Agreed. The general agreement seems to be that the Xbox 360 is the easier console to develope for, which is why it's the lead developement console for most titles. So it's logical to assume that Microsoft have done something right, something which other console manafacturers can learn from for the next generation.
yeah, but not now. earlier on (maybe the first 2 to 3 years) yes, but devs really can't keep falling on this argument... not after what we've seen done on the PS3 and the other multiplat devs out there that don't seem to have a problem. it's almost as if that very statement is what's holding them back:
'we don't have to make an effort because all we have to say is the PS3 is hard to program for and everyone will agree'
and so they just sit on their lazy arses and chug out endless minor updates to struggling engines... do you agree Bethesda?
Well after 5 years the Playstation 3 is still getting weaker versions. Skyrim is one example. We all know the Playstation 3 is more advanced, as it should be since it costs more to manufacture and also came out a year after the XBOX 360. However that means very little if developers need to spend extra time on the hardware. If the Playstation 3 was setting the world on fire, with hardware sales much like what happened with the Playstation 2 last generation, then it would have been the lead platform again.
***and so they just sit on their lazy arses and chug out endless minor updates to struggling engines... do you agree Bethesda?***
If you know anything about game development, you would know they aren't "lazy". By software industry standards game developers get worked the most and tend to burn out far more than business software.
***yeah, but not now. earlier on (maybe the first 2 to 3 years) yes, but devs really can't keep falling on this argument...***
because you know the platform better doesn't mean the issues don't remain.
@LevelHead
***We all know the Playstation 3 is more advanced, as it should be since it costs more to manufacture and also came out a year after the XBOX 360.***
This is a case of more advanced in the wrong places! The PS3 if balanced, would have been an excellent performer. Instead, Sony did multiple crucial mistakes so instead you paid extra for essentially wasted resources.
An example is, what use is super fast video RAM, when the bottleneck isn't the speed, but the quantity?
Argh! Are any of you developers? Have any of you developed for both the PS3 and Xbox360? No? Then you plain and simply do not know what you're talking about if you say that developers are lame for using this excuse. How so? Believe it or not, there are numerous fields of studies in programing and programing for the PS3 is only ONE of them.
BTW, I'm not a developer, either. However, when someone who has an expertise in said field, I, like many of you should, have a tendency to assume that they know what they're talking about.
[EDIT] @LevelHead, When concerning many types of technology, 'more advanced' typically means easier to work with than its predecessors.
Smart move by MS. Listening to developers when designing the 360 has really turned into a strenth of the platform. This isn't new news either. It has been known throughout this genneration that the 360 handles multiplats better than the PS3. Even 5-6 years later you have games that perform better on 360. Skyrim and BF3 are just two of the newest examples. All this gives people a reason to like the 360 over the PS3
Why be afraid to talk about it, it's just the truth.
Funny how the best looking games exclusive are on the PS3 then huh? Sure you are well aware of the titles. Why is it the PS3 gets Game of the Year games too. If one happens to be on the XBox. That means the game is a multi platform. When a Dev say's easier. They mean one of two things. One, lazy and want plug in play code. Two, over their head in skill. Something PS3 dev's have no issue with ever since MGS4.
Of course they still say it now, not everybody has got the chance to suffer through developing for the PS3 and know it as much as other devs have. What other games on the PS3 have these devs worked on? Even if a developer spends years working on the PS3, it doesn't change the fact that the 360 is still easier to develop for. I see no reason for them to be embarrassed in stating their experiences.
@Black
It takes "skill" to develop for a much harder hardware? Developers are lazy for struggling to deal with unnecessarily difficult hardware? Really? As far as I know, the game has been working fine on both consoles
It's a little silly to think that developers who are focused on making multiplatforms are supposed to be able to know the PS3 in and out like exclusive developers who work on nothing BUT the PS3.
Sony pushes their first party hard to make sure they understand the PS3, but that doesn't mean it's not a pain to develop for or that if they jumped ship they would find the 360 easier to develop for.
I can care less about "superior graphics" when most games this gen suffer from long dev cycles and lack of gameplay content. The shiniest of PS3 games are linear, corridor setpiece games-- amazing games, but some people act as if the PS3 can pull of Battlefield 3 with 64 players. Games like Kingdom of Amalur that have bigger worlds and more content are just as good as the best looking exclusives, it's too bad graphics has to be such a focus for some.
MS, from the start, has done a great job in making their product easy to develop for, it's something Sony needs to learn from. I'm tired of people passing blame to the developers all the time and accusing them of being lazy or stupid, or as if they are somehow supposed to find the PS3 easier to develop for than the 360 one day.
Even if there are developers out there now that are good at developing games on the PS3, that does not mean it is easy. It just means that those developers are good at a difficult task.
Wasn't it Naughty Dog that came out and said they DONT want another Playstation to come out because it took them so long to get used to the PS3? They're a first party developer for Sony and they are on record saying they dont want another Playstation yet? What more proof do you need?
"something which other console manafacturers can learn from for the next generation. "
It's not about choice/decisions/learning, it's about technical possibilities and partnerships in business. ms had ATI chips which had just gone unified, for sony: nvidia chips hadn't gone unified yet so to get the extra graphcal performance lots of processing is offloaded to the cell cores.
Next gen I could make a calculated guess that all consoles will likely be easy to develop for, as a given.
The PS3 is hard to program for than an Atari 2600 as well. The results are still the same with PS3 having the best games, with the best graphics sound and gameplay :D
with myself having worked in the games industry for a little more than 3 years - devs are, in fact, really lazy.
the argument that the PS3 is "harder" to develop for simply does not hold any water anymore. after nearly 6 years, they should have a pretty good grasp on how to develop for the PS3 (and that's not even including the time devs had access to the PS3 prior to the release of the system!).
there's no doubt that it's not the same architecture as the X360, but that doesn't mean it's *harder*, it's just *different*.
if devs keep whining about how "hard" it is to develop for the PS3, then maybe they should either go back to school and learn a new career or get better at their job.
No one is saying that better games arent made because the PS3 is harder to develop for, they are just saying that since the 360 is basically like a PC hardware-wise, its easier to make games for and next gen consoles should keep it in mind.
i remember dice devs saying that developers troubled developing on ps3 is just because their code is too 360 oriented. developing both from the very beginning concurrently will solve the problem. but 'small' or 'lazy' dev wouldn't care that much on ps3 because ps3 'would sold less'.
besides, its 2012, there are dozens if not hundreds of papers on the internet helping this problem.
In other news, the SNES is significantly easier to develop for than the Wii U.
While developers are trying to say something good about the 360, they're actually just dissing its hardware power. They're pretty much admitting the 360 has weaker hardware.
Of course it's a spin by dedicatedtogamers, just look through his post history. How he came up with that username is beyond me. After reading his comments one would think his username would be dedicatedtobeingafanboy.
Sony is actually starting to listen as Vita is a well designed system that is much more developer friendly. I would assume the PS4 will also cater to developers much more than the PS2 and PS3 did.
@WitWolfy
That's not entirely true. The Playstation 3 hardware has its RAM split as well which further complicates things. The bluray drive is also a slower drive so read speeds will have an affect too. This is why so many games on the Playstation 3 require mandatory installs.
***Only reason Xbox 360 is easier to develop on is because it runs on Power PC hardware. The same hardware a everyday computer exists of.... ***
If you know anything about the history of the Xbox (and subsequently the Xbox 360), you would know that the console was designed to be easy to develop for. MS constantly touted prior the 360's release how content is to be the center and that they didn't want developers to hamper their development by dealing with technical details.
Xbox dev tools are practically universally praised, and MS approach has fundamentally changed the industry.
Even Sony now admits and aspire to making the PS Vita the easiest to develop for.
The difficultly of the PS3 comes from the SPUs design. It's made to take very specific kinds of small data packets, arranged in a very certain way, and do very certain calculations on it. http://www.insomniacgames.c...
Embarrassing is someone without any development knowledge calling an actual game developer "lazy" so they can try and save their little box of plastic/silicone some face.
Move on, the PS3 is more difficult to develop for, even Sony admitted it, it doesnt need defending anymore...
'save there little box of plastic'? you know, sometimes people say things because they want to, not just to defend something. it IS embarrassing and IMO it is lazy to say this now. it's got nothing to do with the fact it's a Sony machine. not everyone on here is twelve you know
Then that my friend, just makes you ingorant. As your knowledge in said field is? Nothing?
But hey, your probably right, the dudes making the games are the lazy ones, the dudes sat at home moaning over the interent, we're the real go getters right? LOL...
Eventually, you talk enough BS, you begin to believe it.
you do realise the vast amount of configurations makes PC an absolute pain to develop for? Hence is awful optimisation for every PC multi-plat realsed this gen? even your precious guru john Carmack said that
after 5 years we're still getting this? aren't they embarrassed to make these statement yet?