lilbroex said:
binary solo said:
fillet said:
binary solo said:
PS3 just required a different technical solution, which is to only render items in the immediate environment of the player. That way there's a lot less demand on the RAM, despite there being hundreds or even thousands of item movements and placements across the entire game world. The only thing is that would require Bethesda to make major changes to the game engine, which would increase the cost of making the PS3 version immensely, and thereby make the game much less profitable.
Of course they could have started out by looking at the architecture of all the machines they'd be putting the game onto and design the software accordingly, rather than design the software to work well on 2 out of 3 of rhe machines and be sub-standard on the 3rd. |
That is exactly what Bethesday - and ALL other developers do and have done since 3D gaming first came about on the PC in 1995.
All 3D graphics cards only render the image that is actually visible using memory on the graphics card. Other assets that could be needed before a load point are stored in RAM.
There is no solution.
|
Right, so it's 1995 thinking being used in 2012. No one's come up with a smarter way of doing it than loading it all on RAM. Why is that? Because more RAM has always been the answer rather than using existing resources in a different way. As pointed out above, you can stream stuff of the HDD but it takes longer to do so. If you have some of the data on RAM and there is a dynamic interchange between RAM and HDD then that's a hardware solutionm that merely needs the software to operate it. It can be done for Skyrim or Dawnguard because they software is already written.
PS3 presented a problem for Bethesda's ambition. Bethesda chose not to address the problem at the design phase, or more likely they had no idea it would be a problem so they didn't even realise they might need to find a solution.
|
The first console to do real 3D, to my knowledge, was the Virtual Boy. Tha twas released in 1995 as well. It was glasses free at that.
|
Glasses free?
Are you kidding me???
