News Tretton: Developers creating on PS3 first

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12/20/tretton_developers_creating_on_ps3_first/1

Sony Boss Jack Tretton believes that more and more developers are developing primarily for the PS3 and working backwards onto other platforms.

 

Yeah, of course they are.

Probably because coding for the madness that is basically PPC is not easy, thus takes longer.

Of course they're going to start on the hardest task first.

Is Tretton a bit of a thickie?

 

it seems like traditional PR spin, making any news good news. However I hope the ps3 gets some good games soon, that thing is a beast and IMO the best all around console package.

not to mention the playstation network is free unlike xbox live

 

it seems like traditional PR spin, making any news good news. However I hope the ps3 gets some good games soon, that thing is a beast and IMO the best all around console package.

not to mention the playstation network is free unlike xbox live

 

seems like typical marketing spin. making any news into good news. However I like this approach as the ps3 might finally get some games that really exploit the graphics engine and tweak performance (plus they'll be inherently less buggy) .

I prefer the ps3 over xbox because the PS network is free compared to xbox live. That's a deal breaker right there

 

hrmm that was odd

 

If this is going to turn into a psn vs xbox live post, then xbox live will win all the time.

How many ps2 or ps3 games can you play without lag or not able to find a server because the developer can no longer support online play becuase their finances don't allow it????, about half if you're lucky and know this as I own a PS3, along with my wii and an xbox 360. (yes I'm one of those).

PSN does not even offer on an equal plain compared to xbox live. Microsft has dedicated servers so you can play any xbox or 360 game and there is no time limit on how long the developer will support online play.

Like most we do like to admit when Microsoft has done something right, but when it comes to instant online play, the xbox live has championed this area, and it's difficult to see anyone else beating them without doing exactly what they have.

Microsoft and xbox haters may laugh at this, but at least I know that Microsoft won't be releasing an anti-virus product for the 360, like sony has had to, (so much for open systems).

For console online gaming a closed system is better. There is no messing around and no fuss, but now whenever I turn on my PS3, will it be this time some sony hating Microsoft loving monkey will screw up my PS3 with a virus..... and to be honest Trend isn't the best product out there and just how long it is going to be free for..... maybe that £40 per year for peace of mind its worth more than most thing

 

I want some of what he's smoking - though on second thought - I like seeing reality too much.

I'm not saying it's impossible but I'd like to see some proof of this reversal. Until then ...

 

hilarious, man can sony spin crap.
they start on ps3 because it takes longer to do it because the hardware is really hard to program for.

 

Sneaky buggers trying to subliminally make other consoles look inferior.

 

with visual studio and XNA developers other have to write the code once and they can produce a PC and 360 version, so i would thing that the PS3 version would be last on anyones list.

simple math for you, 360 and pc install base verse ps3 install base.

 

Leave me be, I haven't even had my morning cup of tea yet

 

You are so wrong its not even funny. The vast majority of online games for the 360 are peer to peer, so no dedicated server is required. This is why you can only play upto 16 people max in most cases... this is also why some games lag so badly on xbox live, and the voice comms are rubbish. The only good thing about Live is the cross game friends list.... and thats it.

MS do not pay for dedicated servers for games that run under MS LIVE. Why on earth would you think that ? !!!!!!

Dedicated servers can be provided under LIVE, but must be funded by the developer if deemed necessary.

 

Tretton's opinion is not without merit. If companies are wading in the water of PS3 game development potential and it doesn't work out, then it would be a no-brainer to switch platforms. It shouldn't seen as a 'downgrade', per se, as he would suggest. But as far as production difficulty and cost are concerned, it's certainly a step several notches down.

 

To make the idea of paying for online gaming seem more reasonable.

Shame the idea is utter bovine excrement.

 

It's the matchmaking servers which cost money. I'm happy with paying for 12 months XBL for 30 notes, it's good for what I get out of it

 

Previous Quote by themax:

What the Playstation 2 (Not 3, ok, PS2) had for online was not a community. It was decentralized and at developer discression. That was the key difference last generation. You can't sit there and honestly say that PS3 games will be pulled from online on the PLAYSTATION NETWORK, because it happened on the Playstation 2 (which again had no centralized online portal/matchmaking).

Also you use messaging as a strong point? Ok maybe in a single player game it's cool to send a message once in a while, but how many times are you going to seriously stop in the middle of a TF2 Match, Halo 3, or CoD4 match to send your a buddy a message? I hope that is zero, otherwise you probably end up with more deaths because your using that awesome messaging feature in the middle of an online game. How come Sony can offer Video Chat, Voice chat in-game, Voice-chat outside of the game, Friends Lists, Messaging outside of games, Free Demos (You don't need a Gold account for priority nor wait for 3-5 days if you are Silver), Free Online play, and I have yet to be hit with ads? All for free. I pay for Xbox Live Gold, and I still get a giant Mt. Dew or Doritos advert. If Dorito's and Coke are paying the bill at MS why am I paying as well? So ok, Sony doesn't offer it in-game, I can't remember the last time I accept an invite to Halo 3 while in the middle Call of Duty 4 because why the hell do I wanna switch games just because I got an invite?

first off, how many linux pc's do you hear of getting a virus; None. Secondly, that is the lamest justification I have ever heard for owning XBL.....

Also, having seen how long it takes to join a match on Halo3 I can 100% say that the match doesn't come as "instant[ly]" as you say it does.....

Honestly, this is wasted argument. If people like DougEdey are willing to spend $50/yr on a service they deem "worth it" then all power to them. Me, on the other hand, expect it for free, and I see PS3 winning me over in this arena.

From what I have heard, XNA is a joke. Ask any real game developer; so stop bringing it up.

 

So now the PS3 becomes the lead development console and people think it is spin? For the longest people said the 360 being the lead platform was proof of it's dominance. It's odd how the true spin comes from the community half the time with this "console war".

 

XNA is exactly the same as Game studio, it's good for ideas only. Nothing else.

Anyway, as was mentioned, development is starting on PS3 because it takes much longer to train people for it.