NX game price if the library is unified?

[potato_hamster]

JustBeingReal said:

potato_hamster said:

Great. Nintendo joined Khronos. What exactly does that mean for Nintendo? Does it mean they have unfettered access to everything Khronos creates, for them to use how they see fit? Probably not. That's not how it works. But if it did, you're assuming the Kronos API as it stands does exactly what Nintendo needs it to do, and has a resource footprint that meets the demands of Nintendo. Sure it might be low-level, but it might not be low enough, and it might be nowhere near the level Nintendo needs it to be. I can almost guarantee it does not meet Nintendo's needs as it stands, and Nintendo will have to modify it dramatically to meet their needs. That's if they're even using this technology in the NX. They might have just joined the group to evaluate the technology. You should see all the groups Sony and Microsot is a part of. It doesn't necessarily mean anything.

And FYI, it is the API that is "powerful" in the sense that any piece of software can be more powerful than similar software. Some APIs that are more capable and have more functionality could be considered to be more "powerful" than others. This should be obvious. Don't argue over semantics.

Also you're failing to understand the fundamental issue that creating the infrasture ( the APIs, the development kits, the developer tools etc.) is extremely difficult, and you continuously trivialize this. Making all of this work they way you picture it is an very very very difficullt task. Of course this is theortically possible, but is isn't practical - especially not for Nintendo as I've outlined above. And you just kinda shurg and say "Nintendo will benefit by doing so so they'll just do it". They have to actually be able to execute this!

You keep bringing up PCs as if that really matters, and I'm not sure why.  Sure  PC games run on thousands of different hardware configurations, using engines running on APIs and OSs that are vastly different than what is used on consoles. You can deny that all you want but those are still the facts. Console OSs and APIS are still take a fraction of the system resources PC OSes and APIs do, so it is not the same as comparing apples to apples. Optimizing for one architecture, and one OS might much more efficient than having to do all of that for 2 separate platforms, but optimizing for one architecture and one OS, and one specification is much more effiicent than optimizing for two similar archtectures, two similar OSs, and two similar specifications. The resources required to do so might be magnitudes bigger than optimizing for a single specification - don't forget that.

Also the code will only work natively if the engine that's actually translating the code (you know, one of the dificult part I discussing) makes it so. Do you know that for multi-platform games the PS4 and the Xbox One are actually running practically identical code, just compiled differently and running on engines customized for each console? It doesn't "just work" on it's own! People have to put a lot of time and effort making the engines and APIs, and developer kits and tools and all of the other stuff that's needed for it to "just work" and it's the "just work" part that the topic of this discussion.

It is not easy to implement the solution you continue to brush off as trivial no matter what the huge benefit is. Sure the upside is huge, but only if you make it happen, that that if, no matter how much you deny it, is a huge one.

Considering that Vulkan is open source actually it means that anyone can use it and that includes Nintendo.

Yes Nintendo would get unfettered access to it. Vulkan is everything a developer could want in the way of an API, Low-Level, while also allowing for multi-core, Asynchronous/GPU Compute and it's supported by every major vendor, including AMD (the likely creator of NX's CPU and GPU Core Architecture). The performance of Vulkan in demos speaks for itself.

LOL no, an API is just a tool, now it can be more efficient or less, but in of itself it doesn't have power, because it's the hardware that crunches the numbers. If anything it's more how it's used that detemerines it's level of power. I'll argue over anything I choose, if I feel someone's being untruthful, you have no right to bark orders, like your the one in power in this debate LMFAO. There are no semantics here, you're wrong about this point.

LOL you're arguing over nothing, making new infrastructure isn't a problem, platform holders do it every generation and largely it's a matter of iteration and learning from the mistakes of past generation, or in the case of APIs, etc you can use a product that already exists and is freely available for you or anyone else to use. Hell being a contributor and Vulkan itself being open source means that anyone, be it a company or an independent programmer can re-write it or parts of it as they see fit, that's how it works with open source software.

You're acting like making tools for a single architecture is more complicated than it really is.

The hypothetical NX platform wouldn't have 2 separate architectures or 2 separate Operating Systems, one OS, one overall architecture, so all code runs natively on it, without issue.

It's so much more straight forward than making 2 separate architectures and 2 OS. You haven't even brought up a single point as to why this isn't true, you just keep on inventing stuff to try and support this fake point you keep on attempting to make.

Seriously what issue do you have with Nintendo taking this route? Because none of the things you keep insisting are true are.

Of course the PC example matters, because it's an outright example of a platform that has potentially infinite combinations of hardware, even with different architecture (because of different vendors making different types of core processing tech) and provided that Vendors update their drivers to incorporate new games those games work seamlessly.

The only difference between an API used on a PC and console is the language, because Sony and MS make them for their consoles, but that doesn't mean a platform holder can't use Vulkan or some other API that is also used on PC.

An API will work on any platform that it's been written to work on. Modern PC APIs are just as Low Level as Console ones, they do the exact same things as console APIs.

The whole point about this hypothetical NX is that it would use one OS, you ignoring this point doesn't change that fundemental point.

No resources needed don't get larger, because your making software for one architecture, the only difference between each device is power, the weaker platform can still run the code natively, it just runs less of it.

The engine doesn't have to translate a thing, because it's working on one architecture.

No multiplatform games made for PS4 and XBox One aren't practically identical, because they have different Operating Systems, they have different core languages made specifically by each platform holder, because the APIs are fundementally different, which is why games wouldn't run natively on each system.

This is why game developers have to port between each device or make different versions of games in tandem with the PC versions of titles (if a PC version is being developed). Your PS4 and XBox One example makes no sense in comparison to how NX platforms would work in this discussion we're having.

The reason NX handheld and console just run the same code is because it's written for the same API, that runs on the same architecture, hell even if the architecture was different it wouldn't matter, becaus the API would be written to work natively on both. Developers don't have to do anything, besides pick the settings they need to make it run on the weaker system.

It's just as easy as I'm saying, you inventing issues where there aren't any doesn't change that fact.

Ultimately making a single OS that incorporates two pieces of hardware is much simpler than making two Operating Systems, with two separate pieces of hardware. Each generation you make a new API, OS, etc anyway or you iterate on past technology and software.

Great. Vulkan is open source. It doesn't mean it's free to use in commercial products, and it also doesn't mean that developers have access to the entire code base. That would actually depend on the parameters of the partnership. Just because something is open source doesn't mean its a free-for-all. And again, you're assuming Vulkan is everything a developer would want in an API. You literally do not know what Nintendo's requirements are, but I can assure you they're a lot tighter than any other PC game developer. But keep assuming, really. It just makes you look bad, but I'll get to that later.

Yes, APIs are tools. But some tools are better than others. A $10 manual torque wrench you buy at the hardware store isn't nearly as powerful or useful as a torque wrench a mechanic uses in an auto repair shop. Both are used for the same thing, but one will allow you do it quicker and more precisely. I'd call the mechanics tool "more powerful" than the hardware store manual one, but that would be semantics wouldn't it? I'm not going to argue this further. Don't be obtuse.

You're completely oblivous to the work required to make the tools you're describing. You're also completely obliivous to how primitive and difficult to use Nintendo's tools are compared to their competition. You are also completely oblivious to how much Nintendo would have to push themselves and hire additional expertise to develop this infrastucture you think are is so trivial. Not all developer kits are created equal. Not all developer tools are as capable, not all APIs are a lightweighr or as useful. You might think this is me making a mountain out of a mole hill. However, my 10+ years experience making console video games for living, and actually working directly with Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, EA, along with others, and actually using their developed infrastures and tools a tells me I know better.

If you were actually as right as you were, it would mean that Sony would just be able to develop a slightly more complicated and slightly more bloated API to get all PS3 and all PS4 games running on the Vita with little additional work for developers. If what you were saying were true, Sony could easily have done that, and undoubtely would have. Trust me, I know first hand how difficult it is porting a PS4 game to the Vita, Sony was bending over backwards to make it as easy on developers as possible, and even with all their great tools it was easily the most difficult project I was ever a part of.  They wanted every third party making as many vita games as possible, that was their mission. They said they designed the Vita from the ground up to be "a truly portable playstation".

Yet, somehow, Sony in all of its capabilites, couldn't bash two rocks together and think "well gee if we just developed the Vita to have a similar architecture to our upcoming PS4, and a similar OS to our upcoming PS4, this would all be a cakewalk! Developers could just recompile their games to run on lower specs! And, think of how much easier it would be supporting two similar platforms! We could just combine our resources! It's just that easy, some guy on the internet says it is!" But Sony didn't go in that direction, did they. And, if were right, and you did your homework, that should make pretty much zero sense to you considering Sony has been on the board of directors of Khronos for over a decade, not just a member like Nintendo and Microsoft. You'd figure they'd be fully aware of exactly what Khronos and its collectiviely developed technologies can do, even a few years ago while desiging the Vita, would have supposedly had access to all the latest tech. Yet here they were, supposedly derping around when designing the vita, and completely missed the boat while sitting on the board of the group that make the technology you think will solve all of Nintendo's API issues. Its incredible that this still makes sense to you. Have you considered that maybe, just maybe that the very technology you're claiming that Nintendo can "just use" in the consoles has been developed by Sony? Lets see how that Lead Zeppelin sails.

And like that, everything else you're saying is out of pure naievtiy, (for example, you should know the engine sits between the game and the OS/API, so you need develop the engine to work with the different APIs, not the game itself, which actually is mostly identical regardless of the platform). But because you don't actually have any practical experience, and  because it looks so easy on paper based on your understanding,  and you seem to forget that people actually have to execute the things you assume are not just possible, but easy. Nope. Doesn't work that way.

But alas, I'll forgive you and plainly say: You don't know what you're talking about. You'll know how right I am in about 5 months time when Nintendo announcesthe NX that isn't what you think it's going to be. And maybe, just maybe, I already know I'm right about that one ;)

Good day.