By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
NeoRatt on 04 January 2009
Edit Thread
Million said:
TheNino85 said:
In both my Computer Architecture and VLSI classes back in college, the professors always made it very clear that when designing some type of mass market programmable device, your architecture had to be easy (well, relatively easy, not like BASIC easy) to design for by the average engineer. It didn't matter how awesome your specs were; if your system were complicated, most of the system would go to waste. If the engineers designing it couldn't figure it out and design/program well in it, it wasn't their fault that they can't "get" your design; it's yours for making it complicated enough that your system is underutilized. There are more relevant engineering principles I could discuss, but I really don't want to turn this into a long, full-blown flame war.

This is not some fanboy ranting about the way things oughta be. This is a fundamental engineering principle that Sony chose to ignore. It isn't the programmers' faults that they're underutilizing the PS3. It's Sony's fault for forcing them to underutilize it. "Laziness" has absolutely nothing to do with it, and the fact that you're claiming that laziness is the problem tells me that you have absolutely no idea how product development works. Please stick to things you do know about.

good post , the fault issue is debtable however "for forcing them to underutilize it."  well no Sony isn't forcing them to underutilize it , putting them  in a difficult position in terms of cost , time , know how etc is the case. the developer has the opportunity to under utilize which brings consequences unrelated to Sony,  bad reviews , p.r , sales etc.

"laziness is the problem tells me that you have absolutely no idea how product development works. Please stick to things you do know about."

if the developer has the opportunity to make a good game but chooses not to  because of the complexity of the architecture , that's a choice they make , one they should be largely be accountable for( i'm not saying Sony don't share the blame but let's be  reasonable). There are developers that have taken advantage of the ps3 and produced excelent title so it' onlly  fair that developers who can't even get  their game to run at a sready frame rate should be considered lazy.

I disagree that developers are accountable, I think it is more the shareholders.  You should maybe try to tell a shareholder putting up $5-30 million up front waiting for a game to be released that it may take 4-6 months longer because of the complexity of development for a given console.  The answer back may be something like, "it has to be done by the same date the other consoles are ready" or "screw it, let's not bother".  The bottom line is that games come down to dollars and cents (sense) and shareholder decisions NOT developers...  If it makes sense to spend the extra time they will but if there is no reason to they won't... 

Given the economic reality that has set in around the world, people are going to pay more attention to game building costs and make decisions based on that.  The PS3 needs to become easier to build for, otherwise a bunch of shareholders will make some real difficult choices on which platforms they will support.