potato_hamster said:
Miyamotoo said:
All Nintendo talk about unifying hardware and software teams, same architecture, same OS, same platform, they even mentiond example of iOS and Android, is beacuse there will be no need like before to develop game separate for handheld and separate for home console, they will develop one game in same time for both consoles.
If Nintendo will benefit from that, there is no reason why 3rd party couldn't too.
Nintendo reorganized its R&D divisions and integrated the handheld device and home console development teams into one division under Mr. Takeda. Previously, our handheld video game devices and home video game consoles had to be developed separately as the technological requirements of each system, whether it was battery-powered or connected to a power supply, differed greatly, leading to completely different architectures and, hence, divergent methods of software development. However, because of vast technological advances, it became possible to achieve a fair degree of architectural integration..
For example, currently it requires a huge amount of effort to port Wii software to Nintendo 3DS because not only their resolutions but also the methods of software development are entirely different. The same thing happens when we try to port Nintendo 3DS software to Wii U. If the transition of software from platform to platform can be made simpler, this will help solve the problem of game shortages in the launch periods of new platforms. Also, as technological advances took place at such a dramatic rate, and we were forced to choose the best technologies for video games under cost restrictions, each time we developed a new platform, we always ended up developing a system that was completely different from its predecessor. The only exception was when we went from Nintendo GameCube to Wii. Though the controller changed completely, the actual computer and graphics chips were developed very smoothly as they were very similar to those of Nintendo GameCube, but all the other systems required ground-up effort. However, I think that we no longer need this kind of effort under the current circumstances. In this perspective, while we are only going to be able to start this with the next system, it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.
Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase. Currently, we can only provide two form factors because if we had three or four different architectures, we would face serious shortages of software on every platform. To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS. Another example is Android. Though there are various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with various models. The point is, Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples. Whether we will ultimately need just one device will be determined by what consumers demand in the future, and that is not something we know at the moment. However, we are hoping to change and correct the situation in which we develop games for different platforms individually and sometimes disappoint consumers with game shortages as we attempt to move from one platform to another, and we believe that we will be able to deliver tangible results in the future.
What we are aiming at is to integrate the architecture to form a common basis for software development so that we can make software assets more transferrable, and operating systems and their build-in applications more portable, regardless of form factor or performance of each platform. They will also work to avoid software lineup shortages or software development delays which tend to happen just after the launch of new hardware.
|
That's talking about making games easier to port from handheld to home console and vice versa. However, at the end of the day you are still making two distinct builds have to test for two distinct platforms. This is a solid idea. It makes it a far easier decision for Developers to support both the NX Home and NX Handheld instead of one or the other. It will lead to more games on both platforms.
However, let's be clear, this is far and away from what others have been saying. This is describing two distinct platforms. Not one platform in two form factors. Sure it'll be easier than say it is to make a Wii game run on the 3DS, or a PS3 game run on the Vita, but it's still not as easy as "Make one game that plays on two different form factors of the same console". You still have to make device-specific optimizations. You still need to test on every platform. Let's use an example Nintendo discusses. iOS - not every piece of software available for the iPhone is available for the iPad and vice versa. There are reasons for that. Even though they share very similar operating systems, and the same development API, they are two distinct platforms. You need to modify your iPhone app to work properly on the iPad. You don't just make an iPhone app and it "just work" on the iPad. Not even close. Even if you're just making an iPhone app. If you want your app to work well on the iPhone 4, 4S, 5, 5S, 6, and 6S you need to optimize the app for each device and test it on the 4, 4S, 5, 5S, 6, and 6S. You need to have all of those devices to deploy your app to. You can't just make an app for the iPhone 5 and assume it will work just as well on the 4 and 6.
The same will go for the next Nintendo platform. Even if the development environment is more unified, even if the different devices share similar architecture, they will be treated as two separate devices, have separate software, and developers will not be forced to develop for both simultaneously.
Thank you for providing further concrete evidence to support what I've been saying all along. I appreciate it.
|
