ATI - PS3 is Unrefined

[Sis]

Ok, while I know we've progressed a long way since this remark and I'm not actually adding anything to it, I just had to comment because the sucker keeps giving me the giggle-fits.

Usually the only "sperm donation" remarks I hear lobbed out come when talking about Hentai titles...

LMAO.

You'd think it'd be the only time "sperm donation" had been used at B3d. But it's not

.Sis

 

[mckmas8808]

Just because someone decided to implement it doesn't mean it's a good idea, or that it will sell well.

Doesn't matter people have to take risk. If companies didn't take risk then we wouldn't have some of the great things in games that we do today.

 

[Powderkeg]

Doesn't matter people have to take risk. If companies didn't take risk then we wouldn't have some of the great things in games that we do today.

And when you take big risks, you sell yourself to Sammy.


Risk taking in business is rarely desirable from a business point of view. Usually, if you are taking big risks, it's because your business is in risk of going under.

 

[Brimstone]

Dual-screen support on PS3 will require a jury-rigged second display which few but the most extreme of gamers are likely to go to the effort for. Supporting two screens for multiplayer could be good and something players might ocassionally go to the effort to set up, but for most uses a second screen isn't going to add anything except workload for the developers.

How is workload being increased in any signifigant way? The data already exists in the game already. All that needs to be done is to enable the data to be shown on a second screen, so the person playing the game has an easier time comparing the data the game is already using.

Say I'm want to do a trade with a team in a Major League Baseball game. I have my pro team, along with Triple A, Double A, and Single A minor league teams. Thats 4 teams filled with players just on my side alone. Now double that when looking at the other organization. Now taking into account overall batting average, home runs, doubles and such. Take into account batting average vs. left handers compared to right handers, Salary, contract length, age, injuries, and so on. It would be nice to glance back and forth between the two screens to make an informed decision without the hassle of sub menu's.

Games that have a level of micro-managment contain data that impacts the game. The second display just makes things a bit easier when making informed decisions. No one is asking for new data to be created for dual display use. All thats being advocated is the PS3 may allow for dual display support, so it would be nice if developers would allow the option for more data to be shown via a second display. I can't see this requiring much work at all.

 

[mckmas8808]

I thought this two screen stuff is suppose to be embedded inside the OS?

 

[Sis]

And when you take big risks, you sell yourself to Sammy.


Risk taking in business is rarely desirable from a business point of view. Usually, if you are taking big risks, it's because your business is in risk of going under.

Mckmas has a valid point, especially if supporting dual-HDMI adds a trivial hardware cost.

I honestly believe it's a useless addition, but if a few games make use of it, and it doesn't increase the cost, and it's a risk by Sony that perhaps devs will find a unique use for it, then what's the big deal?

.Sis

 

[Powderkeg]

How is workload being increased in any signifigant way? The data already exists in the game already. All that needs to be done is to enable the data to be shown on a second screen, so the person playing the game has an easier time comparing the data the game is already using.

So, all you have to do is reprogram the screens to be output to a different display than they are in a single-display environment, resize them to ensure they fill the whole screen, and reporgram them to be persistent and updated in real-time during gameplay rather, but you are going to manage this without actually working?

Good luck on achieving that.

 

[mckmas8808]

So, all you have to do is reprogram the screens to be output to a different display than they are in a single-display environment, resize them to ensure they fill the whole screen, and reporgram them to be persistent and updated in real-time during gameplay rather, but you are going to manage this without actually working?

Good luck on achieving that.

Again isn't some of this stuff going to be built into the OS? Maybe the devs have directions/papers on how to do some of this stuff. Just maybe.

 

[expletive]

Mckmas has a valid point, especially if supporting dual-HDMI adds a trivial hardware cost.

I honestly believe it's a useless addition, but if a few games make use of it, and it doesn't increase the cost, and it's a risk by Sony that perhaps devs will find a unique use for it, then what's the big deal?

.Sis

Theres no big deal. My original post about dual HDMI was that it was a tip-off that RSX was based on a PC part. The reason i said this wasbecause, imo, it wasnt likely Sony would include dual displays on their list of requirements if they were building a display part from scratch.

The debate ensued and i guess we're debating that its not a tip-off that the RSX is a G70, and that Sony could have really thought this was necessary and included it in a potential 'custom' graphics chip.

 

[expletive]

Again isn't some of this stuff going to be built into the OS? Maybe the devs have directions/papers on how to do some of this stuff. Just maybe.

I cant see how anything really evolutionary in dual screen gaming will eb part of the OS, these are gameplay elements you guys keep coming up with, not some sort of simple dashboard like XBL.

 

[Tap In]

... My original post about dual HDMI was that it was a tip-off that RSX was based on a PC part. The reason i said this wasbecause, imo, it wasnt likely Sony would include dual displays on their list of requirements if they were building a display part from scratch.

The debate ensued and i guess we're debating that its not a tip off that the RSX is a G70 and that Sony could have really thought this was necessary and included it in a potential 'custom' graphics chip.

ahhh yes back on topic

 

[Powderkeg]

Mckmas has a valid point, especially if supporting dual-HDMI adds a trivial hardware cost.

His point has SOME validity. So does mine.

Changes and risk taking just for the sake of making changes and taking risks rarely works out for the best. Usually, the end result ends up as a hack-job because it wasn't something that was well thought out, planned well, and implemented correctly.

If it was, it wouldn't be much of a risk.

So, considering what we know about the PS3, dual-display requirements, and how often dual-display is implemented in PC games where people are MUCH more likely to have dual displays in the first place, what would you say the odds are that Sony spent a lot of time developing dual-display as an important part of the PS3 and PS3 game design?

I would say chances are pretty remote that it will be anything more than a barely supported hack-job feature. Certainly no developer is going to implement any gameplay-effecting feature using dual-displays that couldn't be reproduced on a single display. They wouldn't want to piss off the majority of their customers by cutting features from their game just to cater to the 5 whole people who have 2 HDTV's in the same room.

 

[Tap In]

Doesn't matter people have to take risk. If companies didn't take risk then we wouldn't have some of the great things in games that we do today.

true, but as has been stated, there really is no risk when they were just keeping what was already built into the Nvidia PC part (dual output) from which the RSX is supposedly derived.

now if you're talking about the devs taking a risk, then I agree.

there are man ideas once thought of as ridiculous that turn out to be "hey, how did we ever live without that" realities.

​

 

[j^aws]

ATI - PS3 is Undefined

Fixed.

And Xenos is a PC part (R400).

Or Xenos is a beta test for R600.

Semantics this thread is.

 

[Sis]

Theres no big deal. My original post about dual HDMI was that it was a tip-off that RSX was based on a PC part. The reason i said this wasbecause, imo, it wasnt likely Sony would include dual displays on their list of requirements if they were building a display part from scratch.

The debate ensued and i guess we're debating that its not a tip-off that the RSX is a G70, and that Sony could have really thought this was necessary and included it in a potential 'custom' graphics chip.

My post was specific to Powder's rant about Sony having to be sold to Samsung because of this risk. His tone was aggressive given the minor thing we were all talking about.

.Sis

 

[_xxx_]

That is a nice effect, but a fake nonetheless.

Does it matter if it produces the same results?

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Does it matter if it produces the same results?

It does not produce the same result, that's why I've called it a fake.

 

[zidane1strife]

Hmmm, one more comment on the Molina demo and SSS on cell. DeanA, will have to come and clarify, but he said one of the ways in which the demo could be improved visually in ps3 realtime game scenes was through the use of improved animation. Obviously it wouldn't improve if the lighting was thrown off and this was barely taxing the 2.4Ghz cell...

 

[Bad_Boy]

It does not produce the same result, that's why I've called it a fake.

Visually, how is the result different? The word fake has such a bad connotation.

 

[expletive]

Fixed.

And Xenos is a PC part (R400).

Or Xenos is a beta test for R600.

Semantics this thread is.

So ATI wil stop support of dual displays with R600?