software cell distribution

[McFly]

You're not thinking like a dev, you're thinking like a gamer! What speaks against it is time and money and sheer laziness. Why do more work than you have to, especially if only a minority will get to enjoy it.

What if Sony delivers that 3D engine (co-developed with 1st party devs) and the devs just need to create the models and textures? Maybe the 3D engine is stored in the actual harware and updated (internet download or on game disc) from time to time as Sony optimizes the engine? If the basic PS3 hardware is strong enough, so that this general 3D engine still looks better or similar then everything from the competitors, then maybe that could work. Devs could concentrate more on the textures/models and the actual game then trying to get the best gfx out of the hardware.

Just an idea.

Fredi

 

[Guden Oden]

But the engine STILL would not be able to conjure photorealistic graphics from thin air. Think of the sheer scope of detailing indoors environment with all the crap we're used to seeing there. Games of today are spartan not just because of performance reasons, but because nobody has yet attempted to tackle something like that.

Movie productions have a department dedicated to set dressing, with warehouses full of stuff to use, but for a game most would have to be created from scratch. That's a monumental task!

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

Hi everyone. It's my first post here, so please go easy on me!

I've been spending some time lately thinking about how CELL will work on a practical level. The "CELL-enabled toaster providing extra CPU cycles for a PS3 game render loop" scenario seems a bit unrealistic from a game developer perspective.

Instead of duplicating existing console tasks and providing additional power, what if CELL architecture was used for feature addition in a way that didn't require game developers to write code? An example of this would be pushing audio processing off to a CELL-enabled Sony receiver or having your Sony TV running an FSAA pass against PS3 video input.

A related example might be enabling distributed management for all your CELL-enabled Sony devices using a single consistent UI. Your PS3 could bring up a compound menu for all devices on the network that allowed you to copy saves to an available PSP, schedule TV recording on a future CELL-enabled PSX device, etc.

The idea would be that a potential Sony electronics customer would have a noticeable feature in mind, instead of a cloudy "my games will run better" feeling.

Thoughts?

 

[3dcgi]

What makes you think this will be any kind of savings for the manufacturer? They'd have to develop and verify two CPU/GPUs, manufacture two different models too thereby tying up more fab resources, they'd need two separate assembly lines, keep track of supplies for these two different assembly lines, etc etc. A big part of the economics of mass production would get lost, especially with the more expensive version.

It adds up to a whole lot of bother for the manufacturer, in addition to potential confusion for the buyers, plus extra work for the developer. Ok, for some people it might be a neat idea, but it wouldn't ever work in reality, that's the whole point of a console, to have ONE hardware unit only. ...Which is why Sega created 2 CD units and the 32X I suppose...

First, remember that I don't think Sony will do this, but to dismiss ideas because they don't fit with your definition of a console is a bad idea. My definition of a game console is a device dedicated to playing games. Regardless of the hardware configuration.

In regards to your first question. Look how many models Ati and Nvidia sell. Surely they wouldn't sell them if it didn't make economical sense. If a design is scalable creating a version that is functionally identical, but not as fast doesn't take too many design and verification resources. And the reduced cost of the smaller chips seems to make up for producing smaller amounts. In my example I mentioned edram because it is likely expensive and changing the amount would be an easy way to enable or disable support for HDTV resolutions.

Of course, other companies like Intel often manufacture only one version and then rely on binning and disabling cache to get "cheaper" versions. So this obviously isn't a black and white situation and it can work both ways.