Not as much as with film. Both markets are closely nit, as southern california is full of game studios. I helped teach a game design class at a major uni for a quarter, working along side mechwarrior developers. Helped as a game tester when i was in college moved over to work with a couple game producers who wanted to incorporate modern day cinema into their games, so i talked with their developers on how to do this, as my degree is in film and digital media. Currenly like my name suggest, im working with a certain game franchise which will be made into a movie. Other films I have played a small role in were Castlevania produced by crystal sky, started by creative executive Andrew Hyatt and then passed onto Paul W.S. Anderson. Which hes going to ruin a good film. The original script written my mr. hyatt was much better. Also with crystal sky Tekken, 75 million dollar budget film based off the game franchise, Have been in communications with the author of the RING and his Rival, best known for the parasite eve trilogy. Marvels Avi Arad for his upcoming films and finally been in communications with the guy who owns the rights to the Fallout franchise. Hate or like it, a movie is being made off that.Originally Posted by Squall7
Enough about me though, i hope that helped clear up any unbelievablity in my claims. I really dont want to say too much though because too much lnformation on some projects can get me in trouble with my line of work.
yep, but more pain than its worth for disc swapping.Switching Disks only works if all of the game data can be stored on a single DVD/CD (so all the gameplay mechanics, engine, script etc...). It's only used when the movie files are too big to stick on also. Of course, I think it's still possible to do it, even if it can be considered "undesirable" to do so.
Im saying that those developers who want to make a large and blockbuster style game will look for the medium that allows them the most freedom to do really big projects. Developers will naturally continue to drop games on more than one system, but the games they release will be limited by the medium they are put on and payed on. As time goes on, developers look to out do the other, to make the next biggest and greatest thing. To do that, More advanced GPUs and Storage mediums will be needed.I'm not quite sure I'm following you. Are you saying that developers will eventually and naturally go to the PS3 once they hit the ceiling of the competitors and their limitations? Or that Sony will have a hand in every game because it has the least problems when it comes to power?
Xbox will release another verion of the 360 here soon with a 180 gig hard drive, yet they refuse to put in an HD DvD rom drive. Which means they plan on more games installing on the HD than relying purely on one disc.
Well what happens in these cases is that it cost the developers more time to make these changes, which means more money. However, the game itself is limited by the first system it comes out on. If they do a re-release of a game for another system, it means they are tying to keep the game alive and continue the revinue from it, but it also means more devopement time. They dont usually like to do this, but will if they want to keep reapin in the benefits of one title.That's not neccessarily true in this gen so far. Some of the games have been downgraded and ported to the Wii. Marvel Ultimate Alliance is an example of this. It's also allowed for an extended lifespan of the PS2, as we see things like Tony Hawks Downhill Jam get ported to that also.