I work at a game development company and I can tell you this... After alpha, pretty much everyone is working the hours you would expect lawyers to work.

Slust

@zerokoolpsx: Yeah they could call it Dead Rising: Costs Rising Edition :)

Astrofox

@Astrofox: Yeah, I just don't think I've ever seen the aggression from Sony that Microsoft has now, in terms of advancing its market position. And you're right, creating exclusives by holding back other versions isn't a win for anyone-- it doesn't benefit Microsoft's install base, because it's just a waste of money. I don't care if the other guy doesn't get it, I only care that I get it. I hope those kind of deals stop real quick.

@TheHun: You're right, but the third-party support is something Microsoft's been fighting for very hard this generation. Sony didn't really fight for third-party support in the PS2 generation-- it was all carried over from the PS1 years. And to be honest, Sony didn't have to fight for it, then, either-- they just opened up their doors and said if Nintendo's telling you they don't want you, come on in. And the entire industry went inside and made nice with the Playstation.

wild homes is non-canonical

Most of the games are going multi-platform, because of rising cost of development. Wouldn't mind seeing Dead Rising on my ps3.

zerokoolpsx

@suya123: you sir are so correct. Or that some smaler devs dont have a coder for the cell and they don't know how to make games for them, and wouldn't be worth it to.

Allcars

Honestly, paying for exclusives is just another way to say, "bribing for exclusives." Fact is, it's a really low-brow move to pay people to make games for your console. To me thats saying, "We are so cowardly and we don't believe in our abilities so we resort to paying people to float our console." The only thing that Microsoft says to me is that they don't trust themselves to have the capability to thrive in the video game industry without throwing around money.

suya123

@wild homes is non-canonical: The support of 3rd parties is the major one.

TheHun

@sascha23: I know what your saying and agree with you, but using a figure of average cost of development would be better than what titles can go up to.

Llost

*work stations. ugg.

laser beams

@PowerButton: while costs for dev-kits and workstaions may be around the same for each successive generation, you have to take into account that since these new systems and computers are so much more powerful- it takes a lot more time to get the most out of them. the difference in art/detail from MGS1 to MGS4 is staggering. there are a lot more artists, programmers and designers at work on the blockbuster games of this current generation. a lot of the cost is simply to pay all the salaries at these large studios.
plus you have games that use a lot of proprietary programs or graphic engines from other companies (think Havok, and Unreal Engine 3) that they have to pay to license and use in their own games. a lot more factors add up to much higher development costs.

laser beams

@Llost: Regardless: The original argument was that the "costs" associated with development weren't very different from back in the PS1 days.

That is very incorrect and it's a big risk for developers to just stick with one console without money exchanging hands.

sascha23

@wild homes is non-canonical: Yeah I agree that the PS1/PS2 era was pretty passive compared to MS right now...

I'm liking less and less where Microsoft is going with their games division. Selling off their big 1st parties makes me feel nervous since they have little investment in the future of the games industry.

Secondly I don't like situations like Rockband 2 where they essentially pay to have the other platform versions held back... this is not what I like about exclusives.

I would much prefer they create quality 1st party games than spend their money in crummy business moves like these.

Astrofox

@PowerButton: fingers slipped ... the complexity and amount of effort that goes into games now dwarfs that time period.
The tools have gotten 'cheaper' in that you can now do what they did then for next to nothing. Retro gaming appeal and the Wii don't represent the entire market though. Graphics get better and that always costs because that's always pushing new tech further.

Ehardergardens

@PowerButton: Actually, costs have been going up because of the time it takes to make a game, the development cycle has been getting longer for a while now and it's been the same for every new generation of consoles. There's also the human ressources you have to take into account. Developers use much bigger teams now than they did ten years ago.

It's not too hard to calculate : more employees * longer period of time = greater costs

Just think about games that came out on the NES. They could be made in a couple of months with a small team of people with the right tools. Now think about games like Halo, GTAIV and MGS4 (to name a few). Those are blockbusters, sure, but two of those came out on one platform only, limiting the market and in turn profits.

Yobari

@sascha23: Sure it can go as high as 100 million but that's not a very fair representation of the average cost since most games cost around a third of that.

@Salen: There is very little real extra's for the PS3 version but if in the future they start adding more content for multi platform releases then it will be worth it.

Llost

Wait a minute...PR speak from one of the "Big 3" and no smack talk? /golfclap

Sammo21

@PowerButton: Besides the other corrections

Ehardergardens

@slomo788: I'm not arguing, but I think the hallmark of Microsoft's current strategy is agression, in terms of pursuing partnerships and functionality. I wouldn't say Sony was terribly aggressive with the PS2-- if anything, it really seemed to benefit from the strong relationships Sony cultivated when Nintendo blew off publishers late in the SNES life cycle. What are the characteristics of Sony's strategy you see in Microsoft these days? I'm curious.

wild homes is non-canonical

@PowerButton: You are incorrect my friend.

Do a little research and you will find:

PS1 development was generally under a million per game.

PS2 development cost roughly 5-10 million per game.

PS3/360 development lands as high as 100 million (GTA4).

This is why multiplatform is a no-brainer.

However, if Sony or M$ want to pay for it, I'm happy to accept their exclusive offerings.

sascha23

@PowerButton: Please cite me one game of the PS1/N64 era that cost 100 mils. GTA4 did. MGS4 is estimated at 120 mils. I remember KZ2 was touted as a record in 06 for requiring a mere (estimated) 60 mils. So yeah. That's pretty expensive. Don't you think?

slomo788

I dont understand ehen people says "in this days, cost a lot more to develop a title...." and things like that. I mean, the developemt tools needed back in the days on the ps1-n64 era for example, were very news and costly because were a new tecnlogy back then. Just like the developemt tools are costly rich now for the 360-ps3. So the costs must be about the same that back then.

Just imagine this: in the 1994-1997, the boom for 3d games was at its peak, so software tools for make 3d games were very very expensive, even that, there were too many exclusives. Right now almost anybody with a little knowledge of design and a PC can make a 3d game.

So anyone can explain me, what that BS about current games being too pricely??

PowerButton

@Asfad: I'm sure Otacon is all about third-party exclusives.

sascha23

There will be a few third-party exclusives as far as heavy-hitters like MGS and Final Fantasy (main series), but for the most part, I think the multiplatform and/or timed-exclusivity is sufficient.

Sony's internal development studios are large and offer a lot of awesome content. Microsoft will need to really flesh out their internal studios or they will keep losing money on having to buy titles all the time from third-party studio.

sascha23

Only geeks and otaku want third party exclusives

Asfad

@Maldron: Indeed. As a matter of fact, some could argue that MS's strategy now was Sony's strategy with the PS2. And one has to see some Ninty in Sony's stance now.

slomo788

@Salen: Ok you want to put aside your ego for a min and actually read his comments? He said he EXPECTS there to be a difference between the quality of games on the two platforms it doesn't mean that there IS one as of now.

Have you actually consider why there is a mandatory install for specific games or do you really think that the mandatory install is something developers put in for shits and giggles.

There's no doubt about it, game developing company are in it to make money. So then the only reason a game is exclusive is because someone down the line made it worth their while (be it on sony or microsoft).

It's a simple interview on Sony and his own stance on the upcoming titles and on "exclusives". Take it for what it is and please don't take it out of context.

seamouse

@Spoony Bard: Honestly though, I do find myself somewhat envious of the fact they'll get it. Honestly, both are valid strategies - investing for your console in first or third party studios. Both have perks.

Maldron

Very smart guy. He really seems to play Phil's role well. Much more classy than the smack talk we got used to. I'm looking at you Tretton!

slomo788

@DigitalHero: Oi vey! ;)

@Maldron: Agreed Mal. Also the fact that this forces more innovation in hardware rather than some bullshit move to keep "GTA" exclusive content on your console. Ahem, ahem.

Spoony Bard

Certainly nice to hear someone that isn't verbally gutting the opposition *cough* Aaron Greenberg *cough*. I agree with his thoughts on exclusives as well. With development costs as high as they are this generation it's a wonder anyone can create an exclusive title without a first-party company intervening.

SolidOni

@VixDiesel:

Basically what NBGI's president said once; they'll make a game exclusive if it makes sense to do so financially. For the most part this generation, few titles fit that criteria.

SG79

@Maldron: Yeah exactly, buying studios is a very good thing in my eyes :)

Astrofox

I really like the way Sony is interested in making it's own games.

1st party games are usually designed to take advantage of hardware and showcase a systems capabilities. The quality and care put into these games often make the game that little bit more special.

I like Nintendo for the same reason, although I would like to see a return to the SNES days for them...

Astrofox

I like that response. Amounts to "We're not going to buy third-party exclusives, we're going to invest in our first-party studios instead."

Maldron

@Salen:

What game has a mandatory 8GB install exactly?

SG79

Exclusives are slowly gonna die out. It's just too pricey to develop for one system only.

VixDiesel

I don't think major third party exclusives are over, but given trends this generation, you can count them on two hands for all platforms combined. And that's speaking of true exclusives, not timed ones.

I reckon key titles will be paid for under the table, and original IP's will get the cold shoulder and end up multiplatform.

Case in point, MGS4. Sony's push of the game isn't quite subtle, is it?

SG79

@Salen:
Actually, some games lately have been coming forward with PS3-exclusive bonus content. EndWar has that Minority Report interface, some of EA's sports games have PS3-specific modes too, and there's the rumor (probably untrue, but we'll find out next week at E3) about Kratos being in Soul Calibur IV.

It may not be a TON of bonus content, but then again, Sony only adopted this stance what, three, four months ago? Not many games have had time to make mention of it.

Archaotic

@vanderblade: I'm thankful that he's not a PR loser. I like his more understated approach since bragging and insulting other consoles rarely works other than to rile up fanboys. Sony's had a lot of problems with third parties (lack of third party support initially, third party titles being delayed or buggy on PS3, early titles were better on 360 etc.) so it would be pointless pretending it was all rosey.

I like the guy from what I've seen so far.

Llost

Nice read. He has big shoes to "Phil", literally. Ok, bad joke =P.

DigitalHero

sounds fine but it seems many devs are just porting the games to ps3 which in of itself is a bad idea considering the different abilities of the consoles.

lilaliendog

As far as I can see, with major publishers like Activision and EA, their major titles will be day-and-date with the Xbox 360 and their quality will be really good. And some of the titles, I expect, will have something extra because of the PS3's abilities and the space on the Blu-ray format.

Uh, Mister Quality Examination between 360 and PS3 say otherwise, Yoshi. Can I call you Yoshi?

Also, as for the 'extras', I thought those were called 8 gig installs. Alas, 360 doesn't have that. I'll live you that much.

Salen

Conservative PR move, not a bad idea.

At least theres not much you can say against it, anyways.

Jayl3w

@vanderblade:
I think he's trying to avoid saying something like a "We don't buy exclusives" quote people can call him out on and rip on him for later.

Archaotic

"And some of the titles, I expect, will have something extra because of the PS3's abilities and the space on the Blu-ray format."

That's all he has to say in favor of the Sony platform? Either he forgot his propaganda pill when he was talking or he was (thankfully) sitting on his PR haunches.

vanderblade

hmmm very interesting read.

theblade

@Theoutlet: NO NO NO! We don't want Sony to go the Nintendo way because then that means we get thousands of games and 90% of them are horrible. Then the 10% that are good get old within a few hours because it's just the same thing as last gen only the depth was ripped out of it so that it's easier for people to play.

I'm sorry but Smash Brothers was a let down for me. The online didn't work and the game was just Melee with the depth and skill ripped out of it like I mentioned before. So here's to Sony staying on the course it is heading and not following Nintendo.

Spigget

@NeVeRMoRe666: Sorry that didn't really make much sense (the sentence at the end). I'm at work so forgive me. What I mean is that it takes alot of money and resources now to make games that people will buy. And in turn, companies now would have to make a larger profit to cover the cost of development. Hence there would be no reason why third party companies would want to limit their market.

NeVeRMoRe666

@wild homes is non-canonical: Well I was referring to the way they relied on 3rd parties. PS2's biggest guns could (and most of them have) appeared on other consoles. Not so with the PS3. The IPs that were considered secondary are now under the spotlight as showcases (R&C, KZ) and in just 2 years Sony introduced tons of IPs and they were all heavy-hitters (HS, Uncharted, Lair, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Resistance, LBP, without counting the downloadable games) and I could bet that more is coming. On the other hand, MS has secured the most exclusives from companies that were Sony's bitches last gen (Rockstar, Squeenix, etc). But yeah, you're right about the aggressivity. For the PS2 it's more like Sony was waiting for third parties to come instead of hunting them down.

slomo788

@PowerButton: To further elaborate on the great points other people have posted, I recently read in my copy of Nintendo Power which featured an interview with the developers of the original shining force that the first game only took 3 of them to make (and one of the three was a lady who worked as a receptionist in their office) and it went on to be a huge huge success. In todays day and age, that same feat would be next to impossible (including DS titles). Alot has changed in the last few years. In my opinion, to make any kind of profit now would require huge teams backed by lots and lots of money and resources (EA, Activision, Take 2).

NeVeRMoRe666

Ahh, whatever...so the game would cost to much to develope? Thats what I took out of that. Or does it mean we will make it later down the road? If it's later I will still be pissed! I love my Ps3 and think theres lots to play and do with it, but this gamke was showcased as an exlusive that made me buy the console. I hate them for canceling this title.

boots555

The only thing I dislike about the downward slope of exclusives is that a game made for all platforms will look as good as the least powerful one. So game likes Gears of War, and MGS4, well become harder and harder to find. Oh well, here's hoping Sony can go the nintendo way and rake people in with (rehashing the same old shit), making quality games.

Theoutlet

@fenderfuel08: Burnout Paradise has extra features on the PS3, nothing big but it's a start since developers are just now starting to develop on the PS3 and then port it to the 360 which works better for both systems.

Spigget

The rule is that the platform with the largest marketshare gets the most exclusives, and that is not the PS3.

I have not seen any multiplatform PS3 games benefit yet from extras(because blu ray has more space) so maybe its one of those things that is good in theory but too expensive in terms of time and money for developers to impliment.

fenderfuel08

Ok then. I got the point. Thanks everybody for answer that question. Honestly i understand now. Its difficult to believe that on MGS1 no more that 10 people could had work at that time and for MGS4 at least 50 people are needed ( and i said AT LEAST). Times changes, and in the gold era of video games ( i call that the ps1-n64 era) the developers not only saw the video game as a profit but also as an enjoyment for us, they really cared about bring us enjoy. Now, in this times, all i see on them is PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT. I think they only see us as a bag with a $ print on it. Back then they saw us as a bag with a $ too, but, at least they brought us enjoyment.

Think about it, the most importat titles we are expecting are franquicies or the 4th part of a series ( GTA--> 4, MGS--> 4, GT--> 5, GeoW-- >, Halo --3, FF-->13). I think the golden era has come to an end and just now we are living from successes from the past.

PowerButton

@Spigget: I thought Nintendo went the PS2 way with tons of shovelware burying all the gems.

And um, there aren't any games that are that much different than last generation. I can't play any of the ones people list as "innovative" without thinking about where all the mechanics come from. Sure they're really fun games, but this "downfall" of Wii games is something the fanboys like to ignore in most 360/PS3 games. I honestly can't think of a game that isn't derived from games I've already played.

Okay I'm done.

formina

@wild homes is non-canonical: Thank you sir! :)

slomo788

@slomo788: Thanks. I figured you had it worked out, it just didn't seem obvious to me. Your point about Sony becoming Nintendo is really well-taken, though-- I hadn't thought about it, but you're right. They've taken the time to grow a lot of these franchises last generation, and now they're attempting to use them as tentpole releases. Very like Nintendo. Good on you. Cheers!

wild homes is non-canonical

@fenderfuel08: Not much of a rule since it completely doesn't work in the current situation (unless you think Wii gets most third-party exclusives? well maybe it does, but only if you count budget-priced PS2 ports as 'exclusives').

quen

@slomo788: Any time, my friend. Any time.

wild homes is non-canonical

@Spigget: That's fine. I personally think it depends on the game and not the platform, but it makes little difference.

formina

@formina: I'd agree games are derived but I feel the difference is that when a game is derived on the 360/PS3, things are added instead of taken away.

Spigget

I know it will not happen but I would so love to see at E3 Yoshida say that Eight Days and the Getaway were not canceled. May be He could say there names were droped for some thing else. Because right before Eight Days was canceled there was the rumor that Eight Days would get a name change. So then for the Getaway it could be its own series and have nothing to do with the Getaway series. So for me I hope both of those games still come out.

BlackIceJoe

@Archaotic: Well, that's sort of cool. But Microsoft already wrapped up GTA4's content for themselves at least for 6-8 months. Both companies are setting up for getting themselves some content for themselves.

@SG79: No clue. But I keep hearing about these 20-30 minute installs and I figured that if you own a few games, you probably have at least 8-gigs worth of required install data. Didn't mean to say that it's all 8-gig or nothing.

@seamouse: Awww, but I love taking things. I usually hide them behind the couch. I'm sure I have a whole bunch of context back there. *is just being weird now, please pay no attention to the ferret who needs to go have dinner*

But it's not my 'ego' that's saying that the 360 versions of games is better than the PS3 version, that's what almost every gaming news and review outlet seems to say. The side by side comparisons is something I actually find rather interesting, and yes, some games look better on the PS3 than the 360 but more often than not, its vice versa. Now, lately, the PS3 has been doing a LOT better with getting close to the same quality of graphics at the 360 though, so go team. It's no real big deal to me. But if Yoshi's gunna talk about quality of games coming out on both consoles, well, I'm gunna bring that up.

But anyways, enough rambling from me. I seriously need food.

Salen

I like this guy so far, nice interview.

WolfGod

"Activision and EA, their major titles will be day-and-date with the Xbox 360 and their quality will be really good"

Haha. Nice one.

cdammers

@Theoutlet: exactly, which is why as a gamer I fully support exclusives. Multiplatform development does nothing to show the strengths of a given platform and dilutes the overall library for the generation. Too many people still hold on to this belief that PS3 games don't look as good as 360 games because of inferior hardware. Then there are those that believe that Wii games will never look better than 1st gen PS2 game... which is total bullshit.

Since the NES era you have to look towards the exclusives to see what these machines are truly capable of. Anyone using multiplatform/middle-of-the-room development as an example of a console's strength is totally missing the point.

From a business perspective...multiplatform is a more sensible road. Development is just too damn expensive these days. What I find more ironic than anything else is fans and critics will applaud games like Gears of War being exclusive to 360 but will curse MGS4 being exclusive to PS3. Thank goodness Bioshock is coming to PS3 end of year with extras...can we get mouse and keyboard support with that?

Striderhayasa - Phillyyakk on PSN and Live.

@NeVeRMoRe666: However, I agree with Seamouse, these installs aren't for nothing. What the potential massive install for Soul Caliber means for xbox...I have no idea.

NeVeRMoRe666

@SG79: @Salen: I remember reading an article about a potential massive install for Soul Caliber but I can't seem to find it. Here's another of interest though.

[kotaku.com]

NeVeRMoRe666

@Theoutlet:

Didn't Nintendo already go the Sony way, making a console with mass appeal ala the PS2?

EmeraldDragon

@Salen: Mandatory installs aren't features that expand on overall gaming experience, so please leave that shit out and go back to the flame forums where you originated.

What about the PS3 UT3 that came with Mouse/Keyboard support and Modability? And the X360 version UT3 that doesn't come with either?

The PS3 version ESSENTIALLY has the capability to offer more because of its abilities (HDD) and its space (Blu-ray) so he EXPECTS the titles on PS3 to have more features should the develop take full advantage. I've only seen first-party developers really take advantage of whats on the PS3 so I don't this will be the case anyway.

element7

@Spigget:
I think Smash Bros was a let down as well. With all the changes and barely functional online, I don't understand how the game was rated as highly as it was by everyone.

Sammo21

I think that this is a smart move, by not putting as much money into third party publishers. Sony itself is able to put more money and efforts in publishing original games for the PS3 and PSP themselves examples, Patapon and the upcoming Little Big Planet.

W-Force4

@element7: Actually element7, I was under the assumption that mandatory installs were there to help the game by reducing load times. So please don't say I'm flaming, just because I think it's silly to spend a lot of time installing a lot of stuff to the HD only to have it speed up the game by a very minute smidge.

As for the keyboard and mouse, if that's what you want, have a day. I'm not a 'PC gamer'. My controller works just fine. The mods are pretty cool though, but I don't care about UT3. But if that makes you happy, good. It's nice to know that you find the mod use in UT3 useful.

And to be truthful, all first party developers seem to have this deal with being kickass with their own hardware, but other folks struggle with it. The Wii has lots of folks developing for it, but only Nintendo is really using the system for any good if you go by their reviews. And the PS3 is finally looking to be coming out of that stage, where non-first party developers are going to be doing some kick ass stuff with it. Just like how Epic made Gears of War for the 360.

Salen

Sounds good to me. Many of the best full and downloadable games on PS3 have been the ones that were developed in house at Sony. I'd like to see them make more of an effort to support these smaller/in house devs. Creating a game development environment on the platform that is more or less self sufficient is probably best for them right now.

For both xbox and ps3, buying up exculsives is only going to last so long before people expect you to come up with something new.

Look and nintendo

B1S1

i think most of those resources went to Killzone 2...

darktorns

Yay! More 1st Party Sony = More Patapon, more Ico, more Shadow of the Colossus, more Folklore! All good. Bring it on!

ThursdayNext

Well, I think this is also one of the reasons why nintendo decided to do a system like Wii... Since they only do games for their own systems and considering that, at least during the Gamecube era, the third party support was almost irrelevant... If they made a system that was so expensive to develop for as the ones from the competition, they would practically be signing their own death sentence.

Sony should organize their resources and try to make the most out of them, so at least they can produce a few exclusive games for their systems each year. More or less as they once said, maybe not that much quantity, but quality.

MaximoSupino

@NeVeRMoRe666:

Heres two links with the Install Info (probally not entirely correct but at least it confirms the install)

Xbox: "Hard Drive Required"
[www.xbox.com]

PS3:
[www.yesasia.com]

Yeah 6700MB install and 2048MB saves. According to that yesasia page. I personally blame the massive "assets" the character have.

seamouse