Kaz Hirai (SCEA) Interview - 1up/EGM
- Thread starter two
- Start date
- Status
Dude, look above... That's already going on IN THIS VERY THREAD!Edge said:
> "Dude, look above... That's already going on IN THIS VERY THREAD!"
This thread is too funny. Every PS3 advantage is a disadvantage.
Sony should remove the usb ports, remove wi-fi, remove 1080p, and remove the network ports (especially that, considering no online service worth mentioning). Opps forgot those standard memory card slots that are also not on X360, remove those also. And of course remove the Blu-ray drive, as it's going to cost a million dollars each.
Dumb down the CPU to three concurrent running threads like the X360 CPU, as no programmer on the planet is ever going to figure out how to make use of EIGHT concurrent running threads on CELL. (note, keyword is concurrent, as X360's CPU cannot run 6 threads at the same time, as CELL can run 8 threads at the same time due to having 8 seperate processors.)
This thread is too funny. Every PS3 advantage is a disadvantage.
Sony should remove the usb ports, remove wi-fi, remove 1080p, and remove the network ports (especially that, considering no online service worth mentioning). Opps forgot those standard memory card slots that are also not on X360, remove those also. And of course remove the Blu-ray drive, as it's going to cost a million dollars each.
Dumb down the CPU to three concurrent running threads like the X360 CPU, as no programmer on the planet is ever going to figure out how to make use of EIGHT concurrent running threads on CELL. (note, keyword is concurrent, as X360's CPU cannot run 6 threads at the same time, as CELL can run 8 threads at the same time due to having 8 seperate processors.)
Tap In said:Nobody is arguing that 1080P is not a nice option (well at least I'm not) but is it feasible to make most games on the PS3 at 1080P
THAT is my question, yet nobody has given a definitive answer. If the devs can not easily produce well playing/looking games at 1080P then the whole fact that the output device supports it is moot. That is why 720P seems like the most productive choice. Xenos can do 1080P also but MS choose to have the output device not support it.
It is difficult to appreciate your viewpoint when in one post, you can say that 1080p is both a "nice option" and "moot". even if the majority of time it will be used only with movies, 1080p is a feature lacking in x360.
At least we agree that there is no definitive answer on feasibility/unfeasibility of games in 1080p, though it is trivial to point out that 720p is easier than 1080p. Developers can choose 1080p, although the cost is uncertain.
Acert93 said:
This comparison is not so shaky - it is 8% difference, after all.
In questioning the validity of using PC benchmarks, your inclusion of Quake 1 as an example, is perplexing. Today's benchmarks for 7800 are DX9, not DX8 that you suggest people have been using.
You are also assuming a static "install base" for HDTV users, by forgetting to mention also Consumer Electronics Association's estimate of 50% prevalence in american households by 2007 (such enthusiasm from CEA).
Even using your "online gaming" analogy, we are comparing 10% of xbox consumers (despite the 215M broadband accounts) against 15% of american households in uptake of HDTV. And you say "HDTV" is less important?
Didn't Deano say he believed that Heavenly Sword would end up being 1080p? So there is one title already. I'll be quite happy if games only looked that good.
Why is it so unbelievable? it isn't as if 1080p goes wasted if it isn't displayed at 1080p -- quite the contrary.
If I can play current gen games at max settings (with a current gen card) at 1600x1200 without any major optimizations, I don't see why people can't expect next gen games to be played at that with a next gen card (especially considering the fact that the metal will be touched quite a bit, unlike in the PC world where you program to the OS more than you do to the metal).
Get off the insanity train.
Worst case we see 720p games. Saying there won't be any 1080p games is silly -- some of you forget that outputting a higher res and down sampling it has benefits (people who only have 720p TVs benefit also).
Why is it so unbelievable? it isn't as if 1080p goes wasted if it isn't displayed at 1080p -- quite the contrary.
If I can play current gen games at max settings (with a current gen card) at 1600x1200 without any major optimizations, I don't see why people can't expect next gen games to be played at that with a next gen card (especially considering the fact that the metal will be touched quite a bit, unlike in the PC world where you program to the OS more than you do to the metal).
Get off the insanity train.
Worst case we see 720p games. Saying there won't be any 1080p games is silly -- some of you forget that outputting a higher res and down sampling it has benefits (people who only have 720p TVs benefit also).
Bobber , its unlikely to me that many devs will use 1080p and waste resources doing it when such a small amount of people have tvs capable of it and it will continue to be like that for a long time .
1080p is a million more pixels than 720p . That is alot of power to spend when such a small amount of people have it .
1080p is a million more pixels than 720p . That is alot of power to spend when such a small amount of people have it .
But those resources at 1080p = AA at lower levels, so they're not 'wasted'. Alternatively HS could be written for 720p and written to have 2x SSAA...
I'm rather skeptical as to what sacrifices have to be made to support 1080p vs. 720p. What difference will be noticeable in the shaders or poly counts? And we don't know how well PS3 handles 1080p in the first place! For all we know, 1080p on PS3 looks 10x better than 720p on XB360!
If PS3 stutters along at 1080p, with low quality, boring shaders, I'll agree. If 720p on PS3 looks weak compared to XB360, because the devs are writing to 1080p instead of 720p, I'll agree. If games written for 720p on PS3 look much better than games written for 1080p but displayed at 720p, I'll agree. Until then, I say good for Sony in providing options for devs to choose from.
I'm rather skeptical as to what sacrifices have to be made to support 1080p vs. 720p. What difference will be noticeable in the shaders or poly counts? And we don't know how well PS3 handles 1080p in the first place! For all we know, 1080p on PS3 looks 10x better than 720p on XB360!
If PS3 stutters along at 1080p, with low quality, boring shaders, I'll agree. If 720p on PS3 looks weak compared to XB360, because the devs are writing to 1080p instead of 720p, I'll agree. If games written for 720p on PS3 look much better than games written for 1080p but displayed at 720p, I'll agree. Until then, I say good for Sony in providing options for devs to choose from.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Qroach said:
Tell me something I don't know. :?
RSX+Cell in a close-boxed environment is very different to G70 + x86 CPU in a PC.
Err you can most likely do 4x fsaa at 720p for less performance than going to 1080p . Remember all your shader work becomes greater at 1080p than 720p . ALso 1080p is not double the res of 720p
1920 x 1080 vs
1280 x 720
To get 2x supersampling at 720p you would need 2560x 1440 renderings to downsample to 720p for 2x super sampling . So its not really 2x and calling that is a bit missleading . Its like a 1.5
Less work per pixel . Less creatures on screen at once , less complex lvls and deisgns
You need more of all kinds of power for 1080p over 720p . There is no getting around that .
Looking at pc games are a bit misleading . Games like half life 2 use very few shaders and very uncomplex shaders , low polygon counts . Its designed to run on dx 8 cards . Even battlefield 2 runs on a radeon 8500 . You have 500$ cards , 1000 dual card set ups that are running games that are designed around 50$ video cards or worse yet cards that aren't even sold anymore
Qroach said:
So... What is the argument? (I really don't know who this was directed at anymore, but I'll try to answer it anyways)
That they won't support it because they don't have to? and people don't have TV to support it? While those both are fairly valid points, they aren't conclusive in discrediting the viability of 1080p.
It is the developers choice (as has been said, not every developer will want to use it) -- not every game needs a billion lines of shader code to make it look pretty, so it'll be usable (not every game is made to push the limits of shaders -- it is stupid to assume this). Heavenly sword looks beautiful and apparently it can handle 1080p -- if a game that looks like that can run 1080p then why is it automatically assumed that 1080p is impractical? Not every game is going to require UE3 style pixel shaders to portray the feel of the game properly. It depends on the game -- not every game will push the pixel pipelines to the limit, so doubling the pixels might not be as bad of an impact as it seems.
Can any of you say that every game made on PS3/Xbox360 will be limited in the same way? Because this seems to be the common thinking against 1080p -- Shader limited things will need to do 2x the work, and thus not work! If a game isn't pixel pusher limited there is no reason for a developer not to look at 1080p as a viable option... It is the choice of the developer to weigh both sides -- 720p can have more shiny stuff happening and 1080p looks better.
Outputting at 1080p has a very real benefit even if your tv only accepts 720p -- so it isn't wasted. It doesn't matter how small amount of people have 1080p TVs -- the option would have been chosen because it was possible, not because people have 1080p TVs. Why would a company make a game at 720p if it ran fine at 1080p? That has nothing to do with how many people have 1080p TVs.
So, now what is there to argue about?.
On a side note: I don't see any reason that Xenos couldn't output at 1080p (outside of the output chip that doesn't support it) -- PS3 supporting 1080p doesn't necessarily mean it is more powerful, it just has more resolution options for developers to play with. While every Xbox360 game will have to play at 720p (or 1080i, essentially the same), PS3 gives developers the option (if their game isn't limited) to play at 1080p. How anyone can bash this is absurd.
If your GPU supports MSAA at HDR. But regardless of the costs, the question is does it matter? Are the visuals at 1080p on a PS3 that much inferior to 720p images that devs would be better off supporting the lower res?jvd said:
Having seen HS I can't say I'm desperately disappointed at a lack of creature on screen
At the moment you're only specualting that 1080p will look worse and so it's a waste of time, but maybe that's not the case? if it's a choice between 10 baddies at 1080p and 20 at 720p, I'd hate to see 1080p used. But if it's a difference between 500 and 600 baddies, who cares?!But it's not wasted as you called it. Maybe it could be used more efficiently, but if the games still look amazing at 1080p, how much more difference would it make targetting 720p instead. Lets take HS as a real-world example. What could be done differently to beneft that game now if they dropped from a 1080 image? Especially when the game engine has been expanded to fully use the Cell.
What you're saying is Sony shouldn't have provided the option of 1080p, but why not? Why not let developers decide how to use the hardware? Maybe games will suffer at 1080p and devs will instead produce 720p? But I can also see some games with simpler graphics benefitting. Cartoon shaded games at 1080p will have exceptional clarity. For me and my EU fellows, we'll get the same game downsampled to PAL with AA and still get a very realistic cartoon look. Even though the XB360 could manage the same rendering, 60 fps at 1080p cartoon shaded, MS haven't the option to let developers use that, despite presumably little extra cost. Even if only 2% of PS3 owners ever see 1080p, the cost to enable it is negligable so why not let them get the most of their TVs? And in 4 years time, maybe a TV tech will provide 1080p sets to Europe to replace our SDTV sets, providing a larger user base? What is wrong with the option and safeguarding against unknown future developments?
- Status
