The funny thing about the PS3 being a monster to code for?
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
TheSonicRetard on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The funny thing about the PS3 being a monster to code for?
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
What's an SDK?
Henroid on
0
Dusdais ashamed of this postSLC, UTRegistered Userregular
The funny thing about the PS3 being a monster to code for?
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
What's an SDK?
Software Developer Kit.
I think.
august on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The funny thing about the PS3 being a monster to code for?
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
On another forum I frequent a couple dudes who work for various game developers hang out, and they've both had mini rants about what a pain in the ass the PS3 is to program for, where as the 360 is infinitely easier because IIR the machine works on Direct X, and MS has spent years working on tools to help PC developers make the most of Direct X, and all that transfers over pretty easily.
On the subject of blu-ray versus HD dvd, I hope neither of them win. They just don't seem important to me.
Part of the reason the ps2 sold so well was because it was a cheap dvd player, right? The ps3 is a cheaper blu-ray player, but the difference between blu-ray and dvd doesn't seem nearly as drastic as the difference between dvd and vhs, to the average consumer anyway. It just hasn't seemed like that big of a leap to me.
There's another key difference between the PS2's DVD player, and the PS3's blu-ray player. When the PS2 was released, DVD's were an established market and already on their way to replacing VHS. The cost of adding DVD functionality was minimal to Sony because costs had already come down, so they included it. Blu-ray was, more or less, kicked off at the same time as the PS3, had direct competition from HD-DVD, and had substantial added cost to the price of the players.
The funny thing about the PS3 being a monster to code for?
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
What's an SDK?
A set of tools and libraries that makes programming easier.
MKR on
0
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
You can't sell the PS3 without bluray.
it's what the games run on.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
But that's the basic problem: The fact that it's hard to code and that they're not building up the necessary userbase to make themselves attractive to developers means the amount of nifty that gets squeezed out of the technology remains low. It's a bit of a catch-22.
I think that the deal with the Wii is that it is very similar to a Gamecube (1.5 olol) in architecture, so any experiance gained from developing on GC can be carried over to the Wii.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
And yes, I am worried about that, and I know the PS3 is hard pressed to pull a victory without a miracle game (much like Halo was to the Xbox. Who knows, PS3 could get its miracle.
If Warhawk actually had a Campaign mode, then good lord, we could have had it early.
EDIT: I remember seeing a "power score" for last gen, and GC was second, though both it and the Xbox were far ahead of the PS2
As fa as I know, while the PS3 may have a more "advanced" processor that can do more interesting things (and is therefore more annoying to do shit with), the 360 has much better and faster graphics setup. It's more of a trade off then most people think.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
And yes, I am worried about that, and I know the PS3 is hard pressed to pull a victory without a miracle game (much like Halo was to the Xbox. Who knows, PS3 could get its miracle.
If Warhawk actually had a Campaign mode, then good lord, we could have had it early.
EDIT: I remember seeing a "power score" for last gen, and GC was second, though both it and the Xbox were far ahead of the PS2
If they created it without blu-ray what would've happened is they release a blu-ray add-on for movies not for gaming just like microsoft has done.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
And yes, I am worried about that, and I know the PS3 is hard pressed to pull a victory without a miracle game (much like Halo was to the Xbox. Who knows, PS3 could get its miracle.
If Warhawk actually had a Campaign mode, then good lord, we could have had it early.
EDIT: I remember seeing a "power score" for last gen, and GC was second, though both it and the Xbox were far ahead of the PS2
No, he's saying they never should have tried to use Blu-ray at all for PS3 games, there could still be an add-on like the HDDVD drive for the 360. If the PS3 hadn't had blu-ray, then it wouldn't have been so expensive, wouldn't have had production issues early on, and probably would be in a much better position than now.
As for miracle games, I guess MGS4 will be a system seller to fans of the series (like me) unless Konami decides that they could make more money on the 360 since A) it has a much higher install base and it would be impossible to port to the Wii, and the MGS series is more popular in America anyway.
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
No one was saying to go ahead and put it in... ever.
The Xbox 360 will never have HD DVD or Blue ray games unless there is some special edition one that comes out for people with the add on drive.
Had the PS3 forgone Blu ray they would simply pull multiple disk games... like everyone else has done since the original Disk based games. OR, they could leverage their hard drive for installable content for the games that run larger than 9GB.
And not many games have gone over a single DVD9 yet, so the massive storage space on the Blue ray disks is hardly as big an issue as many would portray it to be.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
And yes, I am worried about that, and I know the PS3 is hard pressed to pull a victory without a miracle game (much like Halo was to the Xbox. Who knows, PS3 could get its miracle.
Hoping for a miracle is not at all a viable business plan.
It's been said before, but the PS3's problems, at least in the beginning, are wrapped up in Blu-ray. Without it, the system would have cost the same as the 360, and likely done as well or better.
The problem is that people don't give a shit about next-gen DVDs in general, plus Sony can't remove it. The 360 can't add HD-DVD games either... doing either would seriously piss off the market, and that's part of what sank Sega during the whole Sega CD/32X/Saturn fiasco.
So Sony is stuck with Blu-ray, and that's why they're futzing around with new models and various mutations of BC and whatnot. It seems like Sony is trying every vaguely feasible strategy simultaneously, but that risks confusing/annoying the market with a flood of new models.
The 360 and ps3 are not that different as far as actual GPU capability. The 360 is an order of magnitude easier to work with, and the tools are a zillion times better.
The tools for the ps3 are horrific, and feel like alpha versions of the ps2 tools.
The Wii's tools aren't the greatest, but a lot of that is sony's fault (they bought SN Systems). Hardware wise, it's a GC with most of the parts that really sucked about the GC removed. The painful bits *now* are mostly figuring out how to keep the asset pipelines similar enough that you don't need two *completely* different teams for the 360 and Wii versions of a title.
ReaperSMS on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Except Sony didn't start out as a game developer. :P
Neither did Sega or Nintendo really. More related to games than Sony sure, but still not video games.
EclecticGroove on
0
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
In five or ten years, if Sony's game division continues to implode, I expect someone sane up in Sony's management to write a really fantastic account of all this. One of those amazing corporate tell-all tragedies about powerful men ruining lives with their hubris and incompetence.
But Sony will probably limp along for a couple years and start to recover instead. Still: if it comes out, I expect the book to put that one about Carmack and co. to shame.
In five or ten years, if Sony's game division continues to implode, I expect someone sane up in Sony's management to write a really fantastic account of all this. One of those amazing corporate tell-all tragedies about powerful men ruining lives with their hubris and incompetence.
But Sony will probably limp along for a couple years and start to recover instead. Still: if it comes out, I expect the book to put that one about Carmack and co. to shame.
I think I have finaly worked out Sony's plan.
1. Fail, intentionally, with the PS3 as badly as possible.
2. Make Book about how the PS3 was a massive failure, and why.
3. Make millions from book sales.
In five or ten years, if Sony's game division continues to implode, I expect someone sane up in Sony's management to write a really fantastic account of all this. One of those amazing corporate tell-all tragedies about powerful men ruining lives with their hubris and incompetence.
But Sony will probably limp along for a couple years and start to recover instead. Still: if it comes out, I expect the book to put that one about Carmack and co. to shame.
I think I have finaly worked out Sony's plan.
1. Fail, intentionally, with the PS3 as badly as possible.
2. Make Book about how the PS3 was a massive failure, and why.
3. Make millions from book sales.
Millions...or BILLIONS!(Pinky to mouth)
Dragkonias on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
In five or ten years, if Sony's game division continues to implode, I expect someone sane up in Sony's management to write a really fantastic account of all this. One of those amazing corporate tell-all tragedies about powerful men ruining lives with their hubris and incompetence.
But Sony will probably limp along for a couple years and start to recover instead. Still: if it comes out, I expect the book to put that one about Carmack and co. to shame.
I would kill for a book about the 32X, Sega CD, Saturn, and PS3 and what was going through the company's heads when they were making them. I would love to see why the hell Sega thought having the Sega CD in addition to the 32X was a good idea.
I would kill for a book about the 32X, Sega CD, Saturn, and PS3 and what was going through the company's heads when they were making them. I would love to see why the hell Sega thought having the Sega CD in addition to the 32X was a good idea.
TSR and others went over that in one of the older threads round here awhile back.
The Sega CD itself really wasn't an issue (aside from some real lack of dev time) but the 32Xand Saturn were basically butting heads against each other.... was a real mess that.
Posts
Being a snap to code for was the biggest draw of the PSX. It was one of the first consoles ever that came with an SDK that you wrote code in C++ for.
Poetic irony - sony beat an incredibly hard to code for machine by being easy to code for. Now their incredibly hard to code for machine is being beaten by an easy to code for machine.
What's an SDK?
Software Developer Kit.
I think.
Oh, durr, that'd make sense.
No idea how the Wii is on the developer spectrum.
There's another key difference between the PS2's DVD player, and the PS3's blu-ray player. When the PS2 was released, DVD's were an established market and already on their way to replacing VHS. The cost of adding DVD functionality was minimal to Sony because costs had already come down, so they included it. Blu-ray was, more or less, kicked off at the same time as the PS3, had direct competition from HD-DVD, and had substantial added cost to the price of the players.
A set of tools and libraries that makes programming easier.
it's what the games run on.
When it comes down to coding, the PS3's principles are different, they aren't just an update of what came before. This isn't neccesarily a bad thing, you can do some great stuff with the 360, but odds are you can do more with the PS3.
But that's the basic problem: The fact that it's hard to code and that they're not building up the necessary userbase to make themselves attractive to developers means the amount of nifty that gets squeezed out of the technology remains low. It's a bit of a catch-22.
I think that the deal with the Wii is that it is very similar to a Gamecube (1.5 olol) in architecture, so any experiance gained from developing on GC can be carried over to the Wii.
You can't sell a PS3 without Blu ray now, but they damn well could have created it without blu ray. All it is is a storage medium.
And as for the PS3 vs 360 in terms of ultimate potential... I'm sure that's true. But how much work is it to get to that point ans when will the average games be different enough to notice a real difference between the 2?
The PS2 was no doubt more powerful than the Dreamcast, yet it took a good year + to start seeing PS2 games that really showed that difference.
The gap between the 360 and PS3 is far, far less. In terms of which can pull off the prettiest games, I think that's going to be far more about the publishers working on the games than the bragging rights of the hardware itself.
At least, it seems to look a lot nicer than my PS2.
no, the xbox was.
yeah it was Xbox>GC>PS2
People would be immeasurably pissed, like, 1000x what they are now, if they bought a PS3 without bluray, only to have all the games after a year come out on blu-ray.
I know that I would wreck my shit, my neighbours shit and have it climax in driving a car through the mall into the store where I bought it.
And yes, I am worried about that, and I know the PS3 is hard pressed to pull a victory without a miracle game (much like Halo was to the Xbox. Who knows, PS3 could get its miracle.
If Warhawk actually had a Campaign mode, then good lord, we could have had it early.
EDIT: I remember seeing a "power score" for last gen, and GC was second, though both it and the Xbox were far ahead of the PS2
Ah, gotcha. Well, the point stands, anyways. The PS2 was the shittiest hardware last gen, and yet it's one of the most successful consoles ever.
Not to say sweet hardware can't be a giant advantage, but you need developers working to make games for your machine or no one really gives a crap.
If they created it without blu-ray what would've happened is they release a blu-ray add-on for movies not for gaming just like microsoft has done.
No, he's saying they never should have tried to use Blu-ray at all for PS3 games, there could still be an add-on like the HDDVD drive for the 360. If the PS3 hadn't had blu-ray, then it wouldn't have been so expensive, wouldn't have had production issues early on, and probably would be in a much better position than now.
As for miracle games, I guess MGS4 will be a system seller to fans of the series (like me) unless Konami decides that they could make more money on the 360 since A) it has a much higher install base and it would be impossible to port to the Wii, and
No one was saying to go ahead and put it in... ever.
The Xbox 360 will never have HD DVD or Blue ray games unless there is some special edition one that comes out for people with the add on drive.
Had the PS3 forgone Blu ray they would simply pull multiple disk games... like everyone else has done since the original Disk based games. OR, they could leverage their hard drive for installable content for the games that run larger than 9GB.
And not many games have gone over a single DVD9 yet, so the massive storage space on the Blue ray disks is hardly as big an issue as many would portray it to be.
Many games to come, and more games after that and so on... and after each release the dev's become stronger.
devs are currently lvl 1 noobies next year they should of leveled up a couple times and by 09 should be lvl 5+
Will they be getting +5 SDK?
Sony needs that stat pretty bad.
Hoping for a miracle is not at all a viable business plan.
The problem is that people don't give a shit about next-gen DVDs in general, plus Sony can't remove it. The 360 can't add HD-DVD games either... doing either would seriously piss off the market, and that's part of what sank Sega during the whole Sega CD/32X/Saturn fiasco.
So Sony is stuck with Blu-ray, and that's why they're futzing around with new models and various mutations of BC and whatnot. It seems like Sony is trying every vaguely feasible strategy simultaneously, but that risks confusing/annoying the market with a flood of new models.
PS3 is the Saturn, except without the good games and awesome Japanese marketing campaign.
Why are you talking about console game formats like they're sports teams and you're a player on one of said teams?
Pretty much, yeah.
WE as in PS3 owners, and sony.
It's easier and and simpler than saying "Sony could have increased sales and the owners could feel fulfilled."
Poor Sega, they had such good potential
The tools for the ps3 are horrific, and feel like alpha versions of the ps2 tools.
The Wii's tools aren't the greatest, but a lot of that is sony's fault (they bought SN Systems). Hardware wise, it's a GC with most of the parts that really sucked about the GC removed. The painful bits *now* are mostly figuring out how to keep the asset pipelines similar enough that you don't need two *completely* different teams for the 360 and Wii versions of a title.
Except Sony didn't start out as a game developer. :P
Neither did Sega or Nintendo really. More related to games than Sony sure, but still not video games.
But Sony will probably limp along for a couple years and start to recover instead. Still: if it comes out, I expect the book to put that one about Carmack and co. to shame.
I think I have finaly worked out Sony's plan.
1. Fail, intentionally, with the PS3 as badly as possible.
2. Make Book about how the PS3 was a massive failure, and why.
3. Make millions from book sales.
Millions...or BILLIONS!(Pinky to mouth)
I would kill for a book about the 32X, Sega CD, Saturn, and PS3 and what was going through the company's heads when they were making them. I would love to see why the hell Sega thought having the Sega CD in addition to the 32X was a good idea.
TSR and others went over that in one of the older threads round here awhile back.
The Sega CD itself really wasn't an issue (aside from some real lack of dev time) but the 32Xand Saturn were basically butting heads against each other.... was a real mess that.