The one thing the PS3 and the Dreamcast have in common!

[Final-Fan]

Words Of Wisdom said:

Final-Fan said:
Note A: (this also draws on the later exchange between MikeB and yourself)
How exactly is optimizing different from utilizing the hardware at closer to its limit? Isn't the entire purpose of optimization gettig the most use out of the hardware? Isn't that exactly what you said you were talking about instead of optimization? Tell me the difference. "Never", in this case, is also a generalization. Though there may be exceptions, the nature of console vs. PC hardware guarantees that it is true so much that "always" is a very small exaggeration indeed AFAIK. A steel rod being driven entirely through the skull and brain doesn't ALWAYS kill the victim (ask Phineas Gage), but close enough.

Note B: You incorrectly separated "PC with Blu-ray" from "at console prices". You can get a decent PC for console prices but a Blu-ray drive (even your $130 one) drives the price beyond that range.

Note C: This is correct only if you are saying that the "quality-to-crap" ratio will not improve. The NUMBER of quality games will most definitely improve, making his assertion a "Fact" for the discerning customer.

A) "Optimization" can mean many things as can "pushing toward its limits." Firefox 2 has a memory leak which can push a system's RAM usage to its limits but I would hardly classify that as optimization. I tend to interpret the former as getting more for less and the latter as the maximum of whatever you get at all points of efficiency (most of which are irrelevant I would imagine).

The nature of PC vs console optimization does not guarantee that one will always be more so than the other. A PC developer must "optimize" for several different architectures, CPU/GPU drivers...etc. A console developer need only focus on one. Does that mean that a PC developer has somehow done less optimization because their load is much larger than a console developer?

B) Rocketpig already did the breakout for the other way. Nothing more to say here.

C) Unfortunately for your argument, it is not provable at this point in time After the generation is over and we can look back on the libraries of all the systems, it may be a fact. However, until then, it is solely opinion. And even worse, it's subjective opinion.

A)  I'd call your Firefox example closer to debugging than optimization, but I freely acknowledge that I am not a programmer.  Are you?  rocketpig, you know a lot about this.  What do you say? 

As far as the nature of PC vs. console, it is just not possible to take full advantage of all the tweaks and tricks as console games do in the later years on PC hardware becasue it is so varied.  PC programmers can do just as much optimization or even much MORE work on optimization and the game itself will still be less optimized, because as you say their efforts have to be directed at so many kinds of hardware.  

B)  I wonder if he included the cost of the BR drive in that $600-$650 price range?  He was arguing about power in that response.  rocketpig? 

C)  Are you seriously suggesting that it is even POSSIBLE that the PS3 will not have, numerically, substantially more quality games than it does now, EVER?  I think that we have gone beyond opinion to say that that is not true for any console in the first half of its existence, which the PS3 is.  You may disagree.  Please answer the question in the first sentence of this paragraph.