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

Here comes a bunch of people that do not have 1/1000 the knowledge he does on developing about to call him a lazy dev.rybe1025

The truth is none of us know exactly how much more work goes into a PS3 port.Javy03

What we know is the PS3 has six SPE's at a time when developers are struggling to utilize two cores, plus that the low performance of Cells PPE forces developers to offload work to these SPE's when multithreading optimization isn't anywhere near perfected right now.

How you measure that in difficulty is hard to say, Carmack says it's twice as hard for the same result as 360; but we already know what PS3 users think of him.

[QUOTE="rybe1025"]Here comes a bunch of people that do not have 1/1000 the knowledge he does on developing about to call him a lazy dev.ktrotter11

Dude, he chose not to do games for the PS3 because it isn't cost effective, and that's the end of the story.

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).

Zythyl

Gee, I have no clue what the cows will think about this. Especially since the idea that the PS3 is harder to develop for is totally new news that nobody has ever heard before.

[QUOTE="Javy03"] The truth is none of us know exactly how much more work goes into a PS3 port.AnnoyedDragon

What we know is the PS3 has six SPE's at a time when developers are struggling to utilize two cores, plus that the low performance of Cells PPE forces developers to offload work to these SPE's when multithreading optimization isn't anywhere near perfected right now.

How you measure that in difficulty is hard to say, Carmack says it's twice as hard for the same result as 360; but we already know what PS3 users think of him.

So in short, the 360 version of Rage will be the superior version. :DDoolz2024

Didn't you have a PS3 first, I thought you would be more biased for the PS3 TBH.

Carried over from other thread.

Let's set aside the ultra petty whining about "Waaah he insulted the PS3 Waaah!" and whatever and actually take a good look at what he has actually been saying about RAGE.

What i think is that Carmack is missed the boat. If we look at quake 4 today it fankly looks like ass, this is becuase his design philosophy is one which always attempts to push the bounderies of graphical prowess but always ends up somehow looking out-dated. Case in point Doom 3, again big on the tech side of things especilly the Textures BUT it's lighting methods (just like that of Quake 4) leave much to be desired, Especially when you consider this came out the same year as Half Life 2. His engines are always feature packed but always lack a sense of realism, i find this is the case with Rage.

Right back to the interveiw. He comments on how the lighting is infact mostly static in Rage, there is no day and night in this world and he is scripting the game almost entirely. I also think he misses the bout here too, Doom 3 again gives us a clue about his lacking of immersion in the visuals, sure it was pretty but it was never really living, this is my main concern about rage; It could actually be a modern carmack game i.e. pretty but dumb.

I've been trying to pin down my problem with the graphical side and i think it comes down mainly to how plastic things always look in hid post 2000 games. It's even more pronouced than in the UE3 which is ctiticised often for that waxy look, thinks have texture but never quite look realisic., it's very pronouced when you look at the game. Also the Sky, it just looks dead.

His design philosophy seems to be stuck in the past; his comments on the modding community is just wrong he obviously mised the indie game boat and hasn't heard of all those source based games like Zeno Calsh. His ideas about dynamic lighting being a liability i can kind of understand but the games i have plaed this gen that have immered me most (The STALKER Gmaes) have the utter polar opposite aprouch with it's full cycle, weather and A-Life. Honestly his comments on the PS3 are a side note, i find im almost totally irrelevant to modern gaming.

So in short, the 360 version of Rage will be the superior version. :DDoolz2024

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]So in short, the 360 version of Rage will be the superior version. :DThreebabycows

Didn't you have a PS3 first, I thought you would be more biased for the PS3 TBH.

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]So in short, the 360 version of Rage will be the superior version. :Dstereointegrity

Its a well known fact he hates the architecture of the PS3 because he is really set in stone with his PC programming ways.

I've heard from other developers that once you actually learn the console its not all that bad. Not easy, but not that bad.

Wasdie

Or as good as Uncharted or MGS4

[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

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.

videogamesdead8

Then why do some multiplat games look better on PS3? And why do the PS3 exclusives troucne anything on the 360? Even carmack says in the latest issue of GI that the PS3 is more powerful if you take the time to use it so you really have no clue what your talking about.

[QUOTE="Zythyl"]

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).

ZIMdoom

Gee, I have no clue what the cows will think about this. Especially since the idea that the PS3 is harder to develop for is totally new news that nobody has ever heard before.

Here comes a bunch of people that do not have 1/1000 the knowledge he does on developing about to call him a lazy dev.rybe1025

[QUOTE="rybe1025"]Here comes a bunch of people that do not have 1/1000 the knowledge he does on developing about to call him a lazy dev.PS2_ROCKS

[QUOTE="rybe1025"]Here comes a bunch of people that do not have 1/1000 the knowledge he does on developing about to call him a lazy dev.PS2_ROCKS

I have never heard a dev. say that development for their game came EASY, exclusive or multiplat. The only devs. that complain about the PS3 are the ones that make games on BOTH systems at the same time and wanna port. 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

I don't think you really need developers to complain about PS3 exclusives to realize the troubles involved with PS3 development, the constant delay of exclusive titles on the system should be a good indications of the difficult development process.

We already knew this (or at least I did).

We already knew this (or at least I did).

NielsNL

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

We already knew this (or at least I did).

Zythyl

There are articles much older that explain that the PS3's architecture requires more effort from programmers to achieve the same. There are even older articles in which John Carmack tells this. I'm not going to look it up for you, you gotta take my word for it.

[QUOTE="Zythyl"][QUOTE="NielsNL"]

We already knew this (or at least I did).

NielsNL

There are articles much older that explain that the PS3's architecture requires more effort from programmers to achieve the same. There are even older articles in which John Carmack tells this. I'm not going to look it up for you, you gotta take my word for it.

Carmack said what we've suspected for a long time. PS3 is harder to develop for but more powerfull. Also, 1 DVD can't really hold everything you'd like it to.

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

[QUOTE="Zythyl"] Interesting, seeing as the video interview was only released a few days ago...Zythyl

There are articles much older that explain that the PS3's architecture requires more effort from programmers to achieve the same. There are even older articles in which John Carmack tells this. I'm not going to look it up for you, you gotta take my word for it.

Dude, how about you use google yourself? Trust me, you'll find interviews with other devs saying similar things. You're right (far as I know) about this being the first video interview that covers the subject though.

I don't get why some people are getting pissy about what he said. I thought it was common knowledge that the PS3 was harder to develop for? :/ He's not the first person to say it and probably won't be the last.