John Carmack: 'You have to sweat a lot more over the PS3...'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGjIZc7lytg&feature=related

6m20s in...

Part 2/3 of a really interesting interview with John Carmack (Doom creator). Talking about Rage, megatextures, and developing for consoles in Part Two; also mentions:

"You have to sweat a lot more over the PS3... easier to make things happen on the 360..."

What are the cows / lemmings thoughts on this? Being a hermit I'm glad to hear him confirm that they're aiming for a 60fps norm, without comprimising visual / gameplay quality (low-res textures or 30fps gameplay).

ps2 was harder to develop for than dreamcast, yet multiplatform games looked better on ps2 because it was the more powerful console regardless of it being harder to develop for.

this excuse ps3 being harder to develop for than xbox360 is the reason games look worse is exactly a excuse.

it's really the xbox360 is more powerful and i have known this since day one.

Nothing good comes easy. Bread_or_Decide

Unless you happen to develop for a platform that isn't PS3.

LOL cpu's arent even hard to program for to begin with.

it's not like cell is a brand new architecture it uses a standard powerpc stripped down core and the only thing kinda new is a spe it's still based on existing architectures dev's have seen before.

this has nothing to do with ps3's textures being lower resolution, xbox360 has unified memory it has more memory to work with that's why it has better lookin textures aka graphics and it has better shaders because of a more advanced gpu.

ps3 as a whole might be able to do more cpu cycles, crunch more numbers run more advanced physics

but it just doesnt have the goddamn ram architecture set up to compete or gpu to compete with xbox360 graphically

There hasnt been a 360/ps3 game that looks noticably better on the 360 yet so i dont care.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Nothing good comes easy. AnnoyedDragon

Unless you happen to develop for a platform that isn't PS3.

ps3 as a whole might be able to do more cpu cycles, crunch more numbers run more advanced physics

but it just doesnt have the goddamn ram architecture set up to compete or gpu to compete with xbox360 graphically

Like most multiplats nowadays, both console versions would be near-identical anyway.

Lazy devs.Bread_or_Decide

I think PS3 users have used that excuse a fair too much for it to be taken seriously.

The only developers not lazy to PS3 users are those being paid by Sony.

ps3 as a whole might be able to do more cpu cycles, crunch more numbers run more advanced physics

but it just doesnt have the goddamn ram architecture set up to compete or gpu to compete with xbox360 graphically

videogamesdead8

Take a breath, will you, there's an edit button. And the point of what Carmack is getting accross has little to do with which platform looks visually more appealing, but which the game developers are leaning towards more. Well, developers of prestige such as the likes of id and VALVe (Gabe notoriously loathes the PS3).

Like most multiplats nowadays, both console versions would be near-identical anyway.

ForceFreeze

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Lazy devs.AnnoyedDragon

I think PS3 users have used that excuse a fair too much for it to be taken seriously.

The only developers not lazy to PS3 users are those being paid by Sony.

@6:37 what was that he said? Oh in theory there is more computing power in the ps3, you just got to work it differently. Yep that sounds like what he said.

Pretty much. Thats why KZ2 looks so good. Bread_or_Decide

I think Killzone looks ugly, especially in regard to character textures.

Before you react strongly to that I think there are other PS3 games that look better than KZ2.

@6:37 what was that he said? Oh in theory there is more computing power in the ps3, you just got to work it differently. Yep that sounds like what he said.

GreyFoXX4

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Pretty much. Thats why KZ2 looks so good. AnnoyedDragon

I think Killzone looks ugly, especially in regard to character textures.

Before you react strongly to that I think there are other PS3 games that look better than KZ2.

I think LBP looks better than KZ2.

But KZ2 is more visually photorealistic, sure.

I'm just not one for brown / grey textures.

Everywhere.

EDIT:

Found another PS3-bashing clip @ 7m20s

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Pretty much. Thats why KZ2 looks so good. AnnoyedDragon

I think Killzone looks ugly, especially in regard to character textures.

Before you react strongly to that I think there are other PS3 games that look better than KZ2.

Really worth checking out Part 3.

Carmack talks a lot about the future of game hardware, hardware limits, and mass-texturing (briefly mentioning World of Warcraft).

TL;DR

We are very close to the 'future' of gaming. We have virtually almost hit the hardware wall. The "power density" wall being the closest.

[QUOTE="videogamesdead8"]

ps3 as a whole might be able to do more cpu cycles, crunch more numbers run more advanced physics

but it just doesnt have the goddamn ram architecture set up to compete or gpu to compete with xbox360 graphically

Bread_or_Decide

All the games that get used for example of great graphics like, KZ2, MGS4, GT5 etc all had/have extreamly long development time to make sure they have great graphics. If a company spent the same amount of time in development on a 360 game then it would match or surpass KZ2 graphics. Some games are coming close to it with much less development time.

these developers are just lazy, and i can say that even though i do nothing but sit in my grandmas basement and play videogames

why dont they realise that sony is doing them a favour by making the PS3 hard to develop for? kutaragi san was a visionary who realised that developers weren't working hard enoogh so he made the ps3

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Nothing good comes easy. Bread_or_Decide

Unless you happen to develop for a platform that isn't PS3.

these developers are just, and i can say that even though i do nothing but sit in my grandmas basement and play videogames why dont they realise that sony is doing them a favour by making the PS3 hard to develop for? kutaragi san was a visionary who realised that developers weren't wokring hard enoogh so he made the ps3hy4k

On topic, JC knows what he's talking about.

Carmack is a genius but a statement like that makes it come off that he wants to go the easy road.hiryu3

Yeah how dare they, how dare developers want to focus on the games instead of using more of their R&D budget on doing the same things in harder ways.

You know it's really as simple as it just being overall easier for PC developers to port their work over to the 360 considering it's archtype is almost the same. PS3 seems to be worlds different to the developers, and I think "making you sweat" is the plain fact they have to put any extra work into it to port over to the PS3 instead of the 360. It's not being lazy it's just better business, if they were assured good sales from a PS3 port I can see them whining less about it.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Nothing good comes easy. AnnoyedDragon

Unless you happen to develop for a platform that isn't PS3.

LOL What do you call that? Development Osmosis Proxy?

Another platform is hard to develope for so that make yours easier?

LOL What do you call that? Development Osmosis Proxy?

Another platform is hard to develope for so that make yours easier?

skektek

Hello Cow, and yes generally when something is hard to develop for those that are not can be considered easier in comparison.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]Nothing good comes easy. AnnoyedDragon

Unless you happen to develop for a platform that isn't PS3.

LOL cpu's arent even hard to program for to begin with.

it's not like cell is a brand new architecture it uses a standard powerpc stripped down core and the only thing kinda new is a spe it's still based on existing architectures dev's have seen before.

this has nothing to do with ps3's textures being lower resolution, xbox360 has unified memory it has more memory to work with that's why it has better lookin textures aka graphics and it has better shaders because of a more advanced gpu.

videogamesdead8

Whatever you say buddy

[QUOTE="skektek"]

LOL What do you call that? Development Osmosis Proxy?

Another platform is hard to develope for so that make yours easier?

AnnoyedDragon

Hello Cow, and yes generally when something is hard to develop for those that are not can be considered easier in comparison.

Aaah, the dogma of fanboys and lazy devs everywhere!

When a dev makes a game exclusive to the PS3 you never hear complaints about their hardware but of course when you just wanna cut and paste a game from the 360 to the PS3 and can't, thats when all the crying comes about.Javy03

That's because developers developing exclusivly for the PS3 are generally under Sony's control.

Killzone 2

Uncharted 2

MAG

All Sony published titles, even MGS4 which wasn't published by Sony was clearly funded by them because of the product placement.

As for the "easy" comment that was the person I was responding to, developing games is never easy; but it's certainly easier than PS3.

Aaah, the dogma of fanboys and lazy devs everywhere!

skektek

Yes Cow, you would have to have dogmatic beliefs to accept something as common knowledge as PS3 being more difficult to develop for; wouldn't you?

I think everyone knows what the PS3 is capable of given the time & right amount of attention. :)

Kojima is the best example.Remember MSG games for PC was worst port.Kojima is Lazy badtaker

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Aaah, the dogma of fanboys and lazy devs everywhere!

AnnoyedDragon

Yes Cow, you would have to have dogmatic beliefs to accept something as common knowledge as PS3 being more difficult to develop for; wouldn't you?

Its not a question of accepting that fact, it is a matter of dwealing on that fact.

[QUOTE="hiryu3"]Carmack is a genius but a statement like that makes it come off that he wants to go the easy road.AnnoyedDragon

Yeah how dare they, how dare developers want to focus on the games instead of using more of their R&D budget on doing the same things in harder ways.

I think everyone knows what the PS3 is capable of given the time & right amount of attention. :)

shad0w70

He also said that "There's a lttle bit more theoretical raw performance on the PS3, so we've got a little bit more headroom".