EA: Red Alert 3 looks best on PS3, thanks to delay
by Randy Nelson 
{ Mar 6th 2009 at 7:20PM } 
Since changing its tune about "skipping" a PS3 release of Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, citing the platform's "exotic and tough" development climes, EA Los Angeles actually says its time learning the ins-and-outs of the architecture has been for the best.
Speaking to 1UP, producer -- and former games journo -- Greg Kasavin claims the PS3 version (the "Ultimate Edition") is the best-looking of the bunch, sporting better water effects and more detailed units. In addition, the "general color palette" is somehow improved. As we've previously reported, the PS3 release of Red Alert 3 is launching with free DLC maps and includes a whole bunch'a bonus material (making-of clips, bloopers and other vignettes).
The moral of this story: Developers can make PS3 perform some neat tricks if they just take the time to get to know it. Sometimes simply over a cup of coffee; other times while tackling one of those team-building obstacle courses together.
Speaking to 1UP, producer -- and former games journo -- Greg Kasavin claims the PS3 version (the "Ultimate Edition") is the best-looking of the bunch, sporting better water effects and more detailed units. In addition, the "general color palette" is somehow improved. As we've previously reported, the PS3 release of Red Alert 3 is launching with free DLC maps and includes a whole bunch'a bonus material (making-of clips, bloopers and other vignettes).
The moral of this story: Developers can make PS3 perform some neat tricks if they just take the time to get to know it. Sometimes simply over a cup of coffee; other times while tackling one of those team-building obstacle courses together.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
HitNRun @ Mar 6th 2009 7:28PM
Clutch your PS3 to your chest and fall backward.
nick @ Mar 6th 2009 7:34PM
The game looked pretty good prior to the PS3 version, but that being said, I don't think it's one of those games that necessarily sells well on a console. Seems like it would be do better on a PC.
Orex @ Mar 6th 2009 7:34PM
Again
(ill prbably ge downvoted for 2nd post lol but just trying to help)
I dont think this will be posted if i submit it to playstationfanboy so ill let you guys know here if you dont already
OFFICIAL PSN cards comming soon (first to EU i think) these will also have AUTOmatic trophy sync-update to the cards
BxGT @ Mar 6th 2009 7:36PM
Articles like this are so 2007, nowadays about gameplay.
Foetoid @ Mar 6th 2009 11:03PM
+1
Cerpin Taxt @ Mar 6th 2009 7:36PM
The real question is if The Last Remnant will run on PS3 thanks to a delay.
Evi1d33d @ Mar 7th 2009 6:09PM
It uses the Unreal Tournament 3 engine so of course it will.
DeathroW @ Mar 6th 2009 7:39PM
They wasted so much potential by ignoring the fact they could of added FULL mouse and keyboard support for this game.
This could of actually sold pretty well if they did that.
Cerpin Taxt @ Mar 6th 2009 7:41PM
So, I haven't been following this game so closely. Are they really not supporting mouse and keyboard on the consoles?
If you're correct, then LAME.
KarlW @ Mar 7th 2009 6:23AM
That's insane. The PS3 always has supported USB keyboards and mice.
Why not allow it in-game for the one game that could really do with it?
mynk @ Mar 7th 2009 11:08AM
so has the 360!
not a fanboy comment, but just saying that they had even more incentive to support it.
required @ Mar 6th 2009 7:40PM
The ugly truth is that many developers prefer the PS3 to Microsoft's box.
nimh @ Mar 6th 2009 7:51PM
It's a beautiful truth that you're completely incorrect.
SoulBlade @ Mar 6th 2009 8:08PM
yea... i mean dealing with two compilers for a platform with one main core, and 6 other SPEs is so much better than dealing with a single compiler for a platform with 3 general cores that run 2 hardware threads each...
just because a game looks better on the ps3 doesn't mean a developer liked making it. it's all about the tools, and you can't really beat MS in that department yet.
required @ Mar 6th 2009 8:32PM
You goofballs should relax. Just because a game looks better on the PS3 does not mean a developer hated making it. Now I know it hurts for you to acknowledge this, but many developers do in fact prefer the PS3 and many hold a great disdain for Microsoft's wares.
vDopey @ Mar 6th 2009 8:35PM
dont forget the ps3 runs the os on the 7th spe, it also has the controlling PPU which does most of the general CPU work. The xbox360 run the os on the 3 cpus and its only hardware threads, its one physical CPU that is alloted different data on an algorithm not much better than intel hyperthreading (definately better though because intels hyperthreading was shit). It may gain a 20-30% performance boost because of the the threading (aka virtual cpu), but is in no way comparitive to another physical cpu number crunching on its own. Also it still has to run the Microsoft OS on these cpus, what sort of resources that takes I wouldnt know.
The PS3 instead dumps that onto its own spe so that the developers have the other 6 spes at their disposal.
Memory usage of either operating system I have no Idea.
Premature ejaculation man @ Mar 6th 2009 8:46PM
I don't really care if the truth was for either side. The way you put it annoys me. But then again, the majority of the crap people say about consoles here annoys me.
vDopey @ Mar 6th 2009 9:14PM
@premature ejaculation man..
Its all 1 big pissing contest, which actually means bugger all :)
To quote the man himself:
"What kind of disturbs me sometimes, because a lot of people ask me about this PS3/360 question, is that it's not about the hardware - I want people to look at the game itself. Sometimes I even feel like it should be on a PC so that people don't ask me about hardware and platforms," Hideo Kojima
if its micro and its soft surely it must lose all of this pissing contests though right ?
Sheppy (of the Fidlious Clan of Wong) @ Mar 6th 2009 10:37PM
It's not an "ugly truth." Many developers prefer PS3, many developers prefer 360. In the end, so long as the game runs fine, who gives a shit. By calling it an "ugly truth" you've slung the words of a console warrior.
Poisoned Al @ Mar 7th 2009 8:12AM
@ Premature ejaculation man: It's all psychological. Human beings are really egotistical, so they will always have to try to convince everybody their choice was right. There's a name for it which I forget, but usually, the more wrong you are, the more likely you are to defend your position. The more wrong you are, the more fanatical you become, despite all the evidence, which you ignore all the bad points and hold up tiny victories over them (a lot of multiple platform games look like ass on the PS3, but forget them! Red Alert 3 is better therefore the PS3 is better then everything, dispute the fact anyone with any brains gets this game for the PC). Add the fact that most fanboys are teenagers who can't possibly entertain the concept of they being wrong, and you get the hordes of monkeys flinging their poo about on internet blogs, all made worse be people like me who likes to poke them with a stick to watch them spaz out.
Same happens elsewhere like in politics or your favorite car or your favorite sandwich filling. You know YOU are right, so everyone else must be wrong!
I mean anyone who doesn't think that Marmite and cheese sandwiches are delicious are clearly idiots!
The Baron @ Mar 7th 2009 9:16AM
proof is required, required.
tmontana213 @ Mar 7th 2009 12:21PM
The only reason developers usually choose the PS3 over the 360 is because it's harder to develop for and if it works on the PS3, then it'll work on the 360. That being said, once they figure the PS3 out, they can do beautiful things with it's hardware. I mean just look at Killzone 2 and LBP.
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 6:48PM
Poisened AI does it hurt when your ignored ?
I have something that will cheer you up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt8j6o_ZGC4
Poisoned Al @ Mar 7th 2009 9:41PM
"Poisened AI does it hurt when your ignored ?"
What is my ignored doing to hurt me?
Even I know if you're going to attempt wit, you should at least get your grammar right. Also, as you are responding to me, I'm not getting ignored. Therefore your whole comment is an obvious lie. Congratulations! You've achieved truly epic fail in just a few lines of text. Next time, just smash your flipper hands into the keyboard. It will make as much sense and you will suck less. However, nothing will make you look any less of a idiot.
vDopey @ Mar 8th 2009 3:23AM
Seriously relax take a few moments to breathe..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqEqk4ECCIE&feature=related
Watch some of this, maybe this will bring you some joy maybe you can crack a smile :)
Poisoned Al @ Mar 8th 2009 8:09AM
Hey, I'm not the one with the crippling buyers remorse who is resorting to huge text dumps to try to convince everyone, including yourself, that you've wasted your money.
Correction; "that you've wasted your mum and dad's money".
I would say give it up, but the post on this page prove that you're far too stupid to do that. Fell free to get the last word in, as I have better things to do then waste me time on a worthless fanboy troll like you.
vDopey @ Mar 8th 2009 7:12PM
That put a smile to my face,buyers remorse I think not. :)
I know you wish you could afford it, but hey maybe some day, maybe someday ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_fPV13lKm4 This is actually a wicked clip
LameDuck @ Mar 6th 2009 7:40PM
According to recent scientific studies, more time spent on a project produces better results. More at 11.
CynicalStrike @ Mar 6th 2009 8:48PM
Ha ha. Simple fact is the game looks better because they took more time over it; not because the PS3 is a super-mega-ultra console.
Harod Burnett @ Mar 6th 2009 7:45PM
It is cool to hear someone say that.I wish more companies looked at the PS3 this way.For all we hear about the power of the PS3,very few times do we see someone take advantage of the hardware.I just wish we lived in a time when companies did not feel the need to put all versions of a game out at the same time.This is coming from a non crazy PS3 owner. We do exist .(Steps off of soapbox)
Zeus.:God @ Mar 7th 2009 5:46PM
vDopey, you really, honestly, don't have a clue then.
Everything in that Dpad article is entirely factual aside from some minor details that have been changed due to hardware revisions. However, the information in that article can and has been proven through hardware specifications from the manufacturers themselves and common computer hardware knowledge. I recommend you do a bit of research before commenting, and I don't mean quoting supposed theories in load transfer between CPU and GPU and the other marketing crap you've been posting.
Your name suits you well.
Zeus.:God @ Mar 7th 2009 5:47PM
BITCH!
I hate it when I click the wrong reply button.
Zeus.:God @ Mar 8th 2009 9:26PM
Wow, vDopey, you really don't seem to understand what CUDA is, do you? CUDA uses the GPU to take workload off the CPU, not the other way around. GPUs are FAR better number crunchers than your general use CPU in your computer. Trying to use that as leverage, which is what I assume you're doing, in your argument that the SPEs will help the RSX is stupid. Not only is it backward, but the reason CUDA works is because GPUs are so much more powerful.
samik @ Mar 6th 2009 7:51PM
Didnt we keep hearing about how the PS3 had "less" RAM, a weaker graphics card, how the cell processor and the SPUs were not useful for gaming code? How is it that games can look better on the PS3 even with more developer time?
nimh @ Mar 6th 2009 8:01PM
It does have all those things. The problem is that it REQUIRES the additional time, effort and money to get it to equal performance on other platforms and even more time for it to do anything different. EA spent the extra time and money, but it won't be worth it because sales for this won't make up for it.
vDopey @ Mar 6th 2009 8:24PM
@nimh..
Actually it has the same amount of ram 512MB split. .
* 256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz
* 256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz
The xbox 360 has 512MB GDDR3 @700Mhz,
so as you can tell the xdr ram is blindingly fast, it operates at the same frequency as the spes
The graphics card is about on par, when you add in the spe's the graphics capability is better. The spes can be used for shading or any number of things graphics related. Because the memory is split they can max out two pipelines one pumping to the spes and the other to the graphics card. I have also heard they can merge between the two so I guess are able to use all 512mb as one chunk as well minus whatever the os reserves for itself.
Basically when it comes down to it the hardware is more advanced than the 360. Because it is more advanced it means its more difficult to code for.
uncharted / kz2 etc etc.. Are all games that prove that the hardware in the ps3 is much more capable.
One of the main bods behind tekken 6 has already said they maxed out the x360 using tekken 6. The arcade version of tekken 6 is based on ps3 hardware, so in porting they had a lot of difficulties. The xbox 360 just about manages it.
nimh @ Mar 6th 2009 8:33PM
It has the same physical amount of ram, but that doesn't mean that it has the same available to it as the 360. The system memory has a much (MUCH) bigger footprint and splitting the ram up is incredibly limiting. This fact really shows itself when all game assets must be loaded at once and can't be streamed. The GPU is also slower than the 360. The reality is, you have to build the game from scratch to take advantage of the PS3. The real ones who will do that are first party teams because they can't afford to not. There are FAR more behind the scenes deals and marketing agreements than you realize to make certain consoles look a certain way in the public light.
You can't trust a lot of comments. Work on it first, then decide which you'd rather spend time on.
vDopey @ Mar 6th 2009 8:46PM
Actually it means that it does have the same available to it. Read up on the memory usage, developers have already said they can use the 2x256s as 1 continuous chunk.
The GPU is actually faster ,
Custom ATI Graphics Processor
* 500 MHz
* 10 MB embedded DRAM
* 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines
* Unified shader architecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'
550 MHz on 90 nm process (planned to be shrunk to 65 nm for current models [4])
Why does it hurt 360 fans so much knowing that their cheaper console has inferior hardware ? Dude the Cell processor is running the fastest super computer on this planet.. Anything else need to be said ?
eNrique @ Mar 6th 2009 9:34PM
The fact that is claimed by fanboys where the the 360gpu is stronger, is WRONG, it's just a myth.
360's unified architechture makes it easier to develope for, while the PS3 GPU has more power, no dev is going to use it effieciently in multi plat games, because it requieres "help" from the Cell, since it also performs graphics calculations, that's why PlayStation 3 exclusives are unmatched in terms of graphics against 360's.
nimh @ Mar 6th 2009 10:05PM
Who ever said anything about inferior? I never used that term. I also never said the 360 GPU was stronger. I only said the PS3 GPU was slower.
There are a few things here at play. I urge you to question things. You are looking at this from a black and white perspective and that couldn't be further from reality. Marketing has a bigger influence than people realize. One console isn't superior to another, they're just different. I argue that there are MANY misconceptions out there made by back seat developers based on marketing blurbs. EVERYTHING IS ORCHESTRATED.
I support game development Most people who comment on such forums have never been close to console development and I see so many untruths spouted. I'll leave things at that because it's almost a pointless argument. Obviously people feel intense loyalty for some reason to a "thing". It's all business. That's all it is.
Caveman @ Mar 7th 2009 12:02AM
@ vDopey
vDopey said : "Because it is more advanced it means its more difficult to code for."
The Sega Saturn was more advanced then the first Playstation, which also led to it's demise.
Betamax was technically superior to VHS, but the public didn't give a shit about that, it's all about content. Which the Xbox really has a lot of.
Props need to be given to Microsoft for their strategy, while at times flawed (RROD), in producing a machine that not only cost less to produce then the PS3, but which can match it's over hyped processors visuals as well. Sony easily won the last 2 generations, not so much this time around. Only the fanboys care about specs. Just give me the games.
Please no one start listing a bunch of PS3 games that have yet to be released as evidence that the PS3 is the best game machine. Got Lair?
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 3:13AM
nimh show me how the graphics card is slower ? On paper its faster by 50Mhz which is only a slight advantage. The cell spe's can also be used.. Do you actually develop or have you developed anything on the ps3 ? Or have you only developed on the xbox360 ? What games have you helped develop ? Because I haven't developed on either, but would love to get my hands on a ps3 development kit.
Caveman, Sony owns game development studios.
If its games you want that are great and exclusive:
uncharted, heavenly sword, ratchet & clank, time crisis 4, gran tourismo 5 prologue, Killzone 2, Little Big Planet, WarHawk, Valkyrie Chronicles, Motor Storm, WipeOut HD, Flower, Resistance 1 & 2, MGS 4. Yakuza 3 (only in japan but still looks awesome)
Lets also not forget MGS4 earned some major awards in 2008 and LBP has been cleaning up in terms of awards. What does the xbox 360 have thats calls you to it ?
what halo 3 and gears 1 & 2 ?
possibly fable 2 and star chronicles 4
What else is in that "vast" games catalog ?
Look at the exclusives Sony has for this year. Then talk about games, if you truly love games the PS3 is fast becoming the winner in this category.
the xbox360 is the console to date that has the highest failure rate ever recorded.. Something like 30% of them RROD, thats almost as bad as the windows BSOD. No other console released so far has had that high a failure rate.
Face it there is nothing amazing about the xbox360, it was rushed to market. Its a games console and it scratches disks if you accidentally hit into it while your playing a game.. Wow thats what I call shit manufacturing, and you still think it provides the better experience ? You also pay for online experience, that is the biggest joke of it all, it doesnt even get you anything good, still got laggy p2p cod 4 & 5 setup in fact most of the x360 games are p2p and you pay for it and think its the better console ? Dude.. seriously some peoples logic is flawed.
Also lets not forget built in wifi and a gigabit ethernet port for the streaming, also playtv sixaxis and the list goes on..
The PS3 might cost more but in the long run it works out cheaper :)
Oh yeah and if your after something different nothing beats the wii for that.. The xbox 360 I refuse to buy, why pay for an inferior product ? I wish Sega was still around because I would have bought their games console, no doubt it would be better manufactured.
Get yourself a ps3 and be happy buy flower and sit back and chill.
Zeus.:God @ Mar 7th 2009 5:51AM
God, I enjoy watching the arguing... None of you guys know exactly what you're talking about...
In terms of RAM (being the fact that it was the first hardware feature to be brought up), the two consoles have the same amount, the only differences being that the Xbox 360 uses a shared pool of 512MB, 700MHz RAM that supplies both the GPU and CPU. An advantage to this is the ability to provide either processing unit (GPU or CPU) with more than just 256MB of memory, which the PS3 is limited to with it's dedicated sets of 256MB RAM to each chip. The "XDR" is clocked at an unreal, and useless 3.2GHz speed, while the GPU's memory is clocked at the same 700MHz as the 360. Now, the reason I say that the "XDR"'s clock is useless is due to the fact that the Cell, nor any other processor or mainboard, can take full advantage of that speed. Just because the RAM has a high clock doesn't necessarily mean that it can make use of it, and in the hardware world, that is called a bottleneck. The Cell just does not process enough code fast enough to make that speed worth it. 700-750MHz would have done just fine with little to no hit on performance.
The GPU's are quite a fun story... The PS3's RSX, or "Reality Synthesizer X", is an Nvidia NV47 GPU which is a rebadged G70 ripped directly from the Nvidia 7800GTX PC video card. Being such, it has 24 processing "pipelines", all 24 of them being capable of pixel shader operations while only 8 of those pipelines are capable of vertex shader operations, though none are capable of doing both operations at once. For every vertex shader you have running, you have one less pixel shader. This is a non-unified architecture, which is old technology used in video cards from 2004 on back to God knows when. The Xenos, the ATI manufactured GPU in the 360 is, quite literally, an early version of the R600 GPU first released in the HD 2900XTX video cards. The GPU uses 48 pipelines total, but what makes it a "unified" architecture is the fact that all 48 pipelines are capable of running both pixel and vertex shader operations simultaneously, so it's like having 96 separate pipelines, 48 for pixel shaders, and 48 for vertex shaders. That is why the Xenos is a more powerful GPU- it's no myth, as it's the technology that is being used in PC video cards today, and has been proven time and time again to be more efficient that your typical non-unified architecture GPUs.
vDopey, you are correct in saying that the clock is faster on the RSX, however, you're comparing apples to oranges in the sense that one architecture is VASTLY superior to the other. What the RSX has in "speed" the Xenos makes up in efficiency, and then, not some, but a LOT. Another thing I would like to point out is that while the physical bandwidth of the south bridge (GPU district) on the Xbox's mainboard is slower, the 10MB eDRAM boosts the actual bandwidth to 256GB/s, which is far greater than the PS3's 20.8GB/s bandwidth...
I don't know... It's 4:49am as I'm typing this, and since I don't feel I have made my point very clearly, I will go ahead and post a link for, what I have found, is one of the most complete, and most accurate comparison between the two console's hardware.
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1
Poisoned Al @ Mar 7th 2009 8:25AM
You're wasting your time Zeus God. Fanboys are impervious to facts.
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 11:46AM
I read that article years ago and while the guy thinks he knows what he is talking about, he doesnt really..
http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~lanterma/mpg/ece4893_xbox360_vs_ps3_4up.pdf
The ps3's spes can be used as shaders and where done so in pop. He underestimates the power of the ps3 and overestimates the xbox360. Read the comments for the article some one comes in and rips up his whole arguement
read the comments especially 88.
88
HarakoMeshi
"Just some food for thought, in order to render 1080p with 4X AA would require 7 passes on the Xenos, so even if the Xenos setup rate was 4 times faster than the RSX it would still be the underdog. While on the cover it seemed the Xenos would have been better at doing 1080p than the RSX, things are not what they appear when considering all factors. "
This is probably why so many more games on the ps3 are true 1080p :)
I especially like HarokiMeshi's later arguements:
95 & 96 to quote 96:
95:
"However something I hope you didn't miss is that "each polygon is processed AT LEAST TWICE", therefore a game would be limited to a maximum of only 1/2 of the Xenos theoretical maximum polycount thus bringing it more inline with the RSX. "
96:
"An extra note about the implication of Cell in the GPU vs GPU equations.
------
If we assume that 360 games have an achievable limit of say on average 125mtri/s (based on previous discussion above) that figure is in fact only a maximum assuming very trivial vertex shaders. If vertex shaders are more involved say for example doing skinning the could would be lower.
Let's assume that doing skinning with 4 weighted matrices actually takes 16 GPU cycles (could be more or less than that, it would depend on implementation) the total triangle througput may fall as low as 7.8mtri/s on the Xenos. (Even if we ignore tiling and assume vertex shaders dominate all shader pipes we still get only 500m / 16 = 31.25mtri/s maximum)
On the PS3 however the Cell can jump in and do all of the skinning work itself, after all the Cell's SPUs excell at doing that kind of vector intensive-streamable-parallelizable processing. In fact I think you could easily do the skinning in 16 cycles per vertex on an SPU meaning one single SPU could do 200 million vertices per second.
Then by the time triangles reach the RSX there is nothing left for the Vertex Shaders to do so you get the full 250mtri/s GPU throughput on skinned geometry. Now which one sounds better? "
Thanks for pointing to that article. Next time read the comments behind the article as well, they point out a lot of truths.
99, 100 basically any comment from HarakoMeshi The guy knows what he is talking about, almost everything he has said is reality today with the released ps3 exclusives.
"For me... I conclude that Xenon+Xenos can do more pixels, and Cell+RSX can do more polygons, animation and physics. Being a Cell+RSX programmer myself, I'll be working to prove that in the months and years to come. " Thats from 99
100:
"Well as someone with experience in SPUs I can tell you the PROs are that a trivial task like vertex skinning is very easy to implement on SPU. The SPU has a full float vector instruction set, it has 128 registers and it has 256KB of memory. That is sufficient to do very good skinning in an optimized manner (you can hold a lot of matrices in 256KB and 128 registers). The bandwidth for fetching data in & out of the SPUs is also very fast. A simple skinning system would just double buffer input vertices, skin then dump them out. The CON is that you need some memory to dump the skinned vertices to on their way to the RSX.
Bandwidth wise, if you skin 256 million vertices per second in uncompressed form (16 bytes each) you would 'only' use up 8GB/s out of the XDR's total of near 30GB/s.
Of course a the hypothetical 256 million skinned vertices per second is a humongous number that nobody will use in this generation. It's enough to overdraw every pixel on a 720p screen 4 times with 1 pixel wide triangles each one independently skinned at 60 frames per second :-).
What I would expect is developers to use 1 SPU for their skinning needs, or maybe even just 1 SPU for half or quarter of the time. That should be sufficient to meet the thirstiest skinning needs today while offloading the RSX of this task. "
halo3 was testament to his comments it doesnt run at 720p probably because of the tiling issues. Now check the graphics on killzone 2 using a differed rendering engine and at 720p..
don't underestimate the SPE's which is what the author of the article did..
LameDuck @ Mar 7th 2009 1:53PM
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Sony couldn't make the cell do graphics, what makes you think a software dev will pull it off? While the cell is a great number cruncher and can process a complex thread of data easily, if the SPE's are used right, it's still not a substitute for a good general purpose CPU when it comes to gaming. You have to make sure that branching is done right. You have to descide how the SPEs will handle certain data. If you're doing something complicated, should you chain SPEs together. On and on... Alot of jobs are put off on the PPE because it's just not sensable to create a huge SPE program to do something as simple as run AI. Also, when you take a SPE away from the game todo GPU processing, that means the system has less power to work with game data. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have a game to look good and play good than to look great and play like a shinny turd.
Everyone acts like the Cell is made from alien tech and pixie dust. It's not. It's a steam processor being put in the place of a general CPU. Thinking that software devs will pull some magic off with it that IBM and Sony couldn't is stupid. Stop being delusional.
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 2:44PM
@lameduck:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=184843
Here on the NeoGAF forum Mike Acton of Insomniac explained a comment regarding "experimenting with pre-vertex shaders on the SPUs".
"1. Transfer some of the load from the GPU to the SPUs.
2. Minimize complexity of the GPU Shaders. i.e. Rather than making more GPU vertex shaders, or more complex GPU vertex shaders, we'll just edit the data directly from the SPU before the GPU gets it. This allows us to "disguise" complex vertex shader code as a simple shader from the GPU's perspective.
3. Run parts of the complete vertex shader code at different rates. An (SPU Vertex Shader, or Pre-Vertex Shader) does not necessarily have to run in lock-stop with the (GPU Vertex Shader). It could run at half-rate or lower, depending on the data and the need.
We're still experimenting with different approaches and places to do this, but we've had good success so far. For example, we used this idea in RCF to handle UV animations - textures weren't animated on the GPU, the UVs were animated before the stream got to the (GPU Vertex Shader) so it could use the same GPU shaders as any stream that did not have UV animation."
www.developmag.com/interviews/174/QA-Insomniacs-Mike-Acton
www.developmag.com/interviews/175/QA-Insomniacs-Mike-Acton-Part-2
www.guerrilla-games.com/publications/dr_kz2_rsx_dev07.pdf
you were saying ?
Look at the kz2 pdf notice that a lot of the "skinning" is done on the spe's.
Most of the shit direct ports only use the ppe and the rsx only and thats comparable to xbox 360.. With the spe's being used properly its a whole different ball game. Uncharted the devs said they were only using 30-40% power of the cell...
The original design of the ps3 was only the cell and no rsx, it just wasnt fast enough and adding more cell processors would have been freaking expensive..
What do you mean they haven't been able to get any graphics processing from the cell's spe's ? Where did you get that from ?
Again let me point this out to you:
www.top500.org
Notice the roadrunner is top and that uses the cell processer quite extensively.
news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9971006-7.html
" Fun fact: the fastest supercomputer in the world--used to monitor the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile--is really just a PlayStation 3 on steroids. Roadrunner is based on the IBM QS22 blades, which are built using advanced versions of the Cell processor in Sony's PS3. It also runs using x86 chips from Advanced Micro Devices, making it the world's first hybrid supercomputer.
In total, Roadrunner takes up 278 refrigerator-size server racks, and connects 6,562 dual-core AMD Opteron and 12,240 Cell chips. "
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 3:00PM
Is this pissing contest over ?
Let me quote Hideo again:
"What kind of disturbs me sometimes, because a lot of people ask me about this PS3/360 question, is that it's not about the hardware - I want people to look at the game itself. Sometimes I even feel like it should be on a PC so that people don't ask me about hardware and platforms," Hideo Kojima
We can sit here and argue little details. I very much doubt any of us are great games developers, or any type of developer otherwise we wouldn't be getting involved in this discussion in the first place.
Both systems are very capable, do not try and make out the ps3 is worse, because this is not the case.
As already pointed out as well, this only proves one thing with more development time the ps3 port has come out better than expected.
If they sat down and reworked the PC version I am sure that would be years ahead considering graphics hardware such as the gtx 295 :)
Also I too would have liked mouse/keyboard support its available why not offer it ?
Zeus.:God @ Mar 7th 2009 5:48PM
vDopey, you really, honestly, don't have a clue then.
Everything in that Dpad article is entirely factual aside from some minor details that have been changed due to hardware revisions. However, the information in that article can and has been proven through hardware specifications from the manufacturers themselves and common computer hardware knowledge. I recommend you do a bit of research before commenting, and I don't mean quoting supposed theories in load transfer between CPU and GPU and the other marketing crap you've been posting.
Your name suits you well.
vDopey @ Mar 7th 2009 6:36PM
Zeus.:God,
Yes your very right. The game developers who program for the ps3 have no idea what the ps3 is actually capable of. The documentation I linked to is all marketing bullshit. Including the documentary from Universities that detail the specifications of both consoles.. The pdfs produced showing how the spe's are used to do graphics processing are all bullshit.
The one article you post up by Michael "OpTiMuS" Perry who happens to have had nothing with the development of the games console or the games. Obviously is absolutely correct. Even though his assumptions are dissected in the comments and some of them are shown to hold no weight.
Please back up your claims I already have :)
As I said neither is better than the other, you can pull fingers out of your ass or Bill Gates' ass or Balmer's ass it makes no difference to me or to the games thats published. If it is purely taken by the look of the games.
Ultimately even if by some miracle you manage to produce some magic document that actually manages to show just how vastly superior the graphics card in the xbox360 is, I am yet to see a game that shows off all of that superior might.
You have gears of war 1 & 2 absolutely beautiful games I cant deny that EPIC I have always loved their games. (They always supported Linux like iD really respect them both). You also have Halo 3 its a good looking game. What else is there that graphics whores can be blown away by ?
What about PS3 ? have you seen KillZone 2, do you still doubt the power of the cell ? It is the best looking game out on any console.
Uncharted: Drakes Fortune - dude that was some sick graphics.
Little Big Planet - The stages look life like
MGS4 - again some sick graphics.
Not to say that xbox360 isnt capable of these sort of results, but:
"In a X360 magazine interview with Katsuhiro Harada, the executive producer of Tekken 6, the development team at Namco Bandai is experiencing trouble porting the game to XBOX 360. Mr. Harada mentions the difficulties of designing a smooth and dynamic 60fps game on the limited hardware and cites the DVD drive as one of the main factors of the dilemma as well as the XBOX 360 processor."
http://xbox-360.nowgamer.com/news/249/next-xbox-could-be-affected-by-tekken-6-tech
Tekken 6 was originally running in arcade machines based on the ps3, here you have another developer complaining about the limits of the xbox360 being hit..
Doesn't bode too well for your argument.
I really dont want to continue this any more though seriously anything more you say.. I can only say YES.
Yes your right the xbox 360 is the most leet console on the market its uber its graphics prowess is superb it rapes all of the little boys and girls its a work of art has no overheating issues, doesnt randomly spit out e71 error codes doesnt scratch the disk if its accidentally knocked over. Is just the best games machine ever developed. When I think about it I get a boner dude, seriously or maybe im being boned by balmer.. ahh what does it matter anywho, its the best xbox360 FTW its leet 14 &15 yr old gamers on it FTW woohoo.. I love the 360 I really do.. Its a revolution in games consoles..
The PS3 is shit come on, its ugly looks like a george foreman grill, its just a heavy paperweight or just a door ledge right? So what if its reliable a media beast, a bluray player an awesome games console, has wifi builtin has a hdd as standard has a gigabit ethernet port.. Its just shit really aint it?, how can it even compare right ?
me loves being vdopey :)