Support NeoGAF

[EatChildren]

In general really heavy game engine/editing/game multitasking as was pointed out can do it.

I know. This is exactly what will chew up 4GB+ quite comfortably. And yes, RAM is cheap, and there is no harm going 8GB.

I bought 8 gigs of ddr 2133 mhz ram for $90 . 8 gigs of ram is nothing in the end. I'm going to hazard that next year we will se 8 gigs as the norm and 16 gigs becoming more popular where as 1 , 2 and 4 gigs starts decreasing quicker from steam surveys

I wasn't implying that 8GB of RAM was expensive, nor that it was useless and wont be useful in the future. I was making a point that a 2011 gaming performance increase with more than 4GB of RAM negligible. I said this, because it is factually correct.

Some of you guys are getting awfully defensive about a pretty obvious point most of us are actually agreeing on. We're all on the same page. 8GB is good, and especially wonderful if you're Dennis, Warm Machine or anybody else doing heavy application multitasking and/or media editing. My point was, and still is, that a 2011 videogame will not see a noticable performance increase from more than 4GB of RAM.

 

[Warm Machine]

As a side note yesterday I was shocked to see a Asus laptop at Futureshop with a 19" 1080p screen, some crazy graphics card and 16 gig of ram! Come on, that is just a desktop in a laptop case!

Oh, it was near $1800 too.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

If devs had 16GB of RAM to play with, they'd probably use it up in a heartbeat by increasing the amount of stuff loaded in memory and reducing the need for loading times.

this wouldn't help lower loading times by much. Loading is required to read content from the disc, unzip it, and store some data into ram, harddrive installs would be far more benefitial unless you were planing to load entire games into ram (which is rediculous). Lots of content, such as mega textures are too big to store into ram anyways and will be streamed directly off of the disc.

And they would also be able to reduce ugly LOD transitions by having way more intermediate models.

why? this is the main benefit of having hardware tessellation.

Then you look at stuff like LA Noire where they are doing facial scanning. They are not even at HD quality in LA Noire. You put them at HD quality and do full body scanning instead of just facial scanning and that will require significantly more RAM as well (as well as media space; standard 2 layer BluRay wouldn't cut it-- they'd have to go for the 32 layer format to future proof it).

I'm not even sure I understand what you're trying to say here. Models don't have higher resolutions, nor does facial scanning impact the size of anything. It's just an animation and modeling technique...

 

[gundamkyoukai]

In these threads we always have people talking about cheap desktop ram when consoles do not use that.
If anything check out the prices for XDR2 and GDDR5 ram to have idea about consoles.
Then people also seem to forget unlike PC where you just stick in the ram on console they have to be on the mobo which takes up space and can be huge problem later on .

If next gen consoles have anything pass 2GB of XDR2 or GDDR5 i would be happy as hell .

 

[bigboss370]

i'm excited this means they are aiming for graphical power and high tech and not 'casual' appeal, so this can only mean good things. i await the day i can impressively destroy every structure in an urban open world game.

 

[infinityBCRT]

this wouldn't help lower loading times by much. Loading is required to read content from the disc, unzip it, and store some data into ram, harddrive installs would be far more benefitial unless you were planing to load entire games into ram (which is rediculous). Lots of content, such as mega textures are too big to store into ram anyways and will be streamed directly off of the disc.

You'd still need an initial load but you could stream more stuff into memory. There are tons of games which still have loading between levels or loading when transitioning between indoors and outdoors. Plus, in some cases you would want to load a large portion of the game in memory. For example, with MK9 they could load all the fighter data into memory so that theres far less downtime between matches, and it would allow Shang Tsung transformations.

why? this is the main benefit of having hardware tessellation.

I don't know the ins and outs of tessellation but the only applications I've seen of it are to deform a lower poly model into something thats higher poly with additional details. That has the side effect of the model actually changing as you approach it. I'd think what you'd want is the model with the same details represented on it, but represented with lower polygons and with a bump map that has the diff between the lower poly models and the highest detailed model of the object. I don't know if tessellation can accomplish that, but if it can, so be it.

I'm not even sure I understand what you're trying to say here. Models don't have higher resolutions, nor does facial scanning impact the size of anything. It's just an animation and modeling technique...

The motion scan tech does a couple of things. First off its capturing textures (and animated textures at that). The textures themselves are low resolution. Its also creating polygonal models which then are animated. The models themselves are quire low poly (likely because higher poly models would require a lot more animation data) and higher poly ones which capture every little detail which could help reduce the anomalies you see on them such as the freaky teeth that many characters have as well as have better hair

 

[pottuvoi]

I find it strange that people are against more memory on consoles as the amount of memory is what holds most games down in terms of texture resolution and persistent gameworld.

In how many games you have seen cars vanish as soon as player looks in another way or NPCs forget what has happened to them previously.
With more memory games could track what happen in the gameworld and keep the changes play game simulation in areas outside an immidiate vicinity of a player.

Just the graphics will need a lot more memory, but for a truly innovative and huge games we need more memory for actual game data as well.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

I don't think that anyone is against more RAM, people are just trying to be realistic.

 

[Finaika]

I find it strange that people are against more memory on consoles as the amount of memory is what holds most games down in terms of texture resolution and persistent gameworld.

Who are against more RAM? Nooo please no more RAM!

 

[Metal-Geo]

Well let's not remove the challenge of game development. Giving consoles a buttload of RAM could end up making the game developers a bit lazy when it comes to optimizing their code. I mean, if you read about the tricks and 'cheats' game (programmers) developers use to make their games look and run as good as they do now, you can't help but admire their efforts and clever thinking. Let's not remove this fascinating piece of game development.


For PC users, having more than 4GB of RAM would only make sense for the multimedia editors. Like already mentioned, people who use Photoshop, After Effects and 3D modeling and rendering software. Otherwise, I'd recommend no more than 6GB of RAM for PC gamers. Just to keep things smoothly when they want to Alt-Tab between their game and their porn.

But hell, most PC games nowadays still come in a 32-bit excutable! Which means you'll be using no more than 2GB for that game you're playing! It used to be the latest trend around 2005 to release a 64-bit executable. But 64-bit operating systems being way too clumsy back then (horrible drivers, for one) kind of killed the trend. (HL2 and Far Cry being unstable as fuck didn't help either) And what the fuck happened to the 64-bit executable of Crysis 2? :/

Anyway...although I certainly wouldn't oppose to consoles having 4GB RAM (or more), I do fear this could end up making some game developers lazy. But that's just my silly opinion.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

GAH

The myth that there is something noble about having to code to the metal to get around the limitations of consoles must stop. It's just bullshit, it's fine to respect developers who get great results out of limited hardware but there is nothing "character building" or whatever about having to deal with shitty hardware. It's just a thankless chore.

 

[Dilly]

GAH

The myth that there is something noble about having to code to the metal to get around the limitations of consoles must stop. It's just bullshit, it's fine to respect developers who get great results out of limited hardware but there is nothing "character building" or whatever about having to deal with shitty hardware. It's just a thankless chore.

Seriously this, also these things have quite the long life span. 4GB may seem a lot now, but it probably won't be in 8 years.

 

[EatChildren]

Seriously this, also these things have quite the long life span. 4GB may seem a lot now, but it probably won't be in 8 years.

Nothing we have now will seem like a lot in eight friggen years!

 

[Metal-Geo]

GAH

The myth that there is something noble about having to code to the metal to get around the limitations of consoles must stop. It's just bullshit, it's fine to respect developers who get great results out of limited hardware but there is nothing "character building" or whatever about having to deal with shitty hardware. It's just a thankless chore.

How is it bullshit? It helps game developers shine above others if they put more effort into it. It's not thankless at all. Look at how well praised games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (and 3?) are. Oh sure, we don't know the programmers who are responsible for these achievements like we know John Carmack. But despite that, it's not 'thankless' at all. The games are fucking known for these achievements.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Sooner or later we going to have to slow down so in 8 years it might not be huge jump compare to the pass 10 years \ people won't really notice it.
Take the mobile market it's advancing really fast but battery tech is not keeping up.

 

[pieatorium]

How is it bullshit? It helps game developers shine above others if they put more effort into it. It's not thankless at all. Look at how well praised games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (and 3?) are. Oh sure, we don't know the programmers who are responsible for these achievements like we know John Carmack. But despite that, it's not 'thankless' at all. The games are fucking known for these achievements.

It's bullshut because they could do the same with less time and money or better with the same time and money if the hardware would support it.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

How is it bullshit? It helps game developers shine above others if they put more effort into it. It's not thankless at all. Look at how well praised games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (and 3?) are. Oh sure, we don't know the programmers who are responsible for these achievements like we know John Carmack. But despite that, it's not 'thankless' at all. The games are fucking known for these achievements.

I already said that I can understand respecting achievements in that area. My issue with your post is that you represent it as some noble rite of passage that developers should be grateful to have the opportunity to experience, going so far as to advocate mandating limitations so that we don't, in your words "remove this fascinating piece of game development." Frankly, as a coder I think that's totally fucking batshit crazy.

When I was a younger lad, I used to design APIs in such a way that they strictly enforced certain patterns and behaviours. Like, if you didn't sweet talk them into playing nice they would totally screw you. What I noticed was that it caused a loss of productivity in the better coders because they needed to apply a lot of framework specific know-how to their work instead of just focusing on writing sexy code. Now I still enforce patterns and behaviours but I do so in such a way that it's a lot more intuitive for the developers, and they actually enjoy doing it because it's immediately beneficial for them.

The less obstacles you place in front of a good coder the better their code will be. Shitty coders are always going to write shitty code, whether you give them a trial by fire or not. Basically, don't make life worse for the good coders in order to encourage discipline in the shitty ones because everyone loses.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

How is it bullshit? It helps game developers shine above others if they put more effort into it. It's not thankless at all. Look at how well praised games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (and 3?) are. Oh sure, we don't know the programmers who are responsible for these achievements like we know John Carmack. But despite that, it's not 'thankless' at all. The games are fucking known for these achievements.

Are you suggesting that Uncharted 2 got praise on the basis that it was coded to the metal instead of on an API? It was praised for being a fantastic game and looking graphically stunning. If it was made on PC, it would have looked even better, despite not being coded to the metal.

 

[lilltias]

 

[dragonelite]

I bought 8 gigs of ddr 2133 mhz ram for $90 . 8 gigs of ram is nothing in the end. I'm going to hazard that next year we will se 8 gigs as the norm and 16 gigs becoming more popular where as 1 , 2 and 4 gigs starts decreasing quicker from steam surveys

you cna get 1600mhz ddr 8 gig for like 60 euro.
If you buy in bulk and from manufacturer you can probably get it for way cheaper.

 

[UrbanRats]

Anyway...although I certainly wouldn't oppose to consoles having 4GB RAM (or more), I do fear this could end up making some game developers lazy. But that's just my silly opinion.

What if they apply the same efforts, to 4GB of ram?
Your post makes no sense, because you could've said the same for the Ps2-->Ps3 jump.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

AMD's just hyping their new console chip. It's obviously not coming close to Avatar pixel-for-pixel, unless they mean for a point-n-click adventure game. We won't see that in real-time for another 5-10 years (on PC first).

 

[Maxrunner]

So will the console be as big as my antec 900 case?

 

[Busty]

It's a silly thing to correct, but Avatar didn't cost any where near half a billion dollars, it was like $240M.

YOU ARE UNINFORMED. That number was posted on Sharon Waxman's blog The Wrap and referred to Fox's investment in the film.

Avatar was co-financed by Fox, Dune and then Ingenious Partners which came aboard the project when it was well into post production.

While it may not have EXACTLY cost $500m it is certainly the most expensive film every made. A fact Fox have been desperately trying to keep away from the media.

 

[fabricated backlash]

AMD's just hyping their new console chip. It's obviously not coming close to Avatar pixel-for-pixel, unless they mean for a point-n-click adventure game. We won't see that in real-time for another 5-10 years (on PC first).

So in 5-10 years PCs will have multiple thousand core CPUs to process a single frame in 5 hours?

 

[king picollo]

The new xbox 720 is going to be a transformer in disguise, who's sole purpose is to hack everyone's pc and set the default search engine to Bing.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

So in 5-10 years PCs will have multiple thousand core CPUs to process a single frame in 5 hours?

Haha, you've got me there. I guess that was my wishful thinking timeline....

So I mean it could very well be 20-50 years before we see that kind of fidelity and scope...in a real time open world game/FPS. But PC tech moves fairly fast, so possibly we may get there quicker. But it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

 

[pieatorium]

The new xbox 720 is going to be a transformer in disguise, who's sole purpose is to hack everyone's pc and set the default search engine to Bing.

Transformers are robots in disguise, so it will be a disguise within a disguise. Yo dawg, inception etc.

 

[bigtroyjon]

YOU ARE UNINFORMED. That number was posted on Sharon Waxman's blog The Wrap and referred to Fox's investment in the film.

Avatar was co-financed by Fox, Dune and then Ingenious Partners which came aboard the project when it was well into post production.

While it may not have EXACTLY cost $500m it is certainly the most expensive film every made. A fact Fox have been desperately trying to keep away from the media.

I can't think of a single reason why fox would care that this film was the most expensive ever made.

Sure, if it had bombed they would want to keep the cost a well known secret but since it made as much money as it did there is no reason why they wouldn't want to crow from the rooftops that they invested a huge amount of money because they were smart enough to see the windfall that would result from that investment.

 

[pottuvoi]

Wrong forum, please delete.

 

[Casp0r]

So in 5-10 years PCs will have multiple thousand core CPUs to process a single frame in 5 hours?

Didn't Nvidia talk about how inefficient movie industry rendering is?

While they're using render farms for hours for each frame. Our single GPU's are rendering quite advanced frames 60 times a second.

 

[Krev]

I can't think of a single reason why fox would care that this film was the most expensive ever made.

Sure, if it had bombed they would want to keep the cost a well known secret but since it made as much money as it did there is no reason why they wouldn't want to crow from the rooftops that they invested a huge amount of money because they were smart enough to see the windfall that would result from that investment.

They kept things quiet in the beginning to avoid the fallout if it bombed. But why crow about it costing more when it turned out to be a success? That would only make it appear that Fox was making less pure profit. It's smarter to spend less and make more than to spend more and make more.
Plus, they weren't the ones who poured that extra money into the film.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Haha, you've got me there. I guess that was my wishful thinking timeline....

So I mean it could very well be 20-50 years before we see that kind of fidelity and scope...in a real time open world game/FPS. But PC tech moves fairly fast, so possibly we may get there quicker. But it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

At this stage there are simple physical realities that make it impossible to achieve this kind of visuals and fidelity on a user end system that is reasonably priced (below 2000 bucks) and fits in a single room. I won't say it will never happen, but certainly not on a closed system or single machine, let alone the utmost retarded claim that a single GPU would be able to do this in the upcoming years.

If anything cloud based services could achieve that at some point.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

At this stage there are simple physical realities that make it impossible to achieve this kind of visuals and fidelity on a user end system that is reasonably priced (below 2000 bucks) and fits in a single room. I won't say it will never happen, but certainly not on a closed system or single machine, let alone the utmost retarded claim that a single GPU would be able to do this in the upcoming years.

If anything cloud based services could achieve that at some point.

Well said, and I agree. AMD's claim here is complete facepalm worthy, albeit we know why their using the analogy, but still. Not to mention the money it would require to build a game with those visuals and scope in today's gaming market. It's absurd.

 

[king picollo]

Transformers are robots in disguise, so it will be a disguise within a disguise. Yo dawg, inception etc.

That's how deep MS need to go to make people use Bing.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Well said, and I agree. AMD's claim here is complete facepalm worthy, albeit we know why their using the analogy, but still. Not to mention the money it would require to build a game with those visuals and scope in today's gaming market. It's absurd.

The thing is, this is a recurring line that has been spouted so often it has become a running gag at this point. The official N64 promo magazine compared the special effects in Mario 64 to the Movies Abyss, Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park...
Let alone the stuff that was said about the PS3...

 

[XANDER CAGE]

The thing is, this is a recurring line that has been spouted so often it has become a running gag at this point. The official N64 promo magazine compared the special effects in Mario 64 to the Movies Abyss, Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park...
Let alone the stuff that was said about the PS3...

Was it the PS2 that would look "just like Toy Story"?

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Was it the PS2 that would look "just like Toy Story"?

That was Xbox, Sony never claimed PS2 could render Toy Story.

 

[fabricated backlash]

That was Xbox, Sony never claimed PS2 could render Toy Story.

Was it the PS2 or 3 that was supposed to let you hack into the Matrix?

 

[bigtroyjon]

That was Xbox, Sony never claimed PS2 could render Toy Story.

I get a smile whenever someone mentions the ps2 and Toy Story because I know within two minutes someone will come along and make sure everyone knows that it was the xbox that quote was referring to.

Is there some kind of Ps2 Toy Story defense force that I'm not aware of?

 

[Chû Totoro]

Pick your choice :

Dev cost => 80$ games...
Dev cost => games with 15$ add-ons
Dev cost => games with one use online pass
Dev cost => games with limited save files
Dev cost => prequel, sequel, trilogy...
Dev cost => FPS and sports games only :/

Do not want !

Spoiler

even if some of these are already used... I just don't want it to be the norm

 

[XANDER CAGE]

I get a smile whenever someone mentions the ps2 and Toy Story because I know within two minutes someone will come along and make sure everyone knows that it was the xbox that quote was referring to.

Is there some kind of Ps2 Toy Story defense force that I'm not aware of?

Wouldn't want to think that Sony would make up bullshit about the power of their consoles they'd never do that!

Oh wait

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

How is it bullshit? It helps game developers shine above others if they put more effort into it. It's not thankless at all. Look at how well praised games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (and 3?) are. Oh sure, we don't know the programmers who are responsible for these achievements like we know John Carmack. But despite that, it's not 'thankless' at all. The games are fucking known for these achievements.

I'd rather a developer wouldn't have to break their heads and sanity of having to come up with ways to make something work on limited hardware and instead just do (mostly) what they want on top of the line hardware. everyone benefits.

 

[daviyoung]

Wouldn't want to think that Sony would make up bullshit about the power of their consoles they'd never do that!

Oh wait

The number of rubber ducks the new Xbox can render will be out of this world.

 

[Theonik]

Was it the PS2 that would look "just like Toy Story"?

Xbox, but it was Toy Story 2 that was referenced which is even more ridiculous to say. I think some people find it debatable that the top of today may contest the original Toy Story in some fronts. (the Xbox definitely did not)

 

[Lagspike_exe]

I get a smile whenever someone mentions the ps2 and Toy Story because I know within two minutes someone will come along and make sure everyone knows that it was the xbox that quote was referring to.

Is there some kind of Ps2 Toy Story defense force that I'm not aware of?

Uh, what?

1) Journalist who compared PS2 and DC came to conclusion that because PS2 was so much powerful than DC it will be able to render Toy Story in realtime.

2) For some reason, due to this story, it is claimed that Sony (and not the journalist) argued that PS2 could render Toy Story (which they never did).

3) Someone from MS said (and this is on paper) that Xbox can render Toy Story in realtime.

These are facts.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

The number of rubber ducks the new Xbox can render will be out of this world.

I DEMAND 7.1 quacking with real-time sound occlusion.

 

[PdotMichael]

Pick your choice :

Dev cost => 80$ games...
Dev cost => games with 15$ add-ons
Dev cost => games with one use online pass
Dev cost => games with limited save files
Dev cost => prequel, sequel, trilogy...
Dev cost => FPS and sports games only :/

Do not want !

Spoiler

even if some of these are already used... I just don't want it to be the norm

And now?

back to Playstation 2 Hardware?

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Uh, what?

1) Journalist who compared PS2 and DC came to conclusion that because PS2 was so much powerful than DC it will be able to render Toy Story in realtime.

2) For some reason, due to this story, it is claimed that Sony (and not the journalist) argued that PS2 could render Toy Story (which they never did).

3) Someone from MS said (and this is on paper) that Xbox can render Toy Story in realtime.

These are facts.

Good thing I phrased it as a question because I genuinely couldn't remember instead of accusing Sony of being sly about their console's power. Come on, I wasn't trying to slander them.

Spoiler

I waited until the next post to make that joke

 

[fabricated backlash]

Uh, what?

1) Journalist who compared PS2 and DC came to conclusion that because PS2 was so much powerful than DC it will be able to render Toy Story in realtime.

2) For some reason, due to this story, it is claimed that Sony (and not the journalist) argued that PS2 could render Toy Story (which they never did).

3) Someone from MS said (and this is on paper) that Xbox can render Toy Story in realtime.

These are facts.

Hmm yeah and the 70 million polys per second ingame claim was also constructed by the media?

Sony is just as bad at putting out overblown bullshit that has little to nothing to do with the actual capabilities of their products.

The worst part is that people actually still believe some of that crap.