Pc serve as great inspiration for next generation consoles

Most current games are released simultaneously to all three platforms PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC, however this does not usually bode well for PC users, since their machines are far more advanced than the consoles this generation than ever are four years on the market.



Then Capcom decided to do differently the release of Lost
Planet 2, launching the game with a certain gap between the dates for
version of which was released on consoles and PC that arrives in October.

Jun Takeuchi, producer of Lost Planet 2, gave an interview to the site "Pcgameshardware", explaining why the version of the game for the PC is so
special and if the wait will be worth it. Below are some excerpts from the
interview on the site.



1 - Question


Lost Planet 2 still uses the same MT-framework of the previous games, or you have programmed a new technology for this engine from scratch? If reusing
MT-framework you will have to modify or add codes in order to personalize it and allow the view to the requirements of the game? You built a new mechanism using the MT-based framework for Lost Planet for a new technology?

Answer

We use a new version of MT Framework 2.0 for Lost Planet 2, so that we can use in the game technologically advanced features, such as complex backgrounds and co-op 4 player. We had to upgrade
the MT Framework engine for a faster, because we needed it for a better development of the game.

^
2 - Question


Lost Planet 2 for PC took longer to be released in relation to the islands because you have been developing a version of the game for PC separately to make the best of the technical possibilities that the platform can offer? That's right, or you just will trace a port version of Lost Planet 2 consoles for PC?

Answer

All titles from Capcom for PC using the MT-optimization framework is proposed for a certain platform. For example a Lost Planet was compatible with DirectX10 and Resident Evil 5 was compatible with the 3D Vision.

This time Lost Planet 2 is appropriate for the new DirectX 11. We do not
prioritize the development of the game for a particular platform.
In terms of sales, the PC market may not be the main priority
the market as many analysts predict that.

However, most innovations happen on the PC platform
We are certain that the "next generation" of consoles have much of their functions developed from the technology that is currently present in the Pc. That is why we will not stop investing in PC platform. We do not want to develop games in the dark or isolated, but we want innovations
and feel able to challenge the importance of new technology.




3 - Question


The PC version will be technically different from the islands, which are the main differences between the two versions, counting the technical and visual? Technical and visual features that can only be accomplished using the PC as a platform, or just see what features graphics on the PC?

Answer

We have prepared high-resolution textures for the PC, which were not
implemented in the version of the game for the console. We also
DirectX 11 with their characteristics.

^
4 - Question


Players can expect better graphics than the first Lost Planet? How did you use modern techniques HDR, Per-Pixel-Lighting, Subsurface Scattering, Wet Surfaces, Virtual Displacement Mapping, Soft Shadows, Depth of Field and Motion Blur? Can you give us examples of how these processing techniques are used in Lost Planet 2. (Do not be afraid to tell us a lot of those techniques here)

Answer

Compared with the first game, added a better simulation of subsurface scattering and Depth of Field, as additional resources. Other than that, technologies such as HDR, Per-Pixel-Lighting, Soft Shadows and Motion Blur
already used in Lost Planet 1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-xmikSmLCI&feature=player_embedded

5 - Question


While testing the benchmarking of Lost Planet, as well as other Capcom titles Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter 4 we find that the game works better with multi-core processing especially quad core. Is the MT-framework 2.0, shall once more, a technology highly optimized for multithreading? If this is the case:

• How many cores are supported and what is the performance gain of 2, 4 or even 6 and 8 nuclei?
• What different systems run? What type of scheduler you use?
• Is it better to use the SMT or Hyper Threading is recommended that you disable it for maximum performance?

Answer

Like you said the MT Framework is optimized for multi-core processors. Previously, the MT Framework supported up to eight cores, but now in version 2.0 can get up to 12 cores. In terms of performance goals, performance increases up to 80% with 2 cores, 150%, with 4 cores and 8 cores to 250%.

These segments are used for general functions such as sound processing and networks. Hyper threading using SMT will also improve the overall performance of 10 to 20%.





6 - Question


Lost Planet 2 will offer an advanced physics simulation? Where physics not only affect the visual effects, but may also be used to the gameplay, such as enemies being hit by shrapnel?

Answer

We will be using a physics simulation for explosions and other visual effects. In terms of gameplay used to calculate the physical movements of grenades on the floor and other similar functions.

^
7 - Question


Do you use an auto physical scheduled for 2 Lost Planet you decided to implement physical or created by other developers such as Havok, ODE and PhysX (Nvidia)? You still plans to offer a physics support calculated by the GPU (GPU-Physx/Direct Compute / CUDA)? What is your personal opinion about this alternative?

Answer

We use the Havok physics simulation like in Lost Planet 2. Despite not making any use of the PhysX, the MT Framework 2.0 calculates with physical function in the GPU, although that will be available only for DX11.


Translated by: Chris Redfield
Source by: wagnerikki from GameVicio

 

I think the next generation console is will be harder to distinguish from the PC architecture.
Even 360 now is not that different from PC.

 

Yeah, however they're outdated, now we have already processors with 6 cores, GPUs that uses DX11, OpenGL 4.0, Picture Shadder 5.0
Now someone will say that Cell from PS3 has 6 cores plus one reserved, but it's only used like 30% of it.
I bet that if they were used more than 30% of it's capacity they'd be better than today.
I'm glad that the port of games is better now, cuz port games are too much limited.
When a port comes to PC only used DX9c and pic shadder 3.0, that is most like the consoles' hardware specs.
RE5 was great, cuz they put DX10 in it.
That's some of the reasons why a PC port come later.

Anyway, that's why core quad isn't anymore the best choice for those who have money to spend.
A X6 1090T is now better than a X4 955, as a I7 980x is better than it's previous edition, but gamers was afraid to use then cuz they have more than 4 cores and claimed that games only uses 4 cores at maximum, however, as I presumed, games now gonna start using more than 4 cores

 

Even if the cell is used 100%, the PS3 Gpu is still weak to compliment with it.

 

True, it go around a GeForce 9800GT, but has only 256MB of memory, and is limited to DX9c specs.
And like 256MB of Ram only, so it's too much Processor but less gpu and ram, which in gaming word we know that hardware must match all means.
That's why even with that processor, Xbox 360's Xeon can get more performance in the field.
However 360 has 256MB of memory, but it's shared between GPU and ram, so no dedicated memory fpr each hardware item.


So to get this clear, I'm not fanboy, I'm just posting the true facts.

 

I heard IBM cancelled the commercialization of the cell?

 

Yes in fact they did, due the fact it was not so good designed and it's a pain in the ass for developers to make games run in it.
They were planing on a successor for it, but as the same, was cancelled.


R.I.P.

 

The PS3 uses a much more 'powerful' RAM inside its console. Basic numeric comparisons between the two consoles based on the RAM and VRAM aren't a good indicator of performance differences.

 

I see.
Post Merge: [time]1286173539[/time]

Having cell but weak GPU doesn't help much. No wonder why FF XIV is pushed back.
Post Merge: [time]1286173675[/time]
Perhaps Ps3 is more powerful than Xbox360 but it isn't twice as powerful.

The gap between Xbox and Ps2 is far larger.

 

It can be better, in teory, but it's only used 30% of it, it have followed Moore's Law.
And it is better, but the GPU doesn't go with it, as y'know GPU, RAM and CPU must match for better performace, one good hardware, but if one of these are weak, slow down the entire system.

 

I heard Cell is very powerfull in single tasks but piss poor in multitasking, X86 CPU's are average in single tasks but great in multitasking. Cell would suck running a Windows OS or something similar (as shown with Linux).
Cell could be great for consoles if supported by a great GPU (so no RSX) but would suck in anything else that's why we don't have them in PC's.

 

I think the saddest thing about Capcom talking about Lost Planet 2 and it's PC port is how they have this huge gap between release dates, just for graphical refinement and touch ups, but ultimately the game will still end up shit.

I liked LP2, just 90% of the game was shit and not that much fun.

 

... So you liked the 10% of goodness or the 90% of shit?

 

The game was fun when you were playing four player co-op and not dying by cheap deaths. The game was not fun when you were playing alone. The team mate AI is so fucking stupid it's insane. By cheap death I mean getting caught on something grappling because the game decided that you should fall to your death.

I am exaggerating a bit in terms of game quality but the game was a major step down from the first in terms of single player and story. When playing single player, they should've scrapped a lot of the co-op elements and had a little bit less enemies, but no, they decided to keep all the co-op elements, have stupid AI bots who do nothing, and have the same amount of enemies.

 

That would be pawn-some.
Poor cell need to have a lousy companion such as RSX in Ps3.
Now, Cell+460 GTX SLI would be truly a graphical powerhouse, if anyone could do it.

Seriously though, isn't it hard to make out-of-order program such as windows to run using Cell?
I heard you need an in-order program to use the Cell properly.

One more thing, if I am not mistaken, latest GPUs have already did what the Cell and do and even outperformed it.
Post Merge: [time]1286560092[/time]

DX11 is huge. (Well, agree that It shouldn't take that long)

 

GPUs by nature is more powerful than any processor, however it's useless without processor, seen?
And I guess it's take longer due that the port is coming different, using more powerful stuff to handle it, also test and fix possibles bugs.
However, it's never the Beta testers (Debugers) that find bugs, it's aways us customers, that's a funny thing XD