NJ5 said:
This proves that Microsoft gained something by making it easy to port games between the PC and the 360. Valve would probably not care about the 360 if it wasn't the case.
Sony already used non-conventional architectures twice (PS2 and PS3). The first time it worked well, not because developers liked it but because the PS2 dominated so much that there was no choice but learn the ugliness of the Emotion Engine. This time, many developers clearly don't feel as forced to learn Sony's new novelty, since the PS3 isn't nearly as successful as the PS2 was.
I think the PS4 will use a more conventional architecture. PS: Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the Cell in itself. It's a great choice for many programming tasks, just not the best for games (at least in its current form, with only one PPE instead of 2 or 3 as Sony had originally planned). |
PS4 wll use an architecture that devs will find easier to develop for than the PS3's was, out of the gate. That architecture will be Cell, say with 8-16 PPEs and 32-64 SPEs at 6ghz. Devs will be able to develop on it and get great stuff out of it quickly because they learned it, once, with PS3. Unless they *didn't* try to learn to program for Cell with PS3. Then, not so much.
As games are increasingly showing, the fact that Cell is *more* of a beast at video streaming and folding than it is at gaming does not mean that it isn't a beast at gaming. It just has to be learned - once - by devs.
