HappySqurriel said:
greenmedic88 said:
That's probably because most developers don't optimize their code to take full advantage of the console architecture. In the case of the PS3, being the data streaming and XDR memory capabilities as well as the CPU task partitioning due to the CBE architecture.
That has always been one of the more interesting development issues regarding consoles. Since the technical specifications remain static, advances in games must be made by optimizing available resources and functions. It's seen every generation where later games continually go far beyond what the initial ones were able to accomplish.
PC development on the other hand has the convenience or crutch of being able to design games based upon hardware that is not the most common so long as they provide a reasonable amount of scalability. But it's the development for hardware on a sliding scale that leads to the common misconception that fixed console configurations are inadequate for future gaming.
|
You do realize that almost all PS3 and XBox 360 game developers use middleware which tend to have teams of experienced programmers who are entirely focused on taking advantage of the special features of the console.
The fact of the matter is that gamers want large and very detailed 3D environments that have data persist when they're not in the immediate area; and this takes massive ammounts of memory.
|
It's common knowledge.
Of course that doesn't explain why some developers release poor ports that are significantly worse than the originals since they weren't initially coded for the specific architecture they've been ported to.
This is also common knowledge.
Some programming teams have more experience and skill than others when it comes to optimizing code; the proof is in the games. Nobody's bullheaded enough to deny that.
