Edge: Rage runs at 60fps on 360, 'just 20 to 30fps' on PS3 [update]

First of all, all the people saying Caramack is a bad developer or lazy need to learn a little more about him and then stop talking. I think it's safe to say that Caramack knows a lot more about game programming than you do.

Second, this has been the problem with the PS3 since day 1. Sony decided to use a different achitecture for their console, and that makes it difficult for developers, especially longtime PC developers like iD, to pull off the same kind of performance out of the PS3. Sony made an incredible machine but the cost is that the developers have to spend a lot more money and time to get results out of the hardware.

That's why multiplatform games have been at their worst on the PS3, and a select few exclusive titles have really shined. But the upfront cost of developing gems like that for the PS3 is why there are so few of them.


I have no doubt that iD will have Rage running at 60fps by the time it's released on PS3, stop complaining about it.



Besides, the only decent platform to play an FPS on is the PC.

I can understand that each version differentiates in performance besides the hardware issue is the issue of the compression and content available for each version.

I guess the non-PS3 versions will come with two DVDs for installing (PC, Mac) and instantly streaming (Xbox 360). Maybe the streaming along with the compression for the Xbox 360 cannot handle the visual quality as opposed to the other versions and has the problem of using DVD9s as the disc for games; but in result can run it faster. The PS3 might get the upper hand in fidelity but performance might just be sacrificed. Heck it's still in development, let's wait and find out.

Shortly put; Xbox 360 hardware - Multi Disc - Rage "compressed" = 60 FPS?

PS3 Hardware + BD-ROM + Rage less compressed = 30 FPS?

que the *insert legendary talented developer here who has fault with the ps3* is lazy, untalented....


aw shucks. too late.

No way - the cell processor can run at 120fps but they arent familiar with the hardware yet :)

60 FPS is really only important in PC gaming due to the refresh rate of monitors. A game running above 60 FPS suffered from tearing during fast movement. If a game ran under 60 FPS there were other nasty artifacts. The human eye can't recognize the difference between 50fps and 60 but you can recognize a few frames of image tearing or other artifacts because they stick out.

Some people who bought high end CRT monitors ran high resolutions at a 120hz refresh. In that case 60 FPS would be far too slow to prevent image problems. In fact it is pretty stupid to have a game running at 160fs if your monitor only refreshes 60 times every second.

The more advanced rendering techniques available on teh 360 and PS3 can compensate for lower FPS as well as television sets that have advanced processing chips made to smooth out motion. Any game running above 30fps will really not show any slowdown. It is even better to have a game run at a constant 30fps rather than run at 60 for a few seconds and then 20 a few seconds later. The 30fps constant will look smoother than the game that jumps around.

Fist!

New meme time:

Faust.

maybe id software needs to learn to program better. GG's seemed to have mastered the PS3. Lazy devs

I don't understand what all the hullabaloo is about. If the ps3 is capable of 60fps, Carmack WILL get 60fps. It's that simple. He's the smartest guy in the room on this subject, period. There is nobody better. 3D gaming has evolved to where it is today because of his ideas and recommendations. If he can't get 60fps, all that means is that his game is simply too complex for the ps3's architecture. It's not the first time Carmack has been ahead of the curve. Microsoft spent years making directX in Carmacks image, so it's no wonder that what the xbox does, works perfectly with what he wants.

Hell the entire 3d graphics industry was going in the direction mapped out for it by Carmack years ago. Sony knew this but decided to build the PS3 in a completely different manner. It's always going to be a problem for them.

Oh snap. When Carmack says something like this, he means it. The guy knows his stuff.

I look forward to getting my copy of Edge in with this article. Unless it was in the most recent one I got...

I don't get why Joystiq runs baiting posts like this, only to try and caution us in the bodytext to not react in the way that the headline has provoked... I mean, I know its good for traffic and all, but you *really* can't complain when the fanboys go nuts in the comments when you post stuff like this. Like, at all.

Atrimus I own Killzone 2, Resistance, Little Big Planet and several other exclusives and they all stink to be honest. I finally borrowed Drakes and it's the first decent exclusive I've played so far for the PS3. The 360 is simply the better gaming system. Sorry to say it but it just is.

You have no idea what you're talking about. We are all a little bit dumber for having read your post. ;)

It all depends on which platform the game was initially designed for. If you built first for Xbox 360, its going to be quite hard to get the game to run very well on the PS3. Countless develops have stated that building on the PS3 and 'porting', to use a word with an unfortunate bad connotation, is the best way to get the most of both machines and have games with similar performance.

Whatever rather have it run at 30fps on a reliable machine than have my 360 crap out from overextertion like all my Xbox exclusive friends (my condolescences comrades).

Note: The 360 is a fine machine in it's own right as a second or third console as a primary console it's ill-suited for the role.

The problem with Carmack is that he develops games for hardware that isn't even mainstream yet. Back when Quake 3 and Doom 3 were being made, you had to have a top of the line computer to run them and in some cases most top of the line computers couldn't even run his games that great. He's the type of dev that pushes the technology envelop, and frankly when it comes to consoles, he really has not delved into that world too much, and for hardware technology that is 2-3+ yrs old (xbox 360 and PS3) I can understand how it's challenging for him to have to restrain himself. The Rage engine uses humongous amounts of memory for textures and that is probably one of the biggest challenges for him to overcome on either system.

BWAHAHAHAHAA...sigh*, and look at them try to clean it up, go ahead fanboys defend ur console but this has been said time and time again, the truth hurts and Carmack speaks it.