Cross platform development and choice of 'Lead system' *Spinoff*

[iceberg187]

Everyone seems to be leading on Xbox 360. Why did you decide to make the PS3 your main SKU for Burnout?

Channon: We've always led on the Sony platforms. Historically at Criterion we've always done that and we didn't want this year to be any different. We've always loved Sony machines and we've loved PS3 from the start, we think it's a fantastic machine. We felt very strongly about that.

So from the beginning we were always going to lead on PS3 and our transition between the two machines has been really seamless and straight-forward, where as other people have lead on 360 and found it hard to get on PS3.

We've had none of those problems. We really like 360 and if you get the opportunity to play it the two versions are exactly the same. I think we've really reaped the benefits of leading on PS3 because of that.

Why do you think most developers are making Xbox 360 the focus platform for their games? Is it just because it was out earlier?

Channon: Yeah, I guess. I don't know exactly why but maybe it was just because it was the first one out and developers got to know that technology.

Ultimately you get better at making these games the better you know the technology and I think sadly we're nowhere near hitting the limit of the power of the PS3. We'll continue to push it harder and harder. That's simply because of knowledge.

What kind of advantages has leading on PS3 given you in terms of exploiting that specific hardware?

Channon: We haven't got any legacy code from current platforms. It was a huge risk getting rid of everything and it's not always the best thing to do, but in this case it has been because it's a huge step up from last-gen.

We've been able to create things specifically for these machines. That's what's helped us the most. Obviously it's taken a little bit longer and it's been quite hard in terms of getting to know the tech, but because we've been doing it specifically for next-gen that's why we've reaped the benefits.


http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=176610

 

[patsu]

Everyone seems to be leading on Xbox 360. Why did you decide to make the PS3 your main SKU for Burnout?

Channon: We've always led on the Sony platforms. Historically at Criterion we've always done that and we didn't want this year to be any different. We've always loved Sony machines and we've loved PS3 from the start, we think it's a fantastic machine. We felt very strongly about that.

So from the beginning we were always going to lead on PS3 and our transition between the two machines has been really seamless and straight-forward, where as other people have lead on 360 and found it hard to get on PS3.

We've had none of those problems. We really like 360 and if you get the opportunity to play it the two versions are exactly the same. I think we've really reaped the benefits of leading on PS3 because of that.

Why do you think most developers are making Xbox 360 the focus platform for their games? Is it just because it was out earlier?

Channon: Yeah, I guess. I don't know exactly why but maybe it was just because it was the first one out and developers got to know that technology.

Ultimately you get better at making these games the better you know the technology and I think sadly we're nowhere near hitting the limit of the power of the PS3. We'll continue to push it harder and harder. That's simply because of knowledge.

What kind of advantages has leading on PS3 given you in terms of exploiting that specific hardware?

Channon: We haven't got any legacy code from current platforms. It was a huge risk getting rid of everything and it's not always the best thing to do, but in this case it has been because it's a huge step up from last-gen.

We've been able to create things specifically for these machines. That's what's helped us the most. Obviously it's taken a little bit longer and it's been quite hard in terms of getting to know the tech, but because we've been doing it specifically for next-gen that's why we've reaped the benefits.


http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=176610

Thanks for posting this. Will give the game a good look.

 

[22psi]

snip...


http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=176610

I really like this... makes both versions virtually identical to each other even moreso than COD4. Both systems get fantastic versions... it does seem like PS3 to 360 is the way to go if you want both versions to be great.

 

[quest55720]

I really like this... makes both versions virtually identical to each other even moreso than COD4. Both systems get fantastic versions... it does seem like PS3 to 360 is the way to go if you want both versions to be great.

Every comparison I have read has the PS3 superior. Much smoother frame rate and extra eye candy. If reviews reflect this I could see many 360 owners skipping out on it. I think it is a very big risk to make the superior version the one on the console that moves much less software. If a developer thinks it is easier to do it PS3 to 360 fine but the 360 version better be identical or risk pissing off a user base who buys a crap load of games.

 

[liolio]

Apparently also the crashes have more bits and pieces flying around on the PS3? But I've also read that the road textures look a bit better on 360 (though that may be due to lack of a speed blur effect as much as better filtering or memory use, I don't know). The important part of it though is whether or not the 360 version runs better than comparable other 360 games. In theory, it should.

Anyway, it's obvious that they managed to create an engine that makes great use out of both systems. Hopefully they'll set a trend. That and the unreal engine now running well on the PS3 and the OS not taking up as much memory should help with future multi-platform games.

What if the game sells way better on the 360, do you think others editors/dev team will go through this extra effort/time/money ?

 

[.Melchiah.]

What if the game sells way better on the 360, doyouthink other editors/dev team will go through this extra effort/time/money ?

From what I've read, it should be easier to develop games first on PS3 and then port them to 360.

Capcom seems to think PS3 and 360 are basically equal in terms of development costs.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8287&Itemid=50

When Monster Hunter was moved from PS3 to Wii, Capcom said that high development costs related to PS3 were the main factor, adding fuel to the fire called “PS3 is tough/expensive to develop for.” But Fajors considers Xbox 360 and PS3 costs to be quite similar.

“If I’m going to make a blanket statement, I’d say that Xbox 360 and PS3 are basically equal [in terms of development costs],” he says. “The challenge at this early stage lies in the type of games. When you look at the tools and technologies and comfort that people have, given that the Xbox 360 has a year lead on PS3, there are of course more technologies available for a certain genre. So that can make life a little bit easier.

 

[liolio]

es but why would others change their already working engine if the software sales continue to be lowon the PS3?

Ps3 owners that don't own a 360 will by the game if the port is correct as they have no choice.
think at the pool of people owning both the 360 and ps3 why would devs spend more to sell more software on the ps3?
For them it's the same minus dev costs.
And anyway engine will fare better and better on the ps3 (the same is true for 360).
But i don't see burnout setting a trend if it doesn't make its proof with strong sales on PS3.

 

[Arwin]

es but why would others change their already working engine if the software sales continue to be lowon the PS3?

Ps3 owners that don't own a 360 will by the game if the port is correct as they have no choice.
think at the pool of people owning both the 360 and ps3 why would devs spend more to sell more software on the ps3?
For them it's the same minus dev costs.
And anyway engine will fare better and better on the ps3 (the same is true for 360).
But i don't see burnout setting a trend if it doesn't make its proof with strong sales on PS3.

It's all about competition. Even on 360 alone, you may want to change your engine to be able to gain sales from your closest competitor. If you have no competitors, then things are much easier, but that's typically a reality that only exists in the very early years of a console.

 

[Brad Grenz]

The whole point of the idea is that #1: starting on the PS3 and porting to Xbox 360 will save hassle and therefore time and money over trying to do it the other way around and #2: not leave you with a needlessly inferior PS3 SKU. Both of these are benefits for the publisher and neither is a detriment to the Xbox 360 SKU. Everybody wins! The PS3 version doesn't have to be better. It's just nice not to damage your brand with a horribly broken PS3 game (cough... Orange Box).

 

[liolio]

I get your point but :
Why believe burnout devs? Ubisoft had good result with CoD4.
Why not trying to make your game better on a platform which sell a lot of softwares andwhere competition is strong?
not saying that It would be stupid to not improve ps3 version of some games (and nobody does in fact port gets better), but shift to ps3 as the lead sku because some devs get good result with the ps3 as lead sku... is far too streched... especially if this has no impacted on sales.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Well, there are technical reasons to believe what the Burnout devs are saying is true. If you're starting with the premise that your game is headed to both the PS3 and Xbox 360 that means at some point you'll have to make an investment in getting it running on the PS3. It stands to reason that making that investment up front will save you money since getting tour PS3 codebase ported to the 360 will be easier than trying to shoehorn your 360 code onto the PS3. You shouldn't get caught up on this "better version" stuff. There's no reason to believe 360 first titles will give you a better 360 product than the other way. Remember, you can always optimize for the specific platform at the last. But there is plenty of evidence that 360 first games leave you with an inferior PS3 game. So, if that means less potential sales AND a more expensive development process, what is the benefit? At this point it's more a matter of dev familiarity and preference for the 360. That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do from a business development.

 

[DJ12]

UBI haven't done a decent port.

Call of Duty is Activision, or should I say Infinity Ward seeing as Activision are just the publisher.

With burnout we are talking a proper 720p, running at a constant 60fps, where just about everything looks exactly the same on both versions (the consensus seems to be there are a few minor details that are better in the PS3 version). CoD doesn't however, if they led on the PS3, maybe they would've managed it too.

 

[JPT]

Didnt IW say that they didn't lead on any platform, they developed on all platforms at the same time (PS3, X360 & PC) with multiple teams?

 

[Mboojigga]

Didnt IW say that they didn't lead on any platform, they developed on all platforms at the same time (PS3, X360 & PC) with multiple teams?

That is correct.

 

[Mboojigga]

Regardless I doubt the deciding factor comes down to which one looks better or which platform was the leading sku. The main factor for owners of both consoles comes down to Live vs PSN.(multiplayer games)
Friends list which if you have been on Live for the last couple of years and the ease of chat most go with that sku. I myself own both consoles but buy all my multiplayer games for the 360 and exclusives for the PS3.

 

[Mboojigga]

Regardless I doubt the deciding factor comes down to which one looks better or which platform was the leading sku. The main factor for owners of both consoles comes down to Live vs PSN.(multiplayer games)
Friends list which if you have been on Live for the last couple of years and the ease of chat most go with that sku. I myself own both consoles but buy all my multiplayer games for the 360 and exclusives for the PS3.

The average person beyond these forums doesn't know or even care which was the leading sku.

 

[DJ12]

Didnt IW say that they didn't lead on any platform, they developed on all platforms at the same time (PS3, X360 & PC) with multiple teams?

Thats what they said, but then the PS3 version does run at 600p too.

If they really didn't port anything I would expect the PS3 version to be 720p as it's not the greatest at scaling.

 

[Mintmaster]

Thats what they said, but then the PS3 version does run at 600p too.

If they really didn't port anything I would expect the PS3 version to be 720p as it's not the greatest at scaling.

Would you prefer 720p at much less than 60fps with even more examples of low res textures vs. the 360 version? Or 600p at 60fps as it is?

I think they made the right choice. 600p lets them avoid tiling on 360, but it also allows more effects and/or higher framerate on both platforms. If it let them use AF, then it was definately the right choice.

 

[DJ12]

I didn't say it was right or wrong, I said it doesn't exactly tally with Infinity Ward saying they created two versions from scratch.

 

[joker454]

Well, there are technical reasons to believe what the Burnout devs are saying is true. If you're starting with the premise that your game is headed to both the PS3 and Xbox 360 that means at some point you'll have to make an investment in getting it running on the PS3. It stands to reason that making that investment up front will save you money since getting tour PS3 codebase ported to the 360 will be easier than trying to shoehorn your 360 code onto the PS3.

It probably is easier to do a PS3->360 port, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Ports always mean the port-to platform is not being maximized. Looking at sales figures and attach rates, 360 is where the money is and hence that's the platform you need to shine on . It doesn't make financial sense to cannibalize your 360 product by making it as a port from a PS3 game when your competitors on 360 are not doing that. All you end up with is a good "port" on 360 when your competitors product may be fuly exploiting the 360's abilities. Ask the suits and bean counters at your repesctive companies, it just doesn't make sense to do that. The last thing you want is that ~7.0 attach rate to pass your product by because it's a port.