I simply don’t understand how Sony studios extract the visuals they achieve in their games from old hardware. It feels like tech sorcery.
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
How is nearly every answer in this thread wrong?
To answer everyone: haveing a single piece of hardware to develop does help, absolutely. But the answer is simply… money.
Sony pays to have have games like R&C or Uncharted made. These games wouldn’t be profitable for the studio to make, with the level of detail and polish, but they get $60 million (example number, definitely varies) from Sonyand now the studio is in the green.
That’s it’s. Console hardware is more PC than ever, having x86 AMD CPUs that aren’t that different from ones other OEM could just order. These is no secret sauce, they aren’t some crazy in-house developed flop or some weird also-ran processor like PS3 and 360.
I don’t think they’re necessarily wrong but I’d love a nice ELI5 answer that’s not just “there’s one kind of hardware and the developers try really hard to make it run good”
Also, I thought Ratchet and Clank ran at a solid 60fps.
What’s the right answer?