#launch game development

Is it plausible?

Of course it's plausible. The Nintendo Switch started development around 2012-2013, was unveiled in 2016, and was released in 2017. It's been six years since the Switch launched. If Nintendo started developing a new console shortly after the Switch's launch (2018), we're about due for a new console unveiling.

Is it common for console manufacturers to talk about the next console to developers privately?

Absolutely. How do you think the new console's third party launch games get made? We on the dev side get to work with the console dev kits before the public knows about them because new consoles need to launch with games to play or nobody will buy them. We need at least a year (preferably two or three) to build a whole game on new hardware, so you can do the math - if our game launches with the new console in holiday season 2025, that means we need the console dev kits to start building the game 2022-2024. How do you think we get those dev kits if we don't talk to the console manufacturers? We get the dev kits early and are all sworn to NDA Secrecy for that time.

I'll clarify to say that I can neither confirm nor deny anything that I am currently working on, nor can I confirm nor deny the existence of any next-gen Nintendo (or Sony or Microsoft or other party) console system. I am only speaking hypothetically as someone who worked on launch titles for the [PS4/XBOne generation and the PS3/X360 generation].

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

In order to obtain next-gen dev kits, the biggest publishers often meet with the platform representatives and negotiate a deal far in advance. This is the sort of thing that starts at tradeshows and events - not on the show floor with the press and the fanfare, but in private meetings behind closed doors while the other parts of the show are going. Platform’s goal is pretty simple - secure pledges for games that will sell the console. They are looking for buy-in from as many of the biggest third-party AAA publishers as they can to get big budget games to help sell the new system. This generally means Activision-Blizzard, EA, Ubisoft, Take Two, Bandai-Namco, Square-Enix, Sega, and Capcom. The bigwigs secure a deal over time and move forward with the delivery of the dev kits to the publishers.

When it comes to handing out dev kits internally, it always goes in terms of priority. You need your core tech software engineering experts to lay the foundation for everybody else before you start giving them to the people on the game team(s). Core engineering is the internal group of senior software engineers that’s tasked with building and maintaining the publisher’s core technology, the common foundation code that most of the publisher’s games are built on across most/all of their studios. They always gets the first prototype dev kits to learn how the tech works and start building the software foundation for the publisher. They’re the ones who get the first things working - controller inputs, rendering, sound, networking - all of the necessary fundamental stuff - and package it up into the programmer API that the individual game teams will use to develop the projects on the platform. This code foundation can then be used on multiple projects.

After core engineering has enough kits to lay the foundation, you start handing them out to the game team. Engineering, art, and design teams each get at least one dev kit in order to validate work being done (usually taken by the leads), but the individuals on the team are handed dev kits on an as-needed basis. Engineering typically has the biggest need - most programmers each have at least one dev kit in order to test their code changes. Design usually comes in second (often having to share kits) and art is a more distant third, typically with an entire group of artists sharing a single kit. Production doesn’t normally get dev kits because they don’t typically need them - they aren’t touching the game itself, they’re greasing the gears to keep everybody else working. The only exception is generally the executive producer, who gets one because she’s in charge of the whole project. QA also doesn’t get dev kits, they get test kits - cheaper, less fully-featured machines designed to run development builds.

Since dev kits need to be built and manufactured, it’s very common that we don’t get as many dev or test kits as we need initially. The dev kit specs aren’t necessarily finished when we first start to get them. We’re often given a handful of prototype kits at the start with a promise of more eventually. New kits arrive over time as platform improves their production process, fixes bugs, and iterates on their initial designs. It isn’t uncommon to have multiple generations of dev kits scattered among the dev team over the course of launch title development. 

If this all sounds a little haphazard... well, that’s because it is. They’re building the new console while we’re building the game, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that there are unfinished parts here and there, both on the hardware and the software side of development.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

The FANTa Project is being rebooted. [What is the FANTa project?]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

I’ve gotten a lot of questions about the Nintendo Switch, most likely because it’s coming in two months and they just had their big announcement thing. I’m a big fan of looking at data and past examples to look for correlations. This case is no exception. For those who want a TLDR, here it is - I think the Switch has a lot of work cut out for it, and the early prediction is not good.

Issue #1: The Switch is launching 2.5 years into the current hardware generation. 

Its competitors - the PS4 and XBone both have installed bases of around 30-40 million units already, and the Switch does not beat them in terms of hardware or software. The major draw of the Switch is its portability, which would be good if they weren’t already their own biggest competitor in the handheld console gaming market. Unfortunately, the trend in mobile gaming has shifted towards tablets and phones, and there is no way that the Switch will supplant mobile devices. Thus, the absolute best they can hope for is basically to take the 3DS market. 

Issue #2: 3rd Party Publishers are waiting by the sidelines.

The Switch’s launch library is the smallest launch library for a console I’ve eer seen. It’s even smaller than the WiiU’s number of launch titles, and the most important factor for any console’s continued success is the number of games available for it. The games that I saw advertised for the Switch, both launch and upcoming, were either first party (developed and/or publisher by Nintendo), midcore games (Super Bomberman R, Sonic Mania, Puyo Tetris), or ports of AAA titles that’s already available on other platforms (Skyrim, Skylanders, Just Dance). But the absolute worst news is that there are only five launch titles (Just Dance, Skylanders, Zelda, 1-2 Switch, and Super Bomberman R) with six more slated for spring release, and no backwards compatibility for either WiiU, Wii, or even Virtual Console titles. 

I’m sure the first party games for the Switch will be excellent - Nintendo does good work on making games. However, first party support wasn’t enough to save the Gamecube, it wasn’t enough to save the Wii, and it wasn’t enough to save the WiiU (and I’ll note here that when I say “save”, I mean “encourage third party publishers to continue development for”). I have little faith that first party games will be enough to carry the Switch.

Issue #3: The Switch costs more than its competitors

Price point is a potential issue here - the Wii got it right by releasing at $250 when its competitors were priced at $300-350. The WiiU was released at $300 when its contemporaries were also at $300, but the Switch is priced at $300 when PS4 and XBone bundles are retailing with a packed-in game and other goodies for $20-80 less. This is the difference between an extra controller or game. It isn’t much to the hard core fan, but to a more casual buyer it can make a huge difference. The PS4 and XBone both have some really spectacular libraries already. 

Overall, the biggest problem I see with the Switch is that it’s really hard to get people to buy a game system that isn’t a strong, has fewer games, and costs more than its competitors. It’s got a bit of a unique system in that it’s both portable and usable at home, but I’m not entirely convinced that this is something that is really that novel. I’m not saying the Switch is doomed, but I do think that Nintendo has a lot of work cut out for them, and their launch does not look very good. The situation looks very much like a repeat of the WiiU’s launch.

Further reading: [What’s the deal with Nintendo and its weird game experiments?]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Biscuit, Sterling, etc. are a lot like Rush Limbaugh. There’s a very particular segment of the population that really listen to them and care what they have to say. Most people outside of their audiences don’t care. While their audiences might not be that tiny, what Sterling or Biscuit say has very little bearing on the actual process, and are often not particularly informed.

Regarding preorders for games leading to lousy releases, the best counterargument is just to look at the numbers. Troubled launches are nothing new - there have been buggy and troubled game launches ever since big game launches have been a thing. However, the majority of AAA game launches go just fine. Here’s a list of AAA games that launched in 2014:

Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2

Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare

Southpark: The Stick of Truth

Dark Souls II

Elder Scrolls Online

Titanfall

Hearthstone

Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes

Infamous: Second Son

Mario Kart 8

Firefall

Madden 15

The Sims 4

Destiny

ArcheAge

FIFA 15

Disney Infinity 2.0 - Marvel Heroes

Hyrule Warriors

NBA2k15

Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel

Sunset Overdrive

Watch_Dogs

WWE2k15

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare

Assassin’s Creed Unity

Dragon Age: Inquisition

Far Cry 4

Little Big Planet 3

Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor

Smash Bros

How many of them had preorders available? I’d be willing to bet that all of them did. How many of them had troubled launches? Remember, we’re not talking about whether they are bad games, or whether they personally liked them. We’re just talking troubled launches here. Which ones of these had some kind of controversy?

Titanfall had some rough launches in parts of the world - they had to delay the X360 version, the Australian launch had connectivity problems since they had to use Singapore’s servers, and the South African release was cancelled because of no nearby Microsoft data center.

The Sims 4 had some weird animation issues at launch that were quickly corrected

Destiny had connectivity problems at launch that were rapidly addressed via a patch

Shadow of Mordor had that kerfuffle about how reviewers could only receive review copies of the game if they agreed to a restrictive contract

Watch_Dogs had a bad PC launch. The other platforms were fine.

Assassin’s Creed Unity had several launch issues

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare had a data problem with their preload that held up some folks on launch day

If you look at the AAA games that were released in 2014, the issues that were around at launch really weren’t that big a deal, and they were all ironed out fairly quickly. In addition, if you compare the number of AAA games with the number of games that had even something potentially bothersome that would need to be patched, you’ve got something like seven potential negatives out of 31 total releases, and almost all of them were resolved fairly quickly. Games like Arkham Knight’s troubled PC launch tend to be the exception, not the rule. 

Just a few little snippets that I observed while working on one of the launch titles for the new generation of game consoles. No, I am not going to say which.

The first dev version of the XBone that I saw came in white with tiger stripes (half and half, the tiger stripes were on the right side), while the PS4 looked like a big silver and black stereo receiver. Those of us at the studio who were working on them were barred from even saying their names. Those who were under the NDA had to use these bizarre code names in public to refer to them, and certain floors and sections of the studio I was working at the time were off limits to most people.

It got really awkward when somebody from facilities came in and put an “Only NDA people past this point” sign on the cube wall next to my desk - and I hadn’t actually signed the NDA yet, so I had to get put on the list rather quickly. Not that they were really checking. I went for a few days without anybody saying anything.

When it came time for the company Halloween party and people brought their kids by to trick or treat, we had to cover up all of the dev kits and controllers with these big black sheets. Not that the kids noticed at all. They were much more interested in the candy.

The scariest thing about working with prototype hardware is how fragile it is. There was actually this one time when I was updating my prototype PS4 and the instructions actually said "The install will freeze for a few minutes at this point. Do not power off or press any buttons, or you will brick your kit." There are always bricked kits.