ChronotriggerJM on 06 February 2008
The article makes sense, just not in some regards.
Going from PS3 to 360 yields great results because you already have to optimize code to work on the PS3's architecture, then moving optimized code to the 360's general purpose cores makes it a no-brainer. It actually seems like going this way would make the 360 more efficient no?
Vice versa however, you move un-optimized code to a machine that needs to be optimized, and it yields horrid results >_>; Why didn't it make sense to just do that from the start? How did anyone come to the conclusion that this means PS3 hardware is inferior o.O?
From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.
