Look at this Google-cached (pulled down) PlayStation 3 page
- Thread starter Panajev2001a
- Start date
I am trembling with anticipation at the quality of geometry for the next gen. we've seen texture, filtering IQ etc... increases to levels that considered HQ (often near CG levels), but I'm still waiting for geometry to catch up (I don't care if it's bump, diplacement mapping, Trueform whatever). JUST NO MORE OBVIOUSE EDGES ON MODELS PLS!!!
/rant over
/rant over
Paul said:
True, but the hope is that the bar will be raised significantly enough that even the developer who doesn't exert himself due to any number of issues will at the bare minimum be on a much higher plateu than current PS2.
Which is why PlayStation3, unlike the other two consoles, is so fricking cool. It's basically the only wildcard in the game as XBox Next is basically PC-centric and will scale pretty linearly with current PC trends, and Nintendo5 or whatever it's called is restrained by Nintendo's will (although I'm looking forward to it).
Yea, I had just bought Shenmue 2 for Xbox a few days ago. The enviornments IMO are the most detailed city enviornments in a game EVER, utterly gorgeous, my god the detail that must have went into this.
But take a look at the characters.. Low polygon, square hands, screwed up bodies. It's a DC port is why but I'm just saying, the texture work is actually rather fine, just if the polygon counts were upped the characters would look sooo much better. An example as to how polygons can make things look way better.
So yes, I VERY much so also anticipate the geometry next gen. Looking at todays games though.. it's just not really there, alot of square things especially in the enviornments.
But take a look at the characters.. Low polygon, square hands, screwed up bodies. It's a DC port is why but I'm just saying, the texture work is actually rather fine, just if the polygon counts were upped the characters would look sooo much better. An example as to how polygons can make things look way better.
So yes, I VERY much so also anticipate the geometry next gen. Looking at todays games though.. it's just not really there, alot of square things especially in the enviornments.
Yea, I was just going to include the bit about PS3 polygon numbers being so high that even a "low" poly game would look all round.
I agree with you Vince, PS3 is going to be awesome stuff. PS2 was really advanced for its time, only set back by a Rasterizer which had great specs, but not so great IQ and features or VRAM. But still pumping out visuals that amaze(SH3, ZOE2)
Obviously Sony isn't going to make this same mistake twice, and with the rumours saying that Nvidia will be helping them(I think for the tools) that only further makes ps3 into the "miracle machine" as NVDA's ceo called it.
Call me a fan-boy but I think ps3 is going to kick ass.
I agree with you Vince, PS3 is going to be awesome stuff. PS2 was really advanced for its time, only set back by a Rasterizer which had great specs, but not so great IQ and features or VRAM. But still pumping out visuals that amaze(SH3, ZOE2)
Obviously Sony isn't going to make this same mistake twice, and with the rumours saying that Nvidia will be helping them(I think for the tools) that only further makes ps3 into the "miracle machine" as NVDA's ceo called it.
Call me a fan-boy but I think ps3 is going to kick ass.
I feel more secure with PC technology, IMHO. 
I mean, sure it does not evolve drastically, but more of a steady progression. PC might not produce out-of-this-world 3D in a flash, but we know it is going to have pretty 3D along the way.
The slow step up of DXs, the different type of chipsets/boards, ATi vs Nvidia vs Matrox, and realworld usuage. We can be assured that there are significant tweaks with every passing hardware.
PS3 is indeed the wildcard. Crazy 3D out of the blue? I give it a 50-50...? I feel uneasy with it, very powerful cpus, different approach, pixel for polygons as ATi Orton guy said. I seriously hope Sony do get Nvidia's input on the GPU.
Can powerful multipurpose CPUs really out-do specialized GPUs?
I mean, sure it does not evolve drastically, but more of a steady progression. PC might not produce out-of-this-world 3D in a flash, but we know it is going to have pretty 3D along the way.
The slow step up of DXs, the different type of chipsets/boards, ATi vs Nvidia vs Matrox, and realworld usuage. We can be assured that there are significant tweaks with every passing hardware.
PS3 is indeed the wildcard. Crazy 3D out of the blue? I give it a 50-50...? I feel uneasy with it, very powerful cpus, different approach, pixel for polygons as ATi Orton guy said. I seriously hope Sony do get Nvidia's input on the GPU.
Can powerful multipurpose CPUs really out-do specialized GPUs?
chaphack said:
What do you mean by multipurpose CPUs ?
I don't consider the CPUs (Cells) in PS3 to be general purpose CPUs, certainly the EE in PS2 is also not a general purpose CPU.
General purpose CPUs do not need that powerful vector SIMD units.
And the PC GPUs are converging to a more flexible architectures than hardwired ones.
I don't think there is anything significant from Nvidia on the pure hardware side, software may be the only significant resources from Nvidia IMHO.
There are many smart/great guys/companies in the world, Nvidia is just another big brand name with money and marketshare.
The PC 3D is not exactly moving towards PS3 approach. We are still gonna have an Intel/AMD CPU coupled with a GPU. PC 3D will still work on the finer parts of 3D with nifty shaders and all, while PS3(like PS2) is more brute polygons with fancy filter effects. Best put was ATi Orton who once said Sony's work differs from what ATi is gonna do.
I mean, will Sony/IBM/Tosh hit it right with the next generation 3D features? PS2 was terrible in that aspect, and the worse thing was Kutaragi actually thought it was cutting edge back then. Nvidia could be a big help.
I mean, will Sony/IBM/Tosh hit it right with the next generation 3D features? PS2 was terrible in that aspect, and the worse thing was Kutaragi actually thought it was cutting edge back then. Nvidia could be a big help.
Riddlewire
Regular
Vince said:
I was unaware that MS and Nintendo had finalized and published specs for their next systems. I'd very much like to take a look at them, if you wouldn't mind pointing me in the direction of the press releases.
chaphack said:
Chap, I think what was ment by that comment (infact, I know) was that the PC IHV's upcomming products are all moving in the direction of full programmability. Gone are the fixed-function pipes of DX7/8 and before - and instead you'll see more achitecture that are almost Cell-lite if you will in that they have unified shading logic and are built around a plurality of computational units that are plastic in their usage.
Unless, you can explain to me what the architectural difference between the NV3x's TCL front-end and an APU (oversimplified, but it gets the point across).
Well, I know for a fact that as far back as Oct of 2002 (and obviously before) Microsoft had sent out it's preliminary tenders and tech overview to the vendors. Even without going into the realm of how I know what and who told me, I think it's obvious that as you get within the 2 year mark, your starting to focus your vendors and specifications in dramatically.
Unless you think it's still totally in the air - but I think you know better.
chaphack said:
So, you are associating PS3 with flexible architectures, I didn't say that.
And I didn't say flexible approach means CPU+GPU fused together. The current trend is the GPUs are being more and more flexible than the traditional hardwired approach.
PS3 main CPU is Cell, its VPU is also Cell based, PS3 is not like PS2 with the EE and a GS.
BTW, features of PS2 was fixed very long ago, I think it was very reasonable during that period of time. I won't compare features of an old PC with the current ones and say the old one is terrible, because it was good back then.
ah so you don't agree witht he philospy of design behind PS3, that's fine although I should point out that "more brute polygons with fancy filter effects" is oversimplying it a stretch here. since the PS3 should be a superset of feature of current GPU's.
corerction PS2 was terrible in texture operations and IQ. everthing else is pretty sound tho btch to get working.
chaphack said:I feel more secure with PC technology, IMHO.
I mean, sure it does not evolve drastically, but more of a steady progression. PC might not produce out-of-this-world 3D in a flash, but we know it is going to have pretty 3D along the way.
The slow step up of DXs, the different type of chipsets/boards, ATi vs Nvidia vs Matrox, and realworld usuage. We can be assured that there are significant tweaks with every passing hardware.
PS3 is indeed the wildcard. Crazy 3D out of the blue? I give it a 50-50...? I feel uneasy with it, very powerful cpus, different approach, pixel for polygons as ATi Orton guy said. I seriously hope Sony do get Nvidia's input on the GPU.
Can powerful multipurpose CPUs really out-do specialized GPUs?
I personally contribute this to Microsoft having a monopoly on PC Operating Systems. Think about it, it would be a hassle for one company to make a totally new operating system everytime a different designs comes out. No, I'm not saying that MS did this purposely, but it is a result of their business model. If MS wouldn't have a monopoly, then if some other company can invest their resources on a new technology that would be accepted if it was better than the previous installment on windows, then you would see many more/different approaches to PC graphics than on consoles. I'm not saying that the Microsoft issue is a bad thing, because it is nice to have a standard to program for, but it is a drawback if someone has a great idea and Microsoft does not like it.
With the Linux movement this trend might not last so long. I would even like to see a ps3 based pc by Sony, ps2/ps3 games wouldn't be that hard to port over to the system. With a Linux or Totally new OS geared for the PCs architecture, it would be very nice.
ANYWAY, i think polygons are the least of PS3 worries. It will be interesting to see how much RAM Sony can afford in PS3. I hope this time round, they provide enough for true next gen visuals.
Full support across all HDTV res, color depth should go as far as advancement allows, hires detailed textures, large next gen gameworld, large next gen online worl blah blah blah.
Full support across all HDTV res, color depth should go as far as advancement allows, hires detailed textures, large next gen gameworld, large next gen online worl blah blah blah.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Interesting point
qwerty2000
Newcomer
ps3 will be well into the billions of polygons in real time and raw. With a 1+tflop it should
randycat99
Veteran
chaphack said:
This is where chaphack seems to really miss the "thought boat" on this whole PS3 thing (well actually, he misses it numerous areas, but you get the point). It's not a matter of hardwired 3D features, anymore. Basically any effect is open game once you are able to express it in software. That's the beauty of this approach- you get to meet and beat anything the competitor has in the way of effects by software, while the other guy's features are frozen in hardware once the die has been approved.
I don't think he "gets" the point about sub-pixel polygons, either, as he still seems to be rambling on about whether textures will be high-res or not. It's an entirely different ballgame once the polygons are smaller than the pixels vs. what we have now where the pixels are smaller than the polygons. Determining the color for a pixel based on a "texture" (if that entity will even have a formal existence in this new regime) become radically easier to handle, as I understand from the article.
