Carmack: Rage PS3 Lagging Behind Xbox 360, PC

[AdamB5000]

I like that Carmack recognizes the 60fps barrier (or minimum). I like smooth games and often get tired of some PS2 games running choppy. Wish all my games ran at 60fps.

Kudos on that.

 

[megamanx00]

If John Carmack is having trouble with the PS3 you know there is a problem. Still, if anyone can get the most out of the PS3 it's the folks at ID. I'm sure they will find some creative ways to push the PS3 and that will probably mean alot more PS3 developers licensing the ID engine. After all, they don't want to wait till the end of time for Sony to put out better dev tools.

 

[fonzy]

Apparently Sony will be using the Cell Processor for the PS4, if this is true wouldn't they be setting themselves up for another failure?

 

[tenor77]

As everyone else said, multiple processors does not always = better performance.

Think of this like a business and you're the manager. I come to you and say I can give you a minimal but kick ass staff, or I can give you twice the staff that perform at 50% of the other.

With the kick ass staff they knock the tasks you give them out of the park, but you're constantly having them do different tasks, and there's always something to be done.

With the double staff, they struggle individually with the tasks, and you have to micromanage, splitting 1 job amongst several employees and you will at times be having employees standing around doing nothing even when you're busy, just in case a new task comes around.

So Boss? Which do you choose?

 

[seezur]

[citation][nom]fonzy[/nom]Apparently Sony will be using the Cell Processor for the PS4, if this is true wouldn't they be setting themselves up for another failure?[/citation]

Good question.

Probably not by that time most console developers should alredy have experience with it. Also if they upgrade the graphics subsystem over what they currently have the developers not used to it should be able to utilize the GPU over the CPU.

The biggest thing they need to do is beat MS to the puch this time and release it before or around the same time as MS next platform.

 

[helldog3105]

The problem with expecting that developers will have experience with the cell processor by the time the PS4 is out is that companies have to make games for the damn thing. We already have one major publisher saying they may drop support for the PS3 entirely (stupid activision) I wish I could say I was very happy with my PS3 but I use it mostly for Blu-Ray and PS2 games. I just haven't been really caught by most games that have come out recently. Although I have to admit, the re-release of Monkey Island has been pulling all my attention lately. Sucker for adventure games, really.

 

[antilycus]

Eat crap PS3 fanboys. This guy knows better then all of us. Go watch your blu-ray movie and go away.

 

[tenor77]

[citation][nom]Antilycus[/nom]Eat crap PS3 fanboys. This guy knows better then all of us. Go watch your blu-ray movie and go away.[/citation]

I think it would be "crow" not "crap" but regardless they're still gamers and I would personally want to see both platforms do well. MS is great when they have real competition, but when they're on so far on top..........well........

 

[antilycus]

[citation][nom]tenor77[/nom]I think it would be "crow" not "crap" but regardless they're still gamers and I would personally want to see both platforms do well. MS is great when they have real competition, but when they're on so far on top..........well........[/citation]
True that brotha

 

[rexoverbey]

[citation][nom]gamerk316[/nom]1) The PS3 uses OpenGL, not DirectX...So stop balming DX10 support as a factor please.2) If you have a 120Hz LCD running a 60FPS game, then each frame is displayed twice. The game will not go to 120FPS simply because you have a 120Hz TV.[/citation]
A lot of people say DirectX 10 when the really mean SM4.0 or DX10 Compliant. Since the PS3 is SM3.0 and the Xenon is SM3.5+. The API (DirectX/OpenGL) is not important as it can be used for either, the feature set is so it can be blamed.

 

[fuser]

Um, the PC that I dropped off at Goodwill last week is faster than the X360. Give me a break.

 

[pender21]

As much as people complain about programming for the PS3, programming for the PS2 was an even bigger pain and required intimate knowledge of assembly if you wanted to squeeze performance, but the PS2 came out before the Xbox 1 so no gamer really cared.

To date, there is not a game on the PS3 whose quality of graphics make it distinguishable from the 360 or PC platforms. Kill zone 2 is really not that good a game and took 3.5 years to develop, which is a shame.

 

[pender21]

I doubt Sony cares what Carmack thinks because their head is always stuck up something.

 

[anonymousdude]

[citation][nom]fuser[/nom]Um, the PC that I dropped off at Goodwill last week is faster than the X360. Give me a break.[/citation]

How old was that PC and did you make it yourself?

You have to remember that John Carmack is and always will be a PC developer which is why he finds the 360 easier to develop for considering the similarities of a 360 and a PC

 

[99lawrence]

[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]If John Carmack is having trouble with the PS3 you know there is a problem. Still, if anyone can get the most out of the PS3 it's the folks at ID. I'm sure they will find some creative ways to push the PS3 and that will probably mean alot more PS3 developers licensing the ID engine. After all, they don't want to wait till the end of time for Sony to put out better dev tools.[/citation]

ID are not the guys for the job. Look to Sony owned studios. Naughty Dog, Santa Monica, Team Ico or someone like Quantic Dream.
The simple fact is, Carmack is a PC dev and has been outspoken about the PS3 from the offset. Unfortunately, people will listen to him and grant him the authority to make claims on the differences between the machines capabilities.

 

[kamkal]

THE Carmack will figure it out, do not worry.

 

[Guest]

I do agree that Sony should have made developing for the PS3 cheaper and more available to smaller software houses. That being said, choosing a new type of processor rather than sticking with the old type in the 360 was a bold and good move. Its only harder to develop for because its new. Unless companies take a chance and use new technology we will never progress and we would all still be writing for Z80 CPUs!
I do have a slight problem with Carmack's quotes. Either he was misquoted or isn't quite up to speed in developing for the PS3. For a start, how does "The rasteriser is just a little bit slower" become 'it runs at half the speed'? Also, "Processing wise, the main CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off" doesn't really make sense. The Cell CPU is totally designed around splitting tasks off to the different SPEs and if written properly it blows the 360 CPU out of the water.
Perhaps he should have a word with Epic Games and see how they got their PS3 version of the Unreal engine to beat both the 360 and PC versions (unless you spend a fortune on your PC just to get it comparable).

 

[AndrewMD]

Just one comment - This is Sony's Vista! People will buy a PS2 or a XBOX360 before they would buy a PS3...

 

[the associate]

[citation][nom]fuser[/nom]Um, the PC that I dropped off at Goodwill last week is faster than the X360. Give me a break.[/citation]

Really? Must have been at bare minimum an amd 2.8ghz triple core with an 8800gt or higher with 512ddr3 and at least 3 gigs of ram, cause thats what you NEED if you want to even try playing Grand Theft Auto 4, which consoles kill pc's in unless u have a high end quad, 4870+ or gtx260 with nearly a gig or more of on board ram, sure it was a sleasy port, but as it stands, if you want to play gta4 better on pc than a console, it's gona cost more than a PS3

 

[anonymousdude]

GTAIV was a horrible port of the game with performance issues, so it isn't the best game to compare consoles and a PC.