To be honest I don't understand why Microsoft or Sony didn't bother putting 1GB or even 2GB of ram in. It isn't exactly expensive compared to other components in a system

NG5 and Star craft, stop ganging up on Mike B. You are both entitled to your opinions. But no need for attacking the poor guy.

Warning to all stay on topic. Do not derail the thread. Have a nice morning/afternoon/ evening.

MikeB said: Crytek for instance states a port of Crysis to HD consoles would be pretty straight forward.

 

 Could you give us numbers, please ?

If a port was made what do you expect quality-wise from it ? I mean i would like to see a couple of resolution and quality settings compared to PC.

For example i play at 1280*1024 and high/very high quality settings. I use a TOD and a tweak to gain some FPS and some more quality.

What do you expect from Xbox360 and PS3 ports ?

On a another note, when will you come back on earth and understand that GPU pure brute force and its dedicated RAM size and bandwith are far far far far more important for graphics than the Cell or an optimized RAM subsystem ?

 

MikeB said: @ NJ5 & Starcraft Could we please keep this discussion polite and intelligent?

We could, if you went straight to the point and told me where I'm wrong. According to specs, PS3's ram is divided in two between CPU and GPU, that's all I said.

 

I beg to differ mikeB on OSX i know the graphics card can call if it needs to to the main memory bus since 10.4

 

edit, however this is not the ideal set up, a call that distance as you pointed out would slow things down, but does speed up things such as rendering. 

 

I would like to see someone come up with a mod that would let powerpc g5 users play xbox 360 games on the tower, it has the horses nessisary, my setup has 6 gig of ram. remember the early dev kits were modded g5 tower 

theoreticaly it could run both wii, and ps3 games, as all chips this gen are powerpc derivatives. ps3 would probably be the hardest if sub cores were used. still though it should be possible.

olibou21 said: MikeB said: Crytek for instance states a port of Crysis to HD consoles would be pretty straight forward.    Could you give us numbers, please ? If a port was made what do you expect quality-wise from it ? I mean i would like to see a couple of resolution and quality settings compared to PC. For example i play at 1280*1024 and high/very high quality settings. I use a TOD and a tweak to gain some FPS and some more quality. What do you expect from Xbox360 and PS3 ports ? On a another note, when will you come back on earth and understand that GPU pure brute force and its dedicated RAM size and bandwith are far far far far more important for graphics than the Cell or an optimized RAM subsystem ?

Crytek has stated time and time again there are no plans of Crysis being ported to consoles. Crysis is PC only.

 

No no no no. Having to regularly upgrade my rig is what drove me away from PC gaming ( until Blizzard announced SC2 and Diablo3 of course )

Gerinako said: To be honest I don't understand why Microsoft or Sony didn't bother putting 1GB or even 2GB of ram in. It isn't exactly expensive compared to other components in a system

Cost considerations, especially the PS3's fast XDR memory is expensive.

If a game engine is well modified to suit consoles both consoles have a huge amount of memory to work with, especially with streaming methods and a default harddrive.

System bandwidth, processing power and storage space is far more relevant to consoles for optimised game engines. The 360 was only to have 256 MB of RAM originally, but luckily this was upped as graphics take a lot of memory. Executeable code is relatively tiny, for example Gears of War could have been a near identical game (gameplay, effects, etc) but with less quality textures. But high quality textures also take more time to load, hence the pop-ins in games like Gears of War and Mass Effect on the 360.

Rock_on_2008 said: olibou21 said: MikeB said: Crytek for instance states a port of Crysis to HD consoles would be pretty straight forward.    Could you give us numbers, please ? If a port was made what do you expect quality-wise from it ? I mean i would like to see a couple of resolution and quality settings compared to PC. For example i play at 1280*1024 and high/very high quality settings. I use a TOD and a tweak to gain some FPS and some more quality. What do you expect from Xbox360 and PS3 ports ? On a another note, when will you come back on earth and understand that GPU pure brute force and its dedicated RAM size and bandwith are far far far far more important for graphics than the Cell or an optimized RAM subsystem ?   Crytek has stated time and time again there are no plans of Crysis being ported to consoles. Crysis is PC only.

As the points was raised ("HD consoles could run a port") i think we can speculate on the settings that would be there, given the specs of the 2 of them ...

 

MikeB said: NJ5 said: MikeB said: NJ5 said: MikeB said:   You made a false distinction, the main RAM situation on 360 and PS3 is similar in terms of size to work with. Only thing you would do differently is design the game engine differently to suit either console's architecture. The PS3 also has a default haddrive, which could be used for something like virtual memory on the PC. What false distinction did I make? As far as I know, my statement was totally accurate and I stand by it: On the PS3, system RAM is 256 MB (the other 256 MB are graphical memory). On the 360, there's no distinction between graphical/system memory, it's just a total of 512 MB to be divided as developers prefer. wtf...   The fast XDR Ram in the PS3 can also be divided as developers prefer. What's new there? 256 MB of System RAM which can be used as developers prefer, why would anyone expect anything different and in what way did I contradict that in my post? You truly are the master of spin.     On a PC you can't use CPU memory for the graphics card unlike is the case with regard to the PS3. Cheap unified memory solutions on the PC (like some laptops) are similar as the 360's situation. This is a cheaper but less powerful approach as only CPU or GPU can access the memory at a time.

An honest point from an honest dev.

Is there anything you're able to do, visually, on PS3 that you can't on Xbox 360?
Certain procedural effects are easier to create on the PS3 because of the power of the SPEs. Effects like water simulations, especially when you move beyond simple surface effects to fluid dynamics require the kind of algorithms that are really suited to the CELL architecture. Having said that the slightly more flexible GPU and unified memory model on X360 allows some neat tricks that level the playing field somewhat. It will be interesting to see what emerges with video processing and EyeToy as well - CELL is designed for streaming and image processing applications in mind. I think we'll see both new visuals and game play out of that.

As an aside the audio technology running on CELL created by the guys in the SCEE Technology Group in London is pretty amazing, opening out loads more possibilities for real-time audio effects to enhance the visuals, something that is often overlooked but is an important part of increasing gamer immersion.
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2006/12/07/ps3_vs_xbox_360_a_developer_speaks.html
Read the article there is basically nothing in it when the entire systems come down to it. Now guys get back on topic!!!