EA's Vision for the Future: Glenn Entis interview.

[Edge]

> "We might see the xbox 360 become the defacto dev platform."

That would make sense if Xbox 360 became the dominate platform. I hardly doubt that will be the case.

A company could give away development stations, but it's the market that will determine how much development goes to any particular console.

 

[jvd]

> "We might see the xbox 360 become the defacto dev platform."

That would make sense if Xbox 360 became the dominate platform. I hardly doubt that will be the case.

Sadly it will be the case for awhile as the unit will be on sale for a longer period of time .

Aside from that there are other easons that I listed that you seemed to ignore

 

[Edge]

*IF* the PS3 can show superior differences in games, would not competition drive a developer to create superior content for the dominate platform, or risk losing sales to a competitor who took the extra effort?

I expect companies like EA to not care, and develop to a similar output, but most companies out there have pride in what they are doing, and create code to a systems strengths, especially if the dominate console is the stronger of the two.

Your other points don't seem all the relevant to me.

> "Sadly it will be the case for awhile as the unit will be on sale for a longer period of time."

My opinion only, but I don't think it will take Sony long to pass MS in the market, especially if MS is selling next to no systems in Japan.

 

[jvd]

*IF* the PS3 can show superior differences in games, would not competition drive a developer to create superior content for the dominate platform, or risk losing sales to a competitor who took the extra effort?

On a cross platform title that isn't a big deal as the develope will be going for maximum sales . The sales on two consoles should be higher than on 1 console . Esp earlier in the life of the systems when many own 1 console .

I expect companies like EA to not care, and develop to a similar output, but most companies out there have pride in what they are doing, and create code to a systems strengths, especially if the dominate console is the stronger of the two.

I think u will only see first adn second party games pushing the more powerfull system .

Look at the xbox and ps2 . Very few games make use of the xbox's features . Many just run in a higher res and thats it over the ps2 and turn on fsaa and better filtering . You don't see signifigantly higher quality graphics in the gta series over the ps2 series . The amount of money made by upgrading the graphics wont offest the cost in the majority of cases . Besides that the image on the x360 will be beautifull to begin with The ps3 wont have the power diffrence to truely dilever a better final image . In some ways it may be infior too . I.e from what we know you have fsaa or hdr on the ps3 vs fsaa and hdr on the x360 . However the ps3 will drive a higher res and perhaps higher polygon counts .

It will be interesting to see .

Your other points don't seem all the relevant to me.

Most likely becaue they go against your point and you have no counters for them

My opinion only, but I don't think it will take Sony long to pass MS in the market, especially if MS is selling next to no systems in Japan.

Your putting to much importance on the japanese market . Ms can still get 30% of the market with out japan . 30% of the market will still be very important to a developer to tap into or sales .

 

[Tap In]

I agree with jvd on the point about developing power for the least common denominator.

Many cross-platform games looked 75% (my number ) on the Xbox of what they were truly capable of.

I think we'll see the same situation this gen *if* one system is more or less powerful.

I am willing to bet that most cross platform games this gen will look *exactly* alike and even the AAA 1st party games when using each system to its potential will be only subtly distinguishable by the limitations or strengths in each system respectively.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Multiplatform games don't necessarily need to look the same on all platforms, or even have 100% the same features across all different spec platforms.
This gen already has shown a more powerful platform can have more features and have better visuals etc... witness some games a year or two ago when multiplatform games on xbox had online component, had higher resolution textures, better framerate... Of course there are many mp games that are essentially identical, but most do have that 1.5x improvement. Then again there have been games where the game for more powerful platform have been inferior, it's up to the developer really.

During 2006 we'll certainly see most mp games that were coded with xb360 in mind, and ported over to pS3 with minimal or none improvements, or even downgrades. But I think it's possible the devs could switch over to PS3 as their primary dev platform and then downgrade the games over to xbox360.
But the main game structre in mp games will of course be done so that the game will be possible to port over to the lowest specced machine that has a strong market for those games to make them viable to port over.

After all, the next gen consoles area ll the same gen, so there won't be hugely massive differences in the technology behind the games. It won't be like porting a game from PS2 to DS

xb360 as becoming the "defacto dev platform", I really don't udersand that point of view. A "defacto platform" imo is the platform that devs expect to reap the most money out of game sales, that sells the game most, not the platform by which they spec their games to run at minimum.

Personally, I haven't bought that many of those "multiplatform games", I find them often too generic and not that interesting, and that there are often better alternatives within the same genre that are exclusives.
Like the Need For Speed series... or most of EA games or any "real sports" games
The big games buying public does seem to disagree though