Consoles vs PC
Author
Hi
I am not sure if this is the right place to post this.
My question is about the next generation video games for the Xbox360 and PS3, visually most of these games are impressive but I am wondering why couldn't game makers produce games like this 3 or 4 years ago although this hardware for consoles was there for PCs back then.
in another way, it seems to me like games on Xbox360 for example look way better than games on PC which have the same power as the 360
I don't know if it makes any sence but I always wondered about this.
Thanks
Author
No I didn't play Crysis.
I know that there are many PC games outthere that look amazing but that is all because of all the power available for PC compared to consoles.
My question is about comparing a console with a PC with identical hardware for both, like Gears of War for Xbox360 looks great but they could not make games that looked like this for PCs that had the same power as the 360. May be I am wrong but it seems to me that you always need more in a PC (hardware) to make the game visually looks like that on the console!!
I know that there are many PC games outthere that look amazing but that is all because of all the power available for PC compared to consoles.
My question is about comparing a console with a PC with identical hardware for both, like Gears of War for Xbox360 looks great but they could not make games that looked like this for PCs that had the same power as the 360. May be I am wrong but it seems to me that you always need more in a PC (hardware) to make the game visually looks like that on the console!!
1) The graphics card in the 360 (for example) was better than any PC card that was out at the time. It took quite some time before PCs got similar hardware to what is in the 360.
2) When building console hardware, then can make major architectural changes if they want to (PS architecture has never been comparable to PC), whereas PCs have to be backwards compatible with a 386.
3) The OS on a console is a lot more lightweight than on a PC.
2) When building console hardware, then can make major architectural changes if they want to (PS architecture has never been comparable to PC), whereas PCs have to be backwards compatible with a 386.
3) The OS on a console is a lot more lightweight than on a PC.
Quote:Original post by Hodgman
1) The graphics card in the 360 (for example) was better than any PC card that was out at the time. It took quite some time before PCs got similar hardware to what is in the 360.
2) When building console hardware, then can make major architectural changes if they want to (PS architecture has never been comparable to PC), whereas PCs have to be backwards compatible with a 386.
3) The OS on a console is a lot more lightweight than on a PC.
#2 and #3: But the console manufacturer has to write their OS/tools over again if they make major architectural changes. The developers of games also have to adjust (because on a console, you have to squeeze every last drop out of them and you can't rely on cross-platform techniques to get you that far).
Making large changes to everything at once can result in massive headaches (look what happened to the PS3). PCs have been slowly updating individual components of the system (Processors, ram, bus tech, network tech, graphics tech) bit-by-bit so that nobody gets absolutely "architecture shocked" back to the stone age.
Yeah, I didn't say it was a good thing. The PS2 was a huge change from the PSX as well (, which was a huge change from the SNES...). I was just trying to find reasons for why a console performs differently to a PC of similar cost.
That reminds me:
4) Console manufacturers often subsidise the cost of their hardware, which means you're often paying a *lot* less for console hardware than you would for PC hardware.
That reminds me:
4) Console manufacturers often subsidise the cost of their hardware, which means you're often paying a *lot* less for console hardware than you would for PC hardware.
Quote:Original post by Hodgman
Yeah, I didn't say it was a good thing. The PS2 was a huge change from the PSX as well (, which was a huge change from the SNES...). I was just trying to find reasons for why a console performs differently to a PC of similar cost.
That reminds me:
4) Console manufacturers often subsidise the cost of their hardware, which means you're often paying a *lot* less for console hardware than you would for PC hardware.
I think that's the key secret in price:performance right there. How much would a console cost if they didn't subsidise it? If they didn't compensate with developer kits that are 10 to 50 TIMES the cost of the retail hardware? If the title certification process didn't cost anything?
To get up and running with PC development, you're talking $1500-2500 (USD) per person for high-end hardware and software. For consoles, you STILL need that PC hardware and you ALSO need the oppresively expensive hardware and software toolkits provided by the console manufacturers (which are NDAed and so tightly controlled that there is no competition to bring the price down to the PC level).
Consoles are AWESOME for the consumer in their performance/price return. But the developers end up paying for a lot of it.
They can create fast bus between CPU and GFX card. A PC must accept a random HW, which might behave erratically. In fact PCs (with reasonable components) have lower bad HW rate than modern consoles.
At Hodgman 2. point.
The x64 standard must be compatible only with x64 standard, not with something before. Thought they should be more radical. Setting minimal amount of registers to 32 would be MUCH better. (As 32 registers are at a sweet spot from point of manufacturer's view.)
At Hodgman 2. point.
The x64 standard must be compatible only with x64 standard, not with something before. Thought they should be more radical. Setting minimal amount of registers to 32 would be MUCH better. (As 32 registers are at a sweet spot from point of manufacturer's view.)
There is a huge time investment involved in devving for the PC because of hardware compatibility. With console development you don't have to worry about any of that, you basically know your capabilities from the get go.
Quote:Original post by Tiffany
There is a huge time investment involved in devving for the PC because of hardware compatibility. With console development you don't have to worry about any of that, you basically know your capabilities from the get go.
WHile this is true, there are no where near the comliance testing required for PC's.
For a consol game to be released, it needs to be approved by the owning company, and they test it for all sorts of weird things (text boxes still fit in all 5-6-8 langs. etc)
For a PC game to be released, It needs to be uploaded to the web.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
