Quantcast
Third parties will kill the PS4/720

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Third parties will kill the PS4/720

osed125 said:
pokoko said:
I can't imagine any developers would hang onto the RAM constraints of the 360/PS3 when they can work with quadruple that, at the least. Most of the games designed for next gen consoles won't have a prayer of running on this gen devices. They're building these titles on the new dev kits, not on 360/PS3 dev kits. All the new IP will be next gen exclusive--if they aren't, then those games will look like crap compared to games from other publishers.

How will Activision looks if EA's games are far and away superior, or vice versa? We might see some games in development now do as you're suggesting, but no one wants to be left behind in quality. If we have a Battlefield in 2014 that absolutely and completely blows away CoD, how is that going to look? Or the same for any major franchise out there? I can't see that kind of situation lasting more than a year, and that's only with smaller developers and big franchises. New IP are going to be next gen exclusives.

I can agree with what you are saying, but will that make sense financially? Most people are fine with the graphics of CoD and Battlefield (we can deduce that from the sales), they already have the console and they would just have to pay $60 for those games. So why would devs and publishers invest in a big franchise for a console with limited install base? Like I said before ignoring a 140m install base will not be easy for 3rd party developers (especially the big games with a high budget) even with moneyhat from MS or Sony. 

I can't see Activision risking a 10m+ sales of game for what's most likely going to be a lot lower than that.

I'm fine with Activision and EA releasing their games on both new and current gen consoles. They should just either develop them on next gen consoles and port them to last gen ones or use the PC version to port it to next gen consoles.
Increasing the resolution, framerate and adding more AA etc. doesn't cost any money.

We'd be then able to see which versions take off and which don't.



Around the Network
Barozi said:
osed125 said:
pokoko said:
I can't imagine any developers would hang onto the RAM constraints of the 360/PS3 when they can work with quadruple that, at the least. Most of the games designed for next gen consoles won't have a prayer of running on this gen devices. They're building these titles on the new dev kits, not on 360/PS3 dev kits. All the new IP will be next gen exclusive--if they aren't, then those games will look like crap compared to games from other publishers.

How will Activision looks if EA's games are far and away superior, or vice versa? We might see some games in development now do as you're suggesting, but no one wants to be left behind in quality. If we have a Battlefield in 2014 that absolutely and completely blows away CoD, how is that going to look? Or the same for any major franchise out there? I can't see that kind of situation lasting more than a year, and that's only with smaller developers and big franchises. New IP are going to be next gen exclusives.

I can agree with what you are saying, but will that make sense financially? Most people are fine with the graphics of CoD and Battlefield (we can deduce that from the sales), they already have the console and they would just have to pay $60 for those games. So why would devs and publishers invest in a big franchise for a console with limited install base? Like I said before ignoring a 140m install base will not be easy for 3rd party developers (especially the big games with a high budget) even with moneyhat from MS or Sony. 

I can't see Activision risking a 10m+ sales of game for what's most likely going to be a lot lower than that.

I'm fine with Activision and EA releasing their games on both new and current gen consoles. They should just either develop them on next gen consoles and port them to last gen ones or use the PC version to port it to next gen consoles.
Increasing the resolution, framerate and adding more AA etc. doesn't cost any money.

We'd be then able to see which versions take off and which don't.

Yeah I expect them to do that. The problem is that since the game is a port those advancement will only interest a very few minority of people (or even notice those changes) and because only early adopters are going to buy those games, all those 10m+ players are going to stay with the PS3 or 360 version.

So I honestly don't see the new version taking off. And thus begins the problem the OP is saying. 



Nintendo and PC gamer

ps3-sales! said:
Doubt we'll be seeing many exclusive 3rd party games for next gen. If i was a 3rd party developer I'd be in self-interst have all my games on as many consoles as possible to make the most money possible.


We will...from eastern Developers.Especially from those who still develop JApanese Games for the Japanese Community(not SquareEnix and Crapcom)

This time they won't support the new Xbox.They will either go WiiU or PS4 Exclusive.
There is no reason to believe in Microsoft again for them.They had the best support you could get in this Gen in the first few years and couldn't do
anything with it.Most studios even had more problems than before till Sony saved them.And we came from a Gen where J-RPGs where what FPS are now.They had money and couldn't do the jump into the NextGen without any problems and help.
If developing on NextGen is more expensive than in this one they have to make a big choice.
Go for the money Microsoft is offering them and sell like 40k units or go Sony/Nintendo Only.Cause with those 2 you can even sell your games in the west as the community showed in this Gen with petitions and big crying.



I think a lot of the early games will be a crazy mesh of Ps3 / 360 / Ps4 / 720 multiplats, maybe even with a Wii-U port if people start bothering with that. Obviously all the EA sports games will, COD will, Battlefield 4 etc and whatever else. But don't be fooled the Ps4 / 720 games will still be superior for graphics, online and whatever else and thats a big selling point for many people in general.

HOWEVER, I'm confident all the third parties will be launching exclusive games on the new consoles too - whether they be new IP's akin to what Assassin's Creed was or existing games. Why? Because third parties are competiting with each other for marketshare more so then anything, and whatever game gets hyped as the true 'next gen' thing could explode like AC or COD. Every publishers gonna be under pressure to put out a game that truly explodes on the next generation consoles - I'm actually expecting a glut of new IP's so kind of excited. Throw in the first party stuff and you're sorted.



osed125 said:
Barozi said:

I'm fine with Activision and EA releasing their games on both new and current gen consoles. They should just either develop them on next gen consoles and port them to last gen ones or use the PC version to port it to next gen consoles.
Increasing the resolution, framerate and adding more AA etc. doesn't cost any money.

We'd be then able to see which versions take off and which don't.

Yeah I expect them to do that. The problem is that since the game is a port those advancement will only interest a very few minority of people (or even notice those changes) and because only early adopters are going to buy those games, all those 10m+ players are going to stay with the PS3 or 360 version.

So I honestly don't see the new version taking off. And thus begins the problem the OP is saying. 

Just raise the price for PS4/Xbox³ games to $70 and third parties will try to push the new consoles, which wouldn't even be unfair since that would correspond exactly with the inflation rate.



Around the Network

On the other hand, that could be a big boon for Wii U, if 3rd parties stick around on PS360 longer, Wii U is much more likely to stay in the loop (if 3rd parties manage to get their heads out of their collective ass, which admittedly is iffy)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Barozi said:
osed125 said:
Barozi said:

I'm fine with Activision and EA releasing their games on both new and current gen consoles. They should just either develop them on next gen consoles and port them to last gen ones or use the PC version to port it to next gen consoles.
Increasing the resolution, framerate and adding more AA etc. doesn't cost any money.

We'd be then able to see which versions take off and which don't.

Yeah I expect them to do that. The problem is that since the game is a port those advancement will only interest a very few minority of people (or even notice those changes) and because only early adopters are going to buy those games, all those 10m+ players are going to stay with the PS3 or 360 version.

So I honestly don't see the new version taking off. And thus begins the problem the OP is saying. 

Just raise the price for PS4/Xbox³ games to $70 and third parties will try to push the new consoles, which wouldn't even be unfair since that would correspond exactly with the inflation rate.

Raising the prices will be even worse. People will have to buy a $400+ console and a $70 game. It doesn't matter if the games looks like Avatar, most people will not throw that much cash for a single game. Especially if you can buy the same game (only with "uglier" graphics) for only $60 with a console you already own, plus all your friends will be on the PS360. 



Nintendo and PC gamer

Barozi said:

...

Just raise the price for PS4/Xbox³ games to $70 and third parties will try to push the new consoles, which wouldn't even be unfair since that would correspond exactly with the inflation rate.

Do Sony/MS set the price cap then?



If third parties go PS4/X720 too early we will see even more blood than with PS3/X360, because dev costs will be even higher and this time making games like Carnival Games on the Wii to make money won't be an option.

What they can do is to make a PS3/X360 versions, and we'll see what effect does that have on the PS4 and X720 sales because the bestselling games in Sony and Microsoft consoles are third party games.



Soleron said:
Barozi said:

...

Just raise the price for PS4/Xbox³ games to $70 and third parties will try to push the new consoles, which wouldn't even be unfair since that would correspond exactly with the inflation rate.

Do Sony/MS set the price cap then?

Hm I don't think so.

http://www.destructoid.com/kotick-i-would-raise-game-prices-higher-if-i-could-143049.phtml

or should I say at least Activision doesn't think so ? ^^