Bungie undecided on lead platform for new IP

[A7MAD]

Personally I'd make lead whatever console sells more software in general.

If Bungie are making a FPS I'd go with whichever console makes more in sales with FPS and if it' an RPG follow the same rule of thumb.

That'd be the best business decision, however that is me and I'm looking at it from a financial standpoint.

[VintageElise]

Personally I'd make lead whatever console sells more software in general.

If Bungie are making a FPS I'd go with whichever console makes more in sales with FPS and if it' an RPG follow the same rule of thumb.

That'd be the best business decision, however that is me and I'm looking at it from a financial standpoint.

But if they lead on the 360, which has a bigger user-base and sells more software, the they could make a great 360 game and a under-par PS3 port. If they lead on the PS3, they will get a great game on the PS3 and the same exact great game on the 360.

[I_Luv_2_Game]

But if they lead on the 360, which has a bigger user-base and sells more software, the they could make a great 360 game and a under-par PS3 port. If they lead on the PS3, they will get a great game on the PS3 and the same exact great game on the 360.

Yea I agree.. They should go with the PS3 as lead platform just for that reason..

[A7MAD]

But if they lead on the 360, which has a bigger user-base and sells more software, the they could make a great 360 game and a under-par PS3 port. If they lead on the PS3, they will get a great game on the PS3 and the same exact great game on the 360.

True, which would cost them more money and take a longer time...

Not the best decision from a business standpoint.

We're also talking about Activision here.

[Darji]

True, which would cost them more money and take a longer time...

Not the best decision from a business standpoint.

We're also talking about Activision here.

Why would it be more expensive or cost them more money? Thats absolutley ********. Its costs them more time and money if they try to port it from 360 to PS3 because you just cant port it like that.

Many developers know that already and thats why PS3 games nowadays are often leadplatform.

Oh and Leadplatform doesnt mean that it looks better on this platform its just easier to port that way.

[A7MAD]

Why would it be more expensive or cost them more money? Thats absolutley ********. Its costs them more time and money if they try to port it from 360 to PS3 because you just cant port it like that.

Many developers know that already and thats why PS3 games nowadays are often leadplatform.

Oh and Leadplatform doesnt mean that it looks better on this platform its just easier to port that way.

I'm unsure where you get your sources for these matters however developing on the PS3 still costs developers more money out of their pockets than lead developments from the 360, plus it's easier for them too.

How is that BS exactly?

http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-is-har...or-on-purpose/

[SwitchBlade]

I'd be suprised if they if did lead on ps3, just for the fact that they know the 360 inside and out, and bring in some people familiar with ps3 development to help out on that end.

I'm curious to see the new IP since Halo has been stale to me since halo 2.

[Darji]

I'm unsure where you get your sources for these matters however developing on the PS3 still costs developers more money out of their pockets than lead developments from the 360, plus it's easier for them too.

How is that BS exactly?

http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-is-har...or-on-purpose/

I think the guy from Factor 5 said it first. You can just port a game from the 360 to the PS3 and hope it all goes well. He was also the first one who said that its much easier and cheaper to port from PS3 to 360 or even do cross developement like Ubisoft did with Assasins Creed 2 or also now rockstar with Dead Red Rededemption.

And yes the PS3 and 360 is totally different but its not really harder just different.

Also I think Ubisoft said sometime ago that if you do cross-developement, then it costs only 20% more but you get a much better result and its also more time efficient.

[arfi-gorgona-O]

Cross development might be better than a complete port but still its far away from optimal.It would be a lot better to develop with PS3 in mind and do the 360 port than this.But maybe its less $ for them.

[EyeSight]

i think they should lead with the ps3 because it would be a snap for them to port it to the 360 with their experience with it. if they lead with the 360 i think they'll come up against all kinds of problems with the ps3 and may drop the platform or even delay it

[A7MAD]

I was never discussing what would be better for gamers so everyone gets a great solid build.

I was discussing cost, there is a reason why developers up until only recently were developing 360 then porting to PS3 (a majority will remain on this to save money in the long run) and cost was one of the greatest factors because it was still cheaper this way.

[Darji]

I was never discussing what would be better for gamers so everyone gets a great solid build.

I was discussing cost, there is a reason why developers up until only recently were developing 360 then porting to PS3 (a majority will remain on this to save money in the long run) and cost was one of the greatest factors because it was still cheaper this way.

And thats were you are wrong. Its not cheaper to develope on 360 and then port it to PS3 because it needs much more work and time to do so. Its cheaper to start with the PS3 and tehn port it to the 360.

[F34R]

And thats were you are wrong. Its not cheaper to develope on 360 and then port it to PS3 because it needs much more work and time to do so. Its cheaper to start with the PS3 and tehn port it to the 360.

I think you're mixed up here. It's better for the overall quality of the game to start on the PS3, then port to 360. It's better for the overall cost to start on the 360, and port to the PS3.

[A7MAD]

I think you're mixed up here. It's better for the overall quality of the game to start on the PS3, then port to 360. It's better for the overall cost to start on the 360, and port to the PS3.

^^ Exactly

Which is why that's what most developers do to save money...

[Super_Lilith]

They already have a very advanced engine up for the 360 which they have experience with. Would it be more time, cost and resource efficient to just go with the 360 and port to the PS3? while setting aside a team to research more and start building things for the PS3, or even draft some guys from activision's other areas to help with the PS3.

[Galvanise_]

^^ Exactly

Which is why that's what most developers do to save money...

I don't think money is an issue in their relationship with Activision. Bungie are a good development house and I think they'll take the decision that'll make the best game for the most amount of people.

[A7MAD]

I don't think money is an issue in their relationship with Activision. Bungie are a good development house and I think they'll take the decision that'll make the best game for the most amount of people.

That may very well be the case because everybody will win hopefully this way.

My comments were solely based from a financial standpoint. After all they spent something like $50,000,000 for MW2 right (multi)?

OFFTOPIC:

How have you been mate?

[Staticneuron]

Ok people here don't understand the difference between lead and a port.

Well, the last quote I could find.

"What we do now is create for the PS3 and 360 at the same time, and it doesn't cost more than 10 per cent extra to develop for the other machine. Before it was costing us more, about 20 per cent, just because it was difficult to learn the PS3 hardware, but now our engines are done and we can easily develop for both machines." -- Yves Guillemot, President and CEO of Ubisoft - Jan 2008

back then..... ubisoft did not have any PS3 games as lead platform so obviously they were talking about porting "too" the PS3 as being more expensive.

The issue was, back then developing on the PS3 period was expensive. Whether it was the lead, or if it was a port.

The only things I have seen that save cost was developing for both at the same time instead of "porting" to one or another. That doesn't mean there wasn't a lead. Like MW1/2, burnout paradise so on and so forth, the "lead" doesn't denote an increased cost.

Porting "period" does.