MassiveAttack
Banned
Jim said:
Exactly right.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PREMATURE EJACULA-TON: PS3 delayed until November 2006 in Japan?
- Thread starter sonycowboy
- Start date
Exactly right.
Striek said:Wait, why does Sony have to do this and not MS? Sony has more 1st-party franchises and more third-party exclusives already. What do you expect to be the pull of the Xbox 360 away from the PS3? Because thats what you aren't addressing - you're looking at it as though the Xbox360 is the market leader and Sony has to convince users - its the other way.
EA has said they'll be ready, Ubisofts leaked release indicates they'll be ready. You can bet Activision will be ready. Koei has titles down for Spring still
You do realise that the X360 technology was finalised in late 2004 and its not even out in Australia yet - can I forgive them? Yes - because its still going to be the best thing on the market when it releases - same with PS3.
not market leader but come this fall when the battle begins MS will be the next gen leader and sony will be playing catch up. doesnt matter if they are the leader right now. Why must they blow MS away with 1st party titles? Because MS would have been out a year already and will pretty much have the exact same titles on the 3rd party front? Because most likely MS wont have a shortage at the time and is more than likely that sony will? Because if necessary 360 may be cheaper than the ps3? Because gamers will have been waiting for the ps3 for quite some time by fall? I agree that is a waiting game but the long sony delays the more everyone gets frustrated waiting and goes elsewhere for their needs. All of the above is why its almost a must that sonys 1st party stuff is just hands down the best that any company offers this fall. I mean you really dont think they'd be sucessful with almost no exclusive titles do you?
Jim said:
I guess I'm missing the context of your post... starting back in Feb '05 we had official specs, Mar '05 we got the 360 name, then we had E3, followed by the announcements you listed above. There was a steady stream of information and everyone had a general idea of pricing, dates, and games.
Sony debuts the PS3 at E3 and poof... it dissapears for a year and the only news we get is that of a delay.
MS and Sony are not on the same information track if that's what you are trying to imply.
Shogmaster
Member
gofreak said:
The point I think is, with BR out of the picture, PS3 could easily have been Q1 2006 machine, but thanks to BR, it's looking like Q4 2006 machine. Q1 to Q4 is quite a difference.
Striek said:
What kind of nonesense are you driving at? I don't remember any 12X DVD drives in 1996, nor triple core PPE CPUs nor 48 unified pipe SM3 GPUs in 2004.
XeCPU and Xenos are late 2005 techs. No stealth troll for you.
Shogmaster said:
Right, but the point was that it was a 2005 machine. If Sony had specced and announced the machine for 2005 - and I do not think that spec would look the same as we see now - and then pushed it back to 2007, the original poster I was responding to might have a point.
All that said, you can't just "take BR out of the picture". It's obviously a key part of Sony's strategy with PS3, and one of the big components that makes it a very future-proof machine.
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
jedimike said:
And I'm pretty sure we knew that generally, the 360 was set to launch in FALL 2005 for a long time before there, correct? This isn't a slight change of months. This is a completely different season.
Il Comodino
sorry about his english
Sorry I'm late!
is it official or is another speculation?
sony say that?
becouse tomorrow there is the Ps3 event!
is it official or is another speculation?
sony say that?
becouse tomorrow there is the Ps3 event!
Scottlarock
Banned
I started reading this thread when it was 8 pages. its now at 11 pages slow down!
BTW: maybe bill gates was right about launching halo 3 with ps3 launch!
slow down!BTW: maybe bill gates was right about launching halo 3 with ps3 launch!
eeyore the donkey
Banned
can anyone confirm?
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
The problem here is that PS3 being fabbed with the 90nm process it could cost 300 USD for the console without the drive and 200 USD for the drive, giving a total of 500 USD for the console cost, with a delay in PS3 they can take the 65nm process for Cell and RSX and launch a console with a cost of 150 USD for the console withoud the Drive and 200 USD for the drive.
Are we going to see the famous 39.800¥ another time?
Are we going to see the famous 39.800¥ another time?
Ponn01 said:
footage from actual games? a release window that was confirmed and completely feasible? actual flow of information as opposed to the total lack of any kind of statement by sony?
either way, i really cannot see sony missing christmas in NA, this is all just speculation, i hope sony comes out in the next 24 hours and actually gives us some real "official" information.
MassiveAttack
Banned
Shouldn't this thread be called "Official" AFTER the Sony meeting tomorrow?
At the moment, none of the information contained herein is "official".
At the moment, none of the information contained herein is "official".
Il Comodino
sorry about his english
RaijinFY said:
thanks
but why the topic say "official"?
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Striek said:
So you're telling me that the CPU/GPU combo in PS3 is a year ahead of X360? Sony wasn't finalizing PS3 specs in 2004? Man, its crazy that they could pump out a specs list in a matter of months (early 2005 right until E3 2005). If Sony doesn't upgrade the PS3 they will be releasing 2005 tech in 2007, other than the disc drive...and last time I checked people judge how next-gen a system is by the pretty, interactive pictures put on screen, not a disc drive.
Pedigree Chum said:
Specs announced in 2005 != 2005 specs. The system was from the start targetted for 2006, and that's what the spec was built around - what would be possible in 2006. Not what would be possible in 2005. The machine would look very different if that had been the case.
The system is both comptuationally more powerful than the best its wealthiest competitor could arrive at in (late) 2005, and featured in a manner that would have been simply impossible in 2005 (not just in terms of individual components like Blu-ray, or perhaps HDMI 1.3 - which alone make it a '2006 machine' - but the combination of features which were targetted as feasible for a 2006 launch, not 2005). I'm not sure what more is required to qualify it as a machine of 2006.
dante786 said:
I don't remember much footage from games before last years E3. I remember some cryptic Kameo screens and Madden shots and that was about it till E3. Give you the launch window for now till tomorrow, maybe. And we have just about the same information on specs.
Jedimike said:
You just gonna be cute or try to back it up seriously?
CELL was completed in 2004, at B3D PS3 using 2005 revision which implemented some pretty significant changes is pretty well confirmed (increases yields and performance).Pedigree Chum said:
RSX was completed in December 2005.
Xenon/Xenos design was completed in December 2004 for Xbox 360.
So yes, thats exactly what I'm saying.
Shogmaster
Member
FtsH said:
Shit, I hope you guys aren't still thinking that PS3 is gonna ride on the coat tail of BR player sales. It's the other way around: BR is hoping to ride on the coat tails of PS3 sales. This is quite the opposite of PS2 and DVD situation back in 2000.
Ponn01 said:
What do you want me to back-up? Wasn't the PS3 due in Spring? If that's the timeline we're all following here, then we should have an exact date and pricing information. If we're giving Sony the delay, then that blows the timeline because MS never had a delay.
Do you guys really think Sony has been forthrite (sp?) with information?
RaijinFY: Don't worry about it.
Also:
http://www.amtddj.inlumen.com/bin/djstory?StoryId=Crbzn0aebqLqWmdyXnZ
Also:
http://www.amtddj.inlumen.com/bin/djstory?StoryId=Crbzn0aebqLqWmdyXnZ
If you're going to consider the articles rumoring delays to be "news" then we've most certainly had more news than just that and you're being rather selective here.jedimike said:
No, that's not what he's trying to imply. What he's trying to show is how the deployment of a platform can occur under more compressed timescales than most of you act like is possible. The 360 went from first official unveiling to worldwide release in less than a year.
Il Comodino
sorry about his english
what kind of "official" topic is this?
:lol
:lol
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
Shogmaster said:
I remember how at the end of 97 I bought a DVD Player+Decoder for 300$.
When PS2 appeared we had the DVD-Drives and DVD-Players years before the introduction of the PS2, with PS3 the thing is different now, PS3 is going to introduce BluRay.
Shogmaster
Member
Striek said:
If going from 4.6GHz to 3.2GHz is the significant change you are talking about, I agree completely.
Xenos taped out in August 2005. RSX taped out December 2005. That's 4 lousy months difference. It's certainly not 2004 tech vs 2006 tech.
And RSX is just a retrofit of design dating back to mid 2004 (G70). And Cell design dates back to what, 2002? :lol And don't give me this "it got redesigned in 2005!" nonsense. I'm sure Xenos design got tweeked right up to it's tape out date in August 2005.
Which isn't much.
kaching said:
Maybe I'm a little foggy from work, but wasn't PS3 and 360 at the same E3 '05 (and Rev)? If the delay is true, doesn't that put the PS3 at well over 18months from unveiling? I mean what is he trying to prove? That the PS3 has been on track all along? That Sony is not in the information providing stage? What's the point?
Quite the downgrade. Did they do anything to tweak the processor perfromance-wise since they had to lower the clock speed (like, say, another bus or something)? Surely since 2002 they have?Shogmaster said:If going from 4.6GHz to 3.2GHz is the significant change you are talking about, I agree completely.
That's a very interesting point to make.
Surely since 2002 Cell has been at least tweaked to compare with a newer CPU.
As for RSX... unlike the G70, it is tweaked for different hardware, is it not? So isn't it a bit unrealistic to look at it that way?
Shogmaster said:
This isn't saying very much either, I think you'll agree. Unless you now want to start arguing that Cell is 2001 technology.
Technology like this is designed around the target date for mass production and shipment. Not when design started (2001) or when design was announced (2005). When Sony or MS or anyone sits down to design a console, they work out what is possible given their budget and their target launch date. That was 2006 for Sony.
It's irrelevant, but just out of interest, I'm not sure Xenos taped out in August 05. First mass produced silicon may have started coming off the fabs in August, but I'm pretty sure it taped out much earlier than that.
edit - Apparently Xenos design finished in November 2004. But what matters is they were targetting it for late 05 on 90nm, not what would have been possible in 2004!
scarybore
Member
If true, millions of fanboys am cry. The writing has been on the wall for a while now, so no one should really be surprised at a delayed launch except for the deluded.
If US launch slips into 2007, Sony could have quite a struggle on their hands if the 360 performs well unless their launch goes absolutely perfect. I'm not the kind to suggest doom and gloom for them though, thats just stupid talk at the minute.