News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by forrestthewoods on Saturday December 07, 2019 @04:55PM (#21732822)
PS1 didn't hold back PC or other consoles so I bear it no ill will.

PS2 dominated sixth gen sales. By being the winning console but releasing 18 months earlier it held back everyone. And since, like you said, Moore's law was very much alive this represented a significant reduction in overall quality for an entire generation. :(

PS3 at it's peak was great. But it took waaaay too much effort to get there making it a very poor value proposition for developers. And 7th gen was a fully multi-platform era so the end result is the average game was held back and only first party prestige titles could justify the extra cost.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by mr_toad on Saturday December 07, 2019 @05:31PM (#21733014)
> But it took waaaay too much effort to get there making it a very poor value proposition for developers.

It’s funny that this is always a criticism levelled at the CPU and not the developers.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by nrp on Saturday December 07, 2019 @05:48PM (#21733113)
It’s a financial decision. Building a competitive console game wasn’t cheap by that generation, and passion only goes so far. Publishers ultimately want to recoup their investment, which means developers targeting the common subset of functionality and using middleware wherever possible to support multiple platforms. Unless Sony was your publisher, it wouldn’t have made economic sense to deeply optimize for Cell. PS4 and Xbox One being so similar to each other is good for developers, which is good for games, which is good for gamers, even if it does mean fewer esoteric toys for passionate engineers to play with.
Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by cmrdporcupine on Saturday December 07, 2019 @08:47PM (#21733891)
This reminds me so much of the discussions around the Amiga back in the 80s.

Powerful custom hardware can be great for the developers that invest in it, until it isn't anymore and now you've got a bunch of sunk R&D. And then there's the need to ship on more than one platform...

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by lmm on Sunday December 08, 2019 @06:57AM (#21735476)
No, its' tragic that blaming developers is even considered an option. Developers are human and can be expected to behave as such. The value of developer time is well known, and if anything developers undervalue their own time, and are far too willing to waste their time microoptimising for a gratuitously difficult CPU design rather than getting on with more valuable work.
Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by IAmEveryone on Saturday December 07, 2019 @09:01PM (#21733935)
You kinda have to work with the people existing, while there were other CPUs available at the time.

And even if everyone were a super smart 10x-developer like you surely are, their time would still be better spent on a platform that is more productive. The idea that some technology is difficult but rewards proficiency with incredible productivity is almost entirely wrong, which is why nobody does web development in Assembly. LaTeX vs Word would be the only example I would have agreed with in the past, but if you search you'll find a study showing even the most proficient practitioners are slower and make more typesetting mistakes using the former.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by Dylan16807 on Sunday December 08, 2019 @12:38AM (#21734508)
> And even if everyone were a super smart 10x-developer like you surely are

That's not called for. They never implied they were even above average. Just that a bunch of game devs were somewhat lazy.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by mewse on Sunday December 08, 2019 @05:15AM (#21735197)
> Just that a bunch of game devs were somewhat lazy.

That's not called for. You don't know those developers, you don't know what work was on their plate or what constraints they were toiling under.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by Dylan16807 on Sunday December 08, 2019 @01:45PM (#21737400)
It is completely fine for you to say that opinion is unjustified.

But they still weren't calling themselves some kind of better-than-everyone dev.

Though if you're using "developers" to mean that entire section of the company, including management, then what was on their plate and the constraints are almost all self-inflicted.

Re:The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers by forrestthewoods on Saturday December 07, 2019 @06:51PM (#21733442)
Yes. The blame correctly lies on the processor architecture.

Assume you have a developer who is one of the best in the world at writing hyper-optimized SPU code. Imagine this dev WANTS to write micro-optimized assembly. (And there are many such devs). This developer's time would far more efficiently spent if they were writing "normal" code for a "normal" processor.

So yeah. The criticism belongs squarely on the processor. :)