Slashdot Mirror
Why Is It So Difficult To Allow Cross-Platform Play?
cookiej writes "I just got the most recent version of the Madden franchise ('10) for the PS3. Can somebody explain to me why EA has separate networks for the different platforms, only allowing players to compete with people using the same console? Back in the day, there were large discrepancies between the consoles, but these days it seems like the Xbox and the PS3 are at least near the same level. After so many releases for this franchise, they've got to have a fairly standardized protocol for networking; it seems arbitrary not to let them compete. Or am I just missing something obvious? Is it just a matter of Xbox Live and the PlayStation Network not working together?"
PS3s are big endian machines. Xbox 360s are little endian.
Q.E.D They can't talk to each other.
Oh, right, that's why all of those PowerPC equipped Macs couldn't connect to networks and exchange information with my x86 Linux server: they had different endians.
No, actually, that's bullshit. There is absolutely no reason at all why the endian should matter. If a piece of software can't communicate with another because of different endians, the programmers should be dragged out into the woods and be shot.
Network byte order. Look it up.
War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
Dumbest post I've read so far today
Those state of the art latest generation platforms have complex features which allows them to do never seen before things like "swap bytes". It probably takes a whole part of a cycle to do so, but it gets there in the end.
Also, pretty much every type of computer in the world has been talking with each other over the internet comfortably for quite a number of years now. How is that possible if endianness makes this impossible?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
> The simple fact is your WRONG.
Actually... he's right... and you are not only wrong, but rather dumb to boot! It's a good thing you posted anonymously... otherwise that post could come back to haunt you for the utter stupidity you displayed.
>The PC world doesn't have vastly differing hardware and software at all.
So the underlying OS doesnâ(TM)t matter much? Or which version of pixel shaders or how much ram is in the box?
Perhaps you should get to know the Steam Hardware Survey: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
Whole heck of a lot of DX 8 & 9 machines out there.
Obviously Steam hasnâ(TM)t gotten the memo that the PC world doesnâ(TM)t have vastly differing hardware... otherwise they wouldnâ(TM)t care much, now would they?
Moving on... let us just focus on the GPU side of things for a moment... shall we?
While it is true that various iterations of Direct X/OpenGL have various standards of supported features... it is not uncommon for game makers to take advantage of specific extensions/features that one GPU class or another exposes that is not fully DX/OGL compatible.
This is coupled with the fact that not all cards of the same GPU type and speed are created equal... after all, letâ(TM)s not forget that the amount of RAM in a given desktop can vary widely, coupled with the amount of ram on the video card is also variable between PCs... the developer needs to be very careful with their memory usage depending on how low end of a machine they want the game to run on.
The advantage of consoles is of course you have a known platform you can target and exploit without the need to worry about lesser systems... or allowing your game to grow with time or have additional features/effects/resolutions only be available with the next wave of video cards that wonâ(TM)t see most desktops for another year or two.
At the end of the day... DX and OGL are simply the lowest common denominators... and while they can do much... at times you can do even more if you target something specifically.
>The difference between the 360 and the PS3's CPU architecture is vastly different than the difference between PC's
Half true... though as most competent developers will tell you, with the proper designs up front, writing an application that is available on multiple platforms is extremely doable... it all comes down to the question of if it is worth the time and energy required.
>That being said the reason there is not a lot more cross platform gaming is that it is not in their respective financial interests to provide it.
You finally said something that was correct... although largely nonsensical.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
That's very... technical. I am talking about everything else, you know, the data that's transmitted over TCP/IP... the most important issue is whose servers you're using and which services you've licensed--this is platform dependent. Microsoft will not allow you to federate Xbox Live... even it it were possible.