more than once before?
Don\'t give me that cheek baby. The software development process isn\'t defined soley by the hardware platform. Ever since Visual C++ 1, Microsoft has been refining their skills in catering for the needs of software developers. Not to mention the fact that they\'ve been refining their software development processes for themselves, ever since they started. They understand it a lot better than Sony.
And may I assert that I understand it a lot better than you. So please, just agree with me. :)
-
Originally posted by Avatarr
Don\'t give me that cheek baby. The software development process isn\'t defined soley by the hardware platform. Ever since Visual C++ 1, Microsoft has been refining their skills in catering for the needs of software developers. Not to mention the fact that they\'ve been refining their software development processes for themselves, ever since they started. They understand it a lot better than Sony.
And may I assert that I understand it a lot better than you. So please, just agree with me. :)
fuck you avy but you are telling the truth. Nobody can argue that not even MM.
-
With nVidia developing the graphics chip for PS3, it can\'t be too hard to make games for it. Unlike the PS2 which didn\'t have a graphics specialist working up their chips and software..
-
I will stab you
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
fuck you avy but you are telling the truth. Nobody can argue that not even MM.
oh yeah, how many games is microsoft making in house again?
-
irrelevant
-
lol, that\'s the point that was brought to the table, and was claimed as unarguable
:rofl:
-
Some people forget this
http://news.com.com/PlayStation+3+to+be+easy+on+developers%2C+Sony+vows/2100-1043_3-5606515.html
-
Perhaps I misread the (original) quote.. but is this not perhaps talking about the cost to make the dev tools that sony provides? Or are they talking about an engine (which could be re-used or licenced later)? If they mean the developer tools used to create games, then Sony provides some, and as the rest are created, they get sold/licenced around as well, letting in smaller fish in a little while.
I\'m thinking this is like the PS2 problem.. when it came out it was \'too complex\' and nobody could get the full potential out of the system, but with time, tools were created that made games more and more powerful, and easier to write,and these tools ended up in more and more hands... If creating these tools is a ONE TIME investment of 17 mil (estimate), then over the lifespan of decent sized developer, say making 10 games in 4 years, that would work out to a lot less per game... They don\'t have to reinvent their tools everytime they start a new title.
-
Oct. 12th, 2005 2:06 pm
PS3Today.com and PS3Focus.com have reported a recent Japanese article about PS3 developer support, which has an insider source claiming that the initial investment for PS3 software development it at least ¥2 billion (U$S 17.6 million), and that figure does not include the actual development costs associated directly with the title.
This initial investment, according to this insider source, is "nothing but a nightmare for many Japanese software development companies."
The article also reveals that the prevailing rumor in Japanese game development circles is that many companies may end up developing for the Xbox 360, which will lower R&D costs since the system shares many similarities with Windows game development, allowing developers to release a single title on both platforms.
I don\'t like running in the dark and I really have absolutley no idea. But one can speculate that the cost includes dev kits, licensing fees, development of low level drivers to work with high level API\'s. EEEEEEEETTTTTTTTTCCCCCCCCC. Sony should really be responsible for doing the last one rather than developers themselves. Certainly Microsoft has taken that responsibility for the Xbox and Xbox360.
-
Anyone checked my link? :p
-
I\'m glad you could find a non-bias source there, Uni.:rolleyes:
Get me something from a third party developer saying how easy it is to make a Playstation 3 game compared to an Xbox 360 game.
-
Why even debate it everyone should know that it is going to be easier to build games for xbox360 than ps3. Just like xbox and ps2. With the cost being so high this time around sony could have really screwed themselves.
They are going the route nintendo did buying screwing developers.
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
Why even debate it everyone should know that it is going to be easier to build games for xbox360 than ps3. Just like xbox and ps2. With the cost being so high this time around sony could have really screwed themselves.
Why h3ll0 thar Mr. "Bill Gates sucks my wang". I don\'t see why Xbox360 should be sooo much easier to develop for. Both consoles feature multiple cores - which some developers have said to be a pain in the ass to work with. Both have \'PC graphics cards\'. And it\'s not like MS bought off the shelf PC parts this time.
But again, why should we care. We\'ll get our games either way and they\'ll be good. Except those that suck.
-
You\'ve gone soft Sammy. Just say DICK. It\'s easy. See? DICK.
-
Originally posted by Avatarr
You\'ve gone soft Sammy. Just say DICK. It\'s easy. See? DICK.
Wang is a funnier word. You cock gobbling piece of shit.
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Wang is a funnier word. You cock gobbling piece of shit.
nice comeback, quite funny too
-
: ( my anus is bleeding
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Wang is a funnier word. You cock gobbling piece of shit.
MWAHAHAHA! That\'s funny! I think I\'ll keep it! :p
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Why h3ll0 thar Mr. "Bill Gates sucks my wang". I don\'t see why Xbox360 should be sooo much easier to develop for. Both consoles feature multiple cores - which some developers have said to be a pain in the ass to work with. Both have \'PC graphics cards\'. And it\'s not like MS bought off the shelf PC parts this time.
But again, why should we care. We\'ll get our games either way and they\'ll be good. Except those that suck.
There have been multiple developer accounts stating that the multiple core architecture is going to take years to harness on both machines, but that the Xbox 360 is essentially easier to makes games for. Even Kuturagi commented that the PS3 was not built with only games in mind but as more of a computer entertainment center. The Cell was not designed specifically for the PS3 or games but a range of electronic devices, not to mention the Cell architecture is not a standard fare. Perhaps not as extreme a design as the PS2 but it\'s still considered to be more of an "exotic" design compared to other development environments.
-
Originally posted by Riku
I\'m glad you could find a non-bias source there, Uni.:rolleyes:
Get me something from a third party developer saying how easy it is to make a Playstation 3 game compared to an Xbox 360 game.
Point me concrete proof of a famous developer who has had experience on previous consoles and on both PS3 and XBOX360 and its not named Team Ninja.
-
Originally posted by Samwise
Wang is a funnier word. You cock gobbling piece of shit.
I must also agree that wang is a funnier word.
Heh...
...wang...
... :rofl:
-
stop raping me : (
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Point me concrete proof of a famous developer who has had experience on previous consoles and on both PS3 and XBOX360 and its not named Team Ninja.
There\'s one in this very thread, John Carmack with id software. But if that\'s not enough proof for you...
People seem undecided on which of PS3 and Xbox 360 are more powerful. What do you think? Will they be very different machines to design games for?
Dave Perry: The PS3 is ultimately more powerful if you are willing to wait for programmers to master it. It\'s a bit like Path of Neo... Here we are at the end of the PS2 hardware cycle and suddenly we are the first game with Normal Mapping and we also demonstrated 1,500 Agent Smiths on screen at once. Meaning there\'s always some more juice to get squeezed out. The Xbox 360 on the other hand is much more comfortable to develop on and I expect to see programmers pushing it harder earlier. So I expect (like in a horse race) to see Xbox take off out the gate, but after a while, the PS3 overtakes. The good news is that there\'s no loser here, both machines rock.
>>>Link<<< (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php?id=126824)
Are the new console platforms fulfilling what it’s makers promise?
Hideo Kojima: ...For Xbox 360, it’s a little bit more down to earth, more realistic so people maybe can join easily to start creating on the 360. Speaking about Revolution, there are still a lot of secrets and I don’t know everything but from what I heard like you could connect your portables or you could play old games, I get the impression that the developers could create games on less budget or create titles that are not super high expensive in cost. If you allow me to express the three hardware platforms in a funny example, PS3 would be like a dinner that you only have once a year or twice a year on your anniversary etc.
>>>Link<<< (http://ps2.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=8293)
Carmak (id Software), Itagaki (Team Ninja), Kojima (Konami), and Perry (Shiny)...do you need more or is that enough?
-
bottom line:
which will sell more?
:)
-
I predict huge sales numbers for Xbox360 in the USA.
Next gen console war, will definately be more tight than current one.
-
Originally posted by Riku
There\'s one in this very thread, John Carmack with id software. But if that\'s not enough proof for you...
>>>Link<<< (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php?id=126824)
>>>Link<<< (http://ps2.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=8293)
Carmak (id Software), Itagaki (Team Ninja), Kojima (Konami), and Perry (Shiny)...do you need more or is that enough?
John Carmack is best known for his work on PCs
and none of them worked on both (PS3 and 360) final kits.
As for hideo Kojima he didnt state any details nor did he work on PS3 final kits either.But he got great results in a matter of months.
Unexpected.....results.
On....beta....PS3 kits
-
Well, with all the PS3 questioning going on, Sony has been very quiet lately.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
John Carmack is best known for his work on PCs
and none of them worked on both (PS3 and 360) final kits.
As for hideo Kojima he didnt state any details nor did he work on PS3 final kits either.But he got great results in a matter of months.
Unexpected.....results.
On....beta....PS3 kits
Hey, you asked and I answered. Why is Ken\'s word (a man who consistently talks bigger than he ever delivers) better than four big name third party developers?
Carmack is best known for being a good programmer. Final kits or no, both machines are far enough along to get a good sense of how it will be to make games for them.
I didn\'t say the PS3 was not capable of great things, the arguement here is if the PS3 is more difficult to develop for than the Xbox 360. The answer, from the four guys I quoted, looks like a solid yes to me.
I\'m not going to waste my time on you. I provided you with two big-name third party developers plus the ones you already know about (Carmack and Itagaki) that all support the arguement that PS3 is more difficult to make games for than the Xbox 360. Deny it, spin it, interpret it badly, print it out and wipe your ass with it, I don\'t care.
-
It\'s too easy to misinterpret such an interview and not look at the whole picture.
Carmack is respected and acknowledged, yet he\'s only one man, one programmer out of many.
I can recall, from years ago, Carmack\'s \'predictions/visions\' of games\' graphics for the coming decade.
Now look at the \'fruits\'/games of that vision ; Doom3, Quake IV, Prey.
They took along time to accomplish D3 ; now Carmack\'s preaching about easy/short development cycles ?
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Riku
Hey, you asked and I answered. Why is Ken\'s word (a man who consistently talks bigger than he ever delivers) better than four big name third party developers?
I never said that I take Ken\'s word more seriously than Carmack\'s.
Carmack is best known for being a good programmer. Final kits or no, both machines are far enough along to get a good sense of how it will be to make games for them.
I didn\'t say the PS3 was not capable of great things, the arguement here is if the PS3 is more difficult to develop for than the Xbox 360. The answer, from the four guys I quoted, looks like a solid yes to me.
I\'m not going to waste my time on you. I provided you with two big-name third party developers plus the ones you already know about (Carmack and Itagaki) that all support the arguement that PS3 is more difficult to make games for than the Xbox 360. Deny it, spin it, interpret it badly, print it out and wipe your ass with it, I don\'t care.
Carmack is mostly of all a PC developer.He is mpore comfortable in that enviromnent.XBOX360 is similar in many aspects of development to a PC( if we leave out the 3 cored) CPU and has directX support.
Carmack is not the best example of a developer in the console area
Also the difference between Carmack\'s and other statements is that he doesnt take both equally.
As for Itagaki we ve heard many idiotic statements and he even contradicts himself(also a developer who doesnt take both equally).
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
I never said that I take Ken\'s word more seriously than Carmack\'s.
Carmack is mostly of all a PC developer.He is mpore comfortable in that enviromnent.XBOX360 is similar in many aspects of development to a PC( if we leave out the 3 cored) CPU and has directX support.
Wouldn\'t this mean that the Xbox 360 is easier to develop for since it is more familiar?
Carmack is not the best example of a developer in the console area
Perhaps not, but he has looked at both consoles and commented on them. I believe he said something along the lines of "PS3 is a pain in my ass"...
Also the idffference between Carmack and other statements is that he doesnt take both equally.
I have no idea what you\'re talking about here.
As for Itagaki we ve heard many idiotic statements and he even contradicts himself(also a developer who doesnt take both equally).
What about Dave Perry and Hideo Kojima\'s words? Right now the four coincide on the same idea that PS3 is more difficult/not as accessible/not as familiar (what have you) as Xbox 360 development. I\'d be damn impressed if you could spin them all around (and it would have to be all four of them) in order to say PS3 is in fact easier to develop on than Xbox 360. Good luck with that.
-
It makes one wonder though about how much effort Carmack is willing to take to create something astonishing on PS3.
If he goes on record about this, he\'d be a hypocrite to NOT take equal development effort on both Xbox360 and PS3.
If he\'s not even willing to go to even lengths on PS3, as on XBox360, then we all know it\'s a pure money/time issue for him.
His (publicised) ideas about a souped up Doom3 version for PS3 already hint, imo,
money is his incentive.
-
Originally posted by Riku
Wouldn\'t this mean that the Xbox 360 is easier to develop for since it is more familiar?
More familiar to him.Also that doesnt mean that PS3 wont be easy to develop for.
Perhaps not, but he has looked at both consoles and commented on them. I believe he said something along the lines of "PS3 is a pain in my ass"...
Exactly because his personal and most experience is on PC enviroment.Thats his own problem
I have no idea what you\'re talking about here.
He makes a choice and sais indirectly "the other one is a pain in the ass because I am personally more familiar with PC"
What about Dave Perry and Hideo Kojima\'s words? Right now the four coincide on the same idea that PS3 is more difficult/not as accessible/not as familiar (what have you) as Xbox 360 development. I\'d be damn impressed if you could spin them all around (and it would have to be all four of them) in order to say PS3 is in fact easier to develop on than Xbox 360. Good luck with that.
Dave Perry and Kojima are excited for both and dont make a choice.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
More familiar to him.Also that doesnt mean that PS3 wont be easy to develop for.
Exactly because his personal and most experience is on PC enviroment.Thats his own problem
He makes a choice and sais indirectly "the other one is a pain in the ass because I am personally more familiar with PC"
Dave Perry and Kojima are excited for both and dont make a choice.
Did you forget what the hell we\'re talking about? PS3 is more challenging to develop for than the Xbox 360. I did not say how much harder is was than Xbox 360, but the four developers I pointed out seem to think it\'s a difference worth mentioning.
No fucking shit, Uni. Perry said that both machines kick ass in the very quote I supplied for you. Perry said, "The PS3 is ultimately more powerful if you are willing to wait for programmers to master it...The Xbox 360 on the other hand is much more comfortable to develop on and I expect to see programmers pushing it harder earlier." How could you miss the obvious comparison being made? Is it just convenient for you to go retarded?
Kojima has expressed that he admires both machines. You acknowledge that but you ignore that he suggested the PS3 is more challenging? Are Kojima\'s words of \'...For Xbox 360, it’s a little bit more down to earth, more realistic so people maybe can join easily to start creating on the 360...If you allow me to express the three hardware platforms in a funny example, PS3 would be like a dinner that you only have once a year or twice a year on your anniversary etc." He\'s comparing the two consoles and it\'s so clear which one he thinks is the more accessible machine.
Do not interpret that as me saying which one is better or more powerful, that\'s not what I\'m talking about and I don\'t even want to go there.
-
Originally posted by Knotter8
It makes one wonder though about how much effort Carmack is willing to take to create something astonishing on PS3.
If he goes on record about this, he\'d be a hypocrite to NOT take equal development effort on both Xbox360 and PS3.
If he\'s not even willing to go to even lengths on PS3, as on XBox360, then we all know it\'s a pure money/time issue for him.
His (publicised) ideas about a souped up Doom3 version for PS3 already hint, imo,
money is his incentive.
Well, if the PS3 takes a significant amount more time to get only marginally better results out of then is it worth it to really dig into the system? Why do that when he could be focusing resources on a machine he prefers?
This reminds me alot of the Playstation versus Saturn debates. Many developers expressed that the Saturn, with it\'s dual-core processor, was in fact more powerful than the Playstation, but that it just wasn\'t worth the time to exploit the Saturn when they could get a game up and running with less time and effort (which means less money) on the Playstation. Now, I don\'t expect that there to be such an extreme difference between PS3 and 360, developers haven\'t gone as far to say that PS3 \'is a nightmare\' or anything to that effect...god, I\'m getting so tired of this...I think I\'m just going to quit. How\'s that? I have completely lost interest on this subject of the two consoles in mid-thought. Meh.
-
no problem Riku.
But, imo, it\'s waaaay too early, for anybody, to say anything decisive, about both platforms.
Looking at the positive sides :
Xbox 360 will be easily accessible for all devs while PS3 will be not too hard for developers who already know and have invested alot in PS2 development, which are, quit many.
Time will tell. YEs, gamers are impatient ppl.
-
Originally posted by Riku
Well, if the PS3 takes a significant amount more time to get only marginally better results out of then is it worth it to really dig into the system? Why do that when he could be focusing resources on a machine he prefers?
This reminds me alot of the Playstation versus Saturn debates. Many developers expressed that the Saturn, with it\'s dual-core processor, was in fact more powerful than the Playstation, but that it just wasn\'t worth the time to exploit the Saturn when they could get a game up and running with less time and effort (which means less money) on the Playstation. Now, I don\'t expect that there to be such an extreme difference between PS3 and 360, developers haven\'t gone as far to say that PS3 \'is a nightmare\' or anything to that effect...god, I\'m getting so tired of this...I think I\'m just going to quit. How\'s that? I have completely lost interest on this subject of the two consoles in mid-thought. Meh.
Sega rushed to release the saturn.
The architecture was a decision of 8 months before launch.
Sega didnt have the appropriate libraries because of that and not a singke developer has had experience with its dual CPU architecture
The difference is that Sony has spent time for it and they have also made sure that it will support previous techniques
Not to mention what Knotter said that (unlike with the saturn) there are many developers who have had experience on a different enviroment with the PS2
-
wow...everybody has been sayin the same thing,....now i\'m not no fanboy or anything like that but i\'ll admit i\'m more of a playstation fan than xbox,..alot of cats seem kinda scurred to say which console they prefer :p..and if they do say which one they like then they\'re a fanboy or some s**t......also add to the fact that i only buy ONE console per gen period....with that said tho can we say that the ps3 hardware is setup similar to the ps2, but just a little bit easier to develop, but not nearly as easier as the xbox 360?....see? we just went through thee exact same scenario with the xbox and ps2....i\'m no tech head in the least amount, but trust,...there is nothing to worry about....
-
I\'m not worried. I\'ll get a PS3 and Nintendo Rev. I always get Nintendo consoles....and recently, Playstation (there\'s only been 2 so far :) ).
-
Alot of bad PS3 press :
PS3 not fully backwards compatible ? (http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=12554)
PS3 costs drive Sony\'s Q2 profit downwards (http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=12563)
Of course, Xbox & Xbox360 have also been plagued alot by negative press about backwards compatibility and production costs.....
-
PS2 wasnt fully 100% compatible with all PS1 games either anyways.
And the downfall in profts thanks to PS3 R&D is temporal and natural.
Profits are still there.There arent any losses yet
-
R&D as well as the construction of the chip factory for the PS2 also drove Sony profits down. This is expected. Ya gotta spend money to make more money.
-
even the PS2 wasn\'t fully backwards compatible
personally, i don\'t care much
it\'s not like i have this huge ass pstwo i\'m trying to get rid of once PS3 is released