PDA

View Full Version : PS3 visuals, major leaps for at least 4 years


Pages : [1] 2 3

christos
11-15-07, 08:08 AM
From Insomniac games:

"The amount of action we're able to put on the screen at 60 frames per second really dwarfs what we were able to do a year ago at 30 frames per second," said Hastings. "What's most exciting is the way things are headed right now I think we'll see just as big a leap from our second generation engine to our third as we did from the first to second."

Looking ahead, he was equally as optimistic: "We're already seeing a big leap in what people are able to do with the PS3 now compared to a year ago, and we're going to see just as big a leap between now and the end of 2008," said the Insomniac Games Chief Creative Officer. "I think we're going to continue seeing major leaps each year in what people are able to do with the machine for at least three or four more years."

And how are future games going to look better? It seems it's all down to the use of the much talked about PlayStation 3 SPUs, which until now haven't been fully used by developers.

"The tech and gameplay teams have moved tons of things over to the SPUs that used to run on the PPU," said Hastings on the improvements made to Insomniac's game engine. "Collision and physics are entirely running on SPUs now, which allows us to put much more on the screen at once than we were able to with Resistance. Moving more and more code to the SPUs is an ongoing process and I think we'll continue to see major benefits from this for several more years."


http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=22808

Ok, what he says makes logical sense and in a way is to be expected. However, my question is, will this moving of the code to the spu's be something that 3rd party developers will take the time to learn and implement if the ps3 user base continues to be the smaller of the 3 console userbases?

Tygerwoody
11-15-07, 09:10 AM
what a bunch of BS.

|MaguS|
11-15-07, 09:12 AM
what a bunch of BS.

Not really if you compare it to the PS2. The PS2 launched with pretty meh graphics... year by year you had titles releasing that look better then the previous.

Oh and Insomniac is the creater of Rachet and Clank aswell as Resistance... they know their hardware. ;)

Moo
11-15-07, 09:13 AM
what a bunch of BS.

teh cELL > Skynet

That's how it is, bro. (bs2)

Q
11-15-07, 09:16 AM
"No ****" meets "full of ****".

Together, they are the PS3 marketing department.

Of course the games are going to look better from one generation to another, but every system has better and better looking games as the years pass.

|MaguS|
11-15-07, 09:17 AM
Dont see how its BS... You got Resistance which looked great and now you got Rachet and Clank aswell as Uncharted which look far better then the launch titles.

Can you imagine what the next Resistence is going to look like? The original ran at 30FPS and looked worse then Rachet which ran at 60FPS...

thor1182
11-15-07, 09:24 AM
the statement that as they learn how to program for the PS3, that the games will get better and better is not marketing BS, its the truth. If you look at any systems games over its lifespan, you can see that this is true.

Anything they said that is geared to saying that the PS3 will be better than the others because of something like the cELL, you can call BS.

ENU291
11-15-07, 09:35 AM
I think we can file something like this under "common knowledge". With any gaming console games 4 years down the line will look significantly better than games currently out now.

Tygerwoody
11-15-07, 09:42 AM
Of course games will look "better", but this "Major Leaps" is extremely flawed.

thor1182
11-15-07, 10:43 AM
Of course games will look "better", but this "Major Leaps" is extremely flawed.

yeah but I wouldn't blink is MS said the same thing once devs learn how to properly multithread their code to use the 6 thread engines better.

ViN86
11-15-07, 10:50 AM
their GPU can not match the Cell. sure we will see performance increases, but graphics increases for 4 more years is a streeeeeettcchhhhh.

|MaguS|
11-15-07, 11:06 AM
their GPU can not match the Cell. sure we will see performance increases, but graphics increases for 4 more years is a streeeeeettcchhhhh.

The CELL can act as a GPU for many instances so if the GPU lags behind they can code the CELL to take up some of the graphics work aswell. It all depends on the game and the engine.

evilchris
11-15-07, 11:48 AM
lol

Lyme
11-15-07, 12:21 PM
To clarify things:
The GPU in the 360 is significantly more powerful than the Cell (alone).
The CPU in the 360 is significantly more powerful than the Cell cpu (not including spe's).

It has been yet to be clearly seen if:
The Cell SPE's + the nVidia graphics chip on par or more powerful than the 360 gpu, is yet to be seen.

We do know, that:
The Cell cpu + SPE's is worse at general performance than the 360 cpu.
The Cell cpu + SPE's is much better at SIMD (simple instruction, multiple data) performace than the 360 cpu.

There are many other differences in the systems, including SDK's, memory architecture, and scaling, dvd media size, and those will make big differences in the years to come.

IMO: If it takes developers four years to squeeze that much performance from the PS3, the development kits really must be ****ty right now.

brady
11-15-07, 12:23 PM
This all just seems so obvious and trivially true.

ViN86
11-15-07, 12:27 PM
The CELL can act as a GPU for many instances so if the GPU lags behind they can code the CELL to take up some of the graphics work aswell. It all depends on the game and the engine.
you do realize that GPU's are specialized for their task, right? i doubt the CELL can match the floating point power of the GPU.

|MaguS|
11-15-07, 12:33 PM
IMO: If it takes developers four years to squeeze that much performance from the PS3, the development kits really must be ****ty right now.

What he is saying that in 4 years you will have even a lager leap in PS3 graphics then what we have seen in a single year between Resistence and Rachet and Clank. R&C was a huge leap in graphics which rival any current console title yet they claim to have much more room...

I also like how you compare a portion of the CELL to an entire CPU rather then CPU for CPU. The CELL is designed with the SPEs in mind, taking them out of the equation would be like only comparing it to a single core of the Xenon which in turn would mean they are equal since they would both be single core 3.2Ghz CPUs. The difference is that the X360 CPU has three cores while the PS3 has 1 core with 7 SPEs. So you have to consider the SPEs if your going to make a CPU to CPU comparison.

I like how you also make the PS3 sound weaker when nearly all 3rd party developers have clearly stated that the PS3 edges out the X360 in performance. It's accessing the performance capabilities that is the issue.

Also where do you get the idea that the Xenos is more powerful then the CELL? I have never seen a comparison done nor do I think its possible considering that GPUs and CPUs are vastly different in design. I mean the RSX is probably more powerful then the Xenon and its rumored to be weaker then the Xenos.

you do realize that GPU's are specialized for their task, right? i doubt the CELL can match the floating point power of the GPU.

The PS3 was originally designed to have dual CELL chips rather then a standard GPU but since it would have made programming for the PS3 far worse Sony asked Nvidia to design a GPU. The SPEs on the CELL can calculate graphics pretty dam well. A demo was shown that the PS3 was possible of raytracing in realtime without the use of the RSX and also lacking one of the SPE.

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/04/05/real-time-ray-tracing-on-the-playstation-3

Q
11-15-07, 12:49 PM
Useless fact #1

The Saturn was more powerful than the PS, but was such a nightmare to program for that games usually ended up looking worse than their counterparts.

Peoples-Agent
11-15-07, 12:51 PM
But lets be honest, do you really think firms who tend to release multi-platform titles really have the resources and time to piss about with The Cell when it's far more cost effect to simply port over from a 360 version on a platform which has already delivered the goods?

Sure, the exclusive titles may look fantastic but there is hardly any of them about and not many on the horizon. Added to the fact the PS3s online capabilities are useless what much does it leave?

Obvious this would end up in a 360 vs PS3 thread but I cannot for the life of me work out why people side with Sony's offering when the proof is in the pudding as to what machine does exactly what it was advertised to do. The 360 is a games console that delivers (funnily enough), games.

I have been trying to convince myself for months that buying a PS3 would be a good move, but I cannot think of one single reason other than allegiance to the Playstation brand ...for buying one.

I was a die hard Playstation fanboy when the PSOne and PS2 were in their prime and Ratchet and Skank alone isn't enough to justify buying this POS. Resistance was a total joke considering this system was set to be the powerhouse platform to conquer them all.

By the time the PS3 gets its act together in three years time, Microsoft would have announced its next offering. The writing is on the wall.

|MaguS|
11-15-07, 01:09 PM
Useless fact #1

The Saturn was more powerful than the PS, but was such a nightmare to program for that games usually ended up looking worse than their counterparts.

Difference was that the Saturn was more powerful in 2D performance but when it came to 3D it was total ****. It had irregular polygon calculations and couldn't even handle transperancies.

Peoples-Agent, 3rd party developers are already starting to come foward and say taht they will being to use the PS3 as the primary console for future titles because when starting with the PS3 the cost and efforts of developing a title aren't dramatically raised as you are lead to believe. Its far easier to go from the PS3 to the X360 insted of the other way.

If current titles have shown us anything is that developers are starting to grasp the PS3 architecture and finally are able to produce the same quality of graphics that the X360 can... mind you that they have also had far less time with the PS3s development system then they did with the X360.

I don't think this round of consoles will fade away so soon. MS already stated that they want to match the X360's lifespan with that of the PS2. They are looking for a 10 year lifespan... It's too costly for developers to jump to a brand new platform in such a short time, especially when SDKs cost so much and they have invested so much into learning the new systems (even the X360).

Mr_LoL
11-15-07, 01:13 PM
Screw all this nonsense. Where the hell is GTAIV?

christos
11-15-07, 01:22 PM
All I wanted to know was that given the alledged difficulty of moving processes to the SPU's with the benefit of doing so, would 3rd party developers ever invest their time/money in doing this if the ps3 userbase remain behind the other 2 consoles?

I did not intend for yet another ps3 vs 360 thread. I would think most on this forum could afford to buy both if they desired.

ralinn
11-15-07, 01:54 PM
But lets be honest, do you really think firms who tend to release multi-platform titles really have the resources and time to piss about with The Cell when it's far more cost effect to simply port over from a 360 version on a platform which has already delivered the goods?

Sure, the exclusive titles may look fantastic but there is hardly any of them about and not many on the horizon. Added to the fact the PS3s online capabilities are useless what much does it leave?

Obvious this would end up in a 360 vs PS3 thread but I cannot for the life of me work out why people side with Sony's offering when the proof is in the pudding as to what machine does exactly what it was advertised to do. The 360 is a games console that delivers (funnily enough), games.

I have been trying to convince myself for months that buying a PS3 would be a good move, but I cannot think of one single reason other than allegiance to the Playstation brand ...for buying one.

I was a die hard Playstation fanboy when the PSOne and PS2 were in their prime and Ratchet and Skank alone isn't enough to justify buying this POS. Resistance was a total joke considering this system was set to be the powerhouse platform to conquer them all.

By the time the PS3 gets its act together in three years time, Microsoft would have announced its next offering. The writing is on the wall.
I kinda understand what you are getting at, but saying it has no good games sounds to me like you're saying "It has nothing that interests me in my limited genre taste"... If that makes sense. The fact is (coming from experiense), the PS3 does actually have a lot of benifits and good games, it's just that they're not for everyone. Hell, most people wouldn't risk buying a PS3 for a bunch of games they have no idea about... which I don't really blame them for. I went out on a limb and just bought one, because... well, I'm an idiot, but I didn't actually regret it.

At the moment I'm really enjoying The Eye of Judgement, it's had me up until 3am playing with my brother. It's so addictive. Ninja Gaiden, Resistance, Warhawk, Ridge Racer, GTHD/GT5Pro, Loco Roco and a ton of downloadable games for the the PSone, PS3 and PSEye, oh and my entire PS2 lib, I really can't see why it has no good games. But if they don't float your boat... fair enough. But it's a little extreme to say that ultimately it doesn't deliver on games.

Peoples-Agent
11-15-07, 03:51 PM
I kinda understand what you are getting at, but saying it has no good games sounds to me like you're saying "It has nothing that interests me in my limited genre taste"... If that makes sense. The fact is (coming from experiense), the PS3 does actually have a lot of benifits and good games, it's just that they're not for everyone. Hell, most people wouldn't risk buying a PS3 for a bunch of games they have no idea about... which I don't really blame them for. I went out on a limb and just bought one, because... well, I'm an idiot, but I didn't actually regret it.

At the moment I'm really enjoying The Eye of Judgement, it's had me up until 3am playing with my brother. It's so addictive. Ninja Gaiden, Resistance, Warhawk, Ridge Racer, GTHD/GT5Pro, Loco Roco and a ton of downloadable games for the the PSone, PS3 and PSEye, oh and my entire PS2 lib, I really can't see why it has no good games. But if they don't float your boat... fair enough. But it's a little extreme to say that ultimately it doesn't deliver on games.

Lets see... some of the games i've enjoyed over the past months... hmmmm

Just Cause, PGR3, Tenchu Z, Overlord, Flatout Ultimate Carnage, Crackdown, Fight Night 3 (First game I bought when it was still a twinkle in the PS3s eye), Hitman Blood Money, Gears of War, Saints Row, Forza 2, Dead Rising, Bioshock and lets not forget the fact that the 360 is light years ahead of the PS3 when it comes to online gaming... this is what delivers the logevity, so you could add the likes of Rainbow Six Vegas, GRAW2 and even Call of Duty 4 to that list in that given sense.

I don't think my taste in games could get anymore diverse than that, surely. lol

Maybe the fact I don't like games with big bug eyed characters that make rediculous noises and for some reason have to have weird beams of light flailing from an overly enlarged sword or tassels hanging off their trousers or shorts...... might add to it aswell.

I remember when games such as GTA , Pro Evo , Resident Evil ..... were all killer PS2 titles and would draw me to the system and without them it just removes the magic of it all.

...and to make matters worse, nearly all of the multi platform games as of late have been better on the 360 in some way, and when at times it seems to be a closer battle, I go back to my point about the multiplayer aspects.

It's a real shame.

Tygerwoody
11-15-07, 04:03 PM
The only good game for PS3 is NBA Live 08 and Assassin's Creed. Period. Yes they need to get on the ball with games.

Thats not leaving out the Wii though. The only good games for the Wii are Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil 4, and Wii Sports. The rest are "meh".

Now if I were to list the games good on the Xbox360, I would be here for quite a while. Obviously these are all my opinions as a specific gamer, but there are alot of gamers just like me. While they might not agree with my limited game selection, chances are alot of theirs are just as limited with the Wii and PS3, while the Xbox360 still remains king in this aspect.

Only reason I won't buy an Xbox360 is because of the 3 Red Ring problem. Whether anyone likes that or not , I don't really care. Thats my reason. Deal with it.