The Official Xbox One Thread

[zerocool84]

If I prefer to play on one console, why shouldn't I be able to.

Like said before, it'd create no competition. Why the need for multiple consoles then?

 

[Arkaign]

Like said before, it'd create no competition. Why the need for multiple consoles then?

I kind of preferred the Genesis/SNES era myself, great competition, and not that many exclusives (Mario/Sonic/Zelda mainly). Almost every decent game was on both consoles

These days we seem to have a lot of artificial 'exclusives'. Halo irritated the crap out of me. It would have been multiplatform until Microsoft hosed it. What we ended up with was a watered down shadow of what could have been. Then finally we were treated to the absolutely HORRIBLE consolized PC port. Garbage.

 

[crisium]

I think you're wrong. I'd rank nearly all of the greatest 16-bit games as exclusives. Besides fighting games, sports games like NHL 94, and Earthworm Jim, there's not really that many multiplatform 16-bit games that are considered classics, at all. The last two generations have had more multiplatform games than we saw in the 80s and 90s. I think you have it backwards.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I kind of preferred the Genesis/SNES era myself, great competition, and not that many exclusives (Mario/Sonic/Zelda mainly). Almost every decent game was on both consoles

These days we seem to have a lot of artificial 'exclusives'. Halo irritated the crap out of me. It would have been multiplatform until Microsoft hosed it. What we ended up with was a watered down shadow of what could have been. Then finally we were treated to the absolutely HORRIBLE consolized PC port. Garbage.

If MS didn't dumped PC gaming for their own console and concentrated on making PC gaming good I bet the situation would be a lot more favorable to MS now instead people avoiding MS stuff in droves.

 

[exdeath]

8-16 bit was more exclusive than any other generation. That's what made it worth owning each console.

Its harder to swallow today when the systems are four times as expensive and have 99% the same games.

Its one thing to have two $99 toys with 30 unique games each, its another to have to buy another $400 "DVD player" to pick up the 3-4 exclusives you want.

We need MORE exclusives to make it worth the cost of entry. I hate having 3 systems just to play the 5 exclusives I want while everything else is exactly the same.

This generation is extremely boring and cookie cutter.

 

[crisium]

Nintendo was the one exception this generation, as the Wii made it possible for unique third party games not possible on PS360. But then third parties stopped making Wii exclusives pretty early on when they released the high console sales were inflated by mothers who would never buy another games besides Wii Sports.

And, unfortunately for the WiiU, it really doesn't offer anything unique. Normal controller, comparable graphics, what does it have? A touch screen in the middle of that normal controller? It doesn't do much unfortunately.

Back in the day, each console had radically different architecture and formats that meant 3rd parties voluntarily made exclusives. You never see that today. And the PS4 / Xbone have nearly the same architecture, so even less chance.

 

[StrangerGuy]

16 bit was more exclusive than any other generation. That's what made it worth owning each console.

Its harder to swallow today when the systems are four times as expensive and have 99% the same games.

Its one thing to have two $99 toys with 30 unique games, its another to have to buy another $400 "DVD player" to pick up the 3-4 exclusives you want.

We need MORE exclusives to make it worth the cost of entry. I hate having 3 systems just to play the 5 exclusives I want while everything else is exactly the same.

This generation is extremely boring and cookie cutter.

AAAA game development costs have skyrocketed so much that making console exclusives would be a suicide move if you aren't first party. Bioshock Infinite took $200M to make, while IIRC that latest Tomb Raider and Max Payne 3 even failed to recoup their budget while available on 360, PS3 and PC. I'm sure the quality of the games must have some impact but can you even imagine both being more successful as exclusives? Hell no.

Games these days are "extremely boring and cookie cutter" because devs think they have play them safe to appeal to everyone or the realism shooter crowd to recoup their enormous investments.

 

[exdeath]

AAAA game development costs have skyrocketed so much that making console exclusives would be a suicide move if you aren't first party. Bioshock Infinite took $200M to make, while IIRC that latest Tomb Raider and Max Payne 3 even failed to recoup their budget while available on 360, PS3 and PC. I'm sure the quality of the games must have some impact but can you even imagine both being more successful as exclusives? Hell no.

Games these days are "extremely boring and cookie cutter" because devs think they have play them safe to appeal to everyone or the realism shooter crowd to recoup their enormous investments.

Why? You could pay each programmer and artist a 1 million dollar a year salary and STILL not approach $200 million. Where is the money going?

In reality programmers and artists don't even break $100k a year, so again why does a game cost $200 million to produce now when it didn't before?

Is Activisions CEOs penthouse suite and Armani suit falsely included in "the cost to make a game"?

Yet small unheard of companies and indies are suceeding just fine. Level 5 and Namco can create a niche game employing both a world famous animation studio (Studio Ghibli cannot be cheap) and full symphony orchestra that sells under 1 million units and its successful.

Yet EA and Activision model some guns, motion capture some guys shooting and being shit, sell 100 million copies a month, and bitch they are losing money.

Its only the big companies bitching and moaning they can't make enough money on games that sell 100 million because they think they deserved to sell 1 billion copies.

 

[purbeast0]

Why? You could pay each programmer and artist a 1 million dollar a year salary and STILL not approach $200 million. Where is the money going?

In reality programmers and artists don't even break $100k a year, so again why does a game cost $200 million to produce now when it didn't before?

Is Activisions CEOs penthouse suite and Armani suit falsely included in "the cost to make a game"?

because there is A LOT more than just a couple programmers and artists going into making these games. you ever look at the credits of a game when you finish it? hundreds, if not over a thousand of people are involved. and this is for the big budget titles obviously, not an indie game.

and you are delusional if you don't think programmers make over $100k/yr.

 

[exdeath]

So how can EA or Activision sell 50 million copies of a game and be hurting while Namco/Level 5 can hire Studio Ghibli and the Tokyo Philharmonic, sell 700k units, and call it a massive success?

Games like Ni no Kuni aren't made by 5 people in a garage either. The credits for the orchestra alone are over 100 people. Yet they made money with less than 1 million units.

EA and Activision are overstuffed pigs and deserve to fail.

 

[StrangerGuy]

because there is A LOT more than just a couple programmers and artists going into making these games. you ever look at the credits of a game when you finish it? hundreds, if not over a thousand of people are involved. and this is for the big budget titles obviously, not an indie game.

and you are delusional if you don't think programmers make over $100k/yr.

You know, for all tens and hundreds of millions dollars dumped into making games they don't have the cash to hire an intern with a working brain to come up with a non-retarded UI.

*cough* Bethesda *cough*. Priorities!

 

[exdeath]

You know, for all tens and hundreds of millions dollars dumped into making games they don't have the cash to hire an intern with a working brain to come up with a non-retarded UI.

*cough* Bethesda *cough*. Priorities!

Probably takes 100 people to line up the Colt logo texture to make the M4 as realistic as possible, no time for trivial things like interface and gameplay.

 

[crisium]

I just don't get how Tomb Raider sold over 3 million units and it hasn't even broke even. It's an incredible game, but how many copies did they really expect? How could the budget have been so high?

 

[exdeath]

I just don't get how Tomb Raider sold over 3 million units and it hasn't even broke even. It's an incredible game, but how many copies did they really expect? How could the budget have been so high?

Cuz its Tomb Raider and Square Enix stickers on the box gauranteed 100 million copies would sell!

Funny all these companies who transformed to cater to the mainstream so they could make more money are doing worse than they ever have.

I used to idolize Square, now they can go DIAF.

 

[smackababy]

because there is A LOT more than just a couple programmers and artists going into making these games. you ever look at the credits of a game when you finish it? hundreds, if not over a thousand of people are involved. and this is for the big budget titles obviously, not an indie game.

and you are delusional if you don't think programmers make over $100k/yr.

A lot of the programmers used in games don't make anywhere close to $100k a year. More like half of that. The market for game programmers is such a pipe dream, it has become a race to the bottom. Every college kid wants to be a game programmer these days, and they can. You get hired on a contract for a fraction of what you can make in other software jobs, work terrible hours, and then once the game is done, your contract is up and you have to find another job.

At least, this is the picture I've been painted by a few friends who have done it. I am sure this isn't true for all game programmer positions though, just entry level. Once you've got some experience and a portfolio of good work behind you, landing a lead programmer job at a studio should net you a good amount of money.

 

[exdeath]

A lot of the programmers used in games don't make anywhere close to $100k a year. More like half of that. The market for game programmers is such a pipe dream, it has become a race to the bottom. Every college kid wants to be a game programmer these days, and they can. You get hired on a contract for a fraction of what you can make in other software jobs, work terrible hours, and then once the game is done, your contract is up and you have to find another job.

At least, this is the picture I've been painted by a few friends who have done it. I am sure this isn't true for all game programmer positions though, just entry level. Once you've got some experience and a portfolio of good work behind you, landing a lead programmer job at a studio should net you a good amount of money.

Yup. I got out of programming and into IT. Sys admin, network engineer, SQL admin, boring as hell but all pay 3 times or more what a programmer makes and nowhere near as stressful.

 

[purbeast0]

A lot of the programmers used in games don't make anywhere close to $100k a year. More like half of that. The market for game programmers is such a pipe dream, it has become a race to the bottom. Every college kid wants to be a game programmer these days, and they can. You get hired on a contract for a fraction of what you can make in other software jobs, work terrible hours, and then once the game is done, your contract is up and you have to find another job.

At least, this is the picture I've been painted by a few friends who have done it. I am sure this isn't true for all game programmer positions though, just entry level. Once you've got some experience and a portfolio of good work behind you, landing a lead programmer job at a studio should net you a good amount of money.

most entry level programmer jobs in ANY industry don't make anywhere close to 100k either. so i'm not surprised that the entry level guys don't make much at all and are worked like dogs. hell i wasn't even making $50k at my first job out of school.

 

[purbeast0]

Yup. I got out of programming and into IT. Sys admin, network engineer, SQL admin, boring as hell but all pay 3 times or more what a programmer makes and nowhere near as stressful.

again, another delusional statement.

 

[Arkaign]

I think you're wrong. I'd rank nearly all of the greatest 16-bit games as exclusives. Besides fighting games, sports games like NHL 94, and Earthworm Jim, there's not really that many multiplatform 16-bit games that are considered classics, at all. The last two generations have had more multiplatform games than we saw in the 80s and 90s. I think you have it backwards.

Maybe so, it's easy to think of stuff like SF2, MK, Madden, Populous, Lemmings, Batman Forever, Out of this World, Flashback, NBA Jam, etc. Even games like Contra and Castlevania were unique to each system with different great entries. Sports titles were usually better on Genesis, fighting games were usually better on SNES. But you're right, there were a lot of exclusives to each system. Somehow it didn't feel that way. Maybe that was because it was so cheap to do both systems back in the day.

 

[exdeath]

again, another delusional statement.

Oh... Are you a programmer or IT professional?

 

[smackababy]

most entry level programmer jobs in ANY industry don't make anywhere close to 100k either. so i'm not surprised that the entry level guys don't make much at all and are worked like dogs. hell i wasn't even making $50k at my first job out of school.

That is strange. Most of the fresh out of college jobs I saw when I was recently looking were around $65-70k, which is really good for a 23 year old fresh out of college. I suppose that fluctuates based on the area you're from though due to cost of living.

I know just game programming in general is awful to start out in. Even if that is what you really want to do, you're better off working in other software sectors and getting experience and becoming a good programmer before switching to game development.

But yes, exdeath is delusional if he thinks any other IT fields make 3x as much as coders. I've love to find a DBA that makes $300k a year.

 

[American Gunner]

How does all this programmer, IT, square shit have anything to do with the Xbox One? Can we get this back on topic and you guys take your dick measuring contest somewhere else?

 

[smackababy]

How does all this programmer, IT, square shit have anything to do with the Xbox One? Can we get this back on topic and you guys take your dick measuring contest somewhere else?

Back on topic: There is no new information. We've heard nothing and should let the thread die!! >_>


Seriously though, I was messing around wanting to do some DirectX programming and the Windows 8 SDK now comes with the Direct X SDK built in and I believe includes tools for Xbox One games. You won't be able to test them without a XO dev kit, but I don't imagine emulating them on PC would be that hard. It looks like MS is integrating all the development into a single downloadable (Visual Studio 2012 - which I am not liking at all).

This should make porting quite easy between the Xbox One and PC.

 

[American Gunner]

Geoff Keighley even pointed out that while the One is not BC, there is a very good chance that if an arcade game is also on pc, we might see them port over to the one because of the infrastructure. It would be nice if they could figure out a way to bring us some of our arcade games.

 

[BladeVenom]

Why? You could pay each programmer and artist a 1 million dollar a year salary and STILL not approach $200 million. Where is the money going?

In reality programmers and artists don't even break $100k a year, so again why does a game cost $200 million to produce now when it didn't before?

They had 250 people making the game, and it took 3 years to make. The cost per employee is a lot more than just their salary, there are also payroll taxes and benefits. Plus there's also the cost of a building, computer, and software.

Of course that is only half of it. The other half went into advertising.