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.
SonySoldiers2609d ago ShowReplies(3)
Stryfeno22609d ago ShowReplies(9)
talltony2609d ago (Edited 2609d 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

dragonelite2608d 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...

raztad2608d ago (Edited 2608d 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.

dragonelite2608d ago (Edited 2608d 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.

ShinMaster2608d ago (Edited 2608d 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.

starchild2608d 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.

starchild2608d 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.

beardpapa2608d 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.

ShinMaster2608d ago

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

I still stand by what I said previously.

Socrates2608d 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.

NoOoB1012608d 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.

peowpeow2608d ago

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

dude_uk2608d ago

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

CWMR2608d 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.

edhe2607d 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 2607d ago
Inside_out2608d ago ShowReplies(9)
Persistantthug2608d ago (Edited 2608d 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.

SOAD2608d 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.

zag2608d 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.

edhe2607d 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.

MagicAccent2608d 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_null2607d 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 2607d ago
Omega42609d 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

presto7172608d ago

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

dredgewalker2608d ago

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

MaxXAttaxX2608d ago

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

NinjaAssassin2608d 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".

MaxXAttaxX2607d 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 2607d ago
Snakefist302608d ago (Edited 2608d 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

Pandamobile2608d ago

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

dragonelite2608d ago

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

Active Reload2608d 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.

raztad2608d ago (Edited 2608d 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.

OpenGL2608d 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.