PS3 just as easy to code for says one developer

[Mr Men]

The best PC games are very well optimised for lower end PC's as well as top end

A poorly coded game will be poor no matter what format, the 360 is not so much more powerful than the PS3. suggesting the power of the 360 can cover up poor coding is just funny. The console only does what it is told to do from the code, it does not have a mind of it's own

 

[mmj_uk]

Slopping coding will simply result in poor performance. There's no such thing as hardware that's flexible enough to take in shoddy code and make it run at good speeds. There is only the ability to develop and make proper use of the hardware. The 360's hardware is conventional. The PS3's hardware is not. That's all there is to it. Sloppy code, ha! That's a great un.

Why else do you think the smaller developers are tugging themselves over the Xbox 360 architecture? it's because they don't need to put half as much effort in (compared to PS3) to get *acceptable* performance from it. Whereas if they use PS3 as lead platform then their code is going to be much more refined because it requires it.

Also, many would class 25fps as poor performance but it seems to be quite acceptable these days does it not?

 

[Junk]

So thats Naughty Dog, Infinity Ward and ID Software to name but three trumpeting the PS3 hardware, so not just one going against the grain.

It's great hardware, it just doesnt run bl**dy Direct X which is the common platform between PC and 360 (not the hardware as many suggest - never seem a tri-core PPC CPU in a PC!)

 

[wannabedamned]

They put their success down to the fact that they do not dedicated more energy to one platform - and in fact spread out resources and split up teams to work on the game across the different platforms.

there's the bit to concentrate on I think.

Ps3 isnt hard to code for. It just takes a dedicated team. And from the looks of the reviews, It's worth while.

 

[Mr Men]

Why else do you think the smaller developers are tugging themselves over the Xbox 360 architecture? it's because they don't need to put half as much effort in (compared to PS3) to get *acceptable* performance from it. Whereas if they use PS3 as lead platform then their code is going to be much more refined because it requires it.

LOL

 

[wannabedamned]

LOL

Instead of loling, explain.

Because I see his logic. It's generic coding vs advanced coding. And obviously generic coding on generic Hardware is going to be more forgiving when it comes to coding.

Which is where it becomes important to have development teams in place who can concentrate on specific architectures, Instead of coding something on a generic machine, and hoping it'll working on something non generic, and ruining games in the process.

In my statement I said generic a lot, Don't look to twist what i said, into me sayin the 360 is poop.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

So thats Naughty Dog, Infinity Ward and ID Software to name but three trumpeting the PS3 hardware, so not just one going against the grain.

It's great hardware, it just doesnt run bl**dy Direct X which is the common platform between PC and 360 (not the hardware as many suggest - never seem a tri-core PPC CPU in a PC!)

ID Software trumpeting PS3 hardware lolololo Mr Carmack as said meny times that you would allways run on of Ram on the PS3 frist ,256mb ram -96mb for the OS and on the 360 i think is said only 32mb is used in the OS (don't forget theres a pool of 512mb for system and graphics) im sure hes mentioned hes not keen on the CPU of the ps3 as well

PS he saids this in the QuakeCon 2007 videos when talking about the Rage engine

 

[wannabedamned]

ID Software trumpeting PS3 hardware lolololo Mr Carmack as said meny times that you would allways run on of Ram on the PS3 frist ,256mb ram -96mb for the OS and on the 360 i think is said only 32mb is used in the OS (don't forget theres a pool of 512mb for system and graphics) im sure hes mentioned hes not keen on the CPU of the ps3 as well

PS he saids this in the QuakeCon 2007 videos when talking about the Rage engine

Give up, theres more than 1 aspect to a console, Memory is 1 of them, Which everyone knows the PS3 lacks, His "trumpet blowing" came in other forms.

Go look for the interview, instead of lololol'n

 

[mmj_uk]

Another developer has spoken out about it:
http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/07-11-2007-6830.html

"The Xbox and the PC are very similar. They are just two very powerful CPUs and you can make it through your threads and be sure that it's going to run reasonably OK. The PS3 doesn't have many general purpose CPUs like a multi core system has on the PC side. It has a CELL processor which is itself a pretty powerful processor, but if you're really going to get something out of it you're going to have to utilise the SPUs on it, which are small special purpose units that you write little programs for doing whatever you need to get done.

"Those are not just standard threads that you just spawn like you do on a PC. You have to really think it through and identify areas in your game that will benefit from this and isolate that code and make the cuts so you can transfer the minimal amount of data to and from those units and get the most processing power out of them."

"It's a very different approach. The code ends up being rather different than it is on the Xbox and the PC. You can start with something that's pretty much the same and then you try to run it on the PS3 and it doesn't run very well. Then you start to optimise it and optimise it and you get further away from where you started but you really start to unlock some of the potential of the PS3."

 

[Weebull]

Why else do you think the smaller developers are tugging themselves over the Xbox 360 architecture? it's because they don't need to put half as much effort in (compared to PS3) to get *acceptable* performance from it. Whereas if they use PS3 as lead platform then their code is going to be much more refined because it requires it.

Also, many would class 25fps as poor performance but it seems to be quite acceptable these days does it not?

Oh please.

Developers like programming for the 360 because it's just windows-style C++ (or even C#) with DirectX graphics. The multi-threading stuff is fairly simple to get to grips with (from what I've read), and there's little in the way of unusual complexities to throw you. Anybody who has programmed for the PC can get their head round the 360's architecture almost immediately. And the one thing MS do right is offer a ton of help and info on it too.

The PS3, on the other hand, is a completely unique beast, and as such, will inevitably give developers a headache at first. So for a small developer, who will no doubt have programmed for the PC before (what else are you going to program on?), why waste time learning a whole new architecture, when there's a much easier, simpler, far better supported platform already there?

You blatently can get sloppy programming on the PS3. Being difficult to program for doesn't mean developers are goign to be more efficient with what they do in the slightest. If anything, it almost means the opposite. They don't know how to refine the code because they don't know what they're used to.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

PS3 in a lot of ways is the more powerful console , just seems the 360 is far more flexible to make games for with the only big chink the armour (bar the 33% fail rate) is the lack of storage with it being in the form of the game media or the fact that the hard drive is not standard part of the console that the developers can count on

 

[mmj_uk]

You blatently can get sloppy programming on the PS3.

I never said you couldn't, what I said was 360/PC is more tolerant of it hence the smaller less experienced developers prefer the platform.

 

[Mr Men]

I never said you couldn't, what I said was 360/PC is more tolerant of it hence the smaller less experienced developers prefer the platform.

360 and PC are not more tolerant of poor coding in the slightest, they do what the code says, poor code is poor code no matter that format, your making a bit of a fool of yourself.

Give some examples please of poor coding on the 360 that was tolerated, come on, I doubt you have seen a piece of code in your life.

 

[KNiVES]

Give it up Mr Men. I've tried several times, and it hasn't gotten me anywhere What makes me lol is that people are thinking the 360 is the more popular choice for smaller developers because it EATS SLOPPY CODE YAY! instead of the fact that it actually has a far bigger install base than the PS3.

 

[mmj_uk]

Give it up Mr Men. I've tried several times, and it hasn't gotten me anywhere What makes me lol is that people are thinking the 360 is the more popular choice for smaller developers because it EATS SLOPPY CODE YAY! instead of the fact that it actually has a far bigger install base than the PS3.

The reason being you still don't understand...

You can run overly complex/unoptimised code on 360 and get this... it will still run very well (shock, horror).

Therefore it is.. what's that word? more... tolerant?

 

[wannabedamned]

What Mr Men and Knives are missing here, Is that the comments being made are NOT 360 vs PS3 statements. But more the fact he's pointing out the 360 is more tolerant to sloppy coding. PS3 has to be specific.

Think of it if you will like HTML in Firefox and Internet Explorer. Have you ever noticed things like spaces are picked up in firefox? Where as Internet Explorer, which see's exactly the same code, See's the spaces, but doesn't implement them.

That's Because spaces are bad coding. Firefox takes these mistakes and uses them, and we see some messed up pages. Internet explorer, Realises this coding is bad, And doesnt display them

In this scenario, The Xbox 360 is Internet Explorer, and the games are the awesome ones we see.

The PS3 is firefox, and the games are the terrible ports we see.

 

[Weebull]

That's a terrible analogy, and not true in the slightest. The PS3 and the 360 are simply DIFFERENT, and neither is any more "tolerant" to poor coding than the other, because that's not even a working term.

I never said you couldn't, what I said was 360/PC is more tolerant of it hence the smaller less experienced developers prefer the platform.

Please explain to me where you keep getting this idea from, because it's complete nonsense.

As I just said, the platforms are different. What runs on a 360 will not run well on a PS3, and vice versa. There's no getting around that, and that is why you get sloppy ports, no other reason.

Want a technical example? I'm not the most experienced with either piece of hardware, but from what I understand, one of the oddities of the Cell architecture is that it actually processes floating point arithmetic fast than unit integer arithmetic. This is basically completely alien to most programmers, as AMD/Intel chips have always naturally been faster using integers. So you now have to be much more aware of how some of your most basic of data is stored, and how long individual program loops take. Thus to optimise for the PS3, it would be better to turn as many integers into floats as possible. But on the other hand, you try and take that back to the 360 and you'll suddenly find your super-Cell-optimised code simply won't be as good.

Programming for the 360 is "easy" because it's familiar, no other reason. The PS3 is sort of like programming for the DS or a handheld, in that it takes a lot of digging and fiddling to find out how the machine really works, before you can actually start optimising things. That doesn't mean it's any less "tolerant" of code, because that's not how it works.

 

[james.miller]

Give it up Mr Men. I've tried several times, and it hasn't gotten me anywhere What makes me lol is that people are thinking the 360 is the more popular choice for smaller developers because it EATS SLOPPY CODE YAY! instead of the fact that it actually has a far bigger install base than the PS3.

so you're just going to ignore what i said then?


what do you code for, by the way?


people are arguing over semantics.....get it over it! a general purpose processor with a lot of muscle WILL give let you get away with much more than a highly specialized processor like the cell. thats the bottom line here. you can optimise for either but you can bet your left nut that if you dont do so for the ps3 it would be very much worse off.

 

[The Running Man]

i simplify for you;

PS3 easy to code for, difficult to port onto
XBOX360 ~ easy to code for, easy to port onto.

hence when doing multiplatform it would make sense to use the ps3 as a lead as the xbox architecture can be easilier accommodated from the opposing platform than vice versa.

 

[wannabedamned]

That's a terrible analogy, and not true in the slightest. The PS3 and the 360 are simply DIFFERENT, and neither is any more "tolerant" to poor coding than the other, because that's not even a working term.

haha, Should point out i've been drinking, Getting ready for the night ahead. But what i wrote, Seemed okay at the time.

Needless to say, I think what i was getting at. Was if you program on the PS3, You have the SPE's to think about, You make the game initially on there, And the programmers have a relatively easy to time converting whats eben done on the PS3 onto the 360, Cos the coding is easier.

Do it vice versa, And you've got an uphill stuggle