@_Steve_

Quote:

The review I saw which did direct comparisons between the two versions highlighted a shockingly poor PS3 version. Textures were nowhere near as refined or distinct, resolutions were not as clear and minor little touches found in the 360 version were notably absent in the PS3 one. Considering the PS3 version was meant to be the lead release, the quality of it over the 360 is shocking. While on paper the 360 should be lacking in power over the PS3, it appears that Sony have made it very difficult for developers to make use of the power available to them.

If memory serves MikeB posted the Ghostbuster's team saying consessions had to be made to the PS3 version due to the 360. They stated they could do so much more on the screen of the PS3 but had to cut back due to the 360. IMO sad to see the PS3, which the team seemingly claimed to be superior, not have the superior version. If the end user received more poor textures that's not a win. So perhaps the 360 did the PS3 version a favor.

@BrianK

Your memory does serve.

Quote:

MikeB wrote: PS3 lead platform => Potentially better on PS3, but will usually be dumbed down to fit the 360's requirements (DVD, processing capabilities, etc), will make more efficient use of both 360 and PS3 hardware. "Terminal Reality president Mark Randel admitted that Ghostbusters on PS3 has been held back by the fact will also release on 360, saying that the game would have double the amount of objects on screen if it had been PS3-only"

Also here:

Quote:

MikeB wrote: Some comments on a game with development being lead on the PS3 (Ghostbusters): "We’re running the same game for both platforms but if we made a PS3-only game, for example, you could double the amount of objects on screen that you’re seeing." "For example, we’ve reserved one whole processor on the PS3 for Dolby Digital 5.1 sound whereas on the 360 you have part of one processor to do that. So we can have a lot better sound mixing and a lot more effects going on at the same time. That kinds of makes us do a little bit less in the game [360] but makes for better audio. If we’re doing a PS3 only game however, we could be doing a lot more. We could be pushing a lot more on the screen."

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 03:24 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 03:23 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 03:20 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@fairlanefastback

Thanks for the search. I admit to being lazy and not wanting to dig up the old posts.

Strange that the superior PS3 receives worse visuals. The developer claimed the PS3 could do more objects on the screen. Would more blurry objects be what the market is looking for? I'd think not.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

I'm not upset Mike. You are the one throwing around what any "fool" knows, and talking about hate mail and other garbage like that.

I used that wording as I don't like you to attack this person, as for walking out of the show, I think most people wouldn't have done so. People usually have to think this over and the show may be over before people would get to such a decision. Maybe this person did not know fully how the show would develop up until the end until the end of the show, hoping there may have been a positive twist at the end.

@BrianK

Quote:

If memory serves MikeB posted the Ghostbuster's team saying consessions had to be made to the PS3 version due to the 360. They stated they could do so much more on the screen of the PS3 but had to cut back due to the 360. IMO sad to see the PS3, which the team seemingly claimed to be superior, not have the superior version. If the end user received more poor textures that's not a win. So perhaps the 360 did the PS3 version a favor.

They did not claim the PS3 version would be superior, rather that they would have to resort to sacrifices. Ghostbuster, like many or most 360/PS3 multi-platform games was lead on the XBox 360. Recommended development practices on the 360 are inefficient, especially when ported over to the PS3 architecture.

Uncharted 2 is a top example what can be achieved with regard to level of detail in a game if developed exclusively (Cell processing and Blu-Ray streaming). I think playing that game should open some eyes.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @fairlanefastback Quote: I'm not upset Mike. You are the one throwing around what any "fool" knows, and talking about hate mail and other garbage like that. I used that wording as I don't like you to attack this person, as for walking out of the show, I think most people wouldn't have done so. People usually have to think this over and the show may be over before people would get to such a decision. Maybe this person did not know fully how the show would develop up until the end until the end of the show, hoping there may have been a positive twist at the end.

Again, nice try at twisting. I have attacked no one. I have simply stated that someone who admits that they stayed on fulfilling a request to embellish is not a reliable source after the fact, especially when remaining anonymous and when lacking any corroboration.

I have even stated beyond this that my "gut" does still think it might very well be truthful, which obviously further shows I am not "attacking" this anonymous source. So please spare everyone your feigned indignation.

You are the one trying to further a cause and provide it as a proof, and so the burden is on you, thats all. Especially in light of the fact that you have previously endorsed Watchdog's methodology in the past when the Xbox 360 was the target of a previous show via quoting it as a reliable source.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 06:55 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @BrianK They did not claim the PS3 version would be superior, rather that they would have to resort to sacrifices. Ghostbuster, like many or most 360/PS3 multi-platform games was lead on the XBox 360. Recommended development practices on the 360 are inefficient, especially when ported over to the PS3 architecture.

Mike, your own quote from 04/29/2008 on this very board (which is what Brian was refering to and which I quoted in post 722 of this thread ) had you stating the opposite, that Ghostbusters was lead on the PS3.

Quote:

MikeB wrote: Some comments on a game with development being lead on the PS3 (Ghostbusters):

Plus, you were not the only one saying it was PS3 lead either:

MTV Multiplayer article on Terminal Reality choosing PS3 as their lead platform for Ghostbusters

Also Brian did not state that they said the PS3 version would be superior. He brought forth the question of (How could the) "PS3, which the team seemingly claimed to be superior, not have the superior version"?

Again, nice try at twisting.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:23 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:11 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:10 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:08 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:05 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:05 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:00 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 06:59 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @BrianK Uncharted 2 is a top example what can be achieved with regard to level of detail in a game if developed exclusively (Cell processing and Blu-Ray streaming). I think playing that game should open some eyes.

Yep, looking great so far. Really looking forward to that one. The Uncharted game is what got me to finally get a PS3 in the first place.

Honestly Mike, I don't know why you don't stick to honest stuff like this to tout your love of the PS3 and its capabilities. This twisting of people's words over and over, including your own to just keep trying to get a "win" for the PS3 is not fooling anyone.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-Sep-2009 at 07:18 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

Also Brian did not state that they said the PS3 version would be superior. He brought forth the question of (How could the) "PS3, which the team seemingly claimed to be superior, not have the superior version"?

Weird! It's like they made the PS3 the lead platform, played it safe to avoid difficulty porting to the 360 and then tweaked the hell out of the port and left the PS3 version as the original 'safe' version with minimal optimisations!! That is really strange. Why not take the later Amiga vs ST strategy - make a game that you're proud of on your lead format and then downsize/shoe horn the game onto the lesser platform - Lemmings 2 was a great example of this and ultimately led me to dump the aging ST for an AGA Amiga! Multi-platform programming is madness!!!

P.S. Somehow I think the ST version of Rainbow Islands beats the Amiga one! I heard even the NES version was better than the Amiga one! No matter I still love the game

Last edited by BigD on 23-Sep-2009 at 09:19 AM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

Honestly Mike, I don't know why you don't stick to honest stuff like this to tout your love of the PS3 and its capabilities. This twisting of people's words over and over, including your own to just keep trying to get a "win" for the PS3 is not fooling anyone.

I am not twisting words and yes I usually point to specific PS3 exclusives to highlight the PS3's capabilities. Actually I advocated this for a long time.

With regard to Ghostbusters, I simply quoted development comments at the time. I was in no way involved in the development of that game myself. So IMO no need to be upset about that.

But seems clear the game development was lead on the XBox 360, as there were strange glitches which needed patching, which would otherwise been have dealt with before launch.

@MikeB

Quote:

But seems clear the game development was lead on the XBox 360, as there were strange glitches which needed patching, which would otherwise been have dealt with before launch.

And yet the PS3 WAS the lead format and still it did turn out significantly buggier/muddier and with a lower resolution! Go figure!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

About Ghostbusters.

The PS3's cpu has more processing capabilities which lets it keep track of more objects. However, the gpu will not be up to the task of rendering them properly and that's where the 360 excells.

So the PS3 had to "dumb down" the # of objects, but the 360 can support better textures and animation/rendering on them.

It actually makes sense, but I'm a programmer so I can understand that easier.

Sony shoved a lame duck gpu in there. MS went cutting edge for the time. Sony's original hope was that this super cpu could be the gpu as well but that was not the case.

The 360 seems to have more system balance with less bottlenecks. It's only limitation is the size of the storage media but HD-installs negates that.

I am, ofcourse, not referring to production quality issues here.

@fairlanefastback

I rewatched the show just in case to see where exactly lies your issue.

Ian was indeed reporting from the scene, so my reference seems just to me. Secondly, I only saw 1 of the 3 customers speak out on his problems and he didn't say anything that malicious neither. So why you alledge any of them would have lied goes beyond me.

Maybe it was cut out, but it wasn't there in the version I saw.

@Lou

Quote:

So the PS3 had to "dumb down" the # of objects, but the 360 can support better textures and animation/rendering on them.

That's the opposite of what developers say regarding number of objects on screen.

The PS3 GPU is adequate and is about just as powerful as the 360 GPU with regard to screen refresh in many cases (in some cases the RSX is more powerful and under other circumstances the Xenos). However the GPU was picked and designed to not overlap too much with the strongpoints of the Cell architecture. The Cell is far more suitable / flexible for many graphics related tasks, however this works very differently as compared to on the PC / 360, hence there are some issues related to that when designing a cross platform game, amongst other issues.

Really, try Uncharted 2. That will put things into perspective.

The dual Cell idea was from the very early days. The RSX is far more powerful and dedicated than the Cell for some graphics tasks. There could have been potential for fully raytraced games, but that would have complicated games design (and porting of legacy game engines) for such a PS3, a lot more than is currently the case.

Quote:

Sony shoved a lame duck gpu in there

This coming from someone like you (wowed by Wii graphics) this sounds so weird to me....

Last edited by MikeB on 23-Sep-2009 at 01:11 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 23-Sep-2009 at 12:44 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Quote: So the PS3 had to "dumb down" the # of objects, but the 360 can support better textures and animation/rendering on them. That's the opposite of what developers say regarding number of objects on screen. The PS3 GPU is adequate and is about just as powerful as the 360 GPU with regard to screen refresh in many cases (in some cases the RSX is more powerful and under other circumstances the Xenos). However the GPU was picked and designed to not overlap too much with the strongpoints of the Cell architecture. The Cell is far more suitable / flexible for many graphics related tasks, however this works very differently as compared to on the PC / 360, hence there are some issues related to that when designed a cross platform game amongst others. Really, take try Uncharted 2. That will put things into perspective. The dual Cell idea was from the very early days. The RSX is far more powerful and dedicated than the Cell for some graphics tasks. There could have been potential for fully raytraced games, but that would have complicated games design (and porting of legacy game engines) for such a PS3 a lot more than is currently the case.

Really, you don't know what you are talking about. There was no dual-Cell idea only Sony's hubris into thinking Cell would be able to do it all...and RSX is atleast 1/2 a generation behind Xenos. Managing objects (not visually mind you) is a cpu task. Rendering objects is a gpu task. PS3's weak link is the gpu.

@Lou

You always come out with heavy wording, nomatter right or wrong (usually wrong in such cases).

Quote:

Really, you don't know what you are talking about. There was no dual-Cell idea

Here a summary of an old Japanese interview why the dual Cell approach was dropped:


"- A 2-Cell PS3 was considered - one acting as a GPU, one as a CPU. But Cell's nature as a CPU eats away at its efficiency for graphics relative to a dedicated GPU. So they've married Cell with a specialised GPU.

- Cell, however, can be used for graphics tasks. Cell and RSX have direct access to the results of each other's operations. Kutaragi specifically mentions displacement mapping as a sample workload the SPEs could take on. I think he mentions something about harmonising floating point rounding errors between the CPU and GPU to further ease data exchange between the two. Seems like they focussed quite a lot on harmonising communication between the GPU and CPU, and binding them quite tightly together."

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51518

I believe it was 2003 when Ken talked about the dual Cell idea for the PS3, however soon afterwards in early 2004 Sony partnered with nvidia to design a GPU to go hand in hand with the Cell processor.

Please be more humble when talking about things you seemingly don't know about.

Last edited by MikeB on 23-Sep-2009 at 01:53 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

The PS3 GPU is adequate and is about just as powerful as the 360 GPU with regard to screen refresh in many cases (in some cases the RSX is more powerful and under other circumstances the Xenos).

Name that other circumstances. Unless a game doesn't have any texture operations, any RSX's pixel shader's peak performance numbers are void.

Due to lack the of decoupled texture and pixel shader design, RSX's pixel shader's stalls during a texture operation. Like NVIDIA's CUDA GpGPUs, ATI Xenos has decoupled texture and shader unit design.

Quote:

However the GPU was picked and designed to not overlap too much with the strongpoints of the Cell architecture

Fixing RSX's design issues reduces CELL's compute resource. I wonder why CELL was allocated for Early-Z type functions while ATI Xenos and DX10 GPUs includes this feature as standard.

Radeon X1900 + CELL combo would have been a stream computing monster i.e. Fold@Home CELL + Fold@Home GPU1.

Quote:

The RSX is far more powerful and dedicated than the Cell for some graphics tasks. There could have been potential for fully raytraced games, but that would have complicated games design (and porting of legacy game engines) for such a PS3, a lot more than is currently the case.

Raytracing?

(Click for full size)


http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38145/135/
"Radeon 4800 supports a 100% ray-traced pipeline".
Note the tessellation unit's usage for raytracing. ATI Xenos includes a tessellation unit.

Last edited by _Steve_ on 23-Sep-2009 at 10:21 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 02:00 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 01:58 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@MikeB

If Xbox 360 was the lead platform for Ghostbusters, where's the tessellation support? Tessellation was designed to reduce the load on the CPU.

Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 02:09 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 02:08 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@MikeB

Quote:

With regard to Ghostbusters, I simply quoted development comments at the time

I see this comment as disengenious. It has been your modus operandi here to discount the 360 at every turn and support the PS3. IMO these comments were to highlight how the PS3 was better than the 360 and show that the 360 is harming the PS3 development. Of course if Sony made a compelling console instead of being in last place then cross-platform would be less of a worry for developers. It's been said many times that the PS3 development costs are higher and user base smaller than the other consoles. This leads to smaller profits for developers.

Quote:

But seems clear the game development was lead on the XBox 360, as there were strange glitches which needed patching, which would otherwise been have dealt with before launch.

Here you make it sound like a 'glitch' must only be related to a 360 development? If that's what you're saying it's not true. See Rachet and Clank and Uncharted which are glitchy and are PS3 only titles. If that's not what you meant this could use some clarity.

@MikeB

Quote:

However the GPU was picked and designed to not overlap too much with the strongpoints of the Cell architecture

And of course for cost reasons. The PS3 was already a cost bloated console. Moving up a generation to equal or better the Xenos would have meant more costs, read losses, for Sony.