Gabe Newell spits the dummie about Vista and next gen consoles!!!!!

Discussion in 'Video Cards & Monitors' started by lowdog, Sep 5, 2005.

  1. lowdog

    lowdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    4,301
    Location:
    Dreamland.
    Well according to Gabe programing for Vista and next gen consoles will only make a programers life harder. programing games for Vista/next gen consoles may take up to 80% longer. :Paranoid:

    Link: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25919
     
  2. orbitor

    orbitor Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Messages:
    8,352
    Location:
    Rochedale
    so is he saying he doesn't want to have to write multi-threaded code perhaps? Seems fair enough, the developer is going to have to shoulder the extra development time which could equal a lot of time and money wasted.
     
  3. congoh

    congoh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    7,497
    Location:
    Melbourne, not too far from Monash Uni.
    Interesting.
    What made MS was the fact that IBM did not see that real $$ was in software, not hardware. Come 25 odd years later, we have a situation where M$ is selling hardware and is being resented by software developers (may be Bill forgot that is where his pile of $$ came from).

    If enough of these people decides to not develop games for xbox and ps3, that would be really funny.
     
  4. sandeep

    sandeep Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    4,174
    Location:
    Melbourne
    If Half Life 2 took 4 yrs to come, god knows how long his games developed for vista will take. I think he is just too lazy of a pig and is talking from economical point of view. More so, he probably wants to give his Half Life 2 engine more life....after all 4 yrs of development must seem worth while.

    I just really hope games start to look BETTER. More like a revolutionary step.

    "He didn’t spare any criticism for Sony either, saying that "The PS3 makes my life as a developer much harder", his problem being that all of a sudden with the new platforms he basically has to figure out how to make games in a way neither he nor any of his programmers have ever done before."

    There you go, he doesn't even want to refresh his outdated knowledge. :mad:
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2005
  5. fallout

    fallout Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Messages:
    783
    All these developers have a right to bitch. Parallel programming is HUGGE pain in the ass. I just finished a parallel programming subject in my honours year of computer science and all I can say is it makes even the simplest problems really difficult.

    I can imagine it would be very difficult to parallelise games because everything needs to interact together. Which means there would have to be a lot of syncronization between threads occuring. It's not only difficult to program but it is difficult to know that it works.

    Now most of these developers have been thrown into it overnight and suddenly they have to make their engine/games exploit parrallism or they probably won't run fast enough on the PS3/xbox360. From my point of view, they have the right to bitch but it is a necessary next step. It would have been good if it was gradual though.
     
  6. Deeman

    Deeman Vagrant.

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,727
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I'm not exactly sure how this is is Microsoft's fault?

    The requirement to go to multiple cores is a direct result of microprocesor vendors running into both thermal and process problems with single core CPU's.
     
  7. Goose1981

    Goose1981 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,359
    Location:
    Perth
    My sentiments exactly.

    What would software developers suggest as an alternative? Just cease all further development and advancement of computing power? We have reached the absolute maximum we will ever reach?

    Are they serious? :confused:
     
  8. Deeman

    Deeman Vagrant.

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,727
    Location:
    Melbourne
    That's about it. I fully understand the horrible complexity of trying to keep two (or more) threads synchronised, especially in something as procedural and time sensitive as a game, but it's not as though Intel came out last week and magically went "Surprise! Dual core!". It's been a long time coming, and talked about for ages.

    Same for Xbox360 and PS3. Make no mistake, it's not ideal, but that's they way they've gone, and that's the way the industry is going. Carmack has also expressed his annoyance at having to go multi-core.

    Note to game developers: Adapt, or die. If you don't adapt, others will.

    I'm not sure what would really appeal to Valve in Vista anyway - the new DirectX is all they need to care about. I'm not sure what they're expecting. He mentions in the interview automatic pushing out of updated display drivers. An interesting idea, but god knows who's going to be responsible when the automatic driver update hoses your PC. As he says, it's not MS's job, moreso ATi/NVidia.

    But don't worry, Gabe got a quick plug or five in for Steam. I think steam is a good idea, but it's not going to save the world like Valve think it will.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2005
  9. sandeep

    sandeep Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    4,174
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I just hope microsoft doesn't change the requirements to suit the developers AT THE EXPENSE of technological advancement.

    From what appears, it seems DIRECTX 10 might be the leap. Well hope so.

    Do you guys think, microsoft will listen to the developers and cut down on the change??
     
  10. Voltus

    Voltus Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,631
    Location:
    Coolangatta
    we have because they are still making processors on an ages old x86 platform..

    until the design of computer chips change to some other model, we are stuck with this outdated architecture.
     
  11. Deeman

    Deeman Vagrant.

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,727
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Funny. IBM is also struggling to make it's PPC chips any faster. It's nothing to do with the architecture, it's all to do with the process of making tiny little transistors smaller, run faster, and piling more of them into the same amount of die space.

    It's a physical limitation of current process technology - from the lithographic process, to the way we're putting the silicon together (Low-K, SOI are all ways to get around the problem).
     
  12. Voltus

    Voltus Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,631
    Location:
    Coolangatta

    sounds to me like youre describing architecture and design.
     
  13. brettmo86

    brettmo86 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    2,967
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    so the bottom line is multi-threaded games are alot further away than we first thought?
     
  14. Deeman

    Deeman Vagrant.

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,727
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Sorry, i should've said 'instruction set', rather than 'architecture' in the first line.

    What i'm saying, is it's not a problem unique to the x86 instruction set.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2005
  15. akashra

    akashra Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,862
    Location:
    Melbourne, AU
    He's right in some ways. This was a HUGE problem for developers who moved to Playstation 2 development - many of them just couldn't get their head around having to write for what was effectively a distributed architecture. The massive differences between all these systems is nuts as well, because it throws away the possibility of simple ports.
     
  16. FearTec

    FearTec Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,401
    Location:
    NSW

    I cant see what they are fussing about, either code the damn thing for Multi Thread or have an engine at half the speed.

    I will have to update my code to be multi threaded/core compatible.

    I am no genius but i can see where I can get it working in my system (AI, Physics, Multi Texturing etc)

    [​IMG]
     
  17. wastegate

    wastegate Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    103
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I wonder if Cobal programmers bitched about having to learn C+?

    If they think it's rough now, they are going to have a heart attack when we have holodecks. Move over old men, let the fresh programmers that can cope in.
     
  18. MadMikeMooCow

    MadMikeMooCow Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    568
    Location:
    Wauchope, Mid North Coast
    I see that Xbox360 guys are developing some cross platform thing for Pc-Xbox
    to make games easier to port? Im all for it, as long as we dont get heaps of shitty xbox360 games on PC (not saying they are, just you know...)
     
  19. Hairy_Harold

    Hairy_Harold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,301
    Location:
    Ipswich
    Has anyone taken into consideration if something is harder to make they will charge more for it at the retail end? If it takes 80% longer, so if hl2 took 4 yrs add another 80% onto that and then add another 80% on to the price of the thing too maybe
     
  20. Rampar

    Rampar Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2002
    Messages:
    387
    Revenue from games have surpassed movies. Movies generally cost more to make but are able to survive from a $12 movie ticket and $20 dvd. If anything, games should be coming down in price even though additional developers are required. Its big business mate.

    That fat lazy bastard is pissed at his new engine being outdated after 12 months. :)

    cheers
    rob
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: