Sony Endorsing Open Graphics Format For PS3

News for nerds writes "At the tech talk as part of the forthcoming SIGGRAPH 2004 conference on August 11th, an open graphics file format for the interactive 3D [videogame] industry called COLLADA will be unveiled by Sony Computer Entertainment. COLLADA is supported by major 3D toolchain companies including Alias, Criterion, Discreet, Emdigo, Novodex, Softimage and Vicarious Visions. If you combine this with the recent news that Sony has joined Khronos Group to support OpenGL/ES, OpenMAX, OpenVG and OpenML, it seems evident that Sony is quietly fighting back against the loudly trumpeted Microsoft XNA (/. coverage) with its plan of an open game development platform."

Comments

My head hurts

[pHatidic]

I don't get it, which link am I supposed to click on to figure out what this story is about? All I see is "blah blah blah" and I have no idea what this is even about.

Re:My head hurts

[pHatidic]

Oh and did I mention that I work for Sony designing PS3 and I still don't understand what this is about.

Speedier game releases, lower development costs?

[scowling]

One of the major issues (or so I've read) about developing games for the PS1 and PS@ has been that they're difficult and expensive to develop for. Hopefully this will decrease development times with some form of cooperative graphics system, and thereby reduce costs and speed production.

The additional upside to this is that decreased development costs is good for the bottom line, which would decrease the likelihood that any given game publisher will go out of business, seeing as how they seem to die off with alarming regularity. And the upshot of this is that longer-lived publishers tend to increase the quality of their products over time thanks to experience.

Or maybe they'll just blow the money on ale and whores.

Re:Good for them...

[clandestine_nova]

For starters, I don't understand why there is a necessity to constantly re-invent the wheel and create gaming engines from scratch just about each time a new game is released.

I don't know about you, but in my programming experience, I tend to want to craft things myself - for the experience of it, plus the fact that I understand my coding more than anyone else's, obviously.

As to why they are doing it, I haven't got a damn clue. Perhaps something to do with licenses, since there currently isn't any XBox/PS2/GC open source engine, is there?

Re:Speedier game releases, lower development costs

[Klar]

My school has an upper year course for designing PS2 games, and currently it is very hard to get into. They have to keep a small number of people in the class due to the large costs involved in purchasing an SDK and console. Also, from what I have heard, the programming for PS2 is difficult because it uses assembly with multiple processors/gpu's. Hopefully this new open source side will lead to easier access to the development side, increasing programers and allow for more people to get in the industry.

Re:Truly amazing... Well, kind of amazing

[stratjakt]

This has little to do with wanting to "fight microsoft". The PSX brand already dominates, and MSFT really isn't a threat.

This is just Sony listening to developers, who didn't care for the PS2 dev kits and all the wacky proprietary calls.

The focus inside the industry really isn't on ports, it never has been. Ports, by rule of thumb, sell very poorly. Are you going to buy Doom 3 for Xbox and PC? Given the choice of one or the other, which would you choose? So would I.

From the developers perspective, it's good to get your game to the widest possible audience. That means, if practical, PS2, PC, XBOX, and GCN.

But, Sony (and MSFT or Nintendo for that matter) thrive on *excusive* titles. Believe me, Halo sold more Xboxes than probably every other Xbox title combined. Ditto MGS or GTA3 for PS2. Nintendo's stable of exclusive titles is well known.

Anyhow, Sony picking library A over B has shit all to do with competing with Microsoft, embracing RMS's values, or any of that. It was just a decision they made based on feedback from their first tier developers.

Pity Us Poor Mac Users...

[DLWormwood]

Here were are now... On the one hand, Sony's backing the various "Open??" media standards that's been used as a key part of the Mac OS. And on the other, Microsoft is rumored to being using POWER (that is, IBM PowerPC) derived CPUs and ATI hardware for the next XBox.

And yet we Mac users, who've had both for ages now, are out in the cold in the gaming market.

Tanj. (There Ain't No Justice.)

Re:Seems logical

[stratjakt]

PSX and PS2 already have plenty of low-quality games. That was Sony's battle-plan. While Nintendo has had a history of not rubber-stamping things, sending games back to the developers for polishing, Sony focused on "fill the shelves". It worked for them.

Ie; quantity vs quality. AFAIK, it's much harder to get your game approved for market for Gamecube or Xbox than it is for Sony. Go down to the used game shop and just look at the stacks and stacks of pure crap in the PS2 and PSX bins. "Hooters Racing" comes to mind. Yeah, lets take this horse-turd joke of a racing game, stick in a couple still publicity photo's of Hooters girls, and make some bucks.

I'm not saying every PS2 game is shit, some are great. I'm just saying that the "bury 'em in titles" philosophy has worked well for them in the past.

When you walk into Best Buy and the PS2 section is twice the size of the Xbox and GCN sections, that makes a big impact on your average shopper.

It's also how gameboy buried all of it's competition over the years.

Sony and Microsoft

[AztecL0B0]

For anyone who has posted ideas about how Sony is doing this in order to fight Microsoft, I'd like to suggest to reconsider. Microsoft is NOT the 800 lb. gorilla in the cosole market. NOT even close. It holds 2nd place in the US ONLY and is 3rd world wide. The ONLY reason it has fared this well it is because it sells a PC for $150. If you have kept up with the specifications for the Xbox2, you know that it will not be as powerful as the first Xbox was at its time; therefore, it will lose some of its mass appeal. I own all 3 consoles and Halo, but one or 5 good titles do NOT make a console. Look at Dreamcast, granted, Sega had other problems as well, but their original lineup was impressive. Xbox2 must have a superb lineup in order to stay a close 3rd in world wide sales. Sony is trying to appeal to developers and correct its mistakes with the PS2 (difficulty in programming). I prefer Nintendo over the other 2 consoles, but I am realistic. I know it won't beat out PS3 and I am sure Microsoft won't be a real contender. Microsoft will not keep on throwing money after 9 years. By that time they will have lost 4 billion dollars, with a B.