Revolution SDKs cheaper than PSP ones, say devs; final dev kits expected to be made widely available in June
by Dan Choi 
{ Feb 22nd 2006 at 9:58PM }
IGN's hearing from studio insiders that Revolution SDKs are selling for about
$2,000, "which is thousands of dollars cheaper than a PSP SDK, let alone an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 one,"
paving the way for riskier titles with smaller investments to appear on Nintendo's next system.Citing the 1,000-dev-kits-shipped statistic from the recent Engadget interview with Reggie Fils-Aime, IGN Revolution went ahead and talked to "a half dozen studios around the globe for further details about the nature of the kits." Apparently, "three revisions of the development kits have been sent out to studios" so far, with "minor tweaks" and boosts in power (to a GameCube with wired Revolution controller attached) accounting for the different versions. Larger, more committed publishers may already have access to updated hardware and a wireless remote.
An "official fourth SDK prototype" will soon be sent out so the likes of EA and Ubisoft can start getting their playable demos ready for E3, but final dev kits aren't "expected to be made widely available" until June. While this doesn't change the consensus that the Rev will only be "roughly twice as powerful" as the 'Cube, at least this similarity in architecture will make development of next-gen titles easier (and more exciting with the innovative new controller). A $150-$200 price tag would certainly help the system's marketability as well. The proof will be in the playable pudding.
See also:
- Reggie interview: Over 1,000 Revo dev kits sent out
- The Engadget Interview: Reggie Fils-Aime, Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Nintendo
- 3rd-party dev: Revolution a souped-up Xbox
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Anticrawl @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:18PM
Hahaha, good news. Dev kits cheaper than the ones for the psp, crazy. I sure hope this drives the 3rd party support up.
Pixels for my people,
Anticrawl
djork @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:25PM
This is just about what I expected. Nintendo delivered when they said they would let "anybody" develop for the Revolution. While it doesn't mean joey down the street can develop, it means Joey's dad's game development studio down the street that was previously relegated to online PC releases can now get in on the sweet Revolution action :)
cyberfelon @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:26PM
Revolution FTW!
toop @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:31PM
If you read the ign article you will know that the SDKs are:
Developers we spoke to confirm that - at least so far - three revisions of the development kits have been sent out to studios. The first development kit was, quite literally, a GameCube console with a wired Revolution controller attached. The second was the same with a few minor tweaks. And the third prototype, which was shipped to most studios about a month ago, follows the same structure, but also shows some boosts in CPU power, according to sources.
http://revolution.ign.com/articles/690/690730p1.html
--------------------------------------------
So, it shouldnt be surprising that the SDKs are so cheap .... actually thats quite expensive considering the first 3 iterations are modified gamecubes. I bet the final SDKs wont be as cheap tho.
bd @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:32PM
In the article, some developer said:
"At first, we were discouraged that it would be less powerful than Xbox 360, but once we got everything working with the controller, our concerns faded"
Which means that they recovered from mental illness (not to say from retardation). What the hell were they thinking? The Xbox 360 is too damned powerful (well, sorta), so I don't know how did they expect the Nintendo revolution to be "almost as powerful as, or better" than the 360 (in terms of raw power).
Jeff @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:41PM
Just FYI, the cost of dev kits is a pittance in the grand scheme of developing a game. Even $10,000 for a dev kit compares to millions of dollars in total development costs for a game, and you can develop literally hundreds of games over the lifetime of a system with one dev kit. It is inconsequential.
And before anyone says "yes, but they need THOUSANDS of dev kits - one for every employee!"... no, they don't. They need a few. Most of the people that work on a game don't do anything that needs to be done on an actual dev kit - they work with regular old Windows and Mac machines and then transfer their code/art/3D models/whatever over to the dev kit when it's needed.
This is a non-story, IMO.
Anticrawl @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:44PM
Well #4 by your logic the psp sdk's should be cheaper because as you would say "all they are is downgraded ps2's". I did read that article by the way and I do know what they are. You can't use literal examples or simple math to show comparisons from console to console. It doesn't even work with the more straight forward pc. You don't need finalized hardware to start working on a game and get a lot done, just the basics.
Anticrawl
mike @ Feb 22nd 2006 10:55PM
This is a non-story, IMO.
---
really? because this is exactly in line with what NIN said they'd do: cheaper for devs, cheaper for consumers, high marketshare, more incentive to take risks in game development.
while it may take lots of money to do a PS3 game on BluRay, doing it on the Revo DVD discs is alot shorter cuz there's less space in the game.
Nin knows that space is just filled with graphical detail, so they pull back on everything, graphics, space, HD..
because they've made so much money off gameboy, ds, SNES, they KNOW graphics are NOT what people love about gaming, it's gameplay, and fun...
if they're right (i have a DS, they're right) Nintendo is gonna make more money than anyone on this bet, and Sony and MS are going to have bad news for shareholders..
Alex K. @ Feb 22nd 2006 11:09PM
$2000!!! Hell, I'll get one!!!!
Ramez @ Feb 22nd 2006 11:12PM
#6 I think your missing the major benefit of having low cost SDKs. While it is true that some studios can spend millions on game development, it certainly isn't necessary. In fact, the trend of having to spend millions on game development is often cited as the main reason we get so many uninspired sequels, as publishers see them as a safe finacial bet. With cheap SDKs, small/independent developers who operate on a much smaller budget can attempt to create new and unique games without shelling out a fortune.
TacoPants @ Feb 22nd 2006 11:20PM
#6, that is assuming that all developers will spend multiple millions of dollars on games, the cheap SDKs are not to help out huge companies like EA who DO spend millions, its to help out the little guys.
Tony @ Feb 22nd 2006 11:46PM
"Which means that they recovered from mental illness (not to say from retardation). What the hell were they thinking? The Xbox 360 is too damned powerful (well, sorta), so I don't know how did they expect the Nintendo revolution to be "almost as powerful as, or better" than the 360 (in terms of raw power)."
I really don't think the cause of their "concerns going away" was due to the graphics. Referring to the controller in the way they did makes it the obvious source of their fears being calmed. It's not directly related to graphic power, but it's the main thing that makes it what it is and thus a big basis for comparison.
syxed @ Feb 22nd 2006 11:55PM
Cheaper than PSP dev kits maybe, but I'd like to see some comparisons to DS dev kits and past Nintendo system dev kits like GCN and N64.
I don't know if the relationship is as simple as cheaper dev kits = more 3rd party developers. Then again, Nintendo knows what they're doing, so if this does drive a lot of 3rd parties to the Rev (and in turn forces them to innovate) then this is awesome news.
Back_Lit @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:07AM
The advantage of a cheaper dev kit is that it will allow curious developers the chance to actually play with the Rev without making a huge investment. Certianly two thousand is an investment, but its a drop in the bucket next to a PSP kit.
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:35AM
Hopefully they look better then the PSP SDKs b/c they are fugly. They basically look like mini rectangular PCs sitting on their side with a DVD-ROM drive, memory stick slot and thick cable permanently attached to a semi hollow PSP.
Dan Choi @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:45AM
As alluded to by a few comment posters already, I intended to show in my post that the lower SDK price is not the be-all, end-all of development costs, but that it begins to make progress or development easier (by "paving the way for riskier titles with smaller investments"). This is why I added near the end of the post that "...this similarity in architecture [between Rev and GCN] will make development of next-gen titles easier," to show where another significant portion of cost savings will come from (also included in the IGN article linked).
The GameSpot numbers referenced by portnoy are a little old, but they do highlight how much less it can cost for development on Nintendo platforms versus those of its competitors. If the current GameCube numbers can stay down for Revolution titles while Xbox and PlayStation numbers start to shoot up for their successors (due to HD costs and next-gen requirements), we might begin to see more than just a marginal disparity in cost between the companies on the international console (read: non-handheld) front. Those costs are definitely consequential.
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:51AM
In case anyone hasn't seen the rather fugly PSP SDKs:
http://andrewsm.net/psp/novinky/sdk/sdk1.jpg
http://andrewsm.net/psp/novinky/sdk/sdk2.jpg
http://andrewsm.net/psp/novinky/sdk/sdk3.jpg
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:52AM
http://andrewsm.net/psp/novinky/sdk/sdk4.jpg
http://andrewsm.net/psp/novinky/sdk/sdk5.jpg
epobirs @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:00AM
Portnoy, that survey has received great criticism for offering vague definitions of what is an 'average' title. It turns out that many companies are disinclined to divulge detailed numbers, so they had to rely on a scant subset of the industry. Also lacking was details regarding the actual games. For instance, were the GameCube titles primarily original works or were they PS2 ports that would already have a finished design and substantial art assets already in place? Were they the class of game that hits the bestseller charts or were they some of the extremely esoteric products that are nearly unknown outside their native market and sell in small numbers at best? The type of game developed quickly and cheaply with little effort to push the hardware. Such titles are dime a dozen in Japan and little more than improved PS1 exercises.
The claimed rationale for the nearly doubled cost of Xbox games doesn't pass the smell test. Xbox games that don't strive to exploit the hardware are very inexpensive prospects since any PC programmer can jump into Xbox development very quickly. More likely to my mind is that the miniscule native Japanese market for Xbox games means that few or none of the surveyed titles were low end quickies and were primarily aimed at being competitive in the US and European markets. There have been some cheap dating sims and such for Xbox in Japan but far more of the effort has gone to things like Dino Crisis 3.
By and large, unless the difference in cost is orders of magnitude the price of the dev kits is a minor one-time fixed cost in a game project. A decent art team will cost far more. As well, the game industry has learned a lot from how Hollywood does its accounting. If a studio builds a special sound stage for shooting water scenes for a production and then uses that stage in two more productions soon after, the cost isn't spread across the three productions. Instead the complete cost of building the stage is charged to all three movies. This is a great way to hide expenditures for things like nose candy or just allow the studio to scam the taxman. (This example really happened in 90s and nobody went to jail.) Game developers have learned to apply this to things like dev kits and reusable game engines.
That the Revolution dev kit cost less than the PSP's isn't that surprising. The PSP is a new platform contrary to those impaired persons who assume it is a cutdown PS2. It has a lot of hardware features the PS2 lacks and a more straightforward pipeline. The Revolution increasingly appears to be a mildly enhanced GameCube with new controller features. This isn't a bad thing if the cost of entry is low and they can extract enough longterm value from the controller concept. A big question will be what tools Nintendo has created to enable use of the new controller. If the process of getting the input schemes to work is too complex or labor intensive it could eliminate much of the savings from developing a familiar chipset.
Sean DL @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:06AM
Nintendo should become the Sundance of gaming..or at lease start a Sundance fest.
Think of how many new ideals and talent would come out of there....
Pretty Obvious @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:07AM
Can the Revolution even be considered next-gen?
Mullinator @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:12AM
@Jago
Dev kits are not supposed to look good. They are just there for the developer to work on only, why would any company even bother making them look good?
Almost every dev kit for a console is just a big box that looks like a quasi-desktop PC.
Anyway, obviously the cheap dev-kits are not the main cost for any company developing a game. However I think the fact that Nintendo seems to have ensured that they are cheap to sell that it also means they are trying to keep all development costs down. Of course this is what they said in the past but I would call this further evidence that they are in fact following through with that commitment.
This is a very good sign, I really do forsee the Revolution to become the Indy developer console platform of choice. Expect to see the regular big name publisher games as well as a lot of smaller, cheaper indy games on the Revolution as well.
Truf @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:15AM
If this is true then i guess it means all hope of an / near E3 launch are gone. And it would probably explain why we havent seen screenshots yet.
Developers are still working with gamecubes so i guess the rev hardware isnt quite finished yet, and i guess the story of it going 'gold' wasn't true.
A part of me really thinks that the rev underwent a late redesign, at a point when nintendo decided to shift their focus, for their next gen console. And thats why they had so little to show at last years E3.
It will be interesting to see if they manage to get it out this year
Mullinator @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:18AM
@Pretty Obvious
By my definition the Revolution is more "next-gen" than either the PS3 or the 360. That of course is by my definition.
What is your definition of "next-gen"?
John @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:24AM
This news is extremely important. For months we've been hearing Nintendo say how easy and cheap it would be to develop for Revolution, but with this news, we actually see them putting their money where their mouth is, and providing developers with cheap and easy development tools to produce great content with.
Digg the story on Digg.com and help it get more press, this is extremely important!
http://digg.com/gaming/Revolution_Dev._Kit_$2000,_Cheaper_than_PSP,_Developers_Guess_$150_Price
Nintendo Revolution @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:36AM
Well let's just hope this helps drive 3rd party support
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:41AM
"@Jago
Dev kits are not supposed to look good. They are just there for the developer to work on only, why would any company even bother making them look good?"
I know that...but trust me, the programmers I work with also think it is ugly (i.e. not visually appealing.)
"Almost every dev kit for a console is just a big box that looks like a quasi-desktop PC."
That is actually not entirely correct...
The PS2 SDK (while big and sometimes can get very hot) does looks kinda cool. The Gamecube SDK was about the same height as the retail/test systems but was rectangular instead.
That may be true of prototype SDKs, like with the "current" PS3 prototype:
http://www.igniq.com/images/ps3_sdk_hardware_230605.jpg
But that will change.
"Can the Revolution even be considered next-gen?"
Is it really necessary to post such things? We all know you are biased...
If all you think next-gen is is prettier pictures running at a higher resolution then I guess you must not value gameplay that much b/c those things don't add to gameplay.
"If this is true then i guess it means all hope of an / near E3 launch are gone. And it would probably explain why we havent seen screenshots yet."
It is much smarter to release screenshots and videos during the biggest event of the year...ya know...E3.
May 9th @ Kodak Theater at 9am
The time is most likely to be pushed back though b/c those pre-E3 press conferences NEVER start on time.
Kyu @ Feb 23rd 2006 1:51AM
While it does sound good on paper about havinge indi game developer, the truth is, is that they're going to need a publisher/distributor to get their games on the console. So it may not equal cheaper games well, at least not that much cheaper, you may pay the same price for a bigger developed named game.
Zack @ Feb 23rd 2006 2:18AM
Mark my works, your favorite game on the revolution is not going to be made by EA games. Good job nintendo, this is revolutionary, I think this is only the first step in making the revolution a cheaply developed platform, further cuts could be made in production (develop for regular dvds), maybe games could be advertised with an online service or something, I think if Joe's Dad down the street makes a kick ass game for the rev that joystiq will find out and let me know asap.
Truf @ Feb 23rd 2006 2:43AM
"It is much smarter to release screenshots and videos during the biggest event of the year...ya know...E3.
May 9th @ Kodak Theater at 9am"
My comments were in relation to both last E3 and TGS
Its also much smarter to release shots that are more representative of what your system is capable of as opposed to just showing games for the sake of it. Did we learn nothing from microsofts showing at E3 last year??
designerwhite @ Feb 23rd 2006 3:18AM
So is anyone else having fantasies... spending 2000 dollars just to play tech demos on the kit?
dan choi:
"If the current GameCube numbers can stay down for Revolution titles while Xbox and PlayStation numbers start to shoot up for their successors ... Those costs are definitely consequential."
Not just in terms of investors and profit lines - I've started to notice recently; the games I'm enjoying the most seem to have the shortest credits. Is it possible that quality artistic vision and a unified experience are easier to achieve with a smaller team + better toolsets to compensate?
This has definitely been the case with a lot of the million selling DS titles - but even chibi robo (which was awesome) credits seemed at least half the usual size. So I tend to get this fEAling that enormous development tEAms, lEAds to mediocre games. (in general, exceptions of course)
Or it could just be that one shigeru is worth more than the biggest teams money can buy...
Future developer kits should come with his babies. Raise your MYAMITES in the incubator, feed them, wash them, they will make games for you.
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 4:08AM
This has nothing to do with this story but you are awesome #31...
Chibi Robo is indeed one of the "sleeper" hits of this year and I hope the developer gets some real recognition b/c they deserve it.
fawazr @ Feb 23rd 2006 5:51AM
The cost of publishing was mentioned and Silicon Knights, Flagship, and Rare come to mind as small studios that have published through Nintendo. Nintendo are a fairly large publisher and I'm sure they'd be eager to subsidize or help out smaller developers. This is really exciting because I'm imagining that with about $50K startup, a few shaggy beards, sleepless nights, and empty stomachs, the next Westwood graduate and a handful of his (or her) programming buddies could possibly make the next great game.
I can't imagine how keeping costs low wouldn't make it easier to enter the field. I may be losing myself, but it all reminds me of the early days of videogame development where most games were being made by maverick teams, not movie directors, actors, greedy film studios, or crazy political organizations, just people that loved making games. Here's hoping.
Gareth @ Feb 23rd 2006 6:10AM
#5, rules of life - it's impossible to have too much memory, bandwidth and power. Xbox 360 cannot therefore be "too powerful".
Go stand in the corner for saying such a stupid thing.
Gareth @ Feb 23rd 2006 6:17AM
"while it may take lots of money to do a PS3 game on BluRay, doing it on the Revo DVD discs is alot shorter cuz there's less space in the game."
Only a Nintendo fanboy could claim that getting less for your money is a good thing.
"Nin knows that space is just filled with graphical detail, so they pull back on everything, graphics, space, HD.."
Funny, as I'm sure I remember you fanboys claiming the Revolution would be just as powerful as MS' and Sony's offerings before Nintendo released the specs... but now that you find out it's just an overclocked GameCube suddenly specs aren't important.
Jay @ Feb 23rd 2006 6:34AM
This is more than excellent. $2000=£1,146 give or take a little for VAT and Tax. After I graduate from university I'm buying myself a Rev dev kit for sure. My mates are excellent coders, we've made a lot of free games between us. My graphics and design, their coding, Revolution games... ah. Wonderful thing.
Cheers Nintendo.
Jay @ Feb 23rd 2006 6:41AM
There is such thing as "too much power". Thats why the Xbox is huge, heavy and noisy as hell. It goes without saying that more power will bring those kind of things. If you don't want noise, size and weight then the Xbox IS too powerful.
The Dev kits are overclocked gamecube kits with a few snazzy new features, but who on earth is saying that incomplete Dev kits represent the final product? I remember when I visited Ocean some years ago and they had a Mega Drive dev kit. This huge PC with some kind of chip burner thing. anyways, they had this Dev kit before the Mega Drives launch obviously, yet they had to wait an extra 4 months after the machines launch until they had a piece of kit that was anywhere near the speed of the commercial Mega Drive.
Nintendo and developers have even said that the old "twice as powerful as the gamecube" statement was a lie, its much more powerful than that. in SD resolutions all systems look the SAME. so stick that, mental Nintendo haters, in your pipes and cry on it.
Gareth @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:02AM
"There is such thing as "too much power". Thats why the Xbox is huge, heavy and noisy as hell.
It goes without saying that more power will bring those kind of things."
Actually no. The power is yielded from the processor, memory and graphics card, essentially. Size and weight both come from the physical properties of the components - their mass and density - and not the speed or power of its computational abilities. The components that are of large physical size are the motherboard, hard drive, and as you seem to talk about Xbox here and not Xbox 360, the PSU. These larger components are in no way connected to the system's performance.
The noise comes from the coolers. Yes, the coolers are there because the processors are running at such a clock speed that they are essential, but coolers are not noisy because processors are fast - coolers are noisy because of the way that they work. Air has never been a good coolant, but this is not caused by processors running at high clock speeds. Air's poor coolant ability is the result of air's low density and its resultant lack of ability to dissipate heat. Quite how you attempt to blame a computer's speed for the properties of air is amusing however.
If your argument was correct then a 20-tonne truck would be faster than a 1-tonne Ferrari.
"If you don't want noise, size and weight then the Xbox IS too powerful."
I disagree. This should say 'if you don't want the size, weight and noise of an Xbox then you should get a console that has less components - like no internal PSU, no harddrive etc. and is cooled by a more efficient coolant like water'.
"The Dev kits are overclocked gamecube kits with a few snazzy new features, but who on earth is saying that incomplete Dev kits represent the final product?"
Try common sense. MS and Sony lose hundreds on every console they sell because of the technology that they give you for your money. If Nintendo aim to make money on the Resolution hardware just as they have on every other piece of hardware while selling it for less than that, then simple common sense says they will not be supplying anything spectacular performance-wise.
If you can think of a magical new way for them to put hardware of equal power together for less than half the cost of the 360, then you should sell your ideas to the highest bidder as I'm sure it would make you a mint, not to mention make you an instant contender for a Nobel prize.
"I remember when I visited Ocean some years ago and they had a Mega Drive dev kit. This huge PC with some kind of chip burner thing."
By your own argument, a huge and heavy computer should be really powerful. But later in your "argument" we see that it isn't - surely even you can see that there is no link between size, weight and the power of hardware?
"Nintendo and developers have even said that the old "twice as powerful as the gamecube" statement was a lie"
Just like they denied there was a redesigned DS coming you mean? Ah wait...
"its much more powerful than that."
I think everyone on here - even the most hardened Nintendo fanboy - would disagree with you there. Comments?
"in SD resolutions all systems look the SAME"
Funny, I was sure I there was a difference in graphical qulity between my Mega Drive and my Dreamcast... and I'm almost certain that there was also a graphical difference between MSR on Dreamcast and Project Gotham 2 on Xbox... correct me if I'm wrong, oh wise one, but were these games not all running on SD?
"so stick that [...] in your pipes and cry on it."
Quite!
WizarDru @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:08AM
See, here's the thing: this is important in that it shows that Nintendo really is taking a different tack. What is the gamecube's biggest weakness? It's arguably as powerful as the original Xbox, so it's not power. Online support was pretty weak on it and the PS/2, so that's not it. What was it? Not enough third party titles.
The '1000 kits shipped' figure doesn't mean 1000 developers are working on Rev titles. It means a large number of developers were curious about the Revolution's power and it's functionality. Ninty was very clear that they wanted to reduce the barrier to development. They're not sticking with the Gamecube codebase just to keep the console cheap...they're doing it to get more developers in the game.
Consider this: a traditional problem of launch titles is that they're rushed, by people who are unfamiliar with what the new hardware can do. The PS/2 didn't launch with Metal Gear Solid 2...it launched with Evergrace. It sounds like Ninty is pursuing the idea of instead of forcing the developers to learn a completely new kit, they're using an upgraded Gamecube codebase...which would mean they instantly have experienced Revolution development teams in-house.
Better yet, as someone hit upon above, it allows smaller developers to work on the revolution, producing inexpensive titles. Imagine many of the casual webgames or independent games, like Oasis or Zuma, coming direct to the Revolution. Sound far-fetched? Then take a good look at the Xbox 360...and notice that it's current killer app is Geometry Wars and Marble Blast. If the Rev comes in at $200 with a few lauch titles at $20 (the aforementioned casuals and independets) side by side with the $50 games...well, that certainly will be attractive, come the Holiday season.
This doesn't mean that it will compete graphically with the 360 and PS3 in high-def (the jury is out on SD)....it won't and it can't. Ninty is attacking a different segment of the market. This strategy is a gamble only if you view this as a three-way race...and I don't think it is. It's a two-way plus one in both the US and Japan....of course, who the two-way is differs depending on the country in question. ;)
anonymous @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:19AM
I own a small game development company. We have less than ten people working on IP and had information that the REV dev-kit would be inexpensive. This really inspired us because whether or not we need one, two, or five, we can afford them. Five REV dev-kits can be purchased for about the same amount as one PS3 kit. Regardless of the amount of money it takes to complete development... we can now be in the game (so to speak). The millions it takes to make games does not always come from the developers pocket. The dev-kits usually do.
This is a great announcement on Nin's part.
Scooby Doo @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:39AM
While I'm really stoked about the thought of making it easier for smaller developers to create games for Nintendo's next console, I can't help but have a little bit of worry about quality. The Atari 2600 was a very easy system to develop for and I can remember a lot of games that should have never made it to market.
Has anyone seen a copy of a Nintendo licensing agreement? Do they have any quality standards that a product must pass before allowing it to become a Licensed Nintendo software title? I don't know much about the licensing and publishing side of the industry so I couldn't even guess.
Don't get me wrong, I am 100% supportive of giving small developers a shot and I think homebrew is a great thing. I just don't want to see a market flooded with poor quality products. Nintendo has been a big enough target for fanboys of other systems so I don't feel a need to give them any more ammo.
And Jago, why are you wasting people's time talking about how unattractive the development kit is? How do the programmers you work with feel about the DEVELOPMENT TOOLS the SDK offers? If a programmer is more concerned about how a Toolkit looks over how well it helps them write programs, I seriously think they should rethink their priorities.
Jeremy Wright @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:41AM
As a note, the 360's dev kits can be had for free if you work directly with the 360 team, do an exclusive, apply for an XNA grant, etc. And MS's dev kits absolutely kick ass as well.
Hell, you can even get cold hard cash to develop 360 games.
saboola @ Feb 23rd 2006 8:52AM
FWIW, the Xbox 360 looks, to me, twice as powerful as the gamecube. There has yet to be a single demonstration on the 360 that has proved otherwise. On the same note, to the graphics is king group, geometry wars is one of the most popular games on the console, FTW?
Scooby Doo @ Feb 23rd 2006 9:00AM
Jeremy, you do realize that your post makes it sound like Microsoft is really desperate to get developers on board for the 360? It actually made me chuckle.
However in all fairness to MS, I've always thought their first party titles are excellent and the XBOX had its share of games that justified my purchase of the console. Thank God for Bioware.
Also, IMO, Nintendo has been the biggest culprit for trying to lure 3rd parties this round. Some of the statements I've heard the execs like Iwata and Reggie make it sound like they'd practically write a game for a smaller developer if the game is interesting enough.
TMoney @ Feb 23rd 2006 9:05AM
I would just like to say that Gareth's little rant there was probably the most BS laden post I have ever read here. Congratulations!
mocax @ Feb 23rd 2006 9:18AM
I can plonk in $2000 for something to play with!
GamerZero @ Feb 23rd 2006 9:19AM
SDK's are just part of the equation.The cost of producing games go well beyond this.
The 360 hasn't even stretched its legs yet.The titles that came out on release were not optimised to the hardware's final spec so it's clearly wrong to assume that you've seen all what the 360 is capable of.It's multi-core and has an advanced graphics chip that developers are now only getting used to with its unified architecture.The Nintendo will be great in its own way as it's not aimed at power hungry gamers who are used to top end pc's and will definitely have great gameplay and graphics that will make the most of current SD TV's.I want Nintendo to stay in this race as it will be a sad loss to all gamers if they disappeared.The same can be said for Sony's PS3,never has there been such choice for the gamer,casual or otherwise.
Gareth @ Feb 23rd 2006 9:43AM
"I would just like to say that Gareth's little rant there was probably the most BS laden post I have ever read here."
Why? How? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but you have to justify yourself or you're just a moron.
[Er... flame-y.]
Jago @ Feb 23rd 2006 12:34PM
"And Jago, why are you wasting people's time talking about how unattractive the development kit is? How do the programmers you work with feel about the DEVELOPMENT TOOLS the SDK offers? If a programmer is more concerned about how a Toolkit looks over how well it helps them write programs, I seriously think they should rethink their priorities."
Why are YOU wasting everyone's time by criticizing me? You're the only one who seems to have a problem with my post. Did I say the programmers were more concerned about the looks of the SDK? No. I just said that they think the PSP SDK and the PS3 prototype are not most aesthetically pleasing things in the world.
"the next Westwood graduate and a handful of his (or her) programming buddies could possibly make the next great game."
That's funny...Westwood college...LOL. Plus you do realize it takes more then just programmers to make a game right? You are forgetting the cost of 3D modeling software (a couple thousand for licenses) and Photoshop (or something similar), programming software, etc.
Sergio @ Feb 23rd 2006 3:01PM
"Size and weight both come from the physical properties of the components - their mass and density - and not the speed or power of its computational abilities."
Yes... and no. The more powerful the main processor, memory, and graphics processor, the more heat is generated, requiring a way to reduce the heat. This would add both weight and noise from heatsinks and fans. Without these loud and noisy components, the system wouldn't be able to achieve its high performance, since you'd end up frying the thing. Since I don't own a 360 yet, I can only speak from the perspective of a very good PC, and also say that this could also require a decent size case to provide good air flow.
Now I would never say there's such a thing as too much power. My recent computer build would prove that. However, there is a balance between how much power is truly needed to achieve a certain experience, and how low can you get to minimize the size required by heat sinks and fans.
Sony and Microsoft are going to one extreme to add as much power as possible. Making both systems bigger, heavier, and noisier. Nintendo is going the other way, by providing a relatively less powerful system, to reduce size, heat, and possibly noise. However, this does not equate to a system that is not capable of achieving good graphics, and more importantly, good gameplay.
Also, a much heavier Boeing 747 is faster than a much lighter bicycle. But then my analogy is just as bad as your's.