There has been a recent trend (some three or so years, now) to advance the technological intricacies of computation. Specifically, I am referring to the increase in the processing power of devices. In this 'generation' of game console systems (a term that refers to everything in a game console's production period), there has been a major focus on increasing the raw processing of data. When systems (from computers to game consoles) are capable of processing more data simultaneously, those who make products for these systems are free to make more process-intensive programs.
For example, if a computer has a processing power 'x', and is capable of producing 'y' number of polygons on a screen, then if you double the number of processing units on that computer, then it now has '2x' processing power, and can therefore produce approximately '2y' polygons on a screen. It is simple math, really. If you have more stuff, you can do more with what you have.
The trend that has cropped up is having multi-core (Central Processing Unit) systems. Giving a system more than one CPU allows it to preform more calculations. This is generally a good thing; if you don't believe that, feel free to ask any Arts and Technology Major who is trying to render an animation sequence whether they would prefer to be rendering on a computer that's single core, dual-core, or quad-core.
Sony exhibited the belief that this held true when they released their most current console system: the Playstation 3. The processing power of this system is extreme. This console holds a grand total of eight co-processors. In addition to that, it has a one or two contingency processors, should the others give out.
The processing power exhibited by the PS3 is used to make the console capable of rendering and displaying absurdly large numbers of polygons, allowing for very rich and detailed environments in games, and allowing it to produce high-definition images. These are just a few of the tricks up this system's sleeves, but needless to say, this system is powerful.
Microsoft also took to heart the abilities provided by amping up the processing power of their Xbox when they developed their Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 has power that, although not as excessive as the PS3 processing core, is capable of producing its own astonishing number of polygons and mathematical functions. This power comes from a triple-core system built into the specifications that was built more multi-thread processing. (Just think of it as having not just one computer doing one thing, but three computers specially built to multitask working on a single project.)
 |
| The XBox also incorporates faster processing into its equation. 1 |
When it comes to processing, Nintendo was different, though. Nintendo's latest generation system: the Wii, does not have the type of upgrades that Sony and Microsoft made. Actually, the processing power of the Wii is little more extensive than that of a Gamecube (which is the name of their previous gaming console). The difference made by this was initially causing critics to suggest that Nintendo would face significant losses in their customer interest.
The processing power, however nice it may be, comes at a cost. When buying the Nintendo Wii, the cost is about $200. Microsoft's Xbox 360, however costs closer to $ 350, and the marvel of Sony's PS3 is a whopping $600. (Editor's note: These costs were based upon release pricing, excluding bundles and subsequent price cuts.) There is a difference in the price of PCs with single-core processors and multi-core processors too, although this varies upon location of purchase and provider.
The relevance of this is how culture has changed thanks to this, and how the entertainment industry (I'll limit myself to the video game industry for the purposes of this blog) has/hasn't adapted to the demands caused by the availability of this technology.
First, I must mention that thanks to the development of these systems, amazing new possibilities have opened up in the area of game development. An apt example of how this is so would be a game being created called "Achron". Achron has system requirements that involve recent technology (the minimum system requirement includes a dual-core processor). In the past, games like this weren't possible because of the sheer number of mathematical calculations that needed to be preformed and tracked simultaneously.
 |
| Because of the game's scripting complexities, a dual-core processor is needed. |
Secondly, since the advent of this technology, software needed to be created to work with the hardware to improve system performance. To do this,there had to be an evaluation about how well software and hardware interact. New methods have been developed to track this, one of the most important of which is the trace analysis. With the trace analysis, systems can be analyzed to see how effective software is, even on multi-processor platforms. Trace analysis works by breaking the information gathered from the "trace" into three parts: the process analyzer, the context analyzer, and then the segment analyzer, which sorts things into different usable data tables. With trace analysis, it's possible to measure a system performance, and make adjustments. (Source: http://dx.doi.org/10.4316/AECE.2009.03018 )
The question that is left to be asked is: how necessary is all this extra processing power?
Nintendo obviously didn't feel it was important, so is it really needed?
The answer to this question is simply yes, and no.
If we keep demanding games that are realistic, and filled with details,
then the processing power will continue to rise to meet the needs.
However, creativity can make those requirements less daunting.
Nintendo has been praised for their outstanding quality in the texturing
and visuals of their Super Mario Galaxy series, as well as their success in the
Legend of Zelda series. All of these things, with significantly less processing power
than the competition.
Ultimately, it isn't all about the amount of power we have,
it's about how we use it to get the point across. Creativity can
go a long way, but technology doesn't hurt the process.
Still, if we change the hardware, it's important to make sure
that the software is able to keep up. Likewise, if we want to make
software to do something unheard of, we sometimes have to wait
until the hardware has caught up.
With all things, technology especially, there is always room for improvement.
(Edited: 9/13/10)
1: Image courtesy of Absolute_God_Kerberos
No comments:
Post a Comment