DVD Talk
Console Wars: Tech/Specs Thread [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Console Wars: Tech/Specs Thread


Gallant Pig
05-24-05, 12:50 AM
I'd like to see some good discussion on next gen specs. That's sorta what the "inkling" thread was about, but this thread is only about specs.

So techies (belboz, etc) which guts look most promising & why? What I'm reading seems that the 2 announced consoles are very similar. Revo could come out & top all 3 (or not if they want to launch at $200).

The gist of it seems no one really knows which one is more powerful, we really won't know anything until launch games tell the whole story.

Gallant Pig
05-24-05, 12:58 AM
Oh & guys, please take it easy. No need for a pissing contest. Thanks :)

Gromit
05-24-05, 08:25 AM
So techies (belboz, etc) which guts look most promising & why? What I'm reading seems that the 2 announced consoles are very similar. Revo could come out & top all 3 (or not if they want to launch at $200).


I was thinking just the opposite, that the systems' architecture is so different that it's like comparing apples to oranges.

joshd2012
05-24-05, 08:30 AM
I read a news article yesterday which had a different take on the whole thing. They said that Microsoft is going with large amounts of pipes - similar to what Sony did with the PS2. They then said that Sony was going with less pipes done more efficiently, which was what Microsoft did with the Xbox. Very interesting perspective.

The described how both directions have their positives and negatives. I do think they are still very different machines - but they are more similar than the PS2 vs Xbox.

Groucho
05-24-05, 08:48 AM
Will any of the three consoles have built in Wireless networking capabilities?

I was reading the EGM article on the Xbox 360, looks like it doesn't.

joshd2012
05-24-05, 09:04 AM
Will any of the three consoles have built in Wireless networking capabilities?

I was reading the EGM article on the Xbox 360, looks like it doesn't.

The 360 will require the purchase of a wireless adapter. The PS3 will include Wireless B/G, but it makes no mention if they will allow you to connect to the internet. I think its pretty much given - not sure how a PS3 could accept wireless communication from a PSP and not from a wireless router.

Groucho
05-24-05, 09:05 AM
Looks like I'm leaning towards PS3 then.

Josh H
05-24-05, 09:45 AM
The Revolution will have built in wireless as well.

jeffdsmith
05-24-05, 10:26 AM
Which is more powerful?
From a tech standpoint, both systems are so different it is really hard to determine a graphical winner by specs alone. Who knows on the Revolution. Sony looks like a winner on paper, but that doesn't always equal real world performance. (PS2)


As we know, system graphical power doesn't mean jack if a system can't be utilized.
Of all three systems the PS3 will be the hardest to program for. Before the Sony loyalists jump on my me, allow me to qualify that with Sony has pledged to make the cell architecture "transparent" to the developers, but they can only do so much. There will be a learning curve, especially when it comes to pushing the hardware. Sony has already had several developers chime saying the PS3 is easily worked on, for what that is worth.

The 360 and Revolution architecture are very similar to the Gamecubes in that they are based on PowerPC chips and ATI GPU's. Prior to the GC there was already a strong API for this interface, its even better now. Ironically, the 360 will benefit from Nintendo's Gamecube work the generation prior in this area. (To be fair, the Flipper [GC GPU] was designed really by ArtX, so ATI influence was limited) I'm sure Nintendo was thrilled when they heard that MS was switching to their selection of source suppliers this generation.


Don't forget time.
Just as the GC and Xbox were graphically better to the PS2 in part as a benefit of time, the PS3 and Revolution stand to benefit from later release dates. Is 6 months really enough time for Sony to revamp their hardware if the 360 is better? Not really. It does/did allow Sony to aim higher in their goals knowing their latter release date would lower prices. Nintendo allows benefits in same manner. The fact that we don't know any of the Revolution's specs leaves area wide open as to when and what to expect.


Power != Size
Some are quick to believe the revolution will be graphically inferior to the PS3 and 360 (Myself included for now). However, efficiency in design counts for a lot. Consider the Xbox and the Gamecube, the GC is nearly less then 1/4 the volumetric size of the Xbox. It runs quiter, consumes far less power, costs less, and graphically can produce images very close to the Xbox. To be fair the GC lacks no built in 5.1, eithernet, or power supply (Which MS later moved externally due to fires). To be fair yet again, examining the base of the GC you find lots of open space for addons that could have been used for these devices in reference the volumetric comparison.

The point is, don't write of the 360 because it somes in smaller then the PS3, or think the Revolution will be a lame duck when it arrives. The size of these devices depends on what is included, but what matters is how it is utilized by you the gamer.

Technically speaking, one reason I feel the PS3 will be graphically better is the Xbox 360 has 6 front ends and the system has shared graphics memory. So it needs serious amounts of memory bandwidth (good chance one of those threads is going to evict a cache line) and it's sharing it with the graphics card? Bad design. I digress...

Which one will win the console wars?
Sony PS3. (My feeling) But hey, maybe its ugly enough to put the 360 or Revolution on top, doubt it though.

darkside
05-24-05, 10:40 AM
The 360 will require the purchase of a wireless adapter. The PS3 will include Wireless B/G, but it makes no mention if they will allow you to connect to the internet. I think its pretty much given - not sure how a PS3 could accept wireless communication from a PSP and not from a wireless router.

Still can't believe Microsoft is not giving you wireless internet out of the box. Guess that is the price to pay for the HDD being included. I'm defintely going to want a wireless hook up. I have nothing but headaches hooking up my PS2 to my router now. The router is in the other room and I don't have any long cables to run.

Hopefully the Xbox360 wireless addon will be cheap.

Gallant Pig
05-24-05, 10:51 AM
Would the wifi be built into the more bells/whistles version?

goLUCKY
05-24-05, 11:09 AM
Would the wifi be built into the more bells/whistles version?
The whole multiple versions has currently been put on the back burner, and MS will only ship one x360 setup this year.

Groucho
05-24-05, 11:10 AM
Still can't believe Microsoft is not giving you wireless internet out of the box. Guess that is the price to pay for the HDD being included.I thought that was optional too?

darkside
05-24-05, 12:23 PM
I thought that was optional too?

They scrapped the separate versions idea and all Xbox360s will now ship with the 20GB HDD.

Josh H
05-24-05, 01:12 PM
No WiFi out of box is odd, but given a choice I'd take the HDD first, so I can't complain.

Especially since I currently have no affordable broadband options. DirectTV, so no cable internet, and for whatever reason DSL isn't available at my address (kind of odd given I live smack in between DC and Baltimore).

Gallant Pig
05-24-05, 01:44 PM
So the PS3 is going to ship with wifi + HDD + bluray, while the 360 ships with HDD & only RJ45 eithernet? If they sell for the same price it's obvious Sony is taking the bigger hit early on for this generation. I'm guessing getting the rights to use CELL wasn't cheap either. They must be leveraging their success from last gen & taking a calculated price loss to fight off MS.

Josh H
05-24-05, 01:55 PM
Sony can take a bigger loss as they have more 1st party games that are big hits (gran turismo, Jak, R&C, Sly and so forth) that they can put out and make big profits on.

Same with Nintendo, they know their first party series will always make a killing.

joshd2012
05-24-05, 01:59 PM
I'm pretty sure that the PS3 will have no hard drive. The specs say "Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1" which probably means it has a slot for a hard drive, but doesn't come with one. Of course, they could just be waiting to see if they need one before they say they will have one.

Its really a toss up. The official Xbox wireless adapter is $100 (as are most good wireless bridges) and a 20GB 2.5" hard drive is $60 (which can easily be made $100 with a game or service packed in). Either way, if you want both its going to cost you an extra $100.

For me, I see no need for a hard drive. Didn't need one on my PS2, so why would I need one now? My PSP holds my music and movies and photos fine on the memory stick - should be okay with the PS3 as well. And if I really need a hard drive, I'm going to want more than 20GB anyway. But wireless internet is a must. Cords are a thing of the past for Internet access.

Gallant Pig
05-24-05, 02:14 PM
Hard Drives will keep me from buying a memory card. Unless the PS3 takes CF memory, I'll have to buy something. I also suspect it's necessary for backwards compatability.

Wifi would be nice built in, but I already own a wifi bridge I have hooked up to a switch for consoles. No need to reinvent the wheel.

I'm guessing the add-on adapter will be cheaper than their current wifi bridge. Why? It won't be a bridge, it will be an external wireless adapter, they go for around $50 tops.

joshd2012
05-24-05, 02:27 PM
I'm guessing the add-on adapter will be cheaper than their current wifi bridge. Why? It won't be a bridge, it will be an external wireless adapter, they go for around $50 tops.

Aren't they one in the same? The current Xbox Wireless Adapter is just a bridge, right? Doesn't anything less imply that some sort of wireless capability has to be built in?

joeblow69
05-24-05, 02:46 PM
Hard Drives will keep me from buying a memory card. Unless the PS3 takes CF memory, I'll have to buy something.
According to the early specs, it does!
I/O
USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
Memory Stick standard/Duo, PRO x 1
SD standard/mini x 1
CompactFlash (Type I, II) x 1

belboz
05-25-05, 11:59 PM
Sony owns the underlying patent for the Cell. IBM probably did all the heavy lifting in the design and definitely provided the process technology, so they're probably full partners. Not sure how Toshiba fits into it except that they're longstanding partners with Sony on chip technology. In any event, it's probably safe to assume that Sony's deal from IBM on the Cell is better than whatever Nintendo or MS are paying.

From what I've seen of the 360 specs, it looks like a good design for playing video games. I'm a bit leery, though, about the assumption many people are making that the 3 cores are pretty "full featured." My suspicion -- based on cost and power issues -- is that the cores in the 360 CPU are probably more similar to the PPE core in the Cell (narrow issue, in order operation) than they are to a G5 or G4 core. It'd still be a powerful processor, but not nearly what some people are making it out to be.

Sony seems to have dialed back on the Cell a bit. The presentation at the ISSCC described a 4GHz part with 8 operating SPE units that delivered 256 gigaflops. The part in the PS3 is 3.2GHz with 7 operating SPE units so its peak FP rate should be a bit under 200 gigaflops. Still an astounding figure, but it was probably necessary for cost reasons. Can video games put all those gigaflops on the screen? Probably not, but the Cell wasn't designed for just playing video games.

Overall, the PS3 is clearly designed to be an entertainment hub. The standard memory card slots are really surprising to me and hopefully it signals that Sony understands that media players need to be open and standards based.

I thought I saw 3 ethernet ports on the back, which is pretty interesting. It could just be for system linking more than 2 units without needing a switch, but you could do that with just 2 ports and having the systems daisy chain. I suspect that with a WiFi module standard, the PS3 may be able to act as either a wireless AP (for those that don't have one) or a bridge to help connect any other devices (like Tivos or network media players) to the network.

I'm not sure what to make of the two HDMI outputs. The safe bet seems to be that it's just being forward looking and expecting that prices for HD displays in 4 years will be low enough that dual screen gaming won't seem as extravagant as it does today.

It could also be to accomodate some kind of new display technology that requires more bandwidth than a single HDMI link can provide. For example, Apple's 30" LCD is a 4 megapix display that requires 2 DVI links. It could be that Sony has plans for a super HD display with twice the resolution of regular HD. Or one of the more "out there" ideas about this is that they have plans for some kind of HD stereoscopic 3D display.

I seem to be wandering off into wild speculation so I'll stop. As much as Sony and MS have revealed, there's still a lot that's uncertain so it's a bit early to make judgments. Nintendo hasn't really revealed squat about the technical specs of the Revolution, so there's almost nothing to be said about that at this point.

Chris_D
05-26-05, 01:01 AM
It's still too early to say for sure that 360 won't have wireless out of the box. The confirmation of the HD on all models has only just come out, and if MS thinks lack of wireless will be a sticking point for sales then I'm sure they will change their minds and eat the costs. I hope they do! But yeah, I'm for HD over built in wireless (mine would probably be plugged in anyway).

I can't imagine how Sony will match the cost of the 360 when they finally launch, there's just so much funky stuff they're jamming in that box (blueray, 2 dvi ports, all the memory cards), along with brand new cutting edge cpu and graphics. Add the factor that sony is less capable of taking a loss on their console than Microsoft, and I would expect a price difference of $100 between the 2 when ps3 launches (although the 360 launch price might be quite similar).

It's interesting that based on the current ps3 specs we will now only will have 1 cell. Early, completely unsubstantiated, rumours were talking 4, and then later 3 cells, running at up to 4ghz, in a single ps3 unit. To me, this is at least part of the reason why some people had the feeling that the PS3 would absolutely destroy all comers, performance-wise. Now with the actual specs out we have something that is maybe more powerful than the 360, maybe not.

I'm glad we finally have some decent ram in a console, with both going with 512 total. It always seemed stingy on the ps2 and even the xbox (32 and 64 system ram) where you are surely making the developers jump through a few extra hoops for a saving of what, $10 per console?

joshd2012
05-26-05, 08:16 AM
A couple things to note about PS3:

1) The Cell processor only has 7 of its 8 cores available because one of them will be running the background OS exclusively. Its not available for game developers to use.

2) It will use 7 controllers because that is the limit of the technology. BluTooth can support 1 master and 7 slaves - thus, 7 seven controllers.

3) There are 3 ethernet ports - one input and two outputs. It has been hinted at that Cells can only communicate at the Gbit transfer rate, so in order to connect Cells, you would need to connect them directly using this port. Thus, the PS3 should beable to connect to two other Cell operating devices - like a DVR or TV or Blu-Ray burner, etc.

Groucho
05-26-05, 08:30 AM
No interest in a HDD here, after the one on my current Xbox crashed and I lost everything.

jiggawhat
05-26-05, 12:37 PM
A couple things to note about PS3:

1) The Cell processor only has 7 of its 8 cores available because one of them will be running the background OS exclusively. Its not available for game developers to use.

Actually from what I've heard, 7 cores were going to be available because of processor yield issues.

belboz
05-26-05, 06:24 PM
1) The Cell processor only has 7 of its 8 cores available because one of them will be running the background OS exclusively. Its not available for game developers to use.

The reason for reducing the number of active SPE cores almost certainly has to do with improving yields (which reduces cost). Even if one SPE were dedicated to OS processes, that wouldn't exclude a marketer from claiming it as an active core and they wouldn't have changed the number of cores specified from 8 to 7.

2) It will use 7 controllers because that is the limit of the technology. BluTooth can support 1 master and 7 slaves - thus, 7 seven controllers.

That makes sense. I know diddly about Bluetooth so I had no idea it had a limit of 7 client devices per controller device.

3) There are 3 ethernet ports - one input and two outputs. It has been hinted at that Cells can only communicate at the Gbit transfer rate, so in order to connect Cells, you would need to connect them directly using this port. Thus, the PS3 should beable to connect to two other Cell operating devices - like a DVR or TV or Blu-Ray burner, etc.

If you've got a link to a better explanation of what you're trying to say, I'd appreciate it. Ethernet doesn't have in/out ports. On a switched network, it'll run at full duplex or otherwise it can run at half duplex (I/O on the same port, just taking turns).

joshd2012
05-26-05, 07:28 PM
If you've got a link to a better explanation of what you're trying to say, I'd appreciate it. Ethernet doesn't have in/out ports. On a switched network, it'll run at full duplex or otherwise it can run at half duplex (I/O on the same port, just taking turns).

Just speculation of course, but:


Gigabit Ethernet support seems like overkill at first, considering that home broadband service doesn't carry nearly that much bandwidth. But when you look at the number of Ethernet ports available on the machine, it starts to make more sense. Chatani talked about the availability of an HD IP camera peripheral, which would presumably be plugged into one of the gigabit Ethernet ports. The camera will allow you to broadcast an HD-quality video stream, for video messaging and conferencing, and more. The presence of so many ports also leaves open the unspoken possibility that other high-bandwidth peripherals might be plugged into the PS3: a digital video recorder or another PS3, perhaps?


http://www.gamespot.com/features/6125429/index.html

Trigger
05-26-05, 07:50 PM
Based on the specs sony released at e3, the PS3 is theoretically supposed to be up to 25% faster than Xbox360, but with factors such as the PS3 being more difficult to program for (to take advantage of the subcores etc...), the systems should end up being very similar. PS3 should also cost alot more to produce overall (between the cpus and gpus and the fact that they want to stick so many ports in the thing).

The PS3 spec will no doubt change alot between now and next year. Meanwhile, the microsoft has already sent the 360 beta kits to developers who had previously been working with highly modified G5s basically as alpha kits for the past year - they were supposedly 1/3 the power of what the 360 is expected to be. ATI has really outdone themselves with the GPU for the 360.

Originally, Microsoft was prepared to lose the battle in both their first and second generation and hoped to be established enough by their third generation to dominate the field. Now they are pretty confident that they can come out on top this generation... especially after seeing what the competition came up with. Rumors about Nintendo releasing a retro machine turned out to be true and many were a bit shocked to see how unprepared Sony was.

The tables have somewhat turned from last time between Sony and MS - last gen, MS was focused on hardware muscle dominance while Sony focused on software - giving huge concessions to major publishers for exclusive rights to key games while MS stuck to their policies and treated every publisher like the next. This time, it looks like MS is going to be the one with the must-have software and an unprecedented list of launch titles. Meanwihle, Sony spent E3 focused on the PSP and what appeared to be a rushed PS3 prototype touting the hardware power and ignoring the games. They have plenty of time to prepare a decent launch lineup for next year when they debut, but they also might be hoping to coast on the huge PS2 library like they did when they launched the PS2 with PS1 titles. Their original marketing campain for the PS2 was genius and it created a need to own one - especially with Japanese buyers.

Given the specs of both systems, they are both going to cost more than consoles have traditionally come out priced at. Even at 500, both MS and Sony are going to be taking signifigant financial losses on hardware. As an example - the GPU the 360 is going to use from ATI is a few generations ahead of what is currently available for PCs... they plan to release it for PCs in a few years at a price point of 500 bucks. And Sony appears (to many) to have simply taken specs for the 360 and announced specs that would be somewhat better. "360 has 2 USB ports? We'll have 6!" "360 has 3 cores? We'll have 7!" Sony has plenty of time to get their act together though and they simply didn't have as much time to prepare as MS spent on it. I think they were caught by surprise a little bit by what MS had to show.

Last I heard, 360 was going to still have both the less expensive version (just as a pricing gimmick) and the full featured version which would include wifi and a hard drive. The idea was to connect all sorts of devices to the 360 (hence the name)... it is certainly aimed at being alot more than just a video game console. The PS3 is expected to have similar aspirations. Nintendo may have originally come up with this idea back in the NES days - I remember reading an article my dad saved for me from the Wall Street Journal (this was ages ago) describing how Nintendo wanted to make the NES a central hub for communication and home shopping among other things. It took us this long to see this sort of thing realized.

In other news... Ted Turner is launching a service similar to what the Phantom was intending to offer - essentially beating them to the punch... the kicker is that Ted's service is not going to require any special hardware... just a PC. Ted reported that publishers have already agreed to offer around 300 games so far.

All this info is probably old and useless, but I haven't been reading the long threads much around here. But basically - until Sony releases real specs, it's kinda useless to compare...

exocel
05-26-05, 08:19 PM
the CELL chip sounds interesting but i dont value games on graphics and look at the graphics on games like halo 2 and everquest 2 (i think thats the game i mean) do we really need games to look more realistic than that?
i hate it when people say games cause murder,death and aggressive behaviour but i got my first games console when i was 3 years old what if someone gets a next-gen console for a kid and something like manhunt(lame) or cold fear(pretty good/not so lame) that has ''ultra realistic graphics'' theyl'l scar a kid for life.
and i'm only 17 not some angry adult. also it sets games back at least a few months past the expected release date just so the grass sways in the breeze.dont get me wrong its cool that games do that but if we keep improving graphics on console games how will game like pokemon and paper mario look in an ultra realistic style? try making a realistic camel - volcano hybrid does it look the same.
look at the new zelda its got amazing graphics but its looking to much like the ocarina of time (atmosphere) i preferd the wind waker since theres so much more stuff you can do with a cartoony game.

anyway just to make sure you dont think i'm just complianing heres what i'll say about the new console's

PS3: i dont think the ps2 needs improving but it is almost five years old now so its is time for a change from the black box many gamers lose girlfreinds to.allthough not to an ugly piece of crap.though i love the playstation and will probably buy this just for the new final fantasy games it is probably the ugliest looking console ever.either that or a draw with the d.s (i preffered the origional design). i think they need to stick with the old controller not the new ''banana'' one ,to coin a phrase if its not broke why fix it?.(this begs the question why did they release the slim ps2 at all?)

REVOLUTION: now i have only had my 'cube' for 2 years so maybe i'm the only one thinking this but does it need replacing allready?.that said it is nice to finally have a dvd plaing nintendo console BUT i hope you dont have to buy something seperatly to play em' as i'm helluva' broke right now so i havent got one for my x-box yet.
i like the look but it needs to be a bit bigger just because it looks like my cat could easily break it (it breaks everything).i think this will sell better than the ps3 but not the 360.

THE X-BOX 360: a lame name it would have been better called just the '360' but hey at least it looks better than the ps3 who expected that?.at first i didnt like the new look it reminded me of the small ps-one though ,looking over towards my x-box, it does look better than its predeccesor allough a lot like what an offspring of an x-box and a dreamcast wold look like,maybe microsofts just giving sega more input on things since they screwed it with nintendo with 'sonic heroes'(shudders at the memories) the always grinding worst sonic game ever. i think the 360 will easily outsell the ps3 on sheer looks alone and the revolution just because of halo 3.

belboz
05-26-05, 10:50 PM
Based on the specs sony released at e3, the PS3 is theoretically supposed to be up to 25% faster than Xbox360, but with factors such as the PS3 being more difficult to program for (to take advantage of the subcores etc...), the systems should end up being very similar. PS3 should also cost alot more to produce overall (between the cpus and gpus and the fact that they want to stick so many ports in the thing).

That 25% figure sounds like it was pulled out of someones ass.

As for costs, MS has to pay a license fee for the CPU technology that Sony probably doesn't. Also, they still have to pay a company like Flextronics for final assembly. It's probably not enough to entirely offset the cost of all the extra hardware in the PS3, but it narrows the cost gap to less than what most people would think at first glance.

Originally, Microsoft was prepared to lose the battle in both their first and second generation and hoped to be established enough by their third generation to dominate the field. Now they are pretty confident that they can come out on top this generation... especially after seeing what the competition came up with. Rumors about Nintendo releasing a retro machine turned out to be true and many were a bit shocked to see how unprepared Sony was.

This is all sort of meaningless. What a company expects and what actually happens are almost always two different things. Is MS confident? Yes, of course. But they were confident they could crack the Japanese market last time around. They were also confident the XBox would be profitable this generation.

...This time, it looks like MS is going to be the one with the must-have software and an unprecedented list of launch titles.

I think this very much remains to be seen. I have no idea who's going to have the better launch line-up or who's going to have more must-have titles. I don't think you or your "sources" do either.

the GPU the 360 is going to use from ATI is a few generations ahead of what is currently available for PCs... they plan to release it for PCs in a few years at a price point of 500 bucks.

Just to clarify, by the time the 360 ships, the GPU in it will be more advanced than the R520 and G70 chips that ATi and nVidia will have available for PCs at that time. I don't know if it's more advanced enough to qualify as a "full generation" ahead, though. The logic in the eDRAM is a pretty nifty technology. My concern with it, though, is that it's only 10MB, which is only enough to fit a 720P frame with z and stencil information. Hopefully, that doesn't mean their support for 1080i/p is upsampled 720p.

And Sony appears (to many) to have simply taken specs for the 360 and announced specs that would be somewhat better. "360 has 2 USB ports? We'll have 6!" "360 has 3 cores? We'll have 7!"

I don't see any particular reason to believe that unless you wanted to.

Sony has plenty of time to get their act together though and they simply didn't have as much time to prepare as MS spent on it. I think they were caught by surprise a little bit by what MS had to show.

I think the only reason Sony released as much info about the PS3 as they did was to suck the wind from the 360 announcement. Otherwise, they probably would have waited until Tokyo before releasing all the specs. If I were MS, I'd be pissed. The mass media is talking about the 360 and PS3 on equal terms when they should have had the spotlight all to themselves.

The idea was to connect all sorts of devices to the 360 (hence the name)... it is certainly aimed at being alot more than just a video game console. The PS3 is expected to have similar aspirations. Nintendo may have originally come up with this idea back in the NES days - I remember reading an article my dad saved for me from the Wall Street Journal (this was ages ago) describing how Nintendo wanted to make the NES a central hub for communication and home shopping among other things. It took us this long to see this sort of thing realized.

I think the story this generation will be about broadening the role (and market) for the consoles into that of an entertainment hub. As much as certain people here hate it, the whole "convergence thing" is actually starting to happen. They could still fuck it up with the software, but just looking at the hardware, I think Sony is better prepared for this than MS. The Blu-ray drive, the standard memory ports, the built-in WiFi, and the extra ethernet and USB ports give the box more capabilities in this regard.

jeffdsmith
05-26-05, 11:39 PM
As for costs, MS has to pay a license fee for the CPU technology that Sony probably doesn't. Also, they still have to pay a company like Flextronics for final assembly. It's probably not enough to entirely offset the cost of all the extra hardware in the PS3, but it narrows the cost gap to less than what most people would think at first glance.


Was sony going to have people assemble their PS3 units at home themselves? :)

Trigger
05-26-05, 11:56 PM
That 25% figure sounds like it was pulled out of someones ass.Well, whatever... it's an estimate from inside MS... info not released to press afaik. Just relaying what I've heard. I mean, of course it would sound 'pulled from rectum' since the PS3 doesn't even exist.

As for costs, MS has to pay a license fee for the CPU technology that Sony probably doesn't. Also, they still have to pay a company like Flextronics for final assembly. It's probably not enough to entirely offset the cost of all the extra hardware in the PS3, but it narrows the cost gap to less than what most people would think at first glance.Good points, but even so - insiders at MS as well as other industry insiders speculated that the PS3 should be more costly all things considered given the specs they gave. I don't know enough about it. Both systems are going to be quite expensive to produce and both companies are going to take big losses and even with all that, they will be more expensive than consumers are used to paying. I was told the target price point for the 360, but I'm not at liberty to disclose it. Things may change as well anyway.

This is all sort of meaningless. What a company expects and what actually happens are almost always two different things. Is MS confident? Yes, of course. But they were confident they could crack the Japanese market last time around. They were also confident the XBox would be profitable this generation.I'm sorry you found my comments meaningless - please fill out a complaint form and file it with our customer relations department.

Actually - they weren't at all confident in the asian markets - they spent alot of money on advertising there, but it was mostly just to plant a seed of brand awareness. They pretty much gave up on both Japan and Korea before even launching... they were still disappointed and the numbers were even lower than projected, but they didn't really have anything resembling high hopes for that in the first place. This time they actually are pretty confident based on some of the software they're going to launch with and reactions to their product.

I think this very much remains to be seen. I have no idea who's going to have the better launch line-up or who's going to have more must-have titles. I don't think you or your "sources" do either.
Yeah - nobody knows the PS3 lineup... just basing it on what sony has done in the past and what I know of the 360 lineup.

And you don't have to listen to anything I say... sounds like you think my 'sources' is a magic 8 ball. If my comments/information isn't interesting around here, I don't have to post here.

Just to clarify, by the time the 360 ships, the GPU in it will be more advanced than the R520 and G70 chips that ATi and nVidia will have available for PCs at that time. I don't know if it's more advanced enough to qualify as a "full generation" ahead, though. The logic in the eDRAM is a pretty nifty technology. My concern with it, though, is that it's only 10MB, which is only enough to fit a 720P frame with z and stencil information. Hopefully, that doesn't mean their support for 1080i/p is upsampled 720p.It's a few generations ahead from what I'm told - that's filtered down through my magic 8 ball straight from ATI... they already have their technology ready to go for the next few generations, but are only releasing every so many months to keep people upgrading. I didn't really get that technical with the specs of the chip.

I don't see any particular reason to believe that unless you wanted to.
Yeah - that was more of the result of conversations I've had with various people. No need to believe it.

I think the only reason Sony released as much info about the PS3 as they did was to suck the wind from the 360 announcement. Otherwise, they probably would have waited until Tokyo before releasing all the specs. If I were MS, I'd be pissed. The mass media is talking about the 360 and PS3 on equal terms when they should have had the spotlight all to themselves.
I suppose you could look at it that way... but the feeling was more of relief and alot of people felt that sony was caught with their pants down. I didn't talk to everyone though, so it doesn't really matter what I say. I do know that MS wasn't at all pissed... they were quite pleased.

I think the story this generation will be about broadening the role (and market) for the consoles into that of an entertainment hub. As much as certain people here hate it, the whole "convergence thing" is actually starting to happen. They could still fuck it up with the software, but just looking at the hardware, I think Sony is better prepared for this than MS. The Blu-ray drive, the standard memory ports, the built-in WiFi, and the extra ethernet and USB ports give the box more capabilities in this regard.
Ok - well, let's revisit this comment once both systems are released - I think it would be interesting to see how that pans out.

belboz
05-27-05, 01:59 AM
:) meh, I probably shouldn't have put "sources" in quotes like that. Made it seem snide, which was not my intention (well, maybe just a little bit). For things like message boards where there's really nothing at stake, I'm happy to afford people the courtesy of taking them at their word until given reason not to. Not that I've been keeping track, but AFAIK, your sources have been more or less on the money so far (though I'm still waiting for the "unprecedented" part of the launch lineup to be announced ;) ).

Anyway, your posts draw plenty of replies, so you should take that as affirmation that your posts here are valued. Heck, people rarely ever bother replying to any of my posts, and yet I still insist on inflicting my profound and fascinating thoughts on everyone.

Trigger
05-27-05, 04:00 AM
Honestly - my "source" is a friend of mine and I probably blab too much some of the stuff [he or she] tells me in confidence... I haven't really followed message board gossip or visited IGN or other game news sites, so I don't always remember which info is priviledged and which is commonly known. I know alot of things said to me are prefaced with "you can't tell anyone about this, but..." It's kinda fun really - I helped [him or her] get the job they have and it's neat hearing about this 'insider' kinda stuff.

Then there's alot of me just interjecting my own opinions. I was hoping for a better showing from Sony this time because I really want to get a PS3 since I have several PS2 games and no PS2 to play them on. I pray they don't keep that rediculous controller (MS people joked about how much it looked like an old Sidewinder controller) and just keep it more traditional. Also - I wasn't originally planning on getting a 360 because I was kinda mad that they weren't supporting the Xbox as long as they maybe should have. But after E3 and some of the discussions I've had, I don't think i'll have a choice but to get one... unless there are some huge changes between now and launch.

But either way - no hard feelings, I didn't mean to sound like I was taking your comments like a bad sport.

darkside
05-27-05, 10:40 AM
(MS people joked about how much it looked like an old Sidewinder controller)
Thats the name of my old PC controller. I new that PS3 controller looked like one I had on the PC, but I couldn't remember the name.

Honestly, all the hardware looks very tempting at this point. Hopefully we will see a lot more of the actual software over the next few months. I personally give MS a big thumbs up for putting the 20GB HDD in every console and keeping that a standard feature. I wish the Xbox360 was Wi-Fi internet compatible out of the box, but as long as the add on is affordable I think its a fair trade for the HDD. The backwards compatibility is a tough thing that was really out of Microsofts control, but they are at least going to try and make some of the major games work with it.

If they launch with some good software they will be in good shape, especially if the popularity of Live continues to grow.

Trigger
05-28-05, 12:29 AM
http://img.epinions.com/images/opti/34/6c/Microsoft_Sidewinder_Freestyle_Pro_V1_0_Joystick__PC_Game_Controllers-resized200.jpg

http://ascii24.com/news/i/hard/article/2000/03/27/images/images610957.jpg

http://www.gamelife.gr/_data/images/hardware/photos/gamepro2.jpg

http://www.ps3portal.com/downloads/PlayStation%203/11163150396.jpg

Darknight
05-28-05, 12:50 AM
Actually from what I've heard, 7 cores were going to be available because of processor yield issues.

No, he's right. If you look at the CPU, it does have 8 cores, but they only say 7 because like the Xbox 360 and the PSP, there is going to be an OS running in the background at all times and one of the cores is dedicated to that.

jeffdsmith
05-28-05, 12:54 AM
No, he's right. If you look at the CPU, it does have 8 cores, but they only say 7 because like the Xbox 360 and the PSP, there is going to be an OS running in the background at all times and one of the cores is dedicated to that.

Nope, jigga is correct, I quite specifically remember watching the presentation and they said the cell would have 1 of the 8 SPEs disabled for yield reasons.
I'll find a link in the morning though, I'm going to bed. :)

JM
05-28-05, 10:42 AM
Just speculation of course, but:



http://www.gamespot.com/features/6125429/index.html

That makes no sense either. Gigabit ethernet is just more of the Sony hype machine at work. A broadcast HDTV stream is only 12 - 20Mb/s, which is well within standard 100Base-T's 100Mb/s capabilities. Gigabit ethernet is overkill in the home for now, and 99.9% of PS3 owners will get no benefit from it. Like the other specs, it looks good on paper to the ignorant though. See http://www.tomsnetworking.com/Sections-article41-page3.php . In 5-10 years, it MAY be of some use in the home if we are lucky enough to have multiple IP-based HDTV streams available to us.

In any case, as mentioned above, the description of the PS3 having 1 input and 2 output ethernet ports also makes no sense. If the PS3 is just a switch, then its has 3 LAN ports. If it is a router, then it has one WAN port and 2 LAN ports. The input/output distinction doesn't apply.

joshd2012
05-28-05, 11:07 AM
I believe that they are referring to communications between cells, rather than broadcasting an HDTV stream. I'd have to find it again, but I remember reading an interview which mentioned that Cells could "talk" if connections got up to Gigabit level. Being that, as you mentioned, Internet connections won't be that high for many years, it will probably be used soley for home intranets.

I know it sounds like a marketing ploy, and it may be, but even the new nForce4 requirements for motherboards requires Gigabit ethernet - Sony isn't the only one making it a standard.

Edit:


Honda: You used to talk about the concept of CELL or PS3 with grid computing as one of analogies. Since then it's been disclosed what kind of processor CELL actually is. How does the computing model of CELL that has networking functions by itself translate into a game console in future?

Kutaragi: In the next spring, CELL will start to enter homes as the form of PS3. Thought in it there are 7 SPEs, it may be seen only as one hardware from users. But since PS3 has Gigabit Ethernet from day one, you can connect CELLs right away at 1Gbps when you have more CELLs in your home. It can be a home server, or more PS3s, in various styles CELLs in home can connect with one another via network. With 100Mbps bandwidth, they can be connected even through internet.


I think Cells require that much bandwidth.

belboz
05-28-05, 09:08 PM
The same arguments about whether we really needed that higher speed took place when fast ethernet first came out. It was really expensive for a while and everyone said it's not worthwhile, but then it dropped to a price point where it only cost a little more than regular ethernet and all of a sudden the market exploded. Everything was 100 megabit, even print servers that didn't need even 10 megabits of bandwidth.

The same thing is happening with gigabit ethernet. It's been affordable for most early adopters for over a year now. But, now it's being included for free in chipsets and the cost of switches has come down to maybe only double that of 10/100 switches.

Well before the PS3 hits end of life, gigabit ethernet networks will be common in homes just like 10/100 ethernet is now.

Gallant Pig
05-28-05, 09:33 PM
I think it's going wifi before gigabit. Wires are as dead as dead, or will be. Why be wired when you can be wireless?

joshd2012
06-01-05, 09:27 AM
The Big 3 Duke it out:


The Electronic Entertainment Expo marked the start of the next-generation console war. With all sides gearing up for full conflict, opening volleys of insults and predictions are starting to surface in the media at large. The Japanese newspaper Asahi Shinbun's Friday edition featured an article with comments taken from the heads of the three console makers: Microsoft senior vice president and chief Xbox officer Robert J. Bach, Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi, and Nintendo president Satoru Iwata. All three contenders talked about the strategies behind their own consoles and tossed harsh words over the corporate walls toward each other.


Microsoft senior vice president and chief Xbox officer Robert J. Bach--

(NOTE: Bach's comments are translated from Japanese and not directly quoted from his English statement.)

Asahi Shinbun: What do you think of the competitors' machines? Will Sony continue to dominate the gaming market?


Robbie Bach: The other two companies' presentations [at E3] weren't surprising. Sony's [PS3's] capabilities are the same as ours. Nintendo is aiming for the niche market [with its Revolution]. The current-generation Xbox sold more than the PlayStation 2 in North America last Christmas. We will become the market leader with our next-generation console.

Sony's [PS3] will be able to use seven controllers simultaneously and connect with two high-definition TV sets. But it's hard to share a single screen with seven people, and it's also difficult to imagine a room with two high-definition TV sets. We don't know about the selling price yet, but to say the least, our cost of manufacturing [an Xbox 360] is less than Sony's [PS3].

AS: Why doesn't the Xbox 360 adopt a next-generation disc format?


RB: The next-generation disc standard hasn't been solidified yet. Sony is taking a risk. We can decide after the standard has been created.

AS: What has Microsoft learned from its previous game console release?


RB: We'll basically be starting again from square one in the Japanese market. Our current Xbox console didn't have enough software for Japanese consumers. This time, we're teaming up with powerful Japanese game makers, including Square Enix, the maker of Final Fantasy. As for Microsoft's overall game division, we plan to get out of red ink by June 2007.

Ken Kutaragi, Sony Computer Entertainment president--

AS: What do you think of the competitors' machines? Will Sony continue to dominate the gaming market?


Ken Kutaragi: Microsoft is trailing behind us, but they are not a threat. They are good at improving [on products], but we will be advancing to the next level with revolutionary technology. Beating us for a short moment is like accidentally winning a point from a Shihan (Karate master), and Microsoft is still not a black belt. Just like with their operating systems, they might come out with something good around the third generation of their release.

It isn't a bad thing to have a high price. When we released the original PlayStation at 39,800 yen ($368), Nintendo's Super Famicom was in the 10,000 yen range ($100 range). Still, everyone went for the PlayStation. This time, ours [the PS3] will be like a BMW that's equipped with a Ferrari engine. Nintendo's [Revolution] will be something like a new model of a family car. Some people might want it, but if it was me, I'd want to advance to the next level.

AS: Why is Sony's next-generation console adopting a next-generation disc format?


KK: The current DVD [format] had a slow growth during its first three years of release, but it dramatically penetrated [through the market] after the release of the PS2, and its software prices had gone down. By using Blue-ray in the PS3, we hope to boost the amount of available [Blu-ray] software and sales of high-definition TV sets. With enough product [in the market], the Blu-ray will be one step closer to becoming the standard [next-generation] format.

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo president--

AS: What do you think of the competitors' machines? Will Sony continue to dominate the gaming market?


Satoru Iwata: It's questionable what the "horsepower" of the two other companies' consoles will be used for, such as fast calculations and high-definition resolution. Creating game software in high definition will require everything from the [graphic's] models to the background to be redone, and it will bloat up development costs. And yet, it has no use for people that aren't playing with a high-definition TV set. Game consoles are not an essential product in life, so we want to make ours as compact, thin, and as inexpensive as we can so that it won't be viewed with hostility by family members.

AS: What has Nintendo learned from its previous game machine release?


SI: We launched the Nintendo DS last year, and the release of our Nintendogs, which came out this April, is being called the second launch [of the DS, since Nintendogs massively boosted sales of the handheld in Japan]. We want to push the DS's sales with the release of game software during the first year. There's a big gap between people that enjoy games that take time and playing skills, and people that don't. I'm feeling a real sense of danger about the decline in the Japanese gaming population. Patting a dog and telling it to stay [in Nintendogs] is something that anyone can enjoy. We're aiming to increase the population of game players with these new kinds of games.

AS: Sony's PS3 is adopting the Blu-ray next-generation disc format. What about the Revolution?


SI: It will be more beneficial to the consumer if we took the money for [adopting the use of] a next-generation disc format and used it somewhere else where we can present more new fun. Nintendo is a company that likes to see smiles on the faces of people that love entertainment. We're not about selling new kinds of TVs or taking control of the living room.


http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/31/news_6126725.html

jeffdsmith
06-01-05, 09:39 AM
MS:
s for Microsoft's overall game division, we plan to get out of red ink by June 2007.
That'll happen... :smirk:


Sony:
Just like with their operating systems, they might come out with something good around the third generation of their release.

Nintendo's [Revolution] will be something like a new model of a family car. Some people might want it, but if it was me, I'd want to advance to the next level.
Zing!


Nintendo:
We're not about selling new kinds of TVs or taking control of the living room.
Could have fooled me. ;)

Gromit
06-01-05, 01:30 PM
Wasn't everyone at E3 saying that while they are skeptical, if Sony's specs turn out to be true then the PS3 will be much more powerful than the 360? Is Microsoft just hoping that if they continue to say "the 2 systems are equal in power" then it will just become a given?

Gallant Pig
06-01-05, 01:40 PM
Wasn't everyone at E3 saying that while they are skeptical, if Sony's specs turn out to be true then the PS3 will be much more powerful than the 360? Is Microsoft just hoping that if they continue to say "the 2 systems are equal in power" then it will just become a given?

Looking at the specs, don't they look pretty close to you? Is Sony just hoping that if they continue to say "their system is much more powerful" then it will just become a given?

joshd2012
06-01-05, 01:55 PM
I think if you look at the specs on purely an overall basis, the two consoles look very similar, but I think Sony has a slight edge (more to be seen once programmers start using it). If you start to focus on one aspect, that is when you will start to see the benefits and shortcomings of the two different approaches.

And yes, I that Microsoft is playing the PR card pretty hard in terms of power. MS issued a PR note which claimed the Xbox was "3 times more powerful than PS3" because it had three cores and PS3 only had one. Now, we all know that is bullshit. And that is why I think we will see more "the power is the same" comments from MS than we will of power superiority. They really need to step back and focus on Live and forget about the power comparisons, because when it comes down to it, I think PS3 will be a more powerful gaming platform.

Groucho
06-01-05, 01:57 PM
As this generation has shown, "most powerful" doesn't mean anything.

Josh H
06-01-05, 02:12 PM
Exactly, the X-box has the best specs this gen, but the best looking games on the PS2 and GC look pretty much as good as the X-box's best. Not identical, but close enough that 99% of people won't care much.

darkside
06-01-05, 02:53 PM
Damn, Ken was swinging for the fences. He talked some nice smack about the Xbox360 and Revolution.

It does look like Nintendo will not be supporting HD games, but instead will go for an affordable niche system. I'm sure they will do progressive scan again, but not the kind of 1080 resolution stuff the PS3 and Xbox360 will. Honestly it is probably a good strategy for them. Know your niche and find a profitable place in it. Matching horse power with the resources of Sony and MS is just not going to happen for Nintendo. If anything it will send them into the red in a hurry. They are not going to win back the Halo and GTA people no matter what they do because they can't back it up with the Halo and GTA type software.

The thing I'm curious about is Sony. Their console is going to be major overkill and very expensive to build looking at the current components. If the Xbox360 games do compare closely to the PS3 titles Sony will not be able to price their console any higher than MS. Can Sony really afford to lose that much money on every single box they sell? It almost seems like Sony is putting themselves into the positon Microsoft was in this generation. If Sony is planning on selling the PS3 as a $400-$500 console they will not get into many households in '06. If they lose $200-$300 a console it will be a long road to profit with the PS3.

joshd2012
06-01-05, 02:58 PM
It is really about games, so even if consumers don't see a difference between the two consoles, the exclusives will be enough to ensure success.

Also, you must realize that Sony sells more than Videogames. You buy a PS3 and suddenly you are in the market for SACDs featuring Sony/BMG music; Blu-Ray Discs of Sony Pictures movies, a new Sony HDTV, and possibly a new Sony surround sound system. Everything they have added to the system will help them in other areas of their portfolio.

darkside
06-01-05, 03:10 PM
That is obviously the advantage Sony has over a company like Nintendo. I honestly don't know if this thing will help sell SACDs, but Sony is betting on the fact it will almost single handedly win the next generation DVD race for them. The PS2 put DVD movies on the map in Japan when it came out. Look at the PSP. Sony has pretty much started a whole new popular movie format because of it.

Success of the PS3 does not guarantee Sony success in selling more HDTVs and Stereos though. Sony has been losing a lot of money in this market and it looks like they will continue to. I can hook up any stereo and HDTV to a PS3 I don't have to buy a Sony model.

I'm not sure the exclusives will be enough to entice people to pay $100+ more for a PS3 though. Sure they will have GTA, but most of the games like Madden will be on both. If you can buy Madden, Halo 3 and an Xbox 360 for the same price as the PS3 you can bet which one most people will pick.

joshd2012
06-01-05, 03:15 PM
Success of the PS3 does not guarantee Sony success in selling more HDTVs and Stereos though. Sony has been losing a lot of money in this market and it looks like they will continue to. I can hook up any stereo and HDTV to a PS3 I don't have to buy a Sony model.

Very true, but also remember that Sony has partnerships with a lot of different companies. I found it hiliarious how people were talking up Samsung as so much better than Sony for HDTVs for partnership with the 360, when they fail to realize that Sony and Samsung are jointly manufacturing LCDs under the S-LCD company for their HDTV applications.

Also, Sony will have the gimmick of selling TVs with Cell processors in them (as will Toshiba). Who knows if that will turn out to be more than a gimmick, but enough people will bite to make it a worthwhile effort on Sony's part.

jeffdsmith
06-01-05, 03:52 PM
Very true, but also remember that Sony has partnerships with a lot of different companies. I found it hiliarious how people were talking up Samsung as so much better than Sony for HDTVs for partnership with the 360, when they fail to realize that Sony and Samsung are jointly manufacturing LCDs under the S-LCD company for their HDTV applications.

The difference is that Samsung will sell the "same" TV for 25% less then the Sony one.

Gromit
06-01-05, 07:42 PM
Looking at the specs, don't they look pretty close to you? Is Sony just hoping that if they continue to say "their system is much more powerful" then it will just become a given?

Just by looking at the specs, I find it hard to compare them. Is there a way to compare the PS3's Cell architecture to the 360's PowerPC based architecture? At this point, it just sounds like marketing-speak. It's probably not reliable, but I thought the potential power of the PS3 was perceived to be much greater than the 360.

This may be my big mistake: A lot of my info on the 2 systems comes from watching G4's week of E3 coverage. The first night was actually good. The subsequent nights were a bunch of commercials with horribly written "comedy" diaglouge in between, but the first night was a panel of 'experts' just talking about the press conferences. They were going on and on about how much more powerful the PS3 appeared to be. They did say a night or two later that the 360 demos on the floor were more impressive though, so maybe they were just unimpressed by Microsoft's press conference.

I agree that 'power' doesn't mean much, it's just funny to see the 2 companies scramble to make us think that their competitor's product will be crap.

I'll probably buy both systems, but I think it's possible that neither company will be as successful as they are hoping.

Sony's mistake may be in producing a system that's too expensive. I'm sure they will take a loss on the hardware to at least get close to the 360, but they may be taking a page from Microsoft's book in losing too much money on each console sold.

I think Microsoft is counting too much on the cutting-edge, A/V enthusiast market. They keep talking about how Sony is making a mistake by offering 7 controller and dual HD display support, claiming that it's not a realistic expectation to ever need those 'features'. Well at the same time, Microsoft may be ignoring those gamers who just want to play on a 32" 4:3 SD TV. That's not me (42" plasma), and I realize that HD displays are growing in popularity as prices drop, but Microsoft seems to be the most proud of a feature set that a big majority of their customers won't be able or willing to use. Sounds kind of like Xbox Live, which is great, but is hardly used by a large percentage of Xbox owners.

Of course, Sony is counting on the same thing. Video games are no longer exclusively the domain of 14 year old kids who scrape together their money to buy a console, but not all 28 year old gamers can afford 2 HD displays for the same room, much less a single one.

You obviously have to market the cutting edge features of your upcoming product. I realize that Microsoft isn't going to rave about how great 360 games look on a 13" B&W with a broken knob and a coat hanger antenna, but it's still a gamble to release a game console and hope that the consumers buy the HD displays and 5.1 surround sound systems to take advantage of them. How many people will say "That fancy new system won't do much for my 27 inch RCA TV, I'll just stick with my PS2"?

And maybe that's why Microsoft won't be producing any new Xbox games after this year? Will Sony regret continued support of the PS2 since it hardly encourages those gamers on the fence to splurge for a new PS3?

jeffdsmith
06-01-05, 08:26 PM
My concern with so many feature additions is the fact that most developers can't pull a good game out of their ass as it is. More power and gizmos fix a bad game not.

joshd2012
06-02-05, 01:30 PM
Its pretty slow around here today. Hopefully this will get people talking:

I just got done reading some technical articles on the 360, which mention how the processors for both the PS3 and the 360 will be weak on things like AI and physics (proficiency in these areas has been substituted for things like graphical processing and media streaming). It sounds like more indepth games with loose out to eye candy.

But it makes one think, what is enough AI processing power? The most complex AI to emulate would be humans, but how free can you really develop AI before you lose the necessary linearity for following a story? All NPC have a main objective, which is either to help or to hurt you, and possibly a few secondary objectives, like dodge bullets or form groups to better attack. But can it really get deeper than that? Do we really want enemies that "decide" to hide or run away from you if you shoot at them? And quite possibly, I am overly simplifying this.

Another thought I had, was that Nintendo may be heading towards the opposite realm of architecture. Could they possibly be developing a system which can crunch huge amounts of data for AI and physics and make graphics processing the secondary objective? That would definitely be a revolution in gaming.

darkside
06-02-05, 03:45 PM
Honestly, who knows what Nintendo is doing with their console. I think Nintendo is going to need less horsepower simply by not developing their games to run at anything higher than 480p. That will hurt them with the older gamers that have HDTVs, but honestly that is probably not much of a market they will tap into anyway regardless of the specs of the Revolution.

I am concerned a bit about this big push for more eye candy that Sony and MS are going after. Yes, Halo was a great looking game, but that was a minor part of the success of it. It was the incredible gameplay that sold millions of copies of it. GTA was a mediocre game graphically and made its fame off of gameplay as well.

Not saying there isn't a need to keep pushing the graphics, but I'm worried that many developers will put a ton of time into the polygons on these 10 million dollar budget games making them amazing to look at and not bother to actually make the game fun to play.

As far as better AI, to me that is what really pushes games to new levels. One of the best things about Resident Evil 4 was how smart many of the enemies were. Those guys would duck and dodge your shots and were a refreshing change from the enemies in most shooters.

I can see both sides, but I think many of the gamers out there are pushing the market towards eventual failure by wanting better and better looking games to look at instead of better and better games to play.

Save Ferris
06-02-05, 03:55 PM
Wait... Awesome CGI graphics and 3D models taking away from content?? If its happened with MOVIES why wouldnt it happen with video games.

Producers drooling over whats POSSIBLE and blowing their $$$ on visuals end up with an empty shell joke of a movie.

Gallant Pig
06-02-05, 04:15 PM
That will hurt them with the older gamers that have HDTVs, but honestly that is probably not much of a market they will tap into anyway regardless of the specs of the Revolution.

I dunno. It's a dealbreaker for me. I like Nintendo games and was either going to get a Revo or PS3 depending on 1st party games. After you get used to HD games it's hard to go back to 480p. Seems cheap on their part when even last generation (Xbox, PS2) had Hi Def games.

Josh H
06-02-05, 05:46 PM
HD doesn't matter to me as I won't have an HDTV anytime soon (i.e. definitely not in the next 3-4 years, probably not next generation period).

joshd2012
06-29-05, 01:00 PM
I'll bring this thread back to life with something to think about. It has been generally regarded that Sony not including a HDD being a very bad move, because games will not use the hard drive unless it is standard equipment. Then I noticed this from the interview over at TXB:


TXB: Do Xbox 360 games require the detachable HDD to be plugged in for them to work?

Todd Holmdahl: Xbox 360 games do not require the HDD or a Memory Unit, but Xbox Live requires one or the other to save the gamers’ account information.

http://interviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/1190/Xbox-360-Interview-Todd-Holmdahl/p2/

This is a top Xbox hardware guy, in case you were wondering. But if he is correct, it seems the Microsoft has specified to developers that they can not use the hard drive to cache data, or as the sole saving source.

Obviously, Live will require a HDD so it makes sense that 360 ships with a HDD as it also ships with Live. You can provide one without the other. But, couldn't Sony also do the same thing? So far, we have little information about Sony's online plans, but assuming they will sell it as an accessory (as Live is sold as an accessory to Xbox), couldn't they include a hard drive as part of the online package (with a headset, etc)? Both hard drives would serve the same purpose - used for online gaming and as an alternate save medium - and would not affect gameplay during standard play.

My biggest fear about the lack of a hard drive in the PS3 was that gameplay would be affected. But if 360 will not require a hard drive to play games, then any innovation using a hard drive would not be implemented on either system.

Is this a possible senario? Or am I trying to reach too far?

sdcrym
06-29-05, 02:36 PM
My guess is that games still might use the HDD to cache data, but it's not required to. The result may be that users without the HDD attached might have longer load times. Just a guess.