PlayStation 3 vs Gaming PC

[cyborg47]

The graphics API for the PS3 is called OpenGL ES 2.0 (short for Embedded System) which is a subset of OpenGL 2.0. OpenGL is an open standard defined and promoted by the Khronos group. It is also of note that while the RSX should be DirectX9 compliant the PS3 will not use DirectX for it's games as DirectX is not a native API of the Linux enviroment which the PS3 uses.

Check this for more info. Now you know what i am talking about and why linux should be the chosen platform if such things ever becomes a reality. There's no significant loss of integrity here.

I am being realistic. Don't expect sony to win battles straight away with this move but put a halt to microsoft's monopoly if not a "screeching halt".

Nothing is easy but making slow but significant moves assures a certain victory although its gonna be time consuming. Sure the task here is insurmountable & even the idea is a bit far fetched, its not by a great degree.

LOL..victory from what? Microsoft is not Evil here, are they?


Calm down and read everything properly first, Vamsi said most of the 'first party developers' use the low level API's and dont entirely depend on the OpenGL. Its the third party developers or the multi-platform developers who use the OpenGL because its not as time consuming as working through the low level API's (directly with the hardware).

And btw, its OpenGL-ES 1.0 that playstation 3 uses, not 2.0

 

[vickybat]

Dude, I understand you love OpenGL, but dont expect developers to bring graphics like crysis 10 or something. Like I already said, both are equally good when the developers want to use it. It was different back in 2005 when the devs were switching from OpenGL to DX (ofcourse because of the microsoft's marketing crap), and it was difficult for them to get used to the DX API, and thats when Carmack said the devs didnt have to shoot their foot with dx to develop games, he said that OpenGL can do everything that DX can. But the situation is different now, look at BF3, its looking great coz DICE is using the DX11 APIs properly.

Check the following:

Battlefield 3 vs Rage: HD Screenshot Comparison - GamingBolt.com: Video Game News, Reviews, Previews and Blog

Why Rage will be a Better Title than Battlefield 3 << Gaming Irresponsibly » Gaming Irresponsibly


The upcoming doom4 which will use the modified id tech 5 engine will be graphically 3-4 times richer than rage according to "john carmack". So hopefully it might change the opinion of many developers on opengl.

 

[skeletor]

Let me play the devil's advocate here, since the issue of linux gaming was raised.

One thing MS doesn't get enough credit for, is how easy it has made gaming by forcing developers to stick to DX standards. I remember days when you, as the user, had to fiddle with Soundblaster IRQs, set the DMA channels, and sometimes even flip onboard jumpers to get a game to work.

DX eliminated all that and for a developer, instead of having to write specific codes for the potentially infinite CPU+GPU+RAM combination, made coding for PCs easier.

You are talking about pre-OpenGL era here. Game development was done directly to the hardware at that time. DirectX doesn't get any sort of credit for that. OpenGL came before as an API.

Direct3D only started to get popular from (and after) version 9 and only due to Microsoft's FUD. Heck, OpenGL was better and faster compared to it. Just compare the graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

 

[cyborg47]

Check the following:

Battlefield 3 vs Rage: HD Screenshot Comparison - GamingBolt.com: Video Game News, Reviews, Previews and Blog

Why Rage will be a Better Title than Battlefield 3 << Gaming Irresponsibly » Gaming Irresponsibly


The upcoming doom4 which will use the modified id tech 5 engine will be graphically 3-4 times richer than rage according to "john carmack". So hopefully it might change the opinion of many developers on opengl.

Ah please! dont bring the sreenshot comparision. Ditch them, your life gets better
and some of the rage screenshots are from a console and its all BS
All I suggest is to wait till both the games release, and then compare them yourselves.

graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

I find HL2 look MUCH better
Then again, its a bad comparision..a very bad one infact. One is a corridor shooter, rarely has outdoor environments, and the other one is a sandbox style linear shooter with a lot of huge outdoor environments, and some real good physics

 

[skeletor]

I find HL2 look MUCH better

* at the time of release.

It used to be a subjective opinion at that time anyways.

and I haven't said X game used to look better than Y.

 

[vickybat]

LOL..victory from what? Microsoft is not Evil here, are they?


Calm down and read everything properly first, Vamsi said most of the 'first party developers' use the low level API's and dont entirely depend on the OpenGL. Its the third party developers or the multi-platform developers who use the OpenGL because its not as time consuming as working through the low level API's (directly with the hardware).

And btw, its OpenGL-ES 1.0 that playstation 3 uses, not 2.0

I am calm. I have read everything that vamsi said and meant. I don't know what consoles he meant but ps3 relies on opengl ES and PSGL which is absolutely based on opengl ES. Ps3 also uses nvidia's CG. Btw PS3 also utilizes a lot of features of opengl 2.0

Check here.

A quote from wiki

OpenGL ES 1.0 - Supported by the PlayStation 3 as one of official graphics APIs[5] (the other one being low level libgcm library), the PlayStation 3 also includes several features of OpenGL ES 2.0

So what say now?

You are talking about pre-OpenGL era here. Game development was done directly to the hardware at that time. DirectX doesn't get any sort of credit for that. OpenGL came before as an API.

Direct3D only started to get popular from (and after) version 9 and only due to Microsoft's FUD. Heck, OpenGL was better and faster compared to it. Just compare the graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

I absolutely agree buddy.

 

[vamsi_krishna]

The graphics API for the PS3 is called OpenGL ES 2.0 (short for Embedded System) which is a subset of OpenGL 2.0. OpenGL is an open standard defined and promoted by the Khronos group. It is also of note that while the RSX should be DirectX9 compliant the PS3 will not use DirectX for it's games as DirectX is not a native API of the Linux enviroment which the PS3 uses.

Check this for more info. Now you know what i am talking about and why linux should be the chosen platform if such things ever becomes a reality. There's no significant loss of integrity here.

I am being realistic. Don't expect sony to win battles straight away with this move but put a halt to microsoft's monopoly if not a "screeching halt".

Nothing is easy but making slow but significant moves assures a certain victory although its gonna be time consuming. Sure the task here is insurmountable & even the idea is a bit far fetched, its not by a great degree.
.

Okay. Please.. don't move in circles and make the same point again and again. Open GL ES is not platform exclusive. It is used in varied type of embded systems, including PS3. But PS3 is not using out of the box API here. They are putting the API though lot of changes making sure that it talks directly to the PS3 hardware. So, things will not be the same with PC hardware. Visual and performance fidelity that they have achieved with their games will not be possible that easily. Lot of time, man and money are required.

 

[Liverpool_fan]

Excellent posts Vickybat.

 

[rchi84]

Ok, for all D3D bashers out there, please read this:

Carmack: Direct3D is now better than OpenGL | bit-gamer.net

I would take his word for it

 

[vickybat]

Okay. Please.. don't move in circles and make the same point again and again. Open GL ES is not platform exclusive. It is used in varied type of embded systems, including PS3. But PS3 is not using out of the box API here. They are putting the API though lot of changes making sure that it talks directly to the PS3 hardware. So, things will be the same with PC hardware. Visual and performance fidelity that they have achieved with their games will not be possible that easily. Lot of time, man and money are required.

There is simply one point in this whole discussion and that is support of open-gl in more and more platforms and specifically for pc.

I never said open-gl ES is a platform exclusive. Open standards are never exclusive to a particular platform and i very well know that.

And i agree that it won't be easy and definitely man and money power and required. Do you know Rage uses opengl for pc & ps3 but directX for xbox 360.

If developers can port that successfully without considerable loss in performance and fidelity ( Rage in xbox 360 look beautiful) , then why do you think its unachievevable in the context of this discussion.

Sure developers can port the game to pc and use open-gl. Its not that difficult for them as you think.

Excellent posts Vickybat.

Thanks buddy.

 

[vamsi_krishna]

Sorry.. every game will be ported to multiple APIs these days not just rage. Rembmer?

Every game will be ported to PS3 which uses OpenGL. Thats why most multiplatform games performs like sheet on this machine. Lack of polish.

 

[skeletor]

Ok, for all D3D bashers out there, please read this:

Carmack: Direct3D is now better than OpenGL | bit-gamer.net

I would take his word for it

has anyone even bashed D3D?

yup, after 10 years of spreading FUD and pumping $$$ you are bound to make your product good and may be better. OpenGL can still do whatever D3D can.

 

[asingh]

Haha thats a shame then.

High sales = More money from consoles

Which leaves Devs wary of spending TIME and RESOURCES and EFFORT to make the game any better, or optimized at all for the PC.

Is that hard to grasp?

Actually Yes.

What you are speaking does not really make sense. It sounds right, but it is not. Just because a certain device is selling well, it is not the sole reason that development/support for a complimentary device will cease.

What is stopping the game studios to develop and harness the > Dx9 capabilities to the full potential and creating code from scratch. How can we even say that they are so called "porting". Any one from a game studio here...? They are just being plain and simple lazy and not using what is out there for them to use. Why..? Cause they have us believing that consoles are holding back PC games, since consoles run on out dated hardware. If a company really wants to put effort in creating something right they sure can. See Crysis 2. It was done straight up in Dx9 and put most Dx11 touted games to shame. Why..? The company spent the time and effort to do it. I am sure Crytek know what a PS3 and XBOX360 are.

Also anyone who says that the game was just "ported" or reverse engineered to the PC. Probably has not seen object code or been through a product development cycle right till end-of-life. It does not work like this. Either they announce that production will cease on this day and date, but you do not create shoddy half baked products and continue to retail them, on the pretext that a competing product of ours is doing "better". It would be the worst business logic I have heard.

It takes just as much effort to pick up a platform specific code, re-use, re-compile and MODIFY for another variant(hardware). It is just not a copy paste and run, which most people speak about porting. There is umpteen testing and case scenarios. I am quite sure they are writing fresh code for PC games, but just not doing it optimally. PS3 sales have got jack to do with this though. The studios are choosing to write the games the way we see them on PC cause they choose too. It is no market dynamics. Effort is almost just the same.

They don't need to come up with their own operating system.
They don't need tons of money either to promote development on linux like micosoft.

Since the underlying api's are so similar, porting won't be a problem. Linux is an "open platfom" unlike microsoft. So sony won't have to pay any sort of "royalty" to anyone unlike developers paying to microsoft.

Its not some ordeal to simply pull off but expand in terms of providing content & simultaneosly do battle. Good for both console and pc gamers imo.
Sure SCE was in losses but look at them now. They have redefined gaming in many ways. They can do it for linux too and back opengl in the same process.

Good for the future of gaming.

Sony PS3 had Linux when it was launched. One of the FWs disabled it. Why..? Sony was not to happy, about other usages of the PS3. People were using it for super computing on the Linux layer. They are no charity or NGO. They want business and money. They will only sink investment in places which give ROI or promise positive revenue down the line.

Though are you really sure, the APIs were same for Linux and DirectX. Doubt it. Cause both are abstraction layers between hardware and OS. Hardware is same, but OS varies quite a bit...!

I understand. Microsoft has Windows, and you want sony to have linux.
But why the hell would sony even want to go to Linux in the first place?!
They're not doing some kinda social service in the gaming industry here lol.
What you're saying is perfectly possible, sony can fall in love with linux and pull it up yes.

They removed Linux as I mentioned above.

 

[vamsi_krishna]

IMO.. there should not be a monopoly in any kind of thing.

Compition will make consumers king. Monopoly will make the company rich.

DX what is now.. would have been 10times better if OpenGL had clicked in the market.

Sony PS3 had Linux when it was launched. One of the FWs disabled it. Why..? Sony was not to happy, about other usages of the PS3. People were using it for super computing on the Linux layer. They are no charity or NGO. They want business and money. They will only sink investment in places which give ROI or promise positive revenue down the line.

The reason why It wasn't there on Slim.

"I’m sorry that you are frustrated by the lack of comment specifically regarding the withdrawal of support for OtherOS on the new PS3 slim. The reasons are simple: The PS3 Slim is a major cost reduction involving many changes to hardware components in the PS3 design. In order to offer the OtherOS install, SCE would need to continue to maintain the OtherOS hypervisor drivers for any significant hardware changes – this costs SCE. One of our key objectives with the new model is to pass on cost savings to the consumer with a lower retail price. Unfortunately in this case the cost of OtherOS install did not fit with the wider objective to offer a lower cost PS3."

The reason to remove it from other PS3s with firmware upgrade is, Geohot. In a BBC interview he stated that the looted the master key through the "Other OS" option in linux.

And talking about charity.. PS3 funded to a Linux distro for 2 years. Also, Using networked ps3's computing power to study proteins in conjunction with standford university's research on cure for cancer. And plenty more which were unofficial.

 

[vickybat]

Though are you really sure, the APIs were same for Linux and DirectX. Doubt it. Cause both are abstraction layers between hardware and OS. Hardware is same, but OS varies quite a bit...!
.

I didn't get you buddy. Linux is an os and directX is a set of api's. So what exactly do you mean by saying "api's are same"?

 

[asingh]

^
Sorry meant API call on m$ vs. linux.

 

[tkin]

This is the biggest misconception which the gaming community is living in. Why is it the fault of consoles. Why cannot not the developers right code which is specific to all the platforms. It is because game studios are lazy OR the finance houses are pushy that reverse porting happens and we see the wonders off consolization to the PC game. What is stopping them from creating a Dx11 build and a separate build for the console hardware. The hardware is moving quicker than the gaming studios -- for whom it is created in the first place.

Because console games sale more, and a lot, I mean how many play pc games? Many think its hard to install games etc, once my friend bought a game and couldn't install it(cause a virus was blocking access to registry), so he blamed it on pc(not his carelessness), like this many buy console games because its easy to play. 90% of my friends have virus in their pc, and a lot get fooled by shopkeepers into buying old gpu and try to play games on it.
A kid in my block bought a 6200LE for 4k a few weeks ago, tried to play Just Cause 2 on it, guess what happened.

Also developing for consoles is a lot easier, fixed hardware, fixed api, no need to test and deploy in multiple hardware config, perhaps the greatest strength and also the greatest weakness in consoles. Also for same reason console games have higher margins due to minimum development time compared to pc.

Interesting reads:
Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX - Wolfire Games Blog
DirectX vs. OpenGL revisited - Wolfire Games Blog

Good article, but john carmack is one to talk, for how long his IDtech4 has been in development? Now compare Brink vs Crysis 2 visuals, I'll believe it when rage actually comes and proves this.

 

[vickybat]

@ asingh

Yes api call is very much different between windows and linux. But we are only concerned with the multimedia api's i.e directx and opengl.

Windows supports both whereas linux supports opengl only and the graphics library is called Mesa3D. It's an Open Source library which follows the OpenGL API.

But micro$soft isn't touting on opengl and is forcing developers to use directX as the default choice.

 

[asingh]

^^
And what do all the three platforms use..?

 

[vickybat]

^^
And what do all the three platforms use..?

You mean ps3 , 360 and windows?