| happydolphin said: I never said the contrary, but ... that's still mostly incorrect. There was much more at play that cause Sony to win over 3rd parties, they barely had to do anything, 3rd party devs were swarming to them. Reasons were: 1) Nintendo's iron grip on 3rd parties and game policies (which were once needed, but evolution never occured to remove them). 2) Nintendo's business decisions: keeping a cartridge format (higher manufacturing costs, slower delivery time, generally useless complications), higher royalties, the failed 64 DD, and so much more. Refusal to support fmv cutscenes and boasting in-game cinematics. Nintendo was in a mess, really. 3) Sony's reputation in Music, Hollywood and Entertainment in general. The dev-friendly sdks and especially the use of more modern technologies such as CD's, off the bat and support for fmv cutscenes (à la Hollywood). I remember cause I was there ;) |
Couldn't some of those things also be applied to microsoft with the 360 and sony with the PS3?
Higher manufacturing costs? Yup Blu-rays are more expensive than DVDs yet games cost the same.
Un-friendly dev kits? Yup Sony seemed to delight in the fact the PS3 was hard to develop for while MS tried to ensure the 360 was easy to develop for.
Blu-ray complications? Yup while the 360 had problems with devs having to compress things the PS3 had problems with the slow read speeds. Meaning developers had to do some ridiculous solutions such as with MGS4 and it's installs.
MS's strong reputation? Yup most definitely.
The fact of the matter is that really both companies acted fairly similarly. I really don't think MS had to do too much to persuade developers to go multiplatform. To get early releases? Yup most definitely.
