Originally Posted by igyman
On another note, I'm seeing comments that Ouya, Steambox and other newcomers aren't likely to achieve much against giants like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo, but I'd like to remind you all that Sega used to be among the giants once and Microsoft used to be the newcomer with the first Xbox. Bottom line, I wouldn't count the newcomers out so easily.
The problem is that Sega existed in market that's only a fraction of the size of today's. Remember that both Sega and Nintendo were and are very small companies and the games they made were very cheap compared to how things are done now. Sega couldn't compete when things started to change, Nintendo could survive because Hiroshi Yamauchi is one hard edged bastard who knows how to run a business and made sure Nintendo never ran at a loss with anything they did.
Microsoft, as I mentioned many times before, bought their way in. They threw money at every developer they could and bought out others. The Xbox, the first one, was a financial disaster for them but they didn't care because their plan was to SPEND BIG, SPEND HUGE
and then benefit from it later. Why? Because it's Microsoft, they can do that, they didn't stop at anything until they got what they wanted because in the market they introduced themselves too, the price of making games was going up and the developers they were trying to attract were very set in their ways.
It's even more so now. The industry, in many ways, is a lot more expensive and harder to break into and Ouya, Nvidia and Valve need to basically pull a bigger Microsoft than Microsoft did to get in. I believe Valve can do it without having to resort to such extremes, as for Nvidia and Ouya? Sorry, they don't have my vote of confidence. Of course Nvidia is fighting on a different front one that I can't see being a very good front to fight on considering how incidental and "on the train to work" a lot of android gaming is.
Originally Posted by igyman
I definitely agree, but it's a shame many dev teams don't seam to realize the fact that without their games the consoles are nothing. Dev teams nowadays actually pay the console manufacturers "for the privilege of making a game for their console"! Doesn't make much sense, does it?
A lot of devs do realise this fact... in addition, there are a lot of developers who only want to have their main focus as consoles because that's what their company started off with. That said, out of the three console manufacturers, if there were to be this huge developer revolt that drives them all to PC, the only survivor would be Nintendo since they can pretty much survive with their own games on their own system.
As for the fees developers pay to console manufacturers, they do make sense because a company spent quite a lot of their budget and resources developing, releasing and marketing their console and have set in an array of specific features and an infrastructure built around those features.
You gotta spend money to make money and that small fee allows developers to sell, potentially, millions of copies of their games. Do you think Activision is really concerned about these fees when they're thinking about releasing the next Call of Duty on these systems? No, not at all.
That said... things have changed with this generation because they've also adopted the use of digital downloads as a method of distributing games instead of physical media. This, of course allows for the sale of games for more profit but less cost for some developers, and for indie developers, a reduced fee that is a lot more reasonable.
THEN you have to take into account all of the deals that go on with developers and console manufacturers. Remember, I said in my previous post that console exclusives are EXTREMELY important. How are these deals struck? With lots of money of course... lots and lots of money. Make your game exclusive for my console and I'll waive all the fees and thrown money at your face. Done deal.