I don't know what you are talking about. Of course the streamed maps are stored in RAM, I suggest you google UE3 and read up on the subject.
Devil May Cry 4 Going Multi-platform! (Xbox 360/PS3/PC) *Confirmed
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
I don't know what you are talking about. Of course the streamed maps are stored in RAM, I suggest you google UE3 and read up on the subject.
I again think it's way too early to be speaking of what PS4/Cell will do vs the competition, because frankly I expect zero chance that the XeCPU simply be scaled up - it must and will be changed.
Cell is positioned to provide an edge this gen, and I expect to see it happen. Cell has a strong benefit going for it, which is that there is a certain class of developer drawn to an architecture like this vs the desktop or something like the XeCPU. And though the publishers will no doubt follow the money - as they should - I feel good about the talent pool of individual programmers that are coalescing around the architecture. The talent pool was a large part of what made PS2 viable at all vs its easier to program competition, and I feel strongly that the PS3 has an equally commited (and more passionate vs PS2) group of individuals working on it. I expect moments of brilliance, and you'll note that although there were many complaints earlier in the gen about the 'difficulty' of the SPEs, after a dev has worked with them for a while, the comments shift mostly to praise.
I am unsure of which of the early mp games were targeted for one of the power current gen systems before porting to the other but there seems to be a great bit of visual evidence that regardless of the initial platform, 360 mp games currently look better. Things will change by the end of this console cycle - which direction, who knows - but current mp trends are getting very noticible.
I think you are misunderstanding me, no problem!:smile:
I meant DVD vs BD and that having more space for unique textures/objects to be used instead of repetitive textures/objects would require more RAM to store them (or cut down on texture resolution/other aspects). Lets say machine A fills it's 512MB with textures and some of the textures are repeated.
Now machine B fills up it's RAM with the same textures and also whant's to use unique textures instead of repeating textures, then the RAM won't be able to hold it and they would have to be cached to the HDD for streamming. On a note Im talking about displaying the textures at the same time in a frame.
I agree with the situation you outlined but I disagree with the results.
Honestly I was expecting a lot more from ps3 devs to this point because of the talent pool they had on their side (see am2 working on vt3 vs .... Sumo Digital). However despite this talent pool, they have yet to outclass anything on xb360. I wouldn't be surprised to see these AAA devs produce some amazing games come the end of the cycle that will outclass the xb360's offerings. However I also would not be surprised to see the opposite occur as well.
I wouldn't consider Carmack table scraps - for example.
Regarding the future of the xb cpu: I agree it is too soon to call and I said as much in my post, but as it is Sony has the answer for ps4 and it scales well, it's a non-issue for them. What MS and N answer with is the wild card and how far Sony push the arch and when they all time their launches.
No problem, you are probably missunderstanding me as well, because I am talking about disk constrained data not RAM constrained data.
The only advantage a larger disk could have over a machine with identical (more available) ram is add more varied data, not more detailed data.
Things like more levels etc.
The same could be said but in reference to the Sega Saturn architecture for its time and talent surrounding it. Regardless of the technical potential of a system if there isn't a strong revenue incentive the corporate moneyhats will put their most talented on the most financially viable platform. Thats even more true now then it ever has been due to the rising dev costs. I can't predict the future of the console war but talent usually follows the money. The xbox1 had amazing potential with it's time with a more powerful GPU, larger Ram, and included HD but 90% of its games were near identical to their ps2 version.
So, you were expecting the PS3 to outclass the 360 four months into its launch? Because I know you cannot be serious.
The AAA devs haven't released anything as yet; let's wait and see. It's all we can do anyway.
We where talking about different things!
But the UE3 and the new engine from ID (Quake Wars?) use seamingless streamming from HDD to RAM to avoid stutters/loading of a whole map/level in real-time. This will avoid "loading next-level" or pauses inbetween sections of the map/level. I think I got it right now or?:smile:
Just look at the early PS2 games and you'll realize this doesn't mean much
. The tools are better, but if it takes developers 3 years to reach the potential of the platform instead of 5, Sony is still teh doomed. Even if nAo, DeanoC and the rest of the (no doubt talented) guys working for Sony get strapped to IV caffeine systems and never have a moment of sleep for the next several years, Sony can't muscle through on their first-party studios alone.Examples such as this (VT3) are a bit disturbing IMO. I don't have time to dig right now but there are at least 10 mp games that were targeted to the PS3, developed by a superior dev (at least a historically superior dev) and outclassed by the rooks who ported and tweaked the 360 version. I can't say I like or dislike this trend. It just is, and is very noticible.
SEGA didn't have the internal studio operation that Sony did, however, and Sony actively funds many projects that other companies consider quirky or risky; devs who want to follow a 'dream' with their creation benefit in that regard if they secure Sony as their publisher. Their entire EDI setup right now is devoted to encouraging such in fact, with only original IPs receiving funding from Sony themselves. Further though, I wasn't speakign to dev houses being drawn towards Cell, but rather the individual programmer. During Saturn's day when J-devs ruled supreme, J-culture also was in effect. Great gaming culture, but the work culture reflected the lifetime employment paradigm of the day, and if your company was not doing Saturn, then neither were you. But in the more Western-centric model at play now, and with a lot of console talent now in Western countries, you'll see devs leave their present job to go work somewhere else - be it for money, location, or... yes, some will do it for the architecture/programming.
Let's take Heavenly Sword as an example: Sony funded it when no one else would, and Marco went to join the Ninja Theory team to work on PS3 (he was working on a multiplatformer in Italy at the time). So here we see one real-world example - and very tangible on B3D in particular due to Ninja Theory's presence here - of not only a title many are looking forward to, but certainly a capable developer as well coming over to Sony due a) to a risk-taking culture, and b) an architecture that some devs indeed do find 'exciting.'
The LionHead splinter faction that joined up with Sony and became MediaMolecule (of LittleBigPlanet fame) is of course another example of concentrated talent seeking 'liberal' project constraints.
XBox is a system where that 10% of games that weren't identical came later in its life, as the general excitement around the console grew. Halo 2 I'll mark without hesitation as a turning point across both consumer and developer opinion of the console. And if XBox had lasted longer, you would see that the trends of early XBox life would have naturally started to undo themselves anyway; but the box was killed early to ride that wave into the 360 launch, and I think that makes sense. But I *do* think there is a marked difference between the XBox 'atmosphere' pre and post Halo 2.
Last edited by a moderator:
So, you were expecting the PS3 to outclass the 360 four months into its launch? Because I know you cannot be serious.
The AAA devs haven't released anything as yet; let's wait and see. It's all we can do anyway.
Insomniac != AAA dev team?
xbd - I'm shocked and horrified you would say such a thing!
An oversight on your part for sure.
No I was talking mostly about the lack of impressive games in the works. (that I have seen)
I was seriously concerned for xb360 in this regard and posted as much in the "Are PS3 devs aiming higher?" thread. I suppose e3 will shed some light on things.
btw - if ps2 devs had "crap" for dev kits at first and ps3 dev kits are much further along than their ps2 counterparts, how are we to expect a "larger" increase in quality in games on ps3 vs ps2?
And to answer your "canot be serious" question: Yes! I am! They had dev kits that more closely resembled the final product than xb360 did and earlier to boot. Add the AAA dev talent and why would I not assume/expect this? Now ... as if that were not enough we also had the generally accepted "fact" that ps3 completely outclassed xb360 hardware. Now can you tell me why this formula would not add up to clearly more impressive games at this point?
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are constrained by the disk size you may need to cut down on the detail level as well.
I am not saying this will happen this year or next year, but I think it is far to soon to rule out that this scenario may occur a few years from now.
"So, you were expecting the PS3 to outclass the 360 four months into its launch? Because I know you cannot be serious"
Why not, the Xbox outclassed the PS2 graphics wise on launch day and never let up during last gen. If the PS3 is truly so much more powerful like Sony and some people here claim why is it having a problem showing that?
Why is it lagging behind graphically? At this point it's not even pulling up equal to the 360 in multi-plat games and currently nothing the PS3 has matched Gears. I've also not seen a PS3 game that had the textures of Kameo which is over 1 year old.
Why not, the Xbox outclassed the PS2 graphics wise on launch day and never let up during last gen. If the PS3 is truly so much more powerful like Sony and some people here claim why is it having a problem showing that?
Why is it lagging behind graphically? At this point it's not even pulling up equal to the 360 in multi-plat games and currently nothing the PS3 has matched Gears. I've also not seen a PS3 game that had the textures of Kameo which is over 1 year old.
Last edited by a moderator:
scooby_dooby
Legend
Xbox showed it's superior power on day 1 when it launched with Halo. I was so impressed when I played it, I sold my PS2 weeks later and bought an Xbox, that's saying something. The power was obviously there, and it still took years for multiplatform dev's to really tap it, even then it was relatively poor use of the HW.
Now, PS3. Thing is, it's not really even close to having such a large advantage in power, not only does it have 64mb less useable RAM, and better dev tools and documentation, but the 360's GPU seems at this point to be superior.
So, comparisons to the original Xbox are really not very valid here. There is no clear cut more powerful system. It will probably take xplatform Dev's a very long time to do anything remarkeable with CELL, and these games are where MS's strong dev support will really help.
1st party is where it's at, I want to see the games DeanoC talks about where an entire engine is built around the SPU's, then I agree we might really see something where you can say "wow, now that's a PS3 game"
ps - Anyone who's saying 90% of the games looked the same on Xbox as PS2 is wrong imo. You could tell they were ports, but they almost always looked and ran better.
Last edited by a moderator:
I see your point but with xb360 being the lead plat and the lead userbase (of the two) I don't see this being a problem devs will run into. They will fit the game to single dvd or multiple dvd's.
Also remember that it was easier for devs to understand that system as well.
For devs and publishers in the end what the mainstream in the end thinks will matter more. Last Gen many mainstream gamers couldn't tell the difference between the two graphically without having the console out in front of them. This Gen with things being closer then what they were last gen I expect much of the same from the mainstream.
I don't know, would you consider Insomniac a AAA dev team? I mean... what determines that? They're way up there for sure, but... I fguess for me I've not considered them to be in the very top class as yet. anyway I know their new engine director though, and he's got skillz.
Not sure if that'll play out in time for the first Ratchet and Clank, but I do indeed expect some strong efforts.btw - if ps2 devs had "crap" for dev kits at first and ps3 dev kits are much further along than their ps2 counterparts, how are we to expect a "larger" increase in quality in games on ps3 vs ps2?
The entirety of Cell development is a work in progress, across all fields it participates in. As the programming model gains traction and an increasingly diverse code base develops, you will indeed see performance increase, and the range of tasks that performance can be applied to expand. Tools at the moment are geared more towards encouraging utilization period; the road of optimization is still a long one.
And to answer your "canot be serious" question: Yes! I am! They had dev kits that more closely resembled the final product than xb360 did and earlier to boot. Add the AAA dev talent and why would I not assume/expect this? Now ... as if that were not enough we also had the generally accepted "fact" that ps3 completely outclassed xb360 hardware. Now can you tell me why this formula would not add up to clearly more impressive games at this point?
Sure, that's fair enough for you to say.
For the record though, I don't think (and haven't said) that PS3 outclasses 360 in such a blanket way; I say only that Cell outlclasses the XeCPU. I know it seems like splitting hairs... but it's important hair to split!
Similar threads
