"PS4 is easy to developer than Xbone BTW." We don't know this yet. This will only be (partially) true if a multiplatform-dev will say so who is developing for both systems, given a year by now at least. Both Sony and MS are still actively working on dev-tools.

"The devs are saying they need to learn how to work with the eSRAM and DataMoves in Xbone... PS4 works like PC."

Which devs say this exactly? Give us some proofs. And no, PS4 is not like PC as devs told us in threads *you* started, especially due to memory layout.

The problem with Sony's approach with the PS4 is this.  What happens when the developer goes under?

If a game is published by a publisher, the publisher has the distribution rights in 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the cases.  They typically have access to the code, they may even have the rights to purchase the code/IP before anyone else if it's a game they're publishing.  So, what that means is that services like Xbox LIVE and PSN have the right to continue to make a game available for sale or update the game as necessary.

If a developer is the sole owner of the rights to distribute, a whole slew of legal complications happen.  If the company is, say a company of five developers, they are an equal partnership, and they fold and disagree with each other about how to move forward.  How does a service deal with royalties on sales?  How do they know which partner to listen to?  Who has the rights to distribute and do they exist anymore?  Who will be maintaining the code?

Indie developers are great on their own.  They can even be magical.  They become a concern and a problem though if they aren't met with success.  Lots of indie developers will fold because they just won't find the success they believe should be there.  This already happens.

Microsoft's approach maintains their business interests.  Which is they can ensure the uninterupted distribution and support for a game.  Sony can't offer that guarantee, not unless they're also taking on the role of Publisher with indie developers.  Microsoft got burnt when Atari, both a developer and publisher, collapsed.  There were numerous games, some very popular ones, that it could no longer sell because Atari liquidated.

 Sony's approach, if they're not the publisher, is going to create a nightmare situation in the long run.   Indie developers go out of business all the time.  It isn't going to be less true on PSN.  I'm not saying indie developers are bad, they aren't.  It's just they're going to have problems down the road.

I'm not really sure how this is any different from the myriad digital distribution services on PC. This is not a future problem. It's something that happens right now on those services and, as you mentioned, has even occurred on PSN, XBL, etc.

So with the proliferation of indies on consoles, let's agree that this issue will become more widespread next generation. So what? It seems to me that it's far, far better to lower the barrier of entry and have those games, even if they are eventually delisted, than to never have them at all. Like, obviously so. To the point that I'm not even sure how it's debatable.

Titanfall devs from Game Informe magazine...

"they're having trouble even using the 5GB efficiently with all the new architecture tricks"

New architecture tricks means eSRAM + DataMoves... that is the only tricks that Xbone have over PC.

But it is common sense that is more easy to use the RAM on PS4 than Xbone... any low knowledge programer knows that.

This can be interpreted in any way. "even using the 5GB"? What does it mean actually? Devs are already asking themselves what to do with all the memory they have available by now.

And no, these are not the only tricks because you again left out the audio-part which frees the computing units completely of audio-processing.

And what are you talking about more easy and low knowledge (?) programmer? Low knowledge programmers reads so nice I had to lol.

I think it's again your way of arguing and posting again but if something is easier than another thing I want to hear from an actual and legit dev and not on a gaming-sales-forum without any proof. Both systems need good devs to take full advantage, yet I heard via PM on GAF that MS is on its way to make the move-units completely transparent for programmers which is really hard to do by people who build compilers but I think MS can achieve it, they build compilers since ages and have decent knowledge in this.

Most indie developers don't use a service.  They distribute independently.  Some use Steam, but in general on the PC side for indies, distribution happens through a download on their site.  An indie developer rising and falling on their own is just a problem for the consumer.  An indie developer rising and falling on a service like Xbox LIVE or PSN is a problem for Microsoft and Sony as well, since they're conducting business for the developer. 

You're right, this is a current problem.  The problem is I don't see where Sony is doing anything to prevent a negative impact on consumers or their service.

As an example, there is nothing preventing a developer from creating malware.  I'm even going to go out on a limb and say within the first year there will be malware disguised as a game.  Just like there is a plethora of it in the Android store.  It's great that Sony can delist the game.  Awesome!  The problem is the damage has already been done. 

What would it do to consumer confidence and public trust if a game that Sony was actively promoting, turned out to contain malware that harmed consumers?  Just a hypothetical question.

Traditionally, consoles have made the price of entry to them expensive because it is a closed system and some information is sacred.  However, if anyone can develop for a system (the PS4) then you're likely to get more than you bargined for.

I'm not saying more games is bad.  But everyone at the table has to consider everyone else's stake in the game.  No one can just have a myopic view of the situation and say one solution is great and one solution is bad.  Every solution has it's pluses and minuses.  I see two big red flags with Sony's approach, not to say I wouldn't love seeing developers praise Microsoft's approach, but I think right now the view of indie developers is myopic.  They are focused on what is best for them in selling games, but I doubt they are thinking about what happens if they fail or if someone introduces malware to the system. 

Uh... that's pretty fucking out there.

Unlike Android, you still have to have a PS dev kit. And unless Sony has enough faith in you to give you a loaner, that's not cheap. Just because they aren't forcing people into a relationship with publishers (who, in a digital landscape, aren't really necessary) and they are streamlining their concept approval process doesn't mean that any old body can put any old thing on Sony's network. There's still certification, and it's still a walled garden. It's just that the wall is a little lower than it used to be.

Don't know if this is the right thread, but just as a personal opinion: I hate the pile of crap on Android market... I am really affraid that this shit could reflect on consoles. Still don't know the status of dev kits and how the whole developing cycle would work for small entities (open tools... hardware dev kits? simple PC's?). I always found console development to be somehow closed and I was fine with it. Is this gonna change now?

Ah...see with the Xbox One you can develop an Xbox One game with any Windows 8 PC.  Using Visual Studio, develop the game for Windows 8, as well as Xbox One, publish.  Whether they continue the peer reviews or not, I don't know, but with XBLIG there is a peer review.  Once complete, it gets published.

The difference between Xbox 360 and Xbox One is that Xbox One games available through the Xbox LIVE Apps store will run in the Apps VM, not the games VM.  But they're now capable of including Achievements and Medals.

You need a dev kit if you want your game to run in the Games VM and be featured in the Xbox LIVE Games store.

EDIT:  I think the role of the publisher changes with digital distribution, but there is a role a publisher plays.  I am fairly certain for simple legal reasons, Sony is assuming those publisher roles with indie developers.  The difference is that Microsoft is saying it. 

Console developers do the following with every retail game:  Press, package, promote and distribute games.  These are their responsibilities for any game published on their console.  

The publisher, on a console, is purely a financial and legal function.  They provide the financial backing to the developer to complete the project, and they manage the legal obligations.  They are similar to a Record Label/Recording Studio.  They serve a purpose, but a publisher doesn't have to be big.  They just have to exist when everything goes to pots.  An enterprising law firm likely could set themselves up as a publisher.

At some point publishers, in the computer model, will be like agents are in the music/movie industry.  They deal with all the negotiations, etc and the developers create the content.   

If Badgenome is correct, then it would be less likely, but still possible.