jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
where do you think a big expense cam from..Multi-core developement is not cheap because of just the hardware it's because of the game engine's have to be built from the ground up..and you mention 3rd party solution's adapt like crazy?
these multi-core game engine's are also for next generation.
they are not going to waste New development cost's sunk into the next hardware revision in any major way. there will be some investment but not nearly as much as it was this generation.
what do you think they did this generation...The replacement for the Wii is going to be late to the multi-core CPU/GPU party
not even how well the Wii has done is going to force them to just disreguard the other platform's..
that's the Main problem Multi-core has it's expensive in man power and Time.
Something Of which Nintendo does not Care much for.
the main problem is many of the chip make's have gone completely with Multi-core so Nintendo can go single core easy like this generation, but many developer's would have multi-core game engine's that they do not want to waste.
or Nintendo goes with Multi-core but developement is more expensive and they get the same treatment as the other system's.
this is not like previous generation's Multi-core development changed that landscape for good.
3rd party's are not going to leave out the PC, PS4, XBOX3 for just one platform not when the majority of CPU's are all being produced Multi-core.
|
Uh what? The biggest expenses aren't at all programming, and they haven't been since the 8bit days. The costs that actually ballooned this generation have to do with art and assets... it's not the fancy threaded engines and complex physics kits that are massively driving up R&D costs, it's the 1080p texture work and 100k poly models and the army of artists you have to hire/outsource to make them. That's why technologies like Mega/Virtual-texturing and other procedurally generated techniques are so attractive to id, Epic and others in the tech business, because they'll massively slash art costs.
Nintendo's literally going to be at no disadvantage here. In fact, they'll benefit engine wise from all the matured work and know how 360/PS3 demanded in the 3rd party development community. Your argument here is literally backwards.
|
those artist's are not just only main expense, you have sound, production, and yes programming..and the entire team has to program that in. than quite a bit of testing all of which cost money. than cost is replication. packageing. etc. it's all a big effort.
no disadvantage yes they are developer's only had to work on a single core 800Mhz no doubt and that's quite simple vs' 3 or 8 core system's in getting code to run correctly. never mind the fact that the single core development cycle is pretty much to an end. thus if you are not developing on multiple core you have a learning curve.
so no disadvantage here for the Wii replacement maybe not for Nintendo, but for 3rd parties it may even though the Processor's have all been power PC this generation Nintendo may change which processor design. thus if they have no engine built the 3rd party would have to licence or built one. if they do what's the chances of the engine not working on the other system's?
that's the point next generation all the system's will be multi-core this was when Nintendo did not go, next generation Nintendo may have no choice unless they want more 3rd party support like Sony, Microsoft and the PC industry get's the PROBLEM is Most if not all 3rd PARTY developer's are mainly develop Hardcore game's for the PC this generation was a first where the PS3 and the XBOX360 can get game's that only the PC would have got.
in order to be in the same area for a robust system the Wii will have to be over a 1Ghz processor if not more with multiple core's because very many chip maker's are not making anything less.
thus the price would go up ..the next replacement for the Wii may be as much as $300.00
|
Planning and audio costs are virtually unchanged from last generation, especially for high production titles. The main R&D increases this gen are in art and programming, and it's like an 9:1 split. Art costs are insane this gen, and for most devs middleware solutions have blunted significant programming costs.
And most "hardcore" devs made PC games before this gen? I'm sure that's news to Kojima, Mikami, Suda, Kamiya, Nagoshi, Itadaki, etc. lol.
And actually, an over 1GHz $299 Wii 2/HD/WiFi/whatever is more or less what I'm expecting. I mean Wii was already 729 Mhz and $249, neither is actually that big an increase (I'd expect over 3GHz at the least really). And rest assured, Nintendo's likely sticking with IBM (and PPC). Unlike Sony or MDS, they seem to actually care about backwards compatibility. ;)
|
and I said most hardcore game developer's for the PC. i was not talking about mainly console developer's only, which frankly is also less and less because 3rd party need as much as they can get. Multi-core increased the cost over all this generation hardware and the learning curve for some developer's to learn it.
as you just stated over 1 GHz right? what are we talking here 1.5 Ghz, single 2 multiple 1.5 Ghz single core or multiple?
if they go single core the problem will still be trying to cram code made for multiple processor's running on a single core..even if they go Multiple-core they would still need the core's to perform just as good in performance than what ever the other system's are performing at. because less speed multi-core developement would not be any real benefit's over faster multiple core processor's because they are all still multiple core.
Nintendo is not greater than the market of the PC/xbox/playstation.
which most of the major 3rd party Publisher's that make game's for Windows OS are PC developer's more PC game's have been ported to the Xbox360 and the PS3
the 3rd party developer's would be leaving a ton of money on the table if what you would like to happen. Which like I said Nintendo will have no real advantage next generation other than coming out first and get a timed exclusive if anything due to many 3rd party Exclusive's are overwith this generation and most likely from now on. Nintendo would have to pony up some cash or support to get their exclusive.
the exact same boat that Sony an Microsoft will be in next generation.
|
Developers leaving money on the table, or not, depends entirely on how the market actually plays out. Again, I'm arguing Nintendo's strategy likely hinges on preempting the competition to drive an insurmountable userbase advantage. Basically they'll do the PS2 strategy, which is exactly what they're doing with 3DS also. Of course looking at how they handled Wii and even DS mainly, it's pretty clear developers don't have that great a track record with "leaving money on the table". Thankfully, the 3DS commitments implies they can learn from their mistakes though. ;)
And I'd expect Nintendo next CPU to be multicore, speedy and efficient. And from IBM. Something similar to Xenos (but higher specced) would not surprise me in the least.
|
