[kllrnohj]

They could still use JS and not use WebGL. WebGL is just GLES in a web browser. Slower than GLES running natively thanks to sandboxing overhead, for what it's worth. But I was more talking about the RAM overhead of using the browser just to create a window to render GLES into. You can easily achieve the same thing with EGL or SDL or whatever the PS4 natively provides to games. It's trivial to setup a GLES context.

[Narishma]

PS4 doesn't have any form of OpenGL. In this case, WebGL is probably translated on the fly to calls to the proprietary low level graphics API.

[kalleboo]

Is there any more public information available on this? I know the PS3 used a highly custom API that was nontheless based on OpenGL ES (and added stuff that was missing like shaders), it seems like with more standard hardware and the more mature OpenGL ES standards available today, they'd stick with something more standards-compatible.

[Narishma]

The PS3's API (LibGCM) had nothing to do with OpenGL. What Sony did however was provide an OpenGL ES 1.1+extensions implementation on top of the low level API. You can probably count on one hand the number of games that made use of it because it was too slow.

[pjmlp]

This is the typical information the FOSS spread about consoles.

The PS3 has two graphics APIs, OpenGL ES 1.x with Cg for shaders and LibCGM.

Most game studios never used the OpenGL ES API.

The game industry does not care that much about open standards like the FOSS community does.

What counts it getting a game idea sponsored and on the hands of paying customers, regardless of any tool religion.

Porting to multiple platforms is an outsourcing business that is part of the industry since the early days.