Common Misconception XB1 is 'harder' to devlop for.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for BlessedChill
#1 Posted by BlessedChill (697 posts) -

Numerous Developers have stated quite the opposite, in fact some have gone as far as say it's easier to develop for than the Playstation 4. 'Xbox One Easier To Develop For Than PS4' Says Witcher 3 Developer

Some People may use the Xbox One is 'harder to develop for, unoptimzed, and or driver kit issues' excuse to justify is lesser graphical fidelity of games compared to the PlayStation 4.

"The Xbox One is pretty easy to understand because not just the hardware is similar to the PC, but everything like the SDK, the API is really similar to what you would find on a PC," said Torok, speaking to Eurogamer.

This is not true.

Project Cars Dev have said similar things,Link

Avatar image for Pray_to_me
#2 Posted by Pray_to_me (4041 posts) -

It's harder to develop games that dont look last gen is what they meant sorry for the confusion.

Avatar image for I_can_haz
#3 Posted by I_can_haz (6511 posts) -

Whoops, there goes another lemming excuse.

"b....bu....bu....but teh DRIVERZ!!11"

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#4 Edited by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

I really don't care which is harder to dev for because I am not making the games. I only care about the end result and the PS4's end result is prettier.

Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
#5 Edited by Gaming-Planet (18540 posts) -

People don't realize that developing on these consoles is about as easy as developing on PC. If your Xbox One looks like shit and runs like shit, probably because it is shit.

Avatar image for Nengo_Flow
#6 Edited by Nengo_Flow (10644 posts) -

No one ever said that the X1 is hard to develop for....

People just talk about how weak it is, but not that is harder to develop for.

Where did you get that "misconception" from?

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#7 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

Thats sweet but are the ploicies for Microsoft less of a pain in the ass for developers as they were before ?

It was never the hardware, its the Company itself.

Avatar image for Wasdie
#8 Posted by Wasdie (53430 posts) -

If you're coming from a DX based engine the Xbox One will be a bit easier to port too. The PS4 is still an X86 machine and is infinitely easier to develop on than the PS3 was. However it's still going to be in OpenGL which presents itself with a lot of issues that developers would rather not deal with.

The only tricky thing with the Xbox One is that reliance on the ESRAM and Microsoft's dumb XBL Gold policies that prevent games from being ported.

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
#9 Posted by tdkmillsy (2529 posts) -

Nothing to do with being harder to develop for. Its harder to get the best out of the hardware, therefor more improvements will be seen as the drivers get better.

Never get to PS4 but the gap will get smaller, 900p on one 1080p on other and same fps.

Avatar image for treedoor
#10 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

I'll take "common misconceptions that nobody actually believed" for $200.

Avatar image for BlessedChill
#11 Posted by BlessedChill (697 posts) -

@Nengo_Flow: people like BlackAce say messed up drivers are what's making the XB1 not have complete parity in multiplats with the PS4. "Wait until E3" he typically says

Avatar image for edwardecl
#12 Posted by edwardecl (2240 posts) -

i thought it was only hard to develop for because the SDK was unfinished. No idea of the state of the PS4 SDK, but I'm assuming that comment from the witcher dev is more to do with the familiararity of the tools rather being easier.

Avatar image for indigenous_euphoria
#13 Posted by indigenous_euphoria (255 posts) -

@edwardecl said:

i thought it was only hard to develop for because the SDK was unfinished. No idea of the state of the PS4 SDK, but I'm assuming that comment from the witcher dev is more to do with the familiararity of the tools rather being easier.

That's what it sounded like to me to.

Avatar image for joel_c17
#14 Posted by joel_c17 (3206 posts) -

Its not hard to develop for - its just not as powerful as the ps4

Avatar image for AdobeArtist
#15 Posted by AdobeArtist (24610 posts) -

X1 and PS4 both get their architecture from AMD, and are both similarly structured like PCs. How could X1 be "more difficult" to develop for?

Avatar image for SolidTy
#16 Edited by SolidTy (49991 posts) -

Devs are doing the best they can, it's not that the Xbone is so hard to develop for, it is simply the weaker components that M$ put in the Xbone and resource hogs like Kinect and the Xbone OS don't improve matters. Even then, they aren't a problem as long as you don't compare the $500 Xbone to the $400 PS4.

Just pretend the PS4 doesn't exist and life will be a lot easier.

Avatar image for ReadingRainbow4
#17 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (18733 posts) -

Pretty sure the witcher Devs said that because they're porting the game from a DX based engine.

Still, the Xbone is quite a bit weaker than PS4 and part of the reason is because of design decisions that shouldn't have been overlooked, like that pathetic ESRAM.

Avatar image for Gargus
#18 Posted by Gargus (2147 posts) -

I don't recall anyone ever saying xbox one is hard to develop for it. Considering how much I pay attention to gaming and haven't heard about it Id say it isn't a issue at all, if it were then surely Id have heard about as tons of developers and publishers would be saying it.

Avatar image for navyguy21
#19 Posted by navyguy21 (14626 posts) -

Drivers and ESRAM are holding back XB1, not programming difficulties or hardware power.

Anyone that thinks that it cant hit 1080p because of hardware is a fanboy through and through.

That doesnt mean PS4 isnt more powerful, it just means XB1 hardware wasnt the first priority in development.

XB1's software is much like Vista at launch. Outdated drivers caused severe performance problems until a wealth of upgrades in SP2

Avatar image for Shewgenja
#20 Edited by Shewgenja (18838 posts) -

This is old as ****. What the hell?

Avatar image for no-scope-AK47
#21 Edited by no-scope-AK47 (3755 posts) -

Old news seems that myth has been debunked the ps4 has a major advantage in the games.

Avatar image for cainetao11
#22 Posted by cainetao11 (32266 posts) -

And after last weekends gaming get together, I've played on both and all the games looked and played great. Edge to PS4, but not enough to make me not buy an X1 because there are games PS4 wont have that I want. And vice versa. I win.

Avatar image for misterpmedia
#23 Posted by misterpmedia (6209 posts) -

There's a whole bunch of evidence that proves otherwise.

Avatar image for tormentos
#24 Posted by tormentos (26626 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

If you're coming from a DX based engine the Xbox One will be a bit easier to port too. The PS4 is still an X86 machine and is infinitely easier to develop on than the PS3 was. However it's still going to be in OpenGL which presents itself with a lot of issues that developers would rather not deal with.

The only tricky thing with the Xbox One is that reliance on the ESRAM and Microsoft's dumb XBL Gold policies that prevent games from being ported.

This..^^

And DF also say that,they expected the xbox one to perform better than it did on Tomb raider considering the game is a DX11 game,porting to xbox one should have been way more easy,that converting all that code to Opengl.

Probably like you say ESRAM is the guilty card here,other developers have expressed how the PS4 is easier and more straight forward,maybe it depends on what you do.

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#25 Edited by StormyJoe (7541 posts) -

@BlessedChill: I believe devs say the XB1 is more difficult to program for because of the ESRAM.

Oh, and LOL! LOL Cows! Since launch, cows have been basking XB1 and touting PS4 because "Sony learned their lesson, PS4 is easier to develop for". Now, some developers are saying the opposite, and cows are bashing it for that.

Cows have to be, without a doubt, the absolute DUMBEST fanboys.

Avatar image for germansen
#26 Posted by germansen (26 posts) -

It is a fact that this time around Sony chose the simple approach as they have choosen the standard components where as xbox one has 15 special purpose chips that make the difference. I am not even starting the whole discussion on the 3D die.

Because of these custom chips and especially the esram and not to forget the early state of the drivers that where not expected to be released before 2014 - Xbox one have been a pain to harness all the resources. But if you look at 1 party they now what they are dooing - FORZA 5, RYSE... Ryse is still the best looking game yet.

But new driversDX12 will come, and utilize the very specific goodies of the xbox one and will boost performance - then we will have a lot of Sony cry bots complaining and saying that it is not the graphics that count.

Ask yourself why the xbox one should have a much more potent power and advanced heat flow setup.There is a reason and you will see it in time. But better show than tell. The sole reason is now that MS was not ready with the drivers.

Avatar image for Martin_G_N
#27 Posted by Martin_G_N (1884 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@Wasdie said:

If you're coming from a DX based engine the Xbox One will be a bit easier to port too. The PS4 is still an X86 machine and is infinitely easier to develop on than the PS3 was. However it's still going to be in OpenGL which presents itself with a lot of issues that developers would rather not deal with.

The only tricky thing with the Xbox One is that reliance on the ESRAM and Microsoft's dumb XBL Gold policies that prevent games from being ported.

This..^^

And DF also say that,they expected the xbox one to perform better than it did on Tomb raider considering the game is a DX11 game,porting to xbox one should have been way more easy,that converting all that code to Opengl.

Probably like you say ESRAM is the guilty card here,other developers have expressed how the PS4 is easier and more straight forward,maybe it depends on what you do.

They are both easier to develop for than the previous consoles was, at least compared to the PS3. It's not like the X1 is the first console to have this type of memory setup. The perfomance difference between the two is because the gap in power is so big. The ESRAM and Data Move Engines takes up space of the APU, and therefor the GPU is smaller.

And when it comes to OpenGL, it has been out for ages, devs knows how to work with that, and it is still the best way to utilize the hardware in a console 100%.

Avatar image for ni6htmare01
#28 Posted by ni6htmare01 (2501 posts) -

wait! If XB1 is just as easy to develop as PS4 than shit don't look good for Xb1 at all than! This mean it will always be either 1080P vs 720P or 60FPS vs 30FPS

Avatar image for BlessedChill
#29 Edited by BlessedChill (697 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@BlessedChill: I believe devs say the XB1 is more difficult to program for because of the ESRAM.

Oh, and LOL! LOL Cows! Since launch, cows have been basking XB1 and touting PS4 because "Sony learned their lesson, PS4 is easier to develop for". Now, some developers are saying the opposite, and cows are bashing it for that.

Cows have to be, without a doubt, the absolute DUMBEST fanboys.

What this means is those alleged "driver and dev kit issues" isn't an excuse as to why Xbox One multiplats run much worse when compared to the Playstation 4.

Avatar image for GravityX
#30 Posted by GravityX (865 posts) -

No no, anonymous people and fools on twitter say diffferent.