Just when u though Sony couldnt do any worse...

satchmo

projectmayhem wrote:

the memory setup in the ps3 is probably far worse, the difference being there's more of it.

Are you just making stuff up now?! And you talk about "ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here", whatever that means...

The fact that there's more memory on the PS3 doesn't make one bit of difference when it comes to managing it. So you've a bigger addressable area, big deal! The PS3 memory is actually relatively easy to set up, even taking into account the DMA engines and the SPU's local stores. The trouble comes from Sony insisting that they need 64MB of XDR memory and 32MB of VRAM just for the operating system - that's what really hurts memory-wise.

if the same hardware was there under a Windows OS then you'd hear a lot less moaning from devs...

If that was to happen, the only reason would be because Microsoft write good documentation and great tools, both of which make development easier. If the same hardware was there, slapping a Windows OS on it isn't going to make it magically easier to program efficiently - you still need to take the hardware architecture into account very carefully, and the more OS abstraction there (after a certain point), the harder that is to do.

Developing for a moving target like the PC is actually more difficult than the absolute specs of a console; once you're up to 30hz on a console (or whatever your target framerate) you're golden - on the PC you still have to be worried about the typical gamer machine at release date and target that, possibly years beforehand. And that's not to mention the huge variety in peripherals and devices that the game needs to be tested with, different driver versions etc etc... At least with a console you know that when it works on the machine on your desk, it's going to work exactly the same on every other console out there.

Developing for multiple platforms definitely makes things much harder. But if I was told that I had to develop for just a single platform, I probably wouldn't pick the PC.

thelordofcheese

projectmayhem wrote:

you're saying this without thinking of what it was sitting next to. most consoles are a complete and utter biatch when sat next to a PC (or 360, which is basically a PC setup), but anyone with programming knowledge behind them knows that in order to keep up you have to adapt. the reason it's a b1tch to program for is that it doesn't use the friendly PC-type stuff everyone's used to, and its methods are very different.

if the same hardware was there under a Windows OS then you'd hear a lot less moaning from devs...

Consoles are a different beast to PC's, but even amongst consoles the Ps2 is especially difficult to code for.
And as has been already pointed out, PC coding is somewhat easier thanks to the DirectX API which does a great job of interfacing with whatever graphics card is under the hood.

Were sony to put the same hardware under there they'd have to supply some sort of decent API to deal with it if they didn't want devs 'moaning'.

LookingFor

Cheer up, it may not be as bad as you expect - over 1,000 PS2 titles will be BC on launch day, with more added in the future:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23148

That's nearly half of the PAL library BC from the start. A lot better than I'd have thought given the 360 experience with software BC.

Assuming that 1,000 covers the more popular titles, many people may not even notice that BC is more limited on their PS3 versus an earlier Japanese or US model.

Mr.StRiPe

projectmayhem wrote:

65 posts, regardless of the time you're a member, is not a "veteran" tbh...

So 5000+ posts of naive fanboyism and making stuff up is what counts?! Which forum do you moderate to ensure this “vibe of educated opinion”?

satchmo wrote:

Are you just making stuff up now?! And you talk about "ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here", whatever that means...

Does satchmo’s 1,175 posts qualify him as "veteran" in your view?

projectmayhem wrote:

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

5,223 posts

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

the PS2 was a nightmare to program for

65 posts

astrofool wrote:

PS2 WAS a complete nightmare to program for, particularly the memory setup (and that's coming from developers I work with who used to be in the games industry).

+4,899 posts

1huge1 wrote:

no he is right the ps2 was very hard to develop for, look at the quality of a lot of the earlier games...

+2,120 posts

thelordofcheese wrote:

Woah there tex, the Ps2 is a cnut to program for. Sweet jebus it breaks my brain just thinking about it.
Thanks to the retarded ass backwards setup of the chips, and the reliance on the bus speed to compensate for this, getting the ps2 to do anything halfway decent takes alot of time, effort and some very dark arts indeed.

+537 posts

That’s your 5,223 Posts against 7,621 (at the time of posting this thread!) does this mean that your “vibe of educated opinion” is wrong?

1huge1 wrote:

the reason the developers stuck with it was because of the massive customer base sony made with the ps1

thelordofcheese wrote:

And as other people have pointed out, given the massive user base of the Ps1, sticking it out with the Ps2 was probably considered a safe bet by most publishers.

This is the main reason developers “bothered” with it.

projectmayhem wrote:

welcome to console development buddy

welcome to the real world buddy!

Khalim

Yikes! :eek:

Chill out people. Breath in, relax. It's only the internets.

Trust it to Sony to cause this much trouble.

If only they passed on the savings to the consumers, then people would just go on quietly with their lives...

Moojuice

projectmayhem wrote:

i notice a lot of new members ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here.

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

as for the tricks and tweaks, welcome to console development buddy. it's how it goes. why do you think it's such a b1tch for microsoft to make the 360 play all the xbox games?

I dont see how Mr. Stripes post is an uneducated opinion. Nothing has been ruined. Its a very reasonable point of view and is on topic. Whats the problem with it?A bit of boards snobbery peeking through on your behalf ProjectMayhem? Surely quality is superior to quantity?

TBH I think this latest development from Sony is another bullet in the gun for the Playstation 3 and Sony's arrogant attitude towards its customers.

BlitzKrieg

Phil harrison has told the gaurdian that there will be a 1000 titles supported at launch.


Which is fine if its the big titles.

lets hope we dont have a repeat of the Barbies Pony adventure on the 360's backward list.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/phil-harrison-1000-ps2-games-playable-on-pal-ps3-240618.php

Retr0gamer

It could be like the xbox360 list were many of the games are listed as working but have major glitches in them due to the emulation.

tba

I dunno I still think I will hang onto my PS2, for more than one reason

projectmayhem

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

So 5000+ posts of naive fanboyism and making stuff up is what counts?! Which forum do you moderate to ensure this “vibe of educated opinion”?

i want you to go back over my posts and find the naive fanboyism. i actually think i've kept myself out of the "omg sony is teh win" thing. the only reason i post regularly in the sony forums is because i'm an ex employee, and try to keep some semblance of balance going on.

if you want me to piss off i'll be glad to.

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

That’s your 5,223 Posts against 7,621 (at the time of posting this thread!) does this mean that your “vibe of educated opinion” is wrong?

hang on, not once did i say you were wrong. i said un-educated. coming out and saying "the ps2 sucked to program for" isn't necessarily untrue, it's just taken completely out of context. you can't say it's a nightmare on its own, without comparing it to anything else. ps2 was a nightmare next to directx, but quite decent next to other openGL's. hell, even sony know that. and knew it years ago. hence buying up SNsystems in the UK to develop the ps3s (and beyond) toolkits and debug units based on psGL.

Moojuice wrote:

A bit of boards snobbery peeking through on your behalf ProjectMayhem?

hey, if you're in college a 1st year looks lesser to a 4th year. in work an old employee looks better then a newbie. i think it applies to forums too.

Moojuice wrote:

TBH I think this latest development from Sony is another bullet in the gun for the Playstation 3 and Sony's arrogant attitude towards its customers.

another bullet in the gun for a machine that retailers across europe are saying is the number one pre-booked item in games history. whether or not you like or dislike sony's arrogance and general lack of good handling PR in the last year or so, the experiences the machines they make provide enough enjoyment that people are willing to shell out €600 odd for a ps3, €200 odd for a PSP or €2000 odd for a bravia. why bother changing your attitude if it works so well?

maybe their arrogance, despite pissing people off, gives an air of superiority to the products. the same way finches costs more then club orange. it's not actually much better, but it feels like it.

satchmo

projectmayhem wrote:

ps2 was a nightmare next to directx, but quite decent next to other openGL's. hell, even sony know that. and knew it years ago. hence buying up SNsystems in the UK to develop the ps3s (and beyond) toolkits and debug units based on psGL

Okay this doesn't even make any sense. The PS2 doesn't use OpenGL or any other 3D API for that matter, it uses its own VU microcode to perform graphics operations, which is written in assembly - part of the reason it's difficult to program for (no matter what you compare it to). And the SN Systems software is just debugging and tuning tools... they certainly make it easier to debug and profile, but that has no effect on how easy or difficult the console is to program. Sony themselves produce the SDK that is used for actual programming.

Before you start accusing other people of being uneducated, you should really know what you're talking about yourself.

OT, Mr.StRiPe has been around here for a helluva lot longer than you, and as far as I'm concerned, the fact that he only posts when he has something useful to say makes him a better contributer to boards than someone else who might have thousands of postcount++ posts. This is a relatively interesting thread and I don't want it to get locked because of your misguided superiority complex.

projectmayhem

satchmo wrote:

Okay this doesn't even make any sense. The PS2 doesn't use OpenGL or any other 3D API for that matter, it uses its own VU microcode to perform graphics operations, which is written in assembly - part of the reason it's difficult to program for (no matter what you compare it to). And the SN Systems software is just debugging and tuning tools... they certainly make it easier to debug and profile, but that has no effect on how easy or difficult the console is to program. Sony themselves produce the SDK that is used for actual programming.

psGL is a complete 3d API (based on E.S.) for ps3, but a version WAS there for ps2. it went unused by most 3rd party devs until the last year or two of the ps2's life because it took some time, and research to get working with whatever ASM was written.

things like renderware took advantage of psGL during the ps2 lifecycle, bringing games like GTA to fruition.

as for the SN Systems comment, i didn't say they did anything other then develop debug/toolkit units. and they make a HUGE difference, in the same way XNA makes a huge difference to 360 development.

satchmo wrote:

Before you start accusing other people of being uneducated, you should really know what you're talking about yourself.

i'll try better next time sir.

satchmo wrote:

who might have thousands of postcount++ posts.

i like to think i contribute to threads, rather then post mindless "lawl" comments. but if i do, please feel free to report and have me banned.

satchmo wrote:

This is a relatively interesting thread and I don't want it to get locked because of your misguided superiority complex.

i'm not entirely sure why i'm being painted as some inane, babbling ego-maniac here, but as i said, if i am then just hit the report button and i'll be booted out of here faster then you can say "pwned".

BlitzKrieg

i like to think i contribute to threads, rather then post mindless "lawl" comments.

constantly argueing with me does not count as contributing

humanji

Geez, you guys all need a hug! Where's the love?

BlitzKrieg

in my pants

Moojuice

projectmayhem wrote:

hey, if you're in college a 1st year looks lesser to a 4th year. in work an old employee looks better then a newbie. i think it applies to forums too.

That’s a completely rubbish generalisation. Length of tenure in an organisation is no indication of intelligence or ability. Just because you made it to 4th year or have been in a company longer that someone else does not necessarily mean that they are 'lesser' (?). Many companies are riddled with employees who have been there a long time yet are bad at their job, have not learnt any new skills and are a hindrance rather than a help. Academia is worse; it’s full of morons who think that because they have been there for years or because they are a few years ahead of others it makes them better.

Ability and intelligence is what counts. Someone who posts here occasionally is in no way 'lesser' than someone who posts here constantly. It’s the quality of the posts not the quantity.

I agree with Satchmo, this is an interesting thread that is in danger of being descending into stupidity. ProjecyMayhem, I'm not questioning your intelligence I just think you are being a bit elitist and snobbish towards other posters.


Yes Sony's arrogance annoys me as does the naive attitude of their fan boys (and fan boys in general). They seem to have really lost focus with their carry on of late (rootkits, Blu-Ray issues, PS3 delays and price etc)

astrofool

You are not your postcount.

Dont be at yourself

This thread is terminally ill.