Comments on: Sony: PS3 is hard to develop for--on purpose

The Japanese electronics powerhouse is making it hard on developers to create games for the PlayStation 3, and believe it or not, the company is fine with that.

[killerchris2k8]

Gabe Newell Jan. 2007

"The PS3 is a total disaster on so many levels, I think It?s really clear that Sony lost track of what customers and what developers wanted. I?d say, even at this late date, they should just cancel it and do a ?do over?. Just say, ?This was a horrible disaster and we?re sorry and we?re going to stop selling this and stop trying to convince people to develop for it.? The happy story is the Wii. I?m betting that by Christmas of next year, the Wii has a larger installed base than the 360. Other people think I?m crazy. I really like everything that Nintendo is doing."

[killerchris2k8]

HYBERBOLE

[michaelo1966]

Microsoft, for all their faults, has always made really nice IDE's and documentation: even the early stuff was good. If it's easy to write applications people write lots of them, which is probably why Basic and Cobol were the kings of programming languages for decades. It's why there are a countless number of VB applications, why PHP has become the language for most Web 2.0 apps, why HTML caught on while people don't even know what SGML is... The list is endless. Is that "fair?" No. Is it good engineering? Nope; a lot of it is awful. And a lot of the early applications stink, but -- and this is key -- there are lots of them and the selection begets a market which brings in capital which brings in better programmers until you've got great software. The PS3, in third place for 3rd gen console sales and trending the wrong direction, isn't helping themselves by telling developers to work harder.

[SteveW928]

More doesn't mean better. I could care less if a platform as 10,000 titles if there are a few good ones on the superior platform. As long as a console (or computer, etc.) has enough numbers to make a viable market.... the argument of Don's article is meaningless. The PS3 has PLENTY units for a developer to write an exclusive for it and make tons of $. The key is they actually have to write a good title, and not just port their silly 'engines' with new pasted on graphics. My gosh, how many cr*p FPS titles can they crank out and market hype? Most of them aren't worth $5 let alone $50. These are the developers who are whining.

[pithenumber]

@steve
if you make a PS3 exclusive, you don't make as much money writing for PC and xBox since they command more market share

Look, not all games that are on the same engine or language is crap.
look at how many games use Valve's Source, are they all repeats of the last one under a new name(except the hl2 sequels)
what about C++, there are thousands of different games that are written in C++

tlak to the devs that post on the board, or even better, talk to a dev in your neighborhood and they'll explain why its hard to develop for
get all your questions answered, then come back to the comment section of this article

[SteveW928]

@ pithenumber - sorry, that is simply a fallacy. If you write a good game for one platform it will sell better than a poor game on many. What is at issue here is that the developers want a quick and dirty way to put their game on both xbox and PS3 and are unhappy the PS3 didn't make things the same as xbox. The PS3 uses a simplified version of OpenGL and Cg (a variation of C language). This is hardly something crazy to do. My guess (and I'm not a developer... but I've worked with many development teams over the years) is that some of the game development engines and tools for xbox don't work on PS3... so it makes porting harder. Because the xbox is currently the top seller, and a lot of developers are M$ brainwashed, they think this is the way to go. If they all had gotten going on the PS3, then the xbox would be the oddball. It is also likely the xbox is more like a standard PC to program for, since it is more like a standard PC than is the PS3 (remember when xbox developers were demoing their stuff on a Mac G5?) It is 'hard' to develop for because it isn't the quickest path to make a buck they can imagine.

[ewelch]

Of course that Sony official's comments can be taken two ways. Maybe what he meant was that they didn't make it easy to program at the cost of removing the ability to write really powerful applications for the PS3. So his point could be "Yeah, we could have made it easier to program for, but at what cost? Making impossible to do some things we want to do with it.

Of course, that's a condemnation of their ability to make tools that are both powerful and easy to use - like OS X's development tools. They go back to NeXTSTEP which nearly everyone wanted to use because it was so powerful and easy to use. Who was that nearly everyone? Sun. Dell. HP. The list goes on and on. It was very popular on Wall Street because it was easy to program powerful apps. Same today with Objective C and Cocoa and their IDE. But because of Apple's small market share, most people don't know about it, or don't care. They're rather use tools that are harder to use (C# etc.). So they should be able to relate to Sony's point of view.

Was his statement made in English or Japanese. If Japanese, who translated it. And what is his lever of expertise if he was speaking in English?

[mocax]

all the bickering is pointless

why don't we just sit back and watch the sales numbers?

of course, that'll mean a dearth of blog and news updates... :P

[killerchris2k8]

We know the sales numbers. PS3 is at the bottom of the barrel. Everytime I go to gamestop it seems like thePS3 section is getting smaller instead of bigger. It's also usually in some dark corner of the store.

As of Feb.21 2009
XBOX360
0.96M Japan
16.50M America
11.26M Others
28.73M Total

PS3
2.89M Japan
7.91M America
9.81M Others
20.62M Total

[killerchris2k8]

Sony announced a landmark this week for its PlayStation Network: 20 million users worldwide, as of February 20. According to the presser, that breaks down to 5 million in the first 14 months of service, 5 million more 8 months later, and an additional 10 million the 7 months after that. There's quite a few caveats to consider here, as that includes PSP and PS3 users as well as anyone who wishes to use the official PS forums, whether or not they own one of the aforementioned consoles.

However, more interesting to us is a note about the service generating $180 million life to date in revenue. It's a stark contrast to Xbox Live's reported $1 billion revenue since its 2002 launch, as of E3 2009. Based on figures from leaked to Seattle P-I this week, which said XBL had 10 million subscribers worldwide and a 56 percent Gold subscriptions rate in February 2008, we can do some fuzzy math. Assuming those Gold members paid the $50 annual subscription -- or $4.16 monthly, the cheapest per month option -- that amounts to $23.3 million for the month, not accounting for discounts or free Gold trials. Presuming no subscription growth for sake of argument -- we know it's growing -- that's $280 million annually, well over PSN's life to date revenues. Say what you will about mean ol' Microsoft charging for online play, the numbers seem to go in its favor.

[jessiethe3rd]

It's not only the subscriptions... it's the smart content download - the Xbox Live Games, the addins, the movies, pod cast style content, the themes, etc, etc, etc... folks are bought into the Xbox Points and Microsoft is racking up massive $$$.

[killerchris2k8]

Out of those 20 million users my household accounts for 6 of them so you get the picture.

[ProbableCabbage]

Putting aside the question as to whether or not game developers are lazy, we have to wonder why they would expend considerable effort to either "white knuckle it" or develop entirely new ways of thinking/coding/doing business in order to produce slightly better looking games for the third place console in this generation? If they hadn't sold very many iPhones compared to other comparable devices, many developers probably wouldn't have bothered to write as many or as high quality aps as the iPhone is getting now. People who write software professionally are ultimately in it to sell their product to as many people as possible, so whatever platform is the most popular gets the most support by the developers, whatever's the least popular gets the least support by developers.

It's a lot like PC gaming on Windows vs. Mac/Linux. The install base for Windows is so much comparatively bigger, that games are all developed for Windows, and if they are ported to Mac/Linux they tend to be (with some notable exceptions) comparatively lazy ports, significantly less optimized to where they're landing than to where they came from. You wouldn't expect developers to "white knuckle it" or "develop new paradigms" in order to produce games that run better on Linux, would you?

For the PS3 this is significantly more of an issue for game studios who are selling largely to a North American audience, where the Xbox 360 install base is almost twice that of the PS3. It's just not worth it, from a time/money perspective, to put an effort into making a game look slightly better for roughly 1/3 of the people who are going to buy it. If Sony's launch strategy had gone as planned, and the PS3 jumped out to a big lead and was the #1 console, there wouldn't be any problem here. Everybody would develop for the cell since that's the way you make the most money. It's just that Sony's had a bad run this generation, not a lot has broken the way they hoped it would.

I do think the Saturn: Playstation :: PS3 : Xbox 360 analogy is deliciously ironic though. Though, I feel for PS3 owners since I loved the heck out of my Saturn.

[whoruagain]

I totally agree with Kaz Hirai!!!! Whats the sence you tell someone one how to do something instead of them learning it themselves. And I'm not a fanboy or anything, but from seeing what the PS3 can do. its pretty amazing, hard work pays off, never give up..

[t8]

I may not have that much respect for Sony as a company, but I really dislike Microsoft. The way I feel about a company affects my purchasing decisions. Haven't bought a console yet, but if I was to, I would probably buy PS3, not to mention getting a Blue-ray DVD too.

[viper396]

Buying something because of the brand or badge, (or your "feelings" about a company) is a completely asinine and stupid way to make any purchasing decision. Apparently you'd buy overpriced crap if someone stuck a fancy brand name on it.

Either way, since you admit to not even owning a game console your opinion is completely pointless and irrelevent in this matter. Go back to your hole.

[screamapillar]

I can think of MANY reasons why I'd boycott a brand (it is essentially the last remnant of democracy left in our capitalist socieity). But I see few reaons to be loyal to a brand, particularly one like Sony or Microsoft that have done little to earn any form of loyalty and lots to earn a boycott.

These are not elite brands like Arkham or even NAD (for those audiophiles out there). These are commercial f*ck you at the lowest common denominator brands. Sony and Microsoft: These ARE the overpriced crap. Unfortunately, there is little to choose from so you make your decisions based on weighing up many issues, including the integrity of the organisation. If you don't, you are indirectly endorsing the acts of that organisation. So why don't you just deck out your wardrobe with Nike now too?

And please viper396, not owning a console doesn't mean you don't have a valid opinion. I do own a console and am an avid gamer and involved in the development industry but that does not at all make my opinion worth more than anyone elses. And lets face it, the fanboys on this site are buying crap simply because it has the Sony badge on it, so that is a valid argument.

[SteveW928]

Don... that's because the other consoles are more or less just regular computers stuffed in a box. The developers, being lazy, just want to do a one-time development with minimal porting between systems. This means the typical game is LCD (lowest common denominator) in quality. The PS3 is a higher end system which requires some extra effort... I'm fine with that. I'm happy with with a few awesome games than a load of cr*p games the devs cranked out quickly. This reminds me of the old argument about the Macintosh... less titles. Who cares... the titles it does have are worlds better.

I applaud Sony for their long-term thinking on this. That makes total sense out of the statement you quote above. Sony designs the PS3 (and other PS models) to have a long life and be far more technically advanced than the competition. They initially lose out on the mass of titles from the stupid developers who can't see past the short-term budget spreadsheet.... but they end up with good quality titles from developers who are innovative and can actually think beyond the spreadsheet. In the end, Sony wins. Kudos to them for it... that kind of thinking (and less of Don's) is what is actually needed to fix the whole crisis our world is in economically!

[odubtaig]

You think you know so much better, get a job as a game dev. Then you can trash talk other people when you're not 'too lazy' to do games for the PS3. Right now I'd wager your personal game development experience is nil.

Show us all how it's done.

[SteveW928]

No, I'm not a game dev.... but I've read plenty of articles from devs who know how to develop on the PS3 who say it isn't harder, just different. I have been a web developer... and have had to swim against the M$ stream in order to put out good web content (rather than just buying into their lame proprietary tools). I've worked in IS/IT with developers for for over 15 years... so I know how this stuff goes down. Everyone wants to keep things easy, but sometimes you have to do the right thing and learn new skills to create the best. There are obviously plenty of developers WHO ARE doing this. All you have to do is look at some of the great PS3 exclusive titles. Or, maybe I'm just bitter that I wasted time and bandwidth downloading some of the 'hot' titles put out by these whining developers, only to delete them after discovering it was all marketing hype, and the games were cr*p.

[odubtaig]

Yes, you're very bitter. It shows.

I also doubt any of these jobs you've had involved 80 hour weeks just to do the standard level.

[SteveW928]

@ odubtaig - umm... that doesn't sound bitter, huh? LOL, 80 hours a week. Yep, been there, done that... I'm working a bit smarter these days.... though once in a while still have to do weeks like that. As you start getting older, you realize that unless you're really doing something worthwhile, it just isn't worth working like that and missing family, etc. for it.

But, I think we've already covered this....
1) to optimize for any platform and/or create a new innovative game is going to take EXTRA work... no way around that.
2) it isn't any harder to develop for PS3, just different. The whining is because the standard toolsets won't just cookie-cutter to the PS3 so easily as they would like. The solution is to not use those toolsets and forget about cookie-cutter development (which, yes, is easier to hit multiple platforms... but also the reason most games suck... I really don't care of those games don't come to PS3.... as I've stated, I don't buy a platform on title numbers, because just like Win vs. Mac, I realize that 90% of software is cr*p. I'm only interested in the few good titles... and then it comes down to which I prefer more and on what platform).

[odubtaig]

I would love to know who you've been talking to about PS3 dev because all I ever hear is how **** the SDK is and how difficult the hardware is.

I'd also like to see you balance a load across 7 limited function processing units with minimal locking when handling a distribution of functionality. You've said it yourself, you're a web developer, that doesn't usually involve anything outside linear processing. Hmmm, that's a point, someone who's never stepped outside linear programming criticising others for not liking multiple concurrency...

[pithenumber]

@steve
then your fanboy inside you decides to ignore everyone who says its hard to develop for

[SteveW928]

@ odubtaig - Yea, I've had developers tell me all kinds of inaccurate things over the years. Developers aren't immune to bias or spreading 'I heard x' type information. I'm also not a web developer, just have done some web development. I'm just using that as an example that developers don't necessarily pick toolsets for good reasons.... or have really though things through that much.

[WebBanshee]

Sony behaves like snobs.Console snobs.Just people who are worth it should could handle the console.I understand developers who do want/can spend the time to get down with every little trick to exploit the whole power of PS3.

[Draxon]

LOL SteveW928 you are the perfect example of a fanboy.. I counted 8+ comments of yours on this article so far.

Just face it Sony has lost billions with the PS3 that they will never recover, and the have lost the exclusive titles that were the main reason for the PS1 and PS2's success. Final Fantasy and GTA, and more. Its to bad really I had high hopes for the PS3, I loved the PS1 and 2, Its just to bad Sony forgot what made the PS special. it was never them, it was Square soft, and rockstar.

Oh well at least my PS3 makes an excellent blue ray player, and I dont even need to take the DVD out of the drive when I want to play games, I just switch inputs to my 360.

[killerchris2k8]

I don't think Sony can come back at this point. As the price keeps dropping for the 360 and as long as PSN doesn't offer the same sense of accessibility to your friends and ease of use as XBL it can't win. By the time PS3 hits it's stride Microsoft and Nintendo will be readying it's next round of consoles.

[SteveW928]

So, what titles is the PS3 missing? As I said in an earlier post... just about every time I download one of these, so called, 'hot' titles... I'm disappointed I spent the bandwidth and DL time. Most of these titles are marketing hype, not good games. I keep seeing my fellow Warhawk clan-mates chase after the new titles, only to come back after a few weeks bored with that latest hot title.

So... you tell me... is a fanboy someone who buys the best product for them? Or, the one who buys whatever they think is winning the popularity contest at the moment? Anyone who owns a PS3 and makes a statement like your last sentence.... it is quite obvious who the fanboy is. If I owned an Xbox, I'd happily admit I like playing Halo... and probably a few other games on it. I just think the PS3 is better for me... and the better long-term gaming system. I'll let the people reading these threads decide who the fanboy is.

[SteveW928]

@ killerchris2k8 - Yea, by the time M$ and Nintendo ready the next gen.... they probably still won't match the capabilities of the PS3... and by that time Sony will be making profit on the hardware as well as software. Long-term is the idea here.... say it with me... long term. There is a reason Sony is losing money with each console... it IS really that much more advanced.

[Jimbo283]

This is ridiculous. People calling developers "lazy as hell" have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

Imagine building a house with a hammer & nails. Now take away the hammer. Can the job get done? Sure, but it's going to take a hell of a lot of more time & frustration to do it.

[killerchris2k8]

@ SteveW928 you have made some good arguments and I would have hesitated to call you a fanboy but this statement "Yea, by the time M$ and Nintendo ready the next gen.... they probably still won't match the capabilities of the PS3" completely confirms you are.

[SteveW928]

@ killerchris2k8 - Ok, that was an over-statement most likely. It depends on how long it is until the next gen gets developed... if within the next, say 1-2 years.... then I'd stand by it. The reason is that M$ isn't going to over-develop a system like Sony did with the PS3.... it just isn't their strategy.

[FyreW0lf]

I would just like to say this Xbox 360 is yes easy to program for that being said, Games now for the xbox 360 are allready using it's full power. Take halo 3 great game I love playing it, but I remember reading developers had to cut alot out of it to make it work. The game runs at 400p just to get 30 FPS. I remember that if they wanted 720p or 1080p the game would run at 5 FPS LOL. Though MS did do a good job at upscaling it to the higher res.

Another Blonder of MS was HD-DVD yes the movies were great but they never took advantage of HD-DVD for games! How stupid can MS be if HD-DVD was used for games I quite sure the format would have stayed.

I own both consoles I love my xbox 360 for some things but I also love my Ps3 for others. I think though theres a xbox 720 comming out soon because I highly doubt the xbox 360 will survive in the next comming years. Ps3 games now are only using maybe 25% of the system's power where as xbox 360 games now are using all 100% of it.

The biggest **** off though is FInal Fantasy 13. This game comes out in japan this year for the PS3 the game is made for PS3 and would have been easily ported over to NA for a release but since MS gave them millions of dollars to release it for the xbox 360 we players in NA have to wait another 2 years.
If it came out in NA 6 months after the japan release for the ps3 here those ps3 #'s would sky rocket overnight.

Thank you MS for delaying games and technology. oh btw 14 DVD's for ff13 compared to one blu-ray game.

[odubtaig]

Those comments about Halo3 are ignoring the games that have come after it. Early console titles are always restricted by a lack of knowledge about the system which leads to a lack of efficiency in the programming for those consoles. The early games for the PS2 had the same issues but that didn't mean God of War wasn't possible, it meant that more had to be learned about the hardware and how best to use it.

[sparrowhyperion]

Okay a few things to note.

1. The brass at Sony are idiots. These kinds of comments just serve to make that fact more apparent.

2. Developers are not going to want to waste a lot of time developing optimized games for a console that is sooooo expensive that only a small portion of the market can afford one.

3. The PS3 is NOT really as advanced compared to the other two big systems as to make it worth the exorbitant price tag.

4. Did I mention that the brass at Sony are idiots...?

[screamapillar]

Brava! It's about bang for buck. By buck I mean all forms of resources, not just money or dev time. I would rather the game developers spend time story boarding then working out a stupid cube that doesn't do half of what it is meant to anyway.

A good game is not always the prettiest one. Look at hollywood, very quickly you'll see the best actors/actresses aren't the prettiest ones.

[fast_cars]

Don Reisinger's article was very good; however, he missed one very important thing. Sony has decided to go with Intel and their new technology for their next platform. This just emphasizes to developers that any more investment in Cell is not going to pay off for them when they need to start programming for the new and vastly more powerful graphics technology that is available. The Sony exec made a completely ridiculous comment when he already knew that Sony was abandoning the Cell and it had no future.

A fully utilized Cell processor has less than 20% of the compute capacity of the current generation of CPU-GPU combination. Both ATI, nVidia and now Intel will support much easy general programming for the GPUs.

I don't think that the developer tools and programming models going forward for the next generation consoles which alll are in active development are going to allow Sony's development tools to back fill for the PS3 where the tools are very bad. Sony is going to focus on the new platform to make that successful first because they have lost with the PS3.

[VulcanTourist]

Remember, folks... this is precisely the same mindset that gave breech birth to Sony's rootkit DRM and Sony's pointlessly proprietary Memory Stick format, a mindset that ONLY provides MS slots on its devices even when it's a dead format that actually retards product sales, etc, etc, etc.

This is a company so irretrievably mired in proprietary thinking that it will be a miracle if it survives the coming revolution. Sony will likely wither and die rather than adapt to the emerging open source "standard". To steal a word from the Obama Revolution:

Open Source == transparency

I don't think the forces of greed can stop the revolution this time. Either ya get on board this love train or get left behind! Are ya listening, Sony?

[screamapillar]

You've hit the nail on the head VulcanTourist.

Anti-competitive behaviour like this is a BAD thing for the industry, not a good thing. I'm all for innovation but it doesn't have to be at the expense of best practice or creativity (which is where the REAL good games are produced).

[suicidepills]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding...

My current understanding of what was said by Sony's CEO was that Sony purposely made their console difficult to develop for so that it would take longer for developers to figure out how to use the hardware... Is this accurate?

Why not make the platform easy to develop for so that the full potential of the hardware can be taken advantage of immediately? If my understanding of what Sony's CEO said is accurate, isn't that approach deliberately (and shamelessly) trying to "pull one over" on consumers? In other words, early games will not fully harness the hardware that consumers have paid for. How will this approach result in innovation?

I've seen many commentors mention that Sony's approach is advantageous in some way. Can someone please explain this? Preferably without name-calling?

[ProbableCabbage]

I'm personally of the mind that the comments by Sony's CEO were sort of a CYA move. When confronted with the facts that their console is more difficult to develop for than its competitors, rather that a mistake or miscalculation has been made (when has Sony ever admitted a mistake?), he tried to spin it in some positive way.

The best I can do to understand what he was getting at is some variation of: "Game designers have a limited number of really great ideas, if we make the console easy to develop for, they'll all blow their wad and all the studios will release all their really good games all at once. Then, in a few years, the industry will lack ideas for great games, and there will be nothing great coming out so consumers won't get as much benefit out of their consoles since there will be long periods of time where there's nothing out there to buy."

The problem with this reasoning is that history doesn't bear it out. Classically, there's been no shortage of really interesting game ideas for successful consoles, even late into the console's lifespan. Look at things like Kirby's Adventure on the NES; Terranigma on the SNES; Okami, Katamari, and God Hand on the PS2, Psychonauts on the Xbox, etc. (just to name some games I'm personally fond of.) Individual game designers or specific studios may eventually run out of good ideas or otherwise jump the shark (though Tim Schafer should probably be allowed to make as many games as he likes), but the thing about the industry is that game studios come and go, and the ones that run out of steam go away and tend to be replaced by new ones so long as the industry itself is healthy.

Otherwise, I have no idea what he could be getting at. I can maybe see there being a problem for Sony is there are 50 great titles in the first year, but no great titles in the second year; since there won't be shiny new games to convince undecided people to buy consoles in year two. But as this generation has showed us, it's better to jump out ahead earlier on to get market penetration with your console, than to play catchup with a superior product if you're already well behind. At least it was this go around (and the last one too.)

[killerchris2k8]

I was also wondering if anyone could tell me why games like Devil May Cry 4 or GTA5 have to be installed onto the PS3 HDD just to run the exact same way they do on 360.Thats more of a PC than a 360. It's very annoying to get a title and then spend 45 minutes installing it when I could buy it for 360 and play it instantly. At the end of the day I know what the PS3 is capable of. If they had PSN working like XBL I'd probably play it more but until that happens me and all my friends will buy multiplayer games for 360. It's really funny because I bet Sony is losing a whole bunch of sales for just that reason. Abandon PS HOME which most gamers could care less about. We just want to connect with our friends easily. I promise Sony fix PSN and I'll get all my games for PS3 just because the Dual Shock is the best controller ever.