Support NeoGAF

[Mrbob]

Let us try to keep this to relatively normal discussion. Chittagong made an interesting comment in the LOTR Battle for Middle Earth 2 thread about EA backing 360 quite a bit lately. They were part of the CES keynote for MS, and are offering a type of game not traditionally offered on consoles for the 360. Plus they seem to be going through a ton of effort to make sure the controls for LOTR Battle for Middle Earth 2 works on 360. This made me think about all the support EA has been giving MS lately. Yes you can say EAs sports games at 360 launch weren't great but this is because of a rushed console launch. After seeing Fight Night Round 3 on 360 I expect great things out of EA on 360 for 2006. Beyond the Fight Night demo, here are other games EA has demos and trailers and extras for download on the Live Marketplace:

NBA Live
Fifa
Madden
Need for Speed Most Wanted

Now this seems to be the tip of the iceberg. If you look at game announcements for 3rd party western games, they all seem to be planned for PS3/Xbox360 and perhaps also the PC. Do you really expect to see a huge difference between the PS3 and 360 versions?

The point I'm getting too is that the western game market is dominated by western developers/publishers, besides Nintendo. You just need to look at the top sales list in USA and Europe to see this. So for the most part, western developed games are going to be the biggest pusher for sales in Europe and NA. MS is going to have nearly a year head start over Sony. Not getting involved in the HD movie wars directly and selling it as an add on means their console can be priced lower than the Playstation 3. Games will look comparable on the two systems. This is the biggest point. 360 version will be nearly indistinguishable from the Playstation 3, but the system itself may be 100 dollars cheaper. The core system perhaps more. So a consumer can get the same game experience on a system which doesn't cost as much. Price may not be a huge factor Europe or Japan, but it sure is in the USA. You only need to look at the launch of the DS to see how launching early and then gaining a lower pricepoint can help leverage sales. This will help them gain more support for the system.

Will this happen? Too early to say. Despite MS having shipping problems at launch, they have seem to have done an excellent job at gaining third party support for the system now and into the future.

Thoughts?

 

[GitarooMan]

Certainly destroys all those Dreamcast comparisons that people continue to insist on using, IMO.

Seriously though, I think PS3 and 360 will both do well. The question will be who will have the big GTA-like exclusive that really explodes. It could be the next GTA, it could be Halo 3, it could something we haven't even heard of yet

 

[DarienA]

MrBob you do realize you've simply re-worded a thread that's been done to death already?

 

[Doom_Bringer]

If you look at game announcements for 3rd party western games, they all seem to be planned for PS3/Xbox360 and perhaps also the PC. Do you really expect to see a huge difference between the PS3 and 360 versions?

I am not seeing this at all. Oblivion, The Outfit, FullAuto, Ghost Recon, DOA4, Splinter Cell DA, Amped 3 etc are all X360 exclusive and some of them haven't been annouced for PC.

Games will look comparable on the two systems. This is the biggest point. 360 version will be nearly indistinguishable from the Playstation 3

Too early to say that imo. We really don't know what Cell will bring to the table and we don't have enough information on RSX.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I guess today is 360 for MrBob.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I can't remember if it was Edge or Games TM, but a month to two months ago they had a brilliant piece on the geographical markets -- who caters to one, to another, to all etc. Its certainly nice to think about.

It would make for interesting chang3.

 

[Mrbob]

I can't remember if it was Edge or Games TM, but a month to two months ago they had a brilliant piece on the geographical markets -- who caters to one, to another, to all etc. Its certainly nice to think about.

It would make for interesting chang3.

Is this article available online? I would like to read it. Can you find out which magazine it is in? I know Barnes and Noble carries both of these magazines in the states, usually about a month late. If I know the issue I want to try and hunt it down.

 

[elostyle]

I still believe that between Microsoft's strong position in the states and Nintendo's current steamroll success that Sony is going to be in a tighter spot that many people realize.

There is not a single reason why EA would have a preference for Sony staying the unrivaled number one that they are that I can think of.

 

[Ponn]

This is the biggest point. 360 version will be nearly indistinguishable from the Playstation 3

I too think this is a big point, but not the way you think. The biggest selling point for Xbox this gen was that it had better graphics then PS2. Going into next gen and them losing this advantage doesn't sound like a positive to me.

Your statement though has some truth. Western developers are becoming much more relevant and they will continue to be. The most successful console though, IMHO, will be the one that can capture the best of both worlds though. That would be why PS2 was so successful this gen and will be the deciding factor again next gen.

 

[Mrbob]

I too think this is a big point, but not the way you think. The biggest selling point for Xbox this gen was that it had better graphics then PS2. Going into next gen and them losing this advantage doesn't sound like a positive to me.

Your statement though has some truth. Western developers are becoming much more relevant and they will continue to be. The most successful console though, IMHO, will be the one that can capture the best of both worlds though. That would be why PS2 was so successful this gen and will be the deciding factor again next gen.

Graphics wise, I have friends who think Playstation 2 is just as powerful as Xbox, so I don't think graphics will be an advantage either way.

Beyond this, as far as diversity of lineups go, you may be right. We usually only get the top game selling lists. But once you get below the top 20 this could be the difference maker in why the Playstation 2 sells better than the Xbox. Has the best of both east and west game development. Now the question is will Japan publishers ignore the Xbox 360 userbase in North America like they ignored the Xbox userbase. So many potential sales lost. I think things are starting to change regarding Japan development, too. Capcom has Dead Rising, Lost Planet, and Resident Evil 5 planned for 360 already. With more to come.

 

[teiresias]

Ahhh, Mrbob, continuously trying to justify his X360 purchase now that his Team Ninja notions have been dashed!!

 

[DaCocoBrova]

This Gen, other than XBMC and all the joys of a modded console, the XBOX was my go to for sports gaming for the most part.

PS2 and GC were for the exclusive content.

Things will more than likely remain that way.

 

[Ponn]

Graphics wise, I have friends who think Playstation 2 is just as powerful as Xbox, so I don't think graphics will be an advantage either way.

Nice sweep under the carpet there :lol :lol Working in video game retail I can say it's a bigger deal then you just said, and you thought it was a big deal or you wouldn't have said it above. Ask anyone with a PS2 and Xbox what their biggest motive is between getting the Xbox version or PS2 version of a multiplatform game and they will say graphics. Same thing in video game magazine reviews, they always tell you which version to get and it's always xbox for graphics unless it's glitchy. Since I really didn't care for the Xbox exclusives this gen i personally would not have had a Xbox except for the better multiplatform games. My friends already had Halo and i played enough Ninja Gaiden on theirs to get my fill.

Beyond this, as far as diversity of lineups go, you may be right. We usually only get the top game selling lists. But once you get below the top 20 this could be the difference maker in why the Playstation 2 sells better than the Xbox. Has the best of both east and west game development. Now the question is will Japan publishers ignore the Xbox 360 userbase in North America like they ignored the Xbox userbase. So many potential sales lost. I think things are starting to change regarding Japan development, too. Capcom has Dead Rising, Lost Planet, and Resident Evil 5 planned for 360 already. With more to come.

I think MS did it too themselves last Gen, and they are still gonna pay for it this coming gen unless they start kissing up and greasing some palms. They reached out only to the Western gamers with Xbox with a few half ass efforts here and there like Sudeki. It's build made it a perfect PC port machine and it had the best controller for FPS's with Xbox live, what more could you ask for. I think the biggest question now is games like EM, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyessy going to be too little too late? And will they embrace any of the other more eastern games like Katamari?

 

[Excelion]

Now the question is will Japan publishers ignore the Xbox 360 userbase in North America like they ignored the Xbox userbase. So many potential sales lost.

One could think Konami would have learned their lesson with Splinter Cell, but it seems they didn't.

 

[Pedigree Chum]

I too think this is a big point, but not the way you think. The biggest selling point for Xbox this gen was that it had better graphics then PS2. Going into next gen and them losing this advantage doesn't sound like a positive to me.

Your statement though has some truth. Western developers are becoming much more relevant and they will continue to be. The most successful console though, IMHO, will be the one that can capture the best of both worlds though. That would be why PS2 was so successful this gen and will be the deciding factor again next gen.

While that was a big advantage, how many games actually shoed it? Most games were port-ups from PS2, not really taking advantage of the hardware. Its still about the content, if MS can create more hit franchises like Halo they'll be fine, even if they don't have the hardware advantage anymore. The two consoles are very comparable in performance (from what we have to go on), that's more than enough....power never carried a console, it only helps if you've got the content.

 

[Ponn]

While that was a big advantage, how many games actually shoed it? Most games were port-ups from PS2, not really taking advantage of the hardware. Its still about the content, if MS can create more hit franchises like Halo they'll be fine, even if they don't have the hardware advantage anymore. The two consoles are very comparable in performance (from what we have to go on), that's more than enough....power never carried a console, it only helps if you've got the content.

Okay, how well do you think the Xbox would have done if it had say Dreamcast graphics? Just for shits and giggles. You honestly think it would have done the same market share wise? I too think it's all about content, and my point was the Xbox was hurting in the content department and it's graphics advantage is what helped it despite that flaw.

I'm just finding the notion that a year or so ago people were clamoring that Xbox was more powerful graphics wise and that was a big thing. Especially when it launched, that was it's big huge thing. Now though that it's NOT an advantage going into next gen it's being downplayed.

 

[DarkMage619]

Okay, how well do you think the Xbox would have done if it had say Dreamcast graphics? Just for shits and giggles. You honestly think it would have done the same market share wise? I too think it's all about content, and my point was the Xbox was hurting in the content department and it's graphics advantage is what helped it despite that flaw.

I'm just finding the notion that a year or so ago people were clamoring that Xbox was more powerful graphics wise and that was a big thing. Especially when it launched, that was it's big huge thing. Now though that it's NOT an advantage going into next gen it's being downplayed.

I am not convinced this is true. With this line of thinking we could say: "What if the XBOX had NES graphics?" The bottom line that it was mostly exclusive franchies coupled with XBOX Live that really helped M$ move as many XBOX's as they did. There are even documented cases like the Rainbow 6 titles that, while they did look better than the PS2 versions, their compelling online models were what kept people playing. We won't even start on HALO and HALO 2.

Sure XBOX had better graphics but in a multiplatform world things like good online play go much further than better graphics.

The Dark One

 

[Srider]

Mr. Bob, see the red light beside your name? That is the signal that says "stop making threads."

 

[Ponn]

I am not convinced this is true. With this line of thinking we could say: "What if the XBOX had NES graphics?" The bottom line that it was mostly exclusive franchies coupled with XBOX Live that really helped M$ move as many XBOX's as they did. There are even documented cases like the Rainbow 6 titles that, while they did look better than the PS2 versions, their compelling online models were what kept people playing. We won't even start on HALO and HALO 2.

Sure XBOX had better graphics but in a multiplatform world things like good online play go much further than better graphics.

The Dark One

Eh, let's start with Halo since it wasn't even Online till Halo 2. Let's start with Itagki and just blow his whole "i'm putting DOA and Ninja Gaiden and my support behind Xbox because it's more powerful". How do you think those games became exclusives for Xbox? How many developers said they could only DO those games on Xbox because of it's power. Xmen Legends 2, all online for PS2, PSP and Xbox but Xbox got 720p mode. Seriously, at this point anyone trying to downplay how important graphcis were to the xbox success are looking foolish. And before people continue throwing up online as the reason please look up the numbers of Xbox live subscribers.

 

[Kasra]

I think you make some great points and I honestly think that Sony is in trouble. EA being in Microsoft's hip pocket is no small thing.

 

[Deg]

I think the fanboys here are forgetting that EA are the biggest publisher.

 

[DarkMage619]

Eh, let's start with Halo since it wasn't even Online till Halo 2. Let's start with Itagki and just blow his whole "i'm putting DOA and Ninja Gaiden and my support behind Xbox because it's more powerful". How do you think those games became exclusives for Xbox? How many developers said they could only DO those games on Xbox because of it's power. Xmen Legends 2, all online for PS2, PSP and Xbox but Xbox got 720p mode. Seriously, at this point anyone trying to downplay how important graphcis were to the xbox success are looking foolish. And before people continue throwing up online as the reason please look up the numbers of Xbox live subscribers.

Look at games like Rainbow 6, Star Wars Battlefront, BURNOUT Takedown. In the case of Burnout there were aarguements that the game LOOKED better on PS2 yet it still SOLD better on XBOX and I'd say that XBOX's superior online, despite using EAs servers, unified voice chat and friends lists are important and the reason why those games fared as well as they did on the XBOX. And before you discard the XBOX Live subscription rate numbers take a look at the same games released on BOTH XBOX and PS2 and explain why the XBOX version sold better(see above cases). Nine times out of ten it isn't because of better graphics.

Graphics are nice but since so few games are exclusive now-a-days there has to be something else that stands out, that thing for XBOX was its online model. Look how people are raving over 360 now. Sure the graphics are nice but its XBOX Live Arcade and the Live integration is what makes people excited. I'm sorry but saying that the main reason for XBOX's popularlity was because of its better graphics is shortsighted. Maybe initially that was the draw but the online and other inherient features of the console, online, soundtracks, better value were why people bought the console.

The Dark One

 

[SolidSnakex]

One could think Konami would have learned their lesson with Splinter Cell, but it seems they didn't.

And for gamers that's a good thing. Kojima's already responded to the idea of ports (and used SC as an example of why you shouldn't do them).

 

[Red Blaster]

One could think Konami would have learned their lesson with Splinter Cell, but it seems they didn't.

Err...MGS2 Substance?

 

[Guy LeDouche]

Didn't EA say the FN3 engine was basically for X360 and PS3 version would seem like FN4 in comparison?

I think, while EA is always happy to port, they will stick to what has worked in the past and not rock the boat.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Didn't EA say the FN3 engine was basically for X360 and PS3 version would seem like FN4 in comparison?

They didn't really comment on the engine, they just said to not confuse FN 360 and FN PS3 as the same game because FN 360 is more like FN3 and FN PS3 is more like FN4.

 

[Ponn]

And before you discard the XBOX Live subscription rate numbers take a look at the same games released on BOTH XBOX and PS2 and explain why the XBOX version sold better(see above cases).

The Dark One

So why did the other 30 million Xbox owners get an Xbox then?

You are seriously grasping here and completely ignoring all my other points.

 

[CajoleJuice]

Is there any way EA could make more money by developing its own console? Because in America it would rake in the sales.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Is there any way EA could make more money by developing its own console? Because in America it would rake in the sales.

They wouldn't because they're in the best position possible. They can make money on all systems instead of focusing in only 1 system and competing against other companies.

 

[CajoleJuice]

They wouldn't because they're in the best position possible. They can make money on all systems instead of focusing in only 1 system and competing against other companies.

Yea, that makes sense. It'd just be funny to see all the people who eat up Madden year after year have to jump to the EA console.

 

[Shalomi]

Well, I mean...yeah.

It's about a year too early to be making statements like this.

 

[Chairman Yang]

And for gamers that's a good thing. Kojima's already responded to the idea of ports (and used SC as an example of why you shouldn't do them).

How is SC an example of why you shouldn't do ports?

 

[SolidSnakex]

How is SC an example of why you shouldn't do ports?

Because the Xbox versions of SC are much better than the other versions. The GC versions don't have an online mode, the PS2 version has cut up levels ect. Here's his direct quote

GI: Your devotion to the Sony hardware is very understandable given that history. But do you think that there could have been a chance that the series could have gone multiplatform if the Xbox or GameCube versions of the games had been bigger hits?

Kojima: It’s a difficult question to answer, because multi-format is not what I like to do in terms of game development. I believe that all hardware has good points and bad points. With the rivals of this hardware battle, that grows, meaning that the game industry grows. If game hardware is integrated to one, and games are integrated to one, then we die, same as nature. So what I thought was that I wanted to create a game for the PlayStation, specifically using the PlayStation and what the PlayStation could do. Same for the Xbox. I would like to create games for the Xbox, to take advantage of what the Xbox is the most capable of doing.

For instance, Metal Gear Solid 2 was specifically created for PlayStation 2, because the PlayStation 2 was capable of creating transparent polygons. Alpha - meaning combinations of transparent polygons was what gave them the idea to express rain and wind using the PS2. So it was suitable for users to play using the PlayStation format. When it was converted to Xbox, that’s a little different, because there is a change there of the expression. It’s not as complete, because it was designed specifically for the PlayStation 2.

I should not say anything bad about our competition, but look at Splinter Cell 2, the Xbox version looks really great, but the PS2 looks a little odd, with choppy graphics. I think that is not loyal to the loyal game fans. I don’t want to do that kind of thing.

So for Metal Gear Soild 4, we have already started the project for the PlayStation 3 platform. We would like to concentrate specifically on what we could do just for the PlayStation 3. For example, if I was to create Metal Gear Solid 5 or another title for the Xbox 360, I would create solely for the 360, taking advantage of the hardware, and would not convert to PlayStation 3, because that will not be a very good conversion. Another example is the Revolution. I will try to create a title specifically taking advantage of the Revolution hardware.

So it wasn’t the hardware’s fault for the conversion edition of the Xbox game, or the GameCube version of the Twin Snakes. It didn’t do as well as people thought because it was a conversion. It wasn’t created for that machine. If Metal Gear Solid was created specifically for GameCube or Xbox, the result would have been a lot different.

 

[Chairman Yang]

Thanks for posting the text. However, I'd personally rather have an inferior port than no port at all, and I suspect most gamers would feel the same way. If you really want the best version, get the system for it. In other words, what disadvantage is there to having a version of the game on every console, even if some of those aren't as good as the others? None, with the arguable exception of failing to "optimize" for one platform (although the Xbox/PC Splinter Cells didn't have this problem and looked stunning).

 

[Izzy]

Market shift? Maybe. December 2005 NPD numbers:

PSP ~1.12M
DS ~1.07M
PS2 ~1.5 million
Gamecube ~470,000
Xbox ~415,000
Xbox 360 281,441

Market share numbers for 2005:

Nintendo GameBoy Advance 41 percent 4.26 million
Sony PlayStation Portable 35 percent 3.63 million
Nintendo DS 23.5 percent 2.43 million


Console unit sales and market share numbers for 2005
Sony PlayStation 2 5.51 million 55 percent
Microsoft Xbox 2.40 million 24 percent
Nintendo GameCube 1.56 million 15 percent
Microsoft Xbox 360 607,343 6 percent

Discuss.

 

[nubbe]

I would say that PS3 and 360 has about equal limitations in the hardware setup excluding the media format.
How much better either version of a game will look on the platforms will be a developer issue more so than has been.

Like I think that GC and Xbox games look pretty equal visually but the underling hardware has pretty major differences. Now, this coming generation have the most equally matched hardware to date. Memory, bandwith, GPU are all rather equal. It's probably why Sony keep pushing the Cell more than any other part of the system or the system as a whole.

What will be the intressting aspect for consumers this generation is what can be offerd on the machines beyond the retail games.