HN

http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=7881

Well, it's news to me. Several years ago I was fortunate enough to attend my first E3 (courtesy of Jackskeleton) which just happened to have the debuts of the PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube.

Haven't been able to attend any since then and now I just happen to be able to go to this year's E3. And whaddaya know, more next gen hardware. yeah, it makes me happy

Maxflier

Thats cool man,your a lucky mofo.Get lots of pics for us

Josh H

I'm curious to see how much of the PS3 (i.e. how many if any playable games) will be shown.

There will be a ton on the X-box 2 since it launches this fall.

I'm curious to see what Nintendo shows re: the Revolution as well.

slop101

Am I the only one who thinks that it's FAR too soon for the next batch of consoles?

They have been putting out their best games yet, with no sign of slowing down - both the PS2 and the X-Box are still selling very well - why kill the momentum?

Also, launching them this year with current technology would only be a marginal improvement over the current consoles - if they wait another year, it could be a genuine leap forward.

They should release new consoles for Christmas '06, not '05

jeffdsmith

Revolution will be shown as well in some form, just like PS3. sigh...

Josh H

Sony and Nintendo are planning on launching in Fall 2006.

MS is just trying to beat them to the punch and get a head start by launching this fall.

And I agree it's too soon, but that's been discussed in other threads so I won't beat a dead horse here.

Mopower

I don't know why they don't release systems at the same time. Then there wouldn't be this tech leap between the systems. XBOX is more powerful than PS2 because it's a year newer. Then PS3 will probably leap over XBOX 2 because it will be a year newer. I think that's why XBOX versions of PS2 games are always better. Next year PS3 versions will be better than the XBOX 2.

Cedrock

the 2nd xbox will not be called xbox 2/xbox next but will be called xbox 360

Get Me Coffee

I guess that's a smart move for the avg. moron. The reason behide the name is that the 2 could possibly infer an inferior console compared with the 3 in PS3...silly

squidget

it's a sad sad year for me folks.
For this is the year that I'm not going to e3. This year I using my vacation for Europe instead. No shiny blinky lights. No being surrounded by thousands of cool games. No bringing back swag for all my VGtalk peeps. This would have been my 6th.
*sniff*
It's an end of era.







Oh yeah. How dare they release stuff the year I decided not to go? bastiges.
Considering this q4 the xbox2 is suppose to come out it made sense to debut at e3. The PS3, I wasn't expecting anything till the Tokyo Gameshow this fall.

HN

I absolutely agree. Makes one always worry how soon his purchase will become obsolete.

But then I'm not sure when I'll be able to make it to another E3 (or if it will correspond with major hardware releases). So maybe not absolutely agree

If the next nintendo console shows up also, it'll be all the better. not that i'm more excited about one or the others, i just like seeing all the new stuff all at once. what a blast!

Oh, and there will be pics, lots of'em, and video and quite possibly swag as well (though i think i'll only be able to go one day, haven't worked that out yet)

fujishig

It's not the new consoles coming out that I mind so much, it's the death of the old ones. Every time we go from polished, last generation games to (usually) crappy next generation games, until everyone gets comfortable with the hardware. I swear, people could still make great games for the PS1 if they wanted to... especially RPGs. And now I have to wonder which one I'm going to buy first (I'm not dumb enough to buy all of them at launch, but I am dumb enough to buy all of them eventually).

Chris_D

I wouldn't worry, there will be tons of great rpgs for the ps2 for at least the next 2 years (ps3 still a year away). And hell, if by then you've played every decent rpg on the ps1/ps2 you are doing better than most (I just started disgaea, omg what a time sink).

I for one am ready to go! It will be nice to have a console that will be significantly more powerful than the average pc (sure u can have dual and quad-cpu pcs but what games currently use them?). The xbox was released pretty late last gen but it still seems to have been a while since I got mine, and obviously if they're going to try and leap frog everyone then we can expect a smaller gap between xb1/xb2. And of course the ps2 hardware was almost dated from the day of its release (remember how dreamcast games looked better for about 2 years?). Can't wait to move on from that.

At least with the cell sony looks like they might have something that will literally be ball ripping fast! (um maybe ). Sure it might have the same type of learning curve as the ps2, but in this case it will be the curve to make something truely amazing, while with the ps2 it was the curve to not make your game look like crap.

Bring it on!

Cusm

Last MS was too late, this time they will be too early. Although I love my Xbox, it is TOO SOON for me to think about replacing it, and by the time I am ready I will probably get the better (newer and faster - in theory better) PS3.

jeffdsmith

Do you guys think it is possible that MS is launching specifically because they know they will be unable to touch the PS3 Hardware wise? I'm very skeptic about Sony's over promises, but I do know processors and the Cell architecure does hold a lot of promise so in my mind its possible MS doesn't want to launch at the same time out of fear...

LorenzoL

I'll wait until all 3 systems are out before making a purchase decision but I'm leaning towards a PS3 if they include Bluray.

Josh H

I don't think it's fear of the PS3's power so much as it is the fear of the Playstation brand name and third party support.

They know the majority of gamers (especially casual gamers who are the majority) will by the PS3 just out of brand loyalty. Thus they're hoping to launch early and get a few of these people to pick up an X-box 2 while they don't have to choose between it an the PS3.

Factor in that Sony will again have the best 3rd party exclusives and it makes it even more urgent in their minds.

I don't think it will work though. It will end up like the Dreamcast where it sold well at launch to hardcore gamers, but most casual gamers held off an waited for Sony's offering.

jeffdsmith

I agree with all of that. I guess what I'm really curious about is the potential fear MS may have knowing that it can't compete in its one area it excelled in during the generation: graphics. Then again, maybe the cell will be a flaming POS, but I doubt it.

Gallant Pig

I'd be surprised if the CELL was any better than XBOX 2 than XBOX is better than PS2. They are both supposed to have parallel processing which means the Xbox version will be nicely scalable just like the CELL.

Then again, Sony just mentioned that Osama Bin Laden is buying a PS3 and turning it into a time machine to take over the universe, so I could be wrong.

Noonan

I think the fact that PS3 will use BluRay media gives it an edge. It can hold about 6x the amount of a standard DVD disc, which is what the next XBOX is using. That alone should make a big difference.

Gizmo

Just because it can HOLD more dosn't mean it will utilize the extra space.

Josh H

Exactly. Games aren't any longer today than they were on carts, and some CD games on the PS2 looks just as good as the DVD games.

The extra space just tends to be used for cut scenes and music most of the time.

Noonan

I understand that, but just having that ability is nice. Plus, BluRay hasn't even been released yet so there's no way to know if there will be any other avantages to it over DVD media.

And let's say a game was released on both systems, with identical gameplay and in-game graphics but the PS3 version had better audio and cut scenes. Wouldn't that be a reason to choose that version?

Either way, it's too early to tell which will be "better". We're just gonna have to wait and see.

PixyJunket

Space isn't going to be an issue on video games for a LONG time unless somebody decides to release a game that has something like over 5 hours of non-interactive video. I don't even think they've really cracked into dual-layer DVD games yet; San Andreas was a single layer DVD and contained an unheard-of insane amount of high-quality audio, both voice acting and music. If not for audio (uncompressed) and video, most games would still manage to fit on CD media.

Technically, the blu-ray discs may be able to hold more HD video.. but how many games are still using full-motion video for cut-scenes? Very few. Most of that is done with the in-game engines now as is and with the in-game animation getting better and better the need for full-motion video in games is further dwindling.

The Franchise

Beyond raw storage space, having more dense media can decrease load times becuase the info is more closely packed in quite literally. That's why PS2 DVD games load much faster than PS2 CD games.