MikeB on 22 May 2008
@ Squilliam
That was a game with millions of dollars spent on both ports to get it right.
It's an assets and game engine wise 360 orientated game. Like I said it runs more steady and looks better on the PS3, so they did not do a bad job overall (although IMO they should have done more testing considering some issues people were experiencing with versions).
Rockstar's Sam Houser:
"Getting things running on the PS3 initially was challenging. I think it was challenging for a lot of companies, but it's also a machine where, now that we've got comfortable with it—I don't want to say we've cracked it, but we've got comfortable with it"
"I think that's to do with really low-level technical stuff that I'm not the guy to explain. The 360 games have a certain look to them; PS3 games have a certain look to them. I like the way [the PS3] renders."
The low level stuff he talks about regards the Cell's SPUs, which are easy to take advantage of while designing a game engine from scratch. But can be hard work to move over improperly written legacy code.
Dude smoke the crack less please? Seriously do I doubt that a pc in 1995 with multiple cpus is more efficient than a multicore cpu today with billions spent on optimization?
Look if you don't understand the stuff being talked about, why resort to such comments. I was speaking about BeOS. Windows and x86 CPUs carry around lots of legacy bagage which affects efficiency.
This is doubtful. The SPUs are fast but they lack branch prediction and a good AI script has a lot of branches. A multicore X86 cpu would be faster and for a bonus they do out of order execution as well.
Depends upon how you write your code, the SPEs do support branch hints to increase performance (and there's of course the PPE). Reseachers aren't mimicing parts of the human brain on the Cell for nothing.
