Cross-platform development, good read if you are interested in the new consoles

[The Mullinator]

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/crossplatform.ars/1

The article is written about the issue of creating cross-platform games however it is very educational and is something I think many people need to read. Now, since most threads don't seem to get off the ground without a topic of debate I shall say that it seems to me that after reading that Nintendo may actually have a definite advantage over Microsoft and Sony this generation, and not because of the new controller either.

* The growing cost of development for games on next-gen platforms will increase demand from publishers to require new games to be deployed on many platforms.
* Increased cross-platform development will mean less money for optimizing a new game for any particular platform.
* As a result, with the exception of in-house titles developed by the console manufacturers themselves, none of the three major platforms (Xbox 360, PS3 and Nintendo Revolution) will end up with games that look significantly different from each other, nor will any platform show any real "edge" over the others. Many games will be written to a "lowest common denominator" platform, which would be two threads running on a single CPU core and utilizing only the GPU.

All other market factors aside, the platform most likely to benefit from this situation is the Revolution, since it has the simplest architectural design. The PC, often thought to be a gaming platform on the decline, may also benefit. Conversely, the platforms that may be hurt the most by this are the PlayStation 3 and the XBox 360, as they may find it difficult to "stand out" against the competition.

 

[Fishlore]

Thanks for the link. As a predominantly PC gamer I've always hated cross platform development. Obviously I see where the companies come from when doing this sort of thing, but that doesn't mean I like it. Good points all around I'd say. I mean look at PC gamers today when they get a shoddy port of a console game. It really pisses them off. They have the best hardware and get a crappy version of the game. It shouldn't be that way until you take into account the basics of a market economy. Maybe the best idea is to go after your favorite 1st party titles and ignore the other systems. I know that I quit buying cross platformers a looooong time ago and will never go back. 1st party for the win!

 

[VictimOfScience]

I can see all of the points made here and they are solid for the most part. The Revolution will be the easiest platform to understand in terms of architecture and it would follow that more people would develop for it as such. Whether or not this will happen remains to be seen since marketshare will no doubt play a large role.

Actually, I am not sure if it can accurately be said as of now that there won't be a noticable "edge" in the same game from system to system. There are noticable differences in XBox/PS2/Gamecube titles right now and the architectures are not nearly as different as they will be next-gen. I think we will see slightly more of a gap between games in terms of graphics/performance/playability. There will be some devs that understand the 360 architecture very well but the PS3 architecture inadequately in order to get the same sort of performance from the same title, likewise vice versa and the same goes for the Rev.

I never really liked console ports and the so-called "dumbing-down" of games to play on other (weaker) systems (Thief3 comes to mind). However, with the power of the consoles becoming much greater with this next-generation, I think it probably won't bother me as much as games will not necessarily have to be "dumbed-down" in development to take into consideration other (weaker) systems.

It should be very interesting to watch how the multi-threaded learning curve is handled by our favorite developers.