Posted Mar 06, 2008 at 01:43AM by Jay P.
Listed in:
PlayStation 3,
Xbox 360,
Games for Windows
Tags:
Electronic Arts,
Crytek
Ó
|
I really think that PC gaming will experience a renaissance over the next few years. PC games are about pushing the technology and there are titles in the works that are yet to be announced that will see this happen.
|
|
|
[Via Geekpulp]
Permalink |
Email this |
Linking Blogs
| Digg It!
Bookmark / Find this article on: |
|
8 Jumps
Handheld Game of the Year
7 Jumps
PS3 - Game of the Year
7 Jumps
LittleBigJacko struts his stuff
25 Comments
|
 |
by Advertising - |
|
 
|
|
by DNAgent - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Cool.
It would have to be on the PS3 though cause the 360 wouldn't be able to handle it. The PS3 may have to be toned down from the PC version but they will have to water it down even more to put it on the 360 (IF they put it on the 360). I see this being as a PS3 exclusive.
It would have to be on the PS3 though cause the 360 wouldn't be able to handle it. The PS3 may have to be toned down from the PC version but they will have to water it down even more to put it on the 360 (IF they put it on the 360). I see this being as a PS3 exclusive.
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Don't be silly please. :)
Of course the 360 can handle it. Except for those easily fooled by PR and hype, it is widely accepted amoungst ALL multi-format devs (who have spoken on the subject) that the 360 and Ps3 are *very* similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen. So if the 360 couldn't handle it, neither could the PS3!
Besides, I don't expect to see Crysis ported to any console. Instead, I can see them doing what they did brilliantly last gen with Far Cry Instincts, where instead of just porting their PC game, they designed a game based upon the same game world *specifically* for the console, in this case the XBox.
Hence don't expect Crysis on the PS3 or 360, but instead expect the possibility of a console game based upon the same world as Crysis, in otherwords, 'Crysis Instincts'. ;)
Of course the 360 can handle it. Except for those easily fooled by PR and hype, it is widely accepted amoungst ALL multi-format devs (who have spoken on the subject) that the 360 and Ps3 are *very* similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen. So if the 360 couldn't handle it, neither could the PS3!
Besides, I don't expect to see Crysis ported to any console. Instead, I can see them doing what they did brilliantly last gen with Far Cry Instincts, where instead of just porting their PC game, they designed a game based upon the same game world *specifically* for the console, in this case the XBox.
Hence don't expect Crysis on the PS3 or 360, but instead expect the possibility of a console game based upon the same world as Crysis, in otherwords, 'Crysis Instincts'. ;)
|
Re: hush404 - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» RE Yaz
It's not a matter of "Hype and PR". Simply put, it's the Cell processor that has time and time again proved to be a beast in terms of processing power when used properly, something much more than the 360's tripple core CPU and THATS why the hoo-blah about crysis working on the PS3 and not the 360 is around. A major part of Crysis, aside from the visuals, is the amount of processing being down for physics, vegetation and so on which they have proved isn't possible in such an extent on lower powered CPUs including the 360's architecture. It's got nothing to do with the graphical capabilities of the two systems - in that regard they are very close, it's that extra processing power that the Cell with it's SPU architecture brings to the table.
It's not a matter of "Hype and PR". Simply put, it's the Cell processor that has time and time again proved to be a beast in terms of processing power when used properly, something much more than the 360's tripple core CPU and THATS why the hoo-blah about crysis working on the PS3 and not the 360 is around. A major part of Crysis, aside from the visuals, is the amount of processing being down for physics, vegetation and so on which they have proved isn't possible in such an extent on lower powered CPUs including the 360's architecture. It's got nothing to do with the graphical capabilities of the two systems - in that regard they are very close, it's that extra processing power that the Cell with it's SPU architecture brings to the table.
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Hush404
Since when is Crysis on the PC dependant on having a PC CPU with the kind of floating-point processing power seen on Cell, much less the 360's CPU (Xenon)?
Crysis on the PC doesn't require Cell-level floating-point power, so why do you and other gamers automatically assume it will need it on a console?
What Crysis needs most of all is sufficient GPU power and RAM (again, look at the PC). The GPU's of both the 360 and PS3 are more than good enough to do the game justice, and if they design the game specifically for consoles instead of porting the PC version, they can easily adjust to the lesser amount of RAM available in the PS3 and 360.
"is the amount of processing being down for physics, vegetation and so on which they have proved isn't possible in such an extent on lower powered CPUs including the 360's architecture."
No Hush. On paper, the 360's CPU arithmetic processing power is about half that of Cell, and it's general purpose processing power is about double that of Cell. However, even at half that of Cell, the arithmetic processing power for physics and real world modelling on the 360's CPU is still ahead of the best PC CPUs. So again, if it's possible on the PC, then it's possible on the 360.
Since when is Crysis on the PC dependant on having a PC CPU with the kind of floating-point processing power seen on Cell, much less the 360's CPU (Xenon)?
Crysis on the PC doesn't require Cell-level floating-point power, so why do you and other gamers automatically assume it will need it on a console?
What Crysis needs most of all is sufficient GPU power and RAM (again, look at the PC). The GPU's of both the 360 and PS3 are more than good enough to do the game justice, and if they design the game specifically for consoles instead of porting the PC version, they can easily adjust to the lesser amount of RAM available in the PS3 and 360.
"is the amount of processing being down for physics, vegetation and so on which they have proved isn't possible in such an extent on lower powered CPUs including the 360's architecture."
No Hush. On paper, the 360's CPU arithmetic processing power is about half that of Cell, and it's general purpose processing power is about double that of Cell. However, even at half that of Cell, the arithmetic processing power for physics and real world modelling on the 360's CPU is still ahead of the best PC CPUs. So again, if it's possible on the PC, then it's possible on the 360.
|
Re: Thinker - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» To Yaz
Hey Yaz,
I see you coming here time-and-time again with the same argument - that PS3 is not far ahead of 360 in terms of power. In fact, you started out with "both consoles are close, with PS3 having a slight edge", and have now moved on to "360 and Ps3 are very similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen". I could be wrong, but somehow I received the impression that you are much more okay with fans shouting "360 is better" than if someone praised the PS3's attributes.
Also, the perception of the 360 being similar to PS3 power-wise is based on Developer's initial experiences with the Consoles. I'm a Software Engineer, and my perception of tools and Application change from time-to-time - they are not static - based upon my level of experience with the same.
The 360 CPU is "Custom IBM Power PC-based CPU with three 3.2 GHz cores", while the PS3's CPU consists of "PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz" which manages "7 x SPE @3.2GHz". So - and in this I may be wrong - what I see is 360 (3 x 3.2 GHz equals 9.x GHz) while PS3 (7 x 3.2 GHz equals 21.x GHz, managed by another 3.2 GHz CPU). So tell me HOW they are equal. Am I missing something which you happen to understand better?
My understanding may be flawed, but I think the PS3 architecture is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than the 360s. Also, Developers aren't above the principle of CYA (Cover Your A5$) either - they want to give reasonable-sounding explanations of why the PS3 version of a game is only as good as, or worse than, the 360 version, with the calculation that they don't want to make themselves look bad. Please don't try to convince me that Software Developers are some altruistic breed which don't take such political and slef-preservation calculations into account.
Regards,
Thinker
Hey Yaz,
I see you coming here time-and-time again with the same argument - that PS3 is not far ahead of 360 in terms of power. In fact, you started out with "both consoles are close, with PS3 having a slight edge", and have now moved on to "360 and Ps3 are very similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen". I could be wrong, but somehow I received the impression that you are much more okay with fans shouting "360 is better" than if someone praised the PS3's attributes.
Also, the perception of the 360 being similar to PS3 power-wise is based on Developer's initial experiences with the Consoles. I'm a Software Engineer, and my perception of tools and Application change from time-to-time - they are not static - based upon my level of experience with the same.
The 360 CPU is "Custom IBM Power PC-based CPU with three 3.2 GHz cores", while the PS3's CPU consists of "PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz" which manages "7 x SPE @3.2GHz". So - and in this I may be wrong - what I see is 360 (3 x 3.2 GHz equals 9.x GHz) while PS3 (7 x 3.2 GHz equals 21.x GHz, managed by another 3.2 GHz CPU). So tell me HOW they are equal. Am I missing something which you happen to understand better?
My understanding may be flawed, but I think the PS3 architecture is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than the 360s. Also, Developers aren't above the principle of CYA (Cover Your A5$) either - they want to give reasonable-sounding explanations of why the PS3 version of a game is only as good as, or worse than, the 360 version, with the calculation that they don't want to make themselves look bad. Please don't try to convince me that Software Developers are some altruistic breed which don't take such political and slef-preservation calculations into account.
Regards,
Thinker
|
Re: Thinker - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» To Yaz
Please note - my discussion is not related to whether Crysis will see the light of day on 360 or not. In that regard, I couldn't care less if it shows up on 360 or not. If it doesn't, cool, I was going to buy the PS3 version anyway, and if it does, the more the merrier!
Please note - my discussion is not related to whether Crysis will see the light of day on 360 or not. In that regard, I couldn't care less if it shows up on 360 or not. If it doesn't, cool, I was going to buy the PS3 version anyway, and if it does, the more the merrier!
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Hey Thinker
" "both consoles are close, with PS3 having a slight edge", and have now moved on to "360 and Ps3 are very similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen""
That's exactly the same thing Thinker. It seems to me you always perfectly ok with anyone who says the PS3 is so powerful that the 360 cannot keep up (at least, I've never seen you argue against it), and yet you constantly have a problem with me saying they're wrong.
"Also, the perception of the 360 being similar to PS3 power-wise is based on Developer's initial experiences with the Consoles."
Please don't patronize the devs Thinker. You cannot say they are ALL just going by initial experience and somehow have ALL missed aspects of the hardware which will result in obvious PS3 superiority in future. Even before both consoles were launched, ddevs like John Carmack came to the same conclusion based upon HIS understanding of the technology within both consoles.
So you REALLY think all those devs without exception cannot think for themselves and judge the relative power of both consoles?
"what I see is 360 (3 x 3.2 GHz equals 9.x GHz) while PS3 (7 x 3.2 GHz equals 21.x GHz, managed by another 3.2 GHz CPU). So tell me HOW they are equal. Am I missing something which you happen to understand better?"
That kind of analysis as your reason for dismissing the devs for your own beliefs I find rather disappointing in you Thinker.
Firstly, I stated CLEARLY that on paper, Cell has about twice the arithmetic processing power of Xenon, whilst Xenon has about twice the general purpose processing power of Cell. SO OF COURSE they are not equal in every way, however no game code is 100% general purpose instructions or 100% floating-point, they consist of a mixture of both, and therefore it's this balance which will determine which CPU offers better performance at various stages within a game. Overall, it balances out, where the 360's CPU outpaces Cell for some games, and Cell for others. In time, as more and more enthasist is place upon floating-point power, Cell should have the edge in more cases (hence the slight edge overall).
Without going into great detail, Xenon has 3 identical cores running at 3.2Ghz, EACH core has a main processing unit and an arithmetic processing unit. Cell in the PS3 has ONE main processing unit (PPU or PPE) and 6 SPUs (or SPEs) available for games, all running at 3.2Ghz.
So that's 3 main processing cores in Xenon compared to just one main processing core in Cell, giving Xenon the advantage for general/main code. Despite that 3 to 1 ratio, it's not 3 times the power but nearer twice the power in real terms.
For arithmetic processing, PS3's Cell has 6 cores (not 7) available for games vs 3 cores in 360's Xenon, giving it twice the power. But just like the main processing cores there are issues, since it's more problematic to get the power out of the SPEs compared to the 360's arithmetic cores, so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible.
So as you can see, it's not a clear cut case. You can't just say Cell is superior to Xenon and that's it. Cell is superior in some ways, inferior in others.
But of course, there's also the GPUs, and other aspects of the consoles.
"My understanding may be flawed, but I think the PS3 architecture is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than the 360s."
And as I've shown, your understanding (9.x vs 21.x) is clearly wrong, and it's rather arrogant imo to dismiss the comments of all those devs WORKING with the consoles as being nothing more than the opinions of those who lack sufficient experienced to know better than yourself. ;)
BUT BEFORE YOU RESPOND, I would ask you to listen to podcast 15 from Criterion regarding the multi-format developement, keeping in mind that this is coming from a dev who ALWAYS lead on Sony consoles for their games.
http://www.criteriongames.com/podcast/archive/
So, are they wrong too Thinker. Am I really being as harsh or unfair to the
" "both consoles are close, with PS3 having a slight edge", and have now moved on to "360 and Ps3 are very similar in terms of power, and FAR closer than any two consoles were last gen""
That's exactly the same thing Thinker. It seems to me you always perfectly ok with anyone who says the PS3 is so powerful that the 360 cannot keep up (at least, I've never seen you argue against it), and yet you constantly have a problem with me saying they're wrong.
"Also, the perception of the 360 being similar to PS3 power-wise is based on Developer's initial experiences with the Consoles."
Please don't patronize the devs Thinker. You cannot say they are ALL just going by initial experience and somehow have ALL missed aspects of the hardware which will result in obvious PS3 superiority in future. Even before both consoles were launched, ddevs like John Carmack came to the same conclusion based upon HIS understanding of the technology within both consoles.
So you REALLY think all those devs without exception cannot think for themselves and judge the relative power of both consoles?
"what I see is 360 (3 x 3.2 GHz equals 9.x GHz) while PS3 (7 x 3.2 GHz equals 21.x GHz, managed by another 3.2 GHz CPU). So tell me HOW they are equal. Am I missing something which you happen to understand better?"
That kind of analysis as your reason for dismissing the devs for your own beliefs I find rather disappointing in you Thinker.
Firstly, I stated CLEARLY that on paper, Cell has about twice the arithmetic processing power of Xenon, whilst Xenon has about twice the general purpose processing power of Cell. SO OF COURSE they are not equal in every way, however no game code is 100% general purpose instructions or 100% floating-point, they consist of a mixture of both, and therefore it's this balance which will determine which CPU offers better performance at various stages within a game. Overall, it balances out, where the 360's CPU outpaces Cell for some games, and Cell for others. In time, as more and more enthasist is place upon floating-point power, Cell should have the edge in more cases (hence the slight edge overall).
Without going into great detail, Xenon has 3 identical cores running at 3.2Ghz, EACH core has a main processing unit and an arithmetic processing unit. Cell in the PS3 has ONE main processing unit (PPU or PPE) and 6 SPUs (or SPEs) available for games, all running at 3.2Ghz.
So that's 3 main processing cores in Xenon compared to just one main processing core in Cell, giving Xenon the advantage for general/main code. Despite that 3 to 1 ratio, it's not 3 times the power but nearer twice the power in real terms.
For arithmetic processing, PS3's Cell has 6 cores (not 7) available for games vs 3 cores in 360's Xenon, giving it twice the power. But just like the main processing cores there are issues, since it's more problematic to get the power out of the SPEs compared to the 360's arithmetic cores, so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible.
So as you can see, it's not a clear cut case. You can't just say Cell is superior to Xenon and that's it. Cell is superior in some ways, inferior in others.
But of course, there's also the GPUs, and other aspects of the consoles.
"My understanding may be flawed, but I think the PS3 architecture is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than the 360s."
And as I've shown, your understanding (9.x vs 21.x) is clearly wrong, and it's rather arrogant imo to dismiss the comments of all those devs WORKING with the consoles as being nothing more than the opinions of those who lack sufficient experienced to know better than yourself. ;)
BUT BEFORE YOU RESPOND, I would ask you to listen to podcast 15 from Criterion regarding the multi-format developement, keeping in mind that this is coming from a dev who ALWAYS lead on Sony consoles for their games.
http://www.criteriongames.com/podcast/archive/
So, are they wrong too Thinker. Am I really being as harsh or unfair to the
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Just missed the end of my 'essay'. Here's the end again :)
BUT BEFORE YOU RESPOND, I would ask you to listen to podcast 15 from Criterion regarding the multi-format developement, keeping in mind that this is coming from a dev who ALWAYS lead on Sony consoles for their games.
http://www.criteriongames.com/podcast/archive/
So, are they wrong too Thinker? Am I really being as harsh or unfair to the PS3 as you seem to want to believe these days?
Seems my views are in keeping with every multi-format dev in the industry who has spoken on this subject, and your views can ONLY ever be found amoungst a few PS3 exclusive devs (for obvious reasons ;)).
BUT BEFORE YOU RESPOND, I would ask you to listen to podcast 15 from Criterion regarding the multi-format developement, keeping in mind that this is coming from a dev who ALWAYS lead on Sony consoles for their games.
http://www.criteriongames.com/podcast/archive/
So, are they wrong too Thinker? Am I really being as harsh or unfair to the PS3 as you seem to want to believe these days?
Seems my views are in keeping with every multi-format dev in the industry who has spoken on this subject, and your views can ONLY ever be found amoungst a few PS3 exclusive devs (for obvious reasons ;)).
|
Re: Thinker - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» To Yaz
"it seems to me you always perfectly ok with anyone who says the PS3 is so powerful that the 360 cannot keep up"
-> I don't know how long you've been on QJ Yaz, but rest assured that I've criticised PS3 fans (just ask Stealth) just as vehemently as 360 fans. I own both Consoles, and I have no reason to have an illogical bias for any one console. Although I do favour the PS3 slightly, I am not one to unfairly back it. As it is, anybody praising the PS3 (however correct or wrong it may be) does get ticked off by you, and I figure I can never be as articulate as you are anyway in that regard. So I try and stick it to the legions of 360 fans who bash the PS3 without rhyme or reason, and who I've not seen you criticize. However, that still leaves my earlier impression of your bias (or lack thereof) up in the air, which I believe you haven't answered. Of course, it may turn out that I had just missed a post of yours criticizing someone bashing the PS3, and if that is the case, I apologize.
"Please don't patronize the devs Thinker."
-> I'm not. I'm a Software Engineer too (not Games, though - ERP software - Oracle Applications - in a large Consulting firm, not games), remember, and I would not criticize someone working in the same field (even though it may be with different tools), as I know how difficult it is. My argument has more to do with how the human psychology perceives or judges something. Please don't tell me that all human perception is set in stone from the moment of inception. Please don't dismiss my arguments as arrogance - usually in such, i'm the first person to give the other the benefit of the doubt. However, I'm also a student of psychology, and, as such, I also try to delve into the very human reasons of what one says and why they say it. Everything cannot be easily pigeonholed into just technological reasons man:). As an aside, the multitude is not ALWAYS right, although I'm not saying I am. I'm just saying they might have been too hasty in passing judgment. Is voicing my opinion that wrong? I was really disappointed that someone who is as eloquent and convincing in discussion as you are had to resort to accusing me of arrogance. At least I had the humility of assuming that I may be wrong.
"since it's more problematic to get the power out of the SPEs compared to the 360's arithmetic cores, so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible"
-> And that's exactly my point man - the potential is there - it just hasn't come into fruition yet. However, dismissing that potential as something that will NEVER achieve kineticism is a tad short-sighted, wouldn't you think?
"So that's 3 main processing cores in Xenon compared to just one main processing core in Cell, giving Xenon the advantage for general/main code."
-> I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the main core in Cell was just for managing the other 7 (or 6, as per your post) cores.
BTW Yaz, no offense man, but I'm not in this discussion to win (I don't HAVE TO have to win every single argument). If you are right, I'll just as easily accept you are right. However, to someone who has just accused another of arrogance, I suspect you don't let go of an argument easily, do you :)
As a last note, if I offended you somewhere in the rambling above, I apologize.
Regards,
Thinker
"it seems to me you always perfectly ok with anyone who says the PS3 is so powerful that the 360 cannot keep up"
-> I don't know how long you've been on QJ Yaz, but rest assured that I've criticised PS3 fans (just ask Stealth) just as vehemently as 360 fans. I own both Consoles, and I have no reason to have an illogical bias for any one console. Although I do favour the PS3 slightly, I am not one to unfairly back it. As it is, anybody praising the PS3 (however correct or wrong it may be) does get ticked off by you, and I figure I can never be as articulate as you are anyway in that regard. So I try and stick it to the legions of 360 fans who bash the PS3 without rhyme or reason, and who I've not seen you criticize. However, that still leaves my earlier impression of your bias (or lack thereof) up in the air, which I believe you haven't answered. Of course, it may turn out that I had just missed a post of yours criticizing someone bashing the PS3, and if that is the case, I apologize.
"Please don't patronize the devs Thinker."
-> I'm not. I'm a Software Engineer too (not Games, though - ERP software - Oracle Applications - in a large Consulting firm, not games), remember, and I would not criticize someone working in the same field (even though it may be with different tools), as I know how difficult it is. My argument has more to do with how the human psychology perceives or judges something. Please don't tell me that all human perception is set in stone from the moment of inception. Please don't dismiss my arguments as arrogance - usually in such, i'm the first person to give the other the benefit of the doubt. However, I'm also a student of psychology, and, as such, I also try to delve into the very human reasons of what one says and why they say it. Everything cannot be easily pigeonholed into just technological reasons man:). As an aside, the multitude is not ALWAYS right, although I'm not saying I am. I'm just saying they might have been too hasty in passing judgment. Is voicing my opinion that wrong? I was really disappointed that someone who is as eloquent and convincing in discussion as you are had to resort to accusing me of arrogance. At least I had the humility of assuming that I may be wrong.
"since it's more problematic to get the power out of the SPEs compared to the 360's arithmetic cores, so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible"
-> And that's exactly my point man - the potential is there - it just hasn't come into fruition yet. However, dismissing that potential as something that will NEVER achieve kineticism is a tad short-sighted, wouldn't you think?
"So that's 3 main processing cores in Xenon compared to just one main processing core in Cell, giving Xenon the advantage for general/main code."
-> I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the main core in Cell was just for managing the other 7 (or 6, as per your post) cores.
BTW Yaz, no offense man, but I'm not in this discussion to win (I don't HAVE TO have to win every single argument). If you are right, I'll just as easily accept you are right. However, to someone who has just accused another of arrogance, I suspect you don't let go of an argument easily, do you :)
As a last note, if I offended you somewhere in the rambling above, I apologize.
Regards,
Thinker
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» No hard feelings Thinker! :)
We've had some great discussions in the past, and I expect that to continue in future, however if you re-read the first paragraph of your initial response here, perhaps you'll see why it got my back up a little, especially since it's a suggestion you've made about me a number of times now.
Anyway, I'm going to make this quick because I have to leave for work soon.
Like yourself, I too have a software background, having started out as a hobby in the 80s (writing games in Z80 assembler on 8-bit micro computers, hence I know what it's like to spend months optimizing code to sqeeze an extra few clock cycles of performance). Then starting out as a Programmer (not games, but mathematical and statical software), to managing a University's network and computer labs (hardware and software), and still working in the field today.
Putting aside the technical details, what I have learned over those years is that if you need to evaluate hardware/software, then the best approach is to get feedback from those with direct experience of the hardware/software in question. Equally important, is to get feedback from those who can be considered to be the least biased (i.e. those that don't have an interest in promoting one product over another for personal or financial reasons).
It is no different for game consoles. A dev working exclusively on the 360 is not going to give an unbiased view of the PS3, especially given the lack of direct experience on the console. Likewise, a dev working exclusively on the PS3 is not going to give an unbiased view of the 360.
Therefore by far the best people to give a view of the strengths, weaknesses and potential of the 360 and PS3 are those working on BOTH consoles. Not only do they have direct experience of both, but they know how they could do things better in future and would have ideas on how they can get more out of the machines in future, bearing in mind how much potential they feel is present based upon what they know, rather than what they've heard or read (big difference compared to us online ;)).
Yes there's an element of human psychology involved in their perceptions of the consoles, and this would have been more relevent before the 360 and PS3 were launched. But these perceptions are subject to change upon direct experience, and that is what devs have today. Therefore you cannot ignore the years of programming experience, knowledge and talent of the devs when it comes to their evaluation of the merits of the hardware they're working on.
If your evaluation of the PS3 compared to the 360 was true, then devs have been working on both consoles long enough for at least one dev working on both to come to the same conclusion. But so far, there are none! Instead, all those who discuss this subject come to the conclusion I've specificed already, that the two consoles are very similar in terms of power (similar as in not the same btw, the PS3 is seen to have the slight edge overall).
IMO, NO-ONE is more qualified to discuss the differences between the 360 and PS3 than the devs working with BOTH consoles. So unless someone can specify those who are better qualified, with reasons why, then the opinions of these devs are the ones that really matter on this issue.
Wouldn't you agree. :)
Anyway, thanks again for the discussion, sorry for getting a bit annoyed earlier, but hey, it happens. :)
We've had some great discussions in the past, and I expect that to continue in future, however if you re-read the first paragraph of your initial response here, perhaps you'll see why it got my back up a little, especially since it's a suggestion you've made about me a number of times now.
Anyway, I'm going to make this quick because I have to leave for work soon.
Like yourself, I too have a software background, having started out as a hobby in the 80s (writing games in Z80 assembler on 8-bit micro computers, hence I know what it's like to spend months optimizing code to sqeeze an extra few clock cycles of performance). Then starting out as a Programmer (not games, but mathematical and statical software), to managing a University's network and computer labs (hardware and software), and still working in the field today.
Putting aside the technical details, what I have learned over those years is that if you need to evaluate hardware/software, then the best approach is to get feedback from those with direct experience of the hardware/software in question. Equally important, is to get feedback from those who can be considered to be the least biased (i.e. those that don't have an interest in promoting one product over another for personal or financial reasons).
It is no different for game consoles. A dev working exclusively on the 360 is not going to give an unbiased view of the PS3, especially given the lack of direct experience on the console. Likewise, a dev working exclusively on the PS3 is not going to give an unbiased view of the 360.
Therefore by far the best people to give a view of the strengths, weaknesses and potential of the 360 and PS3 are those working on BOTH consoles. Not only do they have direct experience of both, but they know how they could do things better in future and would have ideas on how they can get more out of the machines in future, bearing in mind how much potential they feel is present based upon what they know, rather than what they've heard or read (big difference compared to us online ;)).
Yes there's an element of human psychology involved in their perceptions of the consoles, and this would have been more relevent before the 360 and PS3 were launched. But these perceptions are subject to change upon direct experience, and that is what devs have today. Therefore you cannot ignore the years of programming experience, knowledge and talent of the devs when it comes to their evaluation of the merits of the hardware they're working on.
If your evaluation of the PS3 compared to the 360 was true, then devs have been working on both consoles long enough for at least one dev working on both to come to the same conclusion. But so far, there are none! Instead, all those who discuss this subject come to the conclusion I've specificed already, that the two consoles are very similar in terms of power (similar as in not the same btw, the PS3 is seen to have the slight edge overall).
IMO, NO-ONE is more qualified to discuss the differences between the 360 and PS3 than the devs working with BOTH consoles. So unless someone can specify those who are better qualified, with reasons why, then the opinions of these devs are the ones that really matter on this issue.
Wouldn't you agree. :)
Anyway, thanks again for the discussion, sorry for getting a bit annoyed earlier, but hey, it happens. :)
|
Re: Games4James - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» ...
"I received the impression that you are much more okay with fans shouting "360 is better" than if someone praised the PS3's attributes."
Ouch... a nicely disguised punch to the stomach there Thinker. :-D
"Please don't patronize the devs...it's rather arrogant imo to dismiss the comments..."
Ooo, well no diguise on those punches to the head Yaz. :-)
Only kidding around guys, your posts are excellent. I cant join in your main discusion but I enjoy reading it. Keep it up guys, you're just what qj needs.
"I received the impression that you are much more okay with fans shouting "360 is better" than if someone praised the PS3's attributes."
Ouch... a nicely disguised punch to the stomach there Thinker. :-D
"Please don't patronize the devs...it's rather arrogant imo to dismiss the comments..."
Ooo, well no diguise on those punches to the head Yaz. :-)
Only kidding around guys, your posts are excellent. I cant join in your main discusion but I enjoy reading it. Keep it up guys, you're just what qj needs.
|
Re: Games4James - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» I missed that earlier. going back to Crysis
yaz wrote:"Crysis on the PC doesn't require Cell-level floating-point power"
that's true!
so correct me if I'm wrong, you are saying Crysis wouldn't be a problem on the 360 and ps3 because of the cpus as they have enough power already. But it may be a problem because of the Gpus and ram, and so the devs should make a console crysis game, not do a lazy pc port to the consoles. right?
yeah I agree. :-D
yaz wrote:"Crysis on the PC doesn't require Cell-level floating-point power"
that's true!
so correct me if I'm wrong, you are saying Crysis wouldn't be a problem on the 360 and ps3 because of the cpus as they have enough power already. But it may be a problem because of the Gpus and ram, and so the devs should make a console crysis game, not do a lazy pc port to the consoles. right?
yeah I agree. :-D
|
Re: Thinker - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» To Yaz
No hard feelings either man!
I'll admit I did get a little annoyed when you accused me of arrogance, primarily because I'm usually at the other end of the spectrum from "arrogant".
Anyway, I understand your point of view that it makes sense for a multi-platform Developer who IS NOT PAYING PARTICULAR ATTENTION to one console to give an unbiased statement. However, if a Developer has been guilty of preferring one platform over the other primarily because the other is difficult to program for (e.g. EA, Ubisoft, Valve), I'm not sure that I trust EVERYTHING they say regarding the relative power of the Consoles. I mean, I would be a little skeptical. Wouldn't you be? When you've been working as long as you said you did, surely you realize that people have several layers of motivations for every single thought, word and action?
As it is, I think these Developers are just being politically-correct corporate-wise or are just being careful when they make these statements, especially as this field is their bread-and-butter. I mean, if I was working for one Dev, and in today's corporate-friendly political climate, I didn't know when I might find myself on the other side of the corporate fence, then I would be careful about every single word I said, especially if it was going to be publicised.
By the way, I don't know one thing and was wondering if you knew - Is the 360's instruction set optimized for game code or is the 360 itself somehow good for games only, and can't be used anywhere else? Because if that's not the case, then I don't understand why so many researchers or people who need a high-powered computer for cheap prefer the PS3. Maybe you could shed some light on that?
Also, I think that you were being a little dismissive of the PS3's potential capabilities when you said that "so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible".
Anyway, I believe you again side-stepped that question of mine about your possible bias, but I'm going to ignore that for now ;). After all, don't we all have our prejudices? :)
I hope to continue such discussions with you in the future. If you have either a 360 or a PS3, you can find me on either thru my 360 Gamertag or PSN ID as listed below in double-quotes:
360 Gamer-tag: "Man The King"
PSN ID: "Man_The_King"
Unfortunately, I have to submit a Technical Design by EOD today, and am less than half done, so won't be able to come on this website again today. I'll check tomorrow. Talk to you later man:)
No hard feelings either man!
I'll admit I did get a little annoyed when you accused me of arrogance, primarily because I'm usually at the other end of the spectrum from "arrogant".
Anyway, I understand your point of view that it makes sense for a multi-platform Developer who IS NOT PAYING PARTICULAR ATTENTION to one console to give an unbiased statement. However, if a Developer has been guilty of preferring one platform over the other primarily because the other is difficult to program for (e.g. EA, Ubisoft, Valve), I'm not sure that I trust EVERYTHING they say regarding the relative power of the Consoles. I mean, I would be a little skeptical. Wouldn't you be? When you've been working as long as you said you did, surely you realize that people have several layers of motivations for every single thought, word and action?
As it is, I think these Developers are just being politically-correct corporate-wise or are just being careful when they make these statements, especially as this field is their bread-and-butter. I mean, if I was working for one Dev, and in today's corporate-friendly political climate, I didn't know when I might find myself on the other side of the corporate fence, then I would be careful about every single word I said, especially if it was going to be publicised.
By the way, I don't know one thing and was wondering if you knew - Is the 360's instruction set optimized for game code or is the 360 itself somehow good for games only, and can't be used anywhere else? Because if that's not the case, then I don't understand why so many researchers or people who need a high-powered computer for cheap prefer the PS3. Maybe you could shed some light on that?
Also, I think that you were being a little dismissive of the PS3's potential capabilities when you said that "so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible".
Anyway, I believe you again side-stepped that question of mine about your possible bias, but I'm going to ignore that for now ;). After all, don't we all have our prejudices? :)
I hope to continue such discussions with you in the future. If you have either a 360 or a PS3, you can find me on either thru my 360 Gamertag or PSN ID as listed below in double-quotes:
360 Gamer-tag: "Man The King"
PSN ID: "Man_The_King"
Unfortunately, I have to submit a Technical Design by EOD today, and am less than half done, so won't be able to come on this website again today. I'll check tomorrow. Talk to you later man:)
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-09 |
|
|
» I'll split my reply this time :)
"No hard feelings either man!"
Great!:)
"...As it is, I think these Developers are just being politically-correct corporate-wise or are just being careful when they make these statements"
I understand the point you're making, but I don't believe that's the case. For two main reasons.
Firstly, you're saying they're just being politically correct and careful not to offend, but I have a problem with applying that to _all_ these devs when last gen, no-one had a problem stating the XBox was the most powerful console. Time and time again they stated this, and the results showed in their games. So although they were careful not to cause offense or provide flame bait, devs were more than happy to discuss the strengths of each console and would play down suggestions that versions of their games on weaker consoles were subpar.
Secondly, in terms of being corporate-wise, surely if the power difference between the 360 and PS3 was as high as you believe, then _all_ of these devs are not actually being corporate-wise by claiming the power is similar! Surely this would mean (if what you believe is true) that they are actually talking up the power of the 360 whilst simultaneously talking down the power of the PS3? Hence this would only please MS but not Sony, hence would not be a corporate-wise position for a multi-format dev. Only being close to the truth would they be acting in a corporate-wise way, since neither MS nor Sony can be offended by such comparisons. Therefore I would suggest that their views are far closer to the truth than the idea that the PS3 is significantly more powerful than the 360.
So again, collectively, I believe the comments of these devs are our best judge on the realtive power between both consoles. They may not be perfect, but I can't think of anyone more informed to express their opinions on this subject.
"No hard feelings either man!"
Great!:)
"...As it is, I think these Developers are just being politically-correct corporate-wise or are just being careful when they make these statements"
I understand the point you're making, but I don't believe that's the case. For two main reasons.
Firstly, you're saying they're just being politically correct and careful not to offend, but I have a problem with applying that to _all_ these devs when last gen, no-one had a problem stating the XBox was the most powerful console. Time and time again they stated this, and the results showed in their games. So although they were careful not to cause offense or provide flame bait, devs were more than happy to discuss the strengths of each console and would play down suggestions that versions of their games on weaker consoles were subpar.
Secondly, in terms of being corporate-wise, surely if the power difference between the 360 and PS3 was as high as you believe, then _all_ of these devs are not actually being corporate-wise by claiming the power is similar! Surely this would mean (if what you believe is true) that they are actually talking up the power of the 360 whilst simultaneously talking down the power of the PS3? Hence this would only please MS but not Sony, hence would not be a corporate-wise position for a multi-format dev. Only being close to the truth would they be acting in a corporate-wise way, since neither MS nor Sony can be offended by such comparisons. Therefore I would suggest that their views are far closer to the truth than the idea that the PS3 is significantly more powerful than the 360.
So again, collectively, I believe the comments of these devs are our best judge on the realtive power between both consoles. They may not be perfect, but I can't think of anyone more informed to express their opinions on this subject.
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-09 |
|
|
» Part 2
"I don't understand why so many researchers or people who need a high-powered computer for cheap prefer the PS3. Maybe you could shed some light on that?
Designed by IBM, Toshiba and Sony, and developed from IBM's own PowerPC processor, the Cell processor was developed for widespread use. Hence it's use in the PS3, IBM Blade Servers, and numerous projects between IBM and Mercury Computer Systems in areas such as Medical Imaging.
Also based upon the PowerPC processor, IBM designed Xenon specifically for the 360 console, including optimizations within the processor specifically for gaming. Hence it's exclusive to the 360, you will not see the processor used anywhere else.
That alone is reason enough, however in addition, the Cell processor on the PS3 is easily accessible via the Linux OS. Hence PS3s can be easily linked together on a network and full use made of the Cell processors for other applications. This is not possible on the 360 since the CPU is not accessible in this way. So whilst it is easier to create your own games for the 360 via XNA, you cannot link the 360s together on a network to utilise the CPUs for other applications.
Lastly, people want to make use of Cell for it's floating-point capabilities, not for running general applications. As mentioned, the Cell processor offers up to twice the floating-point power of Xenon, therefore for arithmetic processing, you get more 'bang for the buck' with Cell in the Ps3 compared to Xenon in the 360. So even if MS made it possible to access Xenon in the same way as Cell, it would still make more sense to purchase PS3s for this task rather than 360s.
"I don't understand why so many researchers or people who need a high-powered computer for cheap prefer the PS3. Maybe you could shed some light on that?
Designed by IBM, Toshiba and Sony, and developed from IBM's own PowerPC processor, the Cell processor was developed for widespread use. Hence it's use in the PS3, IBM Blade Servers, and numerous projects between IBM and Mercury Computer Systems in areas such as Medical Imaging.
Also based upon the PowerPC processor, IBM designed Xenon specifically for the 360 console, including optimizations within the processor specifically for gaming. Hence it's exclusive to the 360, you will not see the processor used anywhere else.
That alone is reason enough, however in addition, the Cell processor on the PS3 is easily accessible via the Linux OS. Hence PS3s can be easily linked together on a network and full use made of the Cell processors for other applications. This is not possible on the 360 since the CPU is not accessible in this way. So whilst it is easier to create your own games for the 360 via XNA, you cannot link the 360s together on a network to utilise the CPUs for other applications.
Lastly, people want to make use of Cell for it's floating-point capabilities, not for running general applications. As mentioned, the Cell processor offers up to twice the floating-point power of Xenon, therefore for arithmetic processing, you get more 'bang for the buck' with Cell in the Ps3 compared to Xenon in the 360. So even if MS made it possible to access Xenon in the same way as Cell, it would still make more sense to purchase PS3s for this task rather than 360s.
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-09 |
|
|
» Part 3
"Also, I think that you were being a little dismissive of the PS3's potential capabilities when you said that "so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible""
The reason it's questionable (but not probably not impossible) is that it's a difference which exists only on paper at present. I don't think that's being dismissive, that's just being realistic. Juggling 6 cores is much harder than juggling 3 cores, hence it remains to be seen whether this difference is eventually achieved in game. It's no different than my assessment of 360's 3 cores vs 1 core for main code (i.e. not 3 times the power). And even if twice the fp performance is achieved, it is still in combination with running main code, GPU performance, ram availability and usage, and other factors which will determine the overall game's performance.
I could go on about the use of the GPUs for floating-point calculations (for areas such as physics), but that's just one of many factors which favour the 360 where others favour the PS3. There are pros and cons for each console, but many only seem to want to see the pros. :|
"Anyway, I believe you again side-stepped that question of mine about your possible bias, but I'm going to ignore that for now ;)."
Not at all, I answered it when you brought it up before and therefore saw no need to repeat it here all over again. But I can happily search and provide links to my defence of the PS3 and attacks on 360 fanboys, just as I'm sure you can regarding attacks on PS3 fanboys.
To quote from your first post, the reason you keep seeing me "coming here time-and-time again with the same argument", is because the same arguement keeps being brought up here on QJ time and time again! Ever since Sony gave the (false) impression that the PS3 would be twice as powerful as the 360 back at E3 2005, gamers have held on to this perception and refuse to let go, no matter what. So given that you also believe the PS3 is significantly more powerful than the 360, then of course you're going to take exception to my posts on this issue, seeing it as a reflection of someone who is biased in favour of the 360 rather than someone just speaking the truth as he sees it. :)
"After all, don't we all have our prejudices? :)"
Yes, but some more than other. ;)
"Also, I think that you were being a little dismissive of the PS3's potential capabilities when you said that "so whether we'll really see it achieving twice the power of Xenon in games is questionable, but probably not impossible""
The reason it's questionable (but not probably not impossible) is that it's a difference which exists only on paper at present. I don't think that's being dismissive, that's just being realistic. Juggling 6 cores is much harder than juggling 3 cores, hence it remains to be seen whether this difference is eventually achieved in game. It's no different than my assessment of 360's 3 cores vs 1 core for main code (i.e. not 3 times the power). And even if twice the fp performance is achieved, it is still in combination with running main code, GPU performance, ram availability and usage, and other factors which will determine the overall game's performance.
I could go on about the use of the GPUs for floating-point calculations (for areas such as physics), but that's just one of many factors which favour the 360 where others favour the PS3. There are pros and cons for each console, but many only seem to want to see the pros. :|
"Anyway, I believe you again side-stepped that question of mine about your possible bias, but I'm going to ignore that for now ;)."
Not at all, I answered it when you brought it up before and therefore saw no need to repeat it here all over again. But I can happily search and provide links to my defence of the PS3 and attacks on 360 fanboys, just as I'm sure you can regarding attacks on PS3 fanboys.
To quote from your first post, the reason you keep seeing me "coming here time-and-time again with the same argument", is because the same arguement keeps being brought up here on QJ time and time again! Ever since Sony gave the (false) impression that the PS3 would be twice as powerful as the 360 back at E3 2005, gamers have held on to this perception and refuse to let go, no matter what. So given that you also believe the PS3 is significantly more powerful than the 360, then of course you're going to take exception to my posts on this issue, seeing it as a reflection of someone who is biased in favour of the 360 rather than someone just speaking the truth as he sees it. :)
"After all, don't we all have our prejudices? :)"
Yes, but some more than other. ;)
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-09 |
|
|
» Oh and...
...thanks for the gamertag/PSN ID.
In fact, I'd noted them down from a previous discussion we had, and will contact you once I've purchased the consoles. My aim is to have both, but it's no point right now as I haven't got the spare time to dedicate to gaming at present (they'll just collect dust), but hopefully sometime this year if things go the way I hope, then I'll meet you in the gaming arena online. :)
...thanks for the gamertag/PSN ID.
In fact, I'd noted them down from a previous discussion we had, and will contact you once I've purchased the consoles. My aim is to have both, but it's no point right now as I haven't got the spare time to dedicate to gaming at present (they'll just collect dust), but hopefully sometime this year if things go the way I hope, then I'll meet you in the gaming arena online. :)
|
by DNAgent - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Rubbing it in...
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7659/crysisbs1.png
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7659/crysisbs1.png
|
by Hekynn - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» no 360
I hope they dont put it on the 360 cause it doesnt have the freaking power to play the game only the ps3 does!! :D hell the ps3 is even faster than my pc right now. Plus I hear the 360 uses ati which sucks!!! Nvidia rules all!!
I hope they dont put it on the 360 cause it doesnt have the freaking power to play the game only the ps3 does!! :D hell the ps3 is even faster than my pc right now. Plus I hear the 360 uses ati which sucks!!! Nvidia rules all!!
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Keep telling yourself that.
;)
;)
|
by ConXept - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» To Yaz/Thinker
You guys, in my opinion represent the smart gamer, there should be more of you in the world of gaming. Unfortunately because of the likes of hekynn these forums are often plagued with idiocy. Thank you both for giving me hope on the intelligence of my gaming brethren.
You guys, in my opinion represent the smart gamer, there should be more of you in the world of gaming. Unfortunately because of the likes of hekynn these forums are often plagued with idiocy. Thank you both for giving me hope on the intelligence of my gaming brethren.
|
Re: Eclipze_ - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» Yup yup
I feel kind of sorry for fanboys sometimes.. I think they just go with the flow and follow what other people say. I like actually having someone give facts and truth, not just opinion and lies/rumors.
I feel kind of sorry for fanboys sometimes.. I think they just go with the flow and follow what other people say. I like actually having someone give facts and truth, not just opinion and lies/rumors.
|
Re: Yaz - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» .
Thanks ConXept. :)
Thanks ConXept. :)
|
Re: Games4James - 2008-03-07 |
|
|
» agreed
those two are really good posters, I wish there were more like them here. It's great when they get into a conversation with each other (even the insults are good). :D
those two are really good posters, I wish there were more like them here. It's great when they get into a conversation with each other (even the insults are good). :D
|
by ConXept - 2008-03-06 |
|
|
» I hope your right.
For gaming's sake, i hope what you say has merit. Because it seems every generation, the fanboys get dumber, and angrier instead of having an intelligent conversation about hardware these "idiots" fight about their systems as if they were fighting over their girlfriend/wife. It seems that at this rate there will be violence associated with a damn fanboy fight.
I just wanna say to everyone Chill The ***** Out!! ....its just a game.
For gaming's sake, i hope what you say has merit. Because it seems every generation, the fanboys get dumber, and angrier instead of having an intelligent conversation about hardware these "idiots" fight about their systems as if they were fighting over their girlfriend/wife. It seems that at this rate there will be violence associated with a damn fanboy fight.
I just wanna say to everyone Chill The ***** Out!! ....its just a game.
QJ.NET Blog Network  |
|
| MyQJ | Feed / PDA |
| MyQJ | RSS / PDA |
| Blog of Blogs | Feed / PDA |
| QJ.NET | RSS / PDA |
| Gaming Consoles | Feed / PDA |
| Nintendo DS | RSS / PDA |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS / PDA |
| PSP Updates | RSS / PDA |
| Wii | RSS / PDA |
| Xbox 360 | RSS / PDA |
| PC Gaming | Feed / PDA |
| Age of Conan | RSS / PDA |
| Games for Windows | RSS / PDA |
| MMORPG | RSS / PDA |
| Tabula Rasa | RSS / PDA |
| World of Warcraft | RSS / PDA |
| Science | Feed / PDA |
| Science | RSS / PDA |
| Technology | Feed / PDA |
| Apple | RSS / PDA |
| Gadgets | RSS / PDA |
| iPhone | RSS / PDA |
| Mobile | RSS / PDA |
| Photography | RSS / PDA |
| Tech | RSS / PDA |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - January
| Most Commented | |
| (61) | |
| (59) | |
| (58) | |
| (48) | |
| (39) | |
| (37) | |
| (35) | |
| (35) | |
| (34) | |
| (30) | |
| (29) | |
| (28) | |
| (28) | |
| (27) | |
| (25) | |
| (24) | |
| (21) | |
| (21) | |
| (20) | |
| (20) | |
User Favorites - January
Apple
(3236)E3
(652)Gadgets
(3644)Games for Windows
(6005)iPhone
(124)MMORPG
(7803)Mobile
(2790)News
(868)Nintendo DS
(7597)Opinions & Analysis
(93)Photography
(447)PlayStation 3
(15110)PSP
(14816)Rumors
(168)Science
(2794)Site News
(49)Tabula Rasa
(420)Wii
(12528)World of Warcraft
(3702)Xbox 360
(16049)
Archives