Developer's Favorite Consoles

[bapenguin]

Found via Major Nelson (http://www.majornelson.com), Cubed3 (http://www.cubed3.com/news/5556) has the results of an anonymous game developer survey on a variety of topics.

Which system are you more excited to develop for?
Microsoft XBOX 360 - 37%
Sony PlayStation 3 - 16%
Nintendo Wii - 32%
PC - 5%
Nintendo DS - 5%
PlayStation Portable - 5%
The poor, poor PC, relegated to the level of a PSP.

[bKangy]

I suspect developers aren't excited to develop for the PC because it's been around for longer than God himself.

[MasterEvilAce]

Man, lame.

PC is that low? I guess it makes some sense. Just a few things I can think of..
Piracy on Xbox360 is nill (or atleast very low? I havn't heard anything about the 360 and piracy, really)
Guaranteed hardware.. Easy to program for a specific hardware set.


Hmm.. those two alone are already sorta worth it I guess. I like the 360.. but I'd rather game on a PC.

And yeah, what Khangy said.. "excited" and not necessarily what you want to develop for.

[Winter wolf]

TeH PC is DyINg !!1111!oneone!

Anyway, Consoles are the future i guess.

[Frogleg Special]

Let me guess: the survey was asked to American or British developer of hip, mainstream games (Sports, Urban, Racing, GTA like stuff)? The kind of games with high production value but almost no replayability value?

If it's German, Russian, Scandinivian, Eastern European or Korean developer the PC would have a higher percentage.

[MasterEvilAce]

^ Whatever dude.

[Zawath]

I think they only asked the opinions of console developers and we all know that they are too cool to play PC games because they aren't trendy enough.

[Frogleg Special]

^ Whatever dude.

What's that supposed to mean, Hombre?

[Kamalot]

Wii60 WTW!

[NoName]

Wii60 WTW!
That's what I took away, and it made me all warm and fuzzy inside :).

[Knite]

Keep in mind, this wasn't asking what they want to develop for, or what they prefer, but what they are most excited for.

I can easily see how something like the Wii, 360, or PS3 might be "exciting" to work on, as they are new hardware, less hardware conflicts to worry about, you can make the controls what you want to be, and bring new energies to the table.

The PC has been around a long time, has 1,000,000,000 different configurations to build for, and quite a large number of different control schemes to plan for.

Sure, some people like to take that 1970 Mustang, and see what they can crank out of the engine and transmission, and hope it doesn't break, but most like to just get in a car, turn the key, and hit the gas.

[EvilBob46]

I play console games almost exclusively these days, but the fading of PC gaming is pissing me off nonetheless. You just won't see games like Planescape: Torment or Grim Fandango on consoles.

[MasterEvilAce]

What's that supposed to mean, Hombre?
I'm saying you're out of your gord, man.

First of all, it appears that you essentially say American and British developers only develop games that look like great games, but don't deliver.

Secondly.. "Hip mainstream"... Again you seem to attack racing games / car games saying that they have no replayability value and are only "hip" and essentially fads.

Then somehow you manage the conclusion that these other countries would favor PC over dedicated game consoles?

Honestly.. how do you reach ANY of these conclusions? How are "hip" games only for consoles? How can certain countries be better at making better games on a PC? How can certain countries SUCK at it?

[lost]

This place is like a gladiator pit! Fights break out like their herpes on a hooker.

Blah, interesting and all but fairly meaningless. Excitement can't measure achievement and vice versa. 360 gets a nice chunky advantage here partly due to the fact (in my opinion anyway) that developers are starting to worm there way into the good shit of the console. PS3 will have to wait its year before you get an excited developer base.

[easi]

This is ONE statistic from a Nintendo-focused site. Why didn't you post the results of "Are you excited for the Wii?" (77% yes) or any others?

Oh right, because this is a 360 shill site.

[Captain Awesome]

Piracy on Xbox360 is nill (or atleast very low? I havn't heard anything about the 360 and piracy, really)

Actually the 360 has been cracked for piracy, I've seen these sort of "flash" programs people have ben talking about and using to dump games and such into it. It's only a matter of time until this thing gets modded heavily like the first xbox.

[Captain Awesome]

I play console games almost exclusively these days, but the fading of PC gaming is pissing me off nonetheless. You just won't see games like Planescape: Torment or Grim Fandango on consoles.

Fading? where are you getting these numbers or stats? I also find that percentage about PC games to be utter bullshit.

[Frogleg Special]

First of all, it appears that you essentially say American and British developers only develop games that look like great games, but don't deliver.


Don't deliver is an understatement. Hip games make more money than niche games like Psychonaut or Darwinia. I never say "only" but majority of American and British tend to develop games that garner the frontpage of gaming magazine EGM, OXM and PSM.


Secondly.. "Hip mainstream"... Again you seem to attack racing games / car games saying that they have no replayability value and are only "hip" and essentially fads.


Not all racing games are hip games. But when they are, they're obviously catering to the mainstream. I played Burnout 3 for a while, not finishing all the missions and I don't bother buying the sequel. I stopped playing Burnout when I realized what's the point of hitting the AI cars and see all slo-mo shots. Yeah, sure it's cool but I rather finish Gothic 2 or Planescape Torment.

BTW, I still play Burnout 3 if I have nothing to do on the Weekend.


Then somehow you manage the conclusion that these other countries would favor PC over dedicated game consoles?


Favor? I said higher percentage. That doesn't mean PC would come out on top but at least it would gain something respectable than 5%


Honestly.. how do you reach ANY of these conclusions? How are "hip" games only for consoles? How can certain countries be better at making better games on a PC? How can certain countries SUCK at it?

Hip games are sold more in consoles (no brainer, consoles are more numerous)and it seems that Marketing are directing those games for the consoles for greater exposure. I don't see Tony Hawk or Mark Ecko bring the same publicity in PC gaming magazine. Some countries do make more games on the PC because there are still sizeable markets of PC gamers compared to the percentage in the US and UK.

Funny, you are kind of touchy when I mention mainstream games. If you like those games, why bother of justifying whether it's a good game or not. I don't like playing mainstream games all the time. You seem to like mainstream games. Let it be like that.

[disc]

Sure.

360 > Wii and DS down at the level of PSP/PC.

Right.

Not a Microsoft-centric poll in any way.

[reimomo]

Sure.

360 > Wii and DS down at the level of PSP/PC.

Right.

Not a Microsoft-centric poll in any way.


The sad thing is: Its a poll done at a Nintendo fan site (I gather since all 10 of the recent "news" items are about Nintendo). So while the "PC gaming is dead!" conclusion is totally unfounded (biased sample set anyone?), it is kinda funny that of the people who bother to visit the site, a higher percentage prefer Xbox360 to Wii. Why wasn't Xbox1 or PS2 or Gamecude included?

[Frogleg Special]

I also find that percentage about PC games to be utter bullshit.

That's because:
- Most PC games now are made with smaller budgets.
- Many PC games are made in Eastern European countries.
- Everyone with half creativity but have the necessary coding skills could make a PC game.
- PC as a platform definitely sucks. Millions of configurations, meager effort from Intel and AMD, zero attention from Microsoft until Vista. The Vista support is also pathetic even up to now. Halo 2? Pffft. Give Vista Mechwarrior 5 and Marathon.

You want non-bullshit PC games? Time machine to the last decade.

[MasterEvilAce]

Don't deliver is an understatement. Hip games make more money than niche games like Psychonaut or Darwinia. I never say "only" but majority of American and British tend to develop games that garner the frontpage of gaming magazine EGM, OXM and PSM.

Again, you're throwing mainstream games into a lump of bullshit.

I'm not saying I love mainstream games. Infact, I don't like games like Burnout or anything that's "hip" that you may be thinking of. The GTA series I do find fun. If anything, I hate niche games. Darwinia seems very lame. But just because I don't enjoy a certain game doesn't mean I'm going to throw that entire gametype into some sort of stereotype!

The reason I'm so uptight on this, is because you stereotyped about three things, and lumped them altogether. Instead of giving specific examples of games, you start stereotyping entire countries and consoles.

Just because a game is on a console or a PC doesn't make it a niche game nor a hip game. Honestly. You can't even attempt to draw that conclusion. There are shitty games for both.


Just because a game gets a lot of attention and goes into the "mainstream" doesn't mean it's going to suck because it's mainstream. It would probably have still sucked BEFORE it went mainstream. If it succeeds, then it became mainstream for a damned reason. The games that are mainstream and suck are because of DAMNED GOOD advertising / marketing, or a great developer trying to bank on a crappy product.


Also, MechWarrior? Are you serious? I enjoyed playing Mechwarrior 2, but now even after playing the newer mechwarriors.. I see how much that series sucks. Now that's rubbish.

[holysin]

Well, duh.
The PSP is too expensive to develop, and isn't selling that well. Developers want money.
The 360 is easy to develop to, it's a next gen and it's selling fairly well.
The PC doesn't sell as well as console games, everybody knows that. There's also a bigger chance that your game will be pirated. Starforce 3, as much as people hate it, was the best protection against piracy.
The Wii is new, it has a cool controller, it'll probably sell very well, and if you developed for the gamecube before you'll be right at home.

Anyway, it's understandable that people wouldn't be excited to develop for the pc.

[BigJonno]

It scares me how bent out of shape people get over a poll. It seems a certain percentage of people take any opportunity to inflict their narrow-minded views on the general populace. This doesn't mean that PC gaming is "teh d00m3d" or that the 360 is going to dominate this consoles generation. Like a couple of people have said, there's no way that the PC is going to be an exciting platform to develop for, it's a pain in the arse.

If it's German, Russian, Scandinivian, Eastern European or Korean developer the PC would have a higher percentage.

Yes, because the vast majority of developers in the countries you mentioned are small, lacking in fundage and only have the resources available to develop for the PC. Also, despite a few gems, the games they produce aren't good enough to get translated out of their native tongue. It's like the ridiculous way that the Japanese games industry gets held up as some shining example of greatness by many people, when the reality is that we just see the cream of the crop and the vast majority of Japanese games are too weird, niche or just plain awful to be worth the effort of releasing elsewhere.

[bapenguin]

This is ONE statistic from a Nintendo-focused site. Why didn't you post the results of "Are you excited for the Wii?" (77% yes) or any others?

Oh right, because this is a 360 shill site.

Or maybe because I found the PC information much more interesting than the console stuff. We know every developer is excited about the Wii. We didn't know that the PC has such little interest.

[TrackZero]

Poor BA, dupe posting again. Tch tch tch. ;)

[BigJonno]

Wow, in the time it took me to write my post, the person who's point I was debating said the same thing I did, but as some kind of defence. That's odd.

[didragondi]

One recent item I remember hearing comes to mind when I look at this and the piracy aspect. I heard that someone, a couple of weeks ago, had stolen the code for Hellgate London like they did for Halflife 2. It must be hard to be excited to develop only to see someone rip off your work. I really enjoy PC games, but that is quite discouraging. I am surprised that more PC games with buzz around them(like Hellgate) arent bought out as console exclusives like Microsoft did Halo around five years ago.

[needoptic]

The 360 does have XNA working for it - and that is a big deal for developers. All standard libraries, very stable and easy to use development suite... etc. etc.

[Frogleg Special]

Just because a game gets a lot of attention and goes into the "mainstream" doesn't mean it's going to suck because it's mainstream. It would probably have still sucked BEFORE it went mainstream. If it succeeds, then it became mainstream for a damned reason. The games that are mainstream and suck are because of DAMNED GOOD advertising / marketing, or a great developer trying to bank on a crappy product.


If a game is made to take advantage of pleasing some sadistic notions (GTA) or taking out your dollhouse skill (Sims) then those games are made for the masses. These games are made to reap the most money and often without originality, the publishers keep churning the same kind of games and expansions, others copycatting the same kind of games. Mainstream games are made, not by coincidence.


Also, MechWarrior? Are you serious? I enjoyed playing Mechwarrior 2, but now even after playing the newer mechwarriors.. I see how much that series sucks. Now that's rubbish.

Now that's because of Microsoft Gaming Studios. Mechassault is the worst offender. PC Mech 4 is quite okay.

[Frogleg Special]

I am surprised that more PC games with buzz around them(like Hellgate) arent bought out as console exclusives like Microsoft did Halo around five years ago.

Maybe because not all devs are desperate for money like Bungie, some devs still love developing in the PC platform, and Microsoft doesn't want to take the helium out of Vista gaming.

[Frogleg Special]

Wow, in the time it took me to write my post, the person who's point I was debating said the same thing I did, but as some kind of defence. That's odd.

That's because I'm not a blind PC gaming-only fanboy :D

[Stormwatcher]

that survey really means nothing...
Here, I have made a survey too:
Q: How Awesome is developing games for the PC?
a) Really damn awesome -- 100%
b) as awesome as Scarlett Johanson's lips -- 150%
c) It is like 1 billion bucks -- 25 x e^18274510
d) There are no words in any human language capable of descibring such an infinite level of awesomeness. -- All of them plus 1

[benson]

Wow you guys. So I saw a similar poll in a Game Informer this week. It was a poll of multiple developers, and was anonymous. There were no names mentioned, they didn't mention which developers they polled, nor who was saying what. But the results were similar.

Personally, I like to game on my 360 and my PC in that order. PC gaming is far from dead, look at some of the cool games coming out. And most good RTS games are on PC. And all of the good MMO's are on PC. Sure some of each will come out on consoles, but I don't see the consoles getting the best ones for quite some time.

Anyway, as long as there is money to be made on all of the systems, games will be developed for them. If developers can make a game for the 360 and PC at the same time, why wouldn't they? There is money to be had.

[BigJonno]

The ignorance surrounding GTA is staggering. The original GTA was developed as a 2D, top down game by DMA Design (who are now Rockstar North) a small Scottish developer whose most notable game prior to this was Lemmings. The game was the very definition of niche, it was graphically unremarkable, it didn't fit into any kind of established genre and it had a very dark, satirical and British sense of humour. If I remember rightly it had a respectable showing, both critically and commercially, though nothing amazing.

It wasn't until GTA 3 that the series became big. I remember thinking how amazing it was that they were making something as huge and freeform into a 3D game. It did incredibly well because of two things, firstly, the subject matter made it appeal to the mass market and secondly, it was a bloody good game. It's imitators have failed because they only copied the former.

It was only after that with Vice City that they got the big name voice actors and the licensed tracks and all that. It's at this point that they could've got lazy and let it slide, but they've improved the series with each iteration. I was so sceptical about San Andreas as I couldn't see how they could keep up the pace, but they managed to make it bigger and better in every possible way, while keeping the core appeal of the game.

GTA is possibly the best recent example of an original, innovative game becoming a huge commercial success. The only real competitor for that accolade is the Sims, but EA had it's filthy mits in that and started churning out constant expansions. To write it off as mainstream crap and bundle it in with the yearly updates of identikit sports titles is a sign of either complete ignorance or stick-up-your-arse, to-cool-for-school, elitist bullshittery.

[didragondi]

The original GTA, I remember playing and haring that it was perceived as controversial. I tried it then before it was 3-D and I remember especially from a visual perspective, thinking, I dont get it. Then halflife came out. Never looked back at GTA 2

[Lexicon]

Wow you guys. So I saw a similar poll in a Game Informer this week. It was a poll of multiple developers, and was anonymous. There were no names mentioned, they didn't mention which developers they polled, nor who was saying what. But the results were similar.

Personally, I like to game on my 360 and my PC in that order. PC gaming is far from dead, look at some of the cool games coming out. And most good RTS games are on PC. And all of the good MMO's are on PC. Sure some of each will come out on consoles, but I don't see the consoles getting the best ones for quite some time.

Anyway, as long as there is money to be made on all of the systems, games will be developed for them. If developers can make a game for the 360 and PC at the same time, why wouldn't they? There is money to be had.

It is the same poll as the one from Game Informer.

[ldi222]

I think this poll is nonsense. First off "anonymous sources" are always somewhat questionable but more than that it surprises me how many 360 fanboys are eager to just turn their back on the PC now. As far as how exciting it must be, I would guess that anything new would be more exciting (in the short term) and although the PC continues to be the top when it comes to capabilities its been around by the same name since the 286.

I dunno for me personally instead of dropping $450 on a 360 for Geometry Wars, my Gigabyte SLI mobo with the Geforce 7600GS for about $300 fit the bill nicely and this year has given me Oblivion, Factions, Prey and BFME II. I havent gotten around to mame'ing Frogger yet though.

[Xerxes]

Wow you guys. So I saw a similar poll in a Game Informer this week. It was a poll of multiple developers, and was anonymous. There were no names mentioned, they didn't mention which developers they polled, nor who was saying what. But the results were similar.


It's the same one. And I'm thinking maybe if they changed the poll from just PC to something like DirectX 10. I mean PC has been around. That's like for a 1995 Camry. Now if you say it's the 2007 model then hell yeah. DirectX 10 is the latest tech and it's more to be excited about than PSP. But even then, they probably did poll alot of console devs.

[Watership]

If a game is made to take advantage of pleasing some sadistic notions (GTA) or taking out your dollhouse skill (Sims) then those games are made for the masses. These games are made to reap the most money and often without originality, the publishers keep churning the same kind of games and expansions, others copycatting the same kind of games. Mainstream games are made, not by coincidence.



Now that's because of Microsoft Gaming Studios. Mechassault is the worst offender. PC Mech 4 is quite okay.

Mech 4 was BLAH. MechWarrior 2 was the last good game.

[Malovech]

Mech 4 was BLAH. MechWarrior 2 was the last good game.


Heavy Gear II

[BenN1ce]

This Poll is from Game Informer and I'm shocked the unbiased Nelson left out this question

Q: Will more development time yield better games with PS3?

A: No. For some reason I am feeling like the Saturn all over again

[Meatgortex]

Wow, so many panties bunched up in one thread.

The poll asked developers what they are excited about, not gamers or visitors to any gaming site of any slant. Most of them were probably console developers, but even if most of them were PC developers these numbers make sense.

The Wii and 360 are exciting because they both offer something new (Controller/Live)and are relatively easy to work on. PS3 excitement is tempered by development difficulties.

The PC isn't exciting from a development perspective. Too many configurations, too fractured an install base, weak sales for all but the top titles, rampant piracy. More that anything it's just old. That doesn't mean it's not the best platform for some titles, that it's tEh d0omEd, or that developers don't like it. It's just not exciting.

The one surprise of that poll is the DS. From a developer standpoint the DS offers the same new+ease combo of the Wii60. However it's understandable when you look at the game purchasing habits of DS owners.

[Wonka]

A lot of you want to call this poll biased, but based on the devs I know and have known, I think its pretty close to the truth.

It does NOT matter one bit though.

Since when did Devs get to decide what they work on? The answer is: almost never.

For the most part, developers do what publishers tell them to.

Publishers tell developers to make games that publishers think will make money.


What do publishers think?

Well, publishers like consoles (more than PC). The installed base is larger and easier to guage the size of, and there is less piracy.

And publishers are also being much more careful this time because they are not confident about how the console race will turn out (unlike last time where PS2 became a self fulfilling prophecy).

So the biggest threat to Sony is actually publisher confidence. If the PS3 is not an overnight sensation, if weakness is perceived this fall, that will be BAD news for Sony. If things go the other way, then it could be BAD news for MS. The year head start is like an insurance policy that MS has against the latter happening. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

[Steele Johnson]

Why isn't the iMac on the list? ;)

Personally, as much as I love playing games on the pc, there are numerous reasons why developing games for a console is preferred.

I also rather play online games on a console because everyone has the same hardware so I feel there's no advantage/disadvantage outside of your skill level.

[Kagger]

I'm really suprised the DS was ranked so low. I suppose it could be because most developers would want to develop for a non handheld...but it just suprised me.

[Cobalt]

If this was already mentioned ignore, I only skimmed through the posts.

Developers are very excited about the current gen tech because it's on par or better than the average household computer. PC tech is in a slump, people aren't flocking to the store to buy newer faster machines. The average person already has more power than they need. PC is superior, no doubt at all about that.

Retailers nearly abandoned the PC in favor of consoles. Oh sure they keep the big budget games around, but it's getting harder and harder to get samller products on the shelf. Just look at EB. At one point 2/3 of the store was dedicated to PC games, now there's only some shitty display stuffed in the corner. Why? Retailers make less money on PC games. They take up more space, they have less advertising, draw fewer customers. Especially places like Wal-Mart, where you do 40-50% of your business. Who's the average Wal-Mart demographic? A casual mass market consumer.

PC games also have an entrance barrier - Hardware. When you pick up a PS2 game, you know it's going to work. When you pick up a PC game, there's a decent chance you may not be able to play it.

Consoles remove tech from the equation. If you can use a DVD player, you can use a console.

If you want to lay blame on the demise of PC gaming, blame evolution. What was once a geek zone, is now the hip. Hip = mass market = lowest common denominator = money wasted on glitz, catch phrases, marketing dribble instead of designing better games.

There is hope! Online Distribution, Episodic Content, Indie Developers. Support those, and you'll see the PC revived.

[Returner]

I like the PC but developing for it sucks because of compatibility. But anybody who thinks PC is dying is a fool.

[Gamasutra Podcast]

I apologize in advance for the long post...

In a nutshell, there is a big difference between what developers are intrigued by, and what they actually develop for.

Actually, PCs are the largest installed base. But not necessarily gaming PCs, or the market of game purchasers among that base. For the sake of comparison to the other platforms in the survey, I am discounting the casual space. The big money is currently in console dev, but only if you happen to release a blockbuster title that sells through literally millions of units.

PC gaming isn't dying; it's just evolving. As long as publishers can continue to make money there, they won't stop developing for the market. It's just that PC gaming is a more targetted market, and it is getting smaller in comparison to the console market. But total sales don't matter as much as the budget allocated for development versus return on investment. Meaning, if you sell through only <1M units for a niche title, that could still be counted as a success if you don't lose that much money on it. With the increasing viability of downloadable distribution, publishers could stand to see more direct money in their pockets, as well.

On the portable side, the reason DS is ranked relatively low is that third-party developers make far less profit per unit sold. So you have to sell a lot more product compared to, say, if you put the investment toward developing an Xbox 360 or PS2 title. (Of course, 21 million DS's (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=10205) isn't a bad market to pursue.)

But as a publisher, if you have limited resources to allocate against each platform, you're going to invest more heavily in those areas where you're more likely to see more return. It's simple economics. And with the increasing resource requirements for Xbox 360 and PS3 development, publishers and developers are stretched more thinly than ever before.

It will be interesting indeed to see how this all plays out. I think Sony is in a rut of strangely bad PR. They just can't seem to stop with the media missteps. The PS3 price announcements at E3 started off a string of odd, and very public pronouncements from Ken Kutaragi (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3175&Itemid=2), Kaz Hirai (http://ps3.qj.net/Kaz-Hirai-Takes-A-Swing-At-Microsoft-/pg/49/aid/57196), and Phil Harrison (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/07/13/sonys-phil-harrison-i-dont-think-were-arrogant/) that left industry pundits, the games press (http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=13128) and gamers scratching their heads. But don't forget that they still have the largest number of third-party developers out there. And, they have incumbency and a strong (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060712/nyw079.html?.v=59) worldwide brand. The proof will be in the software, and there undoubtedly will be some stunning exclusive titles coming out for the PS3.

Sony's biggest challenge right now is that they are trying to change consumer perceptions of what a game console is: a problem that just might prove to be more difficult in itself than managing tricky manufacturing processes and a worldwide hardware launch. They want their box to have a ten-year life cycle. It is exceedingly expensive and difficult to launch new hardware. And for many reasons, companies are extremely vulnerable in periods of hardware transition (the market for their existing base shrinks as people wait for the next round of technology; there is a tremendous economic outlay to manufacture, distribute, and support the new hardware; etc.) They'd much rather aim their technology window as far afoot as they can and make incremental upgrades -- more in line with what one might see with PCs -- than launch a whole new platform in five years. See this article (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3442&Itemid=2) by analyst, David Cole on next-gen.biz for some somewhat biased, but interesting commentary.

There are other incidental factors at work here, as well. Recall that Sony attempted to classify the PS2 as a Linux-based PC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS2_Linux) so that it would qualify for a lower tax status in the European Union (though they failed that bid in June of this year.)

As for their brazen statements in the press about the high cost of their hardware and software, simply stated, they need to communicate that the PS3 is a premium option. They don't want to, or more accurately, literally can't afford to sell that many of them. They need to take a leadership stance: "We have the best technology, the most premium box, and the most expensive software, and we're proud of it." After all, if you can shift your thinking a little bit, it is true that you are getting quite a bit (http://ps3.gamedaily.com/game/features/?gameid=4688&id=1049) for what you're paying.

Because of the unexpectedly high (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060712-7248.html) cost (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2006/07/10/2003318162) of hardware production, it's not looking like it would be that beneficial to sell through lots of PS3s until manufacturing economies of scale and efficiencies kick in. (According to this article (http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2006/07/18/afx2888056.html) in Forbes, they have enlisted not just one, but two third-party manufacturers to help them ramp up their PS3 production to their goal of 2M units worldwide by launch.) I think SCE also would have preferred to wait until their third-party development partners figured out the hardware and provided them with a bigger and broader launch library. But MS forced their hand with an earlier-than-anticipated Xbox 360 launch.

Even Sony most probably didn't count on their manufacturing woes to be so daunting. With this in mind, imagine how much SCE is going to have to eat on each sale of a PS3, even in the $650+ price range. Couple this with the rapidly declining support for the PSP and UMD games and movies from developers (http://consolemedia.gameworldnetwork.com/articles/article.php/id/747/p/1/), Hollywood (http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=52028) studios (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117938320?categoryid=18&cs=1&s=h&p=0), and big box retailers (http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=73348) and slow category growth overall, and you have a recipe for depressed economic reserves to drive support of the PS3 (and BluRay.) Contrast this to Microsoft's relatively deep pockets (http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY06/earn_rel_q3_06.mspx) to drive support of the 360. In light of these factors, a cautious approach and honest statements of the expense of the PS3 and its software become a little easier to understand.

In the meanwhile, they'll continue to push the PS2 to the mainstream for as long as they possibly can, and hope that their incumbency, solid support from the Japanese market, broad 3rd-party dev support and gorgeous titles carry them through a challenging launch. For the record, I think they'll come out okay, if a little scathed.

[Dag-Sabot]

-Apology not accepted.

[shnastybiznastic]

PC gamers: Noone cares that you play on the PC. Likewise, everyone knows that there are advantages to developing on a PC. Fucking shut up about it already.

Console gamers: Noone cares that you play on a console. Likewise, everyone knows that there are advantages to developing on a console. Fucking shut up about it already.

[aversion2k]

Of course people are going to be more excited to work on a new system.
Doesnt necessarily mean its a better system.

[xcalibur]

Meh, count me as one of the 5% for PC. I guess it is because that is what got me started, playing Wolf3D, DOOM, Quake, Duke3D, Warcraft 2, etc. I just have never been able to get into consoles as much as PC. I think some of it has to do with the superiority of the mouse/kb control scheme for the games I like.


-X

[Xerxes]

Meh, count me as one of the 5% for PC. I guess it is because that is what got me started, playing Wolf3D, DOOM, Quake, Duke3D, Warcraft 2, etc. I just have never been able to get into consoles as much as PC. I think some of it has to do with the superiority of the mouse/kb control scheme for the games I like.

-X

5% eh... So you develop games? Cause it's not about what system people fanbois over but actually the systems the are excited about developing for. Being excited for something doesn't even mean preference in a broad sense.

[xcalibur]

Yes, I am a dev. To me, I prefer to develop games that I enjoy playing. I enjoy playing games more on PC than on console, thus I would prefer dev for PC, in a perfect world where console sales didn't dominate the marketplace.

That being said, I am a console game dev. :)


-X

[Xerxes]

That wouldn't be a perfect world. I don't think either dominate. Aside from there being three consoles to the computer. I think it's all about average in the grand scheme of things. Are you excited about pc dev though. Sure it's what you like, but has anything made you say "computer deving fuck yeah". I mean what's been renewed for you there. Like I said DirectX 10 is the next big change, maybe some dev's didn't have that come to mind but aside from that what to get excited about.

[xcalibur]

Console sales dominate PC sales by far.


-X

[Xerxes]

I would say that's cause of casual gamers which is probably true, but I like my console more cause I've always had one and that's what I'm more use to. <shrug>