ps3 easier to program for

[ZX6Master]

If Microsoft has good dev tools in place, Sony will work up something comparable.

It's not a matter of just turning on a switch and saying "OOOH, we can match that". Microsoft knows how to do it because they've been developing software for decades. The same goes for Nintendo. Sony doesn't have the experience, let alone the mindset (See: Their sink-or-swim attitude with the PS2 which cost developers millions and extra time in development), required to make things as easy as they should be.

 

[{NG}Fidel]

Its not like Sony wont try though. Just because they havent been in as long doesnt may they are not capable.

 

[Michael.R]

Well it might be a little easier to make development tools for sony this time because of cell. Im not an expert nor do I have any knowledge on the subject but I would guess all the companies collaberating with sony on the cell are also working hard on creating good development tools for it. Isnt linux able to run on a cell, and didnt IBM just release an SDK or something like? Cell will probably be very well documented throughout the PS3's lifetime. Well atleast that is my guess.

 

[masher]

It is also safe to assume Sony isn't dumb...Sony can drop 500,000 for a couple of code monkeys to work up a good compiler easily.

Don't forget that Cell isn't a Sony processor. Its an IBM/Toshiba/Sony combined venture, and Cell already has design wins in places outside the PS3.

Earlier in the thread I demonstrated how an optimizing compiler can make programming a chip like the Cell no more difficult than a single-core processor, and that apps written for it can be code-portable to other platforms. IBM has said they are developing such tools. I think that-- in the absence of evidence to the contrary-- its safe to assume they will exist.

Microsoft knows how to do it because they've been developing software for decades. The same goes for Nintendo. Sony doesn't have the experience,

See my point above. IBM has been developing software longer than Microsoft. Especially parallel-optimizing compilers. I don't know that Microsoft has done *any*, to be honest.

 

[ZX6Master]

See my point above. IBM has been developing software longer than Microsoft. Especially parallel-optimizing compilers. I don't know that Microsoft has done *any*, to be honest.

Unfortunately, IBM isn't the company that is going to be responsible for the development tools of the PS3. Sony is the one who is going to have to get those kits out to software developers and do so in a way that doesn't make it a monumental task to create a game.

The PS2 was released in Japan yes, but not in the US until November. Besides that, I don't see how that has ANYTHING to do with what we were talking about before.

The fact that the PS2 didn't come out until November in the US is irrelevant; the development kits that Sony issued had far more time to mature, yet they didn't and developers suffered the consequences. The Xbox and Gamecube were immediately accepted and praised as being easy to create games for. If you can't see the relevance of that in judging the competence of each respective company in regards to issuing development hardware, something is wrong.

You're taking words that I'm typing and using them to drive points that are contained nowhere within my original text.

It's hard to stay in context when you're speaking of pictures that only you know about. Am I supposed to read your mind?

 

[Firewall]

Is 7 pages really needed? Seriously. How about this: untill one person on this board gets BOTH dev kits and uses them to produce a game how about we all pipe down.

No one here knows for sure what they are talking about yet there is 7 pages? How? Why? These threads baffle me!

The ps3 will come out in the US, period. There will be a ton of games for it, period.

Why 7 pages? I feel like I'm in the twilight thread...

 

[masher]

Unfortunately, IBM isn't the company that is going to be responsible for the development tools of the PS3. Sony is the one who is going to have to get those kits out..

I don't think you understand the process here. The "development tools" for the PS3 are going to consist primarily of two major pieces. The Cell SDK, by IBM, and the Cg SDK, by NVidia. Do you actually believe Sony is going to rewrite these itself?

 

[Arkham]

Is 7 pages really needed? Seriously. How about this: untill one person on this board gets BOTH dev kits and uses them to produce a game how about we all pipe down.

No one here knows for sure what they are talking about yet there is 7 pages? How? Why? These threads baffle me!

It's only 4 pages for me.

 

[lesman]

I call you out on that. Look at any launch game and compare it to the games at the end of the hardware's life-cycle.

*Call heard*

But show me any game that looks as good as any prerendered stuff for any console, ever before we argue about "beginning of gen, ending of gen" graphics. Not once have I seen any game that people have said "no way" about in graphics actually look how they show it. Tech demo videos are never realized on consoles. Sure, people are wowed near the end of a console's life, usually, but it's a gradual thing; they soon forget about "what they were expecting" with all the CG videos and crap, then they come to terms with reality. The truth is, no one should ever believe videos shown before a console release, especially when it's completely clear that there is no way in hell any PC or console can come close to doing the graphics shown. Oh yes, and ESPECIALLY never believe Sony.

 

[DukenukemX]

Is 7 pages really needed? Seriously. How about this: untill one person on this board gets BOTH dev kits and uses them to produce a game how about we all pipe down.

No one here knows for sure what they are talking about yet there is 7 pages? How? Why? These threads baffle me!

The ps3 will come out in the US, period. There will be a ton of games for it, period.

Why 7 pages? I feel like I'm in the twilight thread...

It's because we game this Hard.

 

[ZX6Master]

I don't think you understand the process here. The "development tools" for the PS3 are going to consist primarily of two major pieces. The Cell SDK, by IBM, and the Cg SDK, by NVidia. Do you actually believe Sony is going to rewrite these itself?

When a developer has a question about the PS3 SDK, they're not going to go to IBM; they're going to go to Sony.

 

[Lamont]

*Call heard*
But show me any game that looks as good as any prerendered stuff for any console.

This can also be adapted to PC. Tech demo's are tech demo's plain and simple. Showcasing one feature of a GPU. This will happen for Xbox 360/PS3 in the lifetime of the products. Take a look at MGS4, I keep bringing it up because it shows the creativity of the team to get power out of the console. Pre-rendered things will ALWAYS be ahead of the real-time stuff because memory is NEVER AN ISSUE.

BUT, the rate at which real-time artwork on PC/Console has advanced a lot faster in the few years we've been using it because of pre-rendered things.

Sure, people are wowed near the end of a console's life, usually, but it's a gradual thing; they soon forget about "what they were expecting" with all the CG videos and crap, then they come to terms with reality.

It's marketing.

The truth is, no one should ever believe videos shown before a console release, especially when it's completely clear that there is no way in hell any PC or console can come close to doing the graphics shown.

You're right, no one should. But the old rich guys who have money invested want to see it. Companies who are on the verge to going to a new platform want to see it. Artist and programmers see it as something to aspire to. Marketing needs it to make the competition look weak, and make the masses drool and have something to fight over. Being that I used to work for an R&D company for 4 years before going to games, I would have to say it's possible on certain scales. And we were using GF2/3/4 cards.

Oh yes, and ESPECIALLY never believe Sony.

I don't believe any marketing.

 

[ne0-reloaded]

I think you're proving to be a little bit dense here. Tutelary said that Killzone was doable... at 5FPS on the hardware. So then you go on to claim it's doable and list MGS4 as the proof. Newsflash: MGS4 can run on either system (or even the PC) according to Kojima. And while I do not doubt the skill of Kojima productions, you have to remember that you still have to run physics/AI etc and many other things aside from just scripted visual sequences.

how is that being dense? killzone is doable at a normal playing fps, because theres already a game in development that has suprassed it, and the game being playable on other platforms have nothing to do with the conversation. i think more than anything you have an issue with the ps3/sony. i dont think any game dev will release a graphically superior game with no physics or ai, that would absolutely make no damn sense

 

[masher]

When a developer has a question about the PS3 SDK, they're not going to go to IBM; they're going to go to Sony.

And you think this means something? Now you're just being silly. Your original point was that Sony didn't have the experience to write a decent SDK. When I pointed out IBM and NVidia were the ones responsible, you switch to some inane issue about Sony taking tech support calls?

Is it really so painful to be proven wrong?

 

[ZX6Master]

IBM designed the PowerPC CPU behind the Xbox 360 as well. If console manufacturers have nothing to do with the SDK (Which is what you're ignorantly trying to imply), why do developers cite their working relationships with Microsoft when questioned about ease of development for the Xbox 360?

http://www.microsoft.com/xna/

Ever since the PS3's debut at E3, the biggest concern among publishers has been a rise in development costs due to the complexity of making games for the console. Currently, developers lack familiarity with the console's technology, such as how to use the seven synergistic processing elements (SPEs) of the PS3's Cell CPU. Those fears returned during the meeting, as Kutaragi showed the "duck in the bathtub" demo from E3 and explained that it uses a total of 16 programs, including eight physics simulations and eight programmable shaders.

To assuage the audience's fears, Kutaragi said Sony has been looking into ways to make PS3 development easier and to support game designers. Kutaragi revealed that SCE has signed licensing agreements with a number of renowned development-tool companies to include their programs as a part of the software developer kit that will be provided to PS3 game developers.

Funny; it doesn't sound like IBM is doing the leg-work in making programming easier for developers. They might work on one aspect of it, but Sony is the company that has to bring it all together into one workable platform.

 

[masher]

Funny; it doesn't sound like IBM is doing the leg-work in making programming easier for developers. They might work on one aspect of it, but Sony is the company that has to bring it all together into one workable platform.

Exactly so, Sony is the one who has to coordinate all the tools into one package. Not develop the tools. Let me quote you from your own link:

> "SCE has signed licensing agreements with a number of renowned
> development-tool companies to include their programs..."

Now, since you've conveniently forgotten your first statement on the subject, lets repeat that one as well:

> Microsoft knows how to do it because they've been developing software for decades. The
> same goes for Nintendo. Sony doesn't have the experience..."

Sony doesn't need the development experience, because they're not developing the tools. They're bundling tools from other companies. Companies that-- in the case of IBM-- have more relevant experience than Microsoft.

Get it now?

 

[ZX6Master]

Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall, except less intelligent.

Microsoft and Nintendo's experience with developing tools of the past (Whether they created them or not) makes them more proficient at assembling and distributing the programming tools of others. Whether or not Microsoft or Nintendo create the tools is irrelevant; they've been working with them longer.

By "coordinating the tools into one package", they're having to create something; a set of tools that is supposed to be greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[Gnu314]

Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall, except less intelligent.

Microsoft and Nintendo's experience with developing tools of the past (Whether they created them or not) makes them more proficient at assembling and distributing the programming tools of others. Whether or not Microsoft or Nintendo create the tools is irrelevant; they've been working with them longer.

This is summary assumption, and the logic is entirely circular. How would anyone garner any experience with the tools if they have never created them (in the past or in the present).

By "coordinating the tools into one package", they're having to create something; a set of tools that is supposed to be greater than the sum of its parts.

I suppose this is true, but wouldn't that just be burning a couple of CDs?

 

[ZX6Master]

How would anyone garner any experience with the tools if they have never created them (in the past or in the present).

Because they've been faced with the task of assembling, documenting, and distributing unfamiliar programs with their hardware in the past (And they've accomplished it successfully?)

I suppose this is true, but wouldn't that just be burning a couple of CDs?

...no. Burning a bunch of programs onto a CD isn't going to teach developers how to use each program in tandem with the others.

 

[NulloModo]

...no. Burning a bunch of programs onto a CD isn't going to teach developers how to use each program in tandem with the others.

But that is likely all that Sony has to do. Sony doesn't have to entice and tease Developers into making PS3 games, they will already want to for the garaunteed payday as long as the game doesn't suck donkey balls.

If they can make it easier via good tools, even if they are supported by companies other than Sony, that just means better games earlier on.

 

[masher]

I suppose this is true, but wouldn't that just be burning a couple of CDs?

He's a hound dog, refusing to let go of the well-chewed bone of his pet theory.
Sony will have to do a bit more than just burn some CDs. They'll have to write a loader for one, and probably some linker stubs. But the important parts-- and 98.5% of the actual development work-- will be done by other companies. Sony's development experience is therefore irrelevant, and his theory falls flat on its face.

I have a copy Cell DB SDK and emulator myself (straight from IBM, NOT Sony), and plan to fiddle with it next month when I get some free time.

 

[ZX6Master]

I have a copy Cell DB SDK and emulator myself (straight from IBM, NOT Sony), and plan to fiddle with it next month when I get some free time.

When you get a game running, let us know Mind telling us where you got the SDK?

But that is likely all that Sony has to do. Sony doesn't have to entice and tease Developers into making PS3 games, they will already want to for the garaunteed payday as long as the game doesn't suck donkey balls.

It isn't a guaranteed "pay-day".

Let's summarize:

1. Sony has a history of giving developers the cold shoulder with the "Sink or Swim" attitude. Microsoft and Nintendo are known for going through great lengths to explain their development documentation.

2. Ken Kutaragi has gone on record as saying that the PS3 was going to be "expensive" and that people would still buy it; unfortunately, they thought that with the PSX too.

3. Microsoft will have sold millions of Xbox 360 systems before the PS3 ever sees the light of day; who will have the larger userbase?

Developers chose the PS2 because they had no viable option in the Dreamcast (Sega's financial problems were obvious, and anyone with any sort of business sense could see them getting deeper and deeper into debt). By the time the Xbox/Gamecube came out, there was no chance in Hell that Microsoft/Nintendo could have caught up.

 

[NulloModo]

1. Sony has a history of giving developers the cold shoulder with the "Sink or Swim" attitude. Microsoft and Nintendo are known for going through great lengths to explain their development documentation.

And they can, being #1 in the market has certain benefits. I don't doubt they are feeling the heat now though, they are suddenly planning on making their own centralized online gaming system, it is obvious they are worried about the unexpected success of the 360.

2. Ken Kutaragi has gone on record as saying that the PS3 was going to be "expensive" and that people would still buy it; unfortunately, they thought that with the PSX too.

Consoles these days are a lot more than just gaming systems. People are willing to spend $1000 on a computer, they will spend that much on a console with similar capabilities. Plus, it will likely come in at less than that, I am thinking $800 max, $500 more likely, that is easily affordable for most families. In a world of $1000 computers (Well, for anything halfway decent), $2000 HDTVs, $20,000 cars, and $8.99 a lb for cheap steaks (damn safeway), $500 for a system that will last for several years is a drop in the bucket. Plus, the PSX was never launched in the US. Had it in, I would have probably bought one, the capabilities were awesome, but it was a niche market Japanese only product.

3. Microsoft will have sold millions of Xbox 360 systems before the PS3 ever sees the light of day; who will have the larger userbase?

Millions? I am thinking the 360 will ship more than 1 million units before the PS3 launch, but not hit 2 or more than that, but that is just my prediction. They are at what, 600,000+ now? Plus, the initial launch weeks are always the biggest when it comes to sales.
[/QUOTE]

 

[ZX6Master]

And they can, being #1 in the market has certain benefits. I don't doubt they are feeling the heat now though, they are suddenly planning on making their own centralized online gaming system, it is obvious they are worried about the unexpected success of the 360.

*sigh*

This is the type of thinking that got Nintendo pushed into 3rd worldwide. They never thought that a technologically inferior system (Playstation Vs. N64) made by a company that had no experience in the industry (Sony) could dominate them, and it happened.

Unfortunately, Sony basically pulled a 180 with the PS2. Instead of having a developer-friendly console, they created the most complicated hardware they could imagine and laid it on them.

The PS2 became #1 because there were no other options to support at the time, just as I said earlier. This time, there are options.

By the way, they've gone on record as saying they weren't going to have a centralized online service. It's a little late to have changed their minds (And even if they have, it won't be ready for a launch this year).

Consoles these days are a lot more than just gaming systems. People are willing to spend $1000 on a computer, they will spend that much on a console with similar capabilities. Plus, it will likely come in at less than that, I am thinking $800 max, $500 more likely, that is easily affordable for most families. In a world of $1000 computers (Well, for anything halfway decent), $2000 HDTVs, $20,000 cars, and $8.99 a lb for cheap steaks (damn safeway), $500 for a system that will last for several years is a drop in the bucket. Plus, the PSX was never launched in the US. Had it in, I would have probably bought one, the capabilities were awesome, but it was a niche market Japanese only product.

You're severely overestimating the purchasing power of people these days (Especially the US). People aren't going to spend $500~800 when they could have an Xbox 360 (Which will be entering it's second generation and looking superb) at half the price. Then there is the fact that the Nintendo Revolution will be offering a radically new form of gameplay, which means even more competition for Sony.

Citing HDTVs isn't very smart, since the overall market penetration is still hovering around 15%. It's obvious that the people who are willing to drop that kind of cash on a television are in the minority.

The PSX never launched in the US because it was a monumental flop in it's home country. Sony made one mistake and they weren't going to compound it by making another.

Millions? I am thinking the 360 will ship more than 1 million units before the PS3 launch, but not hit 2 or more than that, but that is just my prediction. They are at what, 600,000+ now? Plus, the initial launch weeks are always the biggest when it comes to sales.

...think again.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060127/tc_nm/microsoft_xbox_dc

The world's biggest software maker, which said it sold 1.5 million units of its next-generation video game console in its December quarter, now expects to sell 2.5 million Xbox 360s by late February.

...and there is still a shortage.

 

[masher]

Consoles these days are a lot more than just gaming systems...$500 for a system that will last for several years is a drop in the bucket.

Just so. Sony will sell millions of them for people just looking for a cheap Blu-ray player. And don't underestimate the number of 360 owners that will also buy a PS3. My own household owns a 360, 2 PS2s, 2 Gamecubes, an XBox 1, and several older consoles. If there's a decent selection of Blu-ray DVDs out when the PS3 hits market, I'll probably buy two of them, just so I don't have to push the kids off when I want to watch something.

When you get a game running, let us know Mind telling us where you got the SDK?

Do you have to act like a child in every post? An IBM rep came round the lab with free kits for all. I expect they're trying to drum up support for Cell in the physical sciences arena.

 

[ZX6Master]

If I'm to speak at a level you can understand, acting like a child is necessary.

You still haven't conceded the fact that developers are going to go to Sony for help with their development kits. Why is that? IBM is responsible for documenting the methods behind using the Cell; Sony is responsible for documenting the methods for integrating the usage of the Cell with the other components of their system.

 

[Slartibartfast]

If I'm to speak at a level you can understand, acting like a child is necessary.

You still haven't conceded the fact that developers are going to go to Sony for help with their development kits. Why is that? IBM is responsible for documenting the methods behind using the Cell; Sony is responsible for documenting the methods for integrating the usage of the Cell with the other components of their system.

Unless somebody has absolute proof of what they're saying, you say they're full of bs. Why should anybody believe this statement?

 

[Gnu314]

He has no support for it, because he has no real information. It should be obvious to you at this point that he makes the stuff up and then tries to claim foul when someone calls him on it. Also notice how he changes the subject to something that he can attempt to control in most posts.

 

[ZX6Master]

Unless somebody has absolute proof of what they're saying, you say they're full of bs. Why should anybody believe this statement?

Because it's what every console manufacturer in history has done in the past? This isn't that hard of a concept to grasp; IBM gives the Cell SDK to Sony, but Sony is ultimately responsible for getting that SDK to developers in both physical (Dev kits) and digital form (PS3 SDKs, which would combine the software that Sony received from the third-party SDK writers that were cited earlier).

Gnu, how about you go somewhere else to troll. Unlike you, I've actually provided statements from Ken Kutaragi on the matter. I guess he's lying when he says that Sony is the company that answers the questions and about the PS3 SDK

 

[steviep]

Wellll.... he does often lie

 

[masher]

He has no support for it, because he has no real information. It should be obvious to you at this point that he makes the stuff up and then tries to claim foul when someone calls him on it. Also notice how he changes the subject to something that he can attempt to control in most posts.

He's getting more and more ridiculous with each post. His original point was Sony would never be able to write a decent Cell compiler and SDK; when I pointed out that such already existed, and was written by a totally different company, he shifted to some absurd issue about Sony being incompetently unable to "get it in the hands of developers".

We just have to face facts. There are people interested in facts and rational debate...and then there are people like ZX6Master.

 

[ZX6Master]

I guess you were right all along; Sony doesn't make PS3 SDKs. They're not even making the Playstation 3. Apparently, IBM/Nvidia will be doing 100% of the work, despite the fact that direct statements from Kutaragi have been cited and despite the fact that Sony compiles and assembles the physical kits that can be distributed to developers

/sarcasm

 

[theNoid]

Millions? I am thinking the 360 will ship more than 1 million units before the PS3 launch, but not hit 2 or more than that, but that is just my prediction. They are at what, 600,000+ now? Plus, the initial launch weeks are always the biggest when it comes to sales.

The 360 has sold over 1.5 Million units worldwide already, this was announced last week by MS.

How does your foot taste ?

Get with the times fan-boy.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

I dont get how what was said in that article makes it much easier to program for? The GPU is basically a 7800 so it makes sense that you would be able to use a version of OpenGL to program for the GPU. That has no effect on the Cell chip however, which is the hard part of programming.

When the developer finally talks about the important bits, the pseudo C code for the Cell, he basically says "If you can do 8 threads on a PC you can do it for Cell"... Well DUH? Of course you CAN utilize the entire cell . The hard part is actually doing the 8 different threads. I am glad to see that the development tools are good instead of being clunky, but I dont see them mentioning a compiler that optimzes use of the Cell chip. That is what would really make a difference for the PS3.

I am not doing this to try to flame the Cell or the PS3. I think it has great potential...I am merely referring to the article and the fact that it doesn't seem that the PS3 is any easier to code for than we thought. All it is basically saying is that you code for it in a familiar language...not that it handles the multithreading for you.

Excellent points. While fan-boys and girls are taking this to mean PS3 is as easy to code for as PC, they miss important points such as the fact, as you mentioned, that RSX, not Cell, is what's PC-like to code for. As for Cell, it's NOT like a multi-core PC architecture, because Cell, like Xenon, is incapable of executing the full range of instructions on the SPE's that it can on the main core, it's incapable of dynamically assigning tasks to free processing resources (threads have to be *manually* coded to each SPE, which is where the assignment of specific tasks to specific SPE's comes into play) like a PC processor can, it's incapable of executing instructions out of order like a PC processor can, it's incapable of predicting the next needed instructions like a PC processor can, and so on and so on.

No doubt they're trying to make PS3 easier than PS2, and it's precisely the difficulties and shortcomings of the much hyped Cell that lead directly to the inclusion of the nVidia GPU.

Jason

 

[LynxFX]

The 360 has sold over 1.5 Million units worldwide already, this was announced last week by MS.

That's a big change of tune from two weeks (1/16) ago when the NPD Group was estimating only 600,000 sold in the US. Now MS is claiming 900,000? Where did that extra 300k come from in one week and if MS did ship that many, how could the NPD Group be that much off in their estimate?

Something doesn't add up.