Slashdot Mirror
360 vs. PS3 vs. Wii - The Designer's Perspective
Gamasutra is running a piece today written by Ernest Adams, a frequent contributor to the site and an amusingly opinionated game designer. He writes to weigh in on the console war debate from the perspective of a game designer. He runs down the usual list of pros and cons for each machine, and then digs into the most creative aspects of each machine. Finally, lays out what he sees as the end result of this hardware generation: "So who, at the end of the day, will be the also-ran in this generation of consoles? On the global scale, I'd say it could well be neither the PS3 or the Wii, but the Xbox 360. The PS3 will win over the hardcore gamers who have to have the fastest, most amazing machine available. The Wii will skim off the younger players and those who don't have as much money to spend. Both have the advantage of being made in Japan, so they'll crowd the Xbox right out of that market. In the US and Europe, it's harder to say, but I see the Xbox's early start as more of a liability than a benefit."
"So who, at the end of the day, will be the also-ran in this generation of consoles? On the global scale, I'd say it could well be neither the PS3 or the Wii, but the Xbox 360. The PS3 will win over the hardcore gamers who have to have the fastest, most amazing machine available. The Wii will skim off the younger players and those who don't have as much money to spend. Both have the advantage of being made in Japan, so they'll crowd the Xbox right out of that market. In the US and Europe, it's harder to say, but I see the Xbox's early start as more of a liability than a benefit."
I don't know what will happen in total sales, but I expect that the so-called "Hardcore" gamer will likely purchase multiple systems and will be very attracted to the Wii because the nature of the titles it recieves; what I mean is that many of the so-called "Hardcore" gamers will buy pretty much any piece of hardware that has enough exclusive games, and pretty much all Wii games are exclusive due to the nature of the console.
The majority of gamers are not hard-core and are no where near as big of graphics whores as some people assume; gaming is probably not their only form of entertainment so they're probably less likely to spend too much money on it. The price of the Wii is probably very attractive to them, but they also haven't played enough games to care about how stagnant the industry has become.
...that the XBox360 might be good middle ground for many people, and would thus do quite well in relation to the other two? Don't get me wrong, I wish I had all three, and maybe for now I'd be happy with a Wii. But an XBox360 isn't that much more, and can do much the same stuff as PS3. Maybe it will come down to killer games, and Halo3 will help out a lot there. Wii's got its own fan base... With all the launch glitches from Sony, and recent evidence that they want even higher priced, PS3-based home entertainment systems, makes me think that as gaming consoles go, PS3 may end up the lose. My 2cents.
There are actual console developers with insight into the race between the PS3 and Wii, the problem is that anyone with an actual worthwhile knowledge is too busy actually making games.
...
So instead we get the worthless ramblings of the console dev world's deadweight:
'game designers' aka level monkeys
producers
testers
because the Phantom will destroy all the consoles in the end!
I think it is interesting that everyone seems to be assuming that the fight for first/second is between the Wii and whichever of the other two win out. In the article above as well as the other slashdot comments already posted there is a base assumption that the Wii is going to do quite well. It is as if everyone is acknowledging that the Wii already has a certain segment of the market sewn up and that gives the advantage in the three way battle for the rest of it. Now, that could be completely wrong, but I think it is very interesting to see that unspoken assumption in so much of what I read.
This article is useless rhetoric about the "console wars". At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who has the best graphics or the best kind of control system. What matters is what you like to play, and which console will give you that. The people who want to play the games that only the PS3 offers will buy the PS3, regardless of what Nintendo and Microsoft do, and vice-versa. There will never be a winner to the "console wars", and thus ample opportunity for people to rehash the good and the bad of all of the systems to try and make it sound like a new angle, when they're really just kicking a dead horse.
Or the gamers who, you know, like to have more than 3 games a year and care about more than Halo. It's not like the prices are going to stay fixed forever, and I know kids who have, on their own earnings, bought all three last-gen consoles.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
The Wise Muse hereby predicts a return to the 8-bit Nintendo: the game selection is large and the console is cheap.
From the Article would be:
"So which do I want to design for? From a creativity standpoint, it's the Wii, hands down (or up!). "
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
The Wii appears to have one fundamental problem now that I've been around multiple people who have the system, including myself. The novelty wears off pretty quickly. For some people it takes only a few minutes, for others maybe a couple of weeks. But it seems like everyone has a moment where the Wii goes from 'amazing and revolutionary system with a controller that has unlimited possibilities' to 'eh, just a GameCube with a pointer for a controller that doesn't really work very well for most games'.
... "Anonymous Coward Sony Fanboy Troll says that the Novelty wears off pretty quickly, so I don't think I should bring it over."
I'll try to remember that to get people to stop asking me to bring my Wii to their Christmas party
So far I have not seen anyone play with my Wii and not be immediately engaged. Honestly, from what I have seen, the novelty of shiny graphics wears out far faster than the Wiimote does; I've seen crowds gater for 5 minutes to check out the graphics of the XBox 360/PS3 only to disperse immediately to do something better with their time.
Most people don't care all that much about graphics when they're enjoying the game they're playing; in fact if you're enjoying the game you will probably not be paying too much attention to any of the graphical effects that are happening.
Good point. Nintendo will have to rely in the "whole product experience" and not the "added/kludge/hacked" approach the others will take if this input method catches on. But there is a lot to be said for the whole product experience.. it's a good reason the ipod keeps on top.
So, I've been kicking around the idea of getting a 360 for months, now. I was close, but put off by the sticker shock, and decided to hold off for a bit longer. Maybe until a price drop.
A couple days ago, though, I went over to a friend's place; she manages a small EBgames store, and has a 360 and just about every notable game for it. It was just a small get-together, so a bunch of us spent some time browsing through her collection of 360 games. I'm glad I didn't buy one.
Gears of War. Rainbow 6: Vegas. Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter. FEAR. YAWW2FPS (Call of Duty something, I think). Dead Rising. Saint's Row. Splinter Cell: Double Agent. Dead or Alive 4.
Incidentally, most of these games are the most popular on the 360. Notice something? It's almost entirely FPS. R6:V, CoD and GRAW are your archetypical boring, generic, sequel shovelware. Gears of War and FEAR are both good games in their own right, but considering the company they're in, they don't exactly stand out. Then you have yet another Splinter Cell game, which falls in the same boat: a good game, but reeking of been-there-done-that. Next is Dead Rising, a good game with a few very, very deep flaws, but basically fun, and Dead or Alive 4: an uninspired button-masher fighter that doesn't look like its had its sprites updated in years. Nevermind that the game ought to come with a jar of vaseline, as it's mainly beat-off material for teenagers.
It's not that the 360's game lineup is all that bad, it's just that the console's been out for a year now, and the best game on it is a FPS, on a console that's drowning in FPSes. Yet where are the RPGs? Oblivion and its broken leveling system and litany of cut-and-paste caves/dungeons? Bottom-of-the-JRPG barrel drek like Enchanted Arms (if you're not acquainted with how agonizingly bad this game is, take a look at some of the gameplay videos on Gametrailers)?
If the 360 really has a weakness, its the utter lack of diversity in its games. It's a hell of generic sequelism. That's fine in a launch console, but not a year after release.
The problem with this is that users have to buy the x-box or ps3 "wiimote" separately instead of it coming with the system. I forget exactly what the percentage is of users who buy additional peripherals (such as additional drives, special controllers, etc) after buying the core system, but I think it's quite low. Obviously, developers want to make games that the greatest number of people will buy, not just the few people who bought a particular peripheral. Basically what I'm saying is that if MS or Sony do come out with a "wiimote" chances are only a small percentage of console owners will purchase it, which means you probably won't see many games taking advantage of it.
Yeah, but without an additional calibration method (ie: sensor bar) to fix the drift from the accelerometers in the Sixaxis, you'll never be able to use it for "aiming" at the screen or anything requiring precision... Just gross movements.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
The current winner is the PS2.
I don't think people are rushing out to buy the Wii because it has an innovative controller. IMO, the game lineup over the next few months (plus the low price point) is sufficient reason to get one, controller or no.
My experience is every parallel design fails to achieve its promised potential. Software programmers have a hard time making use of multiple core and multiple processor systems. Almost all programmers have learned software development on single-core/single-processor machines. The result is almost all programs run well on single-core/single-processor computers. Dual-core development isn't too difficult, because many programs have certain natural parallelisms that make it easy to keep two cores busy. If you look at most parallel processing curves, times get really tough when you have more the 4 cores. Not many programs are easy to parallelize at the 4+ core level. The Cell on the PS3 has 7 cores.
A general lack of availability of multi-processor/multi-core developers, and the high-difficulty level of multi-thread software development, will mean that the PS3 development runs late and over-budget. This is a big problem for someone thinking of developing software for the PS3.
And quite frankly, let's say the novelty DOES wear off after a month. Well, see, that person has ALREADY BOUGHT THE WII.
From the almost viral effect the Wii is having, in a couple of years we might see 100 million households with Wiis that are just getting bored of it. Remember the old shampoo commercial? "I told 2 friends, then they told 2 friends" etc. Every last person who's been over to play with my Wii (insert joke here) is now lining up every weekend trying to get one. Once they have it, every one of their friends will be doing the same.
If having half the the planet owning your console, and bored of it, is a problem - I'd like to have that problem, thanks. You think these people will stop buying games entirely?
Besides the fact that "a controller that doesn't really work very well for most games" is complete and utter bull. I've never seen a new idea implemented so nicely on a release lineup. The games designed for the wiimote work amazingly well RIGHT NOW - imagine how good this will get in a couple of years.
I've been a Nintendo fan for decades. I've loved nearly everything they've put out. Yet even I didn't think they'd see a TENTH of the demand and excitement going around right now. It's almost scary just how many people are telling me they want one. And it's got hardly any games yet. Wait until this thing has a few hundred titles out.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
There are 10 kinds of people: ones who understand ternary, ones who don't, and ones who think this joke is about binary
Perhaps what Nintendo understands that no other maker does, is that the last two generations of consoles have cultivated a different kind of consumer/user than previous generations: the "twitch players" which represent a tiny portion of the potential market. Why have so many FPS and violent games come out? Why are developers pandering to this group? I suspect because these games are easy to crank out and don't require nearly as much creativity. As a result, most people don't really give a shit about the "console wars." I know I don't. My last console was the N64 which I abandoned after the dearth of quality games (other than the core Nintendo titles).
It's all about the software. It always has been. The console that has the best software will win. It doesn't matter what the hardware specs are. Great software can compensate for inferior hardware -- though most of today's developers don't seem to understand that. I saw games that ran in 16K of RAM that had more longevity that today's multi-gigabyte monstrosities.
Quite simply, this is why the Wii will come on top. There is no way you can do that with an XBox 360 or a PS3.
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
There are some of us who just want a console. I don't need another computer, another DVD or CD player (or HD-DVD/Blu-Ray for that matter). I just want something to play games on. I can do all the other stuff on other devices I already have, or I can purchase them later and use them. While it's sometimes convenient to have everything in one device, to me that's more of a problem than a feature. There's more code and more hardware, which leads to more things that can go wrong. On top of that, if it does happen to die, you lose ALL that functionality rather than just the one device.
I'm probably not going to buy a PS3 unless they're really, really cheap someday. I'm not buying an XBox360 either because the games just don't interest me. My wife and I went with a Wii on launch day and have thoroughly enjoyed ourselves. Now we can even browse the web on it, though it's probably easier to just get up and walk to the computer room. I'm not complaining that it does a few extra things, because it's taking advantage of hardware that's really already in the system. But, I don't want a living room desktop replacement, and I'd assume a lot of other people don't want one either. We buy consoles to play games.
Remember all the 'I will switch when all my games run on Linux' folks out there? They can now dual boot their shiny PS3 into Linux. Want to play a great game? Boot into PS3 console mode and play away. Need a larger hard drive? Any good SATA laptop drive will fit and work, and with a bit of cobbling you can hook up a 750GB SATA drive, for the true hobbiest.
.001% of the market... maybe...
'kay... that's about
Sony Online for PS3 is free
And sucks...
Sony has donated code that has been accepted into the main 2.6.20 and above Linux kernels! That means that all PPC Linux builds from now on will work natively on the PS3.
Again, what, 0.001% of the market?
If your idea of an free open community being so great would apply to 99.9% of users, then Linux would beat out Windows in the market 10 to 1. But guess what? People are very very happy to pay to use something that works, whether or not they can tinker under the hood. Yes you pay $50/year for an XBox Live account. I pay $15/mo for WoW, what's your point? I finally had a chance to check out Live at a friend's house last week and I have to say I'm shocked. I've never seen something from Microsoft work so well and so intuitively. If it wasn't for the colour scheme having more than two colours, I'd think I was using something Apple made.
I think your view of the average consumer is a wee bit coloured by the glasses you're wearing. The type of user you're describing is Sony's nightmare. They're losing $300+ on each console. The last thing they want you using this thing for is a PC. They NEED you to buy 20 games and 40 blue ray discs so they can actually turn a profit.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
So in summary, Microsoft, I don't care what you have to do, but get lots more top quality games out there. Both original titles, and Live classics. Steal from Sony's back catalog as much as possible.
First, the PS3 is not the most powerful game machine on the planet. Both Nvidia and ATI are releasing a new generation of very powerful video cards. The 8800 is already out. Any computer with a high end next generation PC Video card is going to be able to curb stomp the PS3. A significant performance gap between the PS3 and the Xbox 360 is far from proven.
Second, the Wii is not that cheap. $249 is not that far off from the $339 for an Xbox 360 Core system with a memory unit. I would prefer a Premium myself, but to each their own. Anyone buying a Wii is buying it because that's the console they want, not because they're cheap. Gameplay is important, but I like decent graphics with my gameplay. We don't know whether the current heavy demand for the Wii is in the general gamer populace or from Zelda fanatics. I'm not trying to be derogatory, it's just that Zelda lovers REALLY love Zelda. 75% of Wii purchasers also bought Zelda.
Third, the Xbox 360 is about to pass the 10 million mark in consoles sold. Whether it happens before Christmas (once the sales figures are calculated) or soon after, it will happen. The Dreamcast sold a total of 10.6 million consoles.
Fourth, the demand for the PS3 has plummeted. Look on eBay right now and look at PS3s for sale. It has dropped down to $100 above MSRP. That's with a crippling shortage. Sony has placed an incredible burden on companies that develop games exclusively for the PS3. Every month, more games drop their exclusivity and are brought over to the Xbox 360.
The Xbox 360 may come in third. Japanese sales are awful. But Japan is third behind the Europe and the U.S. in console sales (remember only 128 million Japanese). As well, many Japanese may opt for the Nintendo DS this generation and forgoe a console. The Japanese live in tight quarters and have long commute times, making a portable the optimal choice. The Xbox 360 is pricey, but the other consoles are pricey for what your getting. The Wii is based on the Gamecube architecture and really should cost about $199 with a game. And nobody wants to pay $599 for a game console. So Microsoft should drop the price of a Premium Xbox 360 to $299 with a game. It would be a much more appropriate price.
No, actually, no, that is not how the market works.
If Sony or Microsoft create a controller that works just as well as the Wiimote, they still lose. The winner is always the first to market with a functional concept. To stand a chance, Microsoft or Sony have to create something that is clearly better than the Wiimote.
Maybe if the Wii had launched with a whisper and no one knew about it, the competitors could have gotten away with introducting something similar and taking the market. But that's not what happened, Wii is a phenomenon. Sure, a lot of it is because it's new and different, and this is Christmas, but that means that everyone already knows what the Wii is and what the Wii does. A similar product just doesn't cut it, it has to be something that is so very clearly better that it doesn't look like just a knock-off to the average consumer.
So no, there is no achilles heel there.
just some guy
FORTUNE FAVORS IRONY
not only do i disagree with the author on the same point as the parent but i think this whole article is just a waste of time. all it is, is the same idle speculation that everyone else is doing on the internet with nothing of real substance to back up any of the claims. who cares if it's "from a developers point of view" if said developer is as uninsightful as everybody else out there. plus he seems to be sloppy on the details like this little bit:
_ video_game_consoles), but it also enjoyed a much greater lifespan. of course it got absolutely destroyed by the ps1 but it most definitely was not number 3 to sega's 2 for that generation.
"In the optical media era, Sony brought out the Playstation, Sega gave us the Saturn, and Nintendo hung onto cartridges for one more generation with the N64. From being a major contender, Nintendo dropped into third place and has since failed to recover."
The saturn was number 2 for that generation? what? not only did the N64 have much better sales (over 3 times the sales: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling
he also glosses over important facts in pushing forward his 2 and a half consoles theory (which i think is rediculous)such as the fact that the market is expanding, creating more and more room for other consoles (you can see this by viewing the sales numbers in the above link). shoot, if you want to call the sega saturn a viable contender for its generation then you would have to except the fact that there were 4 major systems in this last generation with the dreamcast showing sales numbers just a bit greater than the saturn did in its generation.
if you really trace things out we've gone from one dominant company with nintendo's nes and a weak second in the sega master system, to two major companies with the genesis and the snes, to 3 with the saturn, n64 and ps1 (although the saturn did terribly here), to a more stable 3 with the gamecube, ps2 and xbox (with even a weak 4th in the dreamcast). Following this trend i think it stands to reason that there now might be room for three successful systems competing on the same level that the genesis and snes were competing at.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Somehow I doubt Sony Legal is going to let a ps1 emulator on the 360 slide.
First off, my response is in no means authroritve. I only know 10 designers, and know their feelings, I also work at a studio of over 100 people in the game industry. That being said my "research" is more valid then Ernest Adams for a couple reasons. The main one is that most of the people I've discussed this with don't give a simple answer like "PS3 will win because it's more powerful" which is a flat out cop out. Or assumes you believe that buyers are morons who don't notice a 200 dollar price tag differential with out a 200 dollar perfomance differential. Only a few people bought the Neo Geo, and remember that was over "4" times more powerful then the other systems (at 3 times the cost) Hint. The Corvette, isn't oversold by Lamborgini Diablos.... Why?
The prevalant view is that no one is going to lose this round. At least not drop out. If someone does it's Sony, pure and simple. They are not turning a profit, don't have a good starting position, their company is in ruins and looking to cut a lot of budget, and the system is asking for more commitment at both ends then the other two. In addition their "Entertainment center" idea is just flat going to fuck them, because unless people constantly buy games, they would have been better off just selling Blu-ray. That being said, they will sell a LOT of systems, the problem is how many games will the sell. No Xbox Live, and other Microsoft developer helpers hurts them. The motion controller is also difficult to work with and their processor is crap for a developer. It's full potential won't be reached not because it's so powerful but because it's layed out in such a poor style. A 360 can get full potential by any programmer who knows about multithreading, GPU vs. CPU, and simple optimization. You might not get direct control of the hardware but in these days no one really wants it. Why does renderware sell? Because it controlled the hardware, not the programmer.
The 360 does a lot to help the programmer, and that's a big step, from match making, to networking code, to Directx, the programmer is put at ease. Porting a game to the 360 is a lot easier then to the PS3. That being said, what's important is sales and not developer's feelings. The point I'm bringing up here, is that the 360 is developer friendly, and with the big inroads that Blue dragon has made in a certain foreign market, Sony might have some issues. But this only talks about games. So let's look at current system sells.
Ps3s will sell in Japan of course, but the fact I've walked into 3 stores in the last 3 days, and seen PS3s in them isn't speaking highly of what sony has done. The fact that people are returning ps3 mainly because they can't sell them on Ebay speaks of intent to buy versus intent to resell. Yes those systems might not last long, but Wiis are selling out instantly with over four times the quanities already hitting stores.
Again is this important? No, This is just discussing what the trends to today is. So what's the prime goal. Well I'll explain who "Wins" The winner is the one who makes the most money and the most units. Note that this is NOT the same person, but the true winner the one you should care about but don't is the one who makes the most money. They will definatly continue to the next round.
The 360 has almost 10 million units out there right now. That's a shit load of units, but in reality it is far from insurmountable for Sony to come back from. The extra year has given Microsoft a good lead. Great. On the other hand Sony is having trouble breaking 1 million, and Wii is probably going to get 2-4 in the next 3 monthes. The 360 has exclusive titles, as does the Wii. Sony has "announced" certain titles, but dates are getting fuzzy, and exclusiviness is being called into question. Sony has lost a couple. However They still claim to have the big 2 (MGS, and Final Fantasy) and after FFXII's big launch, that's good however looking at the other exclusives they've had one can notice I didn't meantion stuff like Assassin'
No you're wrong. They'll have Duke Nukem Forever.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]