Next-Gen Development Libraries Thread
PostPosted:Thu Sep 22, 2005 5:14 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstatio ... opment_Kit
This actually makes me think that Sony has a shot at "winning" the next round of console "wars", if we still want to have that discussion. From a development standpoint, this is quite good, I think. These are very, very good libraries, from what I understand - though it's very odd that it's only OpenGL ES. Why on earth wouldn't they provide full support for the full version? OpenGL ES is a pretty limited subset of OpenGL - meant for very limited systems - it's what the newer 3D cell phone games use. I have trouble seeing why a full-featured console wouldn't support the full version. On the other hand, they managed to get plenty of developers for the PS2 with nothing anywhere close to this good. I'm not sure, though, if "sublicensed technologies" means that developers have to pay Epic if they make a game with the Unreal engine, or if Sony's just paid them a gob of money to make it freely available for all. If it's the latter for all of these sublicensed libraries, I think this may easily be the best intrinsic library support a console's had, by far.
The XBox SDK (which I think is just DirectX or something very close to it) has quite a number of features, but I'm not sure how it stacks up to this. If the sublicensing thing means developers use the sublicensed libraries for free, I'm fairly certain that all together they're quite better than DirectX - otherwise, I'm not sure. If the PS3 supported full OpenGL, I'd be again certain that this SDK is better than DirectX, but it only says OpenGL ES...
I don't think the Revolution development SDK has even been announced to anyone other than a few of Nintendo's key studios (which may actually lend support to the "Nintendo doesn't care about 3rd party developers" idea that I was looking for less dubious evidence for).
As for why this is important, the presence of good embedded libraries would actually make me choose to develop for one system over another. Good libraries can cut down on development time - and cost - by a lot, lot, lot.
This actually makes me think that Sony has a shot at "winning" the next round of console "wars", if we still want to have that discussion. From a development standpoint, this is quite good, I think. These are very, very good libraries, from what I understand - though it's very odd that it's only OpenGL ES. Why on earth wouldn't they provide full support for the full version? OpenGL ES is a pretty limited subset of OpenGL - meant for very limited systems - it's what the newer 3D cell phone games use. I have trouble seeing why a full-featured console wouldn't support the full version. On the other hand, they managed to get plenty of developers for the PS2 with nothing anywhere close to this good. I'm not sure, though, if "sublicensed technologies" means that developers have to pay Epic if they make a game with the Unreal engine, or if Sony's just paid them a gob of money to make it freely available for all. If it's the latter for all of these sublicensed libraries, I think this may easily be the best intrinsic library support a console's had, by far.
The XBox SDK (which I think is just DirectX or something very close to it) has quite a number of features, but I'm not sure how it stacks up to this. If the sublicensing thing means developers use the sublicensed libraries for free, I'm fairly certain that all together they're quite better than DirectX - otherwise, I'm not sure. If the PS3 supported full OpenGL, I'd be again certain that this SDK is better than DirectX, but it only says OpenGL ES...
I don't think the Revolution development SDK has even been announced to anyone other than a few of Nintendo's key studios (which may actually lend support to the "Nintendo doesn't care about 3rd party developers" idea that I was looking for less dubious evidence for).
As for why this is important, the presence of good embedded libraries would actually make me choose to develop for one system over another. Good libraries can cut down on development time - and cost - by a lot, lot, lot.