PS3 Tech Demo

[Kwaad]

if you guys think I lied on purpose. GO FUCK YOURSELF. I dont lie. I dont need to. What I read about the game. I did not see it for another console. So one agian. You say I lie? GO FUCK YOURSELF. I am very mellow and calm. I do NOT like being told I am a liar. Go read my post after someone said multi-patform

Ok so it's not exclusive. However if you think it will be the same game on the DS. You should leave. The DS can barely do 3D... why the HELL do you think it would be a similar game to a PS3 game? If it was PS3/DS I would say the PS3 has an exclusive. and the DS has an exclusive. because they have VERY little in common.

See I admitted I was wrong. So once again. if you said I lied. GO FUCK YOURSELF. well the power of the Cell is doing stuff like that. I'm not gonna say the Cell could compress a zip file faster than what is on the 360... ok I will. but not much faster. :P But running physics, and sheer math stuff like that... the Cell is like 10x faster than any CPU that works with games. :P And once agian. let me list names of people who should go... FUCK YOURSELF. BenKenobi88. And sieanr... just go fuck yourself with that troll club I handed you. stof - And what i mean about hard on CPU, is that 10x10 grid maze, could be done in 2 or 3 seconds brute forceing it on my computer. It could be finessed to be done in about 100 cycles. However when you add the 3rd lvl of pathing. it gets ALOT harder. Name me one game with 3D pathfinding? (that actually works and does a good job) And AI uses quite a bit of power. To do it useing less power you need to go into fuzzy logic, wich is hard on the CPU on it's own, but it's ALOT easier than brute forceing the AI. However that is only useing 2D. Like I said, the 3D uses... alot more power. for my 100x100 grid... it would be 100x100x100 grid... or the math would look like this for total brute force tries. 1.e+20000 That is up from 1.e+200 infact that is 100x more complex. Meaning if the un-optized 2d plot would take 1second. it would take 100 seconds. or 1minute and 40 seconds. That is a VERY small and SIMPLE 3D pathing. go from 100x100x100 to the 10000x10000x10000 you would be looking at a computation that would take years on a top of the line computer. (without optimizeations) There is one math equation that can do it in 2d ALOT faster than in 3D. However going to 3D I dont beleive that equation would work. So back to my point. it uses ALOT of power. A standard x86 would choke on that kinda math. But a RISC processor would be able to fly though it. A Cell is a special RISC processor that is designed for doing stuff like that... fast. :) Wich is 95% of CPU use in games. I think that is what hurt the original X-Box so much. Also, for those of you who say PC games look that great. They do look good and such... but I have a 400$ Graphics card, and I have yet to find a game I'm not CPU limited in. Oblivion @ 1080p... Everything on? Nope. Exact same Framerate as at 1280x1024 the CPU on computers is what is holding back games. I right now, think the PS3 has more power than a home PC. As the graphics cards have passed the CPUs by so far right now... there is no advantage to haveing a graphics card FASTER than what is in the PS3... The new 8800 graphics card for 300$ will blow a 300$ CPU out of the water. You SLI those 300$ graphics cards... and you need a 5Ghz C2D. (they top out at about 3Ghz). My point is. CPU means everything. I have always said the 360 has a good CPU. it's MUCH better than a PC. However unlike the PS3. it is ALOT more like a PC. (recompile the code and there you go) the PS3 has only 20% of it's power on the main chip. the other 80% is on everything else, wich the code to use those, is quite hard to use. (as in you have to write specifically for it... it is easier to write) Everyone talks about how hard it is to write for the Cell. the Cell is very easy to program for. The reason it is hard... is because these companies have to restart EVERYTHING from scratch. (to use the power) I beleive most companies today just have basic optimizations they slap onto the consoles to run on the hardware. The code was done once, and is used over and over and over and over agian. For the PS3 it has to be done completely over agian. It is all new. And trying to use it like a 'traditional' system WILL NOT WORK. For basic math I would say the PS3 is at least 2x faster than the 360, wich is about 5x faster than a top of the line computer. (RISC processors are animals) I am more saying. Expect most games from the PS3 to do stuff like that, as once people learn how to 'use' the PS3, it will have enough power to do that. Optimized for the PS3 and expect alot more. And if anyone wants to compare the graphics cards. I just want to say this. the graphics card on the 360 is about 5% slower than that of the PS3. However it dont stop there. The 360 dedicates about 20 to 30% of it's power DIRECTLY to AA. Meaning 20-30% of the 360's graphics card is useless for anything BUT AA. Wich makes the PS3's graphics card at least 30% faster. If anyone wants to say anything about the unified shader model, your mistaken once agian. It is good for PCs.. (really good) because the games can be better 'tweaked' to the hardware. EG: I'm contracted to port Halo3 to the PC. Useing a unified shader model, I dont have to worry about optimizeing for specifc graphics cards. And the diffrent 'classes' of graphics cards are more... similar. Some have 96unified shaders. My old graphics card has 16 pixel and 16 vertex. Some graphics cards dont have equal numbers. When building a game, limitations such as xpixel and xvertex shaders dont effect you, as long as you know how many you can work with. A game built for 4 of each shaders... will look the same on a card with 16 of each shader. A game made for a card with 16 of each shader... will look HORRIBLE on a 4shader card. Welcome to the PC world. where you cant optimize. Unified shaders, help allow for optimizations. On a Console with set numbers... it dosent really effect it. Look at FF12. Made for a processor about the same speed as a 2Ghz P3. And a graphics card about the same speed as GeForce 1. IF you can run a modern game on a GeForce4... it looks NOTHING like FF12. Why? It's the optimizations that I mentioned. If you build a game specifially for a card it will look better... Look at Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butchers Bay. It required a GeForce4. Yet it ran just fine on the X-Box wich has something about the speed of a GeForce2. Why does the PC need litterally 4x the power? Optimizations. Optimizations is what makes games look great. The PS3 is ALOT more optimizable than the 360. My basis comes form the Cell processor... It is HIGHLY optimizeable. and then the Graphics card. It's harder to comapre... the Graphics card on the 360 is more customizable, but from my experience with computers. ATi cards are easier to optimize than Nvidia. Howeve the Nvidia optimizes better than the ATi. So moral of story. 360 = MUCH easier to make games for. PS3 = More power, More possiblity FOR power. And if you talk to a dev... that is basically what they all developers say... unless they spew crap.