Why are all of the shmups on the XBOX 360?

[Obiwanshinobi]

It's the same reason that shooters continued to be released for the Dreamcast after Sega stopped making/marketing the thing.

I think it's the NAOMI being still alive, and the easiness of porting NAOMI-based games to the DC rather than that. After all, NAOMI is second to Neo Geo only in terms of longevity. I suppose extremely few Japanese DC owners don't own a PS2. Small development costs must've tipped the balance in favour of the DC.

[gray117]

Basically the ps3 on release was massively more expensive to license and get kits for. This completely shut out small developers intially.

Secondly, information was very scarce even for larger developers. The first 'kits' were in fact mock ups of what the hardware probably will be capable of. Even close to launch developers were attending keynotes and conferences and scribbling down info that they got from the sony tech staff there.

Thirdly, Sony were [predictably] very slow to extend proper support and code libraries to developers for a very unique platform. Microsoft had this stuff on day one, had more familiar hardware and were much more keen to court developers with such information. Once upon a time ago the ps2 was thought of an alien piece of kit that was hard to program for but this quickly changed when sony quickly provided great key code libraries to developers - now of course many see the ps2 as a relatively easy system to develop for.

All of this is VERY scary to a small developer who wants to exclusively/lead develop for the system. This led to an initial interest and movement for shmups on the more familiar and cheaper 360 hardware ... Simply signing up key developers early on [never mind the games they released] simply gave momentum to the 360... lets face it a couple of developers IS basically the shmup market...

Microsoft was smart enough to court cave with some publicity and sign them as a developer since they wanted to stimulate the xbox/360 brand in Japan in any manner they could, but Microsoft was really after the jrpg and jrpg-like developers as the major part of this scheme. As a result cave never got special treatment from Microsoft - it was never a big enough player for that - however, even regular support from Microsoft was probably much better than any effort (if any) Sony made.

Then again, you never know, the made-in-nippon understanding still curries favor for Japanese developers and consumers alike... Its just for small developers I doubt they will want to invest in these lean times on dual development for their shmups division. On a more human level you also have to wonder weather the programmers really want to develop for another system.... Lets face it Treasure's investment in the popular-nippon-made wii market was a disaster; would a niche developer on the less popular ps3 simply face worse prospects?

[Mad Mage]

I read that all PS3 disc games have to have high def graphics. Sony won't allow the title to be developed for the PS3 if it does not, and that the only exception they've made so far have been a few dating games.

By all means, tell me I'm wrong. But if not, that right there is all the reason in the world that Cave went with the 360.

[elvis]

Thirdly, Sony were [predictably] very slow to extend proper support and code libraries to developers for a very unique platform. Microsoft had this stuff on day one, had more familiar hardware and were much more keen to court developers with such information. Once upon a time ago the ps2 was thought of an alien piece of kit that was hard to program for but this quickly changed when sony quickly provided great key code libraries to developers - now of course many see the ps2 as a relatively easy system to develop for.

All of this is VERY scary to a small developer who wants to exclusively/lead develop for the system.

The "no tools day one" argument is a little strange, considering most shooters didn't appear on 360 until quite some time after release of the 360 or the PS3. I have good friends working on PS3 titles for small studios (some based in Japan), and all of them have mentioned the "PS3 is too hard to code for" is utterly moot today.

Also:

Thread split, the discussion about innovations in the gaming industry and such is now here.

Ghegs split the discussion a page back, where much of the "the PS3 is too hard to code for" discussion went. Read the quoted link to see some rebuttals to that argument.

[elvis]

I read that all PS3 disc games have to have high def graphics. Sony won't allow the title to be developed for the PS3 if it does not, and that the only exception they've made so far have been a few dating games.

The policy was for new games only. Ports of existing games were fine.

For that reason we have titles like "Sega Genesis Ultimate Collection" on BueRay disk without any problems. Ports of Cave arcade shooters would have easily passed Sony's requirements.

[Lynx Winters]

I now have literaly every console since the NES but no 360. I really dont feel like Im missing out on anything besides the Japanese shmups which would require a Jap 360 anyway. I'll take MGS4, Super Stardust, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Pixel Junk Shooter, Flower, good multiplats, etc. over the next Gears or Halo.

For a board full of people who think they're in the know about video games, you'd think people would realize it's not the best idea to criticize a console for having Halo and Gears Of War when your list of awesome games includes three games that are just as mainstream.

[bcass]

He's talking out of his arse. Everybody and his dog knows that the 360 is this gens best console by a country mile, even without all the shumps, which are the icing on the cake really.

[MrPopo]

I now have literaly every console since the NES but no 360. I really dont feel like Im missing out on anything besides the Japanese shmups which would require a Jap 360 anyway. I'll take MGS4, Super Stardust, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, Pixel Junk Shooter, Flower, good multiplats, etc. over the next Gears or Halo.

For a board full of people who think they're in the know about video games, you'd think people would realize it's not the best idea to criticize a console for having Halo and Gears Of War when your list of awesome games includes three games that are just as mainstream.

I don't think he was criticizing them as being mainstream, and instead criticizing them as not being worth his time.

[MathU]

He's talking out of his arse. Everybody and his dog knows that the 360 is this gens best console by a country mile, even without all the shumps, which are the icing on the cake really.

Incoming fanboy shitstorm.

[bcass]

If that was aimed at me, you couldn't be more wrong. I own all 3 consoles. As regards content, I don't think you'll find many people who don't think the 360 is this gens winner so far.

[MrPopo]

If that was aimed at me, you couldn't be more wrong. I own all 3 consoles. As regards content, I don't think you'll find many people who don't think the 360 is this gens winner so far.

Looking at the relative number of games I have for all three, I have to disagree with your assertion about the 360. Most of the exclusives (which really is what you should use to compare two consoles) are genres that are best played on the PC, so I don't bother with them.

[bcass]

Most of the exclusives (which really is what you should use to compare two consoles) are genres that are best played on the PC

Such as?

[originalz]

Bloody hell, the whole "this system is for this genre" is completely dead this generation. It's not like the PS3 doesn't have a glut of first/third person shooters and western action games.

[mrtie]

Why are all the shmups on the 360? If I had to take a guess, I would say because of how well designed the 360 D-pad is.

[emphatic]

I'd rather have a console with 3 games that I actually wanna play than a console with 20 games I kinda wanna play.

[gray117]

The "no tools day one" argument is a little strange, considering most shooters didn't appear on 360 until quite some time after release of the 360 or the PS3. I have good friends working on PS3 titles for small studios (some based in Japan), and all of them have mentioned the "PS3 is too hard to code for" is utterly moot today.

The point is that early momentum was clearly in 360s favour. This has an impact further down the line when later adopters look to where they think their niche market is.

"PS3 is too hard to code for" is moot today - is true - BUT there is still a an important difference between too hard and familiar - especially for a small studio where the slightest overhead in time/manpower can cause difficulties. Just look at the state of backwards compatibility for some sign of how relatively easy the familiar 360 makes porting/coverting both actual work AND experience.

This kind of discipline is still leading to specialisms - if only for speed. I feel relatively confident that most small developers on ps3 probably are ps3 exclusive by and large ... Hell, look at Bayonetta to see what can happen to a medium sized developer who had to outsource a ps3 port...

There's also a human fatigue factor involved; valve for example can't be bothered with ps3; I'm sure they could if they really wanted. Bethesda I suspect too [they state its too hard to get their engine to load and manage dlc on ps3 ... it can probably be done they just don't want to go to the effort].

Small studios without man power may well spend a year getting to grips with a new machine even while their artist are in production; and if you're porting from say pc/type-x/lindenburgh the 360 [although different] is more familiar. Not to mention R&D is typically a relatively a more proportionally expensive process for a small developer than a larger one.

In my experience [as an artist] coders will generally happily work on any system as long as their work remit is restricted to a section that they can concentrate on. In a large developer, hands on deck, documentation, and labour division obviously helps to get through this process. In a small developer you've got like 2-5 guys who have to basically figure it out and do it all...

[Julimano]

I read a long time ago at Kotaku that the "minimum" copies* of a game that a japanese company need to do for the 360 is very low.
*the companies pay royalties for the console maker (Sony or MS in this case) per unit, but they need to tell before how many copies they will make so they need pay the sum even if they dont sell all the copies
Maybe the "minimum" for sony is too high?

[neorichieb1971]

I think this is all BS. By the above arguments stating the PS3 is too hard to program for your saying that every console from this gen onwards should comply with PC type architecture. If Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft do that, you might as well put all 3's efforts into one super console.

[Ex-Cyber]

By the above arguments stating the PS3 is too hard to program for your saying that every console from this gen onwards should comply with PC type architecture.

I think you're confusing "too hard to program" with "not the best ROI". 360 apparently has advantages in terms of shipping a game faster and cheaper. For a publisher putting out niche games that they can't afford to take multi-platform, that sort of thing matters.

If Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft do that, you might as well put all 3's efforts into one super console.

This is basically the wet dream of the biggest publishers (at least the Western ones). ISTR that EA management has explicitly stated that they want something like this to happen. Nintendo would probably never go for it; their company culture is very strongly built around controlling the platform and designing it for the games they want to make. I could see Microsoft basically doing it, though. AFAICT, they don't actually want to be in the console market as such; they just want control of the platform so that everyone pays them license fees and everyone gets trained on Windows APIs. I wouldn't be shocked if 360's successor ended up being a 3DO/NUON-style deal where MS sets the standard, produces a reference design, and handles licensing ($$$), while consumer electronics companies and/or computer companies make the actual consoles.

[gray117]

I think this is all BS. By the above arguments stating the PS3 is too hard to program for your saying that every console from this gen onwards should comply with PC type architecture. If Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft do that, you might as well put all 3's efforts into one super console.

You must also split hardware from means of operation.

In terms of hardware the ps3 does use many pc based/originated standards in terms of hardware; the cell processor was probably just one step too far since it was just a bit too different in terms of operation and being so flexible requires greater management.

Meanwhile, i think its inevitable a lot of upcoming or recent hardware - both console and arcade - has relied greatly on pc architecture; the cost of doing otherwise is simply outweighing the advantages.

A similar thing to the programming difficulty/familiar problem can in fact be seen within pcs where nearly everyone has bee sticking to 32-bit kernels despite every system now being capable of 64-bit (and backwards compatible) operation. Why is this? Because its what they're familiar with. [Thankfully the cost/balance/benefit is beginning to tip towards 64 bit operation slowly]

And yes you might as well make a super console, but for that you'd have to acheive the greatest double feat in the world; getting people to agree, and getting consumers to shell out a lot of money on a single box ...

Or - as speculation runs rife - cload computing which would give users a cheap single box. But if that happens you can pretty much eat lag and shoot the shmup genre in the head... [it probably won't happen any time soon]

[ShmupSamurai]

Import XBox360 is too expenisive for me, I'll stick to Blazing Lasers for now.

[fox]

The reason Cave choose xbox 360 instead of PS3 despite the large install base in Japan is. The market for Shootemup is very small anyway, most 360 owners are already shootemup fans. And 360 is much easier to develop for, thus 360.

[ShmupSamurai]

The reason Cave choose xbox 360 instead of PS3 despite the large install base in Japan is. The market for Shootemup is very small anyway, most 360 owners are already shootemup fans. And 360 is much easier to develop for, thus 360.

That makes sense.