Developers: How important is the PS3 / Xbox 2 storage medium?
- Thread starter john tv
- Start date
Some companies are forced to do what the publisher wants. There are plenty of companies that have all the pull in what they want. Like Electronic Arts for example.
You're telling me that's the only reason? I think not. Do you not remember Final Fantasy 7? And how Square explained that they were going to Playstation because of space.
They also won't go DVD only. How is that relevant again?
My point is that cutting a few dollars all the way to $50 would not be worth it if it meant restricting developers to 9 GB/disc for all of next generation. Just like cutting RAM would not be either.
What's with this idea of a very strict budget on consoles? You do realize how Sony's strategy works right? Take a huge hit on hardware at first to make high end, and make it back later.
I've already said that it could easily more than $20. It has absolutely nothing to do with numbers.
Every indication we've gotten from the press is that Cell is something big. It's high end, and it's getting a lot of funding. It's common sense that adding the cost of a BR drive to producing a Cell processor would not yield any significant results because the damn chip is high end. Once you get high end, you could double cost of the hardware yet it'll only yield a small percentage of increase in peformance.
Why don't you show me any situation in which spending more money on a high end processor has yielded significant results?
One thing is absolutely certain. Having to heavily decompress files on the fly when a game runs sabotages performance.
Okay I'll concede that, but you can from manufacturer costs. For example, the Intel Pentium 4 3.4 Extreme Edition used to cost intel shit tons more to manufacture over their P4 3.2 C, yet the performance gains were negilible in comparision to the pricing to their already high end CPU at the time.
The same applies to any high end processor manufacture.
WTF. If it's prerecorded, it has to have more data. A higher bitrate over time with the same amount of audio in length = more memory used.
Even if it's created by hardware, it has to have data to create more dynamic music.
Unless you inflate low bitrate sound from somewhere else, you absolutely must have more data to create more accurate sound. This isn't magic. The data doesn't create itself.
Here's a 46" Samsung DLP with 1280x720 resolution for $1750Shogmaster said:
http://www.bestbuypcs.com/store/cgi...396&rnd=8276701&pg=store&sub_pg=prod&ref=1825
And a 42" Samsung Plasma with 1366x768 res for $1650
http://www.bestbuypcs.com/store/cgi...396&rnd=8276701&pg=store&sub_pg=prod&ref=1298
Should I keep going?
Shogmaster
Member
kaching said:
Not quite $1500, and a discontinued model going at closeout prices to boot. New version of that is still $3199 MSRP.
My sources say that the set is 853x480. And is it some kind of UK only model? I get all these UK site hits when I search it in google. Anyways, it's also a discontinued model.
BTW, I would trust that site you linked to as far as I can throw the 46" DLP set.
Keep going? You haven't started yet.
PG2G said:
Yes, some of them were up-res-ed 1080i sources (not line doubled in real time though. Pre-doubled if you will). Some of them were new 1080p demos.
Shogmaster
Member
Mrbob said:One last thing to consider:
What will these prices be 3/4 years from now in 2008/2009.
One thing at a time my friend. No guarentee that the planet will survive the E3 2005.
I can't believe I'm finding myself in agreement with Shogmaster...
A thought for everyone... many people bought a PS2 because it was a relatively cheap DVD player combo. Why would folks who are looking at the bargain unit be the ones buying a brand new TV to go with the PS3?
A thought for everyone... many people bought a PS2 because it was a relatively cheap DVD player combo. Why would folks who are looking at the bargain unit be the ones buying a brand new TV to go with the PS3?
Shogmaster
Member
DavidDayton said:
Hey, wha... What the hell is wrong about agreeing with me? It's a damn fine thing to do! All the hipsters do it!
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
"EA not backing Sega this generation had more to do with Saturn than Dreamcast."
just to revisit, EA were backing sega to the tune of 4 complete games i believe.
Something/someone/some event made EA never release the games.
The Official reason, i believe, is because they didn't have enough resources to form a DC team, and would be able to maximize profits off the PS2 release - yet without a headcount increase were suddenly able to create GC/XB/GBA teams not too long afterwards.
You have to look at that move by EA as a bad one, simply because they actually dragged the DC resources into PS2 development and the game sales utterly sucked. Quake 3, F1 series , etc etc all produced substandard returns.
Internally, management at EA do believe that they have the power to make or break a machine. Unfortunately, it seems to be gaining more validity as time goes on.
All that said, EA alone weren't to blame for the DC's failure. The press didn't help sure (the UK press in particular), retailers didn't help (advising people to preorder PS2 rather than buy DC), but ultimately Sega are to blame. They went with the assumption that people wanted kick ass games, what they really wanted was substandard shit and a cheap DVD player !
I (partially) kid - the arcade game for some unknown reason just did't carry the clout they thought they would when translated to the home console. The lack of a true killer app was also particularly painful.
just to revisit, EA were backing sega to the tune of 4 complete games i believe.
Something/someone/some event made EA never release the games.
The Official reason, i believe, is because they didn't have enough resources to form a DC team, and would be able to maximize profits off the PS2 release - yet without a headcount increase were suddenly able to create GC/XB/GBA teams not too long afterwards.
You have to look at that move by EA as a bad one, simply because they actually dragged the DC resources into PS2 development and the game sales utterly sucked. Quake 3, F1 series , etc etc all produced substandard returns.
Internally, management at EA do believe that they have the power to make or break a machine. Unfortunately, it seems to be gaining more validity as time goes on.
All that said, EA alone weren't to blame for the DC's failure. The press didn't help sure (the UK press in particular), retailers didn't help (advising people to preorder PS2 rather than buy DC), but ultimately Sega are to blame. They went with the assumption that people wanted kick ass games, what they really wanted was substandard shit and a cheap DVD player !
I (partially) kid - the arcade game for some unknown reason just did't carry the clout they thought they would when translated to the home console. The lack of a true killer app was also particularly painful.Where does it say its discontinued on this page?Shogmaster said:
http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/product/b2c_product_detail.jsp?prod_id=HLP4663WX%2fXAA
Samsung's site has a list of "Archived" TVs. You won't find it on that list. You will find it on the list of their current DLP TV models.
My bad, got too ambitious with that one. Should have known better since it was a plasma.
CNET seems to trust them, since that's how I found them.BTW, I would trust that site you linked to as far as I can throw the 46" DLP set.
Since I botched the plasma, here's a Panasonic LCD projection that can be had for $1680. I'll let you make the choice this time as to which retailer with that pricing you choose to trust.
http://reviews.cnet.com/Panasonic_PT_43LC14_TV_projection_43/4014-6484_7-31050630.html?tag=bc
And it doesn't appear to be a discontinued model as far as Panasonic is concerned.
Fair enough, but you didn't quite say $3000 either...you said $3000+. And it would appear that mine and Mrbob's price estimates for what can be had in this category of TVs is a lot closer to the mark than either yours or sonycowboy's estimates have been.
Shogmaster
Member
kaching said:
You won't find it in Samsung's current model page either. Samsung's website is a clusterfuck anyways, missing a lot of shit. That model is the exact same one my friend has. And we know it's been replaced because we tried to get extra lamps/bulbs whatever for it and it came up as discontinued at Best Buy's system.
That's a big mistake on the tech page for the plasma. And they don't mention that either model is discontinued (which they are). Not quite up and up.
I sorta knew that the CRT projections were gonna be the ones that goes against my pricing statement, since it's relatively cheap for the OEMs to take small CRTs and project a blurry image from them. I'll give you the CRTs. This one even seems legit in resolutions.
Fair enough, but you didn't quite say $3000 either...you said $3000+. And it would appear that mine and Mrbob's price estimates for what can be had in this category of TVs is a lot closer to the mark than either yours or sonycowboy's estimates have been.
Let's just say that my pricing is right in line with MSRPs, and is alot closer to reality than what's his name's. Either way, $300 consoles are not going to drive $1500 HDTV set sales en mass, and the best sets that really show off HD-DVD and BR stuff is definitely gonna be $3000+ MSRP (DLPs and Plasmas).
teh_pwn:
> There are plenty of companies that have all the pull in what they want. Like Electronic
> Arts for example.
EA is also a publisher. EA supports all the major platforms which also included N64 at the time.
> You're telling me that's the only reason?
It was the major reason with regards to media.
> And how Square explained that they were going to Playstation because of space.
The PS1 offered a more attractive business model overall. That was the major reason that Sony won.
> They also won't go DVD only.
That's what the specs say.
> My point is that cutting a few dollars all the way to $50 would not be worth it if it meant
> restricting developers to 9 GB/disc for all of next generation.
Says who?
> Just like cutting RAM would not be either.
Says who?
Here's the deal. Developers don't have anything to say. Large publishers can make requests but in the end it's up to the hardware manufacturer how much money it's willing to spend. Designers have a budget that they have to make the most of and the difference between whether something stays or has to go can be a few dollars or even less. In the larger picture spending a lot of money on something like a high capacity optical drive may not be realistic because it means that something else to go or be severely downgraded.
Surely it can't be that hard to understand?
> You do realize how Sony's strategy works right? Take a huge hit on hardware at first to
> make high end, and make it back later.
Huge hit does not mean that the hardware designers can just spend whatever they want. Also, M$ is not Sony. Sony has a vested interest in BRD. M$ has no particular interest in either HD-DVD or BRD.
> I've already said that it could easily more than $20. It has absolutely nothing to do with
> numbers.
It sure as hell does to the hardware manufacturers.
> One thing is absolutely certain. Having to heavily decompress files on the fly when a
> game runs sabotages performance.
I'm not sure that you know how games work. Every game uses compression and I can't imagine there being many games where something isn't decompressed on the fly.
> For example, the Intel Pentium 4 3.4 Extreme Edition used to cost intel shit tons more to
> manufacture over their P4 3.2 C
Different company, different products. Completely irrelevant.
> WTF. If it's prerecorded, it has to have more data.
But it rarely is.
> Even if it's created by hardware, it has to have data to create more dynamic music.
Samples. Which are either in mono (mostly) or stereo.
> There are plenty of companies that have all the pull in what they want. Like Electronic
> Arts for example.
EA is also a publisher. EA supports all the major platforms which also included N64 at the time.
> You're telling me that's the only reason?
It was the major reason with regards to media.
> And how Square explained that they were going to Playstation because of space.
The PS1 offered a more attractive business model overall. That was the major reason that Sony won.
> They also won't go DVD only.
That's what the specs say.
> My point is that cutting a few dollars all the way to $50 would not be worth it if it meant
> restricting developers to 9 GB/disc for all of next generation.
Says who?
> Just like cutting RAM would not be either.
Says who?
Here's the deal. Developers don't have anything to say. Large publishers can make requests but in the end it's up to the hardware manufacturer how much money it's willing to spend. Designers have a budget that they have to make the most of and the difference between whether something stays or has to go can be a few dollars or even less. In the larger picture spending a lot of money on something like a high capacity optical drive may not be realistic because it means that something else to go or be severely downgraded.
Surely it can't be that hard to understand?
> You do realize how Sony's strategy works right? Take a huge hit on hardware at first to
> make high end, and make it back later.
Huge hit does not mean that the hardware designers can just spend whatever they want. Also, M$ is not Sony. Sony has a vested interest in BRD. M$ has no particular interest in either HD-DVD or BRD.
> I've already said that it could easily more than $20. It has absolutely nothing to do with
> numbers.
It sure as hell does to the hardware manufacturers.
> One thing is absolutely certain. Having to heavily decompress files on the fly when a
> game runs sabotages performance.
I'm not sure that you know how games work. Every game uses compression and I can't imagine there being many games where something isn't decompressed on the fly.
> For example, the Intel Pentium 4 3.4 Extreme Edition used to cost intel shit tons more to
> manufacture over their P4 3.2 C
Different company, different products. Completely irrelevant.
> WTF. If it's prerecorded, it has to have more data.
But it rarely is.
> Even if it's created by hardware, it has to have data to create more dynamic music.
Samples. Which are either in mono (mostly) or stereo.
CurlySaysX
Banned
Sega failed because their games were crap, simple as that.
Their arcade games might be nice to play in the arcades but when they do home ports they become stale real fast.. people aren't stupid they aren't going to spend $50 on a game only to be bored with it 15 minutes later.
Shenmue was also very boring.
:lol
Their arcade games might be nice to play in the arcades but when they do home ports they become stale real fast.. people aren't stupid they aren't going to spend $50 on a game only to be bored with it 15 minutes later.
Shenmue was also very boring.
:lol
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Well, it seems none of the prototype HD-DVD or BRD devices (outside of the Sony BRD-ROM player) were outputing 1080p....either they outputting 1080i or 1080/24psF and letting a deinterlacer/scaler handle the rest.....probably a good solution, really....
BTW, all HD-DVD and BRD demos @ CES were authored @ true 1080p and many movies will be 1080p on disk as well...getting that 1080p video to the display is another thing
Just so you know, at CES, Panasonic introduced 3 new 720p LCD sets and 2 of those are quite a bit less than 3 grand (and thats MSRP, not the actual street prices)
http://www.onecall.com/NewAndHot.mpt?ProductID=26668
Not to mention you can get a Toshiba 46HM84 DLP set for $1800:
http://www.pac-2000.com/46hm84.html
I wont go there
Actually, for around $1600 you can get a nice 44 inch Zenith LCD RPTV (3 chip, no less) with *native* 720p resolution:
http://www.pac-2000.com/e44w48lcd.html
Just thought I would lend a helping hand
PS. press "add to my cart" to see the prices
Shog, we gotta take this elsewhere...thread getting horribly derailed...though there doesn't seem much interest in the central question anymore.
And no, I don't expect a $300 device *by itself* to drive sales of TVs costing in excess of $1000 but I do expect it to *in conjunction* with the hundreds that people will spend on the HD content that they will buy for use on it.
But that's exactly how I confirmed it, by looking at Samsung's current model page...Shogmaster said:
Why does what Best Buy discontinues necessarily dictate what the manufacturer has discontinued? Did you actually check with Samsung, or just Best Buy?
There's still no evidence that the Samsung DLP model has been discontinued but the plasma is definitely a cock-up. Not exactly damning evidence yet against the retailer.
Except its not a CRT projection, its an LCD projection.
MSRP for a number of these 42"ish 720p DLP and LCD projection sets are in the $2000-2500 range so you're still off by hundreds and there's very few retailers that don't discount the MSRP by at least a couple of hundred with even the slightest effort to haggle on the part of the customer. These may not be the best sets for HD content but they're a dramatic improvement over the non-HD sets that most people have.
And no, I don't expect a $300 device *by itself* to drive sales of TVs costing in excess of $1000 but I do expect it to *in conjunction* with the hundreds that people will spend on the HD content that they will buy for use on it.
teh_pwn said:
Are you just making this up as you go, or do you really simply not know what you are talking about?
"has much more RAM and relative CPU power " Much more CPU power and ram?..than what a next gen console? I don't think so.
Christ the N64 use to decompress game data.
Aside from a small technicality, this does nothing to refute my point whatsoever. EA is a huge company, and they decide what platform to develop for.
That wasn't the example. Please stop making logical fallacies. *Squaresoft* made games for playstation instead of N64 because Square needed storage space for their CG movies. I'm not saying that the media cost factor wasn't a part of it. However, you did implicitly say that was only the media cost by saying "no it wasn't, it was cost" or something of those lines.
WTF are you talking about?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Playstation+3+to+use+Blue+Ray&btnG=Google+Search
Grow a brain.
SAYS LOGIC.
Yes, because it's flawed reasoning. Developers so fucking do have a say when MS and Sony will be competing so fiercly. Companies like EA have so much influence. If developers don't have a say, and the hardware manufacture goes cheap, you have Nintendo.
Sony is not holding back on hardware. I don't know why you think they are. If anything PSP reinforces their business strategy....you're just blind. Why would Sony have to pay a lot for a BR drive? They helped design it, there shouldn't be any royalty fees. Furthermore, Sony's larger business strategy is to support BR as much as possible. Did you selectively forget about Sony buying out MGM? SO BLIND.
Cutting RAM to 128 MB is absolutely unacceptable. Says who? Reasoning. It's not enough memory. PS3 is using an Nvidia GPU that is a generation the 6800 Ultra. There is almost no onboard video memory, and this generation will support high resolutions. For such high end CPUS and GPUs, you must have plenty of high end RAM.
AGAIN Sony isn't cutting costs here. They're going to use absolute cutting edge next gen rambus with cell.
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050125_170734.html
So Sony is going to change the CPU design of Cell because they have to pay an outrageous price for BR drives. You're grasping at straws.
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. GIVE ME A LINK. DTS takes more space than Pro logic 2. But, please, if you found a way to use magic to shrink DTS audio without losing any quality, then go make DVD audio plausable for CDs too!
It doesn't matter if it's prerecorded or not. It needs more space. PERIOD.
Such a waste of time. This is like talking to a wall. I'm going to exercise my ignore list for the first time.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
BTW, next month Westinghouse will be releasing a 37-inch *1080p* LCD TV for $2499....this should certainly street for around 16-1700
http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=30090-0
They are introducing 43 and 47-inch 1080p products in the 2nd half of this year....
http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=30090-0
They are introducing 43 and 47-inch 1080p products in the 2nd half of this year....
Kleegamefan said:
So what's your take on all the hub-bub about these 1080p sets only doing 30fps? Is there any reasonable chance if Xenon supported 1080p, that any of these sets could run them at 60fps and actually have an input to accept the signal (Instead of just upscaling to 1080)? Am I right to not even be excited by these sets?
JoshuaJSlone
Member
teh_pwn said:
Why? To make an analogy, he's saying that running a game at a resolution of 640x480 doesn't take more space than running a game at 320x240. Of course you could get something looking better if you'd increase the resolution of the textures, but it can still greatly improve the look without.
Regarding the encoding of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies, regardless of the resolution they are encoded at (1080 or 720 - or even 480), I'd imagine that they would no longer use 60i frame rate encoding because the standard should allow for the option of leaving the frames at 24p (amoung others).
Then pulldown conversions wouldn't be needed, but a scaler capable of reproducing what the television requires is needed (pull-up conversion).
The media should ideally contain the native frame rate and as much quality of the source material as possible. Then, the scalers in the next generation players will then have to convert to 720p, 1080i, 480i, 480p, etc. for whateven the TV requires.
It's also my understanding that it's much easier to encode progressive video compared to interlaced video - even if there are only 24 progressive frames nestled into 60 frames interlaced.
Anyway, this would be good, IMO.
Then pulldown conversions wouldn't be needed, but a scaler capable of reproducing what the television requires is needed (pull-up conversion).
The media should ideally contain the native frame rate and as much quality of the source material as possible. Then, the scalers in the next generation players will then have to convert to 720p, 1080i, 480i, 480p, etc. for whateven the TV requires.
It's also my understanding that it's much easier to encode progressive video compared to interlaced video - even if there are only 24 progressive frames nestled into 60 frames interlaced.
Anyway, this would be good, IMO.