expletive said:
Would you agree that code non-portability introduces higher risk for development studios?
No. Perspective and other factors can be much more important:
1. they expect PS3 to sell 90M+ units again and can stand out, and therefor sell more, by focusing on one system (this is true of ANY platform)
2. their franchise fans are PS3 fans and cross platforming dilutes their product
3. Sony is giving them good money to stay
4. Porting code can be very expensive, and for firms with smaller staffs this could be suicide
If code portability is the problem, which we dont know if it is, i think this is what the small to mid dev houses are facing. What if you develop for gillete and no one buys your blades? You're wiped out. Much less risk with the cross platform approach.
Yet even most Xbox fans expect the PS3 to sell best world wide this gen. So if anything the PS3 is not a risk--especially if some of the above (or other) factors apply.
I would think that things like the Unreal 3 engine could even the playing field quite a bit. (interesting thought tho, is there any portability between UE3 devkits on different platforms?).
The problem with UE3 is they have stated they have not specialized for the CPUs much at all at this point; further is that you run the risk of a cookie cutter product. UE3 is expensive ($1M)--and you STILL need to modify it for your game. The advantage is getting artists and map/level designers working EARLY in the process--with less requirement for assistance from programmers.
But this approach will not benefit or even appeal to all development houses.
So while your statement is correct if you hit sales numbers, your risk is much higher of being wiped out by a bad title, or even a decent title that for some reason, doesnt sell well.
A bad title can kill you anyhow. Being on multiple platforms does not always help sales because the risk is diluting your product and being less focused on the actual product (trying to jump through hoops to get decent performance on more than one system, cutting features because they work well on one and not the other, etc).
There are far too many factors, and market positions, to say one is better than another. If I had to choose between a middle of the road 7.5 title on 2 platforms or an 8.5 with great graphics on 1 platform, the chances are the 8.5 is going to sell better.
EA noted that something like over 40 (or 48, something like that) of the 70 best selling games had a mean review at Gamerankings.com had a mean score of 8.0 or HIGHER. Obviously MANY good games don't sell well (market position, branding, advertising, doesn't give with the mass market, too smart, too hard, whatever); but on the other hand if your game stinks it probably wont sell very well.
So if I am a PS2 developer knowing I MUST make a game that is an 8.0 or better, do I work to my strengths: We are good at exposing and maximizing performance on EE, do we focus on exploiting the SPEs and make a graphically killer game OR do we make a generic engine that can either work on SPEs or Xenon?
Same thing for 360 devs. Do we make a title that can be toned down and work well on the PC, something that is portable to the PS2, or do we completely focus on the 360 and try to stand out on that platform?
There is
much to be said to be the BEST game in a genre on a platform. What will sell better on next gen consoles through 2006:
PGR3
NFS
Look at DoA. Being one of the best fighters on the Xbox really made them a LOT of money.
Portability is a factor, but cross platforming is not for everyone. Dev team size, experience, goals, competition (both on the platform and genre wide) all play factors.
So there are obvious cases where specializing is better. My guess is that for many PS2 devs--especially those who were PS2 exclusive--that remaining so could be a very good move if certain criteria are met.
Those with larger dev teams and have a hot product then cross platforming is a good idea. For those with large dev teams and a middle of the road product, well, I am not sure either route will be good.
