| mrstickball said: So when we talk development budgets, it's only fair to compare games that use absolutely no middleware, and everything is built from scratch? To me, developing an engine from scratch or not doesn't really matter if it's done right. We're here arguing that a game made with a middleware engine, made for a fraction of the cost, is as good or better than a game using hundreds of developers over multiple years, using a engine developed specifically for one system, and one system only. Doesn't that sound a little.........Telling...Of what the Playstation 3 is? |
How many studios make their own proprietary engines, ps3 or not? Not EVERYONE has to use middleware, and many outright prefer not to, but all developers do need a new engine for the current gen, and it has to come from somewhere.
Now that Kojima Productions and Geurrilla Games have completed their engines, how much will their next titles for this generation cost? Much less than their first, as - much like with Gears of War - they'll be using an already completed engine. Creating an engine for the next generation is an investment, an invesment that has to be made somewhere.
And UE3 isn't middleware for Epic, as they developed it themselves. I'm sure the engine cost millions of dollars and took quite a few years to originally develop for PC.
Btw, much of the technology researched for Killzone 2 is being worked into Sony titles by other internal developers, somewhat similar to how UE3 has been licensed out by Epic, thus further decreasing costs for those titles.
