Possibly, but that&#x27;s a different discussion, and one that -- unlike the &quot;primary tools&quot; discussion, cannot be solved by throwing more money at it.<p>In my opinion and experience, unless you already have proper testing practices, for PC development it is better to make sure your developers have test rigs on their table that are comparable to end user equipment -- and, in most cases, it&#x27;s better if it is their development machine.<p>&gt; Requiring PC game developers to write a game on a old PC makes no more sense than requiring PSP game developers to write the game on a PSP.<p>&quot;Old&quot; is a spectrum. Most people on this thread say a (e.g. channeling Spolsky) your developer should have the best machine money can buy - with 128GB of ram, 8 cores, 1TB SSD. That&#x27;s not on the &quot;old&quot; &#x2F; &quot;new&quot; gamer machine spectrum at all. It&#x27;s on a completely different scale, given that most gamer machines these days (AFAIK) have 16GB of ram quad cores with 256GB, and casual gamers have 8GB with 128GB SSD or even an HDD<p>I would require PSP developers to test and debug on a real PSP rather than an emulator - but since PC is both the dev and the target environment, it is reasonable <i>in most cases</i> to require the dev PC to be comparable to the deployment PC, and that would essentially guarantee proper function (at some dev cost, compared to the &quot;best machine money can buy&quot;, but with significantly reduced &quot;you need to fix this&quot; testing feedback cost, with a likely overall positive effect -- at least from my experience).