"Good system design" is not objective in that way though. You just believe it to be in this case because you don't like it. Not having user control over a light that is there for developers to use isn't necessarily a bad design. It's a design decision that makes sense in some ways. Could it have been implemented BETTER? Yes. Does that mean it's automatically shit? No.
Now imagine that up until now, the volume for your television was controlled by the people who made the television show. Now imaging trying to code your television to override that and give you control over the volume. Now you have an analogy.
I don't know why people are getting so upset about this light thing. Better this than 720p games.
If it's a problem for a lot of users, Sony should seriously consider investing the resources required to patch in an option to disable or dim the light on the controller.
No, actually I've already discussed why it would be a "problem". It's a problem because as the sole area of notification on the controller, and the fact that it was opened up to the developers to use, there is already existing code in place, and a lot of future code coming that uses the lightbar. Disabling it with software would require that you feed the system conflicting code that attempts to override all the current code that utilizes it. Having a basic knowledge of software coding, superseding old code is not ever as simple as you'd like it to be. I'm not saying it's not entirely doable. I'm just saying that it's not like some five minute coding job that some people think it is.
The required code change is trivial. It's not a complex function in the very first place. What you're implying is that it will break functionality in existing games that do use the light bar, which is, while true, will also be a trivial code change that will need game patches to go through and for Sony to update developer documentation and firmware, which is more admin and deployment work than coding. What exactly is the coding challenge that you are thinking of?No, actually I've already discussed why it would be a "problem". It's a problem because as the sole area of notification on the controller, and the fact that it was opened up to the developers to use, there is already existing code in place, and a lot of future code coming that uses the lightbar. Disabling it with software would require that you feed the system conflicting code that attempts to override all the current code that utilizes it. Having a basic knowledge of software coding, superseding old code is not ever as simple as you'd like it to be. I'm not saying it's not entirely doable. I'm just saying that it's not like some five minute coding job that some people think it is.
No, no. It really is. Linking fundamental functionality of games (which the game doesn't actually require to function) to something so unimportant IS BAD DESIGN. This has nothing to do with preferences. There are pretty fundamental principles in software design that you abstract functionality from other functionality wherever possible - if you don't, you're losing a lot of flexibility in your system.
If the game can physically function without the LED, then there is absolutely no reason for there to be a software dependancy on it other than bad design. Don't try and discredit what I'm saying just because I also am personally affected by this - tell me why I'm wrong.
The required code change is trivial. It's not a complex function in the very first place. What you're implying is that it will break functionality in existing games that do use the light bar, which is, while true, will also be a trivial code change that will need game patches to go through and for Sony to update developer documentation and firmware, which is more admin and deployment work than coding. What exactly is the coding challenge that you are thinking of?
I agree. Now we just have to reach an agreement as to how high a priority this is. Personally, I'd rather have them working on things like DNLA and media playback first.
Oh brother.
First off, the PS4 isn't designed for hardware or software flexibility.
I'm saying that coding things for a light that is always on, and then a year down the road giving a third party control to turn that light off is something that could cause stability problems, or unexpected glitches.
This exactly here. It is not important to them(sony) now. Dimming propably do not take as much qa time than outright disabling light so it is priority over disabling.
I'm saying that coding things for a light that is always on, and then a year down the road giving a third party control to turn that light off is something that could cause stability problems, or unexpected glitches.
This is my point. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be. You just gave two good examples.
But it also sounds like it's going to get harder the more games get released. Right now you have still a rather small number of PS4 games that would have to be patched, a year from now that figure will be much higher. So it would make the most sense to do this as soon as possibleThis is my point. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be. You just gave two good examples.
Sony don't plan to do software updates in the future? Sony were burned badly with the PS3 for designing a system that was difficult to make fundamental changes to, whilst Microsoft did huge OS revamps multiple times through the generation.
Sorry - you don't purposely make bad design decisions just because you're making a console.
That's exactly why you make these abstractions. All of that could be avoided if you do things right.
Meh. They already have the hooks in place as we can see from the PC driver. There is no real QA issue here. Yes they have to test it but it's frankly pretty trivial.
They obviously need to leave it on to some degree for user feedback but I'm pretty sure there will be a 70%/30% brightness setting in a firmware update or something.
The lightbar really is the new Clock Bug. FTFL Sony
But it also sounds like it's going to get harder the more games get released. Right now you have still a rather small number of PS4 games that would have to be patched, a year from now that figure will be much higher. So it would make the most sense to do this as soon as possible
A software update to disable hardware isn't something that's done very often. It would be like giving you the option to turn off your Blu Ray drive. Some people might really like that option, because it saves wear and tear on the drive from random spin-ups, and the drive can be noisy and distracting when it spins up mid game. But simply disabling the drive requires that you change the way the system handles physical disks. Do you classify this as a bad design as well?
If that's your definition of "doing it right" I've never seen a console company do it right then.
This is where you're blatantly wrong. This is ridiculous thinking to suggest that turning off an LED on a controller would cause stability issues or glitches. If Sony goofed up their OS to that point, then even the smallest bug fixes for the next five years are going to be painful, agonizing procedures.
At worst turning off the LED would stop a few game functions to stop working, which are trivial to fix. (Either use patches, or when in doubt turn the LED on. Done.)
That's an extremely bad comparison. I wouldn't classify that as bad design because the blu-ray drive is essential for basic functionality of a physical game, lol.
Not when the game data is already installed.
A software update to disable hardware isn't something that's done very often.
It would be like giving you the option to turn off your Blu Ray drive. Some people might really like that option, because it saves wear and tear on the drive from random spin-ups, and the drive can be noisy and distracting when it spins up mid game. But simply disabling the drive requires that you change the way the system handles physical disks. Do you classify this as a bad design as well?
If that's your definition of "doing it right" I've never seen a console company do it right then.
You contradicted yourself. Either it's ridiculous to think that doing this would cause a few game functions to stop working, or it's the worst case scenario. Which is it?
No, because there are still technical dependancies on that disc. There's a reason why it has to be left in the slot.
You confused yourself. Game functions are not the same as stability or glitches. Read my posts entirely.
Sounds like a bad design to me.
It does? Sony wanting people not to have a single disc that can be shared among an unlimited number of people with a single license sounds like bad design?
There's a real functional dependancy there.
But it's not about what Sony wants. Sony wants there to be a light on the front of your controller.
I'm just pointing out the obvious here.
A software update to disable hardware isn't something that's done very often. It would be like giving you the option to turn off your Blu Ray drive. Some people might really like that option, because it saves wear and tear on the drive from random spin-ups, and the drive can be noisy and distracting when it spins up mid game. But simply disabling the drive requires that you change the way the system handles physical disks. Do you classify this as a bad design as well?
If that's your definition of "doing it right" I've never seen a console company do it right then.
When a game function stops working unexpectedly, I generally classify that as a glitch. Is there some other more technical term you'd like me to use?
I'm really trying not to troll here. I'm just trying to show you that there is not a cut-and-dried one opinion is right solution here.
Right - back to what I said. I said it's likely a matter of principle, not any technical limitations (because as we have explained, if there were such a technical limitation - Sony should check the credentials of their software engineers).
Not when the game data is already installed.
I think it's a decent if not perfect analogy.
No, because there are still technical dependancies on that disc. There's a reason why it has to be left in the slot.
It's an awful analogy.
Sounds like a bad design to me.
tokyo slim insists that Sony will have to move mountains to make such a massive change to the PS4 ecosystem, and that they shouldn't even bother cuz they've got other stuff going on.
I have a giant plasma and I see no reflection. I do see ambient light but when I'm playing a game I don't notice anything so even though I don't understand why Sony just won't give people that option, it really doesn't bother meI bought an LED TV instead of a plasma because of this lightbar issue. No reflection for me.
And you're wrong, both in trying to paint your opposition in such simplistic terms and also in the technical terms you're attempting to follow up with.
It's OCD that I don't want a giant blue reflection on my TV when I'm using the PS4?
I bought an LED TV instead of a plasma because of this lightbar issue. No reflection for me.
That may be, I'm not a game developer. But if that's true, then it also applies to most of the people I'm talking to in this thread. I do know a little about coding, and a little about publishing. I'm trying to communicate that to people who seem to think that this is a five line code patch that Sony is withholding from them simply because they are arrogant.
Tiny bit of hyperbole. But this thread is rife with people saying things in the vein of "This should be an easy fix, just turn the light off, Sony!". When it's actually not that easy and there are other factors at play.Point me to where anyone suggested the bold (not as a joke, I know I posted some silly psuedo-code earlier).
You also seem intent on arguing about software architecture design, at least within the past page. Which seems somewhat removed from your original goal
I'm arguing that the decision to give the game devs the use of the light may have been a poor decision when it comes to the consumers who find the light annoying, but that decision doesn't make the software poorly designed. Just because you don't like the decision, doesn't mean the design is bad.
I'm arguing that the decision to give the game devs the use of the light may have been a poor decision when it comes to the consumers who find the light annoying, but that decision doesn't make the software poorly designed. Just because you don't like the decision, doesn't mean the design is bad.
That was NEVER the argument. Re-read everything. I nor anyone else in here never said Sony shouldn't have given game developers the use of the light.
What makes for poorly designed software is creating dependencies on something that doesn't need to be a dependency. The lightbar *is not required for you to play Killzone: Shadow Fall* - and having a software switch to turn that off *should not* affect that game.
If it does, then you've written poorly designed code. Arguing against that is arguing against some pretty well established conventions for good software design.
if you turn the controller off while watching Netflix it pauses the video
What makes for poorly designed software is creating dependencies on something that doesn't need to be a dependency. The lightbar *is not required for you to play Killzone: Shadow Fall* - and having a software switch to turn that off *should not* affect that game.
If you honestly think this is what you have been arguing against, then you have misunderstood almost every post I have made in this thread and I have wasted my time.
The code is truly trivial to implement as it is already exposed to every PS4 developer. LED controls are exposed to all developers through API calls. I believe SCE DevNet documents 3 API's that control the DS4 LED array. Any PS4 developer can easily turn off the LED with an API call exposed by the PS4 OS which has been there since release. The code would simply be to add a UI element to include a Toggle for LED on/off. It is truly that simple and any PS4 game developer could easily turn off the LED for their game, or include a toggle within their own game..
Again, creating dependency on things that don't need to be isn't an isolated case with the light, nor is it isolated to the PS4, nor game consoles. In fact, it's how Apple Computers is still a thing.
So why are you so focused on this one specific instance?
Currently the lightbar is required for everything because you cannot turn it off. So you are mistaken. You mean to say that it SHOULDN'T be required, and that is an
We're talking about software architecture
the game functions just fine without it being used by the player (e.g. taped up, removed, broken).
Again, creating dependency on things that don't need to be isn't an isolated case with the light, nor is it isolated to the PS4, nor game consoles. In fact, it's how Apple Computers is still a thing.
So why are you so focused on this one specific instance?
Currently the lightbar is required for everything because you cannot turn it off. So you are mistaken. You mean to say that it SHOULDN'T be required, and that is an opinion.
I was talking about my conversation with Qassim. What are you talking about?
Oh, are we?
That doesn't sound like a software solution. I'm talking about software. You are going back and forth.
I'm arguing that the decision to give the game devs the use of the light may have been a poor decision when it comes to the consumers who find the light annoying