scatteh316
Newcomer
Has he even worked with PS3 long enough to come to that conclusion, or has he even worked on PS3??
ITAGAKI Clarifies X360 More Powerful Than PS3 in Interview Pt. 2
- Thread starter aldo
- Start date
Black Dragon37
Newcomer
Sounds like he has, hence his "complicated architecture" statement.scatteh316 said:
But then again, he could've just looked at the released documents of the Cell chip from Sony, Toshiba or IBM's websites.
scatteh316 said:
Well he has access to kits undoubtedly. If he has worked with them, his current feelings on the issue aren't difficult to understand if you're placing a high value on the dev environment, the middleware etc. I would say the tools you get with PS3 right now are fairly bare-bones - a lot of the middleware, the ProDG stuff etc. won't be arriving till next month, officially at least.
aldo said:
Dude, read blackjedi´s post. He believes PS3 is the most powerfull system, he just likes X360 better, for some reason.
Why is Itagaki so suddenly using easu of use as an arguement to choose a system over another? He publisized himself as a pursuer of technology, that the most powerfull console would get his games and no ammount of difficulty would deviate him from developing on the most powerfull hardware, so why the sudden change?
Simple, he is relevant to MS, to Sony he isn´t. In the Sony PS3 plattform, he has to contend with many other franchises that are simply better than what he produces. DOA found an audience on Xbox, he´s not about to leave the people that made DOA something to be recognized as something more than digital babes in mini skirts fighting. What about Ninja Gaiden? Heh, he´ll have plenty on his hands just trying to compete with DMC, and now he doesn´t even have the benefit of better hardware, so chances are it won´t play as good, and won´t even look as good.
Now, don´t get me wrong, his action games are pretty damn good, but ultimately politics determined who got his games, since it seems PS3 really is stronger hardware.
You are asking him to answer a meaningless question for him. He put it into a context that has meaning.Titanio said:
What he is saying is the question is irrelevant from his view point, but he proceedes to frame the question correctly (in his opinion) and then answers it. You disagree with his answer and with his perspective. Considering he is a developer, and his answer makes sense (which gaming platform is the most powerful for making games, from TN's perspective of course) I think his answer has a lot of substance, whereas your insistance on a meaningly answer does not.Itagaki said:
I think we have all been asked questions, either-or type questions, that are irrelevant. In court this is called leading a witnesses. I already gave the race car anecdote--answers have a context. To badger someone because their answer with a context indicates special pleading IMO.
I am not laughing at that comment because it is funny. The fact you would toss that in shows how little value you are actually associating with his comments. They are not flippant excuses or comments!As for subjectivity--of course a developers position is subjective. But it is subjective in the way it counts: The product. Your view of "powerful" is extremely subjective as well, but the difference is your abstraction of power is meaningless. For example, a P4 is MUCH more powerful than an AMD64 in regards to theoretical power. But architecturally the AMD64 is more effecient and therefore more powerful--statistics and theoretical peaks be damned.
How hard is it to understand, from a developers POV, that "hardware power abstractions" have any real world relevance? Software development is a dance between the hardware (theoretical power, architecture, etc), the software (tools, design technologies), and product goal.
I am submitting any question outside that framework is completely irrelevant.
Sigh... no, you are wrong. First, "power" is completely relative to task.
P4 > CELL
P4 > Athlon
CELL > Athlon
CELL > P4
Athlon > CELL
Athlon > P4
Every single one of those statements are true of "What is more powerful". So how do we even begin to measure what is the most powerful?
I think anyone familiar with hardware understands that "power" is always relative to your goal. There is no question that someone who is developing intense AI will consider the strengths of a hardware platform differently than someone creating intense Physics. Context. Perspective.
And yes, when talking about power, talking about the ability to abstract that power (read: software) is just as relevant.
Asking a developer to separate the two is special pleading. The natural response is to answer the question in regards to the work being done and how it is done. Asking someone to separate the two is VERY subjective because it no longer is an answer based on an informed opinion but are forcing them to extrapolate a position that is unnatural.
Q: "What brand of toothpaste is best at removing plaque without a toothbrush"
A:"I don't know--I always use a toothbrush and would never consider not using my toothbrush. But brand X is better at removing plaque with a tooth brush".
Asking someone to remove a realistic context is odd and meaningless.A:"I don't know--I always use a toothbrush and would never consider not using my toothbrush. But brand X is better at removing plaque with a tooth brush".
The problem is you are assuming there is any one metric for determining power. Which of course is not true.
Itagaki gave a response to his position on power. As a game developer, Team Ninja believes the Xbox 360 is most powerful game creating hardware next gen. Depending on the team and design goals that answer may vary.
My guess is we'll only see which console has the most potential when the 2nd and 3rd generation games come out. The first generation will probably consist in most part of clumsy attempts at multithreading in both platforms.
Perhaps the aclaimed steeper learning curve and less evolved middleware of the PS3 will have it's rewards a few years from now. Or not. Only time will tell.
Perhaps the aclaimed steeper learning curve and less evolved middleware of the PS3 will have it's rewards a few years from now. Or not. Only time will tell.
Acert -
A couple of points:
- the simple point of hardware power meant a lot to Itagaki previously, and something tells me he wouldn't be "framing" his answer in a different context if X360 was more powerful
- I do think that ultimately the points he makes are somewhat moot if we accept that both these systems are going to be "tapped" over their lifetimes (and I think that's a very very reasonable expectation).
- As mentioned by others before, while we debate all of this, probably none of this was actually a guiding factor in Itagaki's decision making anyway.
A couple of points:
- the simple point of hardware power meant a lot to Itagaki previously, and something tells me he wouldn't be "framing" his answer in a different context if X360 was more powerful
- I do think that ultimately the points he makes are somewhat moot if we accept that both these systems are going to be "tapped" over their lifetimes (and I think that's a very very reasonable expectation).
- As mentioned by others before, while we debate all of this, probably none of this was actually a guiding factor in Itagaki's decision making anyway.
Acert93 said:
Oh, come on Acert, do you REALLY believe this works out that way? Do you actually believe in that? Don´t you think that a little bit of politics, fanbase and MS´s relationships play a part on this? To me it´s quite clear why Itagaki stuck with MS, he matters to them. All this talk of requirements, perspectives, etc are excuses in my opinion.
He was asked which hardware was better, he responded PS3. The reason he chose X360 is not really related to this.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Don't some die-hards still claim that the PS2 was more powerful than XBOX because it had higher theoretical specs, and claim that after 6 years it still has never been fully utilized?
The power of the Hardware is all relative to the developers ability to EXTRACT that power, so nothing has changed in Itagaki stance since the measure of power has always been the amount they can realistically use rather than theoretcial maximum.
(Theoretical Max) x (Percentage of Power my dev team can extract) = final power. It NEVER been based solely on theoretical specs, NEVER!
it's all relative the knowledge and capabilities of that particular dev, but at the same time cases there's usually a common concensus among MOST people about which console has the most useable power.
Like co-Re said, we'll have to discuss again in 2 or 3 years, when we can compare cross-platform ports, and AAA titles....
The power of the Hardware is all relative to the developers ability to EXTRACT that power, so nothing has changed in Itagaki stance since the measure of power has always been the amount they can realistically use rather than theoretcial maximum.
(Theoretical Max) x (Percentage of Power my dev team can extract) = final power. It NEVER been based solely on theoretical specs, NEVER!
it's all relative the knowledge and capabilities of that particular dev, but at the same time cases there's usually a common concensus among MOST people about which console has the most useable power.
Like co-Re said, we'll have to discuss again in 2 or 3 years, when we can compare cross-platform ports, and AAA titles....
I don't get why you ignored the part where Itagaki says, "firmware"? YOU added the "easier" part, seemingly in order to frame the debate the way you want to frame it.Titanio said:
If the power of a system is an aggregate of its system specs, it's firmware, and its middleware--which is what Itagaki says--then why do you assume that Itagaki is only concerned with the middleware part (the "ease of development" part)?
.Sis
You know, I don't remember this type of questioning when SN Systems made similar comments in favor of the PS3 in Edge Magazine (only to find out a month later they had been aquired by Sony).Almasy said:
Of course political affiliations are relevant to the topic, but then call it what it is: You reject what he says because you believe he is in MS's pocket.
On the other hand I have not affirmed or disagreed with his comments--I think he knows a lot more about his games than I do and I will leave it up to him to decide what is best and more powerful for him and Team Ninja. Further, the 1UP.com question is completely moot; surprisingly Itagaki gives a thoughtful response. If he was in MS's pocket he would have said, "Of course it is!" Just note the CoD2 developers excitement over Xenos (which may be real or not).
Xbox f@nboys are going to dance a gig and feel good about this quote.
Sony f@nboys are going to find every reason they can to dismantle and discredit his claim.
And the rest of us are sitting here
Without a context power is irrelevant. Itagaki spoke up: Xbox 360 is more powerful for him and Team Ninja. Whether that is true or BS who cares.Down the road 2 or 3 years from now we will get a much clearer picture of the issue. It will be decided by what devs create, not what they say. Until then feel free to bash him or praise him. Personally I have never played his games but I respect the fact he makes good games (based on reviews) and that he gives thoughtful replies. Doesn't mean they are right, but when Carmak, Newell, Itagaki, Miyamoto, Suzuki, etc... speak I think it is relevant within the context of their business model. They don't speak for the entire industry, but what they say carries weight and also should be viewed as their companies position.
Sis said:
Without specifics on what the firmware is doing for him, it's a little hard to quantify its contribution, no? Regardless, it's not something that is considered in the normal context of debate over "power". The context I have applied of it being "easier" comes from this and his previous comment as to why he preferred X360, I don't think it's a misleading one.
And scooby - very few people would argue PS2 was more powerful than Xbox. It was not theoretically more powerful than Xbox either. People point at the flop difference on the CPU side, and claim it's the exact same with PS3 and X360, but that's highly ignorant for reasons already explained a zillion times.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say, as is often the case, 'power' is a subjective term with different default definitions to different readers. Some would use the term 'most powerful' to mean greatest peak possibilities. Another might us 'most powerful' to mean that with the most attainable performance.
People are looking too closely at English sentences (and translations into) which are, by the nature of human communications, ambiguous. With Itagaki's comments on the matter is clear that he, personally, likes the power he can get out of XB360. That's what he's said, ergo that's all there is to read. People read between the lines a bit too much IMO and end up imagining things that aren't there.
To methe only relevance of these statements are the contrast with Itagaki's previous comments on hardware where he suggested difficulty was no object. Seems he's wised up and now appreciates that there's more to a console then just max performance. If your wasting time with complex systems to achieve what's easier on another 'less powerful' platform, you may as well just switch (all other things being equal) and save yourself a lot of bother"
People are looking too closely at English sentences (and translations into) which are, by the nature of human communications, ambiguous. With Itagaki's comments on the matter is clear that he, personally, likes the power he can get out of XB360. That's what he's said, ergo that's all there is to read. People read between the lines a bit too much IMO and end up imagining things that aren't there.
To methe only relevance of these statements are the contrast with Itagaki's previous comments on hardware where he suggested difficulty was no object. Seems he's wised up and now appreciates that there's more to a console then just max performance. If your wasting time with complex systems to achieve what's easier on another 'less powerful' platform, you may as well just switch (all other things being equal) and save yourself a lot of bother"
Titanio said:
I think the weakness in his position is that middleware, dev kits, and programming environments can be updated over a consoles life, while the hardware will remain static. If he is basing his comments atleast in part on the programming environment, will he be willing to change his opinion should Sony's dev environment become much more stable (say when the PS3 is closer to being released)?
I would have had more respect for his opinion had he talked about the edram on the xbox360 allowing for 4X antialiasing while the PS3 would be hampered, or if he would have talked about concurancy or data dependency issues being easier to deal with due to the way Xenon is implementated. I could even understand his position more if Sony appeared to have a really bad software development plan. Sony seems to be making a lot of good moves in this regard though. Signing on nVidia, Havoc, and the others was definately a good move.
Nite_Hawk
Sure it is. The quality of firmware would seem to directly apply to power--if the firmware sucks, so will system performance. (Of course, that's if his definition of firmware and mine are in sync--that is, a small bit of software that directly interacts with the hardware as an abstraction for software running ontop the platform.)Titanio said:
It seems to me, though, that any comparison of software-related aspects of the two systems is completely unbalanced: the Xbox 360's software SHOULD be further along, and better, and faster, etc.
.Sis
Similar threads
- Locked
