Xbox 360 dev: PS3 ports to be "reasonably difficult"
by Ludwig Kietzmann 
{ Jun 15th 2006 at 1:30PM }
With game development costs growing to monstrous proportions and trampling the unconventional concepts roaming the streets of less ambitious publishers, it doesn't take a brilliant businessman to realize that multiplatform releases are likely to generate more money than exclusives. It might, however, take a brilliant programmer to carry out that strategy. Since the Xbox 360 and PS3 both embrace the paradigm of parallelism (or really pretty graphics, if you prefer), it has become almost a foregone conclusion that a large number of titles will inevitably wind up on both platforms. It's not an outlandish conclusion to reach, but the journey may not be as easy as all that. In a recent (and very interesting) Ars Technica interview, Xbox 360 developer Matt Lee points out that porting games between the two systems might be a tad tricky. "I think porting from Xbox 360 to PS3 will be reasonably difficult, since the Xbox 360 has a lot more general purpose processing power that can be flexibly reallocated, and all of the Xbox 360 CPU cores have equal access to all memory. The asymmetric nature of the Cell could easily lead to situations where the game has too little of one type of processing power and too much of another."
Of course, the Xbox 360's trio of general purpose processors may pose an equally significant problem when attempting to tackle a game designed with the PS3's Cell design in mind. Adding multithreaded graphics engines and physics routines to the equation only makes things more complicated and fails to provide a clear answer to the question: If a game costs a fortune to produce, how many publishers are likely to invest even more in porting a game across the Microsoft-Sony divide? It may not have been a major issue in the previous generation, but money changes everything.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
JimmyHACK @ Jun 15th 2006 1:34PM
god forbid devs get off their ass and learn new hardware for its great possibilities
Daniel M. @ Jun 15th 2006 1:38PM
Personally, I think this is a good thing.
I think too many gaming companies nowadays just throw something together, release it on all 3 platforms and can rest easy, knowing they will at least generate some decent cash.
With this new "problem", they will have to target the games to a specific console, and not just develop one game + essentially port it three times.
They can no longer just slap a game together and reach a gigantic audience (owners of any of the 3 consoles). They have to make one REALLY good game to capture a good portion of ONE console's users.
striderhayasa @ Jun 15th 2006 1:41PM
I read the interview and it's a good read. I recommend reading the comments as well. Mr Lee had some interesting things to say in defense of his interview when questioned about 360 development and ease of use.
Mikeawesome @ Jun 15th 2006 1:43PM
It is going to be more costly at first, yes, but as developers get better at it it'll grow cheaper, and the return from second game will probably yield a greater return.
shivr @ Jun 15th 2006 1:52PM
Wow, if this is truly the case where will most of the financing for big-time games come from? A lot of games are already "hit or miss" even if they do have high production values, and this would only make things more risky. Will large corporations capable of absorbing bigger losses be the only ones able to create high-production-value games? Though I suppose the smaller devloper now has a place on XBLA and whatever PS3 and virtual console might have, thats still a much smaller market capable of lesser returns than the wal-mart shelf and a 50-60 dollar price tag(isn't it?).
My guess is in-game advertisments and quasi-required micropayments will become a lot more prominent as people begin to expect more from their HD titles a few years into this generation, if the smaller developer is to survive. Of course, this is all assuming multi-platform titles are and stay difficult and costly to create, and this whole super-high-production-value thing hasn't been over-hyped.
oBLIQUE @ Jun 15th 2006 1:56PM
I agree with Jimmyhack and Daniel M. its seems like alot of these developers are just looking to throw a game together quickly and call it a day, and in return it makes the PS3 look bad, all this "Oh the 360 is so easy to develope for!" comments, when i hear things like that it just make me realise how lazy devs have gotten, I remember Cliffy B. said something to this effect a couple months ago. I look at it this way you cant always expect things to be easy and go the same route as you went the generation before, learn what the new technology has to offer and in the end your game will be alot more better.
That is why i respect hideo kojima, he didnt go looking at the Ps3 with a negative mindset saying "this is to diffcult to learn" he went in and look at the early results of what metal gear solid 4 looks like and were just a year off, I may take so flak but i bet if Cliffy B. did spend so time to look into Ps3 developement gears of war would prolly be better on that system then on the 360, not that it wont be a good game though.
and im no fan boy or anything because Im gonna end up buying all three systems come this november.
AceMilo @ Jun 15th 2006 2:00PM
@oBLIQUE Actually sony just threw more money at kojima to get exclusive rights to mgs4, kojima himself said that mgs4 could EASILY have been made for the 360 and would be the same game with the same graphics, etc. Also, there are a lot of eliments to gears of war that lend themselves only to xbox and live like being able to jump into someone else's single player game in the middle of playing (something only possible on a deticated high speed network which sony has tended to stay away from and go with a distributed approach which I'm sure will be the case with the ps3).
elmer @ Jun 15th 2006 2:04PM
It will be more difficult going the other way. And sure as heck, it would take a brave developer to say they AREN'T developing for playstation.
Jaded @ Jun 15th 2006 2:04PM
Okay, lets be clear on this, devs aren't "lazy." Longer development times cost more money. Smaller user bases buy less games. Clear? Good.
LuckyT @ Jun 15th 2006 2:05PM
@ AceMilo:
"Actually sony just threw more money at kojima to get exclusive rights to mgs4, kojima himself said that mgs4 could EASILY have been made for the 360 and would be the same game with the same graphics, etc"
Don't want to start a "did he or didn't he" debate, but he seemed to climb down from that comment at E3. He said there that he could make a MGS4 for 360, but it wouldn't necessarily be the same as the MGS4 for PS3. When he made the first comment, it was in relation to the TGS trailer, and he certainly didn't say "easily". Time moves on, as always..
Regula Oblique @ Jun 15th 2006 2:13PM
To Jaded just as I stated, yes you have a point about development cost, but were not talking about the same lil guy making games at home still living with mom. These companies have the money to back up development, its just that they push to go the easy (lazy) route to make a quick dollar. But what eventually will happen is that Ps3 developement will pick up just as it did with the Ps2 and when these devs see the true power of the new technology which they understand little of now, PS3 games will outshine 360 games like how xbox games outshine ps2 games.
The ZeroCorpse @ Jun 15th 2006 2:15PM
Yeah... But why would we want MGS4 on the 360? The last couple MGS have been awful. I see no reason to believe that Kojima is suddenly going to make a MGS that's as good and revolutionary as the first one was.
He had one hit, then the rest were garbage.
ivanv4 @ Jun 15th 2006 2:16PM
@oBLIQUE, I think developers are not lazy, it's that they are subject to the deadlines of the releases of games. so if they find ways that reduce the amount of time of porting to different systems, it would be helpful for them.
Danny Boy @ Jun 15th 2006 2:16PM
Well seeing as the 360 is more flexable It's probably safe to say that porting games from the PS3 to the 360 would be easier than porting 360 games to the PS3.
Pedro @ Jun 15th 2006 2:19PM
If anything this is bad news for microsoft, when the PS3 takes off and sells. The trend will continue sony will get the best games and more of them. And microsoft will get some games and weaker PS3 ports.
Regula Oblique @ Jun 15th 2006 2:23PM
True ivan I see what you mean but thats where all the politics come in, and stuff of that nature. Would'nt it just be good if devs didnt have to go thru that then all gammes would be great.
Michael McGuire @ Jun 15th 2006 2:25PM
The simple solution will be: don't use the parallelism.
Instead, games will probably use one processor for most of the work, along with the GPU, much like current titles do. More than likely, the exclusives will be where we see the biggest improvements in "next-gen" since they'll be tailored to the individual system.
Joe Smith @ Jun 15th 2006 2:29PM
"if a game costs a fortune to produce" no if's -- games cost a fortune to produce. And every major publisher will be on both major platforms. The biggest cost in produciton is the content, not the code, and once an engine is built, it can ease future developments. No smart company is going to go exclusive without a huge payment up front to cover the missed revenue from the other platform. At least this generation, the two systems are evenly enough matched that we shouldn't end up with a bunch of crappy lowest common denominator games like we had to suffer through last time (when Xbox games looked as bad as the PS2 source games).
Far more problematic will be Wii. The system is more akin to last gen int erms of horsepower and the control mechanics required are totally unique. This makes it a big gamble for publishers/developers sinec the stuff doen for Wii will almost de-Facto be Wii exclusive.
GamerG @ Jun 15th 2006 2:31PM
If this is true then this will mean that the 360 has a stready stream of PC conversions throughout its life as the pc is going Multi core while the PS3 will have to go on its own with its weird chip, whether this is a good or a bad thing is another matter!
Joe Smith @ Jun 15th 2006 2:33PM
I love this "lazy developers" thing. Have any of you ever tried to produce any kind of commercial product? Do you really think working 6-7 days a week 12 hours a day for 2-3 years to make a game counts as lazy? And its not like your average devs get rich off this stuff or couldn't make as good or better a living doing something easier. The worst piece of shit game you ever played still represents a huge amount of labor and effort. In the case of ports, when you are spending 20-30 MILLION making a game, doesn't it make sense to put it in front of as many paying customers as possible?
darryl @ Jun 15th 2006 2:36PM
The simple solution will be: don't develop xbox360 games.
jabbertrack @ Jun 15th 2006 2:37PM
A whole bunch of this depends on Sony's support system and development 'kits'.
As a small-time programmer I can see the benefits of Cell but learning curves = $$$... then of course with programmers and team members leaving companies to go to other jobs etc... a person that knows how to program for the PS3 is going to fetch top dollar.
That means you can either pay someone a lot of money for existing knowledge... or pay someone and hope they learn on the job... which really they may never be worth the money you spent waiting on them.
molecule @ Jun 15th 2006 2:37PM
Money is all that matters, and if developers think they can recoup their losses after porting a ps3 game to the 360 or vice versa by reaching a larger crowd, then they'll do it; a la GTA IV. I'm just glad I don't have to worry about this, 'cause I'm buying the Wiiiiii!!!!!!! and hopefully, 3rd parties will integrate the wiimote into their games enough that they simply wouldn't be the same if ported to 360 or ps3 (not a TOTAL fanboy, btw, I'm going to mooch off my brother when he gets a 360).
LunarDuality @ Jun 15th 2006 2:40PM
Food for thought (from the Comments at Ars):
Are there any plans similar for the Xbox360 of a student/watered-down developer box?
Matt Lee: We haven't announced anything in this area yet, but allow me to share a related story. A little over a year ago, one of the people in my group modded an Xbox, installed Avalaunch, and put all sorts of Xbox mod scene apps on the box, like XBMC, RSS readers, etc, along with some "backup" games. He brought this box along to a meeting with Bill Gates. Bill saw a demo of this, was quite impressed, and asked something along the lines of "How can we engage this community?" - instead of saying something like "How can we squash this?" It's long been on the back of everyone's minds in the Xbox group - how can we get students and hobbyists involved without disrupting the console business model? The good news is that it's still on the radar, we'll see what happens in the future. In the meantime, please visit http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/.
Darth Pixel @ Jun 15th 2006 2:49PM
As I said, the technical divide between PS 3 and the 360 are going to make first-party titles more important than ever.
I think this is a good, since I do not like all those titles built according to the least common denominator.
Evilsmevil @ Jun 15th 2006 2:54PM
Its all very well saying it would be hard to port games but i actually think ars misses the mark a little on this. In this generation its not the game engine that costs big bucks to produce (although the investment is not insignificant), Its the content. More power means more detail which in turn means more art time/money. With cross platform soultions (most notably the Unreal 3 engine) I think that We will just see fewer and fewer in house graphics engines and this sort of work will be left to the few big middleware companys (Epic, ID, Valve).
SuicideNinja @ Jun 15th 2006 3:10PM
Unless the Cell catches on, learning how to develop for the PS3 could potentially be a waste of time.
It's easy for a non-programmer to say, "They should just learn it," when coding is a headache to begin with. It doesn't help that Sony makes their hardware as hard to work on as a Volkswagen. It sounds like devs are getting better tools this time around, but I bet they aren't half as good as MS's development tools.
For example, Visual Studio .NET or NetBeans? If you say the latter...you have problems.
Vader582 @ Jun 15th 2006 3:20PM
14. If anything this is bad news for microsoft, when the PS3 takes off and sells. The trend will continue sony will get the best games and more of them. And microsoft will get some games and weaker PS3 ports.
Posted at 2:19PM on Jun 15th 2006 by Pedro -3 stars
You should have stuck to the "If you vote for me all your wildest dreams will come true" speech. I'm not voting for you and I can see why you got -3 stars with this kind of foolish gibberjabber...
oBLIQUE, Jimmyhack and Daniel M. = fanbois ;)
Jaded has it right...time IS money.
Jaded @ Jun 15th 2006 3:22PM
To pick up the troll bait from #11 ... Zero Corpse did you actually play MGS3? Because in many ways it was better than MGS1. Of course to each their own, but it wasn't the kind of game that could be dismissed as a post-modern wank-job like MGS2.
apoc06 @ Jun 15th 2006 3:24PM
The metal gear commentary is slightly annoying.
Hideo Kojima on the record saying that metal gear4 is only being produced for ps3:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=139826&skip=yes
Hideo Kojima on record saying that mgs4 is able to achieve visual effects only possible on the ps3. surely there is some form of benefit to using the advanced architecture.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=140990&skip=yes
Basically, both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses. MGS4 will be PS3 exclusive at least for the foreseeable future. Okay, dispute should be settled. Lets try to stay on topic.
Wild Homes @ Jun 15th 2006 3:37PM
I agree with a couple of people earlier in the thread: the Wii is the system with the biggest concerns here. the 360 will have to share with the PS3, sure, and get ports from that system, but the Wii looks like it's going to have ports from the PS2. (for reference, look up Madden Wii.) how does Nintendo plan on handling this problem? it's something I really want to hear Reggie take on before I plunk down two fifty on what looks like an innovative gamecube controller, no matter how much fun Nintendo Sports Tennis is.
but, in a more on-topic way, it makes sense to me that coding for a system wherein you need to allocate individual tasks more specifically to each SPE would making porting games a little harder. and don't the SPEs handle the audio, too?
Jake @ Jun 15th 2006 3:38PM
I would agree that this hurts whichever console isn't getting great sales.
We don't know how the PS3 will do, but the 360 is at 1.7 million in North America as of June 1st, 2006.
http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=12922&rp=49
The 360 is in it's 7th month of sales, compare with XBox 1.0 which had sold 1.5 million in NA within 1.5 months.
So unless the 360 really starts picking up steam, there will be little incentive to port PS3 apps to Xbox 360.
But that's fine with me, I prefer unique titles on each, Halo and Gears of War on 360, Heavenly Sword and Mercenaries 2 on PS3. All good.
oBLIQUE @ Jun 15th 2006 3:41PM
To Vader582 im not a fanboi of no kind I have a xbox360 laying up in my living room now with 10 games, and as I said will be getting a Ps3 after a while and a wii on launch.
shows who the real fanboi is. All eyes on you.
p.s. I didnt get any negative stars, and those other guys shouldnt of have they both made valid points.
matthew @ Jun 15th 2006 3:42PM
WOW another dumb article, its the same thing with the ps2 and xbox totally different architecture one has alot more power than the other, high costs, why do people worry over this stuff. It's what has happened over the past 6-7 years stop whining. Everything always works out. All the fanboys argue over the same shit who cares anymore im tired of all this ranting about high costs which is better, the games, omg the wii. Really this sh*thas got people addicted like crack, casue peeps cant seem to not stop thinking about it and over analyze ever damn aspect of a game or console. I know this is a Video-Game blog so i can give you all some lee-way but please those that write for joystiq stop trolling about topics that have been spoken about in about 7 other articles yes i did look how many there were.
Game Artist @ Jun 15th 2006 3:42PM
And on the 8th day God created middleware and the programmers rejoyed!
matthew @ Jun 15th 2006 3:42PM
WOW another dumb article, its the same thing with the ps2 and xbox totally different architecture one has alot more power than the other, high costs, why do people worry over this stuff. It's what has happened over the past 6-7 years stop whining. Everything always works out. All the fanboys argue over the same shit who cares anymore im tired of all this ranting about high costs which is better, the games, omg the wii. Really this sh*thas got people addicted like crack, casue peeps cant seem to not stop thinking about it and over analyze ever damn aspect of a game or console. I know this is a Video-Game blog so i can give you all some lee-way but please those that write for joystiq stop trolling about topics that have been spoken about in about 7 other articles yes i did look how many there were.
matthew @ Jun 15th 2006 3:43PM
WOW another dumb article, its the same thing with the ps2 and xbox totally different architecture one has alot more power than the other, high costs, why do people worry over this stuff. It's what has happened over the past 6-7 years stop whining. Everything always works out. All the fanboys argue over the same shit who cares anymore im tired of all this ranting about high costs which is better, the games, omg the wii. Really this sh*thas got people addicted like crack, casue peeps cant seem to not stop thinking about it and over analyze ever damn aspect of a game or console. I know this is a Video-Game blog so i can give you all some lee-way but please those that write for joystiq stop trolling about topics that have been spoken about in about 7 other articles yes i did look how many there were.
elmer @ Jun 15th 2006 3:46PM
@SuicideNinja
Thing is, if Cell catches on, then it will become a standard for more than just this industry. Frankly it's not nearly as hard as people are saying from what I hear. The vector units can be coded in C++ rather than assembly as per PS2, and EVERYONE in every computing related industry is going to have to get to grips with parallelism. As the dude says in the article, single core chips have peaked somewhat. We can't keep cranking up clock speeds to make cores perform better because they melt: we need to add more cores. All well said and done, and why should we chose Cell? How about that it's power is in all the areas that are needed. Highly parallel vector math may not seem useful for traditional game processes, but they're perfect for the high capacity media processing we'll all be doing, far better than the alternatives for serious scientific computation, and excellent for data analysis (such as computer vision in robots/augmented reality etc.)
The thing is, as much as it doesn't seem so, Sony was looking forward with their CPU, while MS was looking backward. 360's CPU was designed to scale up all the power that we needed for traditional game processes. Cell was designed with the idea of having advanced physics routines, physical simulation, and visual analysis via eye-toy running alongside traditional processes, keeping in mind we only needed so much more power for higher logic AI (and whatever other general purpose computation you can think of).
As for the difficulties of programming: I personally believe that it's a necessary requirement for a healthy console industry. The message we hear from Carmack and Microsoft (who are both awfully PC centric) is that developers need better tools to take advantage of hardware from the start. This is true for the PC where endless new hardware needs to be maximised quickly, before the next card comes out. On consoles however, the development challenges ensure that games improve over the course of a generation on fixed console hardware. It would be depressing if console games released 4 years after launch were exactly as advanced as games released after 2 years, because maximisation of the hardware had been achieved early through great tools. PS2 was a bitch and had awful tools. Result: Fantavision at the start Vs. Shadow of the Collosus at the end.
Personally, I'm hoping that Cell will revolutionise supercomputing for protein folding calculations.
Tom B. @ Jun 15th 2006 4:31PM
Quoting LunarDuality (quoting someone else?):
"It's long been on the back of everyone's minds in the Xbox group - how can we get students and hobbyists involved without disrupting the console business model?"
I really like the irony in this choice of words. Among rumors that Wii will make it easier for hobbyists and independents to develop for that console, it's a perfect contrast to Nintendo's "Blue Ocean"-inspired strategy. When Reggie talks about disruption, it's a good thing. But in the above context, it's a troubling prospect and should be approached with caution.
Still, props to Microsoft for even considering letting the little guys play. Indeed, it's a risky undertaking. But I think both companies can find ways of making it work.
Canadian Geese @ Jun 15th 2006 4:36PM
I've seen some people on here say that this means it will be a bad idea to develop on the 360...
...If the PS3 outsells the 360, this may be true. However, if the PS3 shares the market with the 360 (with a closer-to-equal audience), and the 360 is cheaper and easier to develop for, wouldn't this mean that more developers are more likely to make 360 games?
Porting is important to developers who want to publish on both platforms. I have a feeling (theory) that this coming generation is going pose some changes to the way games are developed. We already see games that are region-specific. Why not consoles? I believe that the 360 will rule the market in the west, while the PS3 will rule the east. (The Wii, as much as I love it, is still not next-gen IMHO. It's designed for casual gaming, while the PS3 and 360 are not.) This will decrease the need to port games, allowing cheaper developer costs with similar sales numbers, and make it cheaper for console owners who only need to buy one console.
The most obvious problem with this situation, would be that competition between consoles would decrease (but still remain strong on a global scale). However, the high demand for new technology, along with the growing fanbase behind console gaming, will continue to push hardware development.
I personally can't decide which is more important: Catering to gamers or catering to developers. ...IMO, the PS3 is doing neither.
Vader582 @ Jun 15th 2006 5:02PM
31. To Vader582 im not a fanboi of no kind I have a xbox360 laying up in my living room now with 10 games, and as I said will be getting a Ps3 after a while and a wii on launch.
shows who the real fanboi is. All eyes on you.
p.s. I didnt get any negative stars, and those other guys shouldnt of have they both made valid points.
Posted at 3:41PM on Jun 15th 2006 by oBLIQUE 2 stars
Hey ding-dong, I mean oBLIQUE ...I was kidding hence the ;) behind it...anyways I'm with you. I'll be getting a getting a PS3 at some point too...but I'll be letting your dumbass make sure they've worked out the bugs before I buy one. Oh I wasn't talking about stars concerning you, I was talking about/to Pedro jokingly...maybe if you got out of your parent's damp, unused basement every now and then you could've picked up on that...to clarify oBLIQUE that is directed at you.
Vader582 @ Jun 15th 2006 5:05PM
"31. To Vader582 im not a fanboi of no kind..." -oBLIQUE
After a quick reread...I just realized that you in fact, ARE A FANBOI...your own comments prove it!!! Thanks dumbass! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Gotta love those double-negatives...
adebacker @ Jun 15th 2006 5:14PM
Those who call developers lazy apparently have little insight into the amount of work it takes to produce a game. Sometimes developers will sleep at the office so they don't waste the two hours it takes to go home and back again.
Also this isn't even about being lazy or unwillingness to learn new tech, it has to do with the cost to port. If they essentially have to remake the game in order to port it then the cost goes way up. The cost goes up for the dev then the cost goes up for us. I do agree this is going to be the hardest on the Wii because it is so radically different from the other two.
Darth Pixel @ Jun 15th 2006 5:27PM
It's ironic Sony is blamed for not innovating when PS 3 brings at least 2 innovations to the table:
- Cell, a never-tried-before processor architecture (even Intel didn't dare to introduce a new processor architecture in nearly 30 years)
- Blu-ray, a brand new media format, set to surpass DVD
I won't even mention the new controller, which is based on a patent they filed in 1996.
In comparison, Nintendo and Microsoft come up with established, mature technology and they are perceived as innovators.
This world is really strange.
First-party developers will decide who win the next-gen war. A big difference this time around.
LaughingTarget @ Jun 15th 2006 5:38PM
The question is wether Cell is really worth learning. While it is a great tool for specific tasks (folding protien, studying weather patterns, mapping the human genome, etc), Cell is not exactly the best multipurpose processor. IBM has even stated that the Cell processor's normal performance in a PC environment isn't all that hot. Especially now with Intel dropping the bomb with Conroe and AMD's K8L coming down the pipes, which should impress.
Because Cell's life as a major consumer chip is rather limited, who's only current planned utilization is in the PS3 with possible HDTV encoding uses (which requires very little coding when compared to PC applicatoins), there is little incentive to really learn to program on it. Why bother with something that will only have 10 million users when the PC world uses a different chip that has hundreds of millions of users?
Much like the PS2, the PS3 will have most of its advertised potential untapped because the efforts to get into those nooks and crannys won't translate into any value generating activities. The Cell is only being used for games, and based on the cost of the PS3, with far fewer projected users than the PS1 and PS2 pulled, so why spend all the money you're likely not going to get back just so something will be a little nicer to look at?
Programmers already know most of the ins and outs of what the 360 has in it. They just need a few more tricks to use three dual core processors. Cell is a whole new banana with an architechture that may never take off, meaning the next generation may likely not have anything similar to it and go back to the current methods of processing or jump to something that is truly a real leap forward (Organic or Quantum processing anyone?).
Gareth @ Jun 15th 2006 5:54PM
Looks like we're going to see developers developing for one machine and then just half-arsed porting to the other.
I remember Saturn ports of Playstation games only using 1 of its 3 main processors because developers just couldn't be arsed learning how to code it properly (though they charged the same prices for those games). As a result Saturn games were often uglier than their PS equivilents, earning the Saturn a reputation as an inferior console. Little did Joe Bloggs know that the Saturn was only running at 33-50%.
Are we about to see a repeat of history? When games are going to cost the best part of 50 quid this time round, I really hope not.
Natsfan7 A.K.A Mariofan14 @ Jun 15th 2006 6:09PM
....WILL THIS EVER STOP?? OK, THERE BOTH STRONG SYSTEMS, AND ARE VERY CLOSE IN GRAPHICS; SO SHUT IT.
NEXT, THE WHOLE MGS4 THING IS CRAP...SURE IT LOOKS GREAT, BUT I HAVE ONE WORD FOR THOSE NAY SAYERS; GEARS OF WAR...OK THREE WORDS. AND DON'T START THAT CRAP "BUT GOW IS ALMOST DONE..", IT LOOKED ON PAR WITH MGS4 AT LAST YEARS E3.
OK, 360 SALES ARE RATHER CONERNING IT SHOULD BE SAID THAT THE SHORTAGE HURT IT...AND THE FACT THAT THERE AREN'T ANY KILLER EXCLUSIVES.
epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 6:12PM
Ease of porting has always been a two-edged sword. On one hand it means more games for your platform. On the other, it can mean many games that fail to take good advantage of your platform's strengths.
The tradeoff goes back to the early days. A lot of hits originated on the Apple II and got ported to the Atari 800. The Atari had hardware modes that made these ports very straightforward but it also meant that major features, like the four-channel sound chip POKEY, or the 128 (later 256) color palette range and tricks that could be performed with the registers, and so much else, were ignored.
The games were good Apple II games made available to Atari owners but not the even better games we knew were possible. We would rather have seen the projects given over to programmers skilled with the Atari chipset and made into more full featured projects. On the occasions when this was done the Atari version could make the Apple original look pathetic. The Commodore 64 got much of the same treatment in its early days but grew so much as a platform it became less of an issue in the long term.
From a publisher's perspective, using those native features mattered far less than having a game on all three major 6502-based computers for a low additional cost on top of the Apple II original's creation. Sometimes an Apple II coder who knew his way around the Atari could boast of porting his game in a weekend.
Consumers back then were much less likely to own multiple computers of differing brands and operating systems. They'd take what they could get for their machine. Today, a family might have at least two consoles and exercise judgement as to which one offers the best version of a multi-platform title. Nintendo is basing a large part of their strategy on this and encouraging non-exclusive titles to be so different on the Wii that a gamer might get the game on both consoles he owns.
If the effort required for ports going either way between the Xbox 360 and PS3 were sufficiently difficult, it might prompt more distinguishing features between the two, rather than one just being a shadow of the other. Or having both both versions watered down to ease porting rather than making good use of either platform.
One can only hope publishers see the wisdom of a distinctive version of a property for each platform. In the old days it was a matter of necessity for a ColecoVision game to look very different from the same game on the Atari 5200. Today it will hopefully be more a matter of wise marketing to adjust to the realities of the situation.
Ipodfanboy @ Jun 15th 2006 6:39PM
number 39 you said the wii is for casual gaming, lol you are funny. According to Perri Kaplan of Nintendo she said the nintendo wii is for the hardcore gamers, many casual gamers have negative views against the wii not because of the graphics but because of nintendo havinga kiddy named called the wii and the control scheme of the console. I dont think xbox360 wont rule in the west and ps3 wont rule in the east wont happen, nobody knows how and who 3rd party developers are going to side with. Last gen 3rd party developers saided with the ps1 current gen 3rd party developers saided with the ps2 over the gamecube and xbox because it was cheaper to develop and ps2 had a bigger installed base, next gen its a bit difficult. Many factors plague next gen development. one is the nintendo wii its not graphically unimpressive in the eyes of some developers like EA, EA even thinks its better to make games for the xbox360 and ps3 over the wii. Lots of big name companies mostly in the west probably wont put big name games on the nintendo wii I might even think EA will pull support from nintendo sometime in the future. Casual gamers dont want a wii nobecause its kiddy. Another factor is the ps3, every casual gamer wants a ps3 but they cant afford it, ps3 will have a small installed base for a couple of years. its also expensive to develop for the ps3, many small developers dont have enough money to make a ps3 game. Ps3 expensive price combine with a small installed base will scare many developers except for Namco EA and Taketwo, its rumored that if the ps3 has a small installed base combine with expensive 3rd party development that many developers particularly the japenese devs will jump ship on the ps3 and make exclusive titles for the nintendo wii istead which is highly possible. By time the ps3 reaches 300 dollars the nintendo wii would have already won next gen console war. The xbox360 factor is that its easy to develop for, its possible that the xbox360 will become the default console of next gen interms of porting games the same way how the ps2 was the default console of the current gen for porting games. Xbox360 will get ported pc games and vice versa for pc. THe problem is the the ps3 and the wii. What if the nintendo wii dominates then the wii becomes the default console interms of graphics. What if the wii dominates and many western developers espicially smalltime developers jump development of the xbox360 over the wii. What if guys like Valve says its better to play an FPS on a wii compared to a 360. Developing games for next gen is going to be tough and its really going to hurt big name companies like EA activision taketwo etc. Many casual gamers wont buy a wii because its kiddy many casual gamers wont buy an xbox360 because its suck, many casual gamers want a ps3 but cant afford it, the major gaming demographic will flame the fires of the next console video game crash. Many 3rd party developers will crash because of the ps3 not being number1 and being too arrogant to put its games on the wii or 360. Next gen console market is goign to crash watch and see.
ill trooper @ Jun 15th 2006 7:01PM
This is exactly what I always talk about - the PS3, while running parallel-dual TTL-CT-SIR with a CMOS sensors (TTL CrossType secondary image registration), still has to contend with advanced early triggering of the true high dynamic-range (HDR) +12 Volt current rating lighting support, while still maintaining 2048x1536@85Hz updates on the controller's 'serect' button, causing bottlenecks at all available TCP/IP, DHCP, SAN ports - something the 360 seemingly handles well, although it too falls victim to pass-through hyperthreaded QVGA transflective TFT with 16-bit color display failures, causing what many call 'ripping' or artifacting on the 68-pin PCMCIA 2.0/JEIDA 4.0 which, while it supports type 1 SRAM cards up to 4MB, still falls flat when asked to synchronize to a system tempo with frequency and time-dependent parameters factored in.
Plus there's no Halo 3, that is teh suxZ, blah, blah, blah...