I never said PSGL was better, in fast I said most use libGCM, only that there are two ways to go about it.
I used content (other people, references, forums etc) outside of what I was saying so you could see they exist which you said it didn't, unlike you who just states only from yourself and a 'trust in me' attitude.
I was trying to provide you with basic, 'simples' evidence that there are two paths you can take when doing graphics on PS3, higher level and lower level and both are not standard but platform lock-in.
Again, let's just end this we are on different parallels and agree to disagree that this conversation has gotten off the topic of platform lock-in on consoles which you said was easier than mobile/PC and I took the opposite that mobile/PC is less platform lock-in and easier from experience, at least more standard.
Granted someone who has always made console games might think the opposite and thus let's agree to disagree rather than going off topic again and spewing ad hominem attacks which typically can be defined as trolling.
Also, I don't think you understand. People who shipped on PS3 know there is no OpenGL ES on PS3, that PSGL is pretty far from OpenGL and had been deprecated by GCM (it's the same "level", whatever that means, it was the PS3 API before GCM). People who shipped on 360 know that DX9 is a subset of the API and definitely don't complain it's "old".
Your saying opposite to the above things means you have not really worked on a console game. You could be in a team that worked and overhead somebody saying something that you did not understand, so I figured you might know some people who actually shipped something (if you don't believe that I had), that's all.
Facts:
- PS3 has multiple ways to use graphics library, lower level libGCM and higher level (uses GCM not OpenGL but made to mimic it) PSGL, both tie into graphics hardware.
- The graphics API used in the PlayStation 3 is LibGCM and PSGL, latter based on OpenGL ES but is not standard OpenGL ES.
- PSGL mimics or is like OpenGL ES, it is on PS3 and PS2, it uses the libGCM subsystem and was made to help porting to other Sony platforms like Vita. I never said it uses standard OpenGL that is my whole complaint. It is specific to their platform! Thus another graphics lib you have to tie into an engine to launch a game on it, waste of time...
- Most developers on PS3 use libGCM which I said was used on the title I worked on (I did gameplay and networking, never said I worked on graphics on that title but I do on all others not console related as I like OpenGL ES based frameworks like on mobile and WebGL v1)
- Xbox 360 uses Dx8/9 custom version, prove me wrong... on any of these without just saying it from you.
You won't tell me the games you have worked on, if you want to validate yourself and keep talking with no validation then prove me wrong on those points by some information or someone outside yourself and your own comments. Otherwise you are just attacking information and me via ad hominem statements which are easily verifiable. You are just some guy in a thread, I tried to validate what I was saying via external references which you also blew off and attacked the messenger further.
I don't really care if you have made games or you have not made games, moot point. But the topic of this thread was we were talking about platform lock-in and you went off on some vector questioning if I have worked on one based of my psgl/libGCM and Dx9 factual comments relating to graphics libraries being non-standard on consoles to further prove the point of platform specific tech needed and that it is costly. I stated clearly what I work on and mostly do mobile/web/desktop which I think is more standard and worth the time compared to last gen consoles. You have made this a waste of both of our time.
We have agreed to disagree on whether console development is harder than web/mobile/desktop, I think web/mobile/desktop is much easier and more standard, you were arguing the other side. Let's leave it as an agreement to disagree.
pandaman, I appreciate the discussion but we aren't getting anywhere, I am sure you shipped games if you say so and just don't want to have any info in your bio or relay the ones you have, no problem. That is fine, all I was saying was I think consoles take more investment and time to develop for. I think we have validated that by acknowledging even from your statements that their graphics libraries are specifically built for the hardware. Sony tried to make it more approachable on PS by making a higher level PSGL that noone uses, and yes xbox still uses an old api, Dx10+dx11 have been out for a while, not updatable on the xbox 360. I am flabbergasted that we are still discussing this topic. I like developing standards that I can use on other platforms like in mobile, web, desktop. I have no problem with people liking the lock-in of the last gen consoles. The next gen PS4 addresses those concerns via Cerny's points. This is the end of the story and last response from me, wasted enough of both of our time here.
You said: "People who shipped on 360 know that DX9 is a subset of the API and definitely don't complain it's "old""
I'll leave you with these articles also backing that consoles hold back PC gaming:
- http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/03/28/1324203/are-console...
- http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.271509-AMD-Say...
- http://www.gameondaily.com/consoles-holding-pc-back-drastica...
- http://www.vgchartz.com/article/84891/are-consoles-holding-p...
- http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/28366508/-direct-x-is-h...
- http://pc.mmgn.com/Articles/Are-consoles-holding-back-the-ga...
There are no universal APIs and calling something "open" does not make it so. Even when you are writing plain C over POSIX you have to port to every system out there because the systems are different. Graphics API are, by their nature, very platform specific and in this case - the easier, the better. So simple APIs on consoles are, in fact, less "locking" you than complex PC APIs. It takes less time to change simple APIs than complex. Pretty easy to move things between PS3 and 360, good luck moving an OpenGL extension using code between different vendor drivers even on PC. Or OpenGL ES to/from OpenGL 3.0 or, even, DirectX 9 to/from DirectX 11.
I have no experience with mobile, but don't you have different languages for iPhone and Android? And good luck finding Objective-C and Java elsewhere. But you have no problem with that because you have not been elsewhere.
When/if you get more experience or, following my advice, talk to somebody who has more experience you will read your own message here and laugh together with me.
>> "See, the problem with your lack of experience is that you also don't realize how does the "platform lock-in" work."
There you go talking out your backside with ad hominems again, you have no idea how much experience I have. You could probably find out in my bio. But you hide your bio and call out people's experience which is not humble but maybe making up for something lacking. Experienced people don't need to do that. I have developed on every platform out there, vendor lock-in is a trick each platform uses, you have to know where to get around it.
>> "I have no experience with mobile, but don't you have different languages for iPhone and Android? And good luck finding Objective-C and Java elsewhere"
"If you knew anything about" multi-platform development you'd know most game engines are C/C++ with Objective-C/Java wrappers like I mentioned 20 thread posts up in this sorry thread. Game engines like early oolong, coco2d-x and custom engines I have worked on are typically C/C++ with minuscule amounts of platform specific code to get them to run on iOS/Android (i.e. OpenGl EAGLView wrapper on iOS and here and there frameworks like GameCenter/IAP, pthreads for instance work on both). Also engines like Unity do this as well and have intermediary languages like C#/Boo in Mono then export to that same multiplatform setup, even their PS3, Wii and XBox output does the same. Wasting time on tech specifics was for the last gen if you want to compete and keep costs down. Custom engines don't pander to the platform they use as little of the platform as needed to run their native C/C++ engines.
You are only causing yourself damage to being a person noone will want to discuss anything with if you consistently attack the message and do nothing but ad hominem attacks. It's no wonder you hide your bio and personal info if that is how you work. Who'd want to work with someone so caught up in themselves that needs to put down others to win conversations? You admit defeat when you do that. I hope you work with someone like yourself and learn a bit.
I'll expect one more ad hominem attack after this but you won't get a response as that is very troll-like. I could put you down but I am not like that, I like to discuss topics not attack people when I know nothing about them. People like that are a waste of time to give any time to. A response that is anything like the above responses you have had proves to me you are a troll and can't discuss topics without attacks, not something you will do for long if you want to succeed.
We have already agreed to disagree, we are on different parallels, no need to continue this it is time to move on. Do yourself a favor, next discussion you get into, try to stay on topic. This off topic tangent we went on made the Google game console thread less appealing to others who cared to stay on topic.