@MikeB
I don't get your point. Of course more work costs more. They built up their game engine from scratch, of course that takes time and effort. But is there really a pre-baked game engine out there suitable for a game like LittleBigPlanet and what it offers? The technology focus of the game is a physics based platform game environment and user content creation, there's no other game like that available that I know about.
And PS3 needs more work to get the job done, which means developing for PS3 will cost more. You can't deny this one either. And when gaming business is what it is currently(Studies show that only 4% of games are profitable.) you really can't afford it. I still would love to see budget for LBP as its sales aren't that good atm.
The Cell is open and well documented, university students learn a lot of low level stuff from its design. You even can learn a lot with just Linux on a plain standard PS3.
Hardware designers and software designers can benefit a lot getting familar with its design. Programmers will learn ways to get the most out of other platforms as well, being more efficient, smarter ways of doing things, how to best handle parallelism, etc.
Sony and IBM did a lot to enhance the general knowledge base amongst student programmers. I don't think they want to go the same road as Microsoft has taken with trying to lure potential game developers into low knowledge requiring easy abstracted solutions only locked to specific platforms. Of course about every programming student has a PC and far fewer a PS3.
This isn't what I asked. I asked why sony is so passive compared to MS. You sound too much like an ad when ever I ask things like this. So I guess your answer is that CELL is the holyness itself and its everyones destiny to know about it, because sony don't want to use the way of the devil by luring ppl to use CELL system. Give me a break!
I have some quotes:
...
If quotes is all you got, you have no usable information about this matter.
(Lair) "Not a specific S.P.U. Our S.P.U. code works dynamically, so we are not locking up one S.P.U. and saying "OK, you are the A.I. S.P.U., but we instead say, "OK, here are these 15 things including A.I." We run them on the S.P.U., and the code automatically distributes them."
If its really this easy, why they don't use those more? Like it or not SPUs are not like super PPUs that can do everything better than PPU. They are cheaper, more dedicated and lack some ablities that PPU have. Why theres even PPU, if SPUs are so incredible?
Well PPU code is ported to the SPUs gradually, you can decide to move some things above others first. Probably those parts which provide the best gains or are most easily accomplished.
That chart is a bit old now, it may well be out of date.
Old or not, its all we got atm about this matter. You can try to spin it into any direction, but all anyone can trust are those dev notes.
However technically I believe the 360 is now at its peak. The real eye catching games from a technical perspective will be on the PS3, I believe this will dampen enthusiasm for the 360 during the course of 2009.
Btw, is there a single exclusive AAA game on X360 that doesn't have 3rd party engine? :)
