PS4 doesn't have custom chips due to developer focused design

"Sony's Michael Denny has explained the reason why the company did not go with custom chips like the Cell processor. It's a known fact that the processor was difficult for a lot of developers to get the hang of and plenty of them complained that it was a lot of work for them to offload GPU tasks on the SPUs."

[black911]

Developers Are Lazy!

[mushroomwig]

It's not that developers are lazy, they just don't have the time. You could spend months working on the cell for something that would only take you days/weeks on the PS4 CPU.

[zebramocha]

@mush black is kinda right bf3 had better effect in comparison to the 360 and portal on the ps3 was the best console version even though the developing time was the same.

[Conzul]

Good. Hope this means Sony can double its game output.
Our wallets are going to hate us so much!

[wishingW3L]

it's pretty well known that all programmers are lazy not just game developers. I have many friends that work developing software for different corporations and what they always tell me is that once a programmer learns a language most of them are very reluctant about learning a new one. It becomes like some kind of religion or fanboy war about what compiler and languages are the best.

The other day a friend of mine was telling me about one of his co-workers that lost his job because the project had to be coded on ColdFusion(CFML) but he wanted to make it on C#....

[nukeitall]

@wishingW3L:

"The other day a friend of mine was telling me about one of his co-workers that lost his job because the project had to be coded on ColdFusion (CFML) but he wanted to make it on C#...."

Wha? I would fight ColdFusion too. What kind of bonehead decision is to create a project on ColdFusion? It's practically no longer used and C# is a much better choice.

The only reason I see sticking with ColdFusion is because this is an upgrade/add-on to an existing ColdFusion project.

I wouldn't want to be there if management made decisions like that myself.

That said, yes developers like *people in general* are reluctant to learn new things. Once they are set in their ways it is very hard to change that, and that goes for all industries, not just programmers. The young and motivated ones are much more interrested in learning new and fresh stuff.

It's just people, not programmers.

[ProjectVulcan]

Time is money.

Games take a long time to make as it is. They cost millions to develop which is an investment with zero payoff til the game launches and hopefully sells successfully.

High risk.

Why force devs to risk even more by having to invest in specialised technologies not relevant elsewhere.

Costs have to be controlled better or the industry will go into meltdown.

[mistertwoturbo]

"what they always tell me is that once a programmer learns a language most of them are very reluctant about learning a new one."

Because once you get pass basic command lines and scripts, it's mother F'in hard! So of course they aren't going to throw away everything they learned in 4-6 years of College and 5-10 years of coding experience.

People don't realize that. Guys like black1911 has no clue about what development really is. These are engineers with Master's and Ph D.s that are working on these engines. Pure geniuses in comparison to 99% of the clowns here on N4G.

[hay]

Bollocks. Developers are hard working. Suits tend force return of investment of every single minute of devs time, which then hampers the innovation factor, retardating the R&D completely, as "imitation" works better in this kind of environment.
With all the "smart spending" crap going around companies, devs are ususally cutting corners to get things as acceptable as possible.

[ShugaCane]

I don't see how this is lazy to want games to be easer and more comfortable to develop.

[ziggurcat]

the different architecture didn't mean it was more difficult, just different.

and devs were notoriously lazy about learning how to optimize their code for the PS3 architecture, not because it was hard, but because they couldn't be bothered to learn (i.e. laziness).

@ mushroomwig: they have the time, that's a tired excuse they often give when they're too lazy to fix something.

@ mustang300c2012: i worked in QA for several years - they really are lazy.

[nukeitall]

@ziggurcat:

"the different architecture didn't mean it was more difficult, just different."

In some cases yes, but inthe PS3 case it was not.

"and devs were notoriously lazy about learning how to optimize their code for the PS3 architecture, not because it was hard, but because they couldn't be bothered to learn (i.e. laziness)."

The PS3 architecture wasn't properly designed for the type of loads video games need so you end up doing a lot of workarounds to optimize your code. However, the PS3 can do super fast computations on small data sets!

The additional benefit is minimally better, yet the drawback was huge.

"i worked in QA for several years - they really are lazy."

QA and is often times where you stuff people with the lowest set of skills and the laziest of the bunch, so yes. That said, good companies will place some of the best, because bugs will kill a product.

[Mustang300C2012]

Another uneducated idiot spewing about devs being lazy

[Qrphe]

If you pay the devs or give them more time they won't be "lazy." A lot of people resort to calling developers and publishers lazy or greedy without considering financial aspects which ARE the main factors in anything within the industry.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

6 1/2 years later and some of you still don't understand or have any respect. But its easy to just say lazy, so lets run with that.

[Yodagamer]

They aren't lazy, they are just business smart. Why spend more money on the version that will sell the least? The ports got better as the ps3 sold more because it finally gave them a reason to spend the extra dollars.

[T2]

Perhaps but that isnt very business savvy ... They made plenty of enemies doing this ... Just look at all fans who hate those companies for ruining their games. Its not a long term strategy to make shit ports for ANY system

[r1sh12]

its a good thing.
The problem is some games are expected every year and if developers have to meet these annual deadlines whilst trying to code for a processor that is generally harder to code for, the games quality could take a hit.
CPU's are powerful enough to easily handle games for a very long time, consoles are only as strong as their weakest component which is usually RAM or GPU.

The PS3 processor will be fine in the next gen but lack of RAM and GPU would hold it back more.

[solid_warlord]

@black911 u create a PS3 game then dumb ass...see how hard it is then to work with a cell based chip.

[xtreampro]

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that Sony's first party studios played a major role in forcing them to abandon that poorly designed monstrosity that is the Cell in favor of better more efficient and easier to use hardware.

So rather than wasting a year figuring out to use the damn thing this time they'll spend more time on actually making games!

Sony's first party devs are far from lazy and they before any other devs asked for this change.

[MYSTERIO360]

It makes me wonder, if the PS4 is using off the shelf PC hardware (non customised) this time its frame could be quite large. i mean larger then the original PS3 and possibly the first XBOX. I could be wrong though.

[lovegames718]

These devs are in it for the money like everyone else so whatever makes things easier for them is what it is. At least now ports across the Ps4 and Xbox will be identical for the most part which is good. Developers like Nd, SM, GG and Media Molecule will still be able to harness the power and do what they have to do with their engines.

[Cyb3r]

Yeah but you gotta admit its a pretty smart move by Sony

[loulou]

an easy to develop for console helped microsoft loads this gen. it makes perfect sense for sony to do the same thing going forward

[NeverEnding1989]

It's good to see SONY correct the mistakes they made this gen.

[Neko_Mega]

It is lazy, because if you look at how many developers finally knew how to use the Cell. Almost all of them did, their was only some.

An I bet if Sony keep using the Cell, they would understand it more better and it be more easy to use.

[maniacmayhem]

Time is money and most devs are third parties and are looking to port there games across all systems. Having one made specifically for the cell would be time consuming and time = money.

[N0S3LFESTEEM]

They made the smarter choice by ditching it this round... an 8 core architecture will win out over a Single core with a bunch of mini cores.

[DigitalSmoke]

Great move on Sony's part, the media can't get between the love of developers for a machine.
Something Sony felt the hard part of last generation, yet eventhough releasing exclusives that broke the visual barier over and over.

Can't see what happens next.

[iconic56]

If I were to make an uneducated guess... I'd imagine Sony cut back on R&D costs and they simply didn't have the funds to heavily customize new hardware.

[Persistantthug]

Everything's still customized.

[iconic56]

I don't know. Maybe it's because they didn't really get into a lot of detailed specs on their PS4 reveal, but I just don't get the feeling that they are heavily customizing their hardware this time around.

In comparison, both the Durango and Wii U seem to be more modified. The Wii U for a fact has a heavily modified GPU and the Durango is swarming with rumors, most likely true about Move Engines and Mutiple Planes and even dual/tri-soc architecture.

Being an early adopter of the PS3, I was all over how technologically customized the console was. That stuff interests me, but the PS4 doesn't garner much hype from me when they essentially came out and said we will be using generic architecture. And in no way is this architecture going to suck, but at the same time... what am I paying these guys for if they aren't doing something technically mind blowing?

I and everyone else knows that Sony has some of the best minds and resources in the world... but the PS4 just seems lazy and uninspired to me.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

That's definitely an uneducated guess.

[MadMen]

Duh, every PS3 crazy out there would SWEAR it was the best Idea because they had their internal games look so good, however they forget about the 80% of games that are not internal.

Going default hardware based and dev friendly was a mistake that SONY recognize and I am proud of them for not trying to be cocky about thier hardware.

They now are back in position of the PS1 days when they were cool, devs loved their machines in comparison to Saturn

Welcome HOME Sony

[GraveLord]

But PS4 does have custom chips. It's not exactly off the shelf. You can't build a PS4 through Newegg or any other OEM retailer.
PS3 however went beyond custom. It went to alien.

[clintagious650]

Sony just needs to make sure that if they do ever decide to create future chips that they also have tools ready with a layout showing how to access each area for 3rd party devs or else they will be like john carmack & b!tch about it.

[delboy]

No, you can have a custom chip and still be developer friendly.
The truth is that Sony is broke, and it's way cheaper to go with of the shelf parts.
But AMD is broke to, so they probably made a offer that either Sony or Ms couldn't resist.

@iconic56

Totally agree with you.
A gaming console need to be custom, or else it is just boring.
Even SNES was custom designed and culd do things that pc couldn't in that time.
Ps4 is so simple that the second generation of games on it will max out the hardware.
So we will not see any major improvement on games over time like it used to be with custom made console architecture.

[N0S3LFESTEEM]

Their both billion dollar companies that cater to the world market... far from being broke.

[kwyjibo]

There is no way the Sony of today has the same RnD budget as the Sony that launched the PS3.

[rainslacker]

IBM fronted most of the cost of the Cell chip. Sony had a hand in it, but it was likely not more than it cost them to develop any of their other custom chips in the PS1 or PS2.

The move to more mainstream processors is because it is what developers wanted. The chips themselves are still modified, and there is no way you would see the same chip available at retail, so the cost is still there for Sony.

Sony isn't broke. Learn how finances work when it comes to multi-billion dollar corporations before saying such a thing. If they were broke we wouldn't be seeing a PS4. We'd see Sony move to a software only maker(or drop out completely).

[DivineAssault]

Good decision even if it means no BC..

[Bonerboy]

Good stuff. Why have devs waste time and resources and money trying to wrap their heads around some funky dumbass achitecture when they could instead spend it on making great games. No wonder ps3 game suffered for so long. 'Bout time you dislodged your head from your ass sony. I just might pick one up this time around. Impress me.