mapesdhs
Distinguished
- Jan 22, 2007
- 35
- 0
- 18,590
dtemple writes:
> ... but because it's fun, it's what I'm playing. ...
Funny you should mention that; I have a decent-spec PC with Stalker, Oblivion, CoD4 & heaven knows
what else, but atm I'm playing the original Mercenaries on PS2 (for the 3rd time) because, as you say, it's *fun*. 😀
(all but one baddies captured alive, just the boss to go...)
I'd rather leave playing the PC games for when I have a good chunk of free time to really get into them, since
atm I'm too busy with work & other things, though I'm already a fair way through Oblivion.
I can understand why the PS2 is still selling well. Many of the PS2 games do hold up nicely in terms of gameplay,
if not graphically. I really liked Black, for example, and, "Time Splitters Future Perfect" was hillarious. Unless
one is fanatical about 3D visuals (as I used to be), gameplay can make all the difference. This is why I liked,
"Draken: The Ancients' Gates" for PS2, and other probably less well known gems; "The Suffering" was pretty
intense - I dare any modern gamer to play this old timer in a dark room with a modern sound system! 😀 Brought back
memories of the original Doom...
As for system specs, I came across an academic analysis last year, comparing the Xbox360 to the PS3, used
in lectures on computer architectures at a USA Univ. Stricly with respect to potential performance, the PS3 is a
faster system, but as people have pointed out it is not as easy to program.
A couple of years ago I talked to a guy at a games company which decided not to port an RPG game they were
working on to the PS3; he said:
"Well, the thing is that the ps3 idea was just that, an idea. But later when we investigated more closely, the ps3
would require almost a complete rewrite of the engine specifically for it in order to use the cell processors etc.
It's a very quirky architecture, I went to a presentation by a guy from IBM who did a crash course on cell
programming etc, and one would have to explicitly program each cell. Each cell has it's own memory and you
have to "upload" the code with its data there and poll for results. Not like an SMP system where you can just
spawn threads that work on the same memory. More like a cluster."
I asked if companies would write higher-level libs to make things easier, something that could be shared; he replied:
"Well, most ps3 games are going to be written 'for the ps3' from start to end, so it won't matter much, it's just
not "port-friendly" so don't expect many PC games ported to it. As for the higher level functionality, I'm not
sure that something universal could work. Everyone is going to make a "cell program manager" for their game,
but these sort of things are usually tailored to the needs of the specific project."
I asked how the Cells communicate with each other; he said:
"They don't, each cell has it's own memory and it's the responsibility of the main program running on the PowerPC
front to put data/code for each cell and check back for results."
Presumably, like the PS2, companies will get better and better at exploiting what the PS3 can do over time, getting
ever more out of the same hardware. By contrast, visual improvements in PC gaming tend to arise from a brute force
approach to making ever faster GPUs, even though a typical PC card is never exploited to more than a third of its
true potential before the product line movies on - it's not economic in the PC gfx market to make drivers that efficient
for every product (too expensive). Given it's PC-derived gfx origins, the Xbox360 has an obvious advantage here
for developers.
It's no surprise that people have differences as to which console they prefer - afterall, we all like different things. One
point is obvious though: a PS3 is a very cost-effective way of obtaining an HD movie player, compared to an ordinary
standalone player, and it can be used for other things aswell. However, I'm not bothering until HD displays are more
sensibly priced with a better technology like OLED.
Lastly, people forget that one aspect of PC gaming is also attractive for many users: messing around with CPU/gfx
hardware, modding, overclocking, etc. is *fun*. In my youth, I was into electronics big time, but these days a lot of
technology is very black-box. Overclocking on PCs, building ever better systems, etc. is perhaps the modern
equivalent of such hobbies. Without PC gaming, I can imagine many people who might otherwise become interested
in electronics, computer science, etc. would never get into it in the 1st place. I got started by coding for 8bit systems
like the BBC Micro, C64, etc., but today it's not practical for home users to write their own programs in this way, so
fiddling with PC tech is the next best thing.
The market needs a range of options, for a variety of reasons. Interactive/Group games do nothing for me (Guitar Hero,
singing games, etc.), so I don't own a Wii, but I can certainly understand the appeal for those who love them, and
wouldn't for a minute suggest that there shouldn't be a product. Nintendo just doesn't make the kind of games I like atm,
even though I was an ardent fan of the N64 (I had the first ever N64 web site, or Ultra64 as it was back then prior to
launch). I didn't buy a Gamecube, but was bought one as a gift - as expected, I found it hard to find suitable games.
I really would have liked to get a PS3, but the price was way too high at launch, games too costly, and as it happens
one of the games I'd been looking forward to turned out to be a bit of a let-down (Mercenaries2), while the other game
(GTA4) is now available for the PC anyway and at a much cheaper price (13 UKP) than typical PS3 games, so I'll just
buy the PC version some day.
As for an XBox360, I don't see the point since I have a PC, and I do enjoy meddling with hw stuff. Besides, I once
walked past MS' Redmond HQ and that's as close as I'd like to get thankye very much. 😀 Having to use Windows is
bad enough...
Sony's mistake is simply price. The PS3 and its games are just too expensive, for whatever reason. Indeed, it was very
clever of MS to point out last year that, for the price of a PS3, one could buy both an XBox360 *and* a Wii. For parents
buying presents, if not for gamers buying for themselves, this may have swayed many people during key buying seasons
like Christmas.
gamerk316 writes:
> I think the biggest problem has become the fact that the PC now overlaps with consoles, and I'm suspecting sales are
> being hit quite a bit as a result...
Very good point. Certainly, consoles are not as simple to use as they used to be. Creeping into our lives with barely
a moan from anyone, we now have consoles that require updates, fixes, etc., and there are huge problems with ported
titles that are full of bugs, eg. Oblivion for the PS3 has lots of flaws. I don't think the PC platform will fade though -
there are other factors involved that will keep it going, as I mentioned above.
Ian.
> ... but because it's fun, it's what I'm playing. ...
Funny you should mention that; I have a decent-spec PC with Stalker, Oblivion, CoD4 & heaven knows
what else, but atm I'm playing the original Mercenaries on PS2 (for the 3rd time) because, as you say, it's *fun*. 😀
(all but one baddies captured alive, just the boss to go...)
I'd rather leave playing the PC games for when I have a good chunk of free time to really get into them, since
atm I'm too busy with work & other things, though I'm already a fair way through Oblivion.
I can understand why the PS2 is still selling well. Many of the PS2 games do hold up nicely in terms of gameplay,
if not graphically. I really liked Black, for example, and, "Time Splitters Future Perfect" was hillarious. Unless
one is fanatical about 3D visuals (as I used to be), gameplay can make all the difference. This is why I liked,
"Draken: The Ancients' Gates" for PS2, and other probably less well known gems; "The Suffering" was pretty
intense - I dare any modern gamer to play this old timer in a dark room with a modern sound system! 😀 Brought back
memories of the original Doom...
As for system specs, I came across an academic analysis last year, comparing the Xbox360 to the PS3, used
in lectures on computer architectures at a USA Univ. Stricly with respect to potential performance, the PS3 is a
faster system, but as people have pointed out it is not as easy to program.
A couple of years ago I talked to a guy at a games company which decided not to port an RPG game they were
working on to the PS3; he said:
"Well, the thing is that the ps3 idea was just that, an idea. But later when we investigated more closely, the ps3
would require almost a complete rewrite of the engine specifically for it in order to use the cell processors etc.
It's a very quirky architecture, I went to a presentation by a guy from IBM who did a crash course on cell
programming etc, and one would have to explicitly program each cell. Each cell has it's own memory and you
have to "upload" the code with its data there and poll for results. Not like an SMP system where you can just
spawn threads that work on the same memory. More like a cluster."
I asked if companies would write higher-level libs to make things easier, something that could be shared; he replied:
"Well, most ps3 games are going to be written 'for the ps3' from start to end, so it won't matter much, it's just
not "port-friendly" so don't expect many PC games ported to it. As for the higher level functionality, I'm not
sure that something universal could work. Everyone is going to make a "cell program manager" for their game,
but these sort of things are usually tailored to the needs of the specific project."
I asked how the Cells communicate with each other; he said:
"They don't, each cell has it's own memory and it's the responsibility of the main program running on the PowerPC
front to put data/code for each cell and check back for results."
Presumably, like the PS2, companies will get better and better at exploiting what the PS3 can do over time, getting
ever more out of the same hardware. By contrast, visual improvements in PC gaming tend to arise from a brute force
approach to making ever faster GPUs, even though a typical PC card is never exploited to more than a third of its
true potential before the product line movies on - it's not economic in the PC gfx market to make drivers that efficient
for every product (too expensive). Given it's PC-derived gfx origins, the Xbox360 has an obvious advantage here
for developers.
It's no surprise that people have differences as to which console they prefer - afterall, we all like different things. One
point is obvious though: a PS3 is a very cost-effective way of obtaining an HD movie player, compared to an ordinary
standalone player, and it can be used for other things aswell. However, I'm not bothering until HD displays are more
sensibly priced with a better technology like OLED.
Lastly, people forget that one aspect of PC gaming is also attractive for many users: messing around with CPU/gfx
hardware, modding, overclocking, etc. is *fun*. In my youth, I was into electronics big time, but these days a lot of
technology is very black-box. Overclocking on PCs, building ever better systems, etc. is perhaps the modern
equivalent of such hobbies. Without PC gaming, I can imagine many people who might otherwise become interested
in electronics, computer science, etc. would never get into it in the 1st place. I got started by coding for 8bit systems
like the BBC Micro, C64, etc., but today it's not practical for home users to write their own programs in this way, so
fiddling with PC tech is the next best thing.
The market needs a range of options, for a variety of reasons. Interactive/Group games do nothing for me (Guitar Hero,
singing games, etc.), so I don't own a Wii, but I can certainly understand the appeal for those who love them, and
wouldn't for a minute suggest that there shouldn't be a product. Nintendo just doesn't make the kind of games I like atm,
even though I was an ardent fan of the N64 (I had the first ever N64 web site, or Ultra64 as it was back then prior to
launch). I didn't buy a Gamecube, but was bought one as a gift - as expected, I found it hard to find suitable games.
I really would have liked to get a PS3, but the price was way too high at launch, games too costly, and as it happens
one of the games I'd been looking forward to turned out to be a bit of a let-down (Mercenaries2), while the other game
(GTA4) is now available for the PC anyway and at a much cheaper price (13 UKP) than typical PS3 games, so I'll just
buy the PC version some day.
As for an XBox360, I don't see the point since I have a PC, and I do enjoy meddling with hw stuff. Besides, I once
walked past MS' Redmond HQ and that's as close as I'd like to get thankye very much. 😀 Having to use Windows is
bad enough...
Sony's mistake is simply price. The PS3 and its games are just too expensive, for whatever reason. Indeed, it was very
clever of MS to point out last year that, for the price of a PS3, one could buy both an XBox360 *and* a Wii. For parents
buying presents, if not for gamers buying for themselves, this may have swayed many people during key buying seasons
like Christmas.
gamerk316 writes:
> I think the biggest problem has become the fact that the PC now overlaps with consoles, and I'm suspecting sales are
> being hit quite a bit as a result...
Very good point. Certainly, consoles are not as simple to use as they used to be. Creeping into our lives with barely
a moan from anyone, we now have consoles that require updates, fixes, etc., and there are huge problems with ported
titles that are full of bugs, eg. Oblivion for the PS3 has lots of flaws. I don't think the PC platform will fade though -
there are other factors involved that will keep it going, as I mentioned above.
Ian.
Facebook
Twitter