of the four development costs (not manufacturing costs), those being software development, game design, art/asset creation, and QA, software development is the largest and most affected by porting. When you push each system, you're essentially doing 1.5 times the work in that area, and that's not taking into account having to redo some models/textures/lighting/effec ts that don't work on either console.
The PS3 was designed to have 2 cells originally. The cell was never designed with graphics in mind. Some people are using creative ways to push graphics out of it, but it was never designed for graphics in the way a graphics card is designed for graphics.
I could say "fable 2 is comparable to real life". That doesn't tell you anything about how the game looks or plays.
You continue to fail to mention what 1-875 are.
that was one example and 2 assumptions.
edit: also, it was a disk space limitation, not a power limitation.
@ other: It would be expensive because the platforms are so different. It's expensive enough to push each system to it's limits on it's own. Look at the budgets of those games you mentioned. Platform specific development would double. Compare that to making a single game that is easily portable to each system, where you get about the same sales with little cost...
All those first party developers can hardly keep their mouths shut about the console produced by the company that owns them...
/shock
Because that would be ridiculously expensive.
They posted a part of an interview with them, then make you check back for the whole interview later.
JUST POST THE WHOLE INTERVIEW. jesus.
one sku of the PS3 is in the top 10. 3 skus of the 360 are in the top 25.
take that however you will.
buh?
...
?
The strongest lineup this holiday is the multi platform lineup. The 360 60gb pro is still going to be $100 cheaper than the PS3, and it will play all the multi platform titles in equal quality. When a parent goes to walmart and sees a console for $100 less that can play about 75% of the good games the other console has, they won't care much about the exclusives. It's got madden? It's got Rockband? Guitar Hero? Star Wars? SOLD!
Whether you like to think so or not, there is a lot o...
they don't have a small market share... especially in the us.
exactly my point in 4.11
graphics and art aren't the same thing. The graphics in PoP aren't really exceptional by any means (except some effects). The art direction is what makes it good. Visual appeal is more about art than graphics.
If the government started maintaining the internet infrastructure more instead of giving ISPs the responsibility to, bandwidth could literally explode. In a matter of months, any minor population center could have speeds comparable to the best connections in the rest of the world.
The Cell isn't used much for graphics, as it's architecture isn't designed to push for it. It's also subject to diminishing returns because of the single PPE. While you might only use half the cells for those games, you won't get double the power from using all of them, as the PPE won't be running twice as fast with them.
Also, the EIB isn't fast enough to let the cell work at it's potential peak performance.
edit: disagrees mean you love me <3
people throw out percentages without actually knowing how the cell works, or what it's being used for.
DD isn't going to work like DVDs or blu-rays today. People will probably do something like netflix or on demand at a lower price. You won't purchase data anymore. You will purchase rights to data.
You lose the HD, you download again. You rent movies for a quarter a watch or something like that. Stream in at least standard definition as it stands now, and we're on the verge of a bandwidth explosion once fiber optics start replacing the infrastructure.
DD is not as far...
That's not how AA works at all. It takes an image larger than it needs, and downscales by averaging the color of all the pixels. That applies to everything on the screen, not just edges.
You must have sucked at the game if that's all u used the weapons for.