-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Final Fantasy 16 producer Naoki Yoshida has reportedly said it would be better for developers and players alike if there was just a single game platfo
In terms of development, it could be argued that developing for only one uniform platform would remove a lot of the extra work and allow *all* gamers a chance to play the game. From that point of view, Yoshida is absolutely correct.
However, the big issue with a singular system is the lack of competition leading to stagnation and regressive monetary practices. It is why we need multiple competitors to keep each other in-check. To prevent a DRM Xbox One Fiasco (to reference a more recent incident that was prevented due to competition).
However, the big issue with a singular system is the lack of competition leading to stagnation and regressive monetary practices. It is why we need multiple competitors to keep each other in-check. To prevent a DRM Xbox One Fiasco (to reference a more recent incident that was prevented due to competition).
phant0m
Member
Yup. This is what I miss about 6th gen and earlier; real hardware & architectural differences. Honestly the only thing that matters between PS + Xbox now is where your friends play, and even that line is getting blurred with cross-platform multiplayer.
Puscifer
Member
Lol well that's just silly. Square Exist as a company because Nintendo decided to use cartridges vs CD roms, the arguably best stretch in the companies history was because of competition. For them to say otherwise is just disingenuous considering how many people still clamor for those days and how people love those half assed remasters.
But what do I know I guess?
But what do I know I guess?
Zephyranthes
Member
I could see it being better in some ways, but worse in others. For developers, only having one platform to design a game for would probably be easier, but gaming technology would likely not be as advanced as it is today without the innovation that comes from competition. For consumers, not having to deal with missing out on some games due to console exclusivity would be nice, but prices would be outrageous.....remember how Nintendo was in the 90s, or the PS3 launch price.
Did you mean Sony? Square existed long before the CDs were used for games and were already famous for their high quality releases before Sony came into the picture due to Nintendo bowing out of disc usage with the N64.
Dream-Knife
Banned
How about an open platform not controlled by one company with multiple storefronts?
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
No shit. This is why exclusives are needed. I dont know how anyone can think otherwise.
Fuck this "play everything everywhere" mentality. Look at the state of the AAA industry. Bunch of broken shit, unambitious design, and last gen graphics.
Make games exclusives.
Fuck this "play everything everywhere" mentality. Look at the state of the AAA industry. Bunch of broken shit, unambitious design, and last gen graphics.
Make games exclusives.
laynelane
Member
Absolutely not. Stop the drug.
It's only "best" for devs, that"s it, and I'm not even sure on the long term, because we would probably get a cheap mass product for the "only" brand at the end like a Wii since that would be that or nothing, and corporate does give a shit about players, that's the profit in the end.
That's the best way to kill video-games and any innovation, by erasing any form of competition and unifying everything.
I was thinking that too. If a developer had an innovative idea and wanted to put it in their game - there could be a situation where a one platform scenario wouldn't support that. Everything would have to fit a certain standard and could negatively impact creativity and new ideas from a developer standpoint.
Last edited:
Puscifer
Member
Oh I know, but I'm referring to the fact that games like FF7, Tactics, Vagrant Story, Parasite Eve, Xenogears, etc exist because the competitions choice allowed them freedom they wouldn't have had otherwise. Sure the N64 had quite a few miracle ports like RE 2 but considering the multi-disc spanning titles they have, the Final Fantasy collections that bundled several games together and even let them enhance Chrono trigger with new cutscenes and it's sequel, Chrono Cross, it's just fair to say that the competition bringing advancement to the table really helped with an excellent run of games that wouldn't have existed with cartridges or being seriously limited in their scope otherwise.
Last edited:
64bitmodels
Reverse groomer.
exclusives are the result of having multiple gaming platforms. when there is only one there is no 'exclusives'... because everyone plays on the same damn thing.
March Climber
Member
People online: “Yea maybe we should just have PlayStation and no Xbox”
Square Enix: “We were talking about Nintendo”
Square Enix: “We were talking about Nintendo”
systemr123
Member
July 28 he started working enthusiastically on the Xbox version of his game and quickly came to the realization it doesn’t work well with the series S parity, changed his opinion August 14.
Doom85
Member
Psssh, fat chance of that shit.
Square: All right, Nintendo, we’ve decided you’re the only console we’re supporting from now on. Here’s Final Fantasy XVI.
Nintendo: Thank you! This will make for a great Cloud game to stream on Switch!
Square: …I’m sorry, did you say “stream”?
Nintendo: Well, yeah. We can’t even get Kingdom Hearts HD to just be a cartridge/download, you think we can handle this title?
Square:
SkylineRKR
Member
But FFXVI is shallow trash regardless, and runs quite bad at that. So whats his point? They had the luxury of 1 version to work on.
supernova8
Banned
True but at least with them letting him do relatively informal interviews like this we get to hear what he actually thinks. Anybody can chuck their representative on stage with a script for a handshake photo-op. Means nothing.
the_master
Member
Moneyhatting funds games
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Why doesn't final fantasy XVI perform like it was made for one platform?
RoboFu
One of the green rats
Ehh sometimes that’s a good thing. Right now it seems developers rely too much on hardware brute forcing their games. We need a little bit of holding back to get devs to actually innovate on their end and master their craft.
Long Far Gone
Member
There's already an all-in-one universal gaming platform; it's called the Personal Computer. Been going for quite some time now...
Maybe make better porting tools or insist. Microsoft and Sony continue to make even more similar systems and architecture. Different packaging, different controllers, different store fronts and digital presence. End the arms race and face off against Nintendo. As we move to digital, developers would love the easy double dip across store fronts.
3D0 had the right idea, they just didn't have licensing fees to support their model failed.
Whilst I agree it's really PC, there is too many highs and lows in builds to ease development. Square is square though.
3D0 had the right idea, they just didn't have licensing fees to support their model failed.
Whilst I agree it's really PC, there is too many highs and lows in builds to ease development. Square is square though.
Fahdis
Member
I would skip nintendo as well for PC emulation.
crackajack
Member
The government would need to be heavily involved, and not fuck it up themselves like they do with allowing those huge mergers previously in oil and finance and now in entertainment sectors.
But like public transport (Murica not so much), water, mobile frequency bands ... there is a reason some stuff isn't just made by a free market willy nilly, but regulated to death and probably somewhat decelarating innovation in exchange for providing that stuff to everyone for reasonable prices.
But like public transport (Murica not so much), water, mobile frequency bands ... there is a reason some stuff isn't just made by a free market willy nilly, but regulated to death and probably somewhat decelarating innovation in exchange for providing that stuff to everyone for reasonable prices.
Woopah
Member
Prrety sure Kingdom Hearts I + II HD being cloud is on SE, not Nintendo.Psssh, fat chance of that shit.
Square: All right, Nintendo, we’ve decided you’re the only console we’re supporting from now on. Here’s Final Fantasy XVI.
Nintendo: Thank you! This will make for a great Cloud game to stream on Switch!
Square: …I’m sorry, did you say “stream”?
Nintendo: Well, yeah. We can’t even get Kingdom Hearts HD to just be a cartridge/download, you think we can handle this title?
Square:
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Just put your games on PC. Japan’s players are embracing it more and more anyways.
daywarf
Member
Who's your avatar? Looks pretty cool!
So what's the difference if it's one platform again somewhere else? In fact that's worse because it's like a single console platform that you don't even own.And that computer can be that one platform.
I agree with the idea of one platform but that platform has to be an open platform that's maybe run by a consortium. One which all devs can contribute to and not control for profit. An open OS, on open hardware. Basically never happening because these mega corporations would never give up control of these things.
Whitecrow
Banned
You all saying PC should be it are making me laugh.
The beauty of 'one platform' is knowing the target specs, knowing 100% how the hardware is operating, and make your games the best they can be for that specified hardware.
PC is the exact opposite of that. Yes. More raw power and whatever. But some people with certain configs may experience crashes, or bugs or glitches that others dont, hence putting more work on devs and gpu vendors.
And if you dont target the minimum specs, also some people would have a straight bad experiencie, so... no, not even close. And I myself have a very powerful PC.
Also, he said one gaming platform, not ONE COMPANY. MS could keep gaming pass between their own games. And Sony can also focus on cinematic games, and so on.
It's clear that one target hardware makes devs life a lot easier, and believe.
Being a game developer takes a lot of mental energy and clarity. It's not your average work where you can automate your tasks after months. So its understandable devs want things easier.
The beauty of 'one platform' is knowing the target specs, knowing 100% how the hardware is operating, and make your games the best they can be for that specified hardware.
PC is the exact opposite of that. Yes. More raw power and whatever. But some people with certain configs may experience crashes, or bugs or glitches that others dont, hence putting more work on devs and gpu vendors.
And if you dont target the minimum specs, also some people would have a straight bad experiencie, so... no, not even close. And I myself have a very powerful PC.
Also, he said one gaming platform, not ONE COMPANY. MS could keep gaming pass between their own games. And Sony can also focus on cinematic games, and so on.
It's clear that one target hardware makes devs life a lot easier, and believe.
Being a game developer takes a lot of mental energy and clarity. It's not your average work where you can automate your tasks after months. So its understandable devs want things easier.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Yoshida's position isn't that radical; I mean go back to the original idea of MSX which was to set a standard was for function and specification that any number of hardware vendors could adhere to.
It was a good idea in theory, but in practice it simply moved too slowly due to all those in the consortium needing to agree to everything and as a result it was overtaken by external competition.
It was a good idea in theory, but in practice it simply moved too slowly due to all those in the consortium needing to agree to everything and as a result it was overtaken by external competition.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
Yes, that platform is PC.
Setsuna Mudou
Member
Read my username
Mibu no ookami
Member
It is an idea that does not work, there must be several manufacturers and brands in a market for it to be healthy.
I don't agree with the sentiment of having one console, but the argument that the 3DO style of manufacturing wouldn't work TODAY is a bit misleading.
We're as close as ever to that very reality with the XSX and PS5 being the most similar set of consoles in any generation.
A Microsoft-Sony 3DO style console could, in theory, work with one system offering GamePass, Activision Blizzard, Bethesda, Microsoft games and the other offering Sony PlayStation Studios games and PlayStation Catalog titles.
I think the biggest problem is that would greatly benefit Microsoft over Sony at this point.
Mibu no ookami
Member
That really doesn't work today. Today performance matters so much in PC gaming more so than it ever did in the 90s and early 2000s.
Developing for PC today is even more difficult than developing for consoles because you have to fine-tune performance across multiple video cards, back in the day, they would have minimum and recommended specs and the gamers had to figure the rest out.
There's a massive range in terms of who can max out games and what the minimum requirements are for a game to work.
Look at the system requirements for Dark Forces 2
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
- OS: Windows 2000, XP or Vista
- Processor: Pentium 90
- Memory: 16 MB
- Graphics: DirectX
- DirectX®: DirectX 5.2 or higher
- Hard Drive: 700 MB
- Sound: 16-bit sound card
- Multiplayer: 8 players IPX or TCP/IP. Pentium 133
No one really gave a shit about performance, it was just git gud
VectorVictor
Member
It is an idea that does not work, there must be several manufacturers and brands in a market for it to be healthy.
Using 3DO as an example is flawed mainly because the architecture and price points were hardly optimized.
I get what you’re saying, but if you had someone spec out requirements that weren’t so cutting edge (for the time) you’d have better price points to work with.
Also the 3DO version of Super SFII is sooo good…
Doom85
Member
Resident Evil 7 and Control have also entered the chat.
64bitmodels
Reverse groomer.
Do you think a switch could seriously run RE7 and control?
Kingdom hearts before 3 was a ps2 game using ps2 assets. Every game in the franchise ran on exponentially weaker hardware than the switch. This was totally a Squenix thing. Cloud makes more sense in Japan when every part of the (small) island is coated in high speed internet. Not so much for big old USA and Europe where there's more rural areas