GDC08: PhyreEngine, Sony's new (free!) cross-platform engine
The ramifications of this subdued announcement are actually quite significant. Three titles have been revealed to have used the PhyreEngine for development: flOw, GripShift and DiRT. Of those three, only one is exclusive to PlayStation. It appears that the PhyreEngine is truly cross platform -- Sony is indirectly contributing to the development of PC (and Xbox 360) games.
But why make it potentially easier to make games on a competing console? Well, it's undeniable that developers are increasingly focused on multiplatform development. It's been rather commonplace for developers to neglect PS3 with inferior and oftentimes delayed versions of multiplatform games. With PhyreEngine, Sony is making a much more attractive plea: make games on PS3 first, guaranteeing high quality games that will not only match their 360 counterparts, but in many cases can exceed them. Sony's message is clear: start games on the PS3, and they will be better for both PS3 and 360 owners. It appears to us that PhyreEngine is a crucial part of that plan.
More details of PhyreEngine will undoubtedly be unveiled later today at a GDC dedicated to what Sony has dubbed "the new hotness." Stay tuned.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Ghost_Crisis @ Feb 21st 2008 8:38AM
WOOOO! First comment! Anyway, its good to see that this type of step is being taken. To be quite honest, and this isnt the "Fanboy" in me, but it seems to be a step in a better direction than the "Community Arcade". Not for nothing, but most people I see with a 360 and a headset are 11 year old jerks. Thats going to slowly become a "YouTube" of the X-Box, and although it will have its fsair share of gems, they will be completley blindsided by the shadow of the millions of games made about "boobs" and such.
Anyway, hopefully, this puts a little more of a boost in Sonys Arm so maybe some decent new IPs can be made.
Stef Geiger @ Feb 21st 2008 9:56AM
First comment? Congrats! Your prize is in the mail!
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 21st 2008 10:22AM
Again "Youtube of games" is just a figure of speech. It doesn't take any talent or knowledge to make a youtube video. It still takes years of experience and training to make an XNA game, AND 100 dollar entry fee.
You aren't going to see "Penis's Adventure in VaginaLand"(Copyright 2008 Crono) on XNA. It isn't going to happen.
E.J. @ Feb 21st 2008 11:24AM
Hi. In case you didn't know, XNA requires just a little bit of knowledge more than making YouTube videos. Not only do you need to be knowledgeable in Visual C#, but also need to have the knowledge and wherewithal of making games, like level design, audio effects, and such.
Any moron can have a camera and upload to YouTube. Talented people make games like Culture, which should be a casual games hit in the future, if not, now, fyi.
@Crono: If you're a college student, you can get a whole slew of programs for free in Microsoft's DreamSpark program including one free year of XNA Creator's Club Online and Visual Basic 2008 Professional, among others. If you have said knowledge of game making (and pure genius, I might add), you can fulfill your dream of making "Penis's Adventure in VaginaLand" with a little elbow grease and determination!
Tiptup300 @ Feb 21st 2008 9:41PM
http://img20.imageshack.us/my.php?image=penisye0.png
I beg to differ.
Kye Wii60DF @ Feb 21st 2008 8:39AM
*Sony moves it's chess piece and says to Microsoft*:
"Check"
Slayer @ Feb 21st 2008 9:02AM
Lol. Good one
Mike @ Feb 21st 2008 10:36AM
Nice
Marty @ Feb 21st 2008 10:49AM
Their development tool works for both platforms, a good thing for the industry and a bad thing for nobody. They wouldn't have put it out if it didn't work for the other platforms anyway, because a substantially lesser amount of people would be interested in it.
Steve @ Feb 21st 2008 10:50AM
MS puts out a Bluray attachment, bundlies it with GTA IV, and drops the price again, looks at Sony and says...
SEE YA!
capt_carl @ Feb 21st 2008 8:45AM
This is an interesting move on Sony's part. While I can understand how developers usually neglect the PS3 versions of games, Andrew brought up a very valid point. Why not start development on the more difficult console to code for? In the end you'll get a better-looking product on both the PS3 and the Xbox 360. The PS3 is more difficult to code for, but it also is considerably more powerful then the Xbox 360, so in the end the game may actually look at run better on the PS3.
From a business standpoint it does sound like a very viable and logical path to follow.
Cyro @ Feb 21st 2008 9:14AM
Who the hell told you *the PS3 is considerably more powerful then the Xbox 360*. You got to be out of your mind. You are a Fanboy at heart. There is still one single game to come out that can proof this. Not a single one. Its really pathetic.
PSN: KillaKornbread @ Feb 21st 2008 9:18AM
hey they did it with Burnout Paradise and that turned out great. i dont know why developers keep trying to port to PS3 from 360 anyway since its already been proven that you loose nothing when porting to 360 from PS3. that way, everyone can get an equal experience and the companies can in turn make even more money.
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 9:23AM
Hey KILLA, you forgot the....
/sarcasm
capt_carl @ Feb 21st 2008 9:52AM
@Cyro:
PS3's Cell has eight cores. Xbox 360's PowerPC has three. Both chips run at 3.2GHz. Cell devotes six cores to games, one to the OS, and the last is reserve in case one core is faulty. Think about it. If the PS3's development cycle is going the same way the PSX and the PS2's did (which it already seems to be doing), there's a HUGE amount of untapped power in the console. Like I said, it's harder to write on.
I don't care what you think, I'm sticking by my statement, and for the record I don't own a PS3. I own an Xbox 360, but my PC blows them both out of the water. Don't believe my statements? Here's wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware
Knight Marquise @ Feb 21st 2008 9:54AM
Actually Andrew did =not= bring up any valid points other then the whining musings of a PS3 fanboy.
The reasons devs aren't using the PS3 as lead platform are many, and why the hell should they change when those reasons have not changed? When the PS3 has a commanding install base lead, then it could be something for devs to consider.
Also, anyone find it amusing that Sony releases this middleware solution, for free, and the sony fanbots rejoice in mass. Had MS done that there would be accusations from them of trying to kill competition, & stifling creativity, and howls of monopoly.
Hell, I haven't even heard a root kit joke jet.
Organic_Shadow @ Feb 21st 2008 10:26AM
One of the main reasons that this method is actually better is that the PS3's ram is split, so why not develop there first so your assets that the ram uses are more organized, and then port to the system(s) with unified ram, so that you don't really LOSE anything.
PC/360 > PS3 causes them to have to rework what files are going to be in the ram, because it's possible that they have items that won't fit within one of the 256mb pools.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 21st 2008 10:27AM
Capt carl, you don't know what you're talking about. The Cell has 1 general purpose CPU capable of and 6 secondary SPE's, capable of running 1 thread each. The SPE's also are not general purpose cores, but specialized. The 360 has 3 cores, each capable of 2 threads each, for a total of 6 available threads. PS3 cell's have 2 cores disable, so they are actually able to compute the exact same number of threads for gaming.
The PS3 is not significantly more powerful than the 360. Given its unusual architecture, its lucky devs can make it EQUALLY as powerful as the 360.
Vidikron (FU) @ Feb 21st 2008 11:13AM
You're all talking out of your asses. Each machine has strong points. It's all in how the devs use these strengths. But it is pretty much a fact that the PS3 hasn't been fully tapped... mostly because coding for all the SPEs is difficult.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Feb 21st 2008 11:26AM
Chrono:
The PS3 is significantly more powerful than the 360.
For starters, the 360 has 6 threads, but it's using hyperthreading and can only run 3 threads at a time, the other 3 sit "in reserve" for when the first 3 can't run due to a long latency memory access.
And speaking of long latency memory accesses... The 360 has a unified memory architecture. This very much simplifies the job of memory planning for the developer. But that means literally only one device in the entire system can access memory at any given time. When you have 3 threads trying to use memory at the same time, and the GPU trying to use memory for calculations and even the video output DAC reading out the entire contents of the screen over and over 60 times a second, there are a lot of devices sharing memory.
On the PS3, you have a single PowerPC core plus 7 SPUs (one of which is reserved for the OS). The 7 SPUs all have their own memory, so all 7 SPUs can access memory at the same time. The graphics system also has its own memory, so it can access memory at the same time as the CPU too. Net effect, all these devices have their own bandwidth. This can lead to massively higher memory throughput and much better CPU availability. And then again, if the developer does it wrong, it can only do as much work as a single core on 360 does.
On top of this, the SPUs are not regular cores like most programmers are used to. They're more of VLIW machines, like Itanium or an amped up version of a DSP (digital signal processor). That means these cores can do calculations much faster than a PowerPC can, so things like 3D matrix math (like transform and lighting) is much faster than it would be on the main CPU. This again leads to the PS3 having a lot more raw power available to the developer. But it also leads to making it more difficult on developers, because it requires special programming techniques to best utilize the levels of internal parallelism these cores have.
I don't know if Sony made the right move, because there are a lot of developers, and many of them won't put forth the effort to utilize the power of the PS3, especially since the code they write wouldn't be useful on their PC or 360 ports. But for the few that do utilize the PS3 correctly, it will be able to do things the 360 cannot.
capt_carl @ Feb 21st 2008 12:49PM
LS2/LS7 said what I was trying to say but in smarter-sounding words. Due to its true multistream, multitasking, multithreaded nature, the Cell can put out some serious performance numbers. In fact, IBM is going to start using Cell chips in its high-end rackmount servers and supercomputers.
saemon @ Feb 21st 2008 9:31PM
@ Knight Marquise
I find it funny that in trying to flame somebody else for being a fanboy, you flag yourself as one by the vertue of the same arguments you're serving.
Things fanboys assume :
- their console of choice is the best
- if another console does something good (ie : releasing free extra tools to make everyone's life better), it shouldn't be praised, and even condemned
- but if your own preferencial console *would* eventually do the same, it would necessarily be attacked by everyone else (because anybody that hasn't chosen the same console as *you* must be a witless idiotic fanboy -- cuz he doesn't think like you do, and because you're oh so perfect)
this reeks so much of US chauvinism it's sickening
CB4D @ Feb 21st 2008 1:58PM
There is some major mis-information here. Proabably because none of you are actual developers with any experience on this hardware.
1. The Xbox 360 has 3 general purpose Power cores, each clocked at 3.2 Ghz. The PS3 has 1 general purpose core + 6 DSPs (actually called SPEs, but it is very important to highlight the DSP nature of these).
2. Each PS3 DSP has a very small local memory (*NOT* a cache - you must manually reserve this)
3. Each core in the Xbox 360 supports 2 hyper-threads. Whoever said that "only 1 thread can run at a time while the others sit in reservation" was out of their mind. Each core has TWO fetch operators, meaning BOTH threads can request memory at the *SAME* time.
4. Hyper-threading is NOT the same as having 6 cores, but it is way better than having only three.
5. Unified memory architecture means you're going to pay a penalty for L2 cache misses. On the other hand, having a unified system saves you the bandwidth of having to constantly shuffle resources back and forth. If you have an SPE generating geometry, you have to shuttle that from local memory to either system or video memory, etc.
6. The PS3 has barely enough backend bandwidth (think fillrate) to supply current gen games. The Xbox 360 has a fast link of 256 GBps to its local eDRAM.
7. I could go on, and on, and on.. but the point is, both machines are powerful - they are more than powerful enough to meet the demands of current gen games.
Nuff said :)
why not the LS2LS7? @ Feb 21st 2008 3:44PM
Fill rate is not limited by the speed of the link between the frame buffer and the RAMDAC as much as it is limited by the speed of the link between the location where the textures are stored and the frame buffer. The eDRAM on 360 is small enough that just the frame buffers use most of it up and thus many of the textures are stored in main memory. Main memory is quite fast on 360, but it is bandwidth shared between all devices and it isn't as fast as the eDRAM link.
If a core really ran two threads at once, it'd be a dual-stream core. Or a dual core. The 360 cores are hyperthreading. In hyperthreading, the only time the 2nd thread runs is when the 1st cannot be run. Basically, the pipeline bubbles created by the 1st thread are filled with ops from the 2nd thread.
It's a good way to fill pipeline bubbles, but it doesn't produce performance equal or even similar to a multi-thread processor. Thus the 360 only runs 3 threads at once, it just can switch between them very rapidly. The other threads are indeed only held in reserve for when the main 3 cannot run.
The fetch unit (not operator) only dispatches instructions. The load/store unit accesses memory. It's possible the load/store units on 360 can both access the cache at the same time or one can hit the cache while the other hits main memory (cache hit under miss operation), but it's exceedingly unlikely each unit has the ability to access main memory at the same time, there would be no point since only one device in the entire system can access main memory at the same time.
Spartacus @ Feb 21st 2008 7:02PM
I don't think any of us really have a true grasp on the technological intricacies of either the Xenon or Cell chip, but from most technical papers I've read the general concensus is that the Xenon is a better general purpose CPU which could compute the majority of game code (which is branch heavy) better than the Cell. However the Cell has more theoretical power and potential if someone spent the time, energy and finances to cater to its complex architecture. For the most part, the Cell has a higher floating point calculation ability, which doesn't always equate to real world performance.
On the other hand, the Xenos GPU is hands down superior to the RSX, so you really have a trade off. The Cell may pay off in the long run, but for most games it's going to be a gamble. We've seen games that suffer on the Cell architecture (Madden) and we've seen games that flourish on it (Uncharted). The Xenon seems to be more of a consistent performer at this point, but again, that may change in the future. However, if only a very select number of studios take advantage of the Cell (which is looking very likely), then I'm not sure if 1 or 2 stellar titles will really justify the Cell amongst the slew of on-par or even sub-par cross-platform titles considering Sony's pre-release claims.
So in short, it's a horse race and it's going to be close. My money is on the 360, but who knows.
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 8:49AM
- *Sony moves it's chess piece and says to Microsoft*:
- moves it's chess piece and says
- moves it's chess piece
- moves it's chess
- moves it's
- IT'S
Now I don't usually do this...
I'll let you correct yourself.
XanthouS @ Feb 21st 2008 8:54AM
- You fail at using the comment system.
- You fail at using the comment
- You fail at using the
- You fail at
- You fail
dark_inchworm @ Feb 21st 2008 8:56AM
lawlz, sony is a chess piece...
SONY IS A PAWN... TO MICROSOFT! L to the O-L
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 8:57AM
I wasn't going to point him out, but thanks for trying.
Maybe that might of worked if that's what I was trying to do...
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 8:58AM
I wasn't trying to "point him out" in terms of lulz btw.
FOXHOUND @ Feb 21st 2008 9:02AM
PROTIP: For those who don't understand the above; "it's = it is". For the comment about moving chess pieces, "its" would've been appropriate since it signifies possession. Press (A) to jump.
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 9:04AM
Thank you FOXHOUND!
MISSION COMPLETE
Nigeria @ Feb 21st 2008 9:32AM
This exchange was interesting.
dark_inchworm @ Feb 21st 2008 9:58AM
I don't think anyone actually understood my comment except me.
Oh well.
dark_inchworm @ Feb 21st 2008 9:58AM
I don't think anyone actually understood my comment except me.
Oh well.
dark_inchworm @ Feb 21st 2008 10:00AM
Oh, how about that? Oddly enough, Jtenma, you have committed grammatical blasphemy as well.
"Might of" - no
"Might've" - sure!
Simstim @ Feb 21st 2008 10:06AM
I learned something here today.
Kye Wii60DF @ Feb 21st 2008 10:21AM
Here I was thinking that an apostrophe can denote ownership; even with the word "it".
e.g.
That house is where the dog lives. That's it's home.
If I have shown ignorance then thank you for correcting me.
Jtenma @ Feb 21st 2008 10:51AM
@ KYE
Correct me if I'm wrong, but [its'] would be appropriate for that?
Oh and don't worry about I was just bein' a jackass todayzzzz
why not the LS2LS7? @ Feb 21st 2008 11:42AM
its' would be wrong too.
There's no getting around that it seems that "it's" would seem to mean "belonging to it". But it doesn't, it's a contraction for "it is". Just type out your sentence with "it is" where the "its" is and if it still reads correctly, then you need "it's" in there.
Otherwise, you're using "its" which isn't a contraction at all (and thus needs no apostrophe) and means "belonging to it".
Microswirl @ Feb 21st 2008 4:05PM
I went too grammor school and I can has tells you It's It's's Its' its Itsey Bitsey spider
StevenRafael @ Feb 21st 2008 7:19PM
@Microswirl: Epic finish. +1
trask @ Feb 21st 2008 8:54AM
Hmm, I wonder if Sony will aim to do an XNA type of deal... sounds like this could be used towards that... well at least a form of it. Despite last year's issues with the PS3 and all, I still have faith that Sony knows what it's doing.
Sain @ Feb 22nd 2008 1:02PM
Sony did something like XNA with the PS1. It was called Net Yaroze or something like that.
Eggy @ Feb 21st 2008 8:58AM
I don't think it's anything like XNA.
FidliousWong @ Feb 21st 2008 9:12AM
I agree. This is a professional level toolset. Not a homebrew level asset. However, could this be the start of the return of Net Yaroze? Doubtful, but a fellow can hope, can't he?
PSN: KillaKornbread @ Feb 21st 2008 9:21AM
yea this seems like more like tools to make it easier on current developers who are using the PS3. now i think it could help some indie devs and possibly help bring us some PSN download games since it isnt too terribly expensive but i dont think its anything like XNA (which i am very interested to see play out actually).
capt_carl @ Feb 21st 2008 10:02AM
Totally agree. XNA developers seem to write their little games with whatever tools they already had. This is basically saying "Here's your fork, now have some cake." And the cake is delicious and moist.
Another thought I had is that since it can use D3D as well as OpenGL, I don't see it being difficult to put games onto the 360 after writing them using this engine.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 21st 2008 10:30AM
XNA has a devkit. It uses C#, from what I can tell.
But then, I know nothing about game programming.
FidliousWong @ Feb 21st 2008 10:53AM
According to this, it works with DX and Glide models... which is nice. Especially the Maya exporters (how those work, no clue but considering the OBJ exporter in Maya always output converts as centimeters as it's unit scale... argh.....) has me interested.
But here are the questions I want to know...
-Can a studio buy a single debug station? I am not a big company by any means but I know my game will flop on PC but on console, it may do decently. I do not have the $10,000 for a dev kit.
-What are the conditions of this free software? The free version of XNA essentially says you cannot SELL your game. How about this toolset?
-Is this a homebrew initiative or is this still just for the PS3 developers?