Top
610°

Carmack Rage: either console could look superior

There are a few questions regarding Rage, the next game by id Software, that are left to answer. Ever since the game was announced for XBOX 360, PS3, PC and Mac (though at E3 2010 id wasn't sure if a Mac version will come out), one of the more frequent ones has been which of the two consoles will offer the best experience, either feature-wise or framerate. Our very own Rangers shot that question over to John Carmack and here's what id's Technical Director and part time rocket scientist had to say.

Read Full Story >>
beyond3d.com
The story is too old to be commented.
SonySoldiers2671d ago ShowReplies(3)
Stryfeno22671d ago ShowReplies(9)
talltony2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

"They are close enough that I could fairly easily design a workload that would make either system look superior. For Rage, we have to expend more effort on the PS3 to maintain 60 hz than we do on the 360, but the PS3 is able to transcode more texture pages in a frame, which helps in some cases."

Ok so more effort but still 60 fps on ps3. But we always knew the ps3 was harder to develop for so this is understandable. What I find interesting is that the ps3 can transcode more textures in a frame so I wonder what that will mean for the final game.
Better textures in the ps3 version?? Possibly

dragonelite2671d ago

It just means the ps 3 can unpack textures faster doesn't mean better quality. Atleast not in the sense of mega textures.

Not entirely sure tried google transcoding and most i got was this wikipage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

raztad2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

But if the PS3 can transcode texture faster higher resolution textures can be used.

I think Carmack and co. are still struggling to get a grip of the SPUs power. They are not to blame tho, everybody in the industry is in the same situation.

dragonelite2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

That's not where mega texture are made for both consoles and pc already have the highest level of textures it has more to do with ram you know the pool where the textures sit in when used. See it like a pack of beer you take a beer and the barman puts back a beer. In case of the ps 3 it takes a beer but the barman puts back 1.5 beer he cant use the o.5 beer because the pack is only made for 6. Hope it get a basic view of how it works. Lets just say the ps 3 can refill the ram with textures faster then 360.

On pc if ID isn't lazy they can baked higher quality megatextures.
Because both consoles are limited to 512mb of ram you wont see any improvements. Pc almost has a limitless amount of ram compared to consoles 8~16gig isn't that rare these days for some pc gamers. I believe metro 2033 can use a large amount of memory when on highest setting.

Dam people stop disagreeing im not freaking trolling or something.

ShinMaster2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

http://www.tomsguide.com/us...

But I'm thinking they're trying to keep both console versions even, as to not to affect sales, my guess.

Kinda reminds me a bit of FFXIII, we all knew it'd be better on PS3, but Square=Enix denied any "significant" differences.

starchild2671d ago

Why would you assume that, when 97% of multi-platform games look or perform better on the 360?

The fact is, the two consoles are very close in power. The main difference being that with the 360 it is much easier to achieve that good graphics and performance than on the PS3.

starchild2671d ago

And for those of you that are doubting Rage, let me just say that it was easily one of the most impressive games at E3. For most people I talked to, it simply was the most impressive game there.

It looks as good or better than any console game out there right now, except that it also has a framerate that runs at twice rate of most of those good looking games.

Check it out http://www.youtube.com/watc... it easily looks as good as Gears of War 3, Uncharted 2 or Killzone 3, but it runs at twice the framerate as any of them. That is truly impressive.

beardpapa2671d ago

really no point in putting extra effort towards a particular console in a multiplatform development when the returns are expected to be the same as always.

Instead, developers this gen had been focusing on providing extra content on particular platform(s) to ensure higher-than-expected returns.

ShinMaster2671d ago

It depends on which console is the lead dev platform.
That is common knowledge.

I still stand by what I said previously.

Socrates2671d ago

The problem with that theory is that last generation even though many games had the PS2 as their lead development platform the Xbox versions still ended up looking much better.

Also, this generation games that have lead on the PS3, such as Dead Space, often end up running better on the 360.

The actual way things work is that developers basically try to make the game look as best they can on each platform.

NoOoB1012671d ago

I think Killzone 3 was confirmed to be 60 fps this time instead of 30 like Killzone 2. I'm too lazy to find the article though.

peowpeow2671d ago

You seriously think they can jump to 60 fps just like that, while still looking better than Killzone 2?

dude_uk2671d ago

i think it has to be 60fps because of 3D.

CWMR2671d ago

Guys, Killzone 3 is 30FPS, just like Killzone 2. It was 30FPS with some drops to around 25FPS. 3D has nothing to do with framerate.

edhe2670d ago

"I think Carmack and co. are still struggling to get a grip of the SPUs power. They are not to blame tho, everybody in the industry is in the same situation."

He's one of the best programmers in the industry, the SPUs have been out for almost 4 years. If you think that the SPUs power's yet untapped you're deluding yourself.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 2670d ago
Inside_out2671d ago ShowReplies(9)
Persistantthug2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

Doom 3 was good, not GREAT, but good, but what have they done since then?

ID is a legend of past, but I've seen nothing in recent memory that makes them a CURRENT Elite developer.

The reason they are having such problems with the PS3 version is because PC developers are used to running sloppy code. You try and port that slop to the PS3, it will spit it right back out at you. ID are PC developers at heart and their fan acclaim is based off of past acclaim that has long since been set aside.

Maybe they should give a call to some current ELITE developers to give them some help....

NAUGHTY DOG perhaps.

Perhaps the Naughty Dog's can teach the old dogs some new tricks.....
it seems they may need it....seriously.

SOAD2671d ago

Yeah, in terms of games iD hasn't made anything great for a while, but John Carmack has invented impressive development techniques such as ambient occlusion so now that he his showing his excitement and flexing his brain on this game, I think RAGE might be a great game.

zag2671d ago

I wouldn't say that, Carmack only came up with the idea of using maths to make areas seems like they are like rooms etc, thus the FPS was born.

With out him FPS might not exist at all.

Anyway, generally the ID game engines run much nicer than other people's engines, he's pretty much the king when it comes to FPS game engines but what cane you expect when you came up with the idea and made it happen.

The 1 thing this doesn't say is what res the PS3 engine is running at I'm fairly sure it's 1080p as he's always wanting the highest res etc out of a game engine.

The way the caching etc could work I don't think that is a consoles strong point, so might not be the best way for a console game to work.

On a PC different story, GFX cards are coming out with 2gig of GDDR5 and 6 is probably a month or 2 away, and 4+ gig of ram with 64bit CPUs being pretty much the standard well caching won't mean much on a PC.

edhe2670d ago

Maybe their games haven't been that great but that's not their purpose - they're like epic, they make a new tech and sell it on to other game developers.

They will make a game to showcase that tech.

MagicAccent2670d ago

Clever titling :P

But seriously, console-waring is liek soo 2009.
Get over it people. You're wasting my internetz.

Carmack will see to it that the game runs equally smooth on both consoles, and that's what counts.

N4g_null2670d ago

Just reading these posts feels like I'm drinking beer and throwing up in my mouth.

Come on guys mega texturing let's you have a texture that is gigs of data. Instead of showing it all it is streamed intelligently off of a harddrive.

What is the big deal well it saves on ram. You only show what you need very similar to nap culling.

Also in this article he hints at using ray tracing and even voxels to cull away geometry and speed up or free up even more resources to make room for better effects.

This articule is not a flame magnet you guys are making it out to be.

You maybe not like his games but no one codes quick like this guy. He always shoots for high frame rates. To me that's what hd console gaming is missing.

It's time to stop arguing over power though. It's really silly. The only difference you guys can see is art.

If your not going to understand what your talking about why post?

Stop being afraid of stuff. Both hd consoles nullify their good points some how and on top of that no one writes code for pc only meaning consoles are holding pc gaming back.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2670d ago
Omega42671d ago

Sounds like they could more easily make the 360 smoother, seems like the main problem with multiplats on the PS3 is that they can't maintain as good a framerate as the 360

presto7172671d ago

please reply with one of your other accounts that still has bubbles on it.

dredgewalker2671d ago

I don't think he's that stupid to give away his other accounts.....even if he does sound stupid.

MaxXAttaxX2670d ago

I remember games like Burnout Paradise running much smoother on PS3.

NinjaAssassin2670d ago

"I remember games like Burnout Paradise running much smoother on PS3."

Then your memory fails you. I remember Digital Foundry saying that they ran equally good. Hmm...it seems my memory serves me correct.

"Put simply, this is the first truly 'next-gen' game that truly is 99.9 percent identical across both PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360"
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

It seems some of you are so desperate to claim a cross platform victory for the PS3, which is so rare, that you will try to stretch an "equal" into a "superior on PS3".

MaxXAttaxX2669d ago

Dude, the fact that there's more frame drops on the 360 version than the PS3 one is absolute.

The difference isn't huge between the two, but the PS3 version is smoother. Not as much to say that it's "superior", which I never did btw.

I just hope 360 games...some day... look as good as PS3 exclusives.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2669d ago
Snakefist302671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

PS3 can do 60fps with the help of SPU.U guys Seen KZ3,U2,GT5 and Finally Infamous 2 it can do 60fps with help of SPUs.

EDIT:Disagress y pleazz tell me if Im wrong.PLEAZZ

Pandamobile2671d ago

KZ2, KZ3 and Uncharted 2 run at 30 FPS and 720p. GT5 runs at 1440 x 1080 at 60 FPS.

dragonelite2671d ago

Panda didn't gt 5 run at 1280*1080.
Still impressive horizontal stretching isn't as noticeable as vertical stretching.

Active Reload2671d ago

If someone disagrees with you, its not necessarily a bad thing. In this case, those games you mentioned don't run at 60fps except for GT5 I think. And I don't know much about the new Infamous, although, I'm kinda pissed they changed everything about Cole.

raztad2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

@Panda

Where did you get those GT5 specs? I want to give it a read, I've been looking but never found anything official.

BTW, Gampespot had GT5 as the winner of E3 best graphics, topping KZ3 and Crysis 2. Rage didnt even make the list.

OpenGL2671d ago

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue runs at 60fps always, and in 1080p mode it is rendered at 1280x1080 with 2xAA. The 720p mode is 1280x720 with 4xAA.

Karum2671d ago

GT5: Prologue isn't exactly GT5 though.

OpenGL2671d ago

I never said it was. Now that Sony's first party studios are adopting MLAA, GT5 could easily be native 1920x1080.

QuantumWake2671d ago

Do you think MLAA would work with GT5? Since GT5 is filled with sub-pixel elements. It'd be interesting to see if Polyphony Digital would add the algorithm.

:D

evrfighter2670d ago

"I never said it was. Now that Sony's first party studios are adopting MLAA, GT5 could easily be native 1920x1080. "

I doubt Gt5 could run at 1920x1080 60fps even with any kind of aliasing. 1280x1080...that's like pizza with no sauce =\

thewhoopimen2670d ago

good analogy... except no 360 game runs at 1280 x 1080 native @ 60FPS... So it's still pretty damn good.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2670d ago
gta_manic2671d ago

developers are now making multiplat game leading with the PS3 instead of the 360, instead of taking the easy way of making a game they are challenging themselves and hopefully creating amazing games like Sony's first party developers are pumping out.

etownone2671d ago

Cause it easy to port a ps3 game to the 360 ...

Not so easy to port a 360 game to the Ps3

Plain and simple

n4gno2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

"creating amazing games like Sony's first party developers are pumping out. "

impossible on xbox360.

incredible to see fanboyz (socrate, etc) always believing that killzone, uncharted2, gow3, and others games with best graphics, are on par with some multipltaforms games ([email protected] socrate, not even here...it remind me the "wait, alan wake has uncharted graphics" joke), or xbox's games (just a fact, for non blinds), not a single game, exclusive or multi on xbox has uncharted 1 graphics, and uncharted 2 is way better (gow3, killzone3 also)..and ps3 is not maxed out.

gta_manic2670d ago

If EA or whoever that don't do exclusives can get a better game out of leading with the PS3 then they would leading with the 360 i think thats a win. Would they be able to go uncharted or KZ2 on us? Most likely not, but a person can dream. I want to play great games and I think better games will be made if they were made for the PS3 and if they had to put the game on 5 discs for the 360 version so be it.

OmarJA-N4G2671d ago

Omega4 running from argument again.

evrfighter2670d ago

wow? the dude has one fucking bubble.

From his posting habits. He doesn't seem the type to have puppet accounts. Take it to PM's if you wanna argue...douche.

TotalPS3Fanboy2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

The question is: Then why not make it smoother on the 360?
The answer is: They can't because it's not as easy as you said.

"...seems like the main problem with multiplats on the PS3 is that they can't maintain as good a framerate as the 360"

The questions is: Who's fault is that?
The answer is: Carmack.

sofocado2670d ago (Edited 2670d ago )

"hey can't because it's not as easy as you said."

How do you know they can not do it?

Probably they are not doing it because they are spending more time with the ps3 version of the game.

Hanif-8762670d ago

It seem to me that the textures are going to be better in the PS3 version. Also the PS3 version is going to run at 60fps with uncompressed EVERYTHING but lets wait until LensOfTruth get their hands on it first.

chad22hkd2671d ago

You are a pse developer. Please explain why then the ps3 can't have a good frame rate. Would it be the ps3 higher floating point. hmmm or maybe the ps3 having more ram. Or maybe it's the ps3's non compressed blue ray discs. Or maybe it's superior processing power. No the truth is pc/360 code doesn't run well on ps3. No mutliplate normally utilizes the ps3. The ps3 demands a custom engine. Yes for a muliplate engine this can be true But this is just pr bs talk like it or not. The 360 cannot render at the hd or levels the ps3 can. Unless you can make a better argument. I'm not a fanboy but this is just the truth. Any thinking otherwise are delusional.

hmmmm2670d ago

The PS3 doesn't have more ram...

SyWolf2670d ago

The higher floating point isn't really higher, the PS3 doesn't have more RAM, just because data can be uncompressed on a BluRay disc doesn't mean the PS3 has the processing power to handle all uncompressed data, the 360's CPU is pretty much equal with that in the PS3 and the GPU is stronger. You are one of the biggest fanboys ever, deal with it.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2669d ago
ULTIMATE_REVENGE2671d ago

It sounds like they love the PS3 more than the 360. Just because it's easier to get 60fps running on the 360 doesn't mean it'll be a solid 60fps.

The 360's weak in so many ways that the mega-textures could potentially drop the 60fps mark to about 40fps on the 360, whereas on the PS3 the SPU's can handle everything.

By the way making use of the SPU's is hard but once you know how to use them you get games like UC2 with solid frame-rates.

WrAiTh Sp3cTr32671d ago

Lol, how did you get all that from Carmack's statement?

MysticStrummer2671d ago

Yeah that makes as much sense as Omega4's statement. Sounds like both versions could look better, but they are making them equal so neither version will be as good as it could be. Typical multiplat. There is no hint whatsoever about which version would be better if the game was an exclusive. Duel on, fanboys.

Socrates2671d ago (Edited 2671d ago )

MysticStrummer, what more do you want? Rage is the best looking game on consoles and is a multiplatform game. That is an amazing accomplishment.

This idea some of you seem to have that exclusives will always necessarily look better than multiplatform games is just incorrect.

Some multiplatform games like Assassin's Creed, Dead Space, Red Dead Redemption, Crysis 2 and especially Rage I would put up against any exclusive in the same genre.

For example, as far as open world games I would say Assassin's Creed and Red Dead Redemption have much better graphics than Crackdown or Infamous. And Rage is simply the best looking shooter on any console platform.

It's true that exclusives tend to have larger budgets and on average have more polished graphics than many multi-platform games, but it is just a tendency, not a rule.