Carmack's Final Verdict: XBOX 360 > PS3

tranCendenZ

Newbie
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
http://www.megagames.com/news/html/console/carmackverdictonx360ps3power.shtml

John Carmack of Doom/Quake fame, arguably one of the best programmers of all time, has cast his final verdict on the next-gen console battle - giving the nod to XBOX 360 as being the superior console.

Before any detractors go off trying to indicate Carmack is biased in some way, remember in the past Carmack has never consistently favored one "brand" over another.
 
I'm not surprised. The XBox 360 isn't easy to program for but it's easier than the PS3. Programmers like easy platforms.
 
I'm not surprised. The XBox 360 isn't easy to program for but it's easier than the PS3. Programmers like easy platforms.
And you know because you program for them right?

Why is this at all a suprise? Carmack already said Xbox360 was his main development platform. Why do you think that is? What is Microsoft really pushing....is it games being pushed from Xbox360 to Pc without having everything be a bitch?
I think thats a very big reason in this whole thing.
 
i prefer to make my own judgements
 
Minerel said:
And you know because you program for them right?

Why is this at all a suprise? Carmack already said Xbox360 was his main development platform. Why do you think that is? What is Microsoft really pushing....is it games being pushed from Xbox360 to Pc without having everything be a bitch?
I think thats a very big reason in this whole thing.
Probably because Cell architecture is completly new, so programmers have to learn a totaly new system of code. X-Box still uses PC like architecture.
 
I honestly dont care too much, hopefully his next engine will provide more use than D3 which honestly was not impressive to me besides some nice lighting (or lack thereof).


I am not saying I could do any better
 
mortiz said:
I'm not surprised. The XBox 360 isn't easy to program for but it's easier than the PS3. Programmers like easy platforms.

3 processors mean hard to program for..not easier. The Xbox 360 will never use it's full potential.
 
Probably because Cell architecture is completly new, so programmers have to learn a totaly new system of code. X-Box still uses PC like architecture.
True, but they should get in the habit of Cell's architecture, as Intel's roadmap does show a far more advanced version of Cell's like architecture in the future.
 
dream431ca said:
3 processors mean hard to program for..not easier. The Xbox 360 will never use it's full potential.

wrong.. it operates similarly to a dual processing desktop CPU, albiet not identical, but the hurdles a developer must leap through in order to achieve the same creativity they could with developeing a PC or 360 game are much greater. I'm glad sony decided to wait until 07 so hopefully they can create a good sdk system simplying things for developers.
 
Ennui said:
i prefer to make my own judgements
Unless you plan to develop for both consoles I don't think you can make any judgements. Only developers are in that position.

Sony has done something that I have to say I absolutely hate. They made a console that requires such a different method of development that it almost seems their strategy was to force developers to only develop for them or face gargantuous porting costs and headaches. I can only see two possibilites for the PS3:

Either developers will program games for it and won't bother spending the time and money to port which will mean the other consoles and the PC are left in the cold, or developers won't bother developing and porting stuff to the PS3 which will leave the PS3 out in the cold.

Right now from my perspective it seems like Sony may have made a bad choice.
 
this holds through for Xbox over PS2 right now to a lesser extent, thats why there are far more ports over to XB (and its microsoft orgins help)
 
My mistake..your right.

Here's a quote from Gabe Newell:

Gabe Nevell said Xbox 360 and Longhorn make his life very hard when it comes to game development while Playstation 3 makes his life virtually impossible and he thinks very very few developers can actually make a game run GOOD on playstation 3.
 
Minerel said:
And you know because you program for them right?

Useless statement.

Why is this at all a suprise? Carmack already said Xbox360 was his main development platform. Why do you think that is? What is Microsoft really pushing....is it games being pushed from Xbox360 to Pc without having everything be a bitch?
I think thats a very big reason in this whole thing.

Irrelevant. Bottom line is that the Xbox 360 is more friendly to developers than the PS3 is - a console that sports entirely different and more difficult to program technology.

So what if this makes games easier to port to and from the PC? I don't know about you, but I wholly support an easy transition as opposed to exclusivity. I would like games to be available for my system of choice. The console race is annoying because of exclusive titles. It's like requiring a Sony DVD player to play DVD's made solely for Sony. It's bollocks and I'd certainly prefer it to be remedied.
 
This is old news. We have all known this for months. And you know what? Its not big news at all. Its simply because Carmack, along with pretty much everyone else out there, isn't used to coding in a multi-threaded environment. He would obviously see the 360 as much easier to develop for since Microsoft's XNA makes development for the 360 and PC very comparable(since they want to merge the PC/console world anyway in order to have Windows running every household on the planet).

The architecture of the PS3 is years ahead of its time and as such, the learning curve is that much steeper. But the PCs of the future will follow in these fresh footsteps in terms of architecture and so those who become skilled at coding for a hardware design like the PS3's will be much more advanced in terms of what they can get out of not only the PS3, but the PCs of the future as well.

Both systems are going to be great and have great exclusive games, but I am really looking forward to the days when consoles like the 360 are ~$150. Now that's worth buying!
 
The Mullinator said:
Unless you plan to develop for both consoles I don't think you can make any judgements. Only developers are in that position.

Sony has done something that I have to say I absolutely hate. They made a console that requires such a different method of development that it almost seems their strategy was to force developers to only develop for them or face gargantuous porting costs and headaches. I can only see two possibilites for the PS3:

Either developers will program games for it and won't bother spending the time and money to port which will mean the other consoles and the PC are left in the cold, or developers won't bother developing and porting stuff to the PS3 which will leave the PS3 out in the cold.
Actually, Carmack said in his Quakecon keynote that it would be easiest to port from PS3 to X360 and PC, and the real difficulty would be to try to port PC games to the next-gen consoles because you would need to optimise the code to run on multi-core/threaded in order processes.

The reason he is using X360 as his primary platform is because it has "the best development environment" and its processor is somewhat easier to program for. Its not like Sony is trying to make it super hard on developers, they are certainly trying alot harder than Microsoft to provide software to ease development; they are providing physics engines and libraries, ProDG tools(Which many developers turned to for PS2), and a lot of other tools and libraries, as well as helping with pricing on UE3 and other software liscenses..
 
So what if this makes games easier to port to and from the PC?
So it will make Developers that make games for Pc and Console look to Xbox360 more...

Bottom line is that the Xbox 360 is more friendly to developers than the PS3 is - a console that sports entirely different and more difficult to program technology.
Epic already said programming for the Ps3 isn't how it went with the Ps2. Im not saying that it's friendier than the xbox 360, but that it isn't to much more difficult according to epic. Plus, Pc's will eventually start using more of a Cell type Architecture but more advanced. Not for a few years but it's coming no doubt.

Useless statement.
No he said that the Ps3 is harder to program than the Xbox360 when that is an opinon statement, in order to form his opinon he would of had to program for the Ps3 and Xbox 360. I just guessed he didn't have a few million to put down on the Dev kit's thus concluding that he didn't ever program for either thus concluding that that he made a biased statement. Thats all I was pointing out.

Irrelevant.
Not at all irrelevant, why you ask?
Simple, a developer that plans no Pc games vs a Developer that plans to make pc games. That little thing, being able to port to Pc better can cause a massive tip in the scale. It infact is probably a very big reason why he chose the Xbox360 over the Ps3. Not the only reason but a very big reason nontheless. That is one of the most important pieces of info that we cannot overlook that for some reason you would overlook in a heartbeat.


Look, what will this mean to all of us? Carmack says this and that...so? I am going to choose the console that I buy not on how games look or how many developers they have. But what console and what games offer the greatest gameplay and gameplay innovations. Which as far as I can tell, project gotham dosn't play any better than Need for Speed Underground 1/2 when seeing a gameplay video. While I can only imagine what developers could do with the Revolution. The Ps3 and Xbox360 just seem like a graphics leap...not a gameplay leap.
 
Lets face it people! Yes the new consoles will be hard to develop for. You want a super detailed game?? It's gonna take longer to make...you wanna long, spectacular and Extremely detailed game????? Hire 500 people to work on it. The more detailed and spectacular the game is, the more longer the develop time is. It's more difficult to make games in this age because we gamers (you and me) are expecting so much out of developers, and developers are always in competition with each other. It's gonna be really stressful for the developers and probably us as well.
 
Minerel said:
So it will make Developers that make games for Pc and Console look to Xbox360 more...

Yeah, and so what? I like standardization.

Epic already said programming for the Ps3 isn't how it went with the Ps2. Im not saying that it's friendier than the xbox 360, but that it isn't to much more difficult according to epic. Plus, Pc's will eventually start using more of a Cell type Architecture but more advanced. Not for a few years but it's coming no doubt.

While that may be true, that doesn't change the present. And while I'm not playing down Epic's word, they are a an experienced developer. Upstart devs are (due to the tech and other factors) are given much incentive to choose the 360.

No he said that the Ps3 is harder to program than the Xbox360 when that is an opinon statement, in order to form his opinon he would of had to program for the Ps3 and Xbox 360. I just guessed he didn't have a few million to put down on the Dev kit's thus concluding that he didn't ever program for either thus concluding that that he made a biased statement. Thats all I was pointing out.

Then your opinion regarding it is also equally invalid. We've reached the point where the industry has formed a rough consensus and can trust what they say.

Not at all irrelevant, why you ask?
Simple, a developer that plans no Pc games vs a Developer that plans to make pc games. That little thing, being able to port to Pc better can cause a massive tip in the scale. It infact is probably a very big reason why he chose the Xbox360 over the Ps3. Not the only reason but a very big reason nontheless. That is one of the most important pieces of info that we cannot overlook that for some reason you would overlook in a heartbeat.

I don't see how this matters. At all. I only see it as a good thing.

Look, what will this mean to all of us? Carmack says this and that...so?

Nobody's treating his words as gospel. It's an opinion that matters more to devs than it does players. Some people find this interesting, is all.
 
I dont see what would be wrong with takeing what Carmack says as gospel, one of his great passions is writing code :) and hes good at it.
 
Because in the end he's a single man and despite his skill, he is not the ultimate authority. His words do, however, have credibility to them.
 
I don't see how this matters. At all. I only see it as a good thing.
I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm saying it's something that is easily going to sway an opinon. Him choosing x does not mean anything.

I'm basically saying that alot of people here would also use this in refrence to how powerfull the ps3 or xbox360 is or isn't. Basically Carmack choosing Xbox360 probably mainly swayed by the ability to port the game to the pc easier. Thus using this in an arugment would be stupid, as it dosn't tell you what one is better to program for, what one is more powerful, what one will have better games. Yet I can guarantee that people will use this in an argument. It is just a little thing where carmack says "I like the xbox360!" Then half the world's gamers will think "Xbox360 is easier to program for and it much more powerful! Yeah!"

Then your opinion regarding it is also equally invalid.
My opinon regarding what? Please point out where I said my opinon.
 
Ennui said:
i prefer to make my own judgements

im too scared to think for myself!
what does Carmack say!

though it is nice to get input from different viewpoints in the gaming industry. frankly, I know that 360 is gonna be much better, its nice to have that cockiness reassured though :E
 
babyheadcrab said:
I dont see what would be wrong with takeing what Carmack says as gospel, one of his great passions is writing code :) and hes good at it.
Yes, but like Absinthe states, he's only one man. Plus, even he is not that great at writing multi-threaded code--no game developer is...yet. Most of the first gen and even second gen games for these consoles will be single-threaded because no one has the expertise with this architecture to be able to really implement it to its fullest. The only reason that these multi-cores were considered is because multi-core will become more of the standard in the next few years and the console lifecycle is longer than that at about 5 years, so in order to be competitive in the long-run, a multi-core design is the smartest, even though people won't really begin to take advantage of its opportunities for a couple of years probably--hence the games we've seen so far not being anything truly jaw-dropping or earth-shattering.

And who really cares which system is "harder" to develop for? The PS2 was notorious for being difficult on developers, but look at the quality/quantity of titles out there for it. Even if the PS3 is more difficult to develop for, the publisher/developer support is already being demonstrated, so this is really sort of a moot point.
 
VictimOfScience said:
The architecture of the PS3 is years ahead of its time and as such, the learning curve is that much steeper.
If the success of a console is supposed to be largely dependant on how easy it is to develop for, and consoles with lower-tech hardware are easier to develop for, then how come there aren't many companies getting excited about the nintendo revolution? o_0
I smell yet another one of Bill Gate's plans to take over the commercial world...
 
VictimOfScience said:
And who really cares which system is "harder" to develop for? The PS2 was notorious for being difficult on developers, but look at the quality/quantity of titles out there for it. Even if the PS3 is more difficult to develop for, the publisher/developer support is already being demonstrated, so this is really sort of a moot point.

Because compared to the investment for a PS2 vs PS3 game, it renders it a massive point.

A 20% development increase on a ps2 title would be for example 200k $ that same increase for a PS3 would be 2million $.

Every developer that has ever been asked about the development for PS3(unless those on the sony bandwagon) have all said that PS3 development is shit.
 
gaming isnt gaming any more. more about hardware and insane graphics than actual satisfaction and fun from playing the games.

*time travels back to when OoT was released*
 
xLostx said:
gaming isnt gaming any more. more about hardware and insane graphics than actual satisfaction and fun from playing the games.

*time travels back to when OoT was released*
*Starts waiting happily for Twilight Princess hoping for the best*
 
tranCendenZ said:
http://www.megagames.com/news/html/console/carmackverdictonx360ps3power.shtml

John Carmack of Doom/Quake fame, arguably one of the best programmers of all time, has cast his final verdict on the next-gen console battle - giving the nod to XBOX 360 as being the superior console.

Before any detractors go off trying to indicate Carmack is biased in some way, remember in the past Carmack has never consistently favored one "brand" over another.

Well considering the Xbox 360 comes out on the 2nd of december and the PS3 hasn't even got a release date, i'd say he's favouring one over the other, or thinks the Xbox360 is better because its easier to program for, which would be no surprise what-so-ever considering the Xbox 360 has a "gold" copy, so to speak and the PS3 hasn't. As for superior, if the PS3 is what it makes out to be, the Xbox 360 hasn't got a leg to stand on. Either way i've got an Xbox360 on the 2nd Dec and i'll have a PS3 the day it comes out as well and i'll make my mind up before someone that the last game (engine) he programmed was pretty weak.
 
Alig said:
As for superior, if the PS3 is what it makes out to be, the Xbox 360 hasn't got a leg to stand on.

Not really. Fancy tech demos aside, the PS3 in terms of raw processing power is not, as some people would like to believe, lightyears beyond the 360.

i'll make my mind up before someone that the last game (engine) he programmed was pretty weak.

Doom 3 had a weak engine? Whoah... you're nuts. :|
 
^Ben said:
Because compared to the investment for a PS2 vs PS3 game, it renders it a massive point.

A 20% development increase on a ps2 title would be for example 200k $ that same increase for a PS3 would be 2million $.

Every developer that has ever been asked about the development for PS3(unless those on the sony bandwagon) have all said that PS3 development is shit.
You don't seem to get it. Development costs for both consoles is going to be seriously ramped up for the next generation, as will development lifecycles. But we have plenty of examples of companies, big and small, willing to pay that price and develop games for one system or the other or both even. What I am saying is that in the end, it doesn't matter what one developer says or what another developer says--the choice of what platform to develop for isn't always decided by money or by popularity or by ease of development. Each dev will have their own reason(s) for developing for the console they wish.

Everyone recognizes the fact that the PS3 will be more of a challenge to code for since its architecture is more advanced than that of the 360. This isn't even an argument anymore. Carmack is so good at what he does that it would be a waste for him to start from relative scratch in a development environment that he is not used to--he'd be a fool not to use his ample talents in such a way that he can get the most out of the industry while, in turn, giving the most to the industry.

Oh, and could you please point out where anyone from Epic ever stated that "PS3 development is shit." Thanks. :|
 
Oh, and could you please point out where anyone from Epic ever stated that "PS3 development is shit." Thanks.
Epic said that it wasn't as difficult as some predicted it would be or something along those lines.

I havn't heard to many developers say anything about "what one is better for developing for" besides Epic and Id.

Not really. Fancy tech demos aside, the PS3 in terms of raw processing power is not, as some people would like to believe, lightyears beyond the 360.
Well in theory the Ps3 can process 2x more but that's in theory and it will never reach that point. Though in certain games the Ps3 will be able to excel better than other games. Games that take a huge level with physics the Ps3 would be able to rock better than a game that takes graphics to a new extreme as Xbox360's graphics card is considered by most people from the specs than the Ps3's. While in terms of the processor itself, when it comes to physics, the Ps3 will be able to push them faster.
The architecture though is the basis for some extremely much more powerfull. Cell itself is not far ahead of it's time. It's a future architecture that's been taken down a few levels bringing it on par with current tech.
 
Minerel said:
Games that take a huge level with physics the Ps3 would be able to rock better than a game that takes graphics to a new extreme as Xbox360's graphics card is considered by most people from the specs than the Ps3's. While in terms of the processor itself, when it comes to physics, the Ps3 will be able to push them faster.

Really? I had heard just the opposite. The PS3 would be able to produce visuals, but non-graphic elements such as physics and AI would be better handled by the 360. I wouldn't really know though, since knowledge regarding technology isn't really my forte.

You make a point though, this is all theoretical power. In terms of actual utilization, we're going to be seeing roughly the same graphics. Each console will have its own standout title that utilizes the tech far better than any other game, but on the whole it's negligible.
 
Really? I had heard just the opposite. The PS3 would be able to produce visuals, but non-graphic elements such as physics and AI would be better handled by the 360. I wouldn't really know though, since knowledge regarding technology isn't really my forte.
Anything to do with numbers that go into decmials the Ps3 should be able to handle better. As the Ps3 in theory has double the floating point calculation power. Intergers and things im not sure how the Ps3 would handle. They even showed a video at E3 of a duck in water. The water was being rendered in real time, as in fluid physics. They just had a duck swiming in water, then eventually added a few hundred ducks, some ships shooting cannon balls etc.. All with the water being fully calculated by physics. Was extremely impressive. The water looks very very very nice. When PPU's get all sorted out Pc's will be able to do that kind of thing.


Though the way the Ps3 is designed(which wouldn't be a flaw on intel's roadmap) will hurt Ai power. It deals with how memory is shared but basically the main processor would have to do Ai calculations.
(I've read sooo many articles on the Ps3 and Cell)

The Ps3 I believe did show a video where the background was rendered by the CPU and the foreground was done by the GPU.

You make a point though, this is all theoretical power. In terms of actual utilization, we're going to be seeing roughly the same graphics. Each console will have its own standout title that utilizes the tech far better than any other game, but on the whole it's negligible.
Very true, the graphics for both consoles will be about equal. The games will be the most deciding factor for this upcoming generation. I do hope though developers will try and innovate with the revolution as much as possible and 3rd party developers will be attracted to it.
 
Absinthe said:
Really? I had heard just the opposite. The PS3 would be able to produce visuals, but non-graphic elements such as physics and AI would be better handled by the 360.
Well, here's what another brilliant programmer had to say about the Cell:
Tim Sweeney: "With UE3, our focus on SPE acceleration is on physics, animation updates, particle systems, sound; a few other areas are possible but require more experimentation."

Also from an article on AnandTech:

--In fact, if properly structured and coded for SPE acceleration, physics code could very well run faster on the PlayStation 3 than on the Xbox 360 thanks to the more specialized nature of the SPE hardware. Not to mention that physics acceleration is particularly parallelizable, making it a perfect match for an array of 7 SPEs.

--Microsoft has referred to the Cell’s array of SPEs as a bunch of DSPs useless to game developers. The fact that the next installment of the Unreal engine will be using the Cell’s SPEs for physics, animation updates, particle systems as well as audio processing means that Microsoft’s definition is a bit off. While not all developers will follow in Epic’s footsteps, those that wish to remain competitive and get good performance out of the PS3 will have to."

Absinthe said:
You make a point though, this is all theoretical power. In terms of actual utilization, we're going to be seeing roughly the same graphics. Each console will have its own standout title that utilizes the tech far better than any other game, but on the whole it's negligible.
So true. Its all going to depend on what games you want to play because they will all (eventually) look great.
 
Back
Top