The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I keep on hearing that the PS2 is hard to program for (in comparison to other games consoles). I remember hearing something along those lines at launch. But cannot quote anyone.
If someone can remember who actually said this, could they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these forums. Was it a case of 1 single third party developer saying this on their first inspection of the hardware?? Or did every developer shout 'We can never program for this!' And throw their arms up in the air??
PS2 games are coming out of companies like Capcom and Konami at a quick pace. Other 3rd parties don't seem to be having problems developing 3d engines either - look at red Faction, WWF etc.
Is there really a problem? I heard that Sony have been releasing massive libraries of utilities for 3rd parties to use, and that the hard graft has been removed from the coding.... They didn't program GT3 in Assembly language!
So who said the PS2 is hard to program for? And where's the proof? Anyone got any ideas?
If someone can remember who actually said this, could they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these forums. Was it a case of 1 single third party developer saying this on their first inspection of the hardware?? Or did every developer shout 'We can never program for this!' And throw their arms up in the air??
PS2 games are coming out of companies like Capcom and Konami at a quick pace. Other 3rd parties don't seem to be having problems developing 3d engines either - look at red Faction, WWF etc.
Is there really a problem? I heard that Sony have been releasing massive libraries of utilities for 3rd parties to use, and that the hard graft has been removed from the coding.... They didn't program GT3 in Assembly language!
So who said the PS2 is hard to program for? And where's the proof? Anyone got any ideas?
I keep on hearing that the PS2 is hard to program for (in comparison to other games consoles). I remember hearing something along those lines at launch. But cannot quote anyone.
If someone can remember who actually said this, could they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these forums. Was it a case of 1 single third party developer saying this on their first inspection of the hardware?? Or did every developer shout 'We can never program for this!' And throw their arms up in the air??
PS2 games are coming out of companies like Capcom and Konami at a quick pace. Other 3rd parties don't seem to be having problems developing 3d engines either - look at red Faction, WWF etc.
Is there really a problem? I heard that Sony have been releasing massive libraries of utilities for 3rd parties to use, and that the hard graft has been removed from the coding.... They didn't program GT3 in Assembly language!
So who said the PS2 is hard to program for? And where's the proof? Anyone got any ideas?
If someone can remember who actually said this, could they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these forums. Was it a case of 1 single third party developer saying this on their first inspection of the hardware?? Or did every developer shout 'We can never program for this!' And throw their arms up in the air??
PS2 games are coming out of companies like Capcom and Konami at a quick pace. Other 3rd parties don't seem to be having problems developing 3d engines either - look at red Faction, WWF etc.
Is there really a problem? I heard that Sony have been releasing massive libraries of utilities for 3rd parties to use, and that the hard graft has been removed from the coding.... They didn't program GT3 in Assembly language!
So who said the PS2 is hard to program for? And where's the proof? Anyone got any ideas?
I agree with you, and I can't rmember his name , but it was on an XBOX post!
As for being hard to program for, this too wasn't true. Of course there was inital problems, mainly to do with getting the Emotion Engine, Grapphics synthesiser and Vector units to work in the right order but as far as I know, this has been cracked...
Then there was the anitaliasing problem... again solved after a couple of months...
Then there was the whinging about thextures... until develpoers discovered that they get streamed off the disc and didnt require a huge texture memory (unile the XBOX and GCN)
The other problems was the style of programming ant language... The PS2 uses the same system as your CGI units used for Hi-Res movie graphics, Beizier curves, nurb redering, MPEG2 etc etc and this was the first time anything like this had been used in a console so obviously it took time for programmers to learn how to use these techniques to create games!
Sony changed the boundaries and the style to acheive graphics that didn't rely on masses and masses of polygons being shoved around and with the multi processing unit, the tasks are less load bearing on the main CPU as opposed to previous consoles where the main CPU did everything.
As with all new technologies, it took time to learn. It took 4 years before developers discovered what the PSX could do when pushed to the limit, it will take the same time for developers to acheive the full potential of the PS2. GT3 was awesome, but no where near the full capability of this machine... not by a long shot!
XBOX have gone for an openGL based system, alright, but limiting to what it can do, GCN have gone towards LINUX and PowerPC(Mac) Architecture and the games look awesome... Sony have used LINUX too plus all the other bells and whistles of CGI... Look at FF-SW, mostly produced on a GS Station (16xPS2's)...
Given them a chance... things can only get better!!
As for being hard to program for, this too wasn't true. Of course there was inital problems, mainly to do with getting the Emotion Engine, Grapphics synthesiser and Vector units to work in the right order but as far as I know, this has been cracked...
Then there was the anitaliasing problem... again solved after a couple of months...
Then there was the whinging about thextures... until develpoers discovered that they get streamed off the disc and didnt require a huge texture memory (unile the XBOX and GCN)
The other problems was the style of programming ant language... The PS2 uses the same system as your CGI units used for Hi-Res movie graphics, Beizier curves, nurb redering, MPEG2 etc etc and this was the first time anything like this had been used in a console so obviously it took time for programmers to learn how to use these techniques to create games!
Sony changed the boundaries and the style to acheive graphics that didn't rely on masses and masses of polygons being shoved around and with the multi processing unit, the tasks are less load bearing on the main CPU as opposed to previous consoles where the main CPU did everything.
As with all new technologies, it took time to learn. It took 4 years before developers discovered what the PSX could do when pushed to the limit, it will take the same time for developers to acheive the full potential of the PS2. GT3 was awesome, but no where near the full capability of this machine... not by a long shot!
XBOX have gone for an openGL based system, alright, but limiting to what it can do, GCN have gone towards LINUX and PowerPC(Mac) Architecture and the games look awesome... Sony have used LINUX too plus all the other bells and whistles of CGI... Look at FF-SW, mostly produced on a GS Station (16xPS2's)...
Given them a chance... things can only get better!!
Tellah wrote:
If someone can remember who actually said this, could
> they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these
> forums.
I think it was this post:
> The Future Of Gaming (Prime Topics)
> Another bloomin' console comparison, sorry.
> Original Message posted by Bonus on 17/10/2001 at 1.40PM
If someone can remember who actually said this, could
> they post the name, because I think it's been grossly over stated in these
> forums.
I think it was this post:
> The Future Of Gaming (Prime Topics)
> Another bloomin' console comparison, sorry.
> Original Message posted by Bonus on 17/10/2001 at 1.40PM
A couple of devlopers have said that they found the PS2 difficult to develop for, due to its innovative internal architecture.
Most notable of these were Oddworld Inhabitants, creators of the PSone Oddworld games, and Munch's Oddyssey.
Strangely, at one point they were saying how wonderfuul the PS2 was, and how it allowed them to create their games to the standards which they had originally envisioned.
Then their attitude changed drastically, and their head honcho started bad-mouthing the PS2. Shortly afterwards, it was revealed that Microsoft had paid them lots of money to make Munch's Oddyssey an Xbox exclusive. Cynics would say that it isn't impossible that the sudden change of heart came about because of/as part of the megabucks deal with MS; but not me, oh no - we all know that MS are whiter than white and never engage in dodgy business practices...
Anyway, I have seen many more reports from developers saying that PS2 isn't 'difficult', it's just 'different'.
One developer - I think it was Volition - has been quoted in PSM2 (unofficial PS2 mag) as saying that the difficulty you have depends on the way you approach the system.
If you try a basic port of a game from another system, it *will* work, but your results will be less than favourable - you won't get the best from the machine.
However, if you design specifically for the PS2 from the outset, the results can be outstanding. There is immense raw power within the PS2, but *you* have to get the best out of it - it is capable of a lot, but you can't just expect it to do everything for you.
For comparison...
As I understand it, the Gamecube is a very capable machine, and does a lot of the work for the developer. A lot of the calculations and stats, such as how many polygons you can push around the screen and how many light sources before game speed is affected are already known - and more or less set in stone. This takes a lot of responsibility away from the developer, who can get on with cosing the game; the limits are already set, and they don't have to worry about them.
This is not the case on the PS2, which is very powerful, but pretty dumb. The number of polys/lights etc. all has to be defined by the developer, possibly on a game-by-game basis. This, in theory, leads to longer development times.
So basically, both systems use a different approach to game development, and so the developers must also adapt their approach. The Gamecube has also been designed with Nintendo's own game style, design preferences and work ethic in mind, which may or may not suit other developers and the type of games they produce.
In short, PS2 may be 'more difficult', but by definition, it may also be more flexible. It just remains to be seen if the developers take the time to coax the best from the machine; current indications seem to be that many of them will.
Of course, things will always get easier for PS2 developers. Criterion Studios are a small company who have developed some fantastic middleware for PS2 (and other platforms) and are licencing the technology to other developers. The two games they are currently working on for PS2 are Burnout and Airblade, using their own software (called RenderWare) - http://www.renderware.com
In my personal opinion, if a relatively small developer can achieve such fantastic results with their first two titles, the system can't be that difficult. And there can be absolutely no excuse for the 'big boys' not to produce some exceptional titles.
Most notable of these were Oddworld Inhabitants, creators of the PSone Oddworld games, and Munch's Oddyssey.
Strangely, at one point they were saying how wonderfuul the PS2 was, and how it allowed them to create their games to the standards which they had originally envisioned.
Then their attitude changed drastically, and their head honcho started bad-mouthing the PS2. Shortly afterwards, it was revealed that Microsoft had paid them lots of money to make Munch's Oddyssey an Xbox exclusive. Cynics would say that it isn't impossible that the sudden change of heart came about because of/as part of the megabucks deal with MS; but not me, oh no - we all know that MS are whiter than white and never engage in dodgy business practices...
Anyway, I have seen many more reports from developers saying that PS2 isn't 'difficult', it's just 'different'.
One developer - I think it was Volition - has been quoted in PSM2 (unofficial PS2 mag) as saying that the difficulty you have depends on the way you approach the system.
If you try a basic port of a game from another system, it *will* work, but your results will be less than favourable - you won't get the best from the machine.
However, if you design specifically for the PS2 from the outset, the results can be outstanding. There is immense raw power within the PS2, but *you* have to get the best out of it - it is capable of a lot, but you can't just expect it to do everything for you.
For comparison...
As I understand it, the Gamecube is a very capable machine, and does a lot of the work for the developer. A lot of the calculations and stats, such as how many polygons you can push around the screen and how many light sources before game speed is affected are already known - and more or less set in stone. This takes a lot of responsibility away from the developer, who can get on with cosing the game; the limits are already set, and they don't have to worry about them.
This is not the case on the PS2, which is very powerful, but pretty dumb. The number of polys/lights etc. all has to be defined by the developer, possibly on a game-by-game basis. This, in theory, leads to longer development times.
So basically, both systems use a different approach to game development, and so the developers must also adapt their approach. The Gamecube has also been designed with Nintendo's own game style, design preferences and work ethic in mind, which may or may not suit other developers and the type of games they produce.
In short, PS2 may be 'more difficult', but by definition, it may also be more flexible. It just remains to be seen if the developers take the time to coax the best from the machine; current indications seem to be that many of them will.
Of course, things will always get easier for PS2 developers. Criterion Studios are a small company who have developed some fantastic middleware for PS2 (and other platforms) and are licencing the technology to other developers. The two games they are currently working on for PS2 are Burnout and Airblade, using their own software (called RenderWare) - http://www.renderware.com
In my personal opinion, if a relatively small developer can achieve such fantastic results with their first two titles, the system can't be that difficult. And there can be absolutely no excuse for the 'big boys' not to produce some exceptional titles.