*spin-off* idTech Related Discussion

[Shifty Geezer]

Ok then, if this is the case then the game(engine) never was developed with the PS3 in mind or at least without knowing anything about the PS3 architecture so the PS3 will most likely be inferior in some way or another.

RAGE clearly wasn't designed with PS3 in mind. It's a PC game from a PC developer who are viewing the graphics rendering pipeline through the eyes of PC architecture and inventing clever new ways to do things on PC. They have extended themselves to consoles where more money is to be had, but that offers different architectures to worry about. XB360 is a good match for the PC way of thinking. PS3 needs iD to reinvent their wheels. iD deserve credit for aiming high and setting themselves the task of wrestling PS3 into submission.

How well they do will be judged solely on the strength of the finished game. All these WIP comments are silly. I'm surprised any developer talks ahead of release. Whether they claim to be amazing (LAIR and Ghostbusters) or say they're having difficulties, it's all bad press in the end. Unless you really are good (Naughty Dog for example) and can confidently make performance claims based on sense and reality, it's better to just be quiet, work on the game, release the PR screenshots and feature lists, and let the developer make the best game they can without public pressure.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I think Megatexture was designed with consoles in mind as much as the pc. Whether the PS3 is more or less capable of handling their implementation is not important. The intention is to make forward looking technology that addresses VRAM limitations as well as assisting the creative process. Whether it is the best solution or will become a standard solution is another question, but I don't think it's fair to say their issues with PS3 is because they are a PC developer with a PC focus.

 

[Weaste]

Ok, it makes a little more sense now with the fragment processing comment. Wasn't that a large part of one of the Phyre Engine presentations and how the SPUs should be used in conjunction with the GPU to reduce bottlenecks? Does this require a deferred renderer though?

 

[RudeCurve]

I think it's kinda ironic that despite the RSX being closer to a PC GPU, it's slower than Xenos when it comes to MT. This flushes the whole PC oriented developer argument down the toilet. The fact AI and physics are running faster on CELL means they're moving along quite well which also makes the PC oriented notion even more irrelevent.

 

[liolio]

I think it's kinda ironic that despite the RSX being closer to a PC GPU, it's slower than Xenos when it comes to MT. This flushes the whole PC oriented developer argument down the toilet. The fact AI and physics are running faster on CELL means they're moving along quite well which also makes the PC oriented notion even more irrelevent.

Indeed some comment are pretty unfair if the post some posts above is legit.

Ok, it makes a little more sense now with the fragment processing comment. Wasn't that a large part of one of the Phyre Engine presentations and how the SPUs should be used in conjunction with the GPU to reduce bottlenecks? Does this require a deferred renderer though?

If their problem (right now, I think they will meet more or less their performances goals) is a the fragment/pixel processing level I don't see how the cell could help. They will need to dig in the RSX low level API, optimize and optimize again.

 

[nAo]

I was told that RSX was vertex limited a million times, and now I find out it's all pixel shaders fault. Oh! Irony!

 

[Weaste]

If their problem (right now, I think they will meet more or less their performances goals) is a the fragment/pixel processing level I don't see how the cell could help. They will need to dig in the RSX low level API, optimize and optimize again.

This is what I was referring to: http://www.technology.scee.net/file...09/DeferredLightingandPostProcessingonPS3.ppt

 

[Scott_Arm]

Isn't it possible that for what they're trying to do, RSX is slower? I mean, we can't exactly look at their code and make any judgements about how optimized it is for RSX. Carmack has always seemed to be pretty honest and upfront with what he's doing and how it's working. That's probably one of the least discussed aspects of ids acquisition. He may not have the freedom to speak his mind like he used to. What will we poor nerds do?

 

[nAo]

Everything's possible (especially given their 'exotic' pixel shading workload) and it's not fair to judge without having some more data point.

 

[psorcerer]

I think it's kinda ironic that despite the RSX being closer to a PC GPU

Eh?

it's slower than Xenos when it comes to MT. This flushes the whole PC oriented developer argument down the toilet.

If you make theories on false assumptions, maybe.

The fact AI and physics are running faster on CELL means they're moving along quite well which also makes the PC oriented notion even more irrelevent.

Sorry to disappoint you, but "AI and physics" do not require even 10% of the processing power required for the rendering loop, if it's done right.

 

[RudeCurve]

What's iD's pedegree with working with consoles? How many console games have they released that have made good, efficient use of the hardware? They are a PC orientated developer, because that's their history. Years and years of design philosophy and previous experience is going to bias their thought processes into methods that are an instant fit for the PC space. They then have to address this and rethink solutions for consoles, needing to learn how best to use the hardware, which takes considerable time and effort and experience. Even experienced console developers have trouble utilising a new console's hardware on their first titles, and if they're a long lived developer, they'll have done this several times and know what to look for yet still have issues!!

So despite them being a PC developer RAGE's graphics is running way faster on X360 than on PS3 (both are consoles) despite RSX being basically a modified PC GPU while Xenos isn't? So because they're a PC developer they can't program a PC GPU as well as a console GPU?

 

[-tkf-]

So despite them being a PC developer RAGE's graphics is running way faster on X360 than on PS3 (both are consoles) despite RSX being basically a modified PC GPU while Xenos isn't? So because they're a PC developer they can't program a PC GPU as well as a console GPU?

Isn´t the Xenox closer to a current GPU than the RSX?
Usually JC designs his work towards the GPUS that is coming, not those that are outdated. Besides it may just be that this engine can use the edram to it´s advantage.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So despite them being a PC developer RAGE's graphics is running way faster on X360 than on PS3 (both are consoles) despite RSX being basically a modified PC GPU while Xenos isn't? So because they're a PC developer they can't program a PC GPU as well as a console GPU?

These consoles are more than just their GPUs; Xenos is as much a PC GPU as any other in design, just it was forward thinking with US; some GPUs are faster than others (are you surprised XB360's GPU is running faster than RSX given all we know?); and we don't know what standard of GPU iD are designing for anyway.

PC experience does not make PS3 easier to extract performance from than XB360. You really should know that by now from all the discussion here!

 

[chris100]

current-and-next-generation-parallelism-in-game -SIGGRAPH 2008 by ID Soft's Jon Olick.
http://s08.idav.ucdavis.edu/olick-current-and-next-generation-parallelism-in-games.pdf

Maybe surprising to some people after seeing "20 fps RAGE we have know" argument,ID Soft really did lots of research on cell processor.

 

[joker454]

Isn´t the Xenox closer to a current GPU than the RSX?
Usually JC designs his work towards the GPUS that is coming, not those that are outdated.

This might be partly true, but in the case of Rage I think it was more developed first and foremost as a solution to memory/texture restrictions (especially on consoles), which have been mostly status quo for some time now. So they thought up megatexture, and now are faced with adapting it to current hardware. I admit to not being 100% up to speed on megatexture, but from what I've read I suspect the ability to do a significant amount of pixel work in vertex shaders should give xenos a very tangible optimization advantage. That could also be why the now ancient 4+ year old xenos is able to run this modern tech at 60fps, although somehow I seem to be the only one around here impressed by this apparently.

 

[-tkf-]

This might be partly true, but in the case of Rage I think it was more developed first and foremost as a solution to memory/texture restrictions (especially on consoles), which have been mostly status quo for some time now. So they thought up megatexture, and now are faced with adapting it to current hardware. I admit to not being 100% up to speed on megatexture, but from what I've read I suspect the ability to do a significant amount of pixel work in vertex shaders should give xenos a very tangible optimization advantage. That could also be why the now ancient 4+ year old xenos is able to run this modern tech at 60fps, although somehow I seem to be the only one around here impressed by this apparently.

Eventhough JC is a visionary man i don´t think he aimed this at Consoles, i think he started with the issues he had with PC´s at that time. And i think that even though much changed (1GB graphic cards!) some of those problems is still real (much higher resolution textures is required today).

As a side benefit his engine fits perfectly with this console generation that seems starved for memory (actually the biggest console flaw imho). The only thorn is the PS3 having to rely on the SPU´s to look good. Since he always starts with what he expects from the future GPU´s and kind a designs "backwards" there was bound to be problems with the PS3, they knew this and hired someone to solve it, i just hope they got someone just as good to replace him, which i am afraid they didn´t.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

These consoles are more than just their GPUs; Xenos is as much a PC GPU as any other in design, just it was forward thinking with US; some GPUs are faster than others (are you surprised XB360's GPU is running faster than RSX given all we know?); and we don't know what standard of GPU iD are designing for anyway.

PC experience does not make PS3 easier to extract performance from than XB360. You really should know that by now from all the discussion here!

I think his point was...

The Cell CPU is far more foreign to ID than the CPU in the X360. Yet they haven't had any significant problems coming to grips with it.

On the other hand, the RSX is a pretty bog standard DX 9.0ish GPU, while the Xenos is less PC standard. And in this case, they are having problems with the more PC like GPU. Add to that RSX is a Nvidia derived GPU which Carmack has preferred working on in the past. And which Carmack has much experience with (the GPU the RSX is derived from). I'm willing to bet the PC part the RSX was derived from will have the same limitations.

So long point short. Console CPU no problemo. PC GPU, can't get it to run at speed (currently).

Thus it isn't the console part of the equation they are having trouble with. It's the part that's most identical to PC and the part Carmack is the MOST familiar with, that they are having trouble getting good speed out of.

I'd expect them to get this resolved before release though. Hopefully without sacrificing IQ.

Regards,
SB

 

[Statix]

So despite them being a PC developer RAGE's graphics is running way faster on X360 than on PS3 (both are consoles) despite RSX being basically a modified PC GPU while Xenos isn't? So because they're a PC developer they can't program a PC GPU as well as a console GPU?

It's not that the RSX is a more PC-like GPU than the 360. It's that the 360's GPU is simply faster in some ways, and more progressive/advanced in some ways (where most of its unique architectural traits have made it or will make it into future PC components). A raw GPU speed advantage (in some situations at least) is going to pretty much be immediately obvious and apparent in the benchmarks right from the get-go, and is hard to compensate for early on in development. This raw GPU speed advantage is directly related to some of the advanced eccentricities of the 360's ATI GPU architecture, and it doesn't need much of a programming learning curve or extra coding gruntwork from the developers to manifest itself as in-game, real-world performance..

 

[Gabrobot]

In this case, if iD have been working on AI say and have a target, and find with an implementation that PS3 runs it faster than that target, they'll have a 'high' for PS3, and when asked about development, they may well say (being normal conversational human beings rather than guarded PR specialists), "Oh, we're really pleased with PS3! It munches through AI much faster than the other platforms. It's a great little machine." Then development continues and they hit a brick wall regards PS3 graphics, and are banging their heads trying to get it working. In these cases you always look at your other systems and think, "it was easy on that machine! Why does this one have to be such a pain?! Why can't everything in life be easy?!" Someone then asks how development is going and that frustration can spill over. "Graphics are looking great, but PS3 is really struggling. It's rubbish by comparison. How the hell are we supposed to make this damned box do anything?! Piece of %*!@#." And then another day, they'll find they can do something else, a change to their data structure and memory access patterns, and it'll be all roses again.

I don't think anyone at id has ever made a dramatic comment. They've all been pretty straighforward developer observations. If you're going to get something running on the hardware, you've got to call the problems like you see them so you can deal with them. Ignoring them isn't going to help. It's the fact that these AREN'T PR statements that throws people...they see an honest observation and interpret it like it's a broad statement about the quality of something. Really what Carmack says is really just what he means. If he says the PS3 version isn't running as fast as the 360 version right now in the development process and it's because of X, or he says that the 360's texture compression will be a little higher so technically they won't be quite as good as the PS3's, THEN THAT'S ALL HE MEANS. It doesn't mean that they intend to release a slow game on the PS3, or that he thinks the PS3 sucks, or that the game will look noticeably worse on the 360, or that he thinks that the 360 sucks, or any of that crap. The only difference between id and other developers is most other developers would never be honest enough to say things like that.

 

[patsu]

Moved RAGE discussion starts here

current-and-next-generation-parallelism-in-game -SIGGRAPH 2008 by ID Soft's Jon Olick.
http://s08.idav.ucdavis.edu/olick-current-and-next-generation-parallelism-in-games.pdf

Maybe surprising to some people after seeing "20 fps RAGE we have know" argument,ID Soft really did lots of research on cell processor.

Thanks for the presentation, I saw that last year. Totally forgot about it. Any other presentation specifically on Megatexture + Cell ?

If the job is complex, they need a team of great PS3 programmers throughout the entire project, not just one superstar programmer. Otherwise, they will need to share more with 360 and PC codebase; or may be worse, rely on old PS3 codebase that's outdated and hard to change.

Also, it may not be important whether PS3 is lagging behind 360 in implementation/timeline, it's whether PS3 version is lagging behind its own schedule. They may have sufficiently different pipeline to begin with, especially the SPU parts.