Killzone 2 Dev: PS3 Development Is Easy

[Keane Ng]

Killzone 2 Dev: PS3 Development Is Easy

Contrary to popular opinion and even the intent of Sony themselves, Guerilla Games doesn't think the PS3 is hard to develop for at all. They think it might actually be simpler than developing for other consoles.

The PS3 is hard to develop for. Gabe Newell says so. Everybody else seems to say so. Even Sony agrees - they apparently made it this way on purpose [http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/], after all. But Guerilla Games, the studio behind PS3 technical powerhouse Killzone 2, would disagree. PS3 development to them? Child's play.

"I think a lot of those stories that you hear about it being 'so difficult' are coming from developers who are native to other consoles and then start working on PS3, because it is very different," Guerilla's Hermen Hulst said. "But like us, if you are native to PlayStation, our tech director doesn't say it's particularly difficult." According to Hulst, Guerilla had a harder time cracking the PS2 than it did with the PS3.

Arjan Brussee got into the technical aspects, saying that the PS3 is a "simpler architecture than some of the other consoles." Brussee explained that the Cell processor's high speed "DSPs" and "SPUs" make it easier to program for, since you can "throw all your calculation tasks" at them. Meanwhile, multi-core architectures that you find on the PC and 360 means doling out multiple tasks to multiple processors, and syncing them is a "huge complex issue to solve and get stable."

[Via GameDaily [http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/killzone-creators-talk-4d-bullet-ad-ps3-development/?biz=1&page=2]]



Permalink

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

Hmmm, the complete opposite to what Gabe Newell said. Of course the architecture is going to be simpler if you're native to the bloody PS3.

Now am I going to believe someone who's company has developed a large amount of games for the xbox, PC and to a degree, the PS3, or am I going to believe someone who's team has created one game for xbox and PC, and the rest for the playstation consoles?

By the by, is that a typo mr Ng, or am I wrong?

Meanwhile, multi-core architectures that you find on the PC and PS3 means doling out multiple tasks to multiple processors, and syncing them is a "huge complex issue to solve and get stable."

 

[GyroCaptain]

So the key is to treat it like there is no graphics architecture at the same time as constructing tasks so that they can be broken into a million tiny pieces for the cell?

I'm sorry, but that's loopy; and it means multi-platform function of any kind is hosed. Good job being a flagship developer with special and exclusive support from Sony, Guerrilla, absolutely none of what you're saying means things will be even possible for high-end PC or 360 developers to deal with.

 

[oliveira8]

When you working for the PS3 for years now, if it didnt become easier then wtf you been doing all along?

 

[johnman]

So even though sony wanted it to be hard to develop for, they failed at taht too?


But seriously, if you have been a developer for ps3 all this time and only use the one console, of course its going to be easier.

 

[Jumplion]

Hmmm, the complete opposite to what Gabe Newell said. Of course the architecture is going to be simpler if you're native to the bloody PS3.

Now am I going to believe someone who's company has developed a large amount of games for the xbox, PC and to a degree, the PS3, or am I going to believe someone who's team has created one game for xbox and PC, and the rest for the playstation consoles?

He said that in the inteview itself;

"I think a lot of those stories that you hear about it being 'so difficult' are coming from developers who are native to other consoles and then start working on PS3, because it is very different," Guerilla's Hermen Hulst said. "But like us, if you are native to PlayStation, our tech director doesn't say it's particularly difficult." According to Hulst, Guerilla had a harder time cracking the PS2 than it did with the PS3.

I'm inclined to agree with him, it makes sense, what's so hard to grasp about that? You're asking a rhetorical question, but that's the answer in itself. He's saying that since his company has been native to the Ps brand that it's easier to program for his team, not that the entire Ps3 is easy to develop for in itself.

Plenty of people programmed for the PS1, moreso on the PS2. It's not that hard to imagine that the people who never programmed on a PS console before *coughGabenewellcough* would find programming for the PS3 hard.

 

[dcheppy]

Hmmm, the complete opposite to what Gabe Newell said. Of course the architecture is going to be simpler if you're native to the bloody PS3.

Now am I going to believe someone who's company has developed a large amount of games for the xbox, PC and to a degree, the PS3, or am I going to believe someone who's team has created one game for xbox and PC, and the rest for the playstation consoles?

By the by, is that a typo mr Ng, or am I wrong?

Meanwhile, multi-core architectures that you find on the PC and PS3 means doling out multiple tasks to multiple processors, and syncing them is a "huge complex issue to solve and get stable."

Uh, Valve has never programmed for the PS3 or any Playstation. Orange Box: PS3 was handled by EA.

Really what Newell really means, and this seems to make sense, PS3 is hard to port to, because its diffrent and since it has a smaller user base it is not worth the extra effort/money/development time to make it work for the PS3. GG is saying that if you design a PS3 from the ground up to be a PS3 game it is no harder than developing a 360/PC games.

 

[SmilingKitsune]

Well when you have four years I'm sure it gets a bit easier, but not all developers can spend that much time on a game. Also Sony knew that Killzone 2 had to at least partialy live up to people's expectations, and so they gave Guerilla all the support they needed, another thing not all developers have.

 

[hippo24]

Hmm...I'm also sure a unicycle gets easier to ride once you have enough time and leeway to relearn all the basic motor skills associated with it, doesn't mean everyone is going to scrap their bikes any time soon though.

I mean really, isn't this common sense? Once your relearn a concept, using a different set of tools, your going to be proficient at it because you have the experience and knowledge.

Its like telling an English writer that he or she needs to write in Japanese, sure Japanese isn't any less of a language, but asking her to relearn the basis of her work and then transfer the same thems to a different medium, is no small task.

 

[yzzlthtz]

this article confirms what i've suspected: the reason ps3s are so difficult for many developers is that they are used to being able to take their pc engine and run with it. since the xbox is just a glorified pc, they can then say "oh yeah, 360, easy to code for, but that ps3, man, it's DIFFERENT." the very fact that porting from the ps3 to xbox/pc is easier points to a more flexible architecture on the ps3.

 

[voirdire]

Hmmm, the complete opposite to what Gabe Newell said. Of course the architecture is going to be simpler if you're native to the bloody PS3.

Now am I going to believe someone who's company has developed a large amount of games for the xbox, PC and to a degree, the PS3, or am I going to believe someone who's team has created one game for xbox and PC, and the rest for the playstation consoles?

By the by, is that a typo mr Ng, or am I wrong?

Meanwhile, multi-core architectures that you find on the PC and PS3 means doling out multiple tasks to multiple processors, and syncing them is a "huge complex issue to solve and get stable."

Uh, Valve has never programmed for the PS3 or any Playstation. Orange Box: PS3 was handled by EA.

Really what Newell really means, and this seems to make sense, PS3 is hard to port to, because its diffrent and since it has a smaller user base it is not worth the extra effort/money/development time to make it work for the PS3. GG is saying that if you design a PS3 from the ground up to be a PS3 game it is no harder than developing a 360/PC games.

That's exactly what I got from that.

 

[KDR_11k]

Of course difficulty is relative but the system's problem is mostly with people who are not very focussed on it and those are the vast majority. Who could blame them for not spending a lot of time to get into the right mindset (or possibly using specialized designs) for the freaking last place system when you can make a port without that effort? If the PS3 requires the game to be written in a completely different way then you won't see companies do that because the other two platforms the game goes on outweigh the PS3.

Sony would have an easier time had they not sacrificed their console business to boost their movie business but I guess we'll have to see how that'll work out for them in the end (especially whether Blu Ray will bring in much money or if it'll get obsoleted again too soon).

 

[D_987]

It must be easy when you have a budget / development team large enough to buy and then populate the Caribbean islands...besides, the game was an exclusive, so of course its going to be easier than trying to create a game on multiple platforms.

 

[Zersy]

So ?

 

[Erana]

Wait... Haven't they made only four games? And wasn't the one game that was on multiple consoles just kinda... fail?

If they actually did make something from another console, I'd be more willing to listen to them. At this point, they sound like a bunch of fanboys, dissing consoles they have no experience with.

 

[Jumplion]

Wait... Haven't they made only four games? And wasn't the one game that was on multiple consoles just kinda... fail?

If they actually did make something from another console, I'd be more willing to listen to them. At this point, they sound like a bunch of fanboys, dissing consoles they have no experience with.

Umm, they didn't diss any of the other consoles in this entire article. Seriously, can you show me one time it mentions "360" or "Wii" in it, and is ment to be putting down the other consoles? Besides this clear put down of the 360 and PC, of course;

Meanwhile, multi-core architectures that you find on the PC and 360 means doling out multiple tasks to multiple processors, and syncing them is a "huge complex issue to solve and get stable."

You're taking what they're saying to the extreme. They're saying that since they've been on the PS brand for a long time, developing on the PS3 is easy. How is that"dissing consoes they have no experience with"?

Though, did Gurriella make a game for multiple consoles? I'm just asking, did they?

 

[scotth266]

Huh. I don't really care. It's statistics: odds are someone will have an easy time programming the PS3. It just happens to be these guys. Everyone else though? Not so much...

 

[TsunamiWombat]

I'd believe you more if you didn't take five years to make one game.

 

[ratix2]

first off, guerilla is OWNED by sony. second, sony sent over quite a few engineers to guerillas offices to help with making the game. id love to see what their response would be if they didnt have such help from sony in the first place.

finally, the last paragraph proves that this guy doesent know shit or is just spouting off pr bs. the cell processor has a very unique articheture, but unique doesent mean easy to work with. syncing up threads on a multicore processor is a duanting task at first, but splitting up code and calculations so that they are small and easy enough for the spes to run being easier? it takes less time and resources to learn to program for a multicore cpu than to learn what you need to to effectivly the the cell processor. and even then with some of todays multicore cpus (core i7 espically) its actually possible to get more out of them than a single cell processor. the ps3 is NOT simpler to anything that can run games in ANY manner.