kars on 24 March 2007
ookaze said:
Kars: what a load of BS !
What has "out of order" execution to do with the fact that the software wasn't compiled for a processor ?
Simple: The compiler does not know the number of parallel units and gwenral delays in the processor. How many parallel load operations are possible and so on. You don't even know the how deep the pipeline is and so on.
ookaze said:
Sorry to tell you that library calls are not enough to hide architecture designs like SMT or SMP.
And library calls are not enough to hide the difference between OpenGL and DirectX, while being efficient.
Sure, they can't hide these differences, but in fact this is not the point. Pure libraries themselves can only handle some differences, the other differences have to be hidden by the structure how you handle the problems. Normally they use complete systems that are more than pure libraries. What in reality is used are complete development systems, that are more workflow oriented, than hardware oriented. The primary job of the programmers is to establish a suitable plattform on which other people can work.
I used libraries as an example how we work, not how game developpers work! But the problemk is the same: You have to hide the plattform itself from the more game oriented people.. They don't want to see all your problems. They have their own.
You don't really start the development system from the bottom up, instead you reuse big parts of your system. Everytheing else takes to much time. You are no longer in the position where you can say this plattform can't handle this task. The systems in itself are more or less capable to solve the same problems but in different ways.
ookaze said:
If they can do that, then they can also do it on the Wii without any problem.
Sure, you can do it Look at EA. But do you really want it? You have serious trouble to synchronize them with each other. You normally want to release tiles simultaniously (Only one advertisement campaign). The Wii does not need to bother with some features and problems that the other plattforms have. It's development cycles are considerably shorter.
If you want to describe the problems as a pure technological problems it simply won't work.
ookaze said:. And I have serious doubts that MS middleware is compatible with the PS3.
Like it or not but there are middleware systems that are implemented on both systems and so hide the differences more or less good. Exactly this is the point of the whole system the biggest cost factors are no longer iun the hardware dependent systems. In fact one of the biggest problems why the Wii doesn't quite fit in here is its bigger and easier to use calculating power.
PS3 and Xbox 360 developers need much more time to tweak their systems.
And while these systems are a great help they are on the other hand a big problem in itself because they thend to limit your choices. You don't really want quite so much help on simpler systems. Its possible range of deadlock situations and race conditions is much more limited. What do they do in their spare time? Work as game testers?
ookaze said:
And your thing about people wanting next generation between Blue-Ray and HD-DVD is BS. People don't buy a console primarily to watch movies. The console maker that focus on these things completely unrelated to games are bound to fail.
Well, simply take a look at the amount of hardware sales, compared to software sales on the PS-3. Better don't ask how many bought the PS-3 because it is the cheapest BluRay Player!
And look at the advantages that the PS-3 has due to this decision in its design process. Bigger transfer problems, because its internal transfer speed is not in the same league as a simple DVD system. A need for a HD as an additional system cache,. HDMI 1.3.
And all these desitions influenced its price and capabilities. I would dare to say that the PS-3 probably wouildn't have its difficulties without BluRay. It would have a totally different price.
But what are the advantages of BluRay for games? I find the lower speed and so less noise. What else.
