Valve's Gabe Newell Speaks on Next Gen Console Development

[Symbiont2]

Slightly off topic:

The thought of EA creating a steam clone is frightening. I hated when Valve created steam because of its potential for abuse, but fortunately they have been pretty good about it. Good thing I don't really play EA games.

[Cronholio]

I love seeing PC devlopers whine about how hard console development is. I fail to see how writing a game for a closed console is any worse than writing games for Windows only using DX. He's bitching about the fact that the code isn't portable, but Valve doesn't port anything anyway so what's the difference? I think more than anything he's probably upset because he sees what a dead end PC game development is and it's not clear if or how Steam can survive on a platform like the PS3 or Xbox where they actually have to pay licensing fees.

[Lyr]

I think more than anything he's probably upset because he sees what a dead end PC game development is and it's not clear if or how Steam can survive on a platform like the PS3 or Xbox where they actually have to pay licensing fees.

That's pretty much it. He basically says all next gen tools suck except for steam, everybody should license steam! I don't really think that interview was anything more than a sales pitch.

[Neil]

There is a whole interview on 1up too:
http://valve.1up.com/

[sacslacker]

I I think more than anything he's probably upset because he sees what a dead end PC game development is and it's not clear if or how Steam can survive on a platform like the PS3 or Xbox where they actually have to pay licensing fees.

I'm no fan of steam that's for sure but saying that PC game development is a dead end might be a bit overstated. Especially with a pretty big "PC only" release year. As a matter of fact, I find myself (along with all my friends) playing PC games a whole lot more than console games dispite owning pretty much every console out there. In fact, I know many people who have bought entire PC's to play a game.

I don't see how you come up with a dead end PC market. Perhaps, I'm missing something.

[JMcWilliams]

Long live the PC and it's superior games. :P :thumbsup: :twisted:

[Shaderhacker]

I'm no fan of steam that's for sure but saying that PC game development is a dead end might be a bit overstated. Especially with a pretty big "PC only" release year. As a matter of fact, I find myself (along with all my friends) playing PC games a whole lot more than console games dispite owning pretty much every console out there. In fact, I know many people who have bought entire PC's to play a game.

I don't see how you come up with a dead end PC market. Perhaps, I'm missing something.

Well, it is actually. Look at the PC back in 1994 when it was getting mostly games from every single genre. Not the case now...it's slowly becoming an MMO or Internet based game machine.

-M

[Cronholio]

Well like it or not, PC gaming has been on a steady decline over the last several years. 5 years from now, by the time Valve is ready to release TeamFortress 2, the PC in it's current form may be a relic on it's way into obscurity. Business will be gravitating towards thin clients and home users will be going portable and using set top devices for all their computing needs, which is why you see all these traditionally PC game developers talking about consoles now; id, Valve, Epic.. They are all talking about consoles because they can see the writing on the wall. If you need proof, just witness the gradually shrinking PC games section at your local EB, notice how there are fewer and fewer big releases. The PC will always be around in some form, and there will always be games for it, but the market is about to shift in as big way and the PC market is becoming less and less lucrative.

I've spent probably 20 times more money buying graphics cards capable of playing the latest PC games in the last 5 years than I have spent on the games themselves. Personally, I'd like to see the games market collapse a bit and everyone just throw their weight behind one console and one handheld with multiple manufacturers, like VHS or DVD.

[ambient-whisper]

I'm no fan of steam that's for sure but saying that PC game development is a dead end might be a bit overstated. Especially with a pretty big "PC only" release year. As a matter of fact, I find myself (along with all my friends) playing PC games a whole lot more than console games dispite owning pretty much every console out there. In fact, I know many people who have bought entire PC's to play a game.

I don't see how you come up with a dead end PC market. Perhaps, I'm missing something.

funny. more and more people around me are going back to consoles :). games on pc are all the same. YEY we got another fps!, booyeah.:rolleyes:

[-Vormav-]

funny. more and more people around me are going back to consoles :). games on pc are all the same. YEY we got another fps!, booyeah.:rolleyes:
Hey! We get plenty of RTS games and diablo clones, too! :wip:

[pthomas72]

I think his remark would only be legit if he had at least a few console developers standing behind this statement.


Also keep in mind this guy may be smart, but hes proven a couple times over he's not firing on all cylinders. (but, most super inteligent types arent.)

[animateddave]

Yes yes. Me and my friends are all playing consoles. You and your friends are all playing pc games. I know a guy thats knows a guys whos brother went to walmart where he met a guy that knows a guy at 7eleven that saw a ufo. Guess what? NO ONE CARES! I think all of them will do well and maybe there might be a shift now but I highly doubt the idea that pc gaming will just die. Maybe I'm right maybe I'm wrong but at the end of the day I really don't care either way.

[Peddy]

regardless of what people think will happen, i sincerely hope that the 2 rival platforms continue to compete and both continue to create games. At least with so much apparent scrutiny pointed towards games on the PC, itll mean they finally pull their hands out of their lined pockets and make something even better.

[PhantomDesign]

Why compete? Personlly, I think it would be nice to have some Console games on PC & intersting for some consoles to get some PC games. Consoles are an obstacle in my opinion (monopoly, corporate controlled) while the PC is a free market.

[Thalaxis]

Why compete? Personlly, I think it would be nice to have some Console games on PC & intersting for some consoles to get some PC games. Consoles are an obstacle in my opinion (monopoly, corporate controlled) while the PC is a free market.

They're also less constrained by legacy hardware and software than PC's. There was an interview posted on a trade rag with ATI about their XBox360 graphics hardware, and it was interesting to see how they'd taken advantage of the fact that they didn't have to be compatible with DirectX to add some new features. The controlled environment of the console also made their hard-wired antialiasing implementation feasible; it would never fly in the PC market where you have to be able to support a wide variety of resolutions, a lot of which are higher than HDTV's.

Most of the advantages that the PC market delivers are also disadvantages, like the pace of progress and the wide variety of choices, which leads to a very broad and rapidly-moving target for game developers to develop for.

[Stormy151]

Not to mention, it has to be easier to develop for a platform where the system is ALWAYS the same, rather than hundreds of different possible hardware configurations/OS.

As far as Xbox telling devs not to count on the harddrive always being there, I kind of think that's crap- I say if Valve wants to develop a game that requires the hard drive, do it. It will sell a lot of hard drives!

[Thalaxis]

As far as Xbox telling devs not to count on the harddrive always being there, I kind of think that's crap- I say if Valve wants to develop a game that requires the hard drive, do it. It will sell a lot of hard drives!

Unfortunately, if Valve did that, it would probably reduce their sales rather than increase sales of hard drives.

[Arrghman]

I love seeing PC devlopers whine about how hard console development is. I fail to see how writing a game for a closed console is any worse than writing games for Windows only using DX. He's bitching about the fact that the code isn't portable, but Valve doesn't port anything anyway so what's the difference? I think more than anything he's probably upset because he sees what a dead end PC game development is and it's not clear if or how Steam can survive on a platform like the PS3 or Xbox where they actually have to pay licensing fees.

I think your missing the point. The nexgen consoles, especially the PS3 represent a massive shift in the way code is writen because of the very sharp change in the hardware and the necessity of multithreading in the code. One of the more difficult things to do in programming is to properly convert code and algorithims that run on one processor to multiple ones and vice virsa. This is what represents the problem, and this is what is going to 'lock' developers for writing software only for the PS3, and to some extent the Xbox 360.

As it stands now, the programming model for all the current consoles and the PC is pretty much the same. The PS2, Xbox and GC all have a CPU and a GPU. Sure, the available instructions might change, but the underlying algrorithms do not. The very nature of the Cell processor in the PS3 and the dual cored PPC chip in the Xbox 360 represent entirely new programming models, not just different instruction sets.

[Thalaxis]

As it stands now, the programming model for all the current consoles and the PC is pretty much the same. The PS2, Xbox and GC all have a CPU and a GPU. Sure, the available instructions might change, but the underlying algrorithms do not. The very nature of the Cell processor in the PS3 and the dual cored PPC chip in the Xbox 360 represent entirely new programming models, not just different instruction sets.

The XBox360 has three mediocre but identical cores in it. The Athlon64X2 has two fast but identical cores in it. Put Vista on that Athlon64X2 box, throw in the latest graphics hardware, and you basically end up with two systems that use multiple identical general-purpose processor cores + DirectX graphics hardware.

Both systems would be largely compile-compatible.

The PS3 is a medicore processor with 7 vector engines. There's nothing else out there that will run code made for it, and code not made for it will crawl on it. There's no hope for more than minimal compile-compatibility between PS3 and anything other platform.

Whether or not that will be a problem depends on the game developers, but that's what Gabe Newell is getting at in that section.

[DonaldKasper]

Let us not forget that one of the main reasons for Sega's Saturn to die and take out the company was that it was very difficult to program for.. which mean 3D developers either stayed a way or made less then steller games.

[heavyness]

different strokes for different fokes...

development and programming is just like 3D apps, not everyone will like the same one and each one will have its weakness and strengths.

just because 1 developer doesn't like doesn't mean much.

[Arrghman]

different strokes for different fokes...

development and programming is just like 3D apps, not everyone will like the same one and each one will have its weakness and strengths.

just because 1 developer doesn't like doesn't mean much.

True, but also keep in mind that parallel programming tends to be one of the harder programming methodologies around, and that up to this point has been something that game devs haven't had to deal with.

There have been other (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050629-5054.html) rumblings of game devs having problems on the nextgen consoles for that very reason.

[Boone]

I have conflicting thoughts regarding Steam and Valve. I shall leave them for another thread...

XBOX 360
----------

I agree with Gabe that Microsoft should have made it plain whether or not the Xbox 360 would have a harddrive or not - upgrading is for PCs not Consoles. The whole point of a console is for it to be simple and straight out of the box. Consumers will forgive a memory card costing £20 - but a harddrive costing roughly £80 for an odd game costing £35? I wouldn't have thought so...

I personally would have said make the harddrive a standard part of the system and price the console at £250. The argument for cost-of-production isn't that strong as a console makes it's real money from the games not the machine itself. And as the first machine had a harddrive( I think it did anyway...correct me if I'm wrong ) and that it was a success - why change a winning formula?


PS3
----

Regarding Programming issues. When the PS2 had first appeared, many said "its difficult to program for - its another Sega Saturn in the making!", but for some reason the machine is the most successful of the market. Last I heard one requires a solid understanding of assembly to get it to sing and dance...

Customers don't care about programming issues and will simply rush out and buy the machine due to the fact its got the Playstation brand name( providing the price is right ). When the machine obtains the most market share then all developers will simply go where the money is. The argument for "its difficult to program" will be met by "quit your belly-aching and get on with it - money is to be made!".

I personally agree that in this day and age that programming should by rights be simple( atleast compared to what it used to be back in the old days of machine code and assembly...). The C++ should be all thats needed for advanced programming...so I can only wonder as to what Gabe is so upset about.... :shrug:

[Neil]

Consumers will forgive a memory card costing £20 - but a harddrive costing roughly £80 for an odd game costing £35?

Yeah, MS should have just made the HD standard. I mean now we gotta buy a memory card anyway, right? This stuff still adds up. If they wanted 2 SKUs, they should have just focused on the unnecessary, but good for total fans stuff. Like different colors, xbox live, 2nd controller, or other stuff that doesn't effect game developers, but still looking alluring to the fan market.

[lightblitter22]

I think more than anything he's probably upset because he sees what a dead end PC game development is and it's not clear if or how Steam can survive on a platform like the PS3 or Xbox where they actually have to pay licensing fees.

Don't believe the hype. I think sales for these "next-gen" consoles will be a lot slower than people think if what's happening with movies is anything to go by. It won't make a big dent in the PC gaming market. If anything, it'll probably re-energize it.

[slaughters]

<SNIP>

PS3
----
<SNIP>

Customers don't care about programming issues and will simply rush out and buy the machine due to the fact its got the Playstation brand name( providing the price is right ). When the machine obtains the most market share then all developers will simply go where the money is. The argument for "its difficult to program" will be met by "quit your belly-aching and get on with it - money is to be made!"...Timewarp to the 1990's and Nintendo.

They lost market share to PlayStation because the varieity of games on the Nintendo seriously started stagnating. In a land of equivalent game machines, the one which has the most *new* titles developed for it will be the winner.

Well, new *quality* games that is

[Cronholio]

As it stands now, the programming model for all the current consoles and the PC is pretty much the same. The PS2, Xbox and GC all have a CPU and a GPU. Sure, the available instructions might change, but the underlying algrorithms do not. The very nature of the Cell processor in the PS3 and the dual cored PPC chip in the Xbox 360 represent entirely new programming models, not just different instruction sets.

Well speaking from experience I can tell you that the PS2 and the Xbox and the GC are all very different. The GS in the PS2 for instance is not a GPU in the same sense as Nvidia or ATI's chips. In order to use the hardware effectively you have to write two concurrent streams of low level code. It's not portable to any other platform. It's been this way pretty much since all the various consoles makers moved into 3D and stopped using Motorola for their CPUs; code written for a specific console is generally not easily portable to different consoles. That's where middle-ware comes in. All studios who are working on multiple platforms either license or write their own middle-ware to make their code more portable. That's the way it's always been and it's something that Valve doesn't seem to have a concept of since they haven't had to deal with it before. It's not some conspiracy amongst these console makers, they design these machines this way so they can get the most possible power into the smallest possible space at the cheapest possible price. They are chiefly concerned with giving consumers the best experience at an affordable price. Ease of development is a secondary concern, and whether or not code is portable doesn't even enter into the equation.

And lightblitter, new consoles always sell slowly, that is why developers continue to support the last gen for two or three years after the new consoles come out. I actually think, and I've said this here before that this next gen is going to send the entire gaming industry into a recession, and it's going to hurt MS's console business and PC gaming the worst. No matter how much Xbox fans wish otherwise, MS just doesn't have the same world-wide appeal as Sony, and Nintendo just is not playing on the same field as MS and Sony. If next gen development proves to be too costly and time consuming for 3rd party developers, you are going to see them sit on the PS2 a lot longer (in what is already proving to be a very long generation) and transition to PS3 when there is a significant base to justify it. No matter who's hardware proves to be better, it's a pretty much a for-gone conclusion to anyone who has worked on at least one game in the last 10 years that Sony will have the lion's share of the world wide market, and Nintendo will always have it's place and make a respectable profit for themselves regardless if any third parties get on board or not. They have most of the most profitable IPs in gaming and always seem to have a knack for coming up with new ones just when they need it. As a game developer, if it's just too expensive to support more than one console, and the industry does go into a recession, you are going to see third parties galvanize behind Sony. In that event, the only way MS is going to get decent 3rd party support is by throwing money at developers or via developers who make games that really don't have a market anywhere other than North America (like former PC devlopers who pump out first person shooters.... hmmmm).

[Boone]

Re: Slaughters.

I wouldn't say they lost market share on that alone - Sony released the Playstation much earlier than the N64 and also had more advertising.

Oh, that and Wipeout! :D

[Knotter8]

I agree with all your points except this one :

and I've said this here before that this next gen is going to send the entire gaming industry into a recession.

Anyway, I'm still having great times with my PS2 and Xbox. Especially for PS2 I'm looking forward to Wanda & the Colossus, MGS3 Substinence, Okami etc. Ppl were also sceptic about the PSP launch in Europe becuz of it's € 249 price, but it's launch sales have been quite a succes ; which proves there's consumer interest in new products which in turn means income for PS2/PSP developers to put effort into development.

The transition from PS2 and PSP to PS3 is also going to be more smoothly for those developers who are PS2 savvy, unlike Newell's team. He's stuck with his costly Source code which he can't just transition over to next gen consoles ; of course he's gonna b1tch about that.

[Thalaxis]

The transition from PS2 and PSP to PS3 is also going to be more smoothly for those developers who are PS2 savvy, unlike Newell's team. He's stuck with his costly Source code which he can't just transition over to next gen consoles ; of course he's gonna b1tch about that.

It's not just Valve... Cell and Xenon pretty much fly in the face of 30 years of research in parallel programming. Gabe Newell isn't the only game developer that is disappointed by the new consoles.

[JosephGoss]

the PC in it's current form may be a relic on it's way into obscurity. Business will be gravitating towards thin clients and home users will be going portable and using set top devices for all their computing needs, .

I don't understand?, soon every 3d artist will do 3d on their latops and no one will use desktops anymore?

wow,

[noisewar]

Cornholio I agree with everything you said that was based on experience. However, I don't see the PC market as dismally as you, nor do I see XBox360 in as a precarious a position as you. The problem with the first is that the PC market hasn't taken advantage of superior content delivery methods, episodical content, and the homebrew community. If anything, trying to put a console experience on the PC is simple disappointing, and redundant. The indie games world is relatively unknown, but suprisingly capable when it find inventive ways to create, expand, and deliver their products.

As for XBox360, throwing cash will work pretty well, but coming out early will work even better. Mass exodus to PS3? Not a chance. But you're right, developing for both will strain budgets. Strained budgets will take a cut out of things that aren't essential. Creativity isn't essential. Games next-gen will look better and play worse than games today. In my eyes, that will only encourage a revolution for the PC (no pun intended).

Besides this mini rant, your perspective is most enlightening. To the rest, Gabe Newell "bitches" because other developers don't have the balls to. Probably the only developer who isn't nuts to the wall scared of the coming leap is Epic, and that's cuz they're badass and they're chosen bed-buddies with both the giants.

[Kion]

As for XBox360, throwing cash will work pretty well, but coming out early will work even better



1.Pc will dominate when the user doesn't have sit behind a desk to play games. When the pc moves from the office to living room that will be the revolution.

2. coming out early has NEVER helped a console in the history of video games. Its about the content. It can be argued but the main reason ps2 is kicking ass is because they were the first to have Madden and GTA

Personally I think the 360 launch is weak. There are no killer games, and no next gen looking games that make me cream my pants. The same thing happened with the first xbox launch. If 360 had halo3 as a launch title, microsoft would be the leader of next gen gaming and i would be getting a 360 on launch day. I have to commend Sony and Nintendo for having strong launch titles they seem to understand what microsft doesn't, no one cares about xboxlive if you have no good games on it. I predict xbox will be in the same spot it is in now, maybe a little better off.

As much as sony over hyped everything they got a lot ppl talking even if what they were showing was fake or real, they showed what next gen gaming is going to be( i hope) Microsoft droped the ball on that, their first party games are not impressing me. They really should have had halo3 for a launch title(nobody whats to spend 400 dollars on system and buy 3 month old madden game thats already available for every other system.

[Boone]

Re: NoiseWar.

I am very much in agreement with your view on the PC market.

I have a recent EDGE magazine with an interview with Ron Gilbert( Monkey Island creator ) and he came to the conclusion that the reason independant games haven't managed to flurish is that they don't have a "Sundance festival" - if you see what I mean. It was a really good article... :thumbsup:

[Neil]

It can be argued but the main reason ps2 is kicking ass is because they were the first to have Madden and GTA


Well xbox has both now. A little late, but regardless.

PC doesn't seem to remain proprietary. I mean consol games do a good job making you buy on their platform, but PC doesn't seem to care and just ports wherever they can.

[Boone]

Another thing to remember about PCs is the mod scene - maybe until consoles are able to allow the creation of mods( with only a joypad? Hohohohhhooo... ), the PC market could have one over on the console market... :D

Actually, I think that may be why the PC market has kept itself strong all these years... :lightbulb

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.